The Peralta Stone Maps, Real Maps to Lost Gold Mines or Cruel Hoax?

[Springfield]

Springy,

Your picture just proved our point. Look at the edges of your cross (rounded and worn). Now look at the inside of the grooves (same color and granularity as the surrounding rock).

I know what tons of markers and symbols look like. I could walk into the mountains with a small sledge and couple of chisels, and have people running in circles for years! I choose not to do that kind of crap. ...

Well, like I said, I first agreed with you and wouldn't decide one way or another until I saw the Supe carving in person. Nearby the cross with the gloves next to it is the following carving - done by one of those pranksters you referred to who like to run guys in circles. Quite a difference in appearance (the 'cross/triangle' carving was about 10 years old when photographed). More accomplished pranksters are at least smart enough to 'weather' their fresh carvings to appear much older.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Cubfan64]

I don't have enough of the hands-on experience as many other folks do, but I thought the chiseled cross Vastterrain posted a photo of looked more recent too until I noticed that he mentioned it was in an area not exposed to the environment.

Without knowing exactly what that means, it might be under an overhang, in a cave or perhaps have even been covered up by a rock for many years. I think trying to determine the age of something like that becomes MUCH more difficult to do - especially just from a photo.

And heck, how old it is doesn't necessarily mean it isn't a marker to a "treasure" - when did DeGrazia supposedly bury those paintings again?

 

[vastterrain]

Gollum
The cross is in a particular place where very very little weathering will ever occur ....carving I never put a timeline on it. Who said and why would it have to be 18th century? because anything after that is not worth its weight in gold even though it maybe Shiny Gold Bars Hmmmmm seems your very sensitive about Your Opinions and others sarcasm! Now ya know what you can doo with that corncob....hahaha

P.S. No we didnt meet...was just there for a few minutes to listen to the guest speakers then left.

 

[vastterrain]

I don't have enough of the hands-on experience as many other folks do, but I thought the chiseled cross Vastterrain posted a photo of looked more recent too until I noticed that he mentioned it was in an area not exposed to the environment.

Without knowing exactly what that means, it might be under an overhang, in a cave or perhaps have even been covered up by a rock for many years. I think trying to determine the age of something like that becomes MUCH more difficult to do - especially just from a photo.

And heck, how old it is doesn't necessarily mean it isn't a marker to a "treasure" - when did DeGrazia supposedly bury those paintings again?

I like the way you think Cub....... Some peeps have tunnel vision and can only walk one path at a time.

 

[cactusjumper]

I don't have enough of the hands-on experience as many other folks do, but I thought the chiseled cross Vastterrain posted a photo of looked more recent too until I noticed that he mentioned it was in an area not exposed to the environment.

Without knowing exactly what that means, it might be under an overhang, in a cave or perhaps have even been covered up by a rock for many years. I think trying to determine the age of something like that becomes MUCH more difficult to do - especially just from a photo.

And heck, how old it is doesn't necessarily mean it isn't a marker to a "treasure" - when did DeGrazia supposedly bury those paintings again?

Paul,

I paused at the "not exposed to the environment" as well. On closer examination, with an enlarged copy, I notice that the surface of the surrounding rock looked quite weathered. What do you think?

Take care,


Joe

 

[gollum]

VT,

Not sensitive whatsoever. In all the years I have been at this, I can't tell you the number of people that have come and gone with their own opinions and theories that ranged from the completely nutty all the way to fairly brilliant. None of them got rich off their ideas. While I have found a couple of things, they were nothing to retire on. I don't mind sharing some of what I have learned over the years. Some people take it in and some don't. No skin off my ass either way.

One thing I have found is that people who can't take advice in the spirit in which it was given have issues that go far beyond treasure hunting. Of the people that stated your cross was modern, not one said anything rude or tried to belittle you in any way. We just gave you our honest opinions based on our experiences. Your reply to that was to be a rude asshol3. Don't worry, I will refrain from sharing any opinions or advice with you any further.

Best - Mike

 

[somehiker]

G'd morning Hiker: More coffee? I certainly need some, 0400 here You posted -->Knowing that most, like yourself, will never be able to differentiate what is man made, but eroded by nature, and what is entirely natural, is
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Interesting, always wiling to learn, so please indicate on your photo which is which. such as an eroded cross. Not snooping but just learning.

Side thingie, where would they get, or need 250,000 gold coins ?

Don Jose de La Mancha

Just for you Don, since you seem to have overlooked what I put the yellow box around in my previous post.
The upper map inset is from the drawing, and the lower is from a hi def photo of the trail stone.
I added a big yellow arrow to help you find the yellow box. Don't waste your time though, trying to see a "cross"....it's an "X" of the same orientation as the one on the stone and the drawing as well.
I also threw in a bonus inset of what I suspect may be an important detail of the "El Tesoro" Cross, considering how a "1751" can be seen on a cliff nearby. That end in particular doesn't look like it was broken by accident.

View attachment square opening with X big.bmp

Side thingie?
The first coin was minted in Mexico City in 1536. I imagine it and all subsequent coinage was put to some use.
Maybe they were saving for a rainy day....

 

[Springfield]

... One thing I have found is that people who can't take advice in the spirit in which it was given have issues that go far beyond treasure hunting...

Not only that, we have to be willing to cut our losses and move on when new input shows that we have been wrong. Hubris and denial can eat up years.

 

[somehiker]

Here is a close up of One Cross in waynes area that is protected from the elements...with a pointer!
View attachment 894714View attachment 894715

That's a better shot than any I have.....adding it to my file.

In answer to some of the other critiques and comments, both for and against.....

That cross, which is very easy to miss, even when looking right at it, is only about four or five inches high.
Even what the "pointer" seems to lead to, a mined deposit of cinnabar, is difficult to spot and climb up to.
A large boulder obscures most of the entrance, but there are no markings in or around the mine or even on the boulder in front.
So it may have been made by whoever was after the cinnabar. There were many mining claims in the surrounding area at one time.
Recent or old, although not likely the same age as the rock it's carved in (tuffa I think), it was actually a bit of a let down for me.
I was looking for an "E" or "F" like the one near the "leaning cross" on the Horse Stone. But I'm still looking.

 

[Cubfan64]

Paul,

I paused at the "not exposed to the environment" as well. On closer examination, with an enlarged copy, I notice that the surface of the surrounding rock looked quite weathered. What do you think?

Take care,
Joe

I wish I could back up my uneducated opinion with enough experience to make it worth something . I couldn't tell you if the rock background is weathered or if that's just the way it formed to be honest. It does look to me like the top line of the "cross" isn't as deep as the rest of it - either that came from the chiseling/carving, or from being worn - I couldn't say.

That squared off entrance into the rocks sure looks interesting, but being open like that I'd be a bit nervous about snakes and/or other "critters" hanging out in there. Not only that, but being open also implies to me that it's already been "explored" by someone in the not too distant past. Now if that was found behind a rocked up portion of stones, I'd have a tough time leaving it for another time.

I've always said that it would take someone like Somehiker to discover something significant out there. I often can't see the things he says he sees in the rocks, but he ultimately finds A LOT of interesting stuff out there! He has a good eye for things that look out of place, and thinks outside the box.

 

[somehiker]

Not only that, we have to be willing to cut our losses and move on when new input shows that we have been wrong. Hubris and denial can eat up years.

True,Spring. But what do we do when almost every excursion and tidbit of information yields positive results.
That Garmin drawing/map,and what it shows, has become part of the puzzle.

I've posted a couple of these shots before, and I have some better ones that I may post later.
But I'm out of time this evening.

View attachment D with cross.bmp

 

[somehiker]

Paul:
It was blocked up with stone when I first found it. I took the photo after I was done....or so I thought at the time.
I was a bit concerned about critters, scorpions in particular.
Can you see anything in the upper left corner of that rock in the last photo above ?
Click on it to enlarge.

Best:Wayne

Tim and the lady at another cross within a circle.

View attachment 100_1610sm.bmp

 

[gollum]

Side thingie?
The first coin was minted in Mexico City in 1536. I imagine it and all subsequent coinage was put to some use.
Maybe they were saving for a rainy day....

The main use for coinage and bars was to make certain the king got his Royal Quinto (1/5th).

When a person was in the outlying areas, they were allowed to use dore bars and raw ore to barter with. When they brought their ore into town, they were forced (by law) to take their dore bars and raw ore into the mint to be refined and smelted into coins or bars. The local mint would assay the bars/ore, then refine and smelt it into coins/barros puros. The mint would then take out the King's Royal Quinto before giving the balance back to the owner. It was illegal to send raw ore or dore bars back to Europe. All bars must be stamped with a royal seal to show that the appropriate taxes had been taken out.

Best - Mike

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

G'd evening Mike G. The orig question was what in the world did they need 250,000 Gold coins for on the very wild frontier? Who would they be dealing with ??

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

so...somehiker...you found this medicine wheel in the superstitions?
do you have a before photograph please?

 

[sgtfda]

Just look at what the treasure ships carried back to Spain. If that was the Kings cut just think what was left behind. No wonder the King got a little greedy.

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

Just look at what the treasure ships carried back to Spain. If that was the Kings cut just think what was left behind. No wonder the King got a little greedy.

I had my hands on a few of the manifest of ships out of vera cruz in the time of Spanish looting the new world...
I didn't think those little boats could carry so much tonnage...
tons of gold...tons of silver, smuggled emeralds...on one boat...
sorry, I forget the citation for this information...

 

[Springfield]

An interesting post by Quinoa from another thread on TNet, dealing with ownership of mining properties in early Mexico and the Crown's means of taxing their proceeds (emphasis mine):

The king's fifth dealt with silver. This is from a pdf file by John Lacy titled, The Historic Origins of the U.S. Mining Laws and Proposals for Change:

"... As the Spanish kingdoms developed out of the ruins of the Roman empire, the first private rights to minerals were defined by the so-called Alcalá de Henares promulgated in 1348 by Alfonso the Just (Alfonso XI) of Castile and Leon and a decree of Juan I of Aragon in 1387. John A. Rockwell, A Compilation of Spanish and Mexican Law in Relationship to Mines and Titles to real Estate, 112-13 (1851). These laws proclaimed that all minerals belonged to the Crown but could be worked under a special license.

The opportunities of the New World substantially changed the picture and, in 1526, spurred by discoveries at Taxco and Jalisco in New Spain, the Crown permitted local governments to grant the permission required to exploit mineral deposits. Based on this authority, don Antonio de Mendoza, New Spain’s first viceroy, issued a comprehensive mining code in 1550 adopting Saxon and English (i.e., Celtic) concepts of discovery, self initiation of rights, and maintenance work required to maintain claims. The popular concepts of Viceroy Mendoza’s code were eventually absorbed into law when on August 22, 1584, Philip II promulgated the Ordenanzas del Nuevo Cuaderno (referred to as the ‘new ordinances’), which was the first comprehensive mining code applicable to most of the Spanish Empire.

The new ordinances contained a remarkably broad grant of rights that granted to the discoverer the right to work mines as their own possession and property…observing both in regard to what they have to pay us [the Crown] by way of duty, and all other respects, the regulations and arrangements, ordered by this edict… Ordenanzas del Nuevo Cuaderno - codified as Law 9, Title 13, Book 6, Recopilacion de las Leyes de Estos Reynos (de Castilla), 1640.

This right has been characterized as ‘direct and beneficial grant of property; and is to be regarded as a qualified gift.’ Under the new ordinances, after making a discovery, a miner had twenty days within which to register the find with a mining justice, or in his absence, the local alcalde. The size of the discovery claim was 160 varas by 80 varas (a Castillian is approximately 32 inches) and could be situated either along or across the vein. The discoverer was not limited in the number of claims that could be staked on the same lode, but all subsequent claimants after an initial discovery were limited to two claims of 120 varas by 60 varas, each of which had to have three claims between them. Claims were required to be perfected through the sinking of a trial pit three estados deep (approximately fourteen feet) within three months of the original date of registration. Very clear work obligations also continued to be imposed by the new ordinances, which required the owners of a mine to keep four people working at all times. If the work was not performed for a four-month continuous period, the mine would be forfeited. In such a case, the owner would be required to file a new registration, but the mine also became subject to denunciation (that is, initiation of adverse rights) by third parties.

The royalty rate, although colloquially referred to as the quinto, or ‘the King’s fifth,’ was, in the case of silver, based on a sliding scale depending on the recovery rate from the ore per quintal (101.45 pounds) of mercury consumed in the amalgamation process of recovering silver. For example, if the recovery was twelve ounces or less, the royalty rate was 10 percent; from twelve to thirty-two ounces, 20 percent; from thirty-two to forty-eight ounces, 25 percent; and more than forty-eight ounces, 50 percent. Separate provisions required a royalty of one-thirtieth for copper, one-tenth for antimony and one-half for gold. It seems clear that this royalty structure was premised upon the use of the ‘patio process’ for precious metals extraction using mercury, which was invented in Mexico in 1554 by Bartolome de Medina. The royalty varied considerably in subsequent years by both edict and administrative practice and normally ranged from one-eighth to one-half.

The new ordinances were law until 1783 when Charles II promulgated the famous Ordenanzas de Minera. The location procedures established in 1783 were not dramatically different from the 1584 new ordinances although the provisions were refined significantly. The basic grant to the miners was stated as follows: ‘Without separating them [mineral rights] from my royal patrimony, I grant them, to my subjects in property and possession, in such manner that they may sell, exchange, … or in any manner, dispose of all their property in them upon the terms of which they themselves possess it …’ Reales Ordenanzas para la Dirección, Régimen i Gobierno del Importante Cuerpo de la Mineria de Nueva-España, i de su Real Tribunal General, De Orden de Su Magestad, tit.5, art.2 (1783).

The grant required adherence to two conditions: royalty had to be paid and operations had to be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the ordinances. Any default was considered a forfeiture and subjected the mine to a new grant to any person making a denouncement. The registration process required the locator to first present a statement of the claim (taken up in 100 vara squares) to the territorial deputation, then post a notice on the door of the local church. Within the following ninety days, the locator had the formidable task of sinking a shaft on the claim measuring one and a one-half varas in diameter and ten varas deep. When the vein was ascertained by this process, one of the district deputies was required to visit the site accompanied by official witnesses to determine the physical nature of the vein. At the time of the inspection, the claim was measured and its boundaries marked by the locator. ..."

 

[cactusjumper]

An interesting post by Quinoa from another thread on TNet, dealing with ownership of mining properties in early Mexico and the Crown's means of taxing their proceeds:

The king's fifth dealt with silver. This is from a pdf file by John Lacy titled, The Historic Origins of the U.S. Mining Laws and Proposals for Change:

"... As the Spanish kingdoms developed out of the ruins of the Roman empire, the first private rights to minerals were defined by the so-called Alcalá de Henares promulgated in 1348 by Alfonso the Just (Alfonso XI) of Castile and Leon and a decree of Juan I of Aragon in 1387. John A. Rockwell, A Compilation of Spanish and Mexican Law in Relationship to Mines and Titles to real Estate, 112-13 (1851). These laws proclaimed that all minerals belonged to the Crown but could be worked under a special license.

The opportunities of the New World substantially changed the picture and, in 1526, spurred by discoveries at Taxco and Jalisco in New Spain, the Crown permitted local governments to grant the permission required to exploit mineral deposits. Based on this authority, don Antonio de Mendoza, New Spain’s first viceroy, issued a comprehensive mining code in 1550 adopting Saxon and English (i.e., Celtic) concepts of discovery, self initiation of rights, and maintenance work required to maintain claims. The popular concepts of Viceroy Mendoza’s code were eventually absorbed into law when on August 22, 1584, Philip II promulgated the Ordenanzas del Nuevo Cuaderno (referred to as the ‘new ordinances’), which was the first comprehensive mining code applicable to most of the Spanish Empire.

The new ordinances contained a remarkably broad grant of rights that granted to the discoverer the right to work mines as their own possession and property…observing both in regard to what they have to pay us [the Crown] by way of duty, and all other respects, the regulations and arrangements, ordered by this edict… Ordenanzas del Nuevo Cuaderno - codified as Law 9, Title 13, Book 6, Recopilacion de las Leyes de Estos Reynos (de Castilla), 1640.

This right has been characterized as ‘direct and beneficial grant of property; and is to be regarded as a qualified gift.’ Under the new ordinances, after making a discovery, a miner had twenty days within which to register the find with a mining justice, or in his absence, the local alcalde. The size of the discovery claim was 160 varas by 80 varas (a Castillian is approximately 32 inches) and could be situated either along or across the vein. The discoverer was not limited in the number of claims that could be staked on the same lode, but all subsequent claimants after an initial discovery were limited to two claims of 120 varas by 60 varas, each of which had to have three claims between them. Claims were required to be perfected through the sinking of a trial pit three estados deep (approximately fourteen feet) within three months of the original date of registration. Very clear work obligations also continued to be imposed by the new ordinances, which required the owners of a mine to keep four people working at all times. If the work was not performed for a four-month continuous period, the mine would be forfeited. In such a case, the owner would be required to file a new registration, but the mine also became subject to denunciation (that is, initiation of adverse rights) by third parties.

The royalty rate, although colloquially referred to as the quinto, or ‘the King’s fifth,’ was, in the case of silver, based on a sliding scale depending on the recovery rate from the ore per quintal (101.45 pounds) of mercury consumed in the amalgamation process of recovering silver. For example, if the recovery was twelve ounces or less, the royalty rate was 10 percent; from twelve to thirty-two ounces, 20 percent; from thirty-two to forty-eight ounces, 25 percent; and more than forty-eight ounces, 50 percent. Separate provisions required a royalty of one-thirtieth for copper, one-tenth for antimony and one-half for gold. It seems clear that this royalty structure was premised upon the use of the ‘patio process’ for precious metals extraction using mercury, which was invented in Mexico in 1554 by Bartolome de Medina. The royalty varied considerably in subsequent years by both edict and administrative practice and normally ranged from one-eighth to one-half.

The new ordinances were law until 1783 when Charles II promulgated the famous Ordenanzas de Minera. The location procedures established in 1783 were not dramatically different from the 1584 new ordinances although the provisions were refined significantly. The basic grant to the miners was stated as follows: ‘Without separating them [mineral rights] from my royal patrimony, I grant them, to my subjects in property and possession, in such manner that they may sell, exchange, … or in any manner, dispose of all their property in them upon the terms of which they themselves possess it …’ Reales Ordenanzas para la Dirección, Régimen i Gobierno del Importante Cuerpo de la Mineria de Nueva-España, i de su Real Tribunal General, De Orden de Su Magestad, tit.5, art.2 (1783).

The grant required adherence to two conditions: royalty had to be paid and operations had to be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the ordinances. Any default was considered a forfeiture and subjected the mine to a new grant to any person making a denouncement. The registration process required the locator to first present a statement of the claim (taken up in 100 vara squares) to the territorial deputation, then post a notice on the door of the local church. Within the following ninety days, the locator had the formidable task of sinking a shaft on the claim measuring one and a one-half varas in diameter and ten varas deep. When the vein was ascertained by this process, one of the district deputies was required to visit the site accompanied by official witnesses to determine the physical nature of the vein. At the time of the inspection, the claim was measured and its boundaries marked by the locator. ..."

Springfield,

The entire course is an interesting and informative read. Lacy seems to know his subject very well.

Good post,

Joe

 

[pippinwhitepaws]

Historical Archaeology - Shipwreck Archaeology