Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this picture?

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Falling apart, if the ONLY Indian who ever had a gold tooth was Massai, the Apache Kid or the Carlisle Kid. Are you going to stick with the statement that NO Indians ever had gold work in their teeth?

Then there is the question of whether that victim with a gold tooth was even related to the rest of the skeletal remains; it could have been a captive Mexican or Anglo that just happened to get killed with the rest of the Indians. Also, the one found with clothes and gold in a poke, may not have been related to those in the main site. It is assumption, in fact one that may well be un-justified, since that particular one had not been stripped, while the others had, it is suggestive that the victors had time to pick over the dead enemies at their leisure, and would not likely miss one if he were close.

Suppose the massacre victims are the Peralta mining party, which is otherwise undocumented; what then do we do with the 1879 documented Apache attack on two Peralta brothers? The one who survived had rich gold ore on him, just like that odd one found by Edwards. Are we to just conclude the 1879 incident was made up to sell newspapers? Funny they would come up with the Peralta name in 1879, just as that odd story of Geronimo having a Mexican father also named Peralta, a point that no one seems to have picked up on.

I only posted two of the reports of Indian massacres Mike, there are several. Only the one of which Dr Montezuma has been posted. All of the reported massacres in the Superstitions are of Indians. You don't find it the least peculiar that Montezuma was sold in Adamsville, so close to where Waltz was obtaining his flour, or the other parallels (two children as survivors, the cattle and horses being stolen first etc) coupled with the fact that these would have been available to the early writers publishing LDM stories.

I have to ditto Joe's remark about putting too much weight on a family memory/tradition; on television recently one of the ads for Ancestry.com mentioned a grandfather who was remembered for being a sailor on a U-boat fighting for the "wrong" side in WW 1, only to learn that particular ancestor was a captain of a US Navy ship who fought against the U-boats in that war. Things get mis-remembered, embellished and confabulated in family memory tales; the fact that such later treasure writers as Storm and Bicknell did embellish the stories and were very likely aware of early and real incidents as the 1879 Peralta case, which could then be blended into a family history by the family reinforces the possibility of such errors. How could it be proven that this is NOT the case? How about finding another family of a victim or victims of the legendary Peralta massacre? A letter from a Peralta to someone, dating to before 1891, in which the massacre is mentioned as an event larger than two men being attacked by Apaches would help.

The collection of assumptions in the Peralta massacre can "fit" the legend of course and may well be true. However even if the skeletal remains are the Peralta mining expedition, we are left with more questions than answers - like why are there not piles of gold and/or gold ore all over the massacre site? Common knowledge has it that Apaches had no use for gold or silver, and there are a number of Amerindian memories of attacks on parties of Anglos in which the gold was simply dumped on the ground or into the creek or river etc. Instead we have the finding of ONE such pile of ore (Silverlock and Malm) and that not exactly on the spot of the massacre either. Silverlock and Malm made the erroneous conclusion that since the ore was found there, the mine must be very close by. Then there is the "work camp". It is an assumption that this must be very close to the mine(s) when it could be miles away possibly not even in the Superstitions at all. The Peralta party could have been traveling to and from a mine or mines that are located some distance away from where the massacre occurred. It may have been a different party of Mexican or Spanish miners which is equally un-documented. How can we assign a date for a collection of skeletal remains seen by Army scouts in 1864, that cannot be examined today? They could be the Espejo party for all we know.

I realize we have been over this ad nauseum, and the evidence which would settle the case absolutely probably can not be found. There is evidence that the Peraltas were mining, but not in what we call the Superstitions today; the gold mine in the Bradshaws of course everyone is aware of but a bit of evidence that they were doing some small scale digging in the Goldfield hills also was found. I don't have the letters handy but mining tools were found in the Goldfield hills in some old diggings, with the intials of Peralta on them. This would work with the full-scale massacre OR the 1879 documented incident of just two men as the site where the actual gold mining was being done.

Sorry for the long post.
Oroblanco
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Roy,

YES FALLING APART! Now, it looks to most people like you are arguing for the sake of argument because your facts got smacked down.

You asked:

Falling apart, if the ONLY Indian who ever had a gold tooth was Massai, the Apache Kid or the Carlisle Kid. Are you going to stick with the statement that NO Indians ever had gold work in their teeth?

YES! I am saying that there is no evidence of any Indian in the area during that time period having any gold or silver teeth. I have looked and found none. While that doesn't mean one or two didn't exist, there is ABSOLUTELY ZERO PROOF that any did. On the other hand gold and silver teeth on Anglos and Mexicans were quite common.

Then there is the question of whether that victim with a gold tooth was even related to the rest of the skeletal remains; it could have been a captive Mexican or Anglo that just happened to get killed with the rest of the Indians. Also, the one found with clothes and gold in a poke, may not have been related to those in the main site. It is assumption, in fact one that may well be un-justified, since that particular one had not been stripped, while the others had, it is suggestive that the victors had time to pick over the dead enemies at their leisure, and would not likely miss one if he were close.

Yes! ABSOLUTELY! A captive that was allowed to keep a pound of rich gold ore. YOU ARE REACHING MY FRIEND!

Are we to just conclude the 1879 incident was made up to sell newspapers? Funny they would come up with the Peralta name in 1879, just as that odd story of Geronimo having a Mexican father also named Peralta, a point that no one seems to have picked up on.

First, do you know how common the name Peralta was/is? VERY! There is a good chance that they were actually THE Peraltas we are talking about going back up to take a look at their mine. To see if maybe the Indian problems had died down enough to come back and have another try at the rich gold mine they knew existed.

So many Indian massacres, but the only one you can show in the area happened about five years too late. I don't know where you learned to debate, but leading with faulty and inaccurate information isn't the best move. If you have this slam dunk evidence to prove Indian massacres in the same area at the same time, why not lead off with it and head the arguments off at the pass. Don't lead with stories that are proven untrue or inaccurate.

Best-Mike

Best-Mike
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Well Mike you have consistently misread and mis-interpreted what has been posted, repeatedly. You describe my facts as "smacked down" yet missed the whole point - that it was a documented massacre of Indians in the Superstitions; which is what I have been saying all along - that this massacre or one of several others (you can go ahead and find them on your own) is the root that was mixed with the incident in which two Peralta brothers were attacked by Apaches to end up with the legend. If Edwards saw the skeletons in 1865, he was in Skull Valley and quite some distance from the Superstitions. The skulls and skeletons there were from an 1864 massacre of Yavapais by Anglos, and the valley was named "Skull Valley" when Lt Montieth left the bodies un-buried. The AZ volunteers were in this very valley in Dec of 1865, as stated by Lt Hutton in his report. In fact his command was stationed there in Camp Whipple at least until Sept of 1866.

Just for an example of your misreading what is posted, what I said was the skeleton with a gold tooth could be that of a captive held by Indians, not referring to the one found with clothing. No poke of gold was found with the one that was stripped. Not sure how you made that connection.

I will be happy to tell you where I learned to debate, when you tell me where you learned to read.
Best to you, and this will be my last post to you on the topic so feel free.
Roy
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Roy,

Its actually very simple. If all we had were a bunch of bones at the Massacre Grounds, I would agree that they would MOST LIKELY have been Indians. Unfortunately (for your argument), we have a lot more. You say they are not related, but what is more likely? Go on, you can say it .... given all the evidence at hand, it is MORE LIKELY that considering the tooth, clothed skeleton, trail of skeletons and personal effects back to the camp site, mining tools at the camp site, trail from the camp site to the arrastra (work site), and matching ore, and Peralta Family History, that the skeletons were from a massacre of Mexicans that had secretly gone into the Supers to work their old mine.

You said,

If Edwards saw the skeletons in 1865, he was in Skull Valley and quite some distance from the Superstitions. The skulls and skeletons there were from an 1864 massacre of Yavapais by Anglos, and the valley was named "Skull Valley" when Lt Montieth left the bodies un-buried. The AZ volunteers were in this very valley in Dec of 1865, as stated by Lt Hutton in his report. In fact his command was stationed there in Camp Whipple at least until Sept of 1866.

One of the main duties of the 1st Az was to act as escort for civilians traveling through hostile areas. If you read the reports of Lt Hutton, you would have seen that men were routinely transferred between units as necessary for manning levels, as well as traveling between posts while escorting civilians. While they were stationed at Ft Whipple, their escort duties took them all over the place. An example of this would be ME! While I was permanently stationed at one place, I was TAD (Temporary Assigned Duty) to the USS Carl Vinson (CVN-70) for her World Cruise in 1983. So, while I may have been stationed one place, I went around the world. Sgt Edwards did basically the same thing on a smaller scale. So did Lt Hutton.

Best-Mike
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Good afternoon Gully: You haven't commented on my last post. Do you wish for an even better one, either will easily answer all of your questions.

Remember, the main problem with Tayopa was that most tried to fit previous incorrect conclusions to fit the basic story and data as it developed. The Dutchman is loaded with them.

An Example , on the Flipper thingie on the setting sun on March the 7th, some have managed to move the sun setting over Tayopa to North of Ocampo to include the Nacori, Guaynopa area If you just take it as it is, it is exactly on spot, it sets over Tayopa.

Another point is that the map posted in Dobies 'Apache gold, Yaqui silver" , is 90+ % correct, yet because of the way that it is drawn - absolutely correctly - someone decided that it meant on the north side of the Sierra Obscura on it's drainage, also that was closer to the Guaynopa zone, etc., so that became a Shibboleth re-enforcing the idea that the Tayopa was up there. I presume that 100's , 'including Westwood JOE', concentrated in that zone erroneously.

I suggest returning to the the very basics of the Dutchman's story and sanitizing the rest with a heavy hand. Remember none of those writing had any success either, also they undoubtedly had more data which wasn't released.

The same goes for those cottin pickin stone maps.

Don Jose de La Mancha
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Jose,

What we don't need are more wild possibilities. In your scenario there was still a group of miners at the beginning.The trail of skeletons and personal effects led back to their camp site.

Like I said to Roy. If all there were was a bunch of skeletons, then Occam's Razor would say that the simplest explanation of a band of Indians massacred by Apaches would be the most likely one. It is only when we add in all the other information that the "most likely" story moves away from Indians.

When you look at Pima History, you can see that they never used more modern techniques in mining, and that mining was never on a large scale. They learned to work placers. They hand cobbled ore from exposed ledges. I can't find any evidence of them doing any REAL hard rock mining. The closest I can imagine would be that in some cases they might work at an abandoned Spanish Mine for themselves, but I haven't found anything to substantiate that.

Best-Mike
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

G'afternoon mi buddy Gully: hmm didn't I mention that the miners were Spanish or mestizos, not Indians ? The Indians massacred them and in turn were RIP?

Don Jose de La Mancha
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Well Mike I thought you might just hit one of the other documented massacres in the Superstitions when you gave the date of 1864, as that is correct and in that instance there were 24 Apaches/Yavapais killed, one white, and a trail of dead from the main battle site. The exact location of this particular fight has not officially been found, the last good landmark reference was crossing the Salt river from the north bank, and the Pima allies joining the whites, with the fight in a valley.

Good luck and good hunting to you all, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Oroblanco said:
Well Mike I thought you might just hit one of the other documented massacres in the Superstitions when you gave the date of 1864, as that is correct and in that instance there were 24 Apaches/Yavapais killed, one white, and a trail of dead from the main battle site. The exact location of this particular fight has not officially been found, the last good landmark reference was crossing the Salt river from the north bank, and the Pima allies joining the whites, with the fight in a valley.

Good luck and good hunting to you all, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

YOU'RE the one making the claim. It's up to you to prove it, not me. But if you are talking about "Bloody Tanks", I didn't give it any thought because it happened on the Eastern Side of the Supers (either Globe or Fish Creek Canyon). On modern maps, Bloody Tanks is just South of Miami, AZ. SE side of the Supers.

Sorry, Massacre Canyon is too far off.

Mike
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

G'morning Gully. You posted -->What we don't need are more wild possibilities
**************
I presume that includes your postulate? Which is even less acceptable from what I have seen posted in here so far??????? Too many loose ends, way too many.

Never get so locked up in anything so that you then become inflexible, until, it is a 'reasonably' proven (?) fact. Even then --??? This is why I have asked readers to question, and question me again on Tayopa.

So far everything holds up , but I realize that that can be strictly a coincidental or a parallel affair. A+B= C, or B+A =C The same applies here .

A small example, if the scout did as he claimed, intending to go back to the mine to work it, would he have disclosed what he did, knowing miners in those days, as he undoubtedly did.. I.E. did he create a verbal trail 'away' from the suppposed mine area?

Obviously, once he did locate it, he would then be relatively safe after filing on it, which he never did? This means that he -----??

Sooo, the jury is still out on this, or any other version so far.

Don Jose de La Mancha

,
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Jose,

I presume that includes your postulate? Which is even less acceptable from what I have seen posted in here so far?HuhHuh Too many loose ends, way too many.

Please show me the loose ends. If they REALLY are loose then I have no problem admitting as much. It is just that you have to take in the big picture of this story, which neither you nor Roy seem to have done. Fixate on a small detail here and there, and leave out much of the rest of the known information. Roy has been trying so hard to prove the skeletons were Indian that he keeps posting evidence that is either too far away or many years wrong. I understand the point that many killings took place, but 30-40 dead did not go unnoticed (even Indian).

I have said it before (blue in the face), that there are TONS of possibilities, but taking in the BIG PICTURE, and considering all the evidence, the MOST LIKELY scenario is the story that we already have. You can say what you want, and I know you want to take up for Roy, but I will always remember that you stated it was your opinion that this monument was natural:

birdmonument2.jpg


You never said that you were joking either. I cannot believe that you can look at that and think that Mother Nature put those four rocks on top of each other! HAHAHA

Best-Mike
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

HI MIKE mi bestest buddy: as for the birdie, as a matter of fact -------------? Meet one of natures anomalies, a baby's shoe, or is it an actual fossil from ancient times.

Oro doesn't need my, or anyone elses help, nor for that matter nor do you. You are all good, however, like me, can get fixiated <- like that word -> on an incorrect, & possibly irrelevant point. However don't do like some, don't get insulted or agressive if something is in doubt or is a possible error, just get in there and defend it. or accept that possibly you have made an error.

I shudder to think of the many that I have made, and still do ----- Shaddup Joe !.

Don Jose de La Mancha
 

Attachments

  • GEDC0001.webp
    GEDC0001.webp
    12 KB · Views: 669
  • GEDC0002.webp
    GEDC0002.webp
    11.1 KB · Views: 688
  • GEDC0003.webp
    GEDC0003.webp
    12.8 KB · Views: 682
  • GEDC0004.webp
    GEDC0004.webp
    10.9 KB · Views: 677
Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Don Jose,

"I shudder to think of the many that I have made, and still do ----- Shaddup Joe"

I don't recall the last time I made a mistake, but my wife tells me my short term memory has grown much shorter lately. :dontknow:

On the other hand, I may have zigged when I should have zagged earlier today.

image00221.jpg


OK........it's been a tough day, but I made it through it. ::)

Take care,

Joe
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

:laughing7: :laughing7: :laughing7:

Battered,but still proud.

Regards:Wayne
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Gee,

A post disappeared. I guess there are some fans of the president here.

The last time I made a mistake is when I thought I made a mistake.

Best-Mike
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

what is a mistake,, is that those steaks you cook with mist...??? ...lol
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

BB speaking of ------------------5th---------------- snicker.

Don Jose de La Mancha
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Bloody tanks fight was most likely NOT in the eastern Superstitions, read the accounts of those who participated and remember they were close enough to the Pima villages for a messenger to go and get Pima warriors to help, and they were present for the fight. Not likely the site would be near Miami in that case, and they were not so far from the Gila river because they buried the white dead on the river bank after the battle. The Gila river is not close to Miami. Some historians think it was at Fish creek, which also seems unlikely due to the topography. As a possible origin for the skeletal remains at massacre field, this battle ought to be considered on several points - especially the number of Indians killed, the trail of dead left by the retreating Apaches etc not to mention the fact the Apaches had just been raiding mining camps and ranches, which could account for the finding of gold with one set of remains.

Also check out the Mammoth mine; someone was mining it long before the Americans re-discovered it; perhaps the very Peraltas of the 1879 incident.

Side note - I will be 'absent' more often in the upcoming weeks, nothing wrong just extra bizzie. So I will probably fall behind in our discussions, but will try to touch base when I can.
Roy
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Mike,

Are you guys talking about Massai - the Chiricahua Indian? I cannot say anything about a gold tooth - but, there is no proof that he was killed by a posse in 1906 or any other time. In fact - he is one of the big mysteries - especially from the time he made it back to Arizona - because he just
disappeared.

In fact, in newspapers across the country, the statement ""Massai manifested himself like the dust-storm, or the morning mist--a shiver in the air, and gone" was re-interated time and again.

Remington wrote a great article about Massai, called "Massai's Crooked Trail" (good read).

They actually think he lived until at least 1911.

Beth
 

Re: Lost Dutchman in the Superstitions? What is wrong with this 'picture'?

Oroblanco said:
Bloody tanks fight was most likely NOT in the eastern Superstitions, read the accounts of those who participated and remember they were close enough to the Pima villages for a messenger to go and get Pima warriors to help, and they were present for the fight. Not likely the site would be near Miami in that case, and they were not so far from the Gila river because they buried the white dead on the river bank after the battle. The Gila river is not close to Miami. Some historians think it was at Fish creek, which also seems unlikely due to the topography. As a possible origin for the skeletal remains at massacre field, this battle ought to be considered on several points - especially the number of Indians killed, the trail of dead left by the retreating Apaches etc not to mention the fact the Apaches had just been raiding mining camps and ranches, which could account for the finding of gold with one set of remains.

Also check out the Mammoth mine; someone was mining it long before the Americans re-discovered it; perhaps the very Peraltas of the 1879 incident.

Side note - I will be 'absent' more often in the upcoming weeks, nothing wrong just extra bizzie. So I will probably fall behind in our discussions, but will try to touch base when I can.
Roy

Roy,

Maybe you can quote a source for that locating of the Fight at Bloody Tanks? I can't find anything of the sort.

Here is an excerpt from the official report on the Battle of Bloody Tanks:

"On January 24, 1864, a party of thirty Americans and fourteen Maricopa and Pima Indians, under Col. King S. Woolsey, aid to the to the Governor of Arizona, attacked a band of Gila Apaches sixty or seventy miles northeast of the Pima villages and killed nineteen of them and wounded others.

Sixty or seventy miles NorthEast of the Pima Villages does not equate to Massacre Canyon. Sorry.

Here is another, more specific account of the battle area:

Here old Juan Chivari, the Maricopa Chief, was found, and expressed a wish to aid in the expedition. The offer was gladly welcomed, and when the return to the Verde camp was made there was added to the party a reinforcement of Maricopa and Pima braves, the leader being the Chief himself, and an additional white volunteer. The trail was then taken up afresh, leading around the base of Superstition Mountain and through by the way of Devil's Canon to a point nine miles west of where Globe now stands. Here at daylight the party came upon the Apaches at some natural tanks in the bottom of a mountain valley.

Let's see, where all the maps place the Fight at Bloody Tanks is ABOUT (7.3 miles) 9 miles West of Globe, Az.

AGAIN, not in your location. Sorry again.

Best-Mike
 

Top Member Reactions

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom