PatrickD
Hero Member
- Jul 23, 2012
- 845
- 704
- Detector(s) used
- Garrett AT Pro
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
You can see the shape that looks like a person just to the left of the red circle that Ditlihi put in the picture.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Good idea but I am not sure what range they have. I am probably about 2 city blocks from the formation and using the camera zoom. I would hate to lose a drone.
What caught my attention isn't this end of the rock formation initially. This end appears to have a bust carved out of it. It is directly on the south side of the formations. This picture isn't really doing it justice and it looks more like a human form from a distance. I highlighted some of the elements visible that caught my attention. (I might be barking up the wrong tree but its still a tree.)
View attachment 1460084
I used the red pen tool to highlight some things to look at. You have to look close though, the markings are not showing up like I hoped. You can see them on different areas if you zoom in on the picture.
Anyone want to go treasure hunting? LOL.
Patrick
Good idea but I am not sure what range they have. I am probably about 2 city blocks from the formation and using the camera zoom. I would hate to lose a drone.
Someone who used to post on Tnet all the time operates drones almost 2 miles out. 2 city blocks is nothing. Get a DJI Phantom Pro and it will do everything you want.
I caution people from succumbing to pareidolia when it comes to natural formations. Pareidolia is a psychological phenomenon in which the mind responds to a stimulus (an image or a sound) by perceiving a familiar pattern where none exists.
I posted a link to a map, earlier in the thread, that shows the region from Mississippi to Santa Fe.
Carte nouvelle de la partie de l'Ouest de la province de la Louisiane sur les observations et découvertes du Sieur Benard de la Harpe... / dressé par le Sr de Beauvilliers... | Gallica
I believe it was made during the 1740s but I'm not sure. Looking at this section of the map, you can see Santa Fe and the village of the Padouka Noirs to the northwest.
View attachment 1402188
Here's a rough translation of the Padouka noir caption. "Villages of the black Padoukas which the Spaniards read from gold by caravans to the Tiguas around these mountains." During one of the early French explorations of this region, the French explorers were told that Spanish miners would come to this village to trade with the Padoukas. The Spanish came from the mountains to the west where they were mining gold with Indian slaves. I've read one account that said La Harpe had this information and another that said Bourgmont. Maybe both had it, maybe others. This map mentions La Harpe, but most of the information on the map came from other sources because La Harpe wasn't in most of these places. Here's something curious about the map. If you look at the position of Santa Fe, you will see that it's at latitude 36 deg and half of a degree, I'm not sure if that's .5 of a degree or 30' out of 60. Anyway, on google earth, Santa Fe is at 35 deg 41' so the map is a degree off. I guess the little circle with the cross on it, shows the location of the Padouka village at 38 deg 30', if half of a degree on the map is 30'. If that location is off a full degree, like the Santa Fe location, that would put the village at 37 deg 30'. The latitude of Treasure Mountain (Citadel Mountain) is 37 deg 27'.
Our group has been researching and looking for this treasure since 2004. After spending much time in the San Luis Valley, Pagosa Springs, and South Fork areas, we concluded that the Spanish had to have known French soldiers and miners were in the area from roughly 1748-1756. Also, again 1799-1802. This is because of the relationships that both Spanish and the French had with the local Indians. Furthermore, it would have been impossible to have groups ranging from 200 - 350 men that would have not been discovered. We have read your posts in this forum. You clearly have done much research.
The article you eluded too about the pistol is no surprise. It is a smoking gun. Our research so far places Spanish Conquistadors in the San Luis Valley as early as 1519. Oddly enough, we also had a gentlemen show us a book that possibly puts Montezuma himself in the San Luis Valley as far north as Antonito! How awesome would it be if it some day could be proven!
I think, in the Citadel, Maynard explains the need for the French to leave the Summitville area in the winter. Treasure Mountain is next to Wolf Creek and Summitville is within a day or less hike. There is no way the French would have endured 450" averages of snow at those altitudes. I have hiked TM several times, and know the Wolf Creek Pass area very well. It gets a lot of snow. Taos and Sante Fe would have been the winter destinations of these men. Look forward to your response.
Our group has been researching and looking for this treasure since 2004. After spending much time in the San Luis Valley, Pagosa Springs, and South Fork areas, we concluded that the Spanish had to have known French soldiers and miners were in the area from roughly 1748-1756. Also, again 1799-1802. This is because of the relationships that both Spanish and the French had with the local Indians. Furthermore, it would have been impossible to have groups ranging from 200 - 350 men that would have not been discovered. We have read your posts in this forum. You clearly have done much research.
The article you eluded too about the pistol is no surprise. It is a smoking gun. Our research so far places Spanish Conquistadors in the San Luis Valley as early as 1519. Oddly enough, we also had a gentlemen show us a book that possibly puts Montezuma himself in the San Luis Valley as far north as Antonito! How awesome would it be if it some day could be proven!
I think, in the Citadel, Maynard explains the need for the French to leave the Summitville area in the winter. Treasure Mountain is next to Wolf Creek and Summitville is within a day or less hike. There is no way the French would have endured 450" averages of snow at those altitudes. I have hiked TM several times, and know the Wolf Creek Pass area very well. It gets a lot of snow. Taos and Sante Fe would have been the winter destinations of these men. Look forward to your response.
This is an interesting post. You have evidence that there was Spanish exploration in the San Luis Valley in 1519. That was about the time that Cortez invaded Mexico. Do you have archeological evidence or documentation? And yes, it would be something to have proof that Montezuma was in the valley. I'd like to here more about this if you can tell.
There are legends, from the Hochunk Tribe, that they came to the Great Lakes region from Mexico, where they were chased out by the Spanish. What route did they take and how many were there and did they bring anything with them? Maybe you can find the answers to these questions because I never could.
I agree that there was probably some interaction between the Spanish and the French and I speculate that it might have involved unauthorized mining and transportation of precious metals, but no concrete proof. Have you ever found any proof that a large expedition of 250-300 men ever left Fort Chartres in the mid 1700's or St. Louis in the early 1800's? If you have, please post information about it.
I've never been interested in the treasure, but I would like to find evidence of a French-Spanish operation.
The Treasure Mountain legend is something I would like to know more about. My biggest question is when was the legend started and by who. It seems that Maynard's books pretty much follow, almost word by word, a newspaper story that was published in the early 1900's. Have you ever talked to any of the locals about this legend and what do they think about it? Also, have you ever found anything about Captain Louis de Villemont?
The San Luis Valley is quite an intriguing place for many different reasons. Dog, I haven't reviewed all the posts in this thread (but I think I might to refresh my noggin), but one thing I've never gotten straight is why, when and by whom the valley first took on the name of a French Franciscan saint. I can't remember ever finding a source that explained it.
The French of course founded and named St. Louis MO in the mid-1700s, which establishes a possible French connection that maybe somehow even links Villemont during the same period. Then, we also know that this region was dominated by Franciscans, at least in Santa Fe and points north, and was settled by the Spanish - some even say much much earlier than the 18th century by crypto Jews. I know the place name may be irrelevant side issue to the story, but you know that I believe the selection of place names is often not a trifling matter.