Tumacacori Mission Mines RE: Sister Micaela Molina Document

[Tuscoro]

pbroker, as per the quoted post by rpezzo51, Antonio de Espejo although he most certainly traveled the area, and I do not profess to know all the history, I have Espejo's expedition documents from 1582-83, if there are available somewhere, somehow.. expedition documents pertaining to 1584-88, I would most certainly love to find them... However I am VERY Certain if they do exist, it is not pertaining to the area of the Verde Valley, I know this because I know the expedition of 1584-88, the party was killed on their return trip near the 4 corners area, whether any survived to write documents I do not know, History has it that Espejo after his expedition of 1582-83, traveled to Cuba and died in 1585, this however cannot be true, as I have a copy of his signed map dated 1588 which was handed to a friend of mine and given to me, by an Apache/Navajo, who received it of his grandfathers who took it with other things from the Spaniards they killed long ago... In Espejo's expedition documents of 1582-83, and to my knowledge, there is no mention of Verde, or Tumacacori... and his trail is very well described. I will say his interests alluded to in his 82-83 documents, and with a return expedition to his true interest and his land grant shortly thereafter, and corroborated by his dated map were much further north, even further than the area he traveled around Zuni in 82-83... Should you or anyone else verify "that a researcher found in an out of print book in a California library. It talked about a 3 soldiers coming into Arizona with the Espejo Expedtion in (1598) in search of a rich gold mine in the Verde Valley..... etc " I would be VERY grateful for any information regarding this... I am also interested in that second page I keep hearing about of the Molina Document... and does anyone have any information on exactly what was agua de "San Roman"? I can be reached at [email protected] Thank You...

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Oroblanco]

pbroker, as per the quoted post by rpezzo51, Antonio de Espejo although he most certainly traveled the area, and I do not profess to know all the history, I have Espejo's expedition documents from 1582-83, if there are available somewhere, somehow.. expedition documents pertaining to 1584-88, I would most certainly love to find them... However I am VERY Certain if they do exist, it is not pertaining to the area of the Verde Valley, I know this because I know the expedition of 1584-88, the party was killed on their return trip near the 4 corners area, whether any survived to write documents I do not know, History has it that Espejo after his expedition of 1582-83, traveled to Cuba and died in 1585, this however cannot be true, as I have a copy of his signed map dated 1588 which was handed to a friend of mine and given to me, by an Apache/Navajo, who received it of his grandfathers who took it with other things from the Spaniards they killed long ago... In Espejo's expedition documents of 1582-83, and to my knowledge, there is no mention of Verde, or Tumacacori... and his trail is very well described. I will say his interests alluded to in his 82-83 documents, and with a return expedition to his true interest and his land grant shortly thereafter, and corroborated by his dated map were much further north, even further than the area he traveled around Zuni in 82-83... Should you or anyone else verify "that a researcher found in an out of print book in a California library. It talked about a 3 soldiers coming into Arizona with the Espejo Expedtion in (1598) in search of a rich gold mine in the Verde Valley..... etc " I would be VERY grateful for any information regarding this... I am also interested in that second page I keep hearing about of the Molina Document... and does anyone have any information on exactly what was agua de "San Roman"? I can be reached at [email protected] Thank You...

Do you believe that the Espejo expedition entered the region around Tumacacori? Thank you in advance. Also, since the mission and town were not really named prior to the Jesuit period, it would not be logical to find it on a map drawn in the 1580s.

 

[Tuscoro]

No I do not, it is very clear they came up the Rio Grand Past Las Cruces, Socorro etc... Now I am wanting to read it again... Thank You for your response!
The map I mentioned is a more specific area and in the northern regions, it is Espejo's Land Grant which took in about 144,000 acres...

 

[Oroblanco]

No I do not, it is very clear they came up the Rio Grand Past Las Cruces, Socorro etc... Now I am wanting to read it again... Thank You for your response!
The map I mentioned is a more specific area and in the northern regions, it is Espejo's Land Grant which took in about 144,000 acres...

I understand now, and I agree with you that Espejo's entradas are fascinating. With all the many claims of people who say they have found a famous lost mine, I have never seen anyone claim to have found Espejo's silver mines.

Please do continue,

 

[Real of Tayopa]

Claim snifl

 

[Oroblanco]

Claim snifl

Amen brother - look how many have claimed to have found the LDM, at last count it was up over 200! They can not all be true!

Please do continue,

 

[Tuscoro]

Oroblanco, Nor have I, I didn't even know he had any... where does this statement of "Espejo's silver mines originate" come from? as I recall in his expedition documents he makes mention of locating mines west of Zuni which he had been told of previously, but I never understood it to mean "His Mines"

 

[Oroblanco]

Oroblanco, Nor have I, I didn't even know he had any... where does this statement of "Espejo's silver mines originate" come from? as I recall in his expedition documents he makes mention of locating mines west of Zuni which he had been told of previously, but I never understood it to mean "His Mines"

I referred to the mines as Espejo's out of common use. Do you have a different name you would prefer to use, to talk about the rich silver mines discovered by Espejo?

 

[Tuscoro]

Why the "Molina Document" is a Counterfeit​

Handwriting style​

The so-called "Molina document" is written in a printed form of handwriting, something that is just not seen in the Spanish colonial era. Although there were, of course, printed books, the populace always wrote in a cursive style. In this forgery, letters are printed in modern style, although the forger tried on occasion to make some of them look archaic. Unfortunately, his lack of consistency gives him away. One glaring example of this is the way the forger made his "r's," as in the word "borrada." Spaniards of the colonial period universally made "r's" that looked like "x's, but this writer's "r's" are consistantly executed like modern printed "r's." A comparison of handwriting styles of the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries graphically shows this "document" to be a phony.

Format​

The counterfeit is written in a "landscape" format, something totally unheard of in the Spanish colonial era. The variation in size of the letters and weaving lines point to someone besides a Spaniard having written it. Those who could write in the colonial era were taught to keep their lines very straight and the size of their letters uniform. They took great pride in their ability to write "properly." Probably one of the reasons they never wrote in the landscape format is because shorter lines are much easier to keep straight.

Roman numerals​

No Spanish document ever used Roman numerals in the text. This forger used them at least twenty-six times in this one short document. Sometimes in extremely rare cases one will see Roman numerals used in headings or titles of books, but the only time they are ever seen even written on the same page as text is in documents from the 1500's, and those numerals are written in a style that is totally foreign to anything we are used to today.

CCCDTC​

The forger is a bit confused when he speaks of "CCDTC varas." That is a strange way to write possibly either 800 or 1200. He wrote it as a measurement once. Then he put ditto marks under it in the next line to reiterate the distance, and then it is written the same to show the symbol that was supposed to be chiseled with the cross on the underneath side of a black rock.

MDXVIII​

Another problem associated with the Roman numerals in this counterfeit document can probably be attributed to oversight, but because the forger left the "L" out of the date at the bottom of the document it changes the date that the imaginary Father S--- L--- supposedly marked the mine in December of 1518. It is a known historical fact that Spaniards were not in northern Sonora in 1658, but 1518, before they ever marched on Mexico City, is ridiculous. John D. Mitchell misread "MDXVIII" and published it as 1508 and most treasure authors, rather than reading the actual Roman numeral have simply reiterated his mistake. One author, however, caught the mistake and blames it on the illusive fictional "Nun."

Redotero​

The very first word of this fraudulent "Spanish" document is a clear indicator that it was not written by a Spaniard or in the Spanish colonial period. Redotero is a Mexican colloquialism that dates this document to the 19th century or later. It is derived from the verb "derrotar" (redotar) which has to do with plotting a course of direction or action. (See Francisco J. Santamaria's "Diccionario de Mejicanismos," and "Diccionario de la Lengua Española por el Real Academia Española.")

Río Santa Cruz​

The river that is today known as the "Santa Cruz River" was not known by that name in the Spanish Period. It was after the establishment of the town of Santa Cruz, located in present-day Sonora, that the river's name changed from "Santa María" to "Santa Cruz." In fact, John Mitchell's first book, printed in 1933, which gave an English translation of this counterfeit document, used the words "old town of Santa Cruz" rather than "Santa Cruz River." He evidently learned that the "old town" was not so old after all, and changed the designation to river rather than town in his 1953 book. Regardless, the useage of the words "Río Santa Cruz" date this forgery, whether original or copied, to a time after the Spanish colonial period and long after the Jesuits were expelled from New Spain.

Patio​

The first time the word patio is used in this forgery, it is used to describe the main room inside the mine. That room was called the criadero in Spanish colonial days. You will not see patio used in such a way.
The word patio was never used in the colonial era to describe a smelter nor the amalgamation process. Nor was the amalgamation process ever called the "Patio Process" by Spaniards, Mexicans, or any other Spanish-speaking community. Patio Process are the words coined by "Anglos" to describe the process that Spaniards called "hacienda de sacar plata por beneficio de azogue." Smelters, in those days, were called simply haciendas or haciendas de sacar plata - again dating this document to the the Arizona territorial period and giving proof positive that an English speaker wrote it, not a Spaniard

Túnel​

Misspelled in this "document" as "tonel." This is a word that was never used in the Spanish era to describe a horizontal mineshaft. The word in useage then was cañon. Túnel is not really even modern Mexican useage. It is obviously an "Anglo" coming up with the only word he knows.

Cañón​

Here is one place where our forger really gets himself into trouble. He uses cañón to describe a "canyon" when, as stated above, it was universally used by Spanish miners to describe a "horizontal mine shaft." The word used here on the frontier to describe a "canyon" in the days of the Spanish was cajón, although on rare occasions one does see the word "cañada." Nobody but a modern Anglo would confuse the useage of these words.

Ceniceros​

Slag piles were universally called grasseros or escoriales by Spanish colonial miners. Once again, an obvious mistake showing this is not a "Spanish" document. The word cenicero is actually an ash pit, something very different than what our "Anglo" forger is trying to describe here.

Abbreviations​

Our forger obviously had access to some true old Spanish documents and was somewhat familiar with their abbreviations - just not quite familiar enough to be convincing, however. He is not consistent with his superscripts and has no real understanding of what should be placed in superscript status. He hits a few on the mark but really shows his ignorance of Spanish abbreviations and marks himself as an English speaker when he abbreviates Diciembre (December) as "Dcbr." and and sur (south), in one instance, as "Sr." Universally, the Spanish abbreviation for December ends in "re," whether superscripted or not. And no Spaniard would ever abbreviate south as "Sr." That was and still is the universal abbreviation for Señor. Another big mistake the forger made that no true writer of an ancient Spanish document would have done, is the abbreviation of varas (rods) as Vrs. The word varas as contained in real Spanish documents is universally abbreviated with a superscript "s" or "as," but certainly never "rs." One thing that he got right, and it leads one to believe that he had copies of some of the original Planchas de Plata documents, is his useage of "@" to designate arroba. However, this is another place where the evolution of the so-called Molina document can be traced, showing that it is a forgery that evolved over the years into something quite different than what it was when the idea first surfaced. Mitchell, in his original 1933 book as well as the 1953 edition, gives the supposed English translation as saying "weighing from 25 to 250 pounds each. Conrotto in his 1955 edition quotes Mitchell. Oliver, who reproduced a facsimile of the forgery in his book in 1991, says "from 1 pound to 125 pounds." Thompson, who also reproduced a facsimile in his 1999 edition, says "slabs of silver weighing 250 pounds each." The original forgery, itself, actually says "from one pound to five arrobas." An arroba being 25 pounds, five arrobas
would have meant that the slabs of silver weighed "from 1 to 125 pounds." Regardless of what the the actual amount is supposed to be, the more authors that are compared to the supposed original, the more of a sham the whole story becomes.

Color and consistency​

These color and consistency descriptions of the ore, and the forger's descriptions of the miners having found planchas de plata fifty rods into the Purísima mine are very suspicious of having been copied from the 1736 planchas de plata documents. Unfortunately, he didn't understand his geology. Horn silver, like that found in the 1736 discovery in Sonora, is found on or very near the surface of the ground, not in the depths of a mineshaft.

Misspellings​

Every ancient Spanish document, without exception, has spelling errors in it. Obviously, the forger of this document was aware of that fact and took pains to make sure he didn't spell everything correctly. He hits the mark well with his misspellings of such words as “hondura,” “bueyes,” "arroyo,"and “Tubac,” but his rendition of others, like “Tumacácori,” “San Ramón,” and “Opatas” are absurd. Nearly every spelling error, or what we would call a spelling error in our day, made by colonial Spaniards was due to the lack of spelling rules and the writer’s lack of understanding of the few there may have been. Since they wrote by phonetics, one can rightly expect the word to sound correct when spoken. For example, Tumacácori being an O’odham word the “T” was closer to a “tyu” sound, and in the native useage of the word the “i” was not always included. So, you often see it spelled “Thumacacor,” Chumacacor,” or “Chumacacori,” but never anything as outlandish as our forger’s spelling of it. And his ending it with a “y” reveals his total lack of understanding of ancient Spanish!
No colonial Spaniard would have ever misspelled the name of the beloved Saint Raymund (San Ramón) by confusing it with the commonly used twentieth century Mexican given name “Roman.” Although Roman was a rather obscure surname in the Spanish colonial days, it was not used as a given name. The same is true for anyone living here when the Opata Indians were still in existence. They would have never misspelled the name to read “Opate.”
Other misspellings also point to an English-speaker rather than a Spaniard having made the mistake: like leaving an "r" out of sierra, the "o" out of grabado, and the "r" out of virgen.

Letters​

One thing that stands out about the Mine Document that destroys any semblance of authenticity is its lack of the use of the letter “z” and its extensive use of the letter “c.” A modern document would, and by modern spelling rules, should have all those “c’s.” An ancient Spanish writer, however, would have exchanged about eighty percent of them for “z’s.” Or, if this were truly a sixteenth century document, some of those "c's" would have been "cedillas," or Greek "z's ("Ç").

Grammar​

From a grammar standpoint, the first thing that jumps off the page at the reader indicating that this writer is an "Anglo" is his useage of "la agua de San Roman." Agua is a masculine word even though it would appear to an English speaker to be feminine. Spanish speakers grow up with "el agua" and would not make that mistake.
The next obvious characteristic of our forger is that he knows how to use the verb estar, but few others - a common problem with people learning a new language. And, he is careful to write in present tense most of the time so he doesn't have to conjugate it very much. One of his more glaring errors along these lines is in the last line of the document where he says "It is marked by Father S--- R---..." (está marcado por Padre S--- R---...). The present tense, "it is" is poor grammar in anybody's language, but even if he meant to use the present, estar is not the verb a Spaniard would have used. A Spanish speaker would have said hubo marcado por Padre S--- R--- (it was marked by Father S--- R---). These are mistakes that only an English-speaker would make. Regardless of the Spanish speaker's education, he would not make those kinds of errors.

Can anyone tell me who wrote this?

 

[Tuscoro]

Oroblanco, No, no preferance ... I am asking, assuming there is some written document that says "Espejos mines" I have his expedition documents and do not recall them being referred to as "his", although they may be considered as such, but I don't think so because the mines he found were existing... and so, I am trying to learn if there is another source for this designation... thats all... ;-)

 

[Tuscoro]

Still looking for the elusive page 2... anyone?

 

[Oroblanco]

Still looking for the elusive page 2... anyone?

I believe it is in one of John D Mitchell's books, not sure which one though.

 

[pbroker]

Is anyone still looking for the Virgin mine anymore? East of Tumacacori AZ. Other threads have more action than this one has seen about the mine and some of them don't have anything to do with this mine!

 

[Oroblanco]

Is anyone still looking for the Virgin mine anymore? East of Tumacacori AZ. Other threads have more action than this one has seen about the mine and some of them don't have anything to do with this mine!

Yes, though I would like to hear why you believe it is East of Tumacacori? Thanks in advance.
Oroblanco

 

[Azquester]

Yes, though I would like to hear why you believe it is East of Tumacacori? Thanks in advance.
Oroblanco

Oro, I'll answer that since he didn't.

It's because of "Lucky Lully" that made the discovery of Hidden Jesuit Gold mine in the Santa Rita range in 1900.
That started a mini gold rush and a town named Alma was born.

 

[gollum]

AZQuester,

Mark Lully was manager of "The Wandering Jew Mine". The Wandering Jew was a Galena Silver Mine, not gold. Colonel Poston talks about finding the "old diggings" at the Wandering Jew in his report on mining in the area. You're gonna have to dig through my thread "Jesuit Treasures, are they Real?":

http://www.treasurenet.com/forums/jesuit-treasures/153540-jesuit-treasures-they-real.html

To paraphrase the report, Poston said documents were found in the mission that said if you stand in the doorway and look Southwest you will see a pointy mountain peak. On that peak they found a rich ledge of Galena Silver. The entire 900 feet between their two test drillings were an ancient digging covered with logs, branches, rocks, and dirt that could not be seen from the surface. They didn't find it until they started digging between their test holes.

That said, you are mixing two things together that should be separate. The Jesuit's Mines versus the Jesuit's Treasure. The Jesuits had several very well known mines (namely the Salero Mines, look up their history). Sometime between 1764 and 1766 the Jesuit Order hid their wealth before their suppression. The Molina Document describes treasure not mines. The best place to hide that would be a completely UNMINERALIZED mountain cave, and Tumacacori Mountain is the best place. After hiding the treasure in the cave system, they blasted the side of the mountain down on it. One place to look is what appears to be a blasted cliff wall near Rock Corral Canyon. Difficult to get to, except for a small trail hand cut by some unnamed individuals. I also have a friend that has had a Treasure Trove Permit trying to dig that treasure out for about twenty years, and another acquaintance that had for many years a TT Permit in Peck Canyon, but he didn't get along with The BLM and they made life hard for him. He hasn't been there in many years as far as I know.

Mike

 

[coazon de oro]

Howdy Mike,

With the LDM forum being slow due to hiking weather, I found myself looking at this thread. After seeing, and reading the Molina Document, or Redotero, I can give you another reason it could be fake. I went through the whole thread to make sure this was not brought up already, and it has. No one noticed because it was brought up by RWLJ, who has been crying wolf for so long trying to connect the Molina Document with just about every other legend out there. That post was #665 on page 45, close to the end it mentions the Lost Josephine of Utah.
The Redotero for the Lost Josephine has to much in common to the Molina Document. Many of the same words, such as Redotero, tunels, patios, ceniceros, Roman numerals, ect.....
The biggest red flag of all is the ore description, which reads word for word, a yellow metal, half silver, and one fifth gold. It also states that they found native silver from "una libra, hasta V@rs". Impossible for two mines so far apart to share the same exact ore.
This other Redotero was found by Professor Russell R. Rich, I don't remember if it is also a copy.
They could both be fake, or if one is real, my money would be on the Lost Josephine Redoreto. Find the date Mr. Rich found his, if it was before 1933, his may be the real deal?

Homar

 

[markmar]

Hi Homar

Not to answer for Mike, but I believe the Tumacacori redotero is accurate if except some mistakes re-written in the text. My opinion is how the Jesuits adopted some codes and treasure symbols to encrypt their maps from the Spanish miners. And IMO one of these codes is that description of the ore " yellowish, half silver and one fifth gold " which is for the terrain at the mine's entrance and describes how it looks like concerns vegetation and orientation. This code could be " translated " as " a place with low vegetation oriented S-SW".

The original Jesuit codes/encrypted words were not used in the description of the Tumacacori redotero, but only in the description of the Plazuela treasure and Tayopa treasure. For example, what we know today as the Tayopa treasure inventory text, in reality is a survey made from the church with degrees and distances to the caches that are depicted in the Tayopa treasure map.

What is a red flag in the Tayopa inventory that should ring a bell: " Two silver chalices from the Jesus Maria y Jose Mine, and twelve solid gold cups. Six gold plates made from the Jesus Maria y Jose Mine, and twelve solid gold cups. Six gold plates made from Cristo Mine and Purisima Mine, and two large communion plates of gold made from placer El Paramo."

The normal would been to be written 24 solid gold cups and 12 gold plates. Also the " two silver chalices " and the " two large communion plates " are used as encrypted distance units.

 

[gollum]

Hey Homar and Markmar,

Since the mines were not strictly owned by the Church, it would be normal for the inventory to show which mines tithed/donated which items to the Church. Not only is it an official "Thank You" for the donations, it is also a public challenge to other mines/businesses/individuals to give as much or more.

Mike

 

[markmar]

Hey Homar and Markmar,

Since the mines were not strictly owned by the Church, it would be normal for the inventory to show which mines tithed/donated which items to the Church. Not only is it an official "Thank You" for the donations, it is also a public challenge to other mines/businesses/individuals to give as much or more.

Mike

Yes, this could be true but IMO the mines used in the inventory were only for the orientation of the directions given in the supposed " inventory ".