Aurum
You make some good points.
However, logic (sort of) dictates the following if you are correct about the
general vicinity of the Soldiers Trail. Had they worked their way down to the conjunction of Peters and Tortilla Canyon (no mean feat as you well know) and then turned back at the waterfall below the big cave in Peters Canyon proper they would have been faced with two choices had they climbed a "big mountain":
1) Up Geronimo Head, over Malapais then down to Peters Mesa. From there they could have dropped down Squaw, Charleyboy or into the lower reaches of Peters Canyon.
or...
2) Up the west side of Tortilla Mtn which would have taken them quite high
up and into terribly rough country, then perhaps thru the Horse Country and the open desert to Picket Post or the Silver King.
The Bark Notes insist that the Soldiers, once they turned back from the waterfall climbed a high mountain IN THE DIRECTION OF THE SILVER KING.The Silver King, according to my poor memory, is south and east of the waterfall area. If this statement is fact..then the Soldiers cut their trail on Tortilla Mtn ("a curious place for a trail?") and not on Geronimo Head.
Am I correct? Who knows. Perhaps Bark changed directions in his notes to throw future searchers off the track. Perhaps the Soldiers were confused when they gave directions...or their directions were garbled, whether intentionally or not, over time.
Deering Comments
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Ghost Riders
Aurum,
Having you respond to a question or statement in this forum is like a ride thru history. It just doesn't get any better than that. I will, however, add a few comments on this thread. Big surprise
The Salt River has never been predictable in the past. There have been times it has overflowed it's banks, by the miles. At other times, you could walk across the river and never see a speck of water as far as the eye could see.
More than once, Martha Summerhayes (an Army wife who lived at Fort McDowell) writes of crossing the Salt River. This was in the mid to late 1800s. They crossed the river approximately ten miles below the fort. This crossing was done in the vicinity of McDowell Canyon. Any crossing within ten miles of Fort McDowell would have to be the best bet for a trip to the Silver King in my humble estimation. I would not be surprise to be corrected here, but Martha writes a compelling story of her life in the 1800s.
Perhaps I have misread Martha's description of those trips.
If the Two Soldiers had crossed the Salt River at this point (Martha did it in a wagon) a quick glance at any map would suggest an easy route to their final destination. Now it could be that the Salt was running high when the Two Soldiers needed to cross it, but that would suggest that it might also have been tough in the rocky shallows area. You would know that better than I would.
Just a few more items to throw into the mix.
Joe
Having you respond to a question or statement in this forum is like a ride thru history. It just doesn't get any better than that. I will, however, add a few comments on this thread. Big surprise
The Salt River has never been predictable in the past. There have been times it has overflowed it's banks, by the miles. At other times, you could walk across the river and never see a speck of water as far as the eye could see.
More than once, Martha Summerhayes (an Army wife who lived at Fort McDowell) writes of crossing the Salt River. This was in the mid to late 1800s. They crossed the river approximately ten miles below the fort. This crossing was done in the vicinity of McDowell Canyon. Any crossing within ten miles of Fort McDowell would have to be the best bet for a trip to the Silver King in my humble estimation. I would not be surprise to be corrected here, but Martha writes a compelling story of her life in the 1800s.
Perhaps I have misread Martha's description of those trips.
If the Two Soldiers had crossed the Salt River at this point (Martha did it in a wagon) a quick glance at any map would suggest an easy route to their final destination. Now it could be that the Salt was running high when the Two Soldiers needed to cross it, but that would suggest that it might also have been tough in the rocky shallows area. You would know that better than I would.
Just a few more items to throw into the mix.
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Walking on Water?
Aurum,
The small amount of reading I have done on this subject points to a pretty heavy use of this ford and the continuing trip up McDowell Canyon to Fort McDowell. It was used by the military as well as civilians traveling north towards the fort or south away from it. It was an extremely dangerous canyon, as you have mentioned. Fort McDowell was in an active area for Indians that had escaped from Camp Apache and the San Carlos Reservation, which were far to the east and southeast of the fort. These same Indians were using the Superstition Mountains to hide in. For that reason, a full company of cavalary and another of infantry were stationed at the fort.
Most of the military coming from the southern part of Arizona would use this crossing. Large or well armed parties made this trip on a fairly frequent basis. They all feared McDowell Canyon.
Since the renegades used the Superstitions as there base, I doubt the Two Soldiers feared that shortcut, less than McDowell Canyon. The canyon was used frequently by freighters, the military, Army patrols and civilians. Although dangerous, it would not be that difficult to find others to make the trip with. The Superstitions, however, are a horse of a different color.
It would seem that the Two Soldiers would have made this trip around 1883, give or take a year. If someone had access to the discharge records for Fort McDowell we might be able to pinpoint the date.
I think there are clues from those closest to the story, that indicate that my theory is more than plausible, perhaps even likely. Common sense goes a long way in figuring out this legend. The popular story has been repeated enough times to become "fact". I do think the Two Soldiers told the truth but that truth was buried with them and has only peeked out in a few, (well accepted) writings. If the true story has been told thru the years, the finding of the LDM would be past history now.
Aurum, the trail you hiked from Tortilla Flat was not the same trail the Two Soldiers would have been walking. In addition, no reservation escapees were hiding there when you made your trip.
Joe
The small amount of reading I have done on this subject points to a pretty heavy use of this ford and the continuing trip up McDowell Canyon to Fort McDowell. It was used by the military as well as civilians traveling north towards the fort or south away from it. It was an extremely dangerous canyon, as you have mentioned. Fort McDowell was in an active area for Indians that had escaped from Camp Apache and the San Carlos Reservation, which were far to the east and southeast of the fort. These same Indians were using the Superstition Mountains to hide in. For that reason, a full company of cavalary and another of infantry were stationed at the fort.
Most of the military coming from the southern part of Arizona would use this crossing. Large or well armed parties made this trip on a fairly frequent basis. They all feared McDowell Canyon.
Since the renegades used the Superstitions as there base, I doubt the Two Soldiers feared that shortcut, less than McDowell Canyon. The canyon was used frequently by freighters, the military, Army patrols and civilians. Although dangerous, it would not be that difficult to find others to make the trip with. The Superstitions, however, are a horse of a different color.
It would seem that the Two Soldiers would have made this trip around 1883, give or take a year. If someone had access to the discharge records for Fort McDowell we might be able to pinpoint the date.
I think there are clues from those closest to the story, that indicate that my theory is more than plausible, perhaps even likely. Common sense goes a long way in figuring out this legend. The popular story has been repeated enough times to become "fact". I do think the Two Soldiers told the truth but that truth was buried with them and has only peeked out in a few, (well accepted) writings. If the true story has been told thru the years, the finding of the LDM would be past history now.
Aurum, the trail you hiked from Tortilla Flat was not the same trail the Two Soldiers would have been walking. In addition, no reservation escapees were hiding there when you made your trip.
Joe
Hi Joe
My own research based on the discharge rolls from Ft McDowell leads me to believe the soldiers were amongst a fairly large group discharged in mid-March 1884. It would be interesting if we could somehow find out the weather conditions around that time frame and then look at a likely crossing point based upon whether the Salt was running fast or not.
About the Apache problem. By the time 1884 rolled around there simply werent any large bands roaming the Superstitions . Mangus and Chato moved their bands to San Carlos peacefuly in February 1884, and Goyathkla was still playing tag with Crook on the border. You might get a few stray renegades from San Carlos or Ft Apache in the mountains, but this threat did not seem to deter the Soldiers from entering the mountains interior.
My own research based on the discharge rolls from Ft McDowell leads me to believe the soldiers were amongst a fairly large group discharged in mid-March 1884. It would be interesting if we could somehow find out the weather conditions around that time frame and then look at a likely crossing point based upon whether the Salt was running fast or not.
About the Apache problem. By the time 1884 rolled around there simply werent any large bands roaming the Superstitions . Mangus and Chato moved their bands to San Carlos peacefuly in February 1884, and Goyathkla was still playing tag with Crook on the border. You might get a few stray renegades from San Carlos or Ft Apache in the mountains, but this threat did not seem to deter the Soldiers from entering the mountains interior.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Discharge
Peter,
Since you have access to the discharge records and have only referenced the large group which was discharged in mid-March 1884, can we assume there is no record of two soldiers being discharged in fairly close approximation to each other in 1883?
There were roving bands of Apache in the Superstitions and working their trade in McDowell Canyon. An Apache did not need to be well known to be a danger to others. The question is whether the Two Soldiers would be more afraid of McDowell Canyon, which could be traveled end to end in a fairly short time and was fairly well traveled, or the untraveled trail thru the Apache stronghold? What do you think?
Martha Summerhayes made her trip north over the Salt River to Fort McDowell in December. In her book, we follow them from Fort Yuma, after they crossed the Colorado on a rope drawn ferryboat. They then travel along the Gila River to Gila City. Crossing the Gila at that point they turned north to Maricopa Wells and crossed the Maricopa Desert. They made the final leg to Fort McDowell in one day, crossing the Salt River at sundown and going through McDowell Canyon after dark. At no point in her narrative does she say they were short or could not find water. I assume from that, and her description of the plant life and pleasent conditions on the trip, that it was not a dry year.
When she and her husband Jack left the fort for another assignment, they made the same crossing, going south accross the Salt, in the month of June. Sounds like the crossing was used year round to me. I am sure no one crossed the Salt during periods of heavy rains.
It is important to know the year of the Two Soldier's discharge and arrival at the Silver King because then we can determine the weather conditions from historical records, and thus, their likely route to Pinal.
As I have said before, there are clues that indicate they did not take the route and find the mine in the manner that many have concluded. Reading the story, including the unpublished accounts, is the easy part. Knowing what people like John Chuning, Jim Bark and Brownie Holmes actually thought concerning the location of the LDM, is a little harder to pick out.
Joe
Since you have access to the discharge records and have only referenced the large group which was discharged in mid-March 1884, can we assume there is no record of two soldiers being discharged in fairly close approximation to each other in 1883?
There were roving bands of Apache in the Superstitions and working their trade in McDowell Canyon. An Apache did not need to be well known to be a danger to others. The question is whether the Two Soldiers would be more afraid of McDowell Canyon, which could be traveled end to end in a fairly short time and was fairly well traveled, or the untraveled trail thru the Apache stronghold? What do you think?
Martha Summerhayes made her trip north over the Salt River to Fort McDowell in December. In her book, we follow them from Fort Yuma, after they crossed the Colorado on a rope drawn ferryboat. They then travel along the Gila River to Gila City. Crossing the Gila at that point they turned north to Maricopa Wells and crossed the Maricopa Desert. They made the final leg to Fort McDowell in one day, crossing the Salt River at sundown and going through McDowell Canyon after dark. At no point in her narrative does she say they were short or could not find water. I assume from that, and her description of the plant life and pleasent conditions on the trip, that it was not a dry year.
When she and her husband Jack left the fort for another assignment, they made the same crossing, going south accross the Salt, in the month of June. Sounds like the crossing was used year round to me. I am sure no one crossed the Salt during periods of heavy rains.
It is important to know the year of the Two Soldier's discharge and arrival at the Silver King because then we can determine the weather conditions from historical records, and thus, their likely route to Pinal.
As I have said before, there are clues that indicate they did not take the route and find the mine in the manner that many have concluded. Reading the story, including the unpublished accounts, is the easy part. Knowing what people like John Chuning, Jim Bark and Brownie Holmes actually thought concerning the location of the LDM, is a little harder to pick out.
Joe
Last edited by Joe Ribaudo on Tue May 20, 2003 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
For those of us following this conversation who aren't as familiar with the places named, maybe someone could give a few more details?
I assume the ferry crossing referred to is the one on the 1880 territorial map marked Marysville/Whiltlow's ferry. On present day topo maps, there is a Marysville along Highway 87 SW of Ft Mcdowell, just before 87 curves south and crosses the Salt River. (about 12 miles SW of the crossing of 87 and the Verde). Is this the spot?
As for Mcdowell Canyon, I don't see this on either map. I see Mcdowell Pass along Highway 87, but I've driven that road and it never seemed much like a canyon. Where would this be?
I assume the ferry crossing referred to is the one on the 1880 territorial map marked Marysville/Whiltlow's ferry. On present day topo maps, there is a Marysville along Highway 87 SW of Ft Mcdowell, just before 87 curves south and crosses the Salt River. (about 12 miles SW of the crossing of 87 and the Verde). Is this the spot?
As for Mcdowell Canyon, I don't see this on either map. I see Mcdowell Pass along Highway 87, but I've driven that road and it never seemed much like a canyon. Where would this be?
Joe
Below is a table for 1883/1884 concerning the numbers of discharged soldiers from Ft Mc Dowell. I have the names of many of them. They were "discharged" for one of the following reasons: 1) disability 2) end of service
3) transfer 4) deserted
1883
Jan 12
Feb 7
Mar 4
April 2
May 5
June 4
July 8
Aug 10
Sept 7
Oct 2
Nov 4
Dec 4
1884
Jan 7
Feb 2
Mar 12
Apr 2
May 121 (transfered)
June 5
July 3
Aug 10
Sept 6
Oct 3
Nov 6
Dec 1
The Feb-March '84 time frame fits for me mainly because of another bit of info I have dug up. That, of course, I am saving for the book I will most likely never write about the LDM.....lol
Below is a table for 1883/1884 concerning the numbers of discharged soldiers from Ft Mc Dowell. I have the names of many of them. They were "discharged" for one of the following reasons: 1) disability 2) end of service
3) transfer 4) deserted
1883
Jan 12
Feb 7
Mar 4
April 2
May 5
June 4
July 8
Aug 10
Sept 7
Oct 2
Nov 4
Dec 4
1884
Jan 7
Feb 2
Mar 12
Apr 2
May 121 (transfered)
June 5
July 3
Aug 10
Sept 6
Oct 3
Nov 6
Dec 1
The Feb-March '84 time frame fits for me mainly because of another bit of info I have dug up. That, of course, I am saving for the book I will most likely never write about the LDM.....lol
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
The Road to McDowell
Senor X,
Three roads converged on Maryville on the south side of the Salt River. Whitlow's Ferry was there in 1880. One trail or road continues north on the other side of the river and goes to Fort McDowell. At the fort the trail splits. One continues north for a short distance and the other goes directly east across the Verde and then turns northeast and goes straight to Old Camp Reno. When you cross the Salt at Maryville and start north, Mt. McDowell is to your left. Maryville and the Whitlow Ferry were almost due south of Fort Mcdowell, depending on the person who drew the map and the year it was drawn. It is also shown southwest, as you stated. I have never seen McDowell Canyon on any map. Perhaps an old military map from the 1800s would show it.
I believe the Ferry and crossing at Maryville was a busy ford. The fact that there was a ferry and the three converging roads from the south would make this more than probable. For some reason, history has given slight mention to this important location, unless it is actually the same as the Hayden Ferry. I am sure Aurum will clear this up shortly.
Joe
Three roads converged on Maryville on the south side of the Salt River. Whitlow's Ferry was there in 1880. One trail or road continues north on the other side of the river and goes to Fort McDowell. At the fort the trail splits. One continues north for a short distance and the other goes directly east across the Verde and then turns northeast and goes straight to Old Camp Reno. When you cross the Salt at Maryville and start north, Mt. McDowell is to your left. Maryville and the Whitlow Ferry were almost due south of Fort Mcdowell, depending on the person who drew the map and the year it was drawn. It is also shown southwest, as you stated. I have never seen McDowell Canyon on any map. Perhaps an old military map from the 1800s would show it.
I believe the Ferry and crossing at Maryville was a busy ford. The fact that there was a ferry and the three converging roads from the south would make this more than probable. For some reason, history has given slight mention to this important location, unless it is actually the same as the Hayden Ferry. I am sure Aurum will clear this up shortly.
Joe
Joe: Thanks for the additional info. As I said, my only source is the copy of the "Official Map of the Territory of Arizona, 1880". Hard to make out the details, but the roads are as you describe, and the Maryville/Whitlow crossing is almost straight south of the fort. So if you keep Mt Mcdowell on your left as you travel the road to the fort, would it follow the west bank of the Verde and squeeze between present day "Arizona Dam Butte" and the river, and this would be the dangerous spot for Indian raiders, called McDowell Canyon?
Or maybe the military reports don't have that kind of detail?
Also, on my DeLorme Topo USA maps software, I notice a spot labeled "Fort Badger". I remember this being discussed in this forum. It is just south of Coon Bluff, on the south side of the junction of the Verde & Salt rivers. Described only as a "historical locale" The marking is one that they added to the map, and I can't zoom down to find it on the topo, so it might not be in exactly the same place. Was this an outpost of Ft Mcdowell?
Or maybe the military reports don't have that kind of detail?
Also, on my DeLorme Topo USA maps software, I notice a spot labeled "Fort Badger". I remember this being discussed in this forum. It is just south of Coon Bluff, on the south side of the junction of the Verde & Salt rivers. Described only as a "historical locale" The marking is one that they added to the map, and I can't zoom down to find it on the topo, so it might not be in exactly the same place. Was this an outpost of Ft Mcdowell?
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Is It Important?
Senor X,
All of this discussion is not without importance, especially if you believe Joe Deering and The Two Soldiers found something. If they took the trail from Tortilla Flats, you are led to a specific area of the mountains. That area has been searched by some pretty fair Dutch Hunters for a lot of years. If on the other hand, they crossed the Salt in the area I believe they did, we are in a whole new ball game. Aurum has laid out the route they would have followed if that was the case. Those who believe they took the trail out of Tortilla Flats have other sources that back up that theory. All of them depend on three things; The Two Soldiers told the truth, those who told the story after them did not change it and they could not cross the Salt at the Whitlow ferry ford. There are clues that Jim Bark, John Chuning and Brownie Holmes did not tell the truth on this story. It is also important to know the year they were discharged. Names and dates have been conviently left out of this story. If you go by Joe Deerings story, the year could be 1884. It could just as easily be 1883. The month could also be an important piece of information.
I am going to guess that few people were aware of the ford south of Fort McDowell. It has never been given serious consideration and could be why the mine they all claimed to have found is still lost. We all know gold was found on the ground at the massacre site and that could be the source of the gold from both, if not all of the legends. It's not a fact, but it is a possibility. There are many on this forum who may be able to offer factual evidence to disprove this theory. That, however, may not be in their best interests. My best guess is that Aurum will have the facts and will not have a problem discussing them.
My own interest in this part of the legends, is still casual, but interesting to debate. Much like The Two Soldiers crossing the Salt River, I could be (probably am) all wet on this bit of conjecture.
Joe
All of this discussion is not without importance, especially if you believe Joe Deering and The Two Soldiers found something. If they took the trail from Tortilla Flats, you are led to a specific area of the mountains. That area has been searched by some pretty fair Dutch Hunters for a lot of years. If on the other hand, they crossed the Salt in the area I believe they did, we are in a whole new ball game. Aurum has laid out the route they would have followed if that was the case. Those who believe they took the trail out of Tortilla Flats have other sources that back up that theory. All of them depend on three things; The Two Soldiers told the truth, those who told the story after them did not change it and they could not cross the Salt at the Whitlow ferry ford. There are clues that Jim Bark, John Chuning and Brownie Holmes did not tell the truth on this story. It is also important to know the year they were discharged. Names and dates have been conviently left out of this story. If you go by Joe Deerings story, the year could be 1884. It could just as easily be 1883. The month could also be an important piece of information.
I am going to guess that few people were aware of the ford south of Fort McDowell. It has never been given serious consideration and could be why the mine they all claimed to have found is still lost. We all know gold was found on the ground at the massacre site and that could be the source of the gold from both, if not all of the legends. It's not a fact, but it is a possibility. There are many on this forum who may be able to offer factual evidence to disprove this theory. That, however, may not be in their best interests. My best guess is that Aurum will have the facts and will not have a problem discussing them.
My own interest in this part of the legends, is still casual, but interesting to debate. Much like The Two Soldiers crossing the Salt River, I could be (probably am) all wet on this bit of conjecture.
Joe
Deering, et al...
There have been many post recently regarding the Two Soldiers and Deering. Much interesting information has been presented. I conceed that we can assume no one told the truth. Thus, we come to what I have always believed - and was said so appropriately by Jim Bark - "one must separate the wheat from the chaffe." That applies to everything. All issues have disturbing or contradictory elements - and, again, it goes back to accepting the bit that is good and recognizing the bit that is bad. But.. just because there is a bad bit does not mean one can throw out everything said.
We all can take elements of the Two Soldiers and Deering tales and make various cases for what "really happened" or what route they took. To me I have my own conclusions based on pieces of "wheat" I separated from much chaffe over the years. I don't suppose I could ever convince anyone in what I believe to be a good scenario for what happened. And, yes... there are probably things that make me believe what I believe that I do not wish to share.
But, we can kick a dead horse only so much. I do not wish to "convince" anyone of anything. Nor should anyone have to - not me or anyone else. We are all just engaging in playful speculation. So, I am refraining from getting into another long winded discussion of what I think about the Two Soldiers - though, yet again, I am tempted to do so. I believe I have talked enough on the subject.
It is time, for me, to do more research - rather than just talking. So, I encourage everyone to broaden their horizons. We might not solve the mystery - but we can sure learn a lot.
We all can take elements of the Two Soldiers and Deering tales and make various cases for what "really happened" or what route they took. To me I have my own conclusions based on pieces of "wheat" I separated from much chaffe over the years. I don't suppose I could ever convince anyone in what I believe to be a good scenario for what happened. And, yes... there are probably things that make me believe what I believe that I do not wish to share.
But, we can kick a dead horse only so much. I do not wish to "convince" anyone of anything. Nor should anyone have to - not me or anyone else. We are all just engaging in playful speculation. So, I am refraining from getting into another long winded discussion of what I think about the Two Soldiers - though, yet again, I am tempted to do so. I believe I have talked enough on the subject.
It is time, for me, to do more research - rather than just talking. So, I encourage everyone to broaden their horizons. We might not solve the mystery - but we can sure learn a lot.
Joe
There's a couple of things that do not make sense concerning your theory regarding the Soldiers route. This theory is based on the possibility that the Soldiers crossed the Salt River at McDowell Canyon, skirted the main Superstition Massif to the west and ended up at the Silver King by the longer, more cicuituous route. In their travels they came upon the Massacre Grounds (much like Waltz had some years before), found the ore there and then later on made up the story about their travels in order to throw future searchers off the trail.
Is this possible? Certainly. Is this the likely chain of events? Well...probably not. Heres why:
1) The Massacre Grounds is simply too far out of the way for someone to hike to who was purported to be skirting the western edge of the mountains. Why would they go up there? To find the gold Waltz supposedly found? Had Waltz missed some back in the 70s?..and they were fortunate enough to find it? Doesnt make sense to me.
2) If Aurum is correct (and he most likely is)..then the Soldiers ended up somehwere in the vicinity of Peters and Tortilla Canyon. They describe this area pretty well (impassable waterfall, monumented trail up a big mountain, etc....). Just how did they know of these landmarks if they hadnt visited the place? From their cavalry days?
3) If they hadnt found what they believed to be a mine why did they outfit themselves for prospecting and return to the mountains? Why not just return to look for more saddlebags filled with ore?
4) The bodies of the Soldiers were found at Bluff Springs and beside a trail
in Barkley Basin. I have seen the grave of the soldier in Barkley Basin and have photos of it. If they were in the vicinity of the Massacre Grounds
how did their corpses end up at these locations?
There's a couple of things that do not make sense concerning your theory regarding the Soldiers route. This theory is based on the possibility that the Soldiers crossed the Salt River at McDowell Canyon, skirted the main Superstition Massif to the west and ended up at the Silver King by the longer, more cicuituous route. In their travels they came upon the Massacre Grounds (much like Waltz had some years before), found the ore there and then later on made up the story about their travels in order to throw future searchers off the trail.
Is this possible? Certainly. Is this the likely chain of events? Well...probably not. Heres why:
1) The Massacre Grounds is simply too far out of the way for someone to hike to who was purported to be skirting the western edge of the mountains. Why would they go up there? To find the gold Waltz supposedly found? Had Waltz missed some back in the 70s?..and they were fortunate enough to find it? Doesnt make sense to me.
2) If Aurum is correct (and he most likely is)..then the Soldiers ended up somehwere in the vicinity of Peters and Tortilla Canyon. They describe this area pretty well (impassable waterfall, monumented trail up a big mountain, etc....). Just how did they know of these landmarks if they hadnt visited the place? From their cavalry days?
3) If they hadnt found what they believed to be a mine why did they outfit themselves for prospecting and return to the mountains? Why not just return to look for more saddlebags filled with ore?
4) The bodies of the Soldiers were found at Bluff Springs and beside a trail
in Barkley Basin. I have seen the grave of the soldier in Barkley Basin and have photos of it. If they were in the vicinity of the Massacre Grounds
how did their corpses end up at these locations?
One more thing before I promise yet again not to talk about the Two Soldiers....
Peter brings up good points. Especially the spots where their bodies were found. And that brings up the issue of the Swamper... And Ernest Pankinin. The "indirect evidence" regarding Pankinin - to me - is the strongest support for the Peters and Tortilla Canyon area - and the validity of the Two Soldiers' tale. I am sure Peter is familiar with what I refer to - and would also agree...
Peter brings up good points. Especially the spots where their bodies were found. And that brings up the issue of the Swamper... And Ernest Pankinin. The "indirect evidence" regarding Pankinin - to me - is the strongest support for the Peters and Tortilla Canyon area - and the validity of the Two Soldiers' tale. I am sure Peter is familiar with what I refer to - and would also agree...
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Theory
Peter,
I was wondering how long it would be before you jumped in on this, since it is your topic. I assume you did not look at your Arizona Gazetteer before saying that the route in my (possibly fictitous) story was "the longer, more circuitous route". It seems to me it is the most direct route to the Silver King. The route they were taking, prior to deciding to take the "short cut" seems a lot longer when you consider the terrain they would have to climb and descend. As the crow flies it's around fourteen miles more. That crow would, however, have some terrific thermal lifts going over the Supes. 
Silverlock and Malm did considerable "prospecting" in the area of the Massacre Grounds and spent a few more bucks than the Two Soldiers. If you found the mine you would not outfit yourself for prospecting at all.
If you think the trail out of Tortilla Flats looked inviting as an entrance to a "short cut" do you consider the entrance to the Massacre Grounds to be more foreboding? Many things could have led them to that area, including a wrong turn early in their trip.
The whole idea here was to point out that there were other posibilities as to where they found their gold ore. The fact that their bodies were found where they were gives no indication of their final destination.
You may have answered point #2 and the point is that there are other answers.
S.C.,
I am surprised at the content of your posts. Since I really have no dog in this fight, my intent is not to convince anyone of my theory. Since some very good men have put more years into solving this puzzle than most of us combined will in our lifetimes, and with information closer to the Two Soldiers and Joe Deering without success, it may be time to look at a this from a different perspective. I may have been just aimlessly "talking" here, but the old story was getting a little stale and leading to the same area it always has. Without input from those who are "in the know" S.C. , this forum will not be much fun. This "dead horse" will be rode until someone finds the mine. Until that happens the exchange of ideas is the best way to keep it moving in the right direction. When you will no longer talk, you have closed your mind to any new ideas and may miss that little nugget that will help you find the mine. It is just possible, if you keep the dialog going, someone may come up with something you and other fans of this story have not thought of. Perhaps even better then my lame theory. Once I have all of the answers, I will be smuggling gold ingots out of the mountains and I expect you all to help me with those answers, not the smuggling part.
Joe
I was wondering how long it would be before you jumped in on this, since it is your topic. I assume you did not look at your Arizona Gazetteer before saying that the route in my (possibly fictitous) story was "the longer, more circuitous route".
It seems to me it is the most direct route to the Silver King. The route they were taking, prior to deciding to take the "short cut" seems a lot longer when you consider the terrain they would have to climb and descend. As the crow flies it's around fourteen miles more. That crow would, however, have some terrific thermal lifts going over the Supes. Silverlock and Malm did considerable "prospecting" in the area of the Massacre Grounds and spent a few more bucks than the Two Soldiers. If you found the mine you would not outfit yourself for prospecting at all.
If you think the trail out of Tortilla Flats looked inviting as an entrance to a "short cut" do you consider the entrance to the Massacre Grounds to be more foreboding? Many things could have led them to that area, including a wrong turn early in their trip.
The whole idea here was to point out that there were other posibilities as to where they found their gold ore. The fact that their bodies were found where they were gives no indication of their final destination.
You may have answered point #2 and the point is that there are other answers.
S.C.,
I am surprised at the content of your posts. Since I really have no dog in this fight, my intent is not to convince anyone of my theory. Since some very good men have put more years into solving this puzzle than most of us combined will in our lifetimes, and with information closer to the Two Soldiers and Joe Deering without success, it may be time to look at a this from a different perspective. I may have been just aimlessly "talking" here, but the old story was getting a little stale and leading to the same area it always has. Without input from those who are "in the know" S.C. , this forum will not be much fun. This "dead horse" will be rode until someone finds the mine. Until that happens the exchange of ideas is the best way to keep it moving in the right direction. When you will no longer talk, you have closed your mind to any new ideas and may miss that little nugget that will help you find the mine. It is just possible, if you keep the dialog going, someone may come up with something you and other fans of this story have not thought of. Perhaps even better then my lame theory.
Once I have all of the answers, I will be smuggling gold ingots out of the mountains and I expect you all to help me with those answers, not the smuggling part. Joe
As always, good points all.
Isn't it reasonable to believe that the cache/mine WAS near the Massacre Grounds, and not just "leftover ore" in saddlebags? This would explain why they would venture "back" into the Sups via the Massacre Grounds area. After all, if they'd hiked through that terrain all the way from McDowell (or wherever they'd actually come from), then this little side avenue wouldn't seem so extreme. Or, there could have been a fork in the road, so to speak, such as an unfriendly faction forcing them into the Massacre Grounds...
This of course doesn't explain how/if they'd ended up at Peters and Tortilla, given the geography of what's been passed down (waterfall, big mountain, etc), but then they could have not ended up there, but merely passed through there on their way to the endpoint. We don't know the whole narrative.
Dos pasos, dos paces, dos pesos
nico h
Isn't it reasonable to believe that the cache/mine WAS near the Massacre Grounds, and not just "leftover ore" in saddlebags? This would explain why they would venture "back" into the Sups via the Massacre Grounds area. After all, if they'd hiked through that terrain all the way from McDowell (or wherever they'd actually come from), then this little side avenue wouldn't seem so extreme. Or, there could have been a fork in the road, so to speak, such as an unfriendly faction forcing them into the Massacre Grounds...
This of course doesn't explain how/if they'd ended up at Peters and Tortilla, given the geography of what's been passed down (waterfall, big mountain, etc), but then they could have not ended up there, but merely passed through there on their way to the endpoint. We don't know the whole narrative.
Dos pasos, dos paces, dos pesos
nico h
<<Isn't it reasonable to believe that the cache/mine WAS near the Massacre Grounds, and not just "leftover ore" in saddlebags? This would explain why they would venture "back" into the Sups via the Massacre Grounds area.>>
Well, the answer is simply NO, it's not reasonable to beleive the LDM was/is near the Massacre Grounds.
Why not?
If one was going on the tale of the Soldiers alone, then yes, I agree the Soldiers could have found the gold at the Massacre Grounds, Tortilla Canyon or the top of Weavers Needle for all I know. However, if one knew the history of the Massacre Grounds, what happened there, what was found and then backtrailed into the interior of the mountains, one would understand that the "Soldiers-finding gold-or the LDM-near the Massacre site" theory was probably not a reasonable scenario.
As I continue to say until I am blue in the face: clues, stories, legends, tales and the like MUST be viewed in the light of the totality of the overall evidence.
Some folks like to latch onto a favorite clue like a pit bull and hold on for dear life. Tunnel vision in this regard will not help, but rather hinder ones search.
Well, the answer is simply NO, it's not reasonable to beleive the LDM was/is near the Massacre Grounds.
Why not?
If one was going on the tale of the Soldiers alone, then yes, I agree the Soldiers could have found the gold at the Massacre Grounds, Tortilla Canyon or the top of Weavers Needle for all I know. However, if one knew the history of the Massacre Grounds, what happened there, what was found and then backtrailed into the interior of the mountains, one would understand that the "Soldiers-finding gold-or the LDM-near the Massacre site" theory was probably not a reasonable scenario.
As I continue to say until I am blue in the face: clues, stories, legends, tales and the like MUST be viewed in the light of the totality of the overall evidence.
Some folks like to latch onto a favorite clue like a pit bull and hold on for dear life. Tunnel vision in this regard will not help, but rather hinder ones search.
Reply
Joe,
My intent was that I (S.C.) have already said too much and I (S.C.) feel I keep beating a dead horse. I sometimes feel I keep harping about the same old things I have said hundreds of times. And I need to learn more - so as to present something new rather than the same old stuff. No offense intended to others. Don't get me wrong. Discussion is good. But, we all have our beliefs and sometimes they become "emotional."
You said: "...This "dead horse" will be rode until someone finds the mine..." True. Maybe that "dead horse" is the ghost stallion Walt Gassler's spirit rides... (As much as the mountains meant to him, I'd like to think his spirit was one with the forces of the mountains...) Though, it is funny - isn't it - how he rode his mount over to Charlebois Canyon and Peters Mesa....
To all:
Peter said the following: "...As I continue to say until I am blue in the face: clues, stories, legends, tales and the like MUST be viewed in the light of the totality of the overall evidence. .." I AGREE 100% with his statement. The total body of evidence indicates the mine is not near the massacre grounds.... Nor a lot of other places. One must look at the totality and then weeded out the good from the bad. To separate the wheat from the chaffe...
S.C.
My intent was that I (S.C.) have already said too much and I (S.C.) feel I keep beating a dead horse. I sometimes feel I keep harping about the same old things I have said hundreds of times. And I need to learn more - so as to present something new rather than the same old stuff. No offense intended to others. Don't get me wrong. Discussion is good. But, we all have our beliefs and sometimes they become "emotional."
You said: "...This "dead horse" will be rode until someone finds the mine..." True. Maybe that "dead horse" is the ghost stallion Walt Gassler's spirit rides... (As much as the mountains meant to him, I'd like to think his spirit was one with the forces of the mountains...) Though, it is funny - isn't it - how he rode his mount over to Charlebois Canyon and Peters Mesa....
To all:
Peter said the following: "...As I continue to say until I am blue in the face: clues, stories, legends, tales and the like MUST be viewed in the light of the totality of the overall evidence. .." I AGREE 100% with his statement. The total body of evidence indicates the mine is not near the massacre grounds.... Nor a lot of other places. One must look at the totality and then weeded out the good from the bad. To separate the wheat from the chaffe...
S.C.
Hello everyone. I am new to this forum, but find it fascinating with all the knowledge and speculation that goes on here. I found this site after reading Tom Glover's book and doing a web search on the LDM. After going through the archived forum discussions, I have a question? Could the story of the 2 Soldiers and the saddlebag of gold found in the 1960's by a man named Kochera be related at all. Seems, from the archived readings, the area(s) both were in gives support to this theory or am I wrong?
Please, from reading the old forum post, I don't mean to offend anyone by bringing this topic up again...but, am just curious about it all. The Glover refference to the gold Kochera found and the linking of it to the Lost Dutchman gold is very noteworthy in my believe. And, if that gold could be traced to the 2 Soldiers, perhaps (just perhaps) it may lead to more interesting finds. Too, bad there aren't samples of any of the saddlebags of either!
Thank-you so much for the many interesting discussions that go on in here...keep hunting, even if it's only on the computer, for the Lost Dutchman Mine!!! It's a fascinating mystery! Good Day.
Please, from reading the old forum post, I don't mean to offend anyone by bringing this topic up again...but, am just curious about it all. The Glover refference to the gold Kochera found and the linking of it to the Lost Dutchman gold is very noteworthy in my believe. And, if that gold could be traced to the 2 Soldiers, perhaps (just perhaps) it may lead to more interesting finds. Too, bad there aren't samples of any of the saddlebags of either!
Thank-you so much for the many interesting discussions that go on in here...keep hunting, even if it's only on the computer, for the Lost Dutchman Mine!!! It's a fascinating mystery! Good Day.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Evidence
Nicoh,
You have voiced the essense of this discussion, the possibilities are still being explored and new ideas can always be formed on an old story. We all may need to move closer to the beach to find our Spanish Treasure Galleon. Those who lock themselves into the deeper water may be overlooking an easier answer.
Peter,
No need to get the blue face here. It's possible that others may have the same "totality of evidence" that you have, but have come to another conclusion. Everyone has exactly the same information that I have on the Stone Maps and have come to a completely different conclusion. If offered, I would consider their theories as well. Can't hurt.
Joe
You have voiced the essense of this discussion, the possibilities are still being explored and new ideas can always be formed on an old story. We all may need to move closer to the beach to find our Spanish Treasure Galleon. Those who lock themselves into the deeper water may be overlooking an easier answer.
Peter,
No need to get the blue face here. It's possible that others may have the same "totality of evidence" that you have, but have come to another conclusion. Everyone has exactly the same information that I have on the Stone Maps and have come to a completely different conclusion. If offered, I would consider their theories as well. Can't hurt.
Joe
Last edited by Joe Ribaudo on Thu Mar 13, 2003 2:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reply
kk,
Hello and welcome. There is indeed probably a link between the Two Soldiers and Kochera. At least... in my opinion... There are samples of Kochera's gold still in existence. As inidcated in Glover's book, at least one piece was tested and was very similar (not 100% similar - but very, very similar) to the analysis of the gold from under Waltz's bed in the Holmes' family possession. And the Holmes' gold was similar to what is called the "Camp Ore." The Kochera ore indicates a similar geological event. Possibly meaning different branches of the same mineralized vein.
Now, if one believes the asumption that the Two Soldiers did end up over on the Peters Mesa / Tortilla area - then Kochera's gold is significant because it was found in that same area. Coincidence? Maybe not. But, at this point it is only speculation. I agree, it would be neat if samples of the Two Soldiers' ore could have survived to this day. And that we could be able to test them to see if they matched Kochera and/or the LDM ores.
SC
Hello and welcome. There is indeed probably a link between the Two Soldiers and Kochera. At least... in my opinion... There are samples of Kochera's gold still in existence. As inidcated in Glover's book, at least one piece was tested and was very similar (not 100% similar - but very, very similar) to the analysis of the gold from under Waltz's bed in the Holmes' family possession. And the Holmes' gold was similar to what is called the "Camp Ore." The Kochera ore indicates a similar geological event. Possibly meaning different branches of the same mineralized vein.
Now, if one believes the asumption that the Two Soldiers did end up over on the Peters Mesa / Tortilla area - then Kochera's gold is significant because it was found in that same area. Coincidence? Maybe not. But, at this point it is only speculation. I agree, it would be neat if samples of the Two Soldiers' ore could have survived to this day. And that we could be able to test them to see if they matched Kochera and/or the LDM ores.
SC
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
WE ALL AGREE 100%
S.C.,
I don't think you will get any arguement on the "totality of the overall evidence" thing. The reason you are getting so many foolish questions, is that we don't all have the same evidence that others seem to hint that they have. I am sure that you have all worked very hard, and spent more than a few shekels accumulating this evidence. No need to share, we should all do our own digging.
It is true that you and Peter have both been repeating yourselves on this subject for a long time. The topic was getting stale, and participation was waning. So along comes Joe, and thinks he will throw in a new wrinkle on this old horse. Now as far as I know, no one has ever talked about an established ford south of Fort McDowell. Due to the pitifully sparse reading I do, I happen to be pretty sure that the Salt was crossed on a regular basis, south of the fort and in the 1800s. If so, you and Peter can both talk until you are "blue in the face" and it will not lessen the possibility that the Two Soldiers could have, and should have, gone south from Fort McDowell.
Now something tells me that some people out there know who the Two Soldiers were. If so, they know when they were discharged. It would not be impossible to find out what the weather conditions were in the months prior to that event, as that could obviously make a difference. If it does, what are the chances that they could get across the Verde? I thought it would be something different for you to put your considerable talents to work on, instead of the same old thing you are now complaining of.
I thought I raised some pretty good (if not well known) points with the Martha Summerhayes crossings and the discussion with Senor X concerning the 1880 territorial map. By the way, that map shows the road that the soldiers built to Camp Reno, as crossing the Verde due east of Fort McDowell. Maps of that period were both accurate and inaccurate, to an amazing degree. Not much to hang your hat on there. I do, however, put considerable faith in Martha's story. If you feel you are wasting your time on this topic, no need to reply. I have not even attempted the smallest part of the research you have compiled on the LDM. Perhaps I should go back to discussing the Stone Maps. I don't mind you guys casting stones at my theories. Keeps me on my game.
Joe
I don't think you will get any arguement on the "totality of the overall evidence" thing. The reason you are getting so many foolish questions, is that we don't all have the same evidence that others seem to hint that they have. I am sure that you have all worked very hard, and spent more than a few shekels accumulating this evidence. No need to share, we should all do our own digging.
It is true that you and Peter have both been repeating yourselves on this subject for a long time. The topic was getting stale, and participation was waning. So along comes Joe, and thinks he will throw in a new wrinkle on this old horse.
Now as far as I know, no one has ever talked about an established ford south of Fort McDowell. Due to the pitifully sparse reading I do, I happen to be pretty sure that the Salt was crossed on a regular basis, south of the fort and in the 1800s. If so, you and Peter can both talk until you are "blue in the face" and it will not lessen the possibility that the Two Soldiers could have, and should have, gone south from Fort McDowell.Now something tells me that some people out there know who the Two Soldiers were. If so, they know when they were discharged. It would not be impossible to find out what the weather conditions were in the months prior to that event, as that could obviously make a difference. If it does, what are the chances that they could get across the Verde? I thought it would be something different for you to put your considerable talents to work on, instead of the same old thing you are now complaining of.
I thought I raised some pretty good (if not well known) points with the Martha Summerhayes crossings and the discussion with Senor X concerning the 1880 territorial map. By the way, that map shows the road that the soldiers built to Camp Reno, as crossing the Verde due east of Fort McDowell. Maps of that period were both accurate and inaccurate, to an amazing degree. Not much to hang your hat on there. I do, however, put considerable faith in Martha's story. If you feel you are wasting your time on this topic, no need to reply. I have not even attempted the smallest part of the research you have compiled on the LDM. Perhaps I should go back to discussing the Stone Maps. I don't mind you guys casting stones at my theories. Keeps me on my game.Joe
Joe,
The info on crossings is indeed very interesting - and NEW angles to pursue. Those certainly did not go unnoticed. They get one to thinking. Especially the need to look at weather conditions at the "estimated" times.
Those are good points and definitely something to research. Like I said, there is much to learn - and research never ends.
Especially so on the Two Soldiers/Deering topic.
I just wonder if somewhere there are the employment records of the Silver King for the time frames in question??? Most of the principles we know of being in the Silver King area are indirect sources - newspapers, and other documents not related directly to the King. Hmmm...
But... there are only so many hours in a day.... and only so much to be done at a time. And there is so much to pursue.
Joe, you have certainly "stirred me up" - I now have some new avenues to pursue as a result of your comments. Though, to some, maybe they are emotional, never the less, they are thought provoking.
The info on crossings is indeed very interesting - and NEW angles to pursue. Those certainly did not go unnoticed. They get one to thinking. Especially the need to look at weather conditions at the "estimated" times.
Those are good points and definitely something to research. Like I said, there is much to learn - and research never ends.
Especially so on the Two Soldiers/Deering topic.
I just wonder if somewhere there are the employment records of the Silver King for the time frames in question??? Most of the principles we know of being in the Silver King area are indirect sources - newspapers, and other documents not related directly to the King. Hmmm...
But... there are only so many hours in a day.... and only so much to be done at a time. And there is so much to pursue.
Joe, you have certainly "stirred me up" - I now have some new avenues to pursue as a result of your comments. Though, to some, maybe they are emotional, never the less, they are thought provoking.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Time
S.C.,
I am very glad I did not ruffle your feathers there. It's true, most of us don't have the time to run down every crackpot idea that floats across our Dutch Hunter radar. I believe in learning from history, but first we have to separate the true history from what often gets made up, for whatever reasons. The principle tellers of this story did not give us the whole truth. The first question that comes to mind is, how much of the story is not true? It would be a good bet, that if they lied, the directions would be a fine place to do it. Starting from the wrong place is the best way not to find this mine. I think Julia Thomas was the first to learn that truth.
Those who have tied themselves to one truth, and no other, have only tied their own hands. In your heart and mind you know you have put together all of the true evidence and thus have been led to a specific area
of the mountains. You should not change your mind lightly but should, however, remain open to other possibilities. I am trying to test the strength of your conclusions, not the conclusions themselves. You are more than likely correct. I am sure you have discounted the landmarks of the story, as told by Bark/Ely/Holmes and by extension, John Chuning and have used other information to arrive at your area of interest. I believe that all of them did indicate the correct area of the mine/cache.
There is no emotion tied to my comments; that will only be found in the reaction of others to those comments.
All of the things you addressed in your last post will take time to run down.
It's possible that some of the members of this forum can make that task a little less time consuming. There are many good researchers at work here. None of that will end up at the LDM, but all of it together may point out a new way to get there, a path you may not have considered before.
There is something in this story that has kept the old Dutch Hunters from finding the mine. If you have not figured out what that something is you may have the same results. Have you only authenticated the original story, or do you know where they all went wrong?
If the Two Soldier's could have crossed the Salt south of the fort, it should stir you up considerably. If that was possible, no route leading to the North side of the Superstitions is reasonable. Gives the story a whole new complexion.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
I am very glad I did not ruffle your feathers there. It's true, most of us don't have the time to run down every crackpot idea that floats across our Dutch Hunter radar. I believe in learning from history, but first we have to separate the true history from what often gets made up, for whatever reasons. The principle tellers of this story did not give us the whole truth. The first question that comes to mind is, how much of the story is not true? It would be a good bet, that if they lied, the directions would be a fine place to do it. Starting from the wrong place is the best way not to find this mine. I think Julia Thomas was the first to learn that truth.
Those who have tied themselves to one truth, and no other, have only tied their own hands. In your heart and mind you know you have put together all of the true evidence and thus have been led to a specific area
of the mountains. You should not change your mind lightly but should, however, remain open to other possibilities. I am trying to test the strength of your conclusions, not the conclusions themselves. You are more than likely correct. I am sure you have discounted the landmarks of the story, as told by Bark/Ely/Holmes and by extension, John Chuning and have used other information to arrive at your area of interest. I believe that all of them did indicate the correct area of the mine/cache.
There is no emotion tied to my comments; that will only be found in the reaction of others to those comments.
All of the things you addressed in your last post will take time to run down.
It's possible that some of the members of this forum can make that task a little less time consuming. There are many good researchers at work here. None of that will end up at the LDM, but all of it together may point out a new way to get there, a path you may not have considered before.
There is something in this story that has kept the old Dutch Hunters from finding the mine. If you have not figured out what that something is you may have the same results. Have you only authenticated the original story, or do you know where they all went wrong?
If the Two Soldier's could have crossed the Salt south of the fort, it should stir you up considerably. If that was possible, no route leading to the North side of the Superstitions is reasonable. Gives the story a whole new complexion.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo