If Frank Alkires' story is accurate, why did Albert Schaffer disappear from sight for two years after Jacob's death? Here was a man who is said to have "had some gold claims", and yet, there is little evidence that he joined Julia in her search for the LDM. Not interested????
This "story" reeks of the "hell, I was there" syndrome.
Ely and Bark paint another picture of Julia Thomas, and it weighs heavily against the story that is now being told. What Julia Thomas became is now being mixed into the person that she seems to have been at the time of Waltz's death.
This makes one hell of a story. Why did it take so long for it to make it into print? Political Correctness?
What is the truth concerning the "Black Legion"? Do they, or did they exist? I have seen them in person, or did I? Common sense tells me I did see two members of that group. Peter claims the never existed, by that name..... I will tell that story, as an eye witness?, at some point in the future. You will have to decide if it's not another case of the "hell, I was there" syndrome.
Can anyone think of some others who were peripheral players or "claimed" experts in LDM lore, who may have added some "questionable facts" to the legend? Is a perceived fifteen minutes of fame enough reason to fabricate "facts" or even an entire story?
Frank Alkires' story, by way of Dr. Glover does not ring true for me. It only creates a number of questions. As you read the story and compare it to others, it is possible you will find a few questions of your own that will beg an answer.
This in no way questions Dr. Glover's research or honesty. I believe he has written the unvarnished "facts", as he found them.
As for "no reason to make it up", that may or may not be a "fact".
Thank you for setting the story straight concerning the Alkire account of Waltz's death. I assumed there could, in all probability, only be two people who could have been the source of that story, and one of them would have been you. I would love to read the story as Frank Alkire wrote it.
There are a few (very few) people who's word I would accept as "fact" when it comes to the history of these legends, and you are one of those people.
Thanks for taking the time to educate me, and anyone else who might not have all of the facts here.
I suppose I have placed too much faith in the Ely/Bark accounts. I always felt that they were close enough to the events and did enough research into the various stories, to supply us with a pretty fair picture of what took place, and who were the honest players in the LDM/Superstition Mountain legends. Judging their characters, from a distance of time and societal change, I feel they were men to be trusted with the task of telling the truth, as they knew it.
Frank Alkires story of the events surrounding Waltz's death would not have been a secret in the, relatively, small community of (1891) Phoenix.
It seems likely to me, that people offered money to Julia to spend a few minutes with the dying Waltz. That may have been hard for her to pass up, as it is unlikely he was aware of his surroundings. As I have said before, I doubt Waltz was saying much in the last hours of his life. It is more than likely that his lungs were full of fluid in those last hours, and he was totally focused (concious or unconcious) with forcing the smallest amount of oxygen into his lungs. That may or may not be how he died, but from the accounts of his drawn-out illness, it seems the likely scenario.
There have been a number of accounts written concerning the death of Jacob Waltz. While I have no doubts that what you have said was true, it is hard to fathom why no mention of the money changing events has ever been "hinted" at before. It's not like the "voodoo-like" atmosphere would not have made one hell of a story.
Your explanation is more than reasonable when it is applied to those citizens you speak of. It seems less reasonable when applied to those who did not have a problem with associating their own names and writings with the LDM and the Jacob Waltz story. It seems like a hard tale to pass up, especially in all of the books that were written up to now. From the description of the events, it had to be common knowledge in Phoenix.
None of this has any bearing on the truth or falsity of the story, but it does tend to raise the curiosity of inquiring minds.
I would like to add to Aurum’s comments, in only that he may have been too conservative. The stigma that has accrued to the Waltz story permeates to this day. Let me give a couple of examples, but first a bit of personal observation. The Waltz story is quite well known, and it happened in the not very distant past. Further, it happened against and as part of western history. This period of history in both time and place has captured the public imagination not only in this country, but also internationally. (I remember once when we were living in England taking a weekend drive out to a stately home for the tour (and the country pubs). As we pulled into the parking area on our left was the manor house, one the right a reconstructed western frontier fort as part of the “draw” for us tourists.)
Back to Waltz’s tale, it is a classic bit of folklore, it is very well known, it sets in a period of history seriously studied by historians, folklorists, economists, writers, etc.; one would think that the Arizona academic establishment would dine of this folklore “bonanza” in their own back yard. How many states have such a tale sitting on their doorstep? One would think there would be master’s thesis on the evolution of the tale, relationships between documented history and the tale, the psychology of the tale, its relationship to crime, etc. But, as far as I know the establishment has turned its back on one of the classic western stories.
I once posed this question to Constance Altshuler, and Connie was indignant. Somewhere around here I have her letter, but I think I can recall enough of it for our purposes. In essence she said that given all the fraud, the violence, the killings, etc. associated with it that to treat the legend seriously would only contribute to more killings, violence and fraud. That it was really quite naive of me to chide the academic establishment. When it came to the ore testing I encountered the same attitude. I had been dealing with Dr. Michael Sheridan at ASU who had been studying the geology of the Superstitions for some years. One summer I discussed the possibility of doing ore testing and he was supportive of the idea. At that time Michael had established a most respected reputation in his field and had his own cadre of graduate students. His interest in the Superstitions could be tolerated given his standing, and his field, geology, was one of the few areas that could be associated with the Superstitions and retain respectability – as it could be disassociated from the legend. The following summer when I returned to Arizona for my research I called ASU and discovered that Michael had taken a post back East (Cornell I think). So I talked with a mineralogist about the ore testing and my discussions with Dr. Sheridan. I was told that in no way would that person or the school (?) want to be associated with something associated with the Dutchman legend. Thank you very much.
I fear I have hit another invisible barrier with the pictures of Ruth’s skull. Now that there is a picture of the right side I would like to have a really good forensic pathologist look at the picture. I know the common wisdom is: Wow, what a big hole…he had his brains blown out…murdered for sure! But, such a big hole could come from animals trying to get at the brain matter could it not? I have not seen the Journal article on this picture, so perhaps this concern has been answered. But, if it has not then I must be conservative in my assessment of the photograph. Right now it is just a big hole, and since it only takes two points to determine a line, and with such a big hole it is almost impossible not to make it line up with the small hole if one wishes. Well, I have been to two forensic specialists – one with the recommendation of the other – and both have declined to get involved. I have now been referred to another man in Arizona.
So put this all together with what Aurum is talking about. Think back when the Valley was a much smaller place, when most people knew each other, when pioneer families were better known and being one held a special respect. If getting involved with the Dutchman legend today still carries stigma and caution, if some still feel that simply being involved with it could seriously hurt their reputation, what must it have been like back then? Back when often one’s reputation could make or break one in the community?
When I was writing my book some wanted me to spice it up, put in things that held more romance and imagination. The purpose of the book was to look seriously at the historicity of the legend, as I then understood it. Establishing the history and helping preserve it now remains my primary concern (in one sense and in many ways it is all that is left to me now, but that is another story.). There have been very few such attempts, Blair’s Tales of the Superstitions and Sikorsky’s Fool’s Gold are two such books – both of which I recommend. But, such works are not common and mostly the legend sinks in its own dung. As the legend sinks in the mire so does the history. I believe there are those who would like to kill the story, and if it means destroying some history to do it that is acceptable as collateral damage. Those who want to kill both the legend and the history are helped by the legend’s questionable status. If the legend continues to lack credibility, then those who try to preserve it get tarred with the same brush. I remember being at the Southwestern Museum’s library in California using my academic credentials and discussing the possibility of looking at some material for an historical society in Arizona. When they found out it was the Superstition Mountain Historical Society I nearly got chuckled out of the room.
Which brings one (me) to a final note. I must say that I am not only most grateful personally for the support shown me by members of the Historical Society, but that I am grateful for the task they have undertaken. However, and I feel it is an important however, to be successful in their endeavor they must gain and retain both respectability and respect professionally. I would suggest that when the Journal has articles in it that are all presented as being on equal footing, be it a thrice told tale or serious documented research or a personal accounting of an adventure or dinosaurs in the Superstitions (presented not in the Journal but, I am told, once in their newsletter) they compromise themselves. It takes little effort to establish categories and with a simple header identify the type of article as research, reprints, personal accounting, opinion, etc. This is done in the Journals of other local historical societies, and when one picks up one of their journals just seeing the headings speaks volumes.
Your post has a cathartic ring. I sense unpleasant events in your recent past. Have you fallen victim to the sort of intellectual blacklisting you spoke of? Has your excellent book caused you trouble in other arenas? We tend to call you "Tom" or "Thomas" on this site; perhaps we should remember to include the "Dr.".
You're right about the Journal, but remember too that these are not professional academics, but volunteers and enthusiasts. They have no funding but membership and tourism, so they need to play the Dutchman card in any way possible to get people interested. Those who are truly interested and involved know the real stuff from the stories. The Journal is sort of an amalgam of things to try and reach the largest possible audience, and I think they do a pretty good job of it.
While I am no expert, it seems very unlikely that the holes in Dr. Ruth's skull were caused as a result of animal depredation. The evidence left behind by the teeth of any animal large enough to make the holes in Dr. Ruth's skull, as seen in the picture, would have been obvious to someone with the skills of Dr. Hrdlicka. That evidence would still be seen in the picture, as it exists today.
The skull is something that would be carried off by a good sized animal. All of the exterior flesh would be removed, and some attempt would be made to get to the interior of the skull. In that process the animal would have done a good deal of damage to the small bone structure in the front of the skull. It is more than possible that some of the teeth would have been chewed out of the mouth. Dr. Hrdlicka could hardly have missed such evidence from a large preditor.
Thomas Glover's post hits a chord with me as well.
There are several good points he makes. One is the issue of a hidden history of pioneer-era central Arizona just waiting to be tapped. But, "guilt by association" and ridicule have prevented many things from coming to light. This is indeed sad. It is a vicious cycle. The information perhaps out there to remove the stigma of the tale is not made available because of the "stigma" itself is involved. Academics seem especially prone to turn their head. Some of their points (as with all points) have elements of validity. But in general there is a bias against the LDM tale. The skepticism out there is incredible.
We, as readers and participants in this forum, sometimes might not understand how we (Dutch Hunters, researchers, historians, or whatever we consider ourselves to be) - and the whole LDM topic - are perceived by the rest of the world. To us, searching for a gold mine or a treasure cache is an exciting adventure – something worthy of respect. At the very least we see we are trying to solve a grand mystery. A noble cause and somehow this must be linked with “history” and - again – is worthy of respect and admiration. But, sad to say, others do not take this as seriously as we do.
Sometimes it seems to us that only a handful of people know of, or care about, the LDM and the Superstitions. And that this group has a common understanding of the issue. In reality, more people know of the tale and the lore than we think. But, they only know of the LDM the way it has been unmercifully presented in Saturday supplements, travel magazines, and various literature dealing with occult and mysterious topics. Those people – unfortunately - lump the LDM together with "wild" things like fairies, the Lost Ark, the Holy Grail, pirate treasure, Atlantis, haunted houses, the Loch Ness Monster, and UFOs. Those outside “our circle” that are more closely associated with the tale – such as the families of central Arizona pioneers – have an even different “understanding” of the issue. They are the ones who’ve seen the scams, the litigation, the ill-will, the bickering, and even violence. Thus, there is their reluctance - and distancing of themselves from the issue.
I have felt the "alienation" involved with the LDM tale more than once. It is one thing to read a book or go to a library. But, it is another to do research that involves interacting with people. Especially families directly or indirectly associated with the tale. More often than not I found myself proving to someone I was not a kook - rather than trying to determine if my sources or contacts were kooks themselves. The burden was on me - not them. The LDM tale has a bad stigma to many and some just don't want to be associated with it. I know people who have knowledge of things that they just do not want to be public knowledge. I was lucky enough to have had individuals like these to eventually share information with me - but that is as far as they wanted it to go. If one gets burned once, that is enough to keep one from letting too much out. And this has happened to some of the people or their relatives. So, naturally these families are guarded. This is indeed unfortunate. But I see their point.
Even in my personal life I keep my activities guarded. I only have a few friends that know of my interest. Only one relative (my sister) knows. The rest of my family and relatives have no idea. My everyday friends and acquaintances know nothing. No one where I work knows either. I keep it to myself because of the kidding and chiding I have received in the past. That is because of the bad perception people can have of the tale. (My older half-brother once "kidded" me about my interest many years ago. He said "If there was such a mine then the big mining companies would have already found it..." Well, I think to myself, it is a more complicated issue than that... But, he'll never see reason - so why try to argue with him... So, I haven't mentioned a thing about it to him since... ) My wife and children only have a passing interest in the LDM. But I am fortunate that they support my hobby and accept my trips to Arizona - but support it no more than some accept that husbands and fathers go elk or deer hunting from time to time.
So, I can see why some individuals do not want to be forthcoming with what we would perceive to be useful information. Nor help in trying to scientifically analyze something. Nor pursue topics - that in any other field - would be worthy of pursuing.
This comes to the issue of trying to make the Lost Dutchman tale and the lore of the Superstitions more respectable. And that is a challenge. A great challenge. And it is something we can all try to help with. Thomas pointed out all the tangents one could seriously pursue - that one would think would have already generated interest. Things like the evolution of the tale, relationships between documented history and the tale, the psychology of the tale, its relationship to crime, etc. But few pursue them. Or pursue them seriously.
I am as guilty as anyone of generating speculation in print versus fact. Some perhaps have gone to what others might consider to be extremes. And these have indeed been published in one form or another for public consumption. We all grow and develop - and I hope to think I am able to do the same. Therefore, I - and others - can make a contribution towards swaying things from stigma and ridicule to respectability. I feel I am more knowledgeable now than I was years ago. We who write all develop as writers and we individually task ourselves. Therefore, today the tangents I - or others - can choose to pursue can be more meaningful than the things that interested us earlier. I agree with Tom Glover. We can all rise to the occasion. There are indeed many topics to pursue and these can be pursued seriously. But an eye has to be kept to the general public and their perception of what is presented. The more based in fact - with less speculation - and with more objectivity, the better.
The outlook is not as bleak as it seems. Things from the past are trickling out. Not as "fast" as perhaps we might like. But they are coming to light. It is a slow process. Yet, it is not a reason to give up. Though the lack of information certainly leads to interpreting what IS known in ways that lead to healthy discussion. And sometimes this leads to "heated" discussion. But, that is what moves things forward.
True. Ruth wore dentures for 7 years before he died in the Superstitions.
But, if a rodent got into Ruths skull for the brain matter, you would think there might be gnawl marks or the teeth marks (of a wild animal type) on the hole(s).
However... This is a mystery we probably won't ever solve. And sometimes I wonder if we should.
If the death was a homicide, a can of worms might be opened up. Once open, it is hard to get them all back in. Meaning, we are discussing this and that - and who could have done what. These are (or were) real people. And homicide is a nasty and serious business. Accusations are certainly something we need to be careful of. If nothing else for showing respect to perhaps innocent individuals.
I have to say that sometimes I find this a scary issue.
A few things were mentioned I would like to comment on. One, Dr Thomas made a good point about being reluctant to go public with recollections about the story. I have known a few pioneers that never mentioned the story and I know that they had to know a few of the principals involved. Even here on the discussion board we like our privacy. Too often we get lumped in with the UFO stuff and etc. I don't want people to lump me in with being some sort of nut case, therefore I am pretty reticent about discussing my interest outside of this board. Of course the drawback is I found out my Wifes grandfather owned a number of mining claims throughout Arizona after he passed away. He hads a number of topos of the Superstitions and spent a lot of time probabkly searching for the Dutchman. we got along great but neither of us ever broached the subject over the ten years we spent together.
Secondly, Aurum mentions being in the vincinity of New River though not what time frame. A man by the name of Tex Hutto was a cook up that way for the round ups and so forth. Probably the only real larger than life cowboy I ever knew. He was retired and was living in Phoenix by the mid to late seventies. Tex was like a grandfather to me. He and his wife Ruby played cards at our house when I was a kid. I used to do the yard work and tend the garden and feed the cow dogs he always had around. Kind of a longshot, but if you met him once you knew him forever.
Last, to get back on the subject matter. I am unable to find even a single instance the afternoon sun is attributed to an individual in the know. I asked a few friends about when and where they heard it and they were as vague as we are. It bothers me how its one of those prominently published clues, but has no solid background. It seems now that we are willing to ask the right questions the resources themselves are all gone and we are left with third and fourth hand accounts.
Thanks for paying attention. Sometimes by the time I get to the end of my posts, I have forgotten what the original subject was.
That does not mean that Ruth's skull would not have borne the marks of any preditor large enough to carry his head away from the body. The remains were examined by a number of doctors prior to being sent to Ales Hrdlicka. I have never seen any indication that evidence of (large) preditor depradation was noted on the skull. I would think that if such reports exist, Greg Davis would have them and probably the originals.
Re: “I sense unpleasant events in your recent past. Have you fallen victim to the sort of intellectual blacklisting you spoke of?”
Nope – my professional fields of science, education and technology are far enough removed from Dutchman lore, as is my geographic location.
“We tend to call you "Tom" or "Thomas" on this site; perhaps we should remember to include the "Dr.". “
Re: the “Dr.” thing – I am not hung up on it. In fact, at times it makes me uncomfortable. I mean how many self-respecting desert rats call themselves “Dr.”. Doc maybe – thinking of Doc Rosecrans, or Professor – I believe I have known a few of those. Actually, I prefer Thomas.
“You're right about the Journal, but remember too that these are not professional academics, but volunteers and enthusiasts. They have no funding but membership and tourism, so they need to play the Dutchman card in any way possible to get people interested.”
Two points: 1) If they play the Dutchman card wrong, or at least too wrong, they will contribute to the demise of the legend’s history, and they will aid those that want the legend and the mountains essentially shut down. 2) What I suggested does not take any appreciable time or money. Simply categorizing an article and putting a header to it takes little effort. There is so little actually involved and so much to be gained one cannot really play the “we don’t have enough time” card, or variations of it.
One final note: AS AN ELEMENT OF RESPECT PLEASE READ ABOUT THE PASSING OF A FRIEND TO ALL…
With all the sadness in the world, it is worth reflecting on an important
person who died recently. Larry LaPrise, the man who wrote "The Hokey
Pokey”, died peacefully in his sleep at the age of 93. The most traumatic
part for his family was getting him into the coffin. They put his left leg
in. And then the trouble started...
Tom; Thank you for your suggestions regarding the format of the Journal chapters and stories. I have made copies of those items you proposed and will send them to both Jack Carlson and Lanna Mesenbrink,(Journal Editors), for possible inclusion into its format. Thank you, Greg Davis
Having never shared a desert campfire with you, I will continue to call you Dr. Glover, unless you specifically request otherwise. As you know, the title of Doctor does not come without a good deal of time, effort and sacrifice, which translates into dedication. For me, that deserves the respect which belongs to that hard won title. I see no reason for you to be "uncomfortable" with the mantle.
Re: the “Dr.” thing – I am not hung up on it. In fact, at times it makes me uncomfortable. I mean how many self-respecting desert rats call themselves “Dr.”. Doc maybe – thinking of Doc Rosecrans, or Professor – I believe I have known a few of those. Actually, I prefer Thomas.
Well, to make everyone comfortable, and if you don't object, I'll call you "Dr. Thomas". As Joe said, the "Dr." did not just appear in front of your name and deserves to be acknowledged.
One final note: AS AN ELEMENT OF RESPECT PLEASE READ ABOUT THE PASSING OF A FRIEND TO ALL…
With all the sadness in the world, it is worth reflecting on an important
person who died recently. Larry LaPrise, the man who wrote "The Hokey
Pokey”, died peacefully in his sleep at the age of 93. The most traumatic
part for his family was getting him into the coffin. They put his left leg
in. And then the trouble started...
I would like to reply to some of what Tom first posted in this subject. I shall with a chuckle try to quote from the movie "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance." " When the legend becomes more interesting than the history, print the legend." And so it has been done . Tom, you suggest the subject of the LDM become part of someone's master thesis. While I'm not entirely sure it hasn't been done, I think that is abit too serious of thought, and maybe that would put the LDM in the wrong forum.
While it is true all of us are mainly interested in the history, that surrounds the LDM, we may bescoffed at for our belief in the legend. As Tom uses Constance Altshuler as an example, I have one myself. About 35 years ago, I located a Bert Fireman, some of you may remember him. I forget what his actual title was , but he was in charge of the history dept. at A.S.U. I asked him quetions about the LDM.
His 350 pounds barely moved in his chair , as he proceeded to tell me that anyone who believed in the legend and worse hunted for it was crazy.
My responce to him was it was people like me and the Mel Fishers, the Coronados, and the Columbus, who all believed in a legend our some unproved fact that found the history and uncovered the truths, not the people like him that could barely get out of his chair. He got alot of his information from people like that.
While it is true that when someone tries to enter into the tangible area such as the ore testing, which we take off our hats to Tom for, we are usually rejected, but we all perserver and continue to add to the little known history. After all , who said " What is history , but a bunch of fables agreed upon by a bunch of fools"? I may have added the last part . How much of the history that was crammed down our throats was true?
As far as anyone's reputation being damaged by being involved with the legend, who gives a damn?
Certainly there are those that would like to kill the legend, such as the forest service, as case in point the taking off of historical places on their map, and of course the delineation of Weavers Needle from their most recent map.
So everyone loosen up and enjoy the legend for what it is, and for what one may find someday. The LDM legend is too big to kill. Most people never become a part of anything, they marry, work , have kids , work, have kids , work.......We all have become part of that glorious mountain.
Ron wrote:As far as anyone's reputation being damaged by being involved with the legend, who gives a damn?
Certainly there are those that would like to kill the legend, such as the forest service, as case in point the taking off of historical places on their map, and of course the delineation of Weavers Needle from their most recent map.
So everyone loosen up and enjoy the legend for what it is, and for what one may find someday. The LDM legend is too big to kill. Most people never become a part of anything, they marry, work , have kids , work, have kids , work.......We all have become part of that glorious mountain.
Damn, you do have a way with words, Ron. Well said!
But are you saying Weavers Needle is not identified on the latest maps?? Why would they do that? Are they so afraid of the LDM legend? Think what a hit it would be to the local economy if it disappeared!
It'll probably end up being Jane Hull Memorial Needle or something.
Look at the Tonto National Forest's map 2oo1, There is no Weavers Needle. Why, is a very good question. Maybe part of the answer can be obtained by looking further at the map to notice springs, historical places , such as Aylor's Caballo camp amongst others are gone. I think it is a methodical process of eliminating history, by not addressing it, but Wiz , I'm sure they probaly will rename the Needle,Piestuwa Peak.
I have been thinking of what Dr. Glover said, and wanting to make a comment. After this many years of talking about the LDM, I have heard every response possible. I have found more envy than derision.
Dr. Fireman probably found his own brand of adventure just getting out of bed every day. Putting down your own interest and excitement over the search for the LDM may have created a warm and smug feeling in his own existance.
I have never been hesitant to talk about the LDM or my own treasure hunt in the Superstitions. The overwhelming response has been "WOW, you must have some interesting stories to tell". They always want to hear them.
Ron, I think you gave the perfect reply to Dr. Glover's post. Not much value in letting others rain on your parade.
Ron, good morning and well said. I do not disagree in substance. Your point about it being people like you/us who uncover history is (I believe) quite accurate. Not that the academic historians don’t. They do and without them I (and I believe all of us) would be lost. But, consider the “amateurs” like Altshuler or Thrapp or Kollenborn and what they have contributed. I remember when only the “uninformed” thought seriously about Viking discovery of America (boy am I dating myself here); that is until they uncovered a Viking settlement in Newfoundland.
The point I was trying to make was simply a reiteration and expansion of the one made by Aurum:
“There is one factor that everyone must keep in mind concerning Waltz and the legends concerning his life and fortunes.
There was a stigma attached to the Waltz name and legend in the years following Waltz's death in Phoenix. This stigma was a huge factor in the information that came forth in later years.”
That is that whether we like it or not that stigma attaches to this day, and the stigma still prevents/effects the information that comes forth.
The survival of the legend is not is doubt, but the credibility maybe. Much of our western history is in jeopardy. Pick-up an arrowhead and you could be in big trouble, but burn down or tear out a western structure from the 19th century and it is okay. This leaving off or changing the names on government maps is not confined to the Superstitions and can have a more sinister aspect. I know of one pioneer family in Arizona that is in danger of loosing their land – the government wants the water rights on the land. The family has been there for over 100 years and many features in the area are named after the family. Well, the new maps have left off their family name for these features. New comers (and AZ has a bunch) make no association of the family as a pioneer family and they receive less and less general support for holding on to their land. This particular situation is much more complicated than just the map names, but that is part of it.
As for the Superstitions, many simply do not want to know, but should the government want to obviate off trail hiking – which is near and dear to many – the technology exists. I for one not only want the legend to survive, but I would like the history to survive and I believe that the more credible the legend is the better chance we have of preserving that history. (And as I’m sure Richard Peck must have realized, without the history all the clues money can buy won’t solve it.)
In Southern California I was once shown a photograph of some stone structures described as “Spanish smelters”. Most interesting photos I must say. I wanted to go into the San Bernardino Mts. and check them out. But, I couldn’t. As everyone knows, there was no Spanish mining in those mountains, so how could there be smelters, if they were not smelters then probably just stone structures of some kind and not of any significance, so why not knock them down. The Forest Service did just that, even though they had to fly a helicopter in with a small “cat”.
And, yes it does make me sad as an academic that the legend has sunk so low over the years (as in a century plus) that it is entirely shunned by the academic community. I think of Frank Dobie and his writings. I do not think anyone can say he hurt the legends of Texas or the treasure legends of the Southwest. Yet, his writings and work were well thought of and generated a forth coming of oral history and support from all sides. Sure be nice if we had the same.
Thomas Glover wrote:As everyone knows, there was no Spanish mining in those mountains, so how could there be smelters, if they were not smelters then probably just stone structures of some kind and not of any significance, so why not knock them down. The Forest Service did just that, even though they had to fly a helicopter in with a small “cat”.
Dr. G,
This is a truly disturbing anecdote. Didn't the Taliban do something very similar to those giant Buddist statues in Afghanistan? The only difference I see is the replacement of "An affront to Allah" with "Not of any significance". Both equally stupid reasons.
Yes it is a disturbing bit of info. But, everyone knows (I am being sarcastic) that there was no Spanish or even pre-Anglo Mexican mining is this area – San Bernardino Mts. and the near by Mojave. The only people who believe in that are misguided treasure hunters and other know-nothing amatures. And since they can be dismissed, their ideas can be dismissed – and as for their “findings” well they are hardly worth even thinking about.
Now, if you will, put this against the following background I was working on: the story of the local historian in 29 Palms who showed the photos which she had taken; interviews with a man who lived on that old dirt road up to Big Bear from Yucca Valley. He told me about an old road/trail with Joshua Trees a foot or more in diameter growing in thr middle of the road/trail; he also told me of a friend of his who had found some very old mining bits of a peculiar nature (hard steel field forged to a soft iron rod) at an abandoned mine in the same general are; the area was one of known mineralization and old mines. In fact, when the first gold mining started in the San Bernardino Mts in Holcomb Valley (which is at about 8,000 feet elevation) when the winter snows came some of the miners who abandoned the mts. for the winter went east towards the desert and found abandoned mines in this very area. This is a matter of recorded history. But, no one knows who the original miners were. So, against a background of established history, geology, legend and twice told tales I was most interested. But, the only physical evidence that might have proved Spanish mining were the smelters as they were in a very remote, very rough area – and they were long gone, dozed by the Forest Service/BLM.
