Heres something interesting.
Being bored and having some time on my hands, I went into a German chat room and had them translate the German Clues in Corbins book for me. And yes I went over every single sentence.....
Most of the wording was word for word with what Corbin relates in the book. However, there was a word: "spitzfelsen" that was interesting.
Some described it as a peak, spire , boulder or sharprock. Others described it as a series of ledges or large prominent cliffs that one would use as a landmark...depending on the context in which the word was used.
Thought that one or two of you might find
the above mighty intriguing......
P
Spitzfelsen.....
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
German Clues
Peter,
It does seem strange, that if those are the directions that "Julia and Rhinehart remembered Waltz saying", why didn't they follow them?
Did anyone mention what "context" would be required to change the meaning of the word? So you don't need to read my mind, how could the sentence be changed to change the meaning? Would they only need to remember one word, in error, to change the meaning, or would it require two, three, or even more?
I realize you may not have gone that far in your questions, but just in case you did, it would be interesting to know.
Respectfully,
Joe
It does seem strange, that if those are the directions that "Julia and Rhinehart remembered Waltz saying", why didn't they follow them?
Did anyone mention what "context" would be required to change the meaning of the word? So you don't need to read my mind, how could the sentence be changed to change the meaning? Would they only need to remember one word, in error, to change the meaning, or would it require two, three, or even more?
I realize you may not have gone that far in your questions, but just in case you did, it would be interesting to know.
Respectfully,
Joe
Well at first I asked about the word itself. They came back with "sharprock" or "peak". But when I explained the context (a geographical landmark trying to get people into a certain area) they then said it could mean a number of different things.
I then gave them the other sentences and they interpreted each one. They were all pretty much dead on to what was interpreted in Corbins book, the Spitzfelsen word stuck with me though.
Heres something that they came up with:
felsenspitze: pointed rock or spire
hoher berg: tall mountain
berg sehen: mountain peak
sehen: peak
spitzfelsen: spire, peak, cliff, ledge
If you notice from the above Waltz used both "felsenspitze" and "spitzfelsen" in different sentences in the German Clues. Did one mean spire and the other mean cliff or ledge?
I dont know. We probably need to speak to a person familiar with the way Swabian German was spoke 130 years ago to know for sure.
I then gave them the other sentences and they interpreted each one. They were all pretty much dead on to what was interpreted in Corbins book, the Spitzfelsen word stuck with me though.
Heres something that they came up with:
felsenspitze: pointed rock or spire
hoher berg: tall mountain
berg sehen: mountain peak
sehen: peak
spitzfelsen: spire, peak, cliff, ledge
If you notice from the above Waltz used both "felsenspitze" and "spitzfelsen" in different sentences in the German Clues. Did one mean spire and the other mean cliff or ledge?
I dont know. We probably need to speak to a person familiar with the way Swabian German was spoke 130 years ago to know for sure.
>>Did anyone mention what "context" would be required to change the meaning of the word? So you don't need to read my mind, how could the sentence be changed to change the meaning? Would they only need to remember one word, in error, to change the meaning, or would it require two, three, or even more?<<
Joe
I had thought of that, but these fellows were doing me a favor so I did not delve too deeply into word context. One thing they did say abut "spitzfelsen" is that it might be a place where someone might have to climb up. They also said look for a big boulder, rock or spire very near the mine.....and the mine might be hidden or partially hidden by that.
So, as in all things LDM, the deeper one delves, the more confused one becomes....
P
Joe
I had thought of that, but these fellows were doing me a favor so I did not delve too deeply into word context. One thing they did say abut "spitzfelsen" is that it might be a place where someone might have to climb up. They also said look for a big boulder, rock or spire very near the mine.....and the mine might be hidden or partially hidden by that.
So, as in all things LDM, the deeper one delves, the more confused one becomes....
P
>>It does seem strange, that if those are the directions that "Julia and Rhinehart remembered Waltz saying", why didn't they follow them?<<
Perhaps they did. It is easy for us (with the topo knowledge most of us have and the LDM lore that we have drilled into our heads) to say.."well they should have ended up at point A or at least point B. But Julia and Rheiney were not familiar with those mountains and most likely tried to follow the clues the best they could.
Heres an experiment we should try. Lets go to ASU and get two college kids that know nothing about the Supes. Give them a starting point and then give them those clues to follow. I'd wager they would have a tough time ending up anywhere close to where they are supposed to (but of course that is based only on my own opinion of where the clues take you).
I pretty much figure Rheiny and Julia were in the same boat back in the 90s.
P
Perhaps they did. It is easy for us (with the topo knowledge most of us have and the LDM lore that we have drilled into our heads) to say.."well they should have ended up at point A or at least point B. But Julia and Rheiney were not familiar with those mountains and most likely tried to follow the clues the best they could.
Heres an experiment we should try. Lets go to ASU and get two college kids that know nothing about the Supes. Give them a starting point and then give them those clues to follow. I'd wager they would have a tough time ending up anywhere close to where they are supposed to (but of course that is based only on my own opinion of where the clues take you).
I pretty much figure Rheiny and Julia were in the same boat back in the 90s.
P
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Following Directions
Peter,
No doubt you are correct. They would have gotten lost, but they would have had to ignore the "fort" clue, crossing two rivers, camping overnight at the Cottonwood Wash and traveling south to the mine. Not only did they ignore these clues once, but many times.
It is curious that Bark did not put these clues in his manuscript.
Respectfully,
Joe
No doubt you are correct. They would have gotten lost, but they would have had to ignore the "fort" clue, crossing two rivers, camping overnight at the Cottonwood Wash and traveling south to the mine. Not only did they ignore these clues once, but many times.
It is curious that Bark did not put these clues in his manuscript.
Respectfully,
Joe
Joe
Point taken on Rheiny and Julia...BUT.... folks they related the clues to very early on (read Herman and Gottfried here) did seem to be able to get into the country that the clues talked about. Does that mean R&J simply were out of their element out there and when other seasoned prospectors arrived on the scene they were able to figure out the country to get into? Maybe...actually most likely.... in my opinion.
Maybe Bark either
1) Didnt have access to the German stuff or
2) Thought it was of such import that he didnt put it in his notes on purpose.
P
Point taken on Rheiny and Julia...BUT.... folks they related the clues to very early on (read Herman and Gottfried here) did seem to be able to get into the country that the clues talked about. Does that mean R&J simply were out of their element out there and when other seasoned prospectors arrived on the scene they were able to figure out the country to get into? Maybe...actually most likely.... in my opinion.
Maybe Bark either
1) Didnt have access to the German stuff or
2) Thought it was of such import that he didnt put it in his notes on purpose.
P
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
More Clues
Peter,
What about Waltz saying that he would point out the trail from the "board house"? I may be wrong about the name here, but you know what I am talking about. There is some verification that this clue was valid, at least to Julia and Rheiny. There is no indication, in the actions they took, that they needed to enter the Superstitions from the Salt River to the north of the mountains.
I don't mean to disparage any of these other clues, but there would be no reason for Herman and Gottfried to go to their early haunts and searches in the mountains from that area either.
Something else took place, not these clues, that took them in that direction. Perhaps a landmark. There are many "landmarks" which can be found in more than one place in those mountains.
Respectfully,
Joe
What about Waltz saying that he would point out the trail from the "board house"? I may be wrong about the name here, but you know what I am talking about. There is some verification that this clue was valid, at least to Julia and Rheiny. There is no indication, in the actions they took, that they needed to enter the Superstitions from the Salt River to the north of the mountains.
I don't mean to disparage any of these other clues, but there would be no reason for Herman and Gottfried to go to their early haunts and searches in the mountains from that area either.
Something else took place, not these clues, that took them in that direction. Perhaps a landmark. There are many "landmarks" which can be found in more than one place in those mountains.
Respectfully,
Joe
Joe
I agree on the "board" (or was that "milk") house clue. I too think it was legitimate. There is, of course, no reason why BOTH clues (entering from the board house on the south side of the range and cutting across the Salt on the north side)could not be "real". I am of the opinion that both the German Clues and Board House clues are legit.
If one thinks about the context in which both sets of clues are given by Waltz....then perhaps he gave out the German Clues in some detail, but realized that either R&J would have too much trouble with them or that it would be easier for him to take a wagon to the board house and point out the correct trail into the mountains...as opposed to taking a wagon the German Clue "route" which I beleive would have been tougher to do.
Some amount of evidence points to the fact that Waltz entered the mtns from different directions, no reason why he couldnt instruct others to enter at multiple points also.
Combine the German Clues with the Holmes directions and you pretty much have some sort of match (more or less). Now if I could only find Brownies rock house......
Me I look for stories, evidence, tales and anecdotes that jibe with each other. I consider the source and then I either discard or follow up on it.
P
I agree on the "board" (or was that "milk") house clue. I too think it was legitimate. There is, of course, no reason why BOTH clues (entering from the board house on the south side of the range and cutting across the Salt on the north side)could not be "real". I am of the opinion that both the German Clues and Board House clues are legit.
If one thinks about the context in which both sets of clues are given by Waltz....then perhaps he gave out the German Clues in some detail, but realized that either R&J would have too much trouble with them or that it would be easier for him to take a wagon to the board house and point out the correct trail into the mountains...as opposed to taking a wagon the German Clue "route" which I beleive would have been tougher to do.
Some amount of evidence points to the fact that Waltz entered the mtns from different directions, no reason why he couldnt instruct others to enter at multiple points also.
Combine the German Clues with the Holmes directions and you pretty much have some sort of match (more or less). Now if I could only find Brownies rock house......
Me I look for stories, evidence, tales and anecdotes that jibe with each other. I consider the source and then I either discard or follow up on it.
P
Heres another thought.
"Needle" clues run rampant throughout LDM lore. Perhaps the clues about the Needle (which most folks assume to be Weavers Needle) really relates to Waltz's spitzfelsen or felsenspitze and the landmark itself wasnt as prominent as Weavers Needle..and could, in fact, be quite small.
Given that context, one would have to relate the needle clues to their own favorite needle in the Supes.
I think I will have to make a trip in this December and see where the shadow of a certain felsenspitze falls on say Dec 21 more or less....
P
"Needle" clues run rampant throughout LDM lore. Perhaps the clues about the Needle (which most folks assume to be Weavers Needle) really relates to Waltz's spitzfelsen or felsenspitze and the landmark itself wasnt as prominent as Weavers Needle..and could, in fact, be quite small.
Given that context, one would have to relate the needle clues to their own favorite needle in the Supes.
I think I will have to make a trip in this December and see where the shadow of a certain felsenspitze falls on say Dec 21 more or less....
P
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Looking for Gold in all the Wrong Places
Peter,
What you say, as to when Waltz gave the clues, makes sense.
A few other things wihich seem to match other clues, would be if you used "spires" instead of "peak" and the "camp in the saddle". Those match other stories very well.
People have been trying to match up that "shadow" clue for a lot of years.
It seems unlikely that Waltz would have confused Julia and Rheiny with more than one trail to the mine. It seems logical that he would have told them the easiest and closest trail to the mine.
If you go into the area you think the instructions lead you to, what is the wide valley to the West?
Waltz was very fluent in English and spoke with little accent, I think. If they were unsure of what he meant, wouldn't they ask him to say it in English?
I use the same method of evaluating clues that you, and everyone else does. Like two opposing political parties, we all hear something different.
I like to think I am not biased towards any specific area, as far as the location for the LDM. Like you, I believe it is a combination of many clues, some true and some false, that you must put together to find Waltz's mine/cache.
While I am not going back into the Superstitions, I will make sure that someone checks out the ravine I believe it is in. That would be my partner, if he has the inclination to make that climb.
Respectfully,
Joe
What you say, as to when Waltz gave the clues, makes sense.
A few other things wihich seem to match other clues, would be if you used "spires" instead of "peak" and the "camp in the saddle". Those match other stories very well.
People have been trying to match up that "shadow" clue for a lot of years.
It seems unlikely that Waltz would have confused Julia and Rheiny with more than one trail to the mine. It seems logical that he would have told them the easiest and closest trail to the mine.
If you go into the area you think the instructions lead you to, what is the wide valley to the West?
Waltz was very fluent in English and spoke with little accent, I think. If they were unsure of what he meant, wouldn't they ask him to say it in English?
I use the same method of evaluating clues that you, and everyone else does. Like two opposing political parties, we all hear something different.
I like to think I am not biased towards any specific area, as far as the location for the LDM. Like you, I believe it is a combination of many clues, some true and some false, that you must put together to find Waltz's mine/cache.
While I am not going back into the Superstitions, I will make sure that someone checks out the ravine I believe it is in. That would be my partner, if he has the inclination to make that climb.
Respectfully,
Joe
>>A few other things wihich seem to match other clues, would be if you used "spires" instead of "peak" and the "camp in the saddle". Those match other stories very well. <<
Lots of Spire clues seem to be involved in the story. Some of them (I like Spanglers ALOT) I believe are legit. If someone saw the area that Waltz camped in the "saddle" today, one would say "what the heck would he camp here for...it's so open...". But I suspect the area was chosen wisely by Waltz. Easy to beat a hasty retreat in multiple directions and it was an area that didnt see much Apache traffic.
>>People have been trying to match up that "shadow" clue for a lot of years.<<
Yep. I always thought it was a bunch of hooey..until I just found out (God bless the internet) where the sun is during the Winter Solstice. Now I think I will check out a certain spire around that time...though I already know where that shadow will point to...
>>It seems unlikely that Waltz would have confused Julia and Rheiny with more than one trail to the mine. It seems logical that he would have told them the easiest and closest trail to the mine.<<
I agree. But maybe he sent them in from the area where it was easiest for him to arrive at in those days.
>>If you go into the area you think the instructions lead you to, what is the wide valley to the West?<<
Its a pretty wide valley too.......
Lots of Spire clues seem to be involved in the story. Some of them (I like Spanglers ALOT) I believe are legit. If someone saw the area that Waltz camped in the "saddle" today, one would say "what the heck would he camp here for...it's so open...". But I suspect the area was chosen wisely by Waltz. Easy to beat a hasty retreat in multiple directions and it was an area that didnt see much Apache traffic.
>>People have been trying to match up that "shadow" clue for a lot of years.<<
Yep. I always thought it was a bunch of hooey..until I just found out (God bless the internet) where the sun is during the Winter Solstice. Now I think I will check out a certain spire around that time...though I already know where that shadow will point to...
>>It seems unlikely that Waltz would have confused Julia and Rheiny with more than one trail to the mine. It seems logical that he would have told them the easiest and closest trail to the mine.<<
I agree. But maybe he sent them in from the area where it was easiest for him to arrive at in those days.
>>If you go into the area you think the instructions lead you to, what is the wide valley to the West?<<
Its a pretty wide valley too.......-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Das Camp
Peter,
While any saddle would be open, the saddle that Waltz is supposed to have drawn has high sides. Camping along the sides, especially if there are any outcropings, would be the likely course. I have seen many campsites (fire rings) and low rock walls for protection in saddles.
You are assuming you know which is the correct saddle. Until you find the mine/cache itself, it remains an assumption. As I know your general area of interest, it seems unlikely you have Waltz's saddle.
Respectfully,
Joe
While any saddle would be open, the saddle that Waltz is supposed to have drawn has high sides. Camping along the sides, especially if there are any outcropings, would be the likely course. I have seen many campsites (fire rings) and low rock walls for protection in saddles.
You are assuming you know which is the correct saddle. Until you find the mine/cache itself, it remains an assumption. As I know your general area of interest, it seems unlikely you have Waltz's saddle.
Respectfully,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Saddle Sore
Peter,
Going strictly from memory, I am guessing that your needle in the saddle would be Miner's Needle. From the "German Clues", that would be anyones guess. Perhaps that is correct.
When looking for Miner's Needle caught in the frame of a saddle, the likely one would be.......way to big to look like the drawing. Course I haven't seen every saddle that frames Miner's Needle.
Might just as well add to this post.
If Marsh Valley is the valley referred to in the German Notes, than I would think that the "high (or, higher) mountain" that "is to the east.", would have to be Black Mountain or Tortilla Mountain. Black Mountain is really the best candidate, if you are using the German Notes. The saddle on Black Mountain is in a perfect position to see Miner' Needle to the south. The problem, if you believe the Waltz drawing to be authentic, is that anywhere that you could see anything close to that picture, say Malapais Mountain, would not really be that close to the drawing.
If Black Mountain is the correct location, than the "high (or higher) mountain" that "is to the east." would be Tortillia. "To the west you will see another peak." That would be Yellow Peak.
I guess when you get to this point, you need to start throwing out some clues, and adding in some from other stories.
Respectfully,
Joe
Going strictly from memory, I am guessing that your needle in the saddle would be Miner's Needle. From the "German Clues", that would be anyones guess. Perhaps that is correct.
When looking for Miner's Needle caught in the frame of a saddle, the likely one would be.......way to big to look like the drawing. Course I haven't seen every saddle that frames Miner's Needle.
Might just as well add to this post.
If Marsh Valley is the valley referred to in the German Notes, than I would think that the "high (or, higher) mountain" that "is to the east.", would have to be Black Mountain or Tortilla Mountain. Black Mountain is really the best candidate, if you are using the German Notes. The saddle on Black Mountain is in a perfect position to see Miner' Needle to the south. The problem, if you believe the Waltz drawing to be authentic, is that anywhere that you could see anything close to that picture, say Malapais Mountain, would not really be that close to the drawing.
If Black Mountain is the correct location, than the "high (or higher) mountain" that "is to the east." would be Tortillia. "To the west you will see another peak." That would be Yellow Peak.
I guess when you get to this point, you need to start throwing out some clues, and adding in some from other stories.
Respectfully,
Joe
Joe,
My interpretation is vastly different than yours. Doesnt mean I am right and you are wrong....just that we have different ways of looking at things.
Course I wouldnt believe so strongly in the German Clues unless there was a host of supporting evidence that would have to link in with some other interesting clues I think are valid.
I could be wrong as heck of course.
P
My interpretation is vastly different than yours. Doesnt mean I am right and you are wrong....just that we have different ways of looking at things.
Course I wouldnt believe so strongly in the German Clues unless there was a host of supporting evidence that would have to link in with some other interesting clues I think are valid.
I could be wrong as heck of course.
P
Joe,
To illustrate my point on different interpretations of the same clues. You state:
>>I am guessing that your needle in the saddle would be Miner's Needle.<<
I do not believe the spitzfelsen IS a needle. I DO believe the felsenspitze IS a needle.
The German translation related to that is " Three kilometers (does he mean 3 miles here or a mile and a 1/2?) from the spring (taking the Indian trail) you find a "spitzfelden". What this spitzfelden is, is open to individual interpretation.
He goes on to say "from my camp in the saddle you will see a peak in the distance with a hole" Actually the interpretation of that with the German folks I was chatting with was unanimous in that the real wording wasnt "peak" or "Spire"....it was "mountain with a hole in it".
My interpretation of the above is:
1) Once you took the Indian trail from the spring you would know you were in the proper area because you would easily be able to spot the "spitzfelden". This could be a number of things, most likely an easy to identify landmark...maybe even Weavers Needle viewed at a distance, or a series of prominent cliffs or ledges.
2) Once you arrive at Waltzs camp that he made in the saddle, it was quite easy to see a mountain to the south with a hole in it. It is likely that this was Miners Needle, but I imagine it could also be a different formation.
It is clear to me, from the German clues, that Waltz used the camp in the saddle to work a mine that was in a northerly direction from this particular camp. I also beleive he had multiple camps (doesnt everyone?...lol) from which he worked the LDM.
Does the drawing of the "saddle" shown by Rheiney and purportedly to have been drawn by Waltz match this particular saddle? Nope. But do we know if that drawing was meant to show the mine location, camp location or part of the trail in? I seem to recall that Waltz gave Rheiney a series of drawings that showed the trail to the mine. The young Petrasch went on a drinking spreee and ended up losing the drawings. I wonder if what we have left is one of the drawings........that only shows a place on the trail IN to the mine area.
Now, if that is the case, and knowing some of the directions that Waltz tried to point out to J&R to get to the mine...I know where there is a dead ringer for that drawing....but it is on the trail in...not from the mine area or Waltzs camp itself.
P
To illustrate my point on different interpretations of the same clues. You state:
>>I am guessing that your needle in the saddle would be Miner's Needle.<<
I do not believe the spitzfelsen IS a needle. I DO believe the felsenspitze IS a needle.
The German translation related to that is " Three kilometers (does he mean 3 miles here or a mile and a 1/2?) from the spring (taking the Indian trail) you find a "spitzfelden". What this spitzfelden is, is open to individual interpretation.
He goes on to say "from my camp in the saddle you will see a peak in the distance with a hole" Actually the interpretation of that with the German folks I was chatting with was unanimous in that the real wording wasnt "peak" or "Spire"....it was "mountain with a hole in it".
My interpretation of the above is:
1) Once you took the Indian trail from the spring you would know you were in the proper area because you would easily be able to spot the "spitzfelden". This could be a number of things, most likely an easy to identify landmark...maybe even Weavers Needle viewed at a distance, or a series of prominent cliffs or ledges.
2) Once you arrive at Waltzs camp that he made in the saddle, it was quite easy to see a mountain to the south with a hole in it. It is likely that this was Miners Needle, but I imagine it could also be a different formation.
It is clear to me, from the German clues, that Waltz used the camp in the saddle to work a mine that was in a northerly direction from this particular camp. I also beleive he had multiple camps (doesnt everyone?...lol) from which he worked the LDM.
Does the drawing of the "saddle" shown by Rheiney and purportedly to have been drawn by Waltz match this particular saddle? Nope. But do we know if that drawing was meant to show the mine location, camp location or part of the trail in? I seem to recall that Waltz gave Rheiney a series of drawings that showed the trail to the mine. The young Petrasch went on a drinking spreee and ended up losing the drawings. I wonder if what we have left is one of the drawings........that only shows a place on the trail IN to the mine area.
Now, if that is the case, and knowing some of the directions that Waltz tried to point out to J&R to get to the mine...I know where there is a dead ringer for that drawing....but it is on the trail in...not from the mine area or Waltzs camp itself.
P
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
No Dog In The Fight
Peter,
While I have no dog in this particular fight, I am interested in the history of the LDM. Over the last forty-six years I have heard so many stories about Waltz's mine, that a sizeable book could be written, just on the stories I have forgotten. I think.
This information is interesting, because, as you have said, it dovetails into a number of other stories and clues. The problem, as with many of the stories and clues which are not tied to specific landmarks in the Superstitions, is that you can usually find two, and sometimes more than two, places that fit any given set of clues and stories.
There is one particular clue, which seems pretty valid, that has been repeated in many, many stories. It is ignored by most Dutch Hunters or misread, a common problem these days and probably more common thirty or forty years ago.
It may be that a few of the "old timers" had a pretty good understanding of the English language, both written and spoken, and also had the advantage of hearing the clues and stories while they were fresh, so to speak. One such Dutch Hunter who should not be taken lightly, was P.C. Bicknell. Seeing how that gentleman interpreted the clues is of passing interest, as he had a great many less stories and clues to filter or obscure the "truth" of the matter.
Those who were on the heels of this legend are the ones I would lean towards for the "trail" of the LDM. Others, such as yourself may take another era as closer to the "truth". I expect my partner from the South will determine if my own thoughts are valid on this little puzzle.
As you can see, I am still interested in the search, just not interested enough to make it my search. I wish you all, especially my partner and his boys, God speed and good friends on your search. Those friends and your time together are the real treasure to be found in the Superstitions.
So far, that is an historical fact.
Respectfully,
Joe
While I have no dog in this particular fight, I am interested in the history of the LDM. Over the last forty-six years I have heard so many stories about Waltz's mine, that a sizeable book could be written, just on the stories I have forgotten. I think.
This information is interesting, because, as you have said, it dovetails into a number of other stories and clues. The problem, as with many of the stories and clues which are not tied to specific landmarks in the Superstitions, is that you can usually find two, and sometimes more than two, places that fit any given set of clues and stories.
There is one particular clue, which seems pretty valid, that has been repeated in many, many stories. It is ignored by most Dutch Hunters or misread, a common problem these days and probably more common thirty or forty years ago.
It may be that a few of the "old timers" had a pretty good understanding of the English language, both written and spoken, and also had the advantage of hearing the clues and stories while they were fresh, so to speak. One such Dutch Hunter who should not be taken lightly, was P.C. Bicknell. Seeing how that gentleman interpreted the clues is of passing interest, as he had a great many less stories and clues to filter or obscure the "truth" of the matter.
Those who were on the heels of this legend are the ones I would lean towards for the "trail" of the LDM. Others, such as yourself may take another era as closer to the "truth". I expect my partner from the South will determine if my own thoughts are valid on this little puzzle.
As you can see, I am still interested in the search, just not interested enough to make it my search. I wish you all, especially my partner and his boys, God speed and good friends on your search. Those friends and your time together are the real treasure to be found in the Superstitions.
So far, that is an historical fact.
Respectfully,
Joe
>>The problem, as with many of the stories and clues which are not tied to specific landmarks in the Superstitions, is that you can usually find two, and sometimes more than two, places that fit any given set of clues and stories.<<
Yes, the above is true, of course. It is easy to fit an area into the LDM story when one can turn up 1 or 2 clues that fit the story.
It is less easy to find an area that fits
numerous (dozens?) clues related to the LDM.
P
Yes, the above is true, of course. It is easy to fit an area into the LDM story when one can turn up 1 or 2 clues that fit the story.
It is less easy to find an area that fits
numerous (dozens?) clues related to the LDM.
P
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Less Easy?
Peter,
While it may be "less easy", It does not take a lot of experience in the Superstitions or historical knowledge of the legends, to understand and find a number of places which fit the bill.
One only needs to talk to a few modern-day Dutch Hunters, listen to there stories, be shown their clues, have their reasoning explained as to why they are searching where they are, to understand that there are "dozens" of places in the Superstitions which have the same "dozens" of clues. I have been shown that information "dozens of times" since I started my trips into the mountains. Almost every one of them had the same clues, landmarks and believable theories.......all in different locations. None of them have found gold.
Every one of those people could explain why they were the only ones, much like you or I, to be correct. Peoplle like Glen Magill had the "inside" track. He is one of hundreds who had that same "inside" track. You are one of hundreds who have walked the same worn path. I walked a less traveled road, but it had all of the major players tracks, without fail.
Here is a major fact: No one, including Jacob waltz could go into the mountains on horse back and or leading a mule, without leaving tracks that could be followed for weeks, or months, depending on the "Thunder God's" despensing of rain, without leaving a trail that anyone with the slightlest ability and a good eye, could not follow. Those who claimed to follow Waltz, did not need to be close in distance or time. (days) If you doubt that, just turn around and follow your own tracks. Don't tell me about the rocks. I have followed tracks through the rockiest places in the Superstitions. The only way that man can travel without leaving sign, is in the air, or water. He even leaves his tracks on the highways.
Respectfully,
Joe
While it may be "less easy", It does not take a lot of experience in the Superstitions or historical knowledge of the legends, to understand and find a number of places which fit the bill.
One only needs to talk to a few modern-day Dutch Hunters, listen to there stories, be shown their clues, have their reasoning explained as to why they are searching where they are, to understand that there are "dozens" of places in the Superstitions which have the same "dozens" of clues. I have been shown that information "dozens of times" since I started my trips into the mountains. Almost every one of them had the same clues, landmarks and believable theories.......all in different locations. None of them have found gold.
Every one of those people could explain why they were the only ones, much like you or I, to be correct. Peoplle like Glen Magill had the "inside" track. He is one of hundreds who had that same "inside" track. You are one of hundreds who have walked the same worn path. I walked a less traveled road, but it had all of the major players tracks, without fail.
Here is a major fact: No one, including Jacob waltz could go into the mountains on horse back and or leading a mule, without leaving tracks that could be followed for weeks, or months, depending on the "Thunder God's" despensing of rain, without leaving a trail that anyone with the slightlest ability and a good eye, could not follow. Those who claimed to follow Waltz, did not need to be close in distance or time. (days) If you doubt that, just turn around and follow your own tracks. Don't tell me about the rocks. I have followed tracks through the rockiest places in the Superstitions. The only way that man can travel without leaving sign, is in the air, or water. He even leaves his tracks on the highways.
Respectfully,
Joe
>>I have been shown that information "dozens of times" since I started my trips into the mountains. Almost every one of them had the same clues, landmarks and believable theories.......all in different locations. None of them have found gold<<
Maybe so. Still doesnt mean anything. 3 people living know where I think the LDM is, and even they dont know everything I have found and suspect.....yet. Still cant for the life of me figure out why folks would share any "inside" knowledge or theories with others unless they were partnering up with them.
As for nobody ever finding any gold....give me a break. That simply is not true.
P
Maybe so. Still doesnt mean anything. 3 people living know where I think the LDM is, and even they dont know everything I have found and suspect.....yet. Still cant for the life of me figure out why folks would share any "inside" knowledge or theories with others unless they were partnering up with them.
As for nobody ever finding any gold....give me a break. That simply is not true.
P
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Their Watching......
Considering the fact that only two people are participating in this topic, it has one hell of a lot of "views". I have no doubt that the "viewers" could add a lot to the topic. It is obviously of interest. Let's hear from you folks.
As for your last post, show me the evidence.
Respectfully,
Joe
As for your last post, show me the evidence.
Respectfully,
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Trust
Peter,
I realize you "can't understand" why anyone would share such information, especially with me.
"3 people living know where I think the LDM is, and even they dont know everything I have found and suspect.....yet."
The fact that those three people, who I (only) suspect must be your partners, don't know "everything" you "have and suspect" is why you "can't understand". It is called "trust".
I have been shown pictures, told stories and trusted with secrets from people I have never met. They have read my posts, and come to a conclusion that is a shade different than you, Wiz, Azmulla and a few others have. They know that whatever they tell me, will go to the grave with me, unless they say otherwise. It will never be told to my partners, without their permission, it will never be spoken about, or placed in someones book, including anything I may write.
No doubt your lack of trust in those closest to you, is the correct way to go about your search. I am not the one who would be an expert on trusting others. I have to live by my own instincts and moral codes.
At least you will never have to make a wrong decision on who to trust.
Perhaps that is best after all.
Respectfully,
Joe
I realize you "can't understand" why anyone would share such information, especially with me.
"3 people living know where I think the LDM is, and even they dont know everything I have found and suspect.....yet."
The fact that those three people, who I (only) suspect must be your partners, don't know "everything" you "have and suspect" is why you "can't understand". It is called "trust".
I have been shown pictures, told stories and trusted with secrets from people I have never met. They have read my posts, and come to a conclusion that is a shade different than you, Wiz, Azmulla and a few others have. They know that whatever they tell me, will go to the grave with me, unless they say otherwise. It will never be told to my partners, without their permission, it will never be spoken about, or placed in someones book, including anything I may write.
No doubt your lack of trust in those closest to you, is the correct way to go about your search. I am not the one who would be an expert on trusting others. I have to live by my own instincts and moral codes.
At least you will never have to make a wrong decision on who to trust.
Perhaps that is best after all.
Respectfully,
Joe