Sims Ely

[cactusjumper]

When are the books do out?

RR,

Soon.

Joe Ribaudo

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Treasure of Victoria Peak - Grab it through Amazon!

[roadrunner]

Have you heard of any reason why there would be more than one book?
I thought it was said maybe 2 books.
Why 2 I wonder.

 

[Dirty Dutchman]

Have you heard of any reason why there would be more than one book?
I thought it was said maybe 2 books.
Why 2 I wonder.

Im guessing so he can sell more books. Give you just enough in book #1 so you'll buy book #2. Marketing 101...

Thanks
Travis

 

[somehiker]

Dr. Glover got a few of us together during last year's Rendezvous for a bit of a round-table discussion, during which he took notes.
Started out with the obligatory introduction summaries from all participants and went from there. I found it somewhat interesting, and wondered what he had in mind, but with a lack of moderation on his part, it eventually became just another gathering of folks engaged in one-on-one conversations. Later, in speaking with some of the participants, I learned that he had probably missed an opportunity to record some interesting experiences, which would have been shared had the round-table been moderated. I do think a chapter about the Rendezvous and it's supporters would be a worthwhile addition to one of his books, though.

Regards:SH.

 

[Cubfan64]

Last update I received indicated a fall release for the first book and the second to come out in 2014.

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

wow..looks like I talk to myself on line as in person..duh?

i do hope dr glover will exceed what I have read prior to his work.
some of the early things were a lot better reading than the recent...
who wrote about the pit mines up on top?...the disappearing pits, great photos an all... that was a decent text...



nobody talks to the crazie people?

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

since no one is responding anyway...I need to rant....
I looked at every map I had...an then some...
someone on line once told me I was deluded {perhaps} as to driving out to reevis ranch once...from superior...boy did that guy go on...put me right in my place..." I worked there an there is only one road into reevis ranch, an that is from the apache trail...route 88.

well..as I said...I let it go that time...who am I to argue? yep...even though I did it...an others with me remembered it...some guy on line knew it all an just had to set me straight...

so I look at all my maps...just cause I was bored an had the bark notes joe sent me...ok...lemmesee...
hey lookit here....reevis ranch trail...straight to pinal from the old man reevis's farm field...
some people don't know reevis made good money selling produce in pinal an silver king...
so here is his old wagon road...but you couldn't drive to reevis ranch from superior?
ok...you are correct...one has to drive oh, a mile or two down the road to get to pinal from superior...an hang a turn to the north...all the roads bump into reevis ranch trail...
damn...so I guess I am startled that I would let some ignorant bully send me off on a tangent an disbelieve what I know I did...
or...why do people, with little knowledge on a topic, invest so much energy into making someone else into the dumb as a rock person in the conversation?

 

[Some Dude]

Kraig,

............ how can we trust a talk given by Jim Bark in 1936?

Since Bark was thinking of writing a book of his own, how do we know he wasn't just seeding the ground, so to speak, for his book aspirations. As you know, it's not uncommon for an author to make up stories before publishing his work, and floating them in public to give more weight to his book when it's finally published.

Speaking of that, when is your book going to the publisher?

Take care,

Joe Ribaudo

Hello Joe,

Interesting idea. I’m curious; do you believe that Jim Bark told distortions deliberately to generate interest in his upcoming book?

Personally, I find it hard to believe that Jim Bark would ever write a book because, unless I am mistaken, he tore down every monument and marker that he could find.


Question for everybody,

I keep reading about references to the “Spangler” version of the Bark Notes. Does anybody have them? Anybody seen them?

If so, do they differ dramatically from the other Barks Notes in circulation (Glover’s book mentioned there were not any major discrepancies in the several versions he had seen, but I don’t know if Dr. Glover had seen the Spangler version).

If anyone has a copy (of the Spangler version), I might be able to make it worth your while.

Best to All,

Just Some Dude - - -

 

[Matthew Roberts]

Question for everybody,

I keep reading about references to the “Spangler” version of the Bark Notes. Does anybody have them? Anybody seen them?

If so, do they differ dramatically from the other Barks Notes in circulation (Glover’s book mentioned there were not any major discrepancies in the several versions he had seen, but I don’t know if Dr. Glover had seen the Spangler version).

If anyone has a copy (of the Spangler version), I might be able to make it worth your while.

Best to All,

Just Some Dude

Some Dude,

From what I've been able to understand, there are several versions of the "Bark Notes" floating around today. Six that I have seen and they all are very similar with no major differences. The "Spangler version" you ask about is the original Jim Bark Notes that is said to contain major differences, one being the 40 questions Bark would occasionally ask people concerning the Lost Dutchman Mine.

That "Spangler" version is not out in the general public and I don't know anyone outside of John Spangler, his sons and grandsons who have ever seen it or have a copy of it. Glover has not seen it and the Spangler family have kept a tight lip on it's contents and LDM issues in general.

If you're looking to buy a copy of the original, the Spangler family would be the only possible source. I live in Huntington Beach not far from the late John Spangler's house and the Spangler's are not yet through with the Lost Dutchman mine so purchasing a copy of Jim Bark's original notes would be a long shot in my opinion.

Matthew K. Roberts

 

[cactusjumper]

Question for everybody,

I keep reading about references to the “Spangler” version of the Bark Notes. Does anybody have them? Anybody seen them?

If so, do they differ dramatically from the other Barks Notes in circulation (Glover’s book mentioned there were not any major discrepancies in the several versions he had seen, but I don’t know if Dr. Glover had seen the Spangler version).

If anyone has a copy (of the Spangler version), I might be able to make it worth your while.

Best to All,

Just Some Dude

Some Dude,

From what I've been able to understand, there are several versions of the "Bark Notes" floating around today. Six that I have seen and they all are very similar with no major differences. The "Spangler version" you ask about is the original Jim Bark Notes that is said to contain major differences, one being the 40 questions Bark would occasionally ask people concerning the Lost Dutchman Mine.

That "Spangler" version is not out in the general public and I don't know anyone outside of John Spangler, his sons and grandsons who have ever seen it or have a copy of it. Glover has not seen it and the Spangler family have kept a tight lip on it's contents and LDM issues in general.

If you're looking to buy a copy of the original, the Spangler family would be the only possible source. I live in Huntington Beach not far from the late John Spangler's house and the Spangler's are not yet through with the Lost Dutchman mine so purchasing a copy of Jim Bark's original notes would be a long shot in my opinion.

Matthew K. Roberts

Kraig,

Funny how your story is different than your old partner Steve's.

He told me that Dr. Glover did see that seventh version, but that Thomas would never admit it. Wonder where he got that bit of information.

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Some Dude]

Hi Matthew,

Thanks for the reply. Because of that, one has to wonder how much validity there is in following the Barks Notes that are in circulation. It has been speculated that Estee Conatser saw the Spangler version and published some of the details in her book. I have no idea whether that’s true or not, or perhaps it’s just wishful thinking.

It will be interesting to see if the ‘real’ Sims notes clear up some of the discrepancies between the so-called Holmes vs. Petrasch group. I guess we’ll just have to wait for Dr. Glover’s new books to find that answer.

Best,
Some Dude

 

[Cubfan64]

Hi Matthew,

Thanks for the reply. Because of that, one has to wonder how much validity there is in following the Barks Notes that are in circulation. It has been speculated that Estee Conatser saw the Spangler version and published some of the details in her book. I have no idea whether that’s true or not, or perhaps it’s just wishful thinking.

It will be interesting to see if the ‘real’ Sims notes clear up some of the discrepancies between the so-called Holmes vs. Petrasch group. I guess we’ll just have to wait for Dr. Glover’s new books to find that answer.

Best,
Some Dude

While the "Bark Notes" that exist in public are interesting, the provenance behind them is questionable at best.

Dutch Hunters (and most treasure hunters at that) are a secretive breed. Take the Spangler Family for example - if they have Bark's original notes and 40 questions/answers, they have not shared them publicly and I wouldn't expect them to.

My best guess is that if there was ever anything of real value in the "Bark Notes" we've seen publicly, that information was removed long ago and before the public version started getting dispersed.

If I were to make a guess, I'd say Dr. Glover's books will bring up 2-3 new questions for every one it answers - that's just the way it is with legends like the LDM imho.

 

[Springfield]

..... My best guess is that if there was ever anything of real value in the "Bark Notes" we've seen publicly, that information was removed long ago and before the public version started getting dispersed.

If I were to make a guess, I'd say Dr. Glover's books will bring up 2-3 new questions for every one it answers - that's just the way it is with legends like the LDM imho.

Anyone who believes he can acquire valuable information regarding the whereabouts of hidden things of value by researching the public record or by purchasing a publication is seriously kidding himself. These are fine sources for accumulating pulp fiction lore surrounding 'lost mines and hidden treasure' legends, sure, but proprietary information with one degree of separation is the only game worth playing. In the case of the LDM, unless you yourself spoke with Waltz (or whatever his name was), you're merely peeing in the wind.

 

[cactusjumper]

Anyone who believes he can acquire valuable information regarding the whereabouts of hidden things of value by researching the public record or by purchasing a publication is seriously kidding himself. These are fine sources for accumulating pulp fiction lore surrounding 'lost mines and hidden treasure' legends, sure, but proprietary information with one degree of separation is the only game worth playing. In the case of the LDM, unless you yourself spoke with Waltz (or whatever his name was), you're merely peeing in the wind.

Springfield,

Since no one alive has spoken to Waltz, and there are people who believe he did have a mine, where would you suggest Dutch Hunters begin their search? I would say to look at the stories that seem to be generated closest to the time and the people who were closest to Waltz.

Each of us views that "evidence", questionable as it is, from our own perspective and biases. Based on that wide disparity of human mental abilities, we will come to many conclusions. In that respect, no one is wrong. That's how I feel about my solution to the Stone Maps. I know it's correct, but that does not mean I needed to find anything treasure related by using that map.

Paul, who I consider a friend, can't see what I do in my solution. The same goes for many of my other friends, friendly acquaintances and outright enemies. I don't take any offense to their opinions. "After all, in that respect, no one is wrong.", including me.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Springfield]

Springfield,

Since no one alive has spoken to Waltz, and there are people who believe he did have a mine, where would you suggest Dutch Hunters begin their search? I would say to look at the stories that seem to be generated closest to the time and the people who were closest to Waltz....

Take care,

Joe

You are at the heart of the matter here. The question is not 'where' but 'why' to begin a search for the LDM. The problem with this lost/mine treasure story, like nearly all others, is that the protagonist is long dead. Even if a contemporary got good information from him at the time, the best you can expect of it is hearsay. The most important tool in treasure hunting is knowledge of human nature. Humans will lie about this kind of information 100% of the time. Then, after a few applications of the childrens' 'telephone' game, any hope for the truth is corrupted beyond repair. Now add a hundred years worth of disinformation, jimmied clues, and other assorted honest or dishonest errors and, well ...

If a guy wants to roam the hills where Waltz - or whatever his name was - allegedly had a hidden gold mine, more power to him, as long as he realizes he has no chance to find the place if it ever existed. Going off on weekend adventures is fun. Pointing out landmarks adds realism to the fantasy. Knowing the whole exercise is a fantasy is healthy. However, devoting years to a search for a phantom based on fatally corrupted data only displays a naivety that can ruin one's life. It's kind of like a gambling addiction - sounds good on paper, but in the end the odds are overwhelming that the naive one will end up with nothing. At least the casinos are air-conditioned.

 

[cactusjumper]

You are at the heart of the matter here. The question is not 'where' but 'why' to begin a search for the LDM. The problem with this lost/mine treasure story, like nearly all others, is that the protagonist is long dead. Even if a contemporary got good information from him at the time, the best you can expect of it is hearsay. The most important tool in treasure hunting is knowledge of human nature. Humans will lie about this kind of information 100% of the time. Then, after a few applications of the childrens' 'telephone' game, any hope for the truth is corrupted beyond repair. Now add a hundred years worth of disinformation, jimmied clues, and other assorted honest or dishonest errors and, well ...

If a guy wants to roam the hills where Waltz - or whatever his name was - allegedly had a hidden gold mine, more power to him, as long as he realizes he has no chance to find the place if it ever existed. Going off on weekend adventures is fun. Pointing out landmarks adds realism to the fantasy. Knowing the whole exercise is a fantasy is healthy. However, devoting years to a search for a phantom based on fatally corrupted data only displays a naivety that can ruin one's life. It's kind of like a gambling addiction - sounds good on paper, but in the end the odds are overwhelming that the naive one will end up with nothing. At least the casinos are air-conditioned.

springfield,

How would you know where to start looking for Troy, or the Atocha?

Take care,

Joe

 

[somehiker]

springfield,

How would you know where to start looking for Troy, or the Atocha?

Take care,

Joe

This has always been one of my favorites....
Archaeologist opens tomb of King Tut ? History.com This Day in History ? 2/16/1923
"Though several of the foremost excavators over the past century had declared there was nothing left to find in the Valley of the Kings, Howard Carter and his sponsor, Lord Carnarvon, spent a number of years and a lot of money searching for a tomb they weren't sure existed. In November 1922, they found it. Carter had discovered not just an unknown ancient Egyptian tomb, but one that had lain nearly undisturbed for over 3,000 years. What lay within astounded the world. "
King Tut - The Discovery of King Tut's Tomb

 

[Springfield]

springfield,

How would you know where to start looking for Troy, or the Atocha?

Take care,

Joe

Comparing the search for Troy with the LDM is so far in different worlds as to beg comment, so we'll politely ignore the question.

However, Fisher's search for the Atocha vs the LDM is a fair comparison, IMO. As you know, the whereabouts of the Atocha's sinking was well known at the time of the incident - it went down in only 50 feet of water with its sister ship having gone aground nearby, marking the spot. The armada's sister ships returned to Vera Cruz and reported the incident, initiating an immediate salvage effort, which failed. To make a long story short and to answer your question - I would emulate Fisher, obviously, who had already located one of the Atocha's sister ships nearby, and keep lookin' in the vicinity where the Atocha was known to rest.

Information: notwithstanding that world class figures such as Homer had no reason to spread self-serving rumors (it was the Golden Age, not the Iron Age) - let's skip Troy and consider the documentation surrounding the Atocha. The Spanish salvage effort recovered a good share of one of the nearby sister ships and searched for the Atocha for years, documenting all details, as was their wont. There was never any question of the ship's cargo or the close vicinity where she lay. They just never found her and gave up. Fisher merely continued the search with better technology, and with diligence and tenacity, he finally succeeded. He clearly had reliable information to begin with. Not rumors.

The LDM? Unsubstantiated rumors, wild speculation, crazy late-comers and nothing but self-serving disinformation from the git-go. It's fun, the books are interesting from a historical perspective and it's been a tidy cottage industry for the locals, but honestly - once Waltz (or whatever his name was) took the dirt nap, who do you choose to believe? And why?

 

[cactusjumper]

Comparing the search for Troy with the LDM is so far in different worlds as to beg comment, so we'll politely ignore the question.

However, Fisher's search for the Atocha vs the LDM is a fair comparison, IMO. As you know, the whereabouts of the Atocha's sinking was well known at the time of the incident - it went down in only 50 feet of water with its sister ship having gone aground nearby, marking the spot. The armada's sister ships returned to Vera Cruz and reported the incident, initiating an immediate salvage effort, which failed. To make a long story short and to answer your question - I would emulate Fisher, obviously, who had already located one of the Atocha's sister ships nearby, and keep lookin' in the vicinity where the Atocha was known to rest.

Information: notwithstanding that world class figures such as Homer had no reason to spread self-serving rumors (it was the Golden Age, not the Iron Age) - let's skip Troy and consider the documentation surrounding the Atocha. The Spanish salvage effort recovered a good share of one of the nearby sister ships and searched for the Atocha for years, documenting all details, as was their wont. There was never any question of the ship's cargo or the close vicinity where she lay. They just never found her and gave up. Fisher merely continued the search with better technology, and with diligence and tenacity, he finally succeeded. He clearly had reliable information to begin with. Not rumors.

The LDM? Unsubstantiated rumors, wild speculation, crazy late-comers and nothing but self-serving disinformation from the git-go. It's fun, the books are interesting from a historical perspective and it's been a tidy cottage industry for the locals, but honestly - once Waltz (or whatever his name was) took the dirt nap, who do you choose to believe? And why?

Springfield,

Looks like we will just have to disagree on this one. I was not comparing those two searches to the LDM. I was comparing the methodology. As for the Atocha, Fisher was at a loss for it's exact location. It was not until Professor Eugene Lyon found the answer in the "Archives of the Indies" in Seville that he found success.

A few years ago I had the honor of talking to Professor Lyon on the phone. He is quite well along in years, and while his voice was a little shaky, his mind was as sharp as could be. It was that mind searching through reams of musty records that brought Fisher over the wreck.

That is what eventually solves most of these puzzles, as far as I'm concerned. Not to discount blind luck, it's usually focused research that saves the day. Others, of course, may have a different opinion.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Springfield]

Springfield,

Looks like we will just have to disagree on this one. I was not comparing those two searches to the LDM. I was comparing the methodology. As for the Atocha, Fisher was at a loss for it's exact location. It was not until Professor Eugene Lyon found the answer in the "Archives of the Indies" in Seville that he found success.

A few years ago I had the honor of talking to Professor Lyon on the phone. He is quite well along in years, and while his voice was a little shaky, his mind was as sharp as could be. It was that mind searching through reams of musty records that brought Fisher over the wreck.

That is what eventually solves most of these puzzles, as far as I'm concerned. Not to discount blind luck, it's usually focused research that saves the day. Others, of course, may have a different opinion.

Take care,

Joe

The point is Joe, that the Atocha incident was well-documented with facts by professional documentarians since 1622, when she went down. Fisher used the information he could get. The LDM legend has no such pedigree and in my book is only valuable for its accompanying Arizona history possibilities, not for its potential as an actual retrievable target. Of course, as always, I could be wrong.