Peter,
You have Waltzed around the question. There is no logical reason for anyone traveling from Fort McDowell to the Silver King Mine to be on the North side of the Superstition Range. They were not familiar with the route, as the correct trail was pointed out to them by someone else.
Joe
Deering Comments
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
No Purpose
Peter,
The Two Soldiers had a purpose and destination. They had a logical plan which would take them from the fort to the King. Within that plan, they were given instructions by a third party as to which was the best way to get to the mine. If that is the way you would travel on foot from McDowell to the Silver King, I can understand how you would end up in the middle of the night at an illogical location for you to be, and since it was illogical for you to be there, I assume it was without any purpose. Most would call that "sleepwalking".
Joe
The Two Soldiers had a purpose and destination. They had a logical plan which would take them from the fort to the King. Within that plan, they were given instructions by a third party as to which was the best way to get to the mine. If that is the way you would travel on foot from McDowell to the Silver King, I can understand how you would end up in the middle of the night at an illogical location for you to be, and since it was illogical for you to be there, I assume it was without any purpose. Most would call that "sleepwalking".
Joe
Joe
If one takes out a straight edge and lines up McDowell and the King, the shortest distance as a Raven flies is thru the interior of the mountains.
Yes there was rough terrain, no trails etc etc..and it would be faster going around the west end. However, we know this with the benefit of modern day topo, maps, computer programs etc.... The soldiers had none of that info in 1884.
Ever think that they were simply adventurous young men and wanted to see what was over the next rise? You yourself are an adventurous older fellow...yet I have a feeling you wouldnt shy away wanting to see what was over the next ridge...whether logic dictated that or not.
P
If one takes out a straight edge and lines up McDowell and the King, the shortest distance as a Raven flies is thru the interior of the mountains.
Yes there was rough terrain, no trails etc etc..and it would be faster going around the west end. However, we know this with the benefit of modern day topo, maps, computer programs etc.... The soldiers had none of that info in 1884.
Ever think that they were simply adventurous young men and wanted to see what was over the next rise? You yourself are an adventurous older fellow...yet I have a feeling you wouldnt shy away wanting to see what was over the next ridge...whether logic dictated that or not.
P
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Just out to have a good time?
Peter,
Be careful, as you are approaching the dark side here. Take your map and your straight edge, and (using a series of straight lines) try to follow the path of the Two Soldiers through the Superstitions. No switchbacks, just straight lines. Now do the same thing going south from the fort to the Salt River, and than take the straightest course to the King.
The Two Soldiers had just completed a hitch as ground pounders for the U.S. Army. It would be interesting to know just how many miles of forced marches they had to make through the pastoral setting that consisted of the areas around Fort McDowell, the Superstitions and the homelands of the Apache Indians of the time.
The reason for taking a shortcut, is to shorten the time and distance one must travel. At the point they decided to do that, they had not traveled a great distance or over very rough terrain. Considering that, I don't think they were out for an adventure in the outback that was know to harbor Apaches of the "breakout" persuasion. Please do not say that the Apache were no problem at that time. They were still a consideration and no prudent person would ignore the possibility of their presence.
No map can give you the experience of what it is like to walk over the land that is depicted on it. These guys were not city rubes out on a lark. The army of the 1800s was no cakewalk. They knew the lay of the land and just how unforgiving it and the residents were. It's impossible to actually understand their mentality unless you have been in a situation (more than a weekend) where your life is constantly on the line. Even when you are relaxing, you are keeping an eye out for trouble and you are never far from your fear or your gun. Without that experience, movies don't count, you are in no way prepared for the reality of how the Two Soldiers might think. It is, as I am sure you know, another world out there.
You are wrong about my being adventurous and wanting to see what is over the next ridge. There are a number of ridges I have no desire to see the other side of. Experience tells me that there is nothing good to be found on the backside of some ridges. The Two Soldiers had that same knowledge. At this point in time, there are no ridges (in this country) that I would not enjoy crossing. At the time of the Two Soldiers, I am sure there were ridges (in this country) that they would have no desire to cross. George Armstrong Custer was the adventurous type, but you can be sure the soldiers behind him had no desire to see what was over the ridge in the Little Big Horn. If you have not read the history of that battle, you might want to check out the foot dragging of some of the other commanders. They had a good idea of what was over the next ridge. The short answer to your question, would be yes I have considered it.
Joe
Be careful, as you are approaching the dark side here. Take your map and your straight edge, and (using a series of straight lines) try to follow the path of the Two Soldiers through the Superstitions. No switchbacks, just straight lines. Now do the same thing going south from the fort to the Salt River, and than take the straightest course to the King.
The Two Soldiers had just completed a hitch as ground pounders for the U.S. Army. It would be interesting to know just how many miles of forced marches they had to make through the pastoral setting that consisted of the areas around Fort McDowell, the Superstitions and the homelands of the Apache Indians of the time.
The reason for taking a shortcut, is to shorten the time and distance one must travel. At the point they decided to do that, they had not traveled a great distance or over very rough terrain. Considering that, I don't think they were out for an adventure in the outback that was know to harbor Apaches of the "breakout" persuasion. Please do not say that the Apache were no problem at that time. They were still a consideration and no prudent person would ignore the possibility of their presence.No map can give you the experience of what it is like to walk over the land that is depicted on it. These guys were not city rubes out on a lark. The army of the 1800s was no cakewalk. They knew the lay of the land and just how unforgiving it and the residents were. It's impossible to actually understand their mentality unless you have been in a situation (more than a weekend) where your life is constantly on the line. Even when you are relaxing, you are keeping an eye out for trouble and you are never far from your fear or your gun. Without that experience, movies don't count, you are in no way prepared for the reality of how the Two Soldiers might think. It is, as I am sure you know, another world out there.
You are wrong about my being adventurous and wanting to see what is over the next ridge. There are a number of ridges I have no desire to see the other side of. Experience tells me that there is nothing good to be found on the backside of some ridges. The Two Soldiers had that same knowledge. At this point in time, there are no ridges (in this country) that I would not enjoy crossing. At the time of the Two Soldiers, I am sure there were ridges (in this country) that they would have no desire to cross. George Armstrong Custer was the adventurous type, but you can be sure the soldiers behind him had no desire to see what was over the ridge in the Little Big Horn. If you have not read the history of that battle, you might want to check out the foot dragging of some of the other commanders. They had a good idea of what was over the next ridge. The short answer to your question, would be yes I have considered it.
Joe
Joe
I guess I will just agree to disagree with you on this subject then.
And I do have a small smattering of knowledge on the Little Big Horn. Foot dragging by Reno and Benteen probably had something to do with Dull Knifes brains splattered all over Renos face..and Benteen simply wasnt in a hurry to reach Auties 5 troops....
I guess I will just agree to disagree with you on this subject then.
And I do have a small smattering of knowledge on the Little Big Horn. Foot dragging by Reno and Benteen probably had something to do with Dull Knifes brains splattered all over Renos face..and Benteen simply wasnt in a hurry to reach Auties 5 troops....
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
The Facts
Peter,
I understand that my posts have presented you with too many facts that you could not address without making the choice to go north of the range look (slightly) unbelievable. I am still waiting for the photo and document that will convince me that they did actually go that way. I have been really good and I have the document from Santa confirming that fact.
I don't fault you for disagreeing with me on this subject. I just don't know what you are disagreeing with. I never said they didn't go that way, only that it made no sense to do it and there was a much, much better, faster and safer way to go. Sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees. It's when you read more into my statements than what I am saying, that we seem to drift into the twilight zone of contention.
Not sure you picked up on the meaning of my comments on Custer. The facts of the battle were not the point. I often have a problem making my point clear in a less than direct manner. No problem, as you seem to be unable to grasp any point, other than yours, on this matter. Your position is clear, you will not consider that the Two Soldiers would have done anything that takes them off the accepted trail, no matter how crazy that trail choice would be.
I don't disagree with your conclusion as to which trail they took, nor do I agree with your conclusion.
It remains possible that there were better choices available and it was unlikely they would choose the trail we have been gifted by those who may have had ulterior motives. Once again, it's something that should be considered if you are testing the truth of this story. Pure theory, of course.
Joe
I understand that my posts have presented you with too many facts that you could not address without making the choice to go north of the range look (slightly) unbelievable. I am still waiting for the photo and document that will convince me that they did actually go that way. I have been really good and I have the document from Santa confirming that fact.
I don't fault you for disagreeing with me on this subject. I just don't know what you are disagreeing with. I never said they didn't go that way, only that it made no sense to do it and there was a much, much better, faster and safer way to go. Sometimes you can't see the forest for the trees. It's when you read more into my statements than what I am saying, that we seem to drift into the twilight zone of contention.
Not sure you picked up on the meaning of my comments on Custer. The facts of the battle were not the point. I often have a problem making my point clear in a less than direct manner. No problem, as you seem to be unable to grasp any point, other than yours, on this matter. Your position is clear, you will not consider that the Two Soldiers would have done anything that takes them off the accepted trail, no matter how crazy that trail choice would be.
I don't disagree with your conclusion as to which trail they took, nor do I agree with your conclusion.
It remains possible that there were better choices available and it was unlikely they would choose the trail we have been gifted by those who may have had ulterior motives. Once again, it's something that should be considered if you are testing the truth of this story. Pure theory, of course.
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
No Argument
Peter,
OK, I think we have squeezed this one for as much juice as it has. Other than everyone says this is the way it happened, you could not come up with a single factor in favor of our favorite route to the King. I expect no points here, as your weak admission that "it would be faster going around the west end.", with the "however" tagged onto the end of this huge capitulation (at least for you), is more than enough reward for my efforts. It took a long time for you to admit that much. You have come a long way, and I am proud of any small part I may have had in educating you in the fine art of Mapology. Don't think I will give you any breaks in the future, just because you have been such a willing student here. 
Joe
OK, I think we have squeezed this one for as much juice as it has. Other than everyone says this is the way it happened, you could not come up with a single factor in favor of our favorite route to the King. I expect no points here, as your weak admission that "it would be faster going around the west end.", with the "however" tagged onto the end of this huge capitulation (at least for you), is more than enough reward for my efforts.
It took a long time for you to admit that much. You have come a long way, and I am proud of any small part I may have had in educating you in the fine art of Mapology. Don't think I will give you any breaks in the future, just because you have been such a willing student here. Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Sandbagging?
Peter,
Does that mean that you do have something to place on the plus side of the ledger in favor of them taking the route through northern Siberia as opposed to the balmy southern route, and are just withholding said plus for a later posting?
I don't think I used the word "capitulating", or anything like it in my post. Is that what you think you have done? If so, I must insist on receiving the proper number of points on the scoreboard.
Perhaps it is time for us to reassess the alien topic.
I don't think you gave an inch. The path of the Two Soldiers was never the question here, only the blind acceptance that no other route was possible or practical. The possibility that a story, that may only be an elaborate hoax (much like the Stone Maps) has been accepted as fact because of seeming corroboration from other sources, as well as hard evidence on the ground is always a factor. The story, and those that follow the original, may very well be built around the evidence that was on the ground, long before the story was first told. On the minus side of the Stone Map Story, we have one negative: I think I recognize the horse. Is that more damning than the negative I have raised on the Two Soldiers Story? I accept the possibility that the Stone Maps could be a hoax, but like you and your belief in the Two Soldiers, I doubt it. I have not come close to disproving your conclusions, nor did I try, but I did raise a question that you could not find a reasonable answer for. That doesn't bother you, but if you were to do the same to me on the Stone Maps, I would have the answer.
Joe
Does that mean that you do have something to place on the plus side of the ledger in favor of them taking the route through northern Siberia as opposed to the balmy southern route, and are just withholding said plus for a later posting?
I don't think I used the word "capitulating", or anything like it in my post. Is that what you think you have done? If so, I must insist on receiving the proper number of points on the scoreboard.
Perhaps it is time for us to reassess the alien topic.
I don't think you gave an inch. The path of the Two Soldiers was never the question here, only the blind acceptance that no other route was possible or practical. The possibility that a story, that may only be an elaborate hoax (much like the Stone Maps) has been accepted as fact because of seeming corroboration from other sources, as well as hard evidence on the ground is always a factor. The story, and those that follow the original, may very well be built around the evidence that was on the ground, long before the story was first told. On the minus side of the Stone Map Story, we have one negative: I think I recognize the horse. Is that more damning than the negative I have raised on the Two Soldiers Story? I accept the possibility that the Stone Maps could be a hoax, but like you and your belief in the Two Soldiers, I doubt it. I have not come close to disproving your conclusions, nor did I try, but I did raise a question that you could not find a reasonable answer for. That doesn't bother you, but if you were to do the same to me on the Stone Maps, I would have the answer.
Joe
-
relacion32
- Greenhorn
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 5:47 am
- Location: flagstaff
hi
ive been following this post and have ifound it quite illuminating ...nasty remarks aside.my advice to jose...dont ecxpect a straight forward reply or ezxplanation from peter because i fear youll bever be in danger of recieving one, peter imho seems far more interested in his relentless pursuit of self promotion. why anybody persists in informing others of the secrets they possess ..or at least their possession of said secrets ..then blithely announces they will not share them is beyond me.wouldnt it be simpler to say nothing?i dont believe the majority of this forum are fooled by such nonsense.
as for dutchman experts ...sorry thers no such thing.we can all surmise and suppose but thats as far as it goes .at the end of the day the legend is just that and nothing more .... a legend
ive been following this post and have ifound it quite illuminating ...nasty remarks aside.my advice to jose...dont ecxpect a straight forward reply or ezxplanation from peter because i fear youll bever be in danger of recieving one, peter imho seems far more interested in his relentless pursuit of self promotion. why anybody persists in informing others of the secrets they possess ..or at least their possession of said secrets ..then blithely announces they will not share them is beyond me.wouldnt it be simpler to say nothing?i dont believe the majority of this forum are fooled by such nonsense.
as for dutchman experts ...sorry thers no such thing.we can all surmise and suppose but thats as far as it goes .at the end of the day the legend is just that and nothing more .... a legend
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Dutchman Experts
32,
Welcome to the forum.
I will not list the vast number of legends that have been lifted from that catagory into fact, as I am sure you may have heard of a few of them yourself. Due to the many stories that surround the Superstitions and the LDM, there are many leads to follow and many old trails to find.
Peter is one of the few people alive today who has taken the time, spent the money and found his "place" in the Superstition Mountains. His knowledge of history and "Legend" goes beyond the small area we are all enjoying. He may be "wedded to his sense of place", but he did not get there by reading a few posts on this forum and buying a few books. A lifetime of research and experience (not just on the LDM legend) has brought him to his (informed) conclusions.
Your own qualifications to judge Peter, or any of the rest of the forum (not to mention the legends of the Superstitions), are still lurking in your keyboard. Are we to assume you have spent the last thirty or forty years coming to your own conclusions? Perhaps you would like to type out a small resume concerning your own background. Peter, as well as the rest of us, has put a lot of information into this forum. It has been subject to the criticism, acceptance and occasional ridicule of the members. Those members look to Peter, Aurum, Azmulla, Wiz, S.C., Zentull, Rosebud and others for their comments on the various subjects that come up. That places them in a position of expertise, at least in the minds of many of us, I am sure.
It is always good to hear the ideas and conclusions of newcomers to the forum. We will look forward to reading yours.
Joe Ribaudo "jose"
Welcome to the forum.
I will not list the vast number of legends that have been lifted from that catagory into fact, as I am sure you may have heard of a few of them yourself. Due to the many stories that surround the Superstitions and the LDM, there are many leads to follow and many old trails to find.
Peter is one of the few people alive today who has taken the time, spent the money and found his "place" in the Superstition Mountains. His knowledge of history and "Legend" goes beyond the small area we are all enjoying. He may be "wedded to his sense of place", but he did not get there by reading a few posts on this forum and buying a few books. A lifetime of research and experience (not just on the LDM legend) has brought him to his (informed) conclusions.
Your own qualifications to judge Peter, or any of the rest of the forum (not to mention the legends of the Superstitions), are still lurking in your keyboard. Are we to assume you have spent the last thirty or forty years coming to your own conclusions? Perhaps you would like to type out a small resume concerning your own background.
Peter, as well as the rest of us, has put a lot of information into this forum. It has been subject to the criticism, acceptance and occasional ridicule of the members. Those members look to Peter, Aurum, Azmulla, Wiz, S.C., Zentull, Rosebud and others for their comments on the various subjects that come up. That places them in a position of expertise, at least in the minds of many of us, I am sure.It is always good to hear the ideas and conclusions of newcomers to the forum. We will look forward to reading yours.
Joe Ribaudo "jose"
-
relacion32
- Greenhorn
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 5:47 am
- Location: flagstaff
ok hi joe-i must first apologise profusely for naming you as jose and not joe.it wasnt intentional just the product of a quick and interrupted session on this computer.i will try to answer your questions as honestly as time permits.
my own level of expertise? i would question whether or not that would be the correct description but none the more for that my answer would be none. i didnt (or didnt intend to) describe myself as an "expert" grade 1 grade2 or any other grade.my observations were based on the subject matter of this post and the writings therein.the arguments concerning the directions taken by dearing and 2 soldiers are to me pure speculation as of course they must be. its not that so much that concerns me. the point is without any proof that said episodes took place is there any point to discuss which directions or trails or by what manner these characters might or might not have travelled?.
you ask have i taken 40 years to form my conclusions?well im 53 years of age-my earliest interest concerning the legend was roughly at the age of 12 so i guess the answers yes.have i looked for the mine? no have i been into the supes? yes many times-not that that fact is either meaningful or important. have i read the available literature? have i delved deeper? have i researched? yes all of these.do i know where the mine is? of course not?do i even believe it exists? i think its extremely doubtful.do i believe the (in my opinion) countless fabricated tales ? no.
what are my qualifications you ask? well i guess the same qualifications that maybe the members of this forum have i.e an inquisitive mind....a boyish sense of adventure maybe...and i hope the abuility to survey the so called evidence and form a reasonabley intelligent opinion. there is a line from rudyards kiplings poem"if" which im sure you are familar with which reads "if you can dream and not make dreams your master"which i feel is the key to researching any legend such as this.its nice to think that things happened in the way dutchman \authors portray events its nice to think that faces cut in rock pont to untold riches..its fun to think untold wealth lie just under ones feet etc butr i suggest the reality is somewhat different. my opinion is the dutchman is a total fabrication at least the "richest mine in world etc" if youve been into superstitions which i presume uyou have then u know that there are plenty of clues for everyone to suit every persuasion every interpretatoion every tale. its a case of seeing what you want to see isnt it? thanks
my own level of expertise? i would question whether or not that would be the correct description but none the more for that my answer would be none. i didnt (or didnt intend to) describe myself as an "expert" grade 1 grade2 or any other grade.my observations were based on the subject matter of this post and the writings therein.the arguments concerning the directions taken by dearing and 2 soldiers are to me pure speculation as of course they must be. its not that so much that concerns me. the point is without any proof that said episodes took place is there any point to discuss which directions or trails or by what manner these characters might or might not have travelled?.
you ask have i taken 40 years to form my conclusions?well im 53 years of age-my earliest interest concerning the legend was roughly at the age of 12 so i guess the answers yes.have i looked for the mine? no have i been into the supes? yes many times-not that that fact is either meaningful or important. have i read the available literature? have i delved deeper? have i researched? yes all of these.do i know where the mine is? of course not?do i even believe it exists? i think its extremely doubtful.do i believe the (in my opinion) countless fabricated tales ? no.
what are my qualifications you ask? well i guess the same qualifications that maybe the members of this forum have i.e an inquisitive mind....a boyish sense of adventure maybe...and i hope the abuility to survey the so called evidence and form a reasonabley intelligent opinion. there is a line from rudyards kiplings poem"if" which im sure you are familar with which reads "if you can dream and not make dreams your master"which i feel is the key to researching any legend such as this.its nice to think that things happened in the way dutchman \authors portray events its nice to think that faces cut in rock pont to untold riches..its fun to think untold wealth lie just under ones feet etc butr i suggest the reality is somewhat different. my opinion is the dutchman is a total fabrication at least the "richest mine in world etc" if youve been into superstitions which i presume uyou have then u know that there are plenty of clues for everyone to suit every persuasion every interpretatoion every tale. its a case of seeing what you want to see isnt it? thanks
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Pointless Discussion?
32,
There are many of us who think there is some truth in the stories of mines, treasures and caches in the Superstition Mountains. The point of my discussion with (mostly) Peter on the route of the Two Soldiers, was to look at the story from another perspective. Since no one has located their mine using the directions originally passed down from Ely and Bark, it could be assumed that something is wrong with the story. I submitted a theory that their route from Fort McDowell to the Silver King, may have been what was wrong. The little known fact that there was a Salt River crossing, directly south of the fort gave the theory some logic. A route that would take them through the Goldfield Mountains is not without merit. On page 54 of The Lost Dutchman Mine, by Sims Ely, the Apache Trail route is mentioned: "They had decided against taking the circuitous Apache Trail, which paralleled the Salt River to the high ground above fish Creek...." Bark's notes (overall) disagree with his partner's story. At one time, Ely's book was the most respected authority on the LDM. Sims is no longer popular with modern Dutch Hunters, unless he agrees with someones point of view. If we use Bark's notes as the authority and truth, we will end up on a trail long known, and traveled from end to end by many knowledgeable searchers. Since none of them found the soldiers mine, we might want to question the truth of that story. Perhaps it is time to take another look at the Ely story. The whole point is to look at other possibilities to a well worn story. Not that I am right or Peter is wrong, just that it may not have happened in the way most of us believe.
Because we choose to spend time, effort and money on our dreams, does not mean they are our masters. You have mastered this particular dream, and lost it. For you, that may be a good thing, but it remains a fascinating hobby, and (sometimes) dream for the rest of us.
Perhaps you have focused on the wrong line. Remember, "yours is the Earth and everything that's in it."
I took no offense to the "jose" moniker.
Joe Ribaudo
There are many of us who think there is some truth in the stories of mines, treasures and caches in the Superstition Mountains. The point of my discussion with (mostly) Peter on the route of the Two Soldiers, was to look at the story from another perspective. Since no one has located their mine using the directions originally passed down from Ely and Bark, it could be assumed that something is wrong with the story. I submitted a theory that their route from Fort McDowell to the Silver King, may have been what was wrong. The little known fact that there was a Salt River crossing, directly south of the fort gave the theory some logic. A route that would take them through the Goldfield Mountains is not without merit. On page 54 of The Lost Dutchman Mine, by Sims Ely, the Apache Trail route is mentioned: "They had decided against taking the circuitous Apache Trail, which paralleled the Salt River to the high ground above fish Creek...." Bark's notes (overall) disagree with his partner's story. At one time, Ely's book was the most respected authority on the LDM. Sims is no longer popular with modern Dutch Hunters, unless he agrees with someones point of view. If we use Bark's notes as the authority and truth, we will end up on a trail long known, and traveled from end to end by many knowledgeable searchers. Since none of them found the soldiers mine, we might want to question the truth of that story. Perhaps it is time to take another look at the Ely story. The whole point is to look at other possibilities to a well worn story. Not that I am right or Peter is wrong, just that it may not have happened in the way most of us believe.
Because we choose to spend time, effort and money on our dreams, does not mean they are our masters. You have mastered this particular dream, and lost it. For you, that may be a good thing, but it remains a fascinating hobby, and (sometimes) dream for the rest of us.
Perhaps you have focused on the wrong line. Remember, "yours is the Earth and everything that's in it."
I took no offense to the "jose" moniker.
Joe Ribaudo
-
relacion32
- Greenhorn
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 5:47 am
- Location: flagstaff
joe
as regards the soldiers travels etc my point was that until the existence iof said soldiers is confirmed speculation regarding their route etc is meaningless.youve mentioned elys work .but remember this is the same ely who included the doc thorne tale in his writings. he either at best genuinely thought the thorne story was valid(which if so casts a cloud of doubt on the rest of his "evidence" or he included the thorne episode purely to give weight to his story. i tend to believe the latter.and isnt this the problem? its unfair to single out ely when most if not all dutchman authors are dishonest(in the literary sense)i remember tom kollenborn making the comment some years ago when asked about the dutchman mine. i believe he replied "theres no proof to say it doesnt exist and none to say it does"if only authors were as honest.
as it seems obligatory (and i know i Started it lol) to quote from kipling..... how about "if you can be lied about... but not deal in lies"
as regards the soldiers travels etc my point was that until the existence iof said soldiers is confirmed speculation regarding their route etc is meaningless.youve mentioned elys work .but remember this is the same ely who included the doc thorne tale in his writings. he either at best genuinely thought the thorne story was valid(which if so casts a cloud of doubt on the rest of his "evidence" or he included the thorne episode purely to give weight to his story. i tend to believe the latter.and isnt this the problem? its unfair to single out ely when most if not all dutchman authors are dishonest(in the literary sense)i remember tom kollenborn making the comment some years ago when asked about the dutchman mine. i believe he replied "theres no proof to say it doesnt exist and none to say it does"if only authors were as honest.
as it seems obligatory (and i know i Started it lol) to quote from kipling..... how about "if you can be lied about... but not deal in lies"
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
"Something lost behind the Ranges"
32
Was speculation on the location of Troy meaningless when it was considered a legend (based in fiction) until it was found in May of 2000? As I said before, many legends have become fact, despite the doubts of those without dreams. "And Joseph dreamed a dream, and he told it his brethren and they hated him the more." Without his dreams, Franck Goddio would be an unknown marine archaeologist. Because of his dreams, he has become a legend.
You might want to reread Kipling's poem. You have taken one line from a poem that says much more than the single line. "If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you..." might indicate that you should not give up your dreams when you are scorned by those around you.
There is no indication that Sims Ely was ever a liar. He was a well respected Arizona pioneer. Perhaps there are modern day Dutch Hunters, that have put in more time and effort than Sims and Jim Bark did and have more truth in their writings. Ely's book was published after his death. More than a few people have speculated that there were things in that book, that he did not write. Many authors have put stories from other sources in their books. That does not mean they are vouching for the truth of those legends.
Your misquote of Kipling is taken out of contex and seems inappropriate in relation to the preceding comments in your last post. I have been told in the past that I am a little dense and that may be the case here.
You have spent a lot of time learning about the LDM. Seems like a waste of time for someone who has made so many trips into the Superstitions and never looked for it. Do you remember where Tom Kollenborn was when he made the comment you quoted? Was that before or after he wrote his books?
Having someone who does not believe in the legends and yet knows them so well, brings a healthy dose of informed doubt into our conversations. Defending one's position (well) only makes it stronger.
Thanks for the give and take,
Joe Ribaudo
Was speculation on the location of Troy meaningless when it was considered a legend (based in fiction) until it was found in May of 2000? As I said before, many legends have become fact, despite the doubts of those without dreams. "And Joseph dreamed a dream, and he told it his brethren and they hated him the more." Without his dreams, Franck Goddio would be an unknown marine archaeologist. Because of his dreams, he has become a legend.
You might want to reread Kipling's poem. You have taken one line from a poem that says much more than the single line. "If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you..." might indicate that you should not give up your dreams when you are scorned by those around you.
There is no indication that Sims Ely was ever a liar. He was a well respected Arizona pioneer. Perhaps there are modern day Dutch Hunters, that have put in more time and effort than Sims and Jim Bark did and have more truth in their writings. Ely's book was published after his death. More than a few people have speculated that there were things in that book, that he did not write. Many authors have put stories from other sources in their books. That does not mean they are vouching for the truth of those legends.
Your misquote of Kipling is taken out of contex and seems inappropriate in relation to the preceding comments in your last post. I have been told in the past that I am a little dense and that may be the case here.
You have spent a lot of time learning about the LDM. Seems like a waste of time for someone who has made so many trips into the Superstitions and never looked for it. Do you remember where Tom Kollenborn was when he made the comment you quoted? Was that before or after he wrote his books?
Having someone who does not believe in the legends and yet knows them so well, brings a healthy dose of informed doubt into our conversations. Defending one's position (well) only makes it stronger.
Thanks for the give and take,
Joe Ribaudo
-
relacion32
- Greenhorn
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 5:47 am
- Location: flagstaff
have no fear joe i never thought you were dense -quite the opposite although i doubt that my opinion counts for very much here. your compaerison of the troy legend isnt in the same league-it is but barely comparable. if you read back to an earlier post discussing this you will see a contribution from a member who explained it far more eloquently than i could hope for. opart of his posting i recall said something safter the fashion of _"surely we are not comparing the writings of the greek poets with the ramblings of storm glover and others"
as regards kollenborns statement he uttered it during a half hour documentary screened a few years ago . if you would like to know the title date etc if you give me time ill find the details for youas im sure its on tape somewhere in the house.as i recall he said he had no belief in said mine in his"ride through time"also. its some time since ive read it so i stand correctef d if this is in error.
sims ely for sure was a respected figure.he was also of course as u know a newspaperman.as for the claim that ely didnt write parts of his book well of course anythings possible but its his name on the cover the credits etc so until PROVED otherwise surely one must assume ely was the author.and ely did lie on a few occasions in his book.one other example that springs to mind is his flat mountain episode lying or misleading?its a thin line.
my intention wasnt to pour scorn on antybodys dreams and if my post gave that impression i apologise.as for dreamers yes of course every invention every action every deed must of course begin with a thought(or dream) and while its relatively simple to catalogue a list of "dreamers" who in the passage of time were proved to be genuine visionaries one tends to ignore the even greater list of dreamers who were proved to be exactly that/
my quote was i feel appropriate(albeit in a loose way)but everybody has their own opinion.thats fine.dreamings fine bt me joe --i do it all the time thanks
as regards kollenborns statement he uttered it during a half hour documentary screened a few years ago . if you would like to know the title date etc if you give me time ill find the details for youas im sure its on tape somewhere in the house.as i recall he said he had no belief in said mine in his"ride through time"also. its some time since ive read it so i stand correctef d if this is in error.
sims ely for sure was a respected figure.he was also of course as u know a newspaperman.as for the claim that ely didnt write parts of his book well of course anythings possible but its his name on the cover the credits etc so until PROVED otherwise surely one must assume ely was the author.and ely did lie on a few occasions in his book.one other example that springs to mind is his flat mountain episode lying or misleading?its a thin line.
my intention wasnt to pour scorn on antybodys dreams and if my post gave that impression i apologise.as for dreamers yes of course every invention every action every deed must of course begin with a thought(or dream) and while its relatively simple to catalogue a list of "dreamers" who in the passage of time were proved to be genuine visionaries one tends to ignore the even greater list of dreamers who were proved to be exactly that/
my quote was i feel appropriate(albeit in a loose way)but everybody has their own opinion.thats fine.dreamings fine bt me joe --i do it all the time thanks
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Equal?
32,
Nice spin on my comments, but placing the finding of Troy and the LDM on an equal footing was not the message.
Storm, Glover and Ely were (for the most part) passing along stories that had come to them through other sources. That follows a pattern that goes beyond the Bible, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Greek Poets. The weight of the subject matter aside, the manner of gathering their content from other sources remains a constant. The truth or falsity of that content, remains in the personal beliefs of each individual reader.
If by saying Sims was a "newspaperman" you are attempting to put him in the same catagory as someone like P.C. Bicknell, that might be a stretch. Ely was (among other things) owner and editor of the Arizona Republic. He was no lightweight in Arizona history, and was highly respected. It is only today that he is being called a liar and I assume horse thief is soon to follow.
I am more than comfortable putting my real name at the bottom of this post.
Joe Ribaudo
Nice spin on my comments, but placing the finding of Troy and the LDM on an equal footing was not the message.
Storm, Glover and Ely were (for the most part) passing along stories that had come to them through other sources. That follows a pattern that goes beyond the Bible, The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Greek Poets. The weight of the subject matter aside, the manner of gathering their content from other sources remains a constant. The truth or falsity of that content, remains in the personal beliefs of each individual reader.
If by saying Sims was a "newspaperman" you are attempting to put him in the same catagory as someone like P.C. Bicknell, that might be a stretch. Ely was (among other things) owner and editor of the Arizona Republic. He was no lightweight in Arizona history, and was highly respected. It is only today that he is being called a liar and I assume horse thief is soon to follow.
I am more than comfortable putting my real name at the bottom of this post.
Joe Ribaudo
-
relacion32
- Greenhorn
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 5:47 am
- Location: flagstaff
ELY as you quite rightly say was a highly respected man.but.... (and im not intent on casting slurs on elys or anybody elses nature) the attaining of high office in any sphere doesnt necessarilly ordain that individual with a high degree of integrity. in my opinion onre glance at this great countries leaders would testify to that.(howls of dissaproval) it is true that ely collected and ammassed tales "facts" etc.you say the truth or falsehoods are in the mind of the reader but truth surely is absolute. the tales ely related were either true or they werent. as far as im concerned ely presented them as fact.it wasnt a book written in the style and manner of dobies works who freely admitted his tales were part fact mostly fiction. i doubt if the total amount of hard truthful evidence regarding this subject would fill a complete page .....well maybe 2.
i must admit to being somewhat puzzled by your final remark stating that you were comfortable stating your real name on the your posting.methinks it might be something more than the bland statement it claims tobe lol
i must admit to being somewhat puzzled by your final remark stating that you were comfortable stating your real name on the your posting.methinks it might be something more than the bland statement it claims tobe lol
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Fiction
32,
Ely makes it clear that his book is a seventy-five year history of the accumulated history of the LDM. He also makes it clear that his research, which included many first hand stories, convinced Bark and himself that the LDM did exist. Any time you relate a story that you were told by someone else, rather than personal experience, it is subject to skepticism.
The reliability of the person telling you the story can always lend weight to the truth others will perceive. Ely labels the "Doc Thorne Mine" as "legend" in his book, and although he does present the story as if he knows the true facts, he gives no sources. Since he was not there
and gives us no reliable source for his story, it would be safe to assume he is presenting it to lend weight to the existance of the LDM. He does state that the stories that were circulating were found in " newspaper literature of ancient and hearsay origin about Dr. Thorne....".
Since Ely gives no source for his own take on this story, we are left with the possibility that he was lying or just telling the story as it had been told to him. You may wish to conclude he was a liar (Peter taught me how to spell that) or that he was relating the story he was told and believed.
You believe he was a liar and I believe there is no evidence in his history to support that conclusion.
At this point in time there is more evidence concerning Ely's veracity and reliability than, say, your own or mine.
You will notice that Ely gives sources for many of the stories in The Lost Dutchman Mine. That does not mean that he is vouching for the truth of each source, only that he is letting us know where he got the story. We can than decide for ourselves the believability of the source and the story. He does make it fairly obvious that he believes it is the truth. Since he or Bark were face to face with many of his sources, he may have a better feel for the truth of the matter than we, who are so far removed from the times and events.
Truth in these matters is not "absolute", until tangible proof is presented and verified. The truth of "legends" remains fluid in the minds of each individual reader until something convinces them one way or the other. That's why they are called "legends" rather than "history".
Joe Ribaudo
Ely makes it clear that his book is a seventy-five year history of the accumulated history of the LDM. He also makes it clear that his research, which included many first hand stories, convinced Bark and himself that the LDM did exist. Any time you relate a story that you were told by someone else, rather than personal experience, it is subject to skepticism.
The reliability of the person telling you the story can always lend weight to the truth others will perceive. Ely labels the "Doc Thorne Mine" as "legend" in his book, and although he does present the story as if he knows the true facts, he gives no sources. Since he was not there
and gives us no reliable source for his story, it would be safe to assume he is presenting it to lend weight to the existance of the LDM. He does state that the stories that were circulating were found in " newspaper literature of ancient and hearsay origin about Dr. Thorne....".
Since Ely gives no source for his own take on this story, we are left with the possibility that he was lying or just telling the story as it had been told to him. You may wish to conclude he was a liar (Peter taught me how to spell that) or that he was relating the story he was told and believed.
You believe he was a liar and I believe there is no evidence in his history to support that conclusion.
At this point in time there is more evidence concerning Ely's veracity and reliability than, say, your own or mine.
You will notice that Ely gives sources for many of the stories in The Lost Dutchman Mine. That does not mean that he is vouching for the truth of each source, only that he is letting us know where he got the story. We can than decide for ourselves the believability of the source and the story. He does make it fairly obvious that he believes it is the truth. Since he or Bark were face to face with many of his sources, he may have a better feel for the truth of the matter than we, who are so far removed from the times and events.
Truth in these matters is not "absolute", until tangible proof is presented and verified. The truth of "legends" remains fluid in the minds of each individual reader until something convinces them one way or the other. That's why they are called "legends" rather than "history".
Joe Ribaudo
TERMS
Joe,
I believe the term is "perveyor of untruths" and not liar. A liar telss a falsehood while knowing what is said is false. A perveyor of untruths tells an untruth, but may not necessarily know that it is false.
There are so many myths and mis-spoken stories that what is true and false are mixed in the stew. One must taste all to get a chance to hear what little truth exists.
What is needed is revival of the lost souls that lived during that time to hear closer to what they thought was true. Even then we would hear some falsehoods.
What is needed are excursions to test the theories and new hypotheses. Who has the latest success or near success. Failure is not a word in our vocabulary (?)!
I believe the term is "perveyor of untruths" and not liar. A liar telss a falsehood while knowing what is said is false. A perveyor of untruths tells an untruth, but may not necessarily know that it is false.
There are so many myths and mis-spoken stories that what is true and false are mixed in the stew. One must taste all to get a chance to hear what little truth exists.
What is needed is revival of the lost souls that lived during that time to hear closer to what they thought was true. Even then we would hear some falsehoods.
What is needed are excursions to test the theories and new hypotheses. Who has the latest success or near success. Failure is not a word in our vocabulary (?)!
Charlie
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Another Voice?
Charlie,
Where have you been? Here I thought 32 and I were the only ones left alive, and up pops his long lost brother. I will not disagree with your statements. Perhaps 32 will come back into the fray. I am all out of Ely defence, but I am only guessing that his ancestors are English. Lets go back to the Two Soldiers route or Apache suppositions.
Joe Ribaudo
Where have you been? Here I thought 32 and I were the only ones left alive, and up pops his long lost brother.
I will not disagree with your statements. Perhaps 32 will come back into the fray. I am all out of Ely defence, but I am only guessing that his ancestors are English. Lets go back to the Two Soldiers route or Apache suppositions.Joe Ribaudo
-
relacion32
- Greenhorn
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 5:47 am
- Location: flagstaff
hi joe
how about yours and oyhers thoughts on the "peralta racetrack" tale?and also maybe elys statement"the spanish called the range sierra de la espuma"
as an aside and only remotely concerned with the subject-are you aware that sims{[id like to think its ok for me to call him by his christian name)wrote a short article fior the illustrated london news sept 1935 in the course of which he wrote of "certain things he knew" which convinced him that he knew the identity of jack the ripper no less(a legendary serial killer who practised his trade in the east end of london 1889)ho hum
long lost brother? hmm sorry no but i have a niece in baltimore that i havent seen for some considerable period of time .
how about yours and oyhers thoughts on the "peralta racetrack" tale?and also maybe elys statement"the spanish called the range sierra de la espuma"
as an aside and only remotely concerned with the subject-are you aware that sims{[id like to think its ok for me to call him by his christian name)wrote a short article fior the illustrated london news sept 1935 in the course of which he wrote of "certain things he knew" which convinced him that he knew the identity of jack the ripper no less(a legendary serial killer who practised his trade in the east end of london 1889)ho hum
long lost brother? hmm sorry no but i have a niece in baltimore that i havent seen for some considerable period of time
.Where to Race?
32,
Where do you believe the race track is/was? I heard someone say it was found in LaBarge. Where?
I would propose west of Tortilla Flat, not far from the creek. That is also where I would put the Peralta base camp. Not the day camps or work camps at or near each mine.
If I get time in October, I may want to look at that area near Tortilla Creek.
Where do you believe the race track is/was? I heard someone say it was found in LaBarge. Where?
I would propose west of Tortilla Flat, not far from the creek. That is also where I would put the Peralta base camp. Not the day camps or work camps at or near each mine.
If I get time in October, I may want to look at that area near Tortilla Creek.
Charlie