Here is a copy of the actual analysis done from the actual people who did them. (I could not figure out how to post my email)
E: FW: Peralta Stones
M. L. Brack Jul 13, 2010
To
me
No worries. I think it’s one of those things where someone has to deal a real nutjob once or twice or three times a year. Kind of like the day I had to talk to a guy that was looking for something, somewhere, couldn’t be more specific but was very curious if we’d had any success with psychics. You can’t override belief with experience.
Mike
- On Tue, 7/13/10, M. L. Brack <mlbrack@desert.com> wrote:
From: M. L. Brack <mlbrack@desert.com>
Subject: RE: FW: Peralta Stones
To: "'Beth Decker'" <oroblanco@yahoo.com>
Date: Tuesday, July 13, 2010, 12:29 PM
I don’t know on all. I’m just the information funnel. Evidentially, the “findings” ended up in an AZhwys article, but I don’t know what the driving force was behind the analysis.
I’m finding that it’s a touch of a sore subject, as it just won’t go away. Our ground stone analyst just got a big long email this weekend where someone wanted to tear apart their interpretations, and expected a response justifying why we have labeled this things as a hoax. There is some degree of craziness associated with the “artifacts.”
I don’t know what else exists as far as project materials, but I don’t think there is much more. I’d recommend contacting Henry Wallace here at Desert (henry@desert.com) as evidentially he coordinated the analysis.
Mike
From: Beth Decker [mailto

roblanco@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 9:45 AM
To:
mlbrack@desert.com
Subject: Re: FW: Peralta Stones
Mike,
Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!
Is there a chance to get a copy (hard or email) of those correspondences for my files? (the original documents - well, a copy of the original documents)?
I really appreciate your efforts. Do you happen to know why DA got the stones to look at?
That's the one other thing I wasn't sure of. I wasn't sure how Arizona Highways was involved, but I do see some of the correspondence mentioned Arizona Highways. I am
making the assumption (which could be incorrect) that either the museum or Flagg asked
DA to look at them?
--- On Tue, 7/13/10, M. L. Brack <mlbrack@desert.com> wrote:
From: M. L. Brack <mlbrack@desert.com>
Subject: FW: Peralta Stones
To: "'Beth Decker'" <oroblanco@yahoo.com>
Date: Tuesday, July 13, 2010, 10:35 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Henry Wallace [mailto:hwallace1@mindspring.com]
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 8:31 PM
To:
mbrack@desert.com
Subject: Fwd: Peralta Stones
Mike, If you don't already have this, here is the summary of our
analyses of the Peralta Stones. This was sent to the director of the
museum where the were kept as well as to the reporter, Anne Montgomery.
--Henry
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Peralta Stones
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 16:23:32 -0700
From: Henry D. Wallace <hwallace1@mindspring.com>
To:
raycyn@cox.net
We are finished with the analysis of the stones (see below for comments
from analysts that we sent to Anne). A photographer from Arizona Highways
may be calling you to get a photo with you and the stones. He was going to
get photos and then they are ready to be picked up.
Cheers,
Henry Wallace
Desert Archaeology
___________________
From Jenny Adams:
In my opinion, they are very nicely done and very interesting pieces.
Having said that - in my opinion - most of the manufacturing was done
with modern (meaning electrical) tools. The pair of dark stones were
mechanically sanded and then drilled or dremmeled to make the symbols. I
didn't see any metal filings to help with that interpretation, but in
many places, there is a start dimple where the drill first touched the
stone. The large cross on one side was chiseled rather than drilled. I
could go on in more detail about which symbols were made with different
tools and with different techniques but I doubt that level of detail is
necessary at this point.
There is no evidence that these stones were ever buried and then dug up
or that they sat out in the elements for any great length of time. The
stone material is very soft and there would be lots of random abrasions
across the sanded surfaces if they had been buried. If they sat out in
the open there would be lichen, weathering of the symbols, and
discoloration of the stone material - just look at old headstones in any
cemetery.
Here's Homer's:
HI Henry,
My comments on the Peralta Stones:
1). Witch imagery- a quick review of witch pictures on the internet reveals
that prior to 1900 witches were not depicted with the pointed hat that
appears on the stone next to one of the 1847 dates. The stone image
resembles strongly witch imagery from the 1910s to 1940s.
Examples-
http://www.geocities.com/~sturtas1031/halloween5.html
http://www.magicgallery.com/images/KELLAR_WITCH.jpg
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=29477&item=2254838871
&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=10945&item=2255094307
&rd=1
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=14013&item=2255749424
&rd=1
2). The horse image is also not typical of horse imagery of the 1840s.
As an
example see:
http://www.csulb.edu/~aisstudy/nae/chapter_3/001_002_3.04.jpg
3). The lettering is completely wrong for Spanish documents of the time
period.
Summary- it is a fake.
Homer Theil, Historical Archaeologist, Desert Archaeology, Inc.
_______________________
Here's Beth Miksa's full report:
Henry-
I looked at the Peralta Stones, and they are not made with rocks
consistent with the Florence area. The big stone with the horse on it
appears to be Coconino Sandstone or a related sandstone--this would be
available on the Mogollon Rim and in parts of northern Arizona. The
other two sandstones are very soft, very fine iron-rich micaceous
arkosic sandstones (possibly graywacke) such as those found in units on
the Mogollon Rim or in northern Arizona. The "heart" stone is an
iron-rich mudstone or shale that is consistent with units in northern
Arizona. I am not sure if it would be available on the Mogollon Rim.
I concur with Jenny Adams' finding that the stones do not show evidence
of being buried for any length of time. There is no weathering or even
minor surface alteration consistent with burial. The map surfaces of
the two conjoining "map" stones are especially fresh.
Beth
*******************************************
Elizabeth Miksa, Ph.D. Ph. 520/881-2244
Research Geologist Fax 520/881-0325
Desert Archaeology, Inc
3975 N. Tucson Blvd.
Tucson, AZ 85716
emiksa@desert.com