Sdcfia wrote:
Well everyone is entitled to an opinion. It does seem
odd that such "modest" mining activity, would have produced stories from the Indians of rich mines and treasures though. Not to mention the mines which were found by American prospectors indicating at least, energetic activity in the time of the Jesuits.
Sdcfia also wrote
2. 3,500 posts on the gollum thread alone, with, essentially, most supporting conclusions drawn from speculative arguments and most rebuttals of counterpoints presented with questionable logic, IMO. For just one example, I remember once asking: if the Jesuits were operating rich mines and caching great wealth in southern AZ, why didn't the Spanish - who had a military presence in Tubac - seize and recover same after the expulsion? The answer: they were incompetent. Hmmm, pretty hard to debate that sort of logic.
Hmm logic does seem to be an issue there - because you are trying to fit a SINGLE sentence to a very complex history. SOME Spanish military on the frontier were clearly led by incompetent officers, even corrupt. OTHER Spanish officers were competent enough, yet as in the case of Anza, we now know that he was a JESUIT. Do we propose that a Jesuit would turn in his brethren for mining? In most cases of Jesuit mining, the Jesuits always had some excuse handy to explain it. The mine was owned by the College, or to the Indians etc, thus dodging the repeated Royal demands that all clergy stop mining. In a few cases, mines known to have been operated by the Jesuits were immediately taken over and attempted to operate by Spanish, so clearly it was not some state secret. We can not know the full story - it appears that the mining at the various missions (Jesuit, Franciscan, Dominican etc) was NOT a total secret, but certainly done
quietly. Hence bishop Palafox complaint against the Jesuits, not that it was Top Secret but that it was so lucrative and potentially dangerous to the state and church.
Sdcfia also wrote
3. This is the simple crux of my doubt - what the readers have been fed: highly exaggerated or manufactured "evidence". It sullies the discussion.
That some unscrupulous persons have produced phony 'evidence' does not erase the mounds of smelting slag at various missions, the slag in the very walls of several missions, the found mines or some of the found treasures which were quite impressive indeed. The solid silver statue of Ignatius at Rome is another glaring example of wealth of the Order.
Sdcfia also wrote
4. Those Kino bars, to me, are an obvious and blatant fraud. I presented a strong argument for this on the gollum thread.
I am on the fence on the Kino bars. I do not know if they are genuine or fake. What markings were on the bars shipped by father Kino intended for Rome, that were "lost" or stolen en route? These belonged to the Order and/or church, what sort of markings
would be logical? These bars have been debated a number of times, and now we know that Kino had complained to a superior about the loss of a shipment of silver bullion, I have to say that
it is entirely possible these are the very bars that were stolen. It is also entirely possible someone made them up to use as proof for internet arguments, which would be a wee bit illogical.
Sdcfia also wrote
5. I agree. Assigning the stone maps to the Jesuits has always been totally unsupported. We'll never know the true story about those rocks until we find out much, much more about Pegleg Tumlinson, the man who apparently invented this "legend".
Well the biggest issue with linking the Jesuits to the Peralta stones (IMHO) is that there is nothing on the stone maps which is absolutely and undeniably Jesuit. Were it marked with IHS, I could then see grounds to link them. But as to Pegleg being the "inventor" of the "legend" we may never know that for certain. Pegleg may have only been another link in a long chain, and it may not be "legend" at all. Before someone writes me an angry PM on this, I could say much the same thing for
most of the treasure maps in public circulation today.
We do not know the provenance on most of them, most of them have been tried and tested repeatedly, without finding anything of value. In but few cases has anything valuable been found. I do support and promote treasure hunting in general, hope that more people will continue to pursue it (and thus keep it legal) but would be very cautious and skeptical about any treasure map that has been in public circulation for long, be it stone, leather, parchment, paper, bark or dirt.
On father Polzer and Burris - while they were certainly highly respected historians, it is a fact that they were Jesuits. Jesuits are sworn to defend their Order from all enemies and attacks, real and perceived. We might not take that seriously but Jesuits certainly do. For some reason the Jesuits are today (and since Polzer's article) denying they ever had treasures or mines. We have shown that they certainly had mines, and mines producing silver and gold which would be treasures. I do not know why this whitewash has been going on, but it is a whitewash and Polzer is guilty of participating. He never mentioned the mines listed in the study The Wealth of the Jesuits in Mexico 1767, in fact his words would have us believe there were no mines at all, the Jesuits were only out to save the souls of the heathens. If we are to trust Polzer, why did he seemingly pretend there were virtually no mines being run by the Jesuits?
<begin RANT> It is frustrating to try to debate this issue, when our skeptics keep turning to well respected historians - and the same historians that had
zero interest in Jesuit mining or treasures. Historians in general focus on social events, military actions, famous leaders, rebellions etc hardly any attention is spent on mines or treasures, and if at all, it is for extremely famous persons like Genghiz Khan or Alexander the Great. At the other end of the spectrum, historians that DO focus on mining, namely the authors of mining and geological studies, HAVE made numerous references to the pioneering mining activities of the Jesuits, as well as Augustinians and other Orders. The earliest placer gold mining in Arizona is credited to an Augustinian padre for instance. These published works by researchers who DID focus on the mining history seem to carry almost no weight with our skeptics, preferring the research of historians that are focused entirely on the cultural, political and military aspects of history. Sylvester Mowry, governors of Arizona territory, even the Congressional Record refer to the Jesuit mining in Arizona - surely we should at least hold some skepticism toward Polzer et al.<\end RANT>
Now that we have fully derailed the topic, please do continue - and I won't press this Jesuit issue further here, rightfully it belongs in another section of the forum. My apologies again.
Oroblanco
