The Brownie Holmes Manuscript

[Oroblanco]

<snip>
Those who have called Dick and Brownie Holmes liars for telling their account must now add Jim Bark to their liars list.
Jim Bark is not alone. There are several other documented pieces of evidence that predate the Holmes manuscript. A deposition given to a Phoenix attorney rests in this attorneys personal files which were donated to the Arizona Historical Society Archives. That deposition is witness to the days immediately following the death of Jacob Waltz in Phoenix and includes Dick Holmes Gideon Roberts and Mrs. Julia Thomas..
<snip>
Matthew

Do you, or does anyone here have access to the Arizona Historical Society Archives, so as to be able to post this deposition for all to judge for themselves? Otherwise it is hard to make any conclusions about whether this alleged document is genuine or not. Thanks in advance,
Oroblanco

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[cactusjumper]

oroblanco,

You are free to believe whatever you wish to believe, it makes no difference to me. You are most certainly welcome to your opinion.
I could answer your statements and questions but so many of them are simply false and things Brownie never said or did.
Brownie never denied "the manuscript" he denied things written by Kennison that he did not say or agree with.
The discussion just goes around and around in the same endless circle.
Again oroblanco, I'm glad you air your opinion here and enjoy reading them. I will post my views and beliefs and why I believe them.
And let each individual reader decide for themselves what they want to believe.

Matthew

Matthew,

Since Brownie originally said he had never seen the manuscript, wouldn't that mean he had no part in writing it, at least until he added family history to it?
At some point, it looks like someone decided there might be some monetary value in a book and Brownie decided to take ownership of the manuscript. I can see the logic in that as well as it being the reasonable thing to do.

That being said, trying to make the history of the thing into something it was not, does not seem to be the right thing to do. Too many books these day are fabricating their own facts to conform with their private opinions. That's why I haven't written a book of my own. Can't accurately remember the facts.On the other hand, that doesn't seem to slow me down from bloviating here.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Gregory E. Davis]

Hello Joe: Just where did Brownie Holmes make the statement that he had never seen the manuscript?? Cordially, Gregory E. Davis

 

[cactusjumper]

Hello Joe: Just where did Brownie Holmes make the statement that he had never seen the manuscript?? Cordially, Gregory E. Davis

Hi Greg,

"Just where" I have no idea, as I wasn't there. I managed to make it into the store today, but I will post exactly where, at least one place, I got that quote. At a guess, I would say from Dr. Glover's book about the manuscript. Don't know who his source was, but he was pretty close with Brownie's family, so that might be the source.

I can tell you one thing for sure, I didn't make it up. Actually, I'm kind of surprised I have such a clear memory of it. I don't think it's all that unknown and I'm surprised you haven't heard it before.

Pretty close to calling it a day here, so I will get back to you this afternoon.

Take care,

Joe

 

[cactusjumper]

Greg,

I was pretty sure that I must have seen that in more than one place. Here it is:

"THE LOST DUTCHMAN MINE OF JACOB WALTZ: Part 2, THE HOLMES MANJSCRIPT. Page viii of the foreword.

"The clincher, however, appeared to be Brownie Holmes' own remarks about The Manuscript. Swanson and Kollenborn reported:"

[At the Arizona Archives [sic. State Library] there is a manuscript, allegedly written by "Brownie" Holmes, which was placed there by Charles Higham. When "Brownie" Holmes examined the manuscript, he stated that he had never seen it before. (Superstition Mountain, A Ride Through Time, 1981, Ch. 14, p121)

If it's good enough for Dr. Glover and Tom Kollenborn, it's more than good enough for me. I assume that you have read both books.

Take care,

Joe

 

[gollum]

Joe,

I remembered reading it in Dr Glover's Book as well, but the actual words used in Brownie's Denial leave a little room for conjecture. When he said that he had never seen it before, was he talking about the entire manuscript? Maybe he gave his notes to Higham who finished them in his own style, and Holmes had not seen it until later? I don't know, but "he stated that he had never seen it before". Maybe he was referring to the specific finished product, and not the manuscript in general terms. Quien sabe?

Mike

 

[cactusjumper]

Joe,

I remembered reading it in Dr Glover's Book as well, but the actual words used in Brownie's Denial leave a little room for conjecture. When he said that he had never seen it before, was he talking about the entire manuscript? Maybe he gave his notes to Higham who finished them in his own style, and Holmes had not seen it until later? I don't know, but "he stated that he had never seen it before". Maybe he was referring to the specific finished product, and not the manuscript in general terms. Quien sabe?

Mike

Mike,

I suppose you can inject any meaning into the quote that your mind can dream up. That being said, I can only read it as it's written. No need for "conjecture" as he was talking about the manuscript.......not some obscure passages or unmentioned script. I have heard all these arguments before. They all ring hollow.

Thank you for your service!

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

Perhaps a comparison of the Holmes manuscript, with the works of Higham, might be enlightening? If they are radically different in content AND style, we could say that is evidence that Higham did not author the Holmes manuscript. On the other hand -......?

Agree that denial by Brownie COULD be interpreted several different ways - however the impression given to those present was clear as a denial of authorship, not a denial of having seen a "finished product'. Think about how such a conversation would logically proceed, IF Brownie was simply saying he had not seen the finished product but HAD authored it. Wouldn't you presume he would make it clear to those present, that he was indeed the author but had not seen a finished product?

Please do continue,
Oroblanco

 

[Not Peralta]

TO ALL DUTCH HUNTERS,
Even If you find a rich hidden gold mine in the Supes or the surrounding area, Theres absolutely no way to prove it was the dutchmans,besides no one would believe you,theres to many that want to keep this legend alive,no matter what is shown or proven. and believe me when I tell you theres been a few found in the past. some known , some not known.Dutch hunters have created this legend,and don't want it to die.the arguments presented here show proof of this, NP

 

[sgtfda]

I look at what was found under the bed. A candle box of ore. That's not much for someone who found a rich mine full of gold. Every prospector keeps samples for his areas. No one knows where that gold was obtained by Waltz. There is placer gold back there. Hell I was panning some samples today. Today you find gold by testing. Same as Waltz did. Most Dutch hunters and many prospectors don't know much about finding gold.

 

[Oroblanco]

TO ALL DUTCH HUNTERS,
Even If you find a rich hidden gold mine in the Supes or the surrounding area, Theres absolutely no way to prove it was the dutchmans,besides no one would believe you,theres to many that want to keep this legend alive,no matter what is shown or proven. and believe me when I tell you theres been a few found in the past. some known , some not known.Dutch hunters have created this legend,and don't want it to die.the arguments presented here show proof of this, NP

I must respectfully disagree, 100%. A comparison of the ore, with known specimens from Waltz/Dick Holmes, done by a qualified geologist, would be a scientific way to provide proof. We have debated this before, and really probably should be in another separate thread as this one is on the Brownie Holmes manuscript.

As for your accusation that some Dutch hunters "created" the legend, have to respectfully disagree as well, and would point out that a great number of people have been wanting to claim the "honors" of having discovered the Lost Dutchman's gold mine, without proof, and always trying to say what you just said - that it "can't" be proven. Most of these people don't have a SPECK of gold to show from what has been called the "richest gold mine in the world". If we are to start accepting all these claims without proof, then the mine has been found over 200 times already.

How much profits do you suppose Brownie Holmes gained from his manuscript, promoting the legend? Really the only people that have profited from the LDM legend are the various businesses of Apache Jct, for the tourism thus generated. Yet do we see these businesses promoting the legend? Hardly!

 

[Not Peralta]

I must respectfully disagree, 100%. A comparison of the ore, with known specimens from Waltz/Dick Holmes, done by a qualified geologist, would be a scientific way to provide proof. We have debated this before, and really probably should be in another separate thread as this one is on the Brownie Holmes manuscript.

As for your accusation that some Dutch hunters "created" the legend, have to respectfully disagree as well, and would point out that a great number of people have been wanting to claim the "honors" of having discovered the Lost Dutchman's gold mine, without proof, and always trying to say what you just said - that it "can't" be proven. Most of these people don't have a SPECK of gold to show from what has been called the "richest gold mine in the world". If we are to start accepting all these claims without proof, then the mine has been found over 200 times already.

How much profits do you suppose Brownie Holmes gained from his manuscript, promoting the legend? Really the only people that have profited from the LDM legend are the various businesses of Apache Jct, for the tourism thus generated. Yet do we see these businesses promoting the legend? Hardly!

what samples would be used for comparison, there are no verifiable samples,are you going to take the word of someone that half the dutch hunters don't believe a word they say,it doe's not make sense what you are saying, all you are doing is proving my point with every thing that you or anyone else says about this story.np

 

[cactusjumper]

Hello Joe: Just where did Brownie Holmes make the statement that he had never seen the manuscript?? Cordially, Gregory E. Davis

Greg,

Was my post what you were looking for?

Take care,

Joe

 

[Oroblanco]

what samples would be used for comparison, there are no verifiable samples,are you going to take the word of someone that half the dutch hunters don't believe a word they say,it doe's not make sense what you are saying, all you are doing is proving my point with every thing that you or anyone else says about this story.np

For starters:



You don't have to believe Holmes got that gold from Waltz, you can believe Julia Thomas and Reiney Petrasch who said he did. They were not exactly pals with Holmes. There is little reason for Holmes to lie about where this gold came from however, and his own actions as well as his son Brownie, indicate they certainly believed there was a lost gold mine that they spent their lives and personal treasures hunting for.

If you have ore that matches this, as judged by a geologist, IMHO that is solid evidence that it came from the same mine. You are certainly free and welcome to believe or disbelieve what ever you wish. I have seen enough evidence that a real Jacob Waltz existed, an immigrant from Germany (Prussia he listed on a census) and that he obtained his citizenship in Los Angeles CA before ever coming to Arizona; that he helped locate several rich gold mines in the Bradshaws and was seen selling rich gold ore for years after he had sold his interests in those mines, and in the same years he was seen going off prospecting, almost always alone, in the Superstitions and nearby areas. It is true that a great deal of nonsense and phony information has gotten blended into the basic story, however it is not a fiction at all.

Whether Brownie actually wrote the Holmes manuscript or not, I would not dismiss everything in it out of hand either. Brownie certainly spent his own life hunting for the mine and so did his partner Clay Wurst. If he had a hand in writing the manuscript or just provided information that went into it, it is certainly worth investigating. Actions speak louder than words after all. If the whole story were just a cooked up tale, the chef that cooked it up would certainly NOT go hunting for it.

There are people on these forums that are deliberately trying to mislead other treasure hunters, and also to discourage them from treasure hunting entirely. I always wonder about their motives when someone is posting that kind of thing, for if there is nothing to it, what possible harm could there be in looking for it? One might as well say you should not go hunting the Easter bunny.

Please do continue;
Oroblanco

 

[Not Peralta]

Oro .Amigo you are justifying every thing I said, and please don't put words in my mouth, and you need to compare ore's that have already been posted on TN. NP

 

[Oroblanco]

Oro .Amigo you are justifying every thing I said,

I sure don't see that in fact we disagree very much on this.

Not Peralta also wrote

and please don't put words in my mouth,

What words have I put in your mouth?

Not Peralta also wrote

and you need to compare ore's that have already been posted on TN. NP

What would that prove? I am not an expert in geology, I could be fooled. A geologist would be the right person to make a comparison. There is a reason why no one has been willing to get an ore comparison done with any of the specimens from Waltz - they know it won't match but still want the 'honors' of being the finder of the LDM.

 

[Not Peralta]

I look at what was found under the bed. A candle box of ore. That's not much for someone who found a rich mine full of gold. Every prospector keeps samples for his areas. No one knows where that gold was obtained by Waltz. There is placer gold back there. Hell I was panning some samples today. Today you find gold by testing. Same as Waltz did. Most Dutch hunters and many prospectors don't know much about finding gold.

Hey Sarge, Another thing people need to watch for in this area is quartz veins barely showing that are rusty and black looking in color, we always called it rotten quartz,people prospecting when they see it or any other vein need to brake it up and check it closely for gold,the rotten quartz always produced more good samples. NP

 

[Gregory E. Davis]

What's happened. I thought this thread was about Holmes and the Holmes Manuscript? Now we are discussing Gold Ore and quartz. Cordially, Gregory E. Davis

 

[azdave35]

What's happened. I thought this thread was about Holmes and the Holmes Manuscript? Now we are discussing Gold Ore and quartz. Cordially, Gregory E. Davis

too bad we couldnt talk clay worst into coming on the forum and posting....he could set alot of things straight on the holmes story

 

[Oroblanco]

What's happened. I thought this thread was about Holmes and the Holmes Manuscript? Now we are discussing Gold Ore and quartz. Cordially, Gregory E. Davis

It was, and my apologies for getting so far off track. I am done posting and derailing in this thread - please do continue. Also, would have to agree with AZDave, wish we could get Clay to join the discussion as I am sure he could fill in a lot of info on the Holmes manuscript.

Oroblanco