True Spelling

[cactusjumper]

Zephyr,

"Unless you lived in those times, you'd only have a generalization of their motives for surviving (and thriving) back then. History books are only good up to a point (as too much is always left out, or will never be known), and can suffer from the biases of those who wrote them."

At what point do you assume you have reached the end of the "good" and are reading the "biases of those who wrote....." the "History books"? In many cases, that is the best evidence that is left of the historic past.
Until someone comes along and provides us with a time machine, I will stick to the imperfect historical accounts.

Some might argue, and do, that too much is put in as opposed to left out.

Other than that, IMHO, some very fine rebuttals.

Joe Ribaudo

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[lamar]

Dear Zephyr;
If I may take this opportunity to respond to your replies:

Unless you lived in those times, you'd only have a generalization of their motives for surviving (and thriving) back then. History books are only good up to a point (as too much is always left out, or will never be known), and can suffer from the biases of those who wrote them.

This observation is wholly untrue, my friend. Books, or more precisely, manuscripts which were written during the period in question are EXCELLENT indicators of how a particular society interacted. Along with the written word we have their art which is another superb window into the feelings and emotions of past peoples. This remains true right up to the modern age, my friend. Again, in order to understand how a particular people interacted during any give time frame, you must first remove yourself from this age and travel backwards, mentally, of course.

Poppycock. Gold and silver were as coveted back then as they are now. And with a horse, sword and armor, a man could attain FAME (which would be almost synonymous with "honor".) Not if you weren't landed though. Very rare that you hear of a peasant becoming a knight...

Once again, you've missed the point because you were most likely trying to view the value of gold and silver from our standpoint instead of theirs. Fact. There remains precise little gold or silver artifacts from the Middle Ages. Reason: There wasn't much of it to begin with. Reason why there was little gold or silver during the time in question. Answer: Because of the breakdown of the Roman Empire, people divided themselves into very small fiefs, with interactive trading being almost unheard of. The famous Roman road system was left to deteriorate as people cowered close to castles and fortresses for protection. Trade goods became limited to those which I already mentioned.

Judging from the number of mints operating in the various city-states (such as Venice, Florence, Genova, and many, many other principalities throughout Europe, starting from before even the Black Death), and the sheer amounts of coinage they put out (from lowly billon backed with silver for use within their realms to standards of international trade such as the florin and ducat), I have to seriously disagree with you there.

Judging from your reply, I have to state that you seem to have wandered away from the main points of my missive. I was not referring to the time period after the Refromation, rather I am limiting my discussion to the Middle Ages. Coinage was practically unheard of in Europe from the fall of the Roman Empire till at least the latter part of the Middle Ages. The few Kings and Emperors that attempted to mint coins in any great volume during the Middle Ages soon discovered that their nobility was using the coinage as ornamentation, or more precisely, as jewelry. It generated no small measure of frustration to the various kings who tried implementing a Romanistic style of money in their various kingdoms. This is also a well documented fact as was recorded in many different manuscripts of the period.

Ah, well, wealth did (as still does) drive people, among other things. Those dusty archives you mention are replete with records of trade accounts, inventory, fines for criminal offenses, taxation, tithes to the Church, wills and bequests, salaries for officials, and so much more. People were not content to remain poor, as you imply, and would try to get ahead any way they could. (Things haven't changed over the millenia...) There was a LOT of money flowing around, even if some of it never reached the lowliest farmer eating dirt to survive.

No, there was not a lot of money flowing around, at least not during the Middle Ages. Those dusty archives which I mentioned ARE replete with records of trade accounts, inventory, fines for criminal offenses, etc, ad nauseum, only those records show that those people mostly paid with barley, wheat, hogs, chickens, cheese, etc. To further exemplify my main point, I shall refer you to the principality of Andorra, which has joint co-rulers, being the Count of Foix of France and the Bishop of Urgell of Spain. The annual tribute paid by Andorra to the co-rulers is as follows: 4 hams, 40 loaves of bread and 10 barrels of wine. Also, please take note of the year when this agreement was made, 1278.Also, please note that as far as I am aware, this agreement has remained in effect till today. This agreement was more of the norm than the exception for the time period and the archives are filled to overflowing with similiar accounts. Have you ever wondered wny Medieval castles were so large? It was in order for the large amounts of trade goods to be stockpiled and stored. One of the castles primary usages was as centralized warehouse, in addition to being the armory, training grounds, etc.

Again, it's using assumptions based on our own existence that drives us away from the path of truth. The answers which we seek are lying about, all we need to do is to read and understand.

Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Good morning my friend Lamar: you posted-->

The Jesuits were well versed in the doctrines of that time and one of those was the vow of poverty
~~~~~~~~~~~

In this I can find no fault for the "majority", But this applied to the individual, not the individuals obligation to further the Society.

This required a constantly increasing flow of capital such as gold and silver. How to accomplish this except through intrigue and mining. ? Jesuit records show many were trained as mining engineers and were in charge of many of the major mines in Mexico..
************************************************************************************

In the periods in which we are most interested, 1400-1700's , You stated that the main driving force in the conquests of the Americas was religious and honor. Perhaps, as a side benefit for the leaders, but what drove the men behind Cortez, Pizarro, etc. ? It is recorded that they were recruited from the riffraff, criminal, x military, adventurers, or wherever they could be found. I doubt that most were avid practitioners of religion., or would be content with a ham as a reward.

All of their records specifically speak in terms of GOLD and SILVER. Curious thing for people that normally, supposedly, had no interest in the precious metals.

Don Jose d e La Mancha

 

[lamar]

Dear CactusJumper;
Good observations, my friend! There is only one slight flaw in them. You are observing from the 21st century, rather than the 14th thru 16th centuries. That the whole of the Society of Jesus was in fact driven by honorable intentions is not in dispute, nor can it be, for it maintains itself today as an honorable religious institution.

That there may be been some bad apples littering the ranks of the Jesuits would seem to be a logical assumption UNTIL you place your thought processes into the period in question, then things are not quite as clear as they would at first seem to be.

For one thing, not just anyone was permitted into the ranks of Roman Catholic Monasteric Orders during the Middle Ages. The monasteries of the day were almost exclusively reserved for those sons of noblity who were not to recieve a significant inheiritance from their fathers. As is well known, part of the fuedal system was that the entire estate fell into the hands of the first born male heir, or lacking one, to the eldest living male heir. The nobility raised and trained all of their sons alike as an act of insurance, as it was quite likely that the first born male heir might not live long enough to recieve his inheritance. Therefore, all of the possible heirs were raised and trained alike.

The bulk of their training was based in martial arts and to excel at combat was the primary goal of all. Once the elder noblity had passed away, the one rightful heir took his place which left the other, younger sons out in the cold, so to speak. Lacking no other place for them, they were most generally sent to the monasteries to live out their lives as priests.

Once housed in the monastery, the young man could look forward to a life of gentler, more scholarly pursuits, such as reading and writing. It was here that the young men learned about Roman Catholic doctrine and as such, they also applied their previous learnings to the task at hand. This gave rise to an extremely rigid, inflexible current which flowed through the Roman Catholic church for centuries.

And so, considering the early training they had recieved in preparation for knighthood and taking into consideration the later training they recieved as monks, it was only natural for them to think in the simplest linear terms. Combining to the two vastly different training environments their existence became rather straightforward. Live a good, clean honorable life, always worship God, slay your enemies and die a good death.

Any deep delving into the realms of philosophy, art, engineering, mathmatics and the like which was commonly taught in the univerisities of Greece and Rome had been cast aside in favor of worhipping God and waging war. This is why the period was known as the Dark Ages.

And so, now we've had the chance to examine who these men were, we can now conclude that life was for them quite brutal and that they in turn meted out justice using the same brutal measure. All infractions, no matter how slight, were punished by all manner of torture, and as a matter of course, people were many times punished for no infractions what so ever.

And so, we may now also conclude that the concept of dishonoring oneself or his religious order or his regent would have been as foreign to a monk during the Middle Ages as astrophysics. It would have been simply unimaginable to these people and lacking any deep knowledge, susperstitious beliefs became the order of the day.

With the coming of the First Crusade, many of these monks, who had been trained in warfare, embarked on pilgramages to The Holy Land, and upon arrival, they almost immediately banded into a rather odd group of warrior monks. That the warrior monks even existed at all is due to fuedal doctrines, religious beliefs, timing and circumstances. These warrior monks took their holy vows VERY seriously and would rapidly and cheerfully dispatch anyone who questioned their honor to the afterlife.

So, perhaps there were a few bad apples scattered amongst the Jesuits or the other religious orders of the era, however taking all of their circumstances into consideration, I'd state that these bad apples very precious few in number and most likely took great pangs to hide any and all illicit or illegal activities. Theft could be cause for immediate death AND excommunication. The death part didn't frighten people as much back then as it does now, however the threat of excommunication was very real and it was a very powerful weapon back then.

And now, to conclude your final statement, my friend. You stated:

"Perhaps, as a side benefit for the leaders, but what drove the men behind Cortez, Pizarro, etc. ? It is recorded that they were recruited from the riffraff, criminal, x military, adventurers, or wherever they could be found. I doubt that most were avid practitioners of religion., or would be content with a ham as a reward."

What indeed could have have been the motivational force which drove these men? Again, all one needs to do is to examine the man and the timeframe in which he lived. Therein lies our answer, my friend. Position! That must be the answer! And now, let's scrutinize these conquistadores a bit closer, shall we?

When we dive into the histories of the conquistadores, we soon find that they were all members of lower noblity who stood no chance of a decent inheiritance or a better position on the social ladder of the time. They realized this, and they also realized that the only way they might possibly rise up a rung or two on this ladder was at the point of a lance. And that's exactly what they attempted to do.

Once we have been indocturnated into the times of the people in question, we can next anticipate their actions with very perdictable results. They flocked to The New World in the vain hope that filling the coffers of the Spanish and Portuguese treasuries would entitle them to lands and power. In a few cases, a very few cases, this was true, however in most cases the conquistadores died broke and broken.

Their motivational factor was not gold or silver, it was trying to attain a higher position for themselves and their future generations. This fact is self evident in all of the colonists who proclaimed themselves as "Hidalgos".

Again, in order to understand what life was like back then, we must understand the rules and doctrines which governed their lives. Let's suppose that an ordinary man had in his possession a bag literally bursting with gold which was obtained legally. What could he do with it? The short answer would be, "Not much!" As a commoner, it would have been illegal for him to even possess the gold, whether gotten by legal means or not. Could he purchase a fine steed with it? Nope! Not even a old nag! In order for him to have been able to possess a horse, first his lord would have needed to give him permission to own one. Maybe he could have purcahsed a sprawling estate? Nope again! The only people who were permitted to own lands were the noblity as was appointed by the King or Queen. Land was not bought and sold, it was granted, and the only ones who held land grants were the noblity. Perhaps he might have given away his gold? There wouldn't have been any takers if that either. People were terrified at the thought of getting caught with gold or silver as the natural tendency of a nobleman during the time whould have been that the possessor must have stolen it. That was more than enough for a quick trial and an even quicker execution. Generally speaking, the trials lasted only about as long as it took for the nobleman to unsheath his sword or pierce the persons' flesh with his lance.

So, what could have driven these conquistadores to risk life and limb for the crowned heads of Spain and Portugal. They did it in the hopes that they would be granted favors from the Crown. This, in fact, did happen, time and again. Some of the conquistadores which did not perish in action lived to become governors and officials in the New World (never in Europe, where the real royality resided) and in the end most of them died broke and bitter.

Strictly as a matter of semantics, the conquistador was named Hernando Cortes, with an "S" and not the more modern "Z" .
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[cactusjumper]

Dear Lamar,

"Dear CactusJumper;
Good observations, my friend! There is only one slight flaw in them. You are observing from the 21st century, rather than the 14th thru 16th centuries. That the whole of the Society of Jesus was in fact driven by honorable intentions is not in dispute, nor can it be, for it maintains itself today as an honorable religious institution."

I fear you have confused my modest comments with the ruminations of my betters.

Having said that, I doubt that you or anyone else here, are making their observations from a 14th thru 16th century mind set. All of our opinions are based on the things that have touched our lives......to date. That may very well include books based on diaries and manuscripts from the period in questions and in some cases, perhaps, the original documents themselves.

To correctly observe events from those past centuries, I believe you need the life experiences of those who lived in those times. Everything else, I believe, is opinions based on our own biases and natural (ingrained/learned) prejudices. You, my friend, have shown us that you are as burdened as any of us with those maladies.

Take care,

Joe

 

[lamar]

Dear CactusJumper;

Once more we have semantics. I have never stated that I could look at things from the mindset of a person in the Middle Ages, merely that by LEARNING about how a group of people lived and by what doctrines they followed, we may gain a better insight into their thought processes. Once we are able to do this then we can in fact predict their behavior, with uncanny accuracy, as has been proven time and again throughout history.

Once we are able to immerse ourselves intellectually into the time in question, then we can begin asking questions to discern the validity of a claim, such as:

Was there ever gold mined at Tayopa? Did the Jesuits mine it or perhaps oversee the mining? Were the natives involved in hard rock mining prior to the arrival of the Spaniards? For approximately how long was this mine in operation? What was the annual average ore tonnage recovered? What happened to the tailings? If the tailings were used to fill in the mine, why was the mine filled in? If the Jesuits were frightened they would be discovered because of the tailings, why weren't they afraid of being discovered during the prior decades that were mining the gold illegally? Of whom were they afraid that they might be discovered? Other monastery orders? The governement? Whom? How many people worked the mine at any given time? Where were they housed? How were they fed? Did they have a well? How were they kept silent? Were they tortured? Were they murdered? If so, where are all of the bodies? There must have been livestock available in order to feed the miners. Where were they corralled? Who fed them and what did they eat? Where are all of their bones? What about supplies and materials? How did they arrive? Who sent them? How many times annually? Were the shippers and providers a part of this vast conspriacy? If so, how were they made to be kept silent? How were the trades paid for? How did the providers hide the gold that was used to pay them?

The list of questions goes on ad infinium and they can never be properly addressed because the mine only existed in the minds of very wishful treasure hunters for generation after generation. Again, once you are able to understand the doctrines of the period, then you will be better able to understand the participants and ultimately better able to contrive what they would have done in any given situation. For humans, the variable actions are NOT infinite in nature or scope as we are governed by our rules and guidelines in the same manner as we've always been. Humans really ARE very predictable.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Morning Lamar: As for Cortes/z both are acceptable in Mexico.

As for your description on the common man owning gold etc, one simply has to read records defining salaries in the 14 - 17-00's in which they were paid in silver, and if of exceptional value, in gold.

It would have been very inconvenient to have to run around with a pack train of hams instead of a small bit of change. This is precisely why coinage was developed. It was also a very excellent way to convert the Precious metal output to practical usage, hence the various casas de Monedas - MInts..

When one realizes that one peso a month was a high salary, it becomes clear that the simple lack of coined volume was basically responsible for this, but the common man did have the right to usage of coins or precious metals.

Regarding the cross section of the followers of Cortez/s, very few were of the nobility, or remotely descended from them, nor would any activity in the service of the king allow them into it's ranks. The Nobility themselves would react against this. Of this the king was well aware of, and so honored their wishes since he depended upon them for his security.

The most that they could hope for, besides a bit of personal loot of gold or silver, was a small plot of land on the frontier to act as a buffer to the "Sin Razones", the Indians.

So, dd the scion's of society then renounce their allegiance to the king in favor of the Society? If so, then their efforts would be divided between saving souls and advancing the society in any manner possible. Some became specialists in the latter and worked out of Rome.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[cactusjumper]

Friend Lamar,

"Once more we have semantics. I have never stated that I could look at things from the mindset of a person in the Middle Ages, merely that by LEARNING about how a group of people lived and by what doctrines they followed, we may gain a better insight into their thought processes. Once we are able to do this then we can in fact predict their behavior, with uncanny accuracy, as has been proven time and again throughout history.

Once we are able to immerse ourselves intellectually into the time in question, then we can begin asking questions to discern the validity of a claim...."

When someone schools us on the spelling of Cortes/Cortez, which as Jose pointed out, is equally acceptable in either form in Mexico, I believe we are being chastised over a difference without distinction. What is important is the history of the man, not how his name is recorded.

There is nothing wrong with using the meaning of words as a tool in discussions such as this. I am unsure why you believe "semantics" is a derogatory term, or even how it applies to what I wrote.

My comments were very basic and did not require a great knowledge of "semantics" to determine the meaning behind the brief message.

What I have been trying to say, is that books, diaries and manuscripts are how we understand all of the things you mentioned......and nothing else. There are no hidden meanings or agendas, just a simple comment.

Take care,

Joe

 

[lamar]

Dear CactusJumper;
I have taken nothing you have written in a derogatory manner, either in the past nor the present. I have always looks forward to your posts with much anticipation and look forward to all future postings from you.

That Cortes is now spelt with a Z in Mexico is correct, however in Spain some people still prefer to spell names of places and peoples in the manner that they were originally written. This helps to avoid confusing the names of historical place names and people with more modern ones.

For example, I continue to spell the city of Guadalaxara with a X instead of the modern J. This also holds true for my home state of Texas. Currently the name Tejas is the correct modern spelling of my state, however if I were to write it as Tejas, then it's very likely that you would not understand me.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA mi amigos,

Lamar wrote:

Let's suppose that an ordinary man had in his possession a bag literally bursting with gold which was obtained legally. What could he do with it? The short answer would be, "Not much!" As a commoner, it would have been illegal for him to even possess the gold, whether gotten by legal means or not.

What nation or state are you referring to, where it was illegal for a "commoner" to own or even possess gold? Can you cite a few sources to support this contention? Your post is written in a general sort of way, which is not specific about which nations you are referring to. For instance, are you saying that it was illegal for a Dane or a Norseman or a Moorish commoner to possess gold in the 12th century? Please clarify your references, and provide a few sources that we might be able to check? Possession of gold has been outlawed in several nations over time, including the USA (1933, with specific exemptions such as rare coins and jewelry) but I doubt that possession of gold was illegal in ALL nations during the Middle Ages, or later.

Lamar also wrote:

Was there ever gold mined at Tayopa? <snip> ...The list of questions goes on ad infinium and they can never be properly addressed because the mine only existed in the minds of very wishful treasure hunters for generation after generation.

Well amigo you have now taken a very difficult position, since you are saying that TAYOPA NEVER EXISTED. How can you prove this claim? Can you show when and where the "story" was "invented"? Can you cite the specific author who wrote or imagined this mine complex? I do try to keep an open mind, but unless you can show exactly who invented Tayopa, when it was invented, and some explanation as to the motives for inventing it, your claim holds no validity. One could as well claim that the Roman Catholic Church is a fictional invention, which can be traced back some twenty centuries to a couple of Jewish religious zealots in Rome....

Lamar, since you are an educated person, you must know that virtually all "myths" and "legends" have some basis in fact. Often enough there are distortions, exaggerations, and "editing" done but at the root we find a reality, if we search diligently and keep our eyes open. Pure fictions do exist, but even in pure fiction we most frequently find that it has been inspired by realities.

Thank you in advance, I look forward to learning exactly who/whom invented Tayopa, when it was invented as well as where and why.
your friend,
Oroblanco

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Lamar my friend: at times you give me a laugh. You posted -->

Was there ever gold mined at Tayopa? Did the Jesuits mine it or perhaps oversee the mining? Were the natives involved in hard rock mining prior to the arrival of the Spaniards? For approximately how long was this mine in operation? What was the annual average ore tonnage recovered? What happened to the tailings? If the tailings were used to fill in the mine, why was the mine filled in? If the Jesuits were frightened they would be discovered because of the tailings, why weren't they afraid of being discovered during the prior decades that were mining the gold illegally? Of whom were they afraid that they might be discovered? Other monastery orders? The governement? Whom? How many people worked the mine at any given time? Where were they housed? How were they fed? Did they have a well? How were they kept silent? Were they tortured? Were they murdered? If so, where are all of the bodies? There must have been livestock available in order to feed the miners. Where were they corralled? Who fed them and what did they eat? Where are all of their bones? What about supplies and materials? How did they arrive? Who sent them? How many times annually? Were the shippers and providers a part of this vast conspriacy? If so, how were they made to be kept silent? How were the trades paid for? How did the providers hide the gold that was used to pay them?

The list of questions goes on ad infinium and they can never be properly addressed because the mine only existed in the minds of very wishful treasure hunters for generation after generation
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

90 % are selfexplanitory, the others I will not comment upon unitl I have finished it's preliminary archaeologicl excavation. This is for obvious security reasons.

I will say that it was a group of mines, most were gofer hole types, 18 mines in a small district of some 4000 x 5000. meters.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[lamar]

Dear Oroblanco;
I presumed that I already HAD explained how the myth of Tayopa was perpetuated. The legend of Tayopa started in EXACTLY the same manner as the Priory of Sion did, with a single person, or a small group of persons, spinning a yarn. From that point, things just kept ballooning outwards until we are at the point where we are now.

I will not delve into theological matters on this topic as we've already been chastised for this once before, therefore I am afraid that we must keep this discussion inside of the parameters for which is was meant to be kept.

I also am trying to refrain from teaching medieval history on this topic as this was never one of my original intentions and I would now like to take this oportunity to inform others that in order to discover for themselves the issues of legality or morality during the Middle Ages, that all they need to do is to RESEARCH the topic.

And no, I do not feel that ANY of the questions regarding illegal or immoral mining activies at Tayopa have been answered satisfactorily, nor do I feel they can ever been answered in a satisfactory manner, for any such activity only exists in the over-active imagainations of generation after generation of treasure hunters.

And, of course there are security issues to explain why certain points of my debate cannot be disclosed, as there ALWAYS are security issues involved! To reside and move about in a world of darkness and secrets seems to be a rather sad waste of a life, if I must say so. Why not live out in the open, in the full view of day? Why the compelling need for secrecy? I have witheld no secrets from this group. I don't need to withold secrets as the facts speak for themselves.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Good Morning Lamar: You posted -->

And no, I do not feel that ANY of the questions regarding illegal or immoral mining activies at Tayopa have been answered satisfactorily, nor do I feel they can ever been answered in a satisfactory manner, for any such activity only exists in the over-active imagainations of generation after generation of treasure hunters.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Yes, of course ----------------hmmmm.
**************************************************************************************
You also posted-->

I have witheld no secrets from this group. I don't need to withold secrets as the facts speak for themselves.
Your friend;
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

May I ask "are you involved with a property that has the potential of being worth a tremendous amount of money" and has a fantastic historical value? If not, then discretion is not necessary on your part, but it is on mine.

In due time any questions will be answered

Don Jose de La Mancha

p.s. I see that Jesuit Father Ed PanLilio is running for governor of one of the provinces of the Philippines?? Apparently They are still involved in politics as usual.

 

[Springfield]

Dear Oroblanco;
I presumed that I already HAD explained how the myth of Tayopa was perpetuated. The legend of Tayopa started in EXACTLY the same manner as the Priory of Sion did, with a single person, or a small group of persons, spinning a yarn. Who were they? When? Documentation please. From that point, things just kept ballooning outwards until we are at the point where we are now. Uh huh.

I will not delve into theological matters on this topic as we've already been chastised for this once before, therefore I am afraid that we must keep this discussion inside of the parameters for which is was meant to be kept. What parameters? Meant by whom?

I also am trying to refrain from teaching medieval history on this topic (thank you) as this was never one of my original intentions and I would now like to take this oportunity to inform others that in order to discover for themselves the issues of legality or morality during the Middle Ages, that all they need to do is to RESEARCH the topic. Your selective interpretation of 'history' is as valid as anyone else's, I guess. You seem to have an axe to grind, however, which is OK, because we all have working models on this topic and others. You, however, have closed your mind to any other explanations other than your own. This does not serve your arguement well, IMO.

And no, I do not feel that ANY of the questions regarding illegal or immoral mining activies at Tayopa have been answered satisfactorily Hmmm, now you're getting it!, nor do I feel they can ever been answered in a satisfactory manner Ooops, slipping , for any such activity only exists in the over-active imagainations of generation after generation of treasure hunters. Closed your mind again.

And, of course there are security issues to explain why certain points of my debate cannot be disclosed, as there ALWAYS are security issues involved! So you know a secret but can't tell? To reside and move about in a world of darkness and secrets seems to be a rather sad waste of a life, if I must say so. Why not live out in the open, in the full view of day? Why the compelling need for secrecy? You tell us - you just opened the 'secret' can. I have witheld no secrets from this group ? . I don't need to withold secrets as the facts speak for themselves. Huh?!? I guess this is some sort of circular reasoning. So far, your arguements re SJ mining activities in the New World are based solely on church dogma and your personal interpretation of 'history'. Not yet compelling. Maybe you'll have to tell us your secret.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Zephyr]

Lamar wrote:

... attempting to understand a culture which thrived and survived 1000 years ago from a position in the 2008.

and

I was not referring to the time period after the Refromation, rather I am limiting my discussion to the Middle Ages.

As am I. As you seem to have defined the time period of the Middle Ages under discussion to be 1000 AD to 1480 (the accepted end of the Middle Ages), my comments are quite relevent to addressing your claims of a lack of coinage in the same period.
Sorry, but the historical records just do not bear you out.
The Friesach pfennigs (early 12th century) and Vienna pfennigs (late 12th century) were regional currencies, as well as the Venetian denaro, piccoli (early 12th century) and grosso (early 13th century), just to name a few. In fact, there were so many different coinages circulating (and accepted) in trade that merchants needed currency conversion charts to keep up with them, not to mention (but I shall) the constant fluctuations in value of the metals themselves. The various principalities were also quite strict in regulating the monies (and bullion) flowing into and out of their realms, even to requiring foreign coinage to be exchanged for their own.

Coinage was practically unheard of in Europe from the fall of the Roman Empire till at least the latter part of the Middle Ages.

For just one example, the Carolingians were operating mints at Melle and Poitiers from the time of Charlemagne to the early 11th century, mints were in London and Winchester from after the time of William I, so not unheard of....

The few Kings and Emperors that attempted to mint coins in any great volume during the Middle Ages soon discovered that their nobility was using the coinage as ornamentation, or more precisely, as jewelry.It generated no small measure of frustration to the various kings who tried implementing a Romanistic style of money in their various kingdoms. This is also a well documented fact as was recorded in many different manuscripts of the period.

The prodigious amounts of coins minted in Europe belies that (as accounted for in the surviving mint records themselves!) Coinage was produced as a medium of trade, and was in widespread use.
Coinage and economics in that era is just too broad a subject to be covered here. That it might have been glossed over or ignored in the sources you have available is a possibility. I hope that this is an area you will research further. It is quite fascinating in it's own right, and often overlooked....

Cheers

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Excellent posts Zephr & Springfield.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Good afternoon mi amigo Lamar:

I have a few questions on several things , which in themselves, while curious, do not denote a verification of Tayopa..

A) Why was a Jesuit Priest climbing around the Cliffs at Tayopa where he fell to his death in the late 1800's ?

At that time there was only two or 3 rancherias of Indians there ? they subsequently named the hill that he fell off of "El Cerro del Cura" - The hill of the Priest.


B) Why was the resident Jesuit at Yecora so agitated when he saw my Logo on the side of my SUV? Why did he insist that I go to Yecora where he had a huge pot of coffee where we could talk all night ?

C) Why were the two young Jesuits (ordained??) near Chinapas looking for a former Au mine operated by the Society? This was before I started on the Tayopa campaign. 1955.


D) Why does the location that I have fit all descriptions of the Legendary Tayopa? Do we have the classic chicken or the egg here?


E) Why is a Jesut running for Governor in the Philippines if all the Society is interested in is saving souls?Philippines?

There are others, but these will do for a start.

Don Jose de La Mancha

p.s. Lamar, I noticed that you mentioned Tejas, do you live there now? if so I would love to fly there for a night of coffee drinking and discussions with you as soon as I have Tayopa flowing smoothly. We could discuss Tayopa, and other points, much more freely, since it would not be posted on the net for all of the world to see, as it is now. I might even bring a few of our room members with me if you were willing. it should be fun and very informative.

 

[lamar]

Dear group;
I am amazed at the lack of research which is done before people post their opinions.

First, AFAIK, Fr. Panlilio is NOT a Jesuit. I would assume that he is an Augustinian, if he is in fact affiliated with any order at all. Of course, the misconception that Fr. Panlilio is a Jesuit is one of the main points of my debate. A rumor becomes repeated often enough until enough people believe, then at some later point the rumor MUST be true, simply because so many people believe it.

In fact, how does anyone KNOW that all of these *Jesuits* which have been so prominently cited, in truth, Jesuits? Did they all have IHS tattooed on their foreheads or something? I am an old school, pre-Vatican II Roman Catholic and I studied in semanaries and I am unable to tell which religious order a priest is from. So, this leads me to ask the question "How can these people be so sure that the priests and seminarians in question are in fact Jesuits?"

I am afraid that I do not understand the fascination regarding the Jesuits. I also do not understand the preceived need to slander them.

Next, Canon 285, if memory serves, in the Code of Canons, states quite plainly that Roman Catholic clergy cannot be involved in the political arean unless it serves the purpose of representing the entire body. Fr. Panlilio therefore, has been suspended as a priest, and he is no longer able to function as one. Has anyone bothered researching this fact BEFORE they hit the SEND key?

Again, I fail to understand what everyones' deep seated fascination regarding the Society of Jesus is. I, do however, wish to offer up an excellent alternate solution to the slanders which have been perpetuated against this order. Why not actually VISIT them and ask questions of them? Visiting a Jesuit will not cause a bolt of lightning to emit from the Heavens, striking one dead immediately.
Your friend;
LAMAR

 

[Cubfan64]

Dear group;
I am amazed at the lack of research which is done before people post their opinions.

First, AFAIK, Fr. Panlilio is NOT a Jesuit. I would assume that he is an Augustinian, if he is in fact affiliated with any order at all. Of course, the misconception that Fr. Panlilio is a Jesuit is one of the main points of my debate. A rumor becomes repeated often enough until enough people believe, then at some later point the rumor MUST be true, simply because so many people believe it.

In fact, how does anyone KNOW that all of these *Jesuits* which have been so prominently cited, in truth, Jesuits? Did they all have IHS tattooed on their foreheads or something? I am an old school, pre-Vatican II Roman Catholic and I studied in semanaries and I am unable to tell which religious order a priest is from. So, this leads me to ask the question "How can these people be so sure that the priests and seminarians in question are in fact Jesuits?"

I am afraid that I do not understand the fascination regarding the Jesuits. I also do not understand the preceived need to slander them.

Next, Canon 285, if memory serves, in the Code of Canons, states quite plainly that Roman Catholic clergy cannot be involved in the political arean unless it serves the purpose of representing the entire body. Fr. Panlilio therefore, has been suspended as a priest, and he is no longer able to function as one. Has anyone bothered researching this fact BEFORE they hit the SEND key?

Again, I fail to understand what everyones' deep seated fascination regarding the Society of Jesus is. I, do however, wish to offer up an excellent alternate solution to the slanders which have been perpetuated against this order. Why not actually VISIT them and ask questions of them? Visiting a Jesuit will not cause a bolt of lightning to emit from the Heavens, striking one dead immediately.
Your friend;
LAMAR

I've got no dog in this fight, but find it interesting nonetheless. If I'm not mistaken, Real just posted directly above your post here Lamar...

B) Why was the resident Jesuit at Yecora so agitated when he saw my Logo on the side of my SUV? Why did he insist that I go to Yecora where he had a huge pot of coffee where we could talk all night ?

I assume whatever was discussed, it didn't dissuade Real from continuing his searching. I also assume you either are questioning whether the man he spoke with was really a Jesuit, or you're questioning whether Real is telling the truth?

 

[lamar]

Dear Cubfan64;
I was not questioning Reals' validity of the claim taht he spoke with anyone, nor was I calling him a fabricator of tales. I am simply questioning the validity of the claim that these *Jesuits* are in fact actually Jesuits.

I mean, how does a person for SURE that someone is a Jesuit without walking up to a supposed Jesuit and asking them? The Society of Jesus does not, to the best of my knowledge, keep a list of active members in their Society which is viewable to the public.
Your friend;
LAMAR