Twin Buttes Markings

Joe Ribaudo · Post by **Joe Ribaudo** » Sat Jan 25, 2003 11:30 am

Now that we have all heard about the Twin Buttes markings, thanks to Tracy, how do you think they may be tied into the Stone Maps and if you don't think they are, why not? Are they associated with the Peraltas and or the Jesuits? We have a pretty good idea what time frame they were done in and that should give us some clue as to their authenticity. I don't think you have to see them, to specualate on their reason for being there or who might have been the authors.
Joe

Joe Ribaudo · Post by **Joe Ribaudo** » Mon Jan 27, 2003 5:54 pm

I'm a little surprised that no comments are being posted on this topic. I know that more then a few of you are believers in the Stone Maps. The picture of the heart on the side of the hill can be found in Bob Ward's book. There are five pictures that were taken by Tracy Hawkins and Ernie Provence. Tracy does not remember giving Bob any pictures and assumes he got the one in his book from Ernie. Bob does not hint at the location, but it is at Twin Buttes. There are two hearts, the one in Bob's book and another one with a curved arrow. There is a horse's head, which I believe pre-dates Bobbie's coloring book, a dagger and the date - 1847 - which was added at a later date than the rest of the markings. The picture in the book, is taken from the North, looking southeast at the East side of the canyon. Most of this information comes from Tracy and is posted with his permission.
Thank you, Tracy.
Joe

Tracy L Hawkins · Post by **Tracy L Hawkins** » Mon Jan 27, 2003 6:21 pm

What really surpeised me was that no one seemed to have ever heard about these markings. I was shown those scraping in the early 60's and assuned they were common knowledge as they are similar to the markings on the stone maps
TLH

S.C. · Post by **S.C.** » Mon Jan 27, 2003 7:23 pm

Joe,

Nice jab about my "friend" Bobby...

Despite all this stuff down by Twin Butte, I still think that one day Bobby and his farm friends are going to surface.

S.C.

Peter · Post by **Peter** » Mon Jan 27, 2003 8:28 pm

And of course, if one was to play Devil's Advocate here...one might forward the hypothesis that a clever forger might have simply taken some familiar landmarks and incorporated them into a bogus "Stone Map".

I know some of you folks passionately beleive in the reality of the Stone Maps but I have said it once and will say it again..they have ruined many a good Dutch Hunter who has become fixated upon them.

Joe Ribaudo · Post by **Joe Ribaudo** » Mon Jan 27, 2003 9:44 pm

S.C.,

Carolyn would say I forgot to smile or laugh and she would, of course, be right. It was a jab made in jest and you obviously took it that way.

Peter, my friend,

Without some inside information concerning the Stone Maps, your hypothesis might require a little more fleshing out. Other then a bad feeling, what specifically do you find to doubt about the Stone Maps?
Rather then letting your friends who believe in these ruinous fakes become helplessly fixated on them and go down that road to ruin, why not give us something solid to put us on the correct path.

I might disagree with your own area of interest and how you got there, assuming I knew these things, but I would never ridicule your evidence or your conclusions. At least S.C. has his coloring book.

Please save me from their terrible grip.

Since the topic here is the markings at Twin Buttes do you care to make a comment regarding them? They can be seen today and given a fairly accurate date of origin, from the time of the Jesuits to 1847.

Joe

Thirsty · Post by **Thirsty** » Mon Jan 27, 2003 10:11 pm

Speaking of Bobby…

S.C., I’m sure you already know this, but I was reading Sikorsky’s book last night and saw an interesting quote from Charles Polzer regarding the Stone Maps:

“the horse design on the rock can be found in children’s drawing books”

I thought of you instantly and wondered who got that idea from who!

Tracy L Hawkins · Post by **Tracy L Hawkins** » Mon Jan 27, 2003 10:19 pm

Bobbys horsee isat twin buttes
TLH

PS
Whereabouts of the carrot is still unknown

TLH

S.C. · Post by **S.C.** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 5:51 am

Thirsty,

Gee... I'll read that again. I guess I am not the only one.

To the best of my recollection, I saw a horse exactly like the one on the stone in an old coloring book in my aunt's garage. She was a pack rat and the coloring book in question was one of her saved treasures. It seemed to be dated from the 1930s. Wish I would have asked her if I could have had it... The stuff is all gone now.

However, my memory has been known to play tricks on me... As some here probably know... So, maybe I am all wrong. At least for now, I am having fun invoking my friend "Bobby" from time to time.

S.C.

Peter · Post by **Peter** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 7:04 am

Joe

Here's another thought. If the information on the Stone Maps was instead on a piece of paper would the Maps enjoy the cult following that they have today? I know you would say they would still be just as valid as their information is correct..but it does give one pause....

TC ASKEY · Post by **TC ASKEY** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 7:48 am

The Twin Buttes Markings you are referring too,are they the same as the ones on page 31 of Charles Kenworthy's book?

Thirsty · Post by **Thirsty** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 9:34 am

S.C., I didn’t mean to imply you stole that notion from Polzer!

On the contrary, I had the humorous notion that he was stealing your theory. Either that, or you both had the same coloring book as kids!

I’m interested in, but skeptical about the stone maps too. And I agree that horse (not to mention the priest) look more 20th century than 19th century to my eye.

But I'm more than willing to be convinced otherwise, so I'd be interested in hearing Polzer's critiques of the stone maps addressed by some of their supporters on this forum.

S.C. · Post by **S.C.** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 9:35 am

Terry,

I believe they are the same ones.

S.C.

S.C. · Post by **S.C.** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 9:40 am

Thirsty,

Maybe he and I DID see the same coloring books... hehe...

Tracy L Hawkins · Post by **Tracy L Hawkins** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 11:12 am

Just a thought that occured to me concerning the age of those carvings--- How could they predate the arivial of the Spanish in this country as horses didnot exist on the North American continent until the Spanish brought them here ???

TC Askey
I don't have a copy of Kenworthys book so I can't say if the pictures are the same. Perhaps you can get Joe to Email you a copy of the pictures he has and you can compair them.
TLH

Joe Ribaudo · Post by **Joe Ribaudo** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 12:04 pm

Anyone who would like an e-mail with the two pictures I have, can send me a private message with their e-mail address and I will be happy to send them to you.

Peter,
You may be right. Would you be less enthralled with your map, if it was in stone? If the Fish Map was in stone would it be less acceptable? If the Spanish markings on Black Top Mesa were in a sealed trunk and on paper, would we be less impressed? We know that stone maps were not an unknown medium and stories of their existence in Mexico are fairly commonplace. Would the story of the Lost Dutchman Mine enjoy the cult following it has now, if it had only been passed down by word of mouth, without the numerous books that have been written about it? Is that all the flesh you can put on your doubts?

Thirsty,
Father Polzer is a staunch opponent of the Stone Maps. Since he is a Jesuit Priest and there may be a Jesuit treasure connection involved here, his conclusions might be a little self serving for the Jesuit Order. He does make some good points, if the stones he saw were the originals. The stones in Sikorsky's book are not the originals. The heart shape has been around since the fourteen hundreds in Europe. Was it unknown to the people of Spain? Perhaps, but it seems likely that they were familiar with the romantic rendering.

Joe

Peter · Post by **Peter** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 9:24 pm

Joe,

I do not have "A" map. There are several maps that I beleive have some merit..but the Stone Maps is not numbered amongst them. (Nor is the Fish Map..btw).

I am a big believer in the "preponderance of the evidence" theory. I have collected reams of data..including old notes, manuscripts, personal anecdotes, dozens and dozens of clues etc.... attempted to seperate the wheat from the chaff to the best of my ability..and have come up with a mountain I beleive the mine is on. Does this place fit all the clues? No, of course not. But it does fit almost all the clues I consider to have merit. Am I right? Who knows. I might have the right mountain, but I could spend the rest of my days looking on it and still come up with zilch. That , of course, still would not prove me right or wrong..it would just prove that I am not a very good (or a very lucky) lost mine hunter.

Joe Ribaudo · Post by **Joe Ribaudo** » Tue Jan 28, 2003 10:29 pm

Peter,
You once said that the Deering sketch just narrowed the area down a little.
If it narrowed down the area you believed the LDM was in, it carried at least, a little weight with you. It was other evidence along with that sketch that convinced you that your conclusions were valid. It is the same with me and I believe most other Dutch Hunters. You have thrown out the Stone Maps, along with a number of other maps as clever fakes. That would make your conclusions unassailable. That puts you in a place no Apache would go, a box canyon with no way out except to find the mine. Once you have closed your mind to any of the evidence that is available your search has been limited in scope. That is not always a bad thing, since you can focus on your mountain without outside influence. I am less focused then you but just as certain. You have explained how you got to your mountain so that even I can understand it.
At the same time, you have Waltzed around my question again. You could save a lot of good Dutch Hunters, by giving my question some consideration.

Thanks for your reply. It's good to be talking to my long lost brother again.

Joe

Ron · Post by **Ron** » Wed Jan 29, 2003 10:41 am

I'm afraid I hang my hat with Peter on the stone maps. I don't put much faith in them; however, I have spent time reseaching them and sometime allowing them to take me places. Unfortunately that is the problem with the stone maps. They will take you to many places. I do know that Bob Corbin had the originals to the FBI lab, or I was told that, and they could of course not date stone, but fiqured the carvings were one hundred or so years old. How they fiqured that , I don't know for sure. I don't agree with them ruining dutch hunters . On the contrary it makes dutch hunters and gives people the opportunity to chase their own dream. After all , how many of us are right in what we're pursuing? But we're all having fun, I hope. Some of us may even become part history.

S.C. · Post by **S.C.** » Wed Jan 29, 2003 11:20 am

Back on the subject of the large "markings" or trail signs by Twin Buttes, I would like to add a couple of comments.

I will grant that it is unlikely the markings are Indian because of the heart design. Tracy also pointed out that horses came with the Spanish - so, it couldn't have been pre-Spanish/pre-Mexican Indians that did them.

However, what if that is not a horse - but is instead an antelope? Hmmm... maybe an Indian could have drawn it then. It is hard to say what it is.

But then we go to the other item to the right of the heart - it appears to be a "7" - not necessarily a "dagger." Either way - dagger or "7" - then that as well could not be Indian in origin.

I am curious what the area history is for the markings? In other words, when did someone first notice them? 1900? 1890? Or more recently? I wonder if anyone knows?

Tracy L Hawkins · Post by **Tracy L Hawkins** » Wed Jan 29, 2003 11:45 am

SC

What appears to be a "7" in the picture is actualy an arrow ,curved and pointing to the center of the heart.

Yhe horse ,dagger and date are farther to the south. No question that it is a horse --

--Bobby would recognize it in a flash

TLH

Tracy L Hawkins · Post by **Tracy L Hawkins** » Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:59 pm

SC
Since this subject came up I have been trying to find some referance to them with no luck. I was shown the scrapings by a chap who had a claim and had sunk a shaft in the center of the heart where the arrow pointed in the early 60's. I have been back to them several times over the years and flew over them several times while looking for signs of old trails and stage routes. I was told they were 6 to 8 hundred years old by a group we met there on one of the trips Earnie and I made . This age is in some doubt because of the stylised heart and the horse, however the age dating of the ironwood trees growing through the scrapings indicated an age of over 350 years so they MUST have been made at least that far back which would indicate they predate the Peraltas. Maybe Joe is correct---his ideas at least make sence.
I have always had my doubts about the stone maps but I have had to rethink my position
TLH

Joe Ribaudo · Post by **Joe Ribaudo** » Wed Jan 29, 2003 7:07 pm

Tracy and S.C.,
Your arguments concerning the heart and the dagger are on point.

Your horse conclusions are in error. The Spanish reintroduced horses to the Americas, several thousand years after our native horses became extinct, actually around ten thousand years ago. The Clovis people hunted them for their meat prior to that time in history. The Apache also liked horse meat, but prefered mules. Eating habits are hard to break, even if you haven't had a meal in ten thousand years. Bon Appetit.

Joe

Tracy L Hawkins · Post by **Tracy L Hawkins** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 7:10 am

Joe
Picky-picky-picky--

The clovis people wiped out or at least helped wipe out the horse,mamoth, sabertoothed cats, ground sloth and several other species---hungry varmits,
LOL I don't think those carvings go back QUITE that far in time, Quite sure the Clovis people didn't make them.
TLH

S.C. · Post by **S.C.** » Thu Jan 30, 2003 8:41 am

This "trail markings" issue is getting complcated. Am I to undertand that someone dated "trees" growing where the markings were scraped into the hill side and those trees were 300 years old? If that is the case, then that makes things very interesting.

However, was that a selective sample? On just one design? Maybe one is older than others? I'm just throwing that out as a topic for discussion...

Lost Dutchman Goldmine