Walker,
The Jesuits in the New World were likely the best educated men to be found. Although Father Rojas was born in Mexico, he was from a pure Spanish family. The National University of Mexico was founded in 1551.
Mistakes in spelling by educated men are (as Azmula has said) not unknown, however, the Jesuits were not educated on the same level as, say, the Peraltas. Poor spelling is often caused in educated people by lack of use, rather than poor education. Azmula knows the education and level of use of the written word by Father Rojas. I am sure that in Azmula's research he has seen the writings of Father Rojas. The first question that might come to mind is: How many times did Rojas mistakenly use the letter "B" in place of the letter "V"?
This, for me, is one of the arguments against the Jesuits (and Father Rojas) being the creators of the Stone Maps.
Respectfully,
Joe
Jesuit treasure of the Superstitions
The Jesuit Treasure
DELETED
Last edited by azmula on Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Peralta/Rojas Connection
Azmula,
Are you saying that there can be no connection between the Peralta family and the Jesuits, in particular, Father Rojas? Have you seen some kind of documentation showing that Father Rojas was not of pure blood lines? It would be an unlikely thing, considering the times, for Rojas to be of mixed blood. You may need to look into the habits (no pun intended) of Spanish entrance into the Church and Army of that era. Have you seen some marraige records of a family as "prominent" as the Rojas family, involved in mixed unions?
[Azmula]
"My point here is that Castillan Spanish was lost in New Spain over the centuries and replaced with Espanol, a more relaxed, less structured language used by nobility as well as Jesuit Priests. Which endures today!"
Is there a source for the time that this slide of "Castillian Spanish" began to take place? Is there some indication in the writing of Father Rojas that he wrote in "Espanol"? Is there some source that indicates that the Jesuits had regressed in language, written or spoken?
Respectfully,
Joe
Are you saying that there can be no connection between the Peralta family and the Jesuits, in particular, Father Rojas? Have you seen some kind of documentation showing that Father Rojas was not of pure blood lines? It would be an unlikely thing, considering the times, for Rojas to be of mixed blood. You may need to look into the habits (no pun intended) of Spanish entrance into the Church and Army of that era. Have you seen some marraige records of a family as "prominent" as the Rojas family, involved in mixed unions?
[Azmula]
"My point here is that Castillan Spanish was lost in New Spain over the centuries and replaced with Espanol, a more relaxed, less structured language used by nobility as well as Jesuit Priests. Which endures today!"
Is there a source for the time that this slide of "Castillian Spanish" began to take place? Is there some indication in the writing of Father Rojas that he wrote in "Espanol"? Is there some source that indicates that the Jesuits had regressed in language, written or spoken?
Respectfully,
Joe
The Jesuit Treasure
DELETED
Last edited by azmula on Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Opinion
Azmula,
Sorry, I missed the part where you said it was only your "humble" opinion.
Considering the amount of research you have done, I assumed all of what you have been writing was going to be backed up by a reliable source or that you would say "this is conjecture on my part".
[Azmula]
"Rojas was a very influential name in the Church and government. But they were no more "pure Spanish" than any other of the nobility of New Spain, just read the marriage accounts of the nobility."
"I did not say that the Rojas or Peralta families were of "mixed blood", quite the opposite, they tried to insure that they married with known blood lines from within New Spain. But that applies to all of the nobility. Yes, there were mixed unions, but very infrequent. There were many Spanish - Indian "unions" (not necessarily resulting in marriage) which resulted in mixed blood prodigy who often took the name of their parents. Hint: Mexican means mixture."
Joe:
Since we were talking about the spelling problems when you brought this up, I just assumed you had some information which would explain the mistakes from a Jesuit educated priest who was sending written reports to his superiors throughout his career. As I understand you now, you have no documents showing that either family had "gone native".
I am pretty much familiar with the early Spanish obsession with maintaining a pure blood line in the nobility. IMHO, While it is possible that there was some mixed blood in the Peraltas (of our legends) it becomes less likely as we travel back to an earlier date. The same goes for the Rojas family in the era of Carlos Rojas. Not impossible, just less likely. The same thing applies to the spoken and written language. As you have said, it took centuries to make those changes.
[Azmula]
"I tried to suggest earlier in my articles the Peraltas do not come into play until the late 18th or early 19th centuries in this particular area after the Stone Maps were created."
Joe:
Would you agree that it is likely that the Peralta family's relations with the Jesuits probably goes back to a much earlier era than you have stated in your post? Do you have documentation that shows it is not likely or even possible?
[Azmula]
"Espanol is not a different language, it is more like a dialect of Spanish caused by the influences of Spanish, Yagui, Mayan, French, and English."
Joe:
If anyone doubts that you have done your homework here, the above statement proves that you have and have done a thorough job of it.
[Azmula]
"You are correct on both of your observations. 1847 is not a date, that has been a common misinterpretation of the Heart Map. What it says is .... , well let's hold that thought until we start deciphering the maps in their sequencial order.
We will discuss that interpretation as well as all of the others on the maps in future articles."
Joe:
Considering the importance of the 1847 date in the legends of the Superstitions, are you making the evidence fit your conclusions here?
That has been a common problem with those who have interpretated the Stone Maps. It throws some doubt on your conclusions when you say
"We will discuss...."
All of the above is my opinion and conjecture so, I could be wrong.
Respectfully,
Joe
Sorry, I missed the part where you said it was only your "humble" opinion.
Considering the amount of research you have done, I assumed all of what you have been writing was going to be backed up by a reliable source or that you would say "this is conjecture on my part".
[Azmula]
"Rojas was a very influential name in the Church and government. But they were no more "pure Spanish" than any other of the nobility of New Spain, just read the marriage accounts of the nobility."
"I did not say that the Rojas or Peralta families were of "mixed blood", quite the opposite, they tried to insure that they married with known blood lines from within New Spain. But that applies to all of the nobility. Yes, there were mixed unions, but very infrequent. There were many Spanish - Indian "unions" (not necessarily resulting in marriage) which resulted in mixed blood prodigy who often took the name of their parents. Hint: Mexican means mixture."
Joe:
Since we were talking about the spelling problems when you brought this up, I just assumed you had some information which would explain the mistakes from a Jesuit educated priest who was sending written reports to his superiors throughout his career. As I understand you now, you have no documents showing that either family had "gone native".
I am pretty much familiar with the early Spanish obsession with maintaining a pure blood line in the nobility. IMHO, While it is possible that there was some mixed blood in the Peraltas (of our legends) it becomes less likely as we travel back to an earlier date. The same goes for the Rojas family in the era of Carlos Rojas. Not impossible, just less likely. The same thing applies to the spoken and written language. As you have said, it took centuries to make those changes.
[Azmula]
"I tried to suggest earlier in my articles the Peraltas do not come into play until the late 18th or early 19th centuries in this particular area after the Stone Maps were created."
Joe:
Would you agree that it is likely that the Peralta family's relations with the Jesuits probably goes back to a much earlier era than you have stated in your post? Do you have documentation that shows it is not likely or even possible?
[Azmula]
"Espanol is not a different language, it is more like a dialect of Spanish caused by the influences of Spanish, Yagui, Mayan, French, and English."
Joe:
If anyone doubts that you have done your homework here, the above statement proves that you have and have done a thorough job of it.
[Azmula]
"You are correct on both of your observations. 1847 is not a date, that has been a common misinterpretation of the Heart Map. What it says is .... , well let's hold that thought until we start deciphering the maps in their sequencial order.
We will discuss that interpretation as well as all of the others on the maps in future articles."
Joe:
Considering the importance of the 1847 date in the legends of the Superstitions, are you making the evidence fit your conclusions here?
That has been a common problem with those who have interpretated the Stone Maps. It throws some doubt on your conclusions when you say
"We will discuss...."
All of the above is my opinion and conjecture so, I could be wrong.
Respectfully,
Joe
Re: Opinion
Joe, shouldn't we wait to hear what Azmula's conclusions are before throwing doubt on them?Joe Ribaudo wrote:Considering the importance of the 1847 date in the legends of the Superstitions, are you making the evidence fit your conclusions here?
That has been a common problem with those who have interpretated the Stone Maps. It throws some doubt on your conclusions when you say
"We will discuss...."
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Conclusions
Hello Wiz,
The first part of my statement is a question. The second deals with his promise to discuss the interpretation of the numbers, 1847. I state at the end of my post that my comments are all conjecture and opinion and that I could be wrong. He makes no such statements in his articles.
Azmula has asked for some interest, and questions. I am trying to supply both. Would you have me just nod my head and agree with everything he writes? If that is what he wants, he can get it at his own kitchen table.
We are being fed this information a bite at a time and he is disapointed at the lack of response. You might consider asking a few questions of your own. I assume we are getting this preview of his book in an effort to get the hard questions asked prior to printing. Smart move.
Respectfully,
Joe
The first part of my statement is a question. The second deals with his promise to discuss the interpretation of the numbers, 1847. I state at the end of my post that my comments are all conjecture and opinion and that I could be wrong. He makes no such statements in his articles.
Azmula has asked for some interest, and questions. I am trying to supply both. Would you have me just nod my head and agree with everything he writes? If that is what he wants, he can get it at his own kitchen table.
We are being fed this information a bite at a time and he is disapointed at the lack of response. You might consider asking a few questions of your own. I assume we are getting this preview of his book in an effort to get the hard questions asked prior to printing. Smart move.
Respectfully,
Joe
The Jesuit Treasure
DELETED
Last edited by azmula on Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Participation
Peter,
It would appear it is easier for you to understand what Azmula is asking for here. I will assume that your last post responds to his request for more participation, and mine have not.
[Joe]
"Considering the importance of the 1847 date in the legends of the Superstitions, are you making the evidence fit your conclusions here?
That has been a common problem with those who have interpretated the Stone Maps. It throws some doubt on your conclusions when you say
"We will discuss...."
All of the above is my opinion and conjecture so, I could be wrong."
I thought my first question could have been answered without giving away any secrets or any information scheduled for future articles or the book.
The doubt which is caused by discussing the interpretations of the 1847 numbers has to do with my (possibly erronious) conclusions that Azmula has not reached the end of the trail yet.
Azmula,
When I have praised you for your work, I was sincere. It is more than obvious that you have gone the "extra mile". I meant no offense. You have done a great job with your articles and I look forward to the book.
I will have no further comments on this subject.
Respectfully,
Joe
It would appear it is easier for you to understand what Azmula is asking for here. I will assume that your last post responds to his request for more participation, and mine have not.
[Joe]
"Considering the importance of the 1847 date in the legends of the Superstitions, are you making the evidence fit your conclusions here?
That has been a common problem with those who have interpretated the Stone Maps. It throws some doubt on your conclusions when you say
"We will discuss...."
All of the above is my opinion and conjecture so, I could be wrong."
I thought my first question could have been answered without giving away any secrets or any information scheduled for future articles or the book.
The doubt which is caused by discussing the interpretations of the 1847 numbers has to do with my (possibly erronious) conclusions that Azmula has not reached the end of the trail yet.
Azmula,
When I have praised you for your work, I was sincere. It is more than obvious that you have gone the "extra mile". I meant no offense. You have done a great job with your articles and I look forward to the book.
I will have no further comments on this subject.
Respectfully,
Joe
Azmula since you asked for some feedback about how you can improve your writings, and now that I know you are doing a book, here are some of my suggestions.
Explain the maps in much more detail, certainly at least the horse map. I can understand how you would want to keep some details to yourself. However if you want people to pay good money to buy a book you had better be able to make a good case for fully solving and explaining at least one map. The horse map would seem to be the best one as per your theory it only gets you to the Superstitions. Thus, you would not be giving away the store to fully explain this one. As to what remains unexplained in this map - why is Santa Fe ignored? I still cannot find a Spanish to English translator that lists the word "bereda" but that could just be me. Show me on a regular map how that crooked tail corresponds to the relatively straight San Pedro (granted "tail" could be synonymous river but they could just as easily carved in a straighter tail), what do the numbers mean? Etc.
Also, a key point of you theory seems to be that the priests were using a codified SYSTEM to draw their maps. In this system other Jesuits could use the maps because they knew the system, whereas non-Jesuits couldn't. That being the case, where are the other map sets that use this system and therefor help prove your theory? Specifically, show your readers other Jesuit maps that use more than just the same symbols for treasure, mine, etc. For example - show us some maps that are in stone, carved to the same depth, done from the same era, carved in a similar amount of detail and style, are in a set, have a heart section, use animal anatomy as reference points etc. In otherwords if there was a SYSTEM for making coded treasure maps there should be other map sets done in that same SYSTEM. As it is, AFAIK, this is only a single isolated map set that looks like no other map set on earth.
My $.02 is that such details would make the book more convincing and interesting too. Then again I am not any sort of Jesuit or stone map historian. I am just a guy who enjoys a good mystery story.
Explain the maps in much more detail, certainly at least the horse map. I can understand how you would want to keep some details to yourself. However if you want people to pay good money to buy a book you had better be able to make a good case for fully solving and explaining at least one map. The horse map would seem to be the best one as per your theory it only gets you to the Superstitions. Thus, you would not be giving away the store to fully explain this one. As to what remains unexplained in this map - why is Santa Fe ignored? I still cannot find a Spanish to English translator that lists the word "bereda" but that could just be me. Show me on a regular map how that crooked tail corresponds to the relatively straight San Pedro (granted "tail" could be synonymous river but they could just as easily carved in a straighter tail), what do the numbers mean? Etc.
Also, a key point of you theory seems to be that the priests were using a codified SYSTEM to draw their maps. In this system other Jesuits could use the maps because they knew the system, whereas non-Jesuits couldn't. That being the case, where are the other map sets that use this system and therefor help prove your theory? Specifically, show your readers other Jesuit maps that use more than just the same symbols for treasure, mine, etc. For example - show us some maps that are in stone, carved to the same depth, done from the same era, carved in a similar amount of detail and style, are in a set, have a heart section, use animal anatomy as reference points etc. In otherwords if there was a SYSTEM for making coded treasure maps there should be other map sets done in that same SYSTEM. As it is, AFAIK, this is only a single isolated map set that looks like no other map set on earth.
My $.02 is that such details would make the book more convincing and interesting too. Then again I am not any sort of Jesuit or stone map historian. I am just a guy who enjoys a good mystery story.
The Jesuit Treasure of the Superstition Mountains
DELETED
Last edited by azmula on Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ya Ho, Greetings and How-Dee Doos to All LDMers, yesterdayers, to-dayers and to-morrowers..... The Day and Time is NEAR.... for what You ask... ????? How many of you would like to take a hike? How many will sign a non-disclosure Agreement? How many of you would really like a one -time opportunity to actually be Selected and requested to be an unbiased, Observer of a Major Recovery that will take place at a time and date in the near future....If Any of You are not Men or Women of Honesty,Respect and Intergity... Do Not REPLY to this Request... Also, I would like to extend to the The Lost Dutchmans Goldmine Kudos and Thanks for the opportunity to express our views,air our throughts, and internet our very own opinions on the Lost Dutchman, the Jesuits, and the ill-fated Peraltas... If anyone thinks that they could Hold that Proverial Candle and or Shine "DEM Boots of either Men such as the cailber of Tom, Ron, or Greg.. who are just a Few of the Many who have contributed to and have dedicated a greater portion of thier lives to Preserving The Past.. For The Future. You ALL are deserving of Any and All Merits.. Nehilo... Brother LDMers.....Go Confidently-In Pursuit Of Your Dreams..
[/b]
[/b]
And all for the low, low price of...?Emanon 2 wrote:Ya Ho, Greetings and How-Dee Doos to All LDMers, yesterdayers, to-dayers and to-morrowers..... The Day and Time is NEAR.... for what You ask... ????? How many of you would like to take a hike? How many will sign a non-disclosure Agreement? How many of you would really like a one -time opportunity to actually be Selected and requested to be an unbiased, Observer of a Major Recovery that will take place at a time and date in the near future....
I apologize, that was a cheap shot. But your midway-style pitch invites skepticism. Would you like to expand on your statements?
Oh, I like the sidelong Homeric reference "Emanon". That's right up there with "Evian water". (For you non-Odyssey readers, Ulysses told the Cyclops that his name was "Noman").
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Emanon
Wiz,
Perhaps to be a little less archaic, this person may just be a fan of Dungeons and Dragons.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
Perhaps to be a little less archaic, this person may just be a fan of Dungeons and Dragons.
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
Reply to Wiz
Ya Ho, WIZ???? Are OUY involved in, any manner of WITCHCRAFT and or MAGIC....?? Can OUY really work wonders...? Or are OUY just DRIED UP, Thin or Shriveled; like a WIZEN..?? Oh well ,what's in a name...? I, had kinda hoped that OUY was of a more sutle nature.. OUY know what I mean..don't OUY..??? NO? "NEVER KICK A GIFT HORSE IN THE MOUTH"!! OH,Bye the Bye, OUY will NOT be Selected and or Requested to be an unbiased observer of any discoveries or the recoveries of ??? To think that OUY could of been an unbiased observer of WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN FOUND AND RECORDED.. There was no MONITARY solicitations to this invitation... I am already established.. OUY know what that means ...don,t ya?? ...and as for OUY retort to Homer and The One-eyed Giant Cyclops-- Opps.. Some One Stuck Me In Me One Good Eye..' thanks for the no-brainer..Wizz. I extend to OUY and Yours, have a nice day..Neheleo... Emanon 2 
[/b]
[/b]
Re: Reply to Wiz
WHEW! Where to begin!Emanon 2 wrote:Ya Ho, WIZ???? Are OUY involved in, any manner of WITCHCRAFT and or MAGIC....?? Can OUY really work wonders...? Or are OUY just DRIED UP, Thin or Shriveled; like a WIZEN..?? Oh well ,what's in a name...? I, had kinda hoped that OUY was of a more sutle nature.. OUY know what I mean..don't OUY..??? NO? "NEVER KICK A GIFT HORSE IN THE MOUTH"!! OH,Bye the Bye, OUY will NOT be Selected and or Requested to be an unbiased observer of any discoveries or the recoveries of ??? To think that OUY could of been an unbiased observer of WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN FOUND AND RECORDED.. There was no MONITARY solicitations to this invitation... I am already established.. OUY know what that means ...don,t ya?? ...and as for OUY retort to Homer and The One-eyed Giant Cyclops-- Opps.. Some One Stuck Me In Me One Good Eye..' thanks for the no-brainer..Wizz. I extend to OUY and Yours, have a nice day..Neheleo... Emanon 2
OK, we've established that:
- none but unquestioning believers need apply;
- Emanon does not check his quotes ("Never LOOK a gift horse in the mouth");
- If it's been recorded, it probably isn't in the Superstitions;
- Emanon can't take a compliment
-...and is challenged with regard to punctuation.
But it makes sense, though - it's been found AND recorded, I guess all that's left is for it to be observed.
And to think, I could have been Selected to be an unbiased observer! I coulda been a contender! *sigh* I guess I need to work on becoming more sutle. I am truly humiliated that anything as obvious as a possible scam occurred to me even briefly.
Well, thanks anyway, Emanon. Good luck observing the discovery of the stuff you've already found and recorded. And a likewise pleasant day to you and yours.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Horse or Ass Kicking
Emanon,
Perhaps you were thinking of "Never kick a tiger in the ass, without having a plan for dealing with it's teeth."
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo
Perhaps you were thinking of "Never kick a tiger in the ass, without having a plan for dealing with it's teeth."
Respectfully,
Joe Ribaudo