The WORST book on the Lost Dutchman Mine is...

[sgtfda]

One thing is missing in all the books I've read. No gold. If the author found gold or treasure with his theory I would pay very close attention. But then why write the book. Though I must admit one author J Mitchell helped me with the information in his story.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[Michael Swartz]

The topic is asking for OPINIONS of books, which is not intended as, and specifically not offered as any kind of attack on any author. With any book on any topic, some may love it and some may well hate it, we all have differing opinions as to what we like to read. I do not see Garry's post as any attack on Mr Allen, simply that he puts that book at the bottom of the rather extensive list. Garry did not call Mr Allen a liar nor fabricator etc.
Good luck and good hunting amigo, I am sorry if this topic is offensive to you, it was and is a "popularity" type of "poll" NOT an attempt to trash/vilify or otherwise assault the character of any author.
Oroblanco[/QUOTE

I'm not sure how you understand the written word but Robert Joseph Allen was called a notorious fabricator of history in the post.
That is villifying the author.
What gives the poster the authority to make such a factual statement ? It may be his or her opinion which is fine, but is stated as a fact.
The point of my posting was to point out that anyone who expects a Fiction book to live up to illogical expectations of a Non-Fiction historical documentary is ignoring the difference between Fiction and Non-Fiction literature.

RJ Allen's book is entirely appropriate in it's proper context and I see no reason why he should be called or even considered a notorious fabricator of history for writing it.

Thats just my opinion and it was you who said the topic was asking for opinions.

Thanks for reading,

Michael Swartz

 

[releventchair]

Barry Storm may be the author I was looking for earlier.
Alas this article claims Barry embellished.
Go get the disparaging culprit councilor!

http://www.ajpl.org/aj/superstition/ldm.htm

 

[Oroblanco]

I'm not sure how you understand the written word but Robert Joseph Allen was called a notorious fabricator of history in the post.
That is villifying the author.
What gives the poster the authority to make such a factual statement ? It may be his or her opinion which is fine, but is stated as a fact.
The point of my posting was to point out that anyone who expects a Fiction book to live up to illogical expectations of a Non-Fiction historical documentary is ignoring the difference between Fiction and Non-Fiction literature.

RJ Allen's book is entirely appropriate in it's proper context and I see no reason why he should be called or even considered a notorious fabricator of history for writing it.

Thats just my opinion and it was you who said the topic was asking for opinions.

Thanks for reading,

Michael Swartz

It appears that perhaps YOU are not fully understanding what was posted. Here is the statement which you found so offensive, and stated that it was "stated as fact"

<Garry wrote earlier>

It appears to be the seed for some later stories of another notorious modern day fabricator of history.

This is NOT a statement of fact, it is clearly an OPINION, and SUGGESTS that book could have been the 'seed' for LATER stories of ANOTHER, modern day fabricator of history. The sentence does NOT name Mr Allen AS a fabricator, liar or otherwise notorious. That is my own reading of that sentence.

Thank you for your opinion and interpretation, however I must respectfully disagree. You have classed Mr Allen's work as a "fiction" which would indeed be a very different set of standards to judge by. When a fiction is published as history however one should not be surprised if it meets with disapproval.

Good luck and good hunting amigos I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

[Michael Swartz]

It appears that perhaps YOU are not fully understanding what was posted. Here is the statement which you found so offensive, and stated that it was "stated as fact"

<Garry wrote earlier>


This is NOT a statement of fact, it is clearly an OPINION, and SUGGESTS that book could have been the 'seed' for LATER stories of ANOTHER, modern day fabricator of history. The sentence does NOT name Mr Allen AS a fabricator, liar or otherwise notorious. That is my own reading of that sentence.




Just for your reference: For there to be ANOTHER notorious modern day fabricator of history, there had to have first been a previous or second notorious fabricator of history.
The only other being refered to in the post under that context was Mr. Allen so Mr. Allen is without question being called a notorious fabricator of history by inferance and literally along with other unnamed and unknown individuals.
It's all quite clear and straightforward. I see this sort of thing all the time in my line of work.

Thanks for reading,

Michael Swartz

 

[ClonedSIM]

The worst book has not been written yet. It will be the one that points out its true location. Which in turn will end the search. I guess there will be a replacement for the LDM but it's gonna be a hard one to beat.

Damn, that's a good answer..

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HI relevelent, You posted --> I gifted it to someone in Green Valley

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

Is that by y chance between Tucson and Nogales??

If so we may have another type of coffee on my next trip North to Tucson

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Ladies & gentsmen, when and if i finally get my book finished and hopefully edited, I don't want to hear a single depreciating word. just mumbles of awe and respect. Ya hear that sheep lover ?

Then, I will turn my efforts to finally solving the LDM maze, and possibly post the story when I return from a 5 year recuperation tour of Rio.

Then after that I suppose that I will have to solve the Victorio peak thingy. Then hide the accumulated loot in order to replace the finished Treasure hunts with a new one.

Sigh, Don Jose de La Mancha

p.s. Side thingy, but I always left a few coins in any site that I was successful on, to show the next Buscador (searcher) that he had been correct, but too late. Sorry oro, wiped out the Lemon mine 50 years ago---- Where diid you say it was I have forgotten ??

 

[releventchair]

HI relevelent, You posted --> I gifted it to someone in Green Valley

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\

Is that by y chance between Tucson and Nogales??


If so we may have another type of coffee on my next trip to North to Tucson

Don Jose de La Mancha

That very valley. About 1900 miles from me where one can set dry in certain season in the evening and watch the monsoons in mountains 25 or so miles away while enjoying a sun downer..A man who had a hand in raising me who,s travels have slowed to about a stop and his wife. They don,t hunt Au type treasure but have hit many historic sites and have noticed at least one desert rat seeking his own in semi? precious stones.I have not visited them in the valley. Az. visited again risks stronger attachment to the climate. An acre in the White mountains would suffice. The book changed hands on a previous visit of theirs .

 

[gollum]

Relevant,

Your book was indeed "Killer Mountains" by Curt Gentry.

Barry Storm wrote:

"Trail of the Lost Dutchman" and "Thunder God's Gold"

I don't know which book my vote would go to. So far, I have been able to glean (at least) a morsel or two from every book on the subject I have read (whether I agreed with the writer or not).

Mike

 

[releventchair]

Thank you kindly Gollum. Memory a tricky thing. While fragments of the book remain,a favorite is the note in check book of "Veni,Vidi,Vici" if remembered correctly.

 

[Garry]

It appears that perhaps YOU are not fully understanding what was posted. Here is the statement which you found so offensive, and stated that it was "stated as fact"

<Garry wrote earlier>


This is NOT a statement of fact, it is clearly an OPINION, and SUGGESTS that book could have been the 'seed' for LATER stories of ANOTHER, modern day fabricator of history. The sentence does NOT name Mr Allen AS a fabricator, liar or otherwise notorious. That is my own reading of that sentence.




Just for your reference: For there to be ANOTHER notorious modern day fabricator of history, there had to have first been a previous or second notorious fabricator of history.
The only other being refered to in the post under that context was Mr. Allen so Mr. Allen is without question being called a notorious fabricator of history by inferance and literally along with other unnamed and unknown individuals.
It's all quite clear and straightforward. I see this sort of thing all the time in my line of work.

Thanks for reading,

Michael Swartz

Michael,

I think a lot of us understand "exactly" where you are coming from.

I have edited my post by deleting the word “another” and replaced it with “a”.

It does state on the cover of Allen’s book that it is a “true” account. Did you get your information that it was fiction from Allen? Or is your source just someone else’s opinion?

Garry

 

[cactusjumper]

[Michael,

I think a lot of us understand "exactly" where you are coming from.

I have edited my post by deleting the word “another” and replaced it with “a”.

It does state on the cover of Allen’s book that it is a “true” account. Did you get your information that it was fiction from Allen? Or is your source just someone else’s opinion?

Garry]

Garry,

I believe your assessment of where Michael is coming from is on the mark. I have Obie Stoker's copy of the Allen book in front of me now, and he wrote extensive notes in the margins.

One of the biggest fabrications in the book, is the account of Frank T. Alkire. Since we know, to our satisfaction, that Alkire never wrote a single word about Waltz or his final days, I believe it's safe to assume he was not there.

Information on the story can be found here:

http://www.thelostdutchmangoldmine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=1239&hilit=Alkire

Allen did claim that he got the story directly from Frank Alkire, (page 138) so that has to be the original source. So the question is, did Frank Alkire lie to Mr. Allen of did Allen make up the story on his own? Personally, after studying the personal writings of Alkire, I don't believe for a moment that he made up this story.

This is my informed opinion.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Michael Swartz]

Michael,

I think a lot of us understand "exactly" where you are coming from.

I have edited my post by deleting the word “another” and replaced it with “a”.

It does state on the cover of Allen’s book that it is a “true” account. Did you get your information that it was fiction from Allen? Or is your source just someone else’s opinion?

Garry

The Library of Congress recorded Allen's book as 1.7G Western Folklore, Legend, a Fiction Classification. The books publisher would have given this classification information to the LOC.
Individual Libraries may have, and do occasionally of their own accord, list LDM Fiction books under the 197.75 Non-Fiction class. This is in error and misleads the public ever further.

You have to understand the difference between a "true" and a historically documented account.

I could write, " John Doe, on the evening of July 4th, 1891 at Moline, Illinois saw a unicorn with a bigfoot riding it south along the Mississippi River."

That is a "true" account. As given to me by my source whomever that source might be. It is an exact account of my source, word for word and therefore a true account as my source saw it and related it. It does not say it is a factual or historically documented account.

We both know this most assuredly never happened but regardless it is the true and accurate accounting of someone's experience. There is a responsibility the reader of all books must take to not take everything literally and project their own criteria and rules onto someone else's work that was never written or intended to fall within that criteria.

Thanks for reading,

Michael Swartz

 

[cactusjumper]

The Library of Congress recorded Allen's book as 1.7G Western Folklore, Legend, a Fiction Classification. The books publisher would have given this classification information to the LOC.
Individual Libraries may have, and do occasionally of their own accord, list LDM Fiction books under the 197.75 Non-Fiction class. This is in error and misleads the public ever further.

You have to understand the difference between a "true" and a historically documented account.

I could write, " John Doe, on the evening of July 4th, 1891 at Moline, Illinois saw a unicorn with a bigfoot riding it south along the Mississippi River."

That is a "true" account. As given to me by my source whomever that source might be. It is an exact account of my source, word for word and therefore a true account as my source saw it and related it. It does not say it is a factual or historically documented account.

We both know this most assuredly never happened but regardless it is the true and accurate accounting of someone's experience. There is a responsibility the reader of all books must take to not take everything literally and project their own criteria and rules onto someone else's work that was never written or intended to fall within that criteria.

Thanks for reading,

Michael Swartz

Mr. Swartz,

I assume, in your mind, that absolves the source from all responsibility once he has passed along his false history to the author, even though he professed it to be a true account. One wonders how someone washes his hands of any guilt if he also fabricated the information out of whole cloth.

I used to take such information as "reliable", depending on the source, but now I am distrustful of all such sources.

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Michael Swartz]

Mr. Swartz,

I assume, in your mind, that absolves the source from all responsibility once he has passed along his false history to the author, even though he professed it to be a true account. One wonders how someone washes his hands of any guilt if he also fabricated the information out of whole cloth.


Your statement makes little or no sense. As I said, the reader of all books have a responsibility to not take everything literally and project their own criteria and rules on someone else's work that was never written or intended to fall within that criteria. That is what you are doing, expecting sources to be factually and historically correct with complete documentation of every detail. That is unreasonable. Frank Alkire needs not be "absolved from all responsibility" for passing along his "false history". He gave his account as he knew it or as it was given to him by someone else. It is you who tries to force an unreasonable criteria onto his account. Mr. Alkire was not giving Allen an "Historical" account, he was giving Allen his personal account as he knew it. There is a difference and I'm afraid you do not understand that difference. Robert Joseph Allen was writing a story, a western folklore legend, a tale with various personal accounts, not an historical documentary, he has no need to "wash his hands of guilt" for fabricating information. That is what authors of Fiction literature do. It's pretty basic stuff actually.

Thanks for reading

Michael Swartz

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

joe, I, to an extent, agree with Michael. You once told me that you hsd a steak waiting for rme at the LDM rondevous. I reposted this, however it is not my responsibility orfor a reader to say that this was so, the steak was actually there, or just a petty remark on my part.

Again on Atlantis you posted data from ancient Greek times, how in the world can you ever be sure that your source was correct?

Not even an experience personally 'experienced' can be certified as being true, only what our 'remembered' impression of it may be, which in turn can be influenced by many factors.

In your case I accept what you post as being the truth, since I trust you, but that doesn't make it so witness my missing steak snifff.

ah, as I once said drink your coffee,or whatever, I am getting too deep, sides my eye still aches a bit rfrm the macular bleeding,so must of necesity cut my time short.

Skol, Cheers, Salut, or whatever

 

[cactusjumper]

Mr. Swartz,

I assume, in your mind, that absolves the source from all responsibility once he has passed along his false history to the author, even though he professed it to be a true account. One wonders how someone washes his hands of any guilt if he also fabricated the information out of whole cloth.


Your statement makes little or no sense. As I said, the reader of all books have a responsibility to not take everything literally and project their own criteria and rules on someone else's work that was never written or intended to fall within that criteria. That is what you are doing, expecting sources to be factually and historically correct with complete documentation of every detail. That is unreasonable. Frank Alkire needs not be "absolved from all responsibility" for passing along his "false history". He gave his account as he knew it or as it was given to him by someone else. It is you who tries to force an unreasonable criteria onto his account. Mr. Alkire was not giving Allen an "Historical" account, he was giving Allen his personal account as he knew it. There is a difference and I'm afraid you do not understand that difference. Robert Joseph Allen was writing a story, a western folklore legend, a tale with various personal accounts, not an historical documentary, he has no need to "wash his hands of guilt" for fabricating information. That is what authors of Fiction literature do. It's pretty basic stuff actually.

Thanks for reading

Michael Swartz

Mr. Swartz,

I don't believe there is a single piece of evidence that Frank Alkire ever told anyone that story. On the other hand, there are a number of modern-day sources who have made up an entire history, with supporting "documents". Some of us like to stick to the truth......especially where it concerns history.

You state that Allen received the story directly from Frank Alkire. Is Allen the only source you have for that statement?

Thanks,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[Michael Swartz]

Mr. Swartz,

I don't believe there is a single piece of evidence that Frank Alkire ever told anyone that story. On the other hand, there are a number of modern-day sources who have made up an entire history, with supporting "documents". Some of us like to stick to the truth......especially where it concerns history.

You state that Allen received the story directly from Frank Alkire. Is Allen the only source you have for that statement?

Thanks,

Joe Ribaudo

It's plainly evident several authors used Mr. Alkire as their "source" in different books and publications concerning the Lost Dutchman Mine. Charles Higham just to name one lists him as a primary source.
There isn't a single piece of evidence Mr. Alkire didn't tell anyone that story. Again you interject your criteria of "history" into a western folklore legend with coincidental accounts by various individuals.
It's apparent you are having a hard time with the Fiction, Non-Ficton classifications, their meanings and usage. You bring to mind the man who went to the circus and demanded his money back because the clowns weren't serious and dignified.
If you are looking for 100% factual historical documentary, you won't find it in books about unicorns, bigfoot, Atlantis or the Lost Dutchman Gold Mine. What you will find are stories, tales, hearsay and personal accounts by all manner of individuals. If those stories and personal accounts don't measure up to your own personal criteria of what you think they should be, the fault is not with the authors, but with yourself.

Thanks for reading

Michael Swartz

 

[cactusjumper]

It's plainly evident several authors used Mr. Alkire as their "source" in different books and publications concerning the Lost Dutchman Mine. Charles Higham just to name one lists him as a primary source.
There isn't a single piece of evidence Mr. Alkire didn't tell anyone that story. Again you interject your criteria of "history" into a western folklore legend with coincidental accounts by various individuals.
It's apparent you are having a hard time with the Fiction, Non-Ficton classifications, their meanings and usage. You bring to mind the man who went to the circus and demanded his money back because the clowns weren't serious and dignified.
If you are looking for 100% factual historical documentary, you won't find it in books about unicorns, bigfoot, Atlantis or the Lost Dutchman Gold Mine. What you will find are stories, tales, hearsay and personal accounts by all manner of individuals. If those stories and personal accounts don't measure up to your own personal criteria of what you think they should be, the fault is not with the authors, but with yourself.

Thanks for reading

Michael Swartz

Yea......you're probably right. I'm just a dumb schlub who can't tell his burro from a hole in the ground.

Have a nice life.

Joe Ribaudo