Greetings Blindbowman and everyone,
Thank you for explaining your theory. Some of your statements have got me confused. I have a few questions remaining, and would appreciate if you could elaborate. (If you would rather
not, as we
have discussed much of this in depth already, I will understand.)
Blindbowman wrote:
it is true the Miguel Peralt was killed about 1848-1850 and they did beleave he was at the massacre site and got away
Can you confirm that Miguel Peralta was killed in that time frame, in some sort of records or archives? If the massacre took place in 1700-1703, how did Miguel get involved in the 1840s?
Blindbowman wrote:
the dutchman did in fact shoot miguel peralta and two others of his family but the mine was not a peralta mine
How can we prove, for a
fact, that Jacob Waltz shot Miguel Peralta and two others of his family?
Blindbowman wrote:
thus the name don and the name pedro on the stones ..because of the simple fact the mans's full name was ( DON Pedro Gonzalez de Mendoza )
If this is true, why did they
not include the name Gonzales OR Mendoza on the stones? This does not make sense to me.
Blindbowman wrote:
how dose it fit togather . Vaca finds the mine from the indains he passes the location & reports back to the jesuit chruch records from there kino goes and finds the mine telling his friends to help untill the indains massacre at tayopa , if i am right there is only one massacre around 1700-1703.... kino is almost killed and the loss of the mine ends up back in the hands of miguel peralta threw don pedro gonzalez de mendoza , threw the relationship of the two families . mendoza and the peralta , IMHO this is why no one saw the relationship because it was threw marriages between the families ....i read a peice of data that stated one of the gonzalez de mendoza had a wife that was a peralta ,,, so the story about Miguel peralta could very well be true .as the dutchman killing him and two others .....as well as the Ruth Gonzalez map .. being true
Okay several questions on this paragraph; first, have you read the available information from de Vaca? Why would you conclude that de Vaca found the mine? As you know from your history, de Vaca was the first European to successfully travel overland from Florida to Mexico, and his report is known as "La Relacion". If you have the time and want to know more, it is available online at:
http://www.library.txstate.edu/swwc/cdv/
(
Interesting stuff really!)
I could not find any mention in his report that sounds quite like something
in the Superstitions, but perhaps you can point it out to me? I would appreciate it.
Second, de Vaca published his "Relacion" in 1555, while father Kino we have already covered was active in Sonora (southern Arizona) 1687-1711, or
over 100 years
after de Vaca published his report, quite a span of time. Why did you conclude that de Vaca reported his find(s) to the Jesuits, and
no one would have bothered to go investigate for over 100 years? We are pretty sure that Coronado, whose expedition was at least partially due to the report of deVaca, did not venture into the Superstitions, so he is '
out' for this question.
Next question,
<reminder, from above paragraph, from Blindbowman>
if i am right there is only one massacre around 1700-1703.... kino is almost killed and the loss of the mine ends up back in the hands of miguel peralta threw don pedro gonzalez de mendoza , threw the relationship of the two families . mendoza and the peralta
Why did you conclude the massacre occurred in that time-frame, 1700-1703?
Why would you say that father Kino was "almost killed"? (There is a great deal of information on father Kino available online)
Why does it "have" to be father Kino, if any Jesuits at all?
I fail to see how the mine ownership then passes from Kino to Peralta. The Jesuits activities in mining had to be in secret as it was against the law for them to be involved at all, and it is hard to imagine the church turning over ownership of such a profitable property as a rich gold mine to a lay person.
I won't repeat the question (posted above) but have you found some sort of record that
proves Jacob Waltz killed Peraltas?
Blindbowman wrote:
" Kino did make the Peralta _Ruth map , Don Perdo Gonzalez de Mendoza made the stones ..." and Miguel peralta could have been shot by the dutchman !
Father Kino was indeed a map-maker, - why did you now conclude that it had to be father Kino that made the Peralta-Ruth map?
Mendoza made the stone maps? Why did you conclude that it was the hand of Mendoza, when (at least as far as I could find), he
never ventured into the Superstitions?
Miguel Peralta "could" have been shot by Waltz? ("Could" is a different statement from "fact") The time-line is a problem
again.
If Miguel Peralta
was shot and killed in 1848-1850, we can safely
RULE OUT Jacob Waltz as the killer, since we fairly well know his whereabouts at that time - here is an extract,
Waltz filed his letter of intent to become a citizen of the United States on November 12, 1848, in the Adams County Courthouse in Natchez, Mississippi. Waltz soon made plans to travel west to the goldfields of California.
Jacob Waltz arrived in California about 1850. His name appears on several California census records. He prospected and worked as a miner in the mother lode country of California for eleven years. It was on July 19, 1861, in the Los Angeles County Courthouse, Jacob Waltz became a naturalized citizen of the United States of America. Waltz worked as a miner on the San Gabriel River for a man named Ruben Blakney. It was probably here he met Elisha M. Reavis, later to become the "Hermit of Superstition Mountain."
Waltz departed California in 1863, with the Peeples-Weaver Party or a similar group of prospectors headed for the Bradshaw Mountains of Arizona Territory. Waltz was one of the earliest pioneer prospectors in the Bradshaw Mountain area. Waltz's name appears on the Gross Claim which was filed in Prescott, Arizona Territory on September 21, 1863. His name also appears on a special territorial census taken in 1864.
On this census Waltz is listed as a miner, 54 years of age, and a native of Germany. Waltz's name also appeared on a petition to territorial governor John N. Goodwin soliciting a militia to control the predatory raids of hostile Indians in the Bradshaw Mountains. Jacob Waltz's name also appeared on the Big Rebel and the General Grant claims in the Bradshaw Mountains. Waltz was very active in the Bradshaw Mountain area between 1863-67.
Jacob Waltz moved to the Salt River Valley in 1868 and filed a homestead claim on 160 acres of land on the north bank of the Salt River. It is from here Waltz began his exploratory trips into the mountains surrounding the Salt River Valley. If Waltz had a rich gold mine or cache he had to have discovered it on one of these prospecting forays. Old timers claim Waltz prospected every winter between 1868-1886. Waltz died in Phoenix, Arizona Territory on October 25, 1891, in the home of Julia Thomas.
(from
http://www.superstitionmountainmuseum.org/LostDutchmanExhibit.htm)
(Note, Bradshaw mountains are some distance from the Superstition range)
I think you can see the problem - Waltz was not IN Arizona until 1863, or at least 13 years
after Miguel had been shot and killed, if we can prove that one Miguel Peralta was in fact murdered in that time period, Waltz was definitely
NOT the killer.
I would make a suggestion, since you have to put off the expedition for a time anyway - it might be helpful to draw up a chart with a time-line on it, (like we see in some history books), and mark on it the time periods when deVaca was passing through Arizona, when father Kino was exploring, when the Peraltas are alleged to have been active (I have never found any absolute proof to support the Peralta legends) as well as the time frame when Jacob Waltz was active in the region. For myself, the time-line problems are quite an obstacle in your theory, but if it makes sense to you, that is really
all that matters - that is, of course until the final proof is found
and recovered. Then
any remaining questions can be put to rest absolutely.
With over 100 years having passed since Waltz passed away and with so many hunters for the treasure(s), it is unlikely for someone to come up with a completely new theory, but I think Blindbowman has managed to do so at least in some parts.
Good luck and good hunting to you, (and to everyone here) and thank you in advance,
Oroblanco
Besides, as Mrs Oro said, you can re-schedule a trip, but can't a life.
Good luck and good hunting to you,
