Deerings/Soldiers Trail

Discuss information about the Lost Dutchman Mine
Peter
Expert
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 7:47 am

Deerings/Soldiers Trail

Post by Peter »

Since it seems it up to me to bring up intersting subjects I thought I would raise the following:

Any of you folks have any thoughts about the trail that the 2 Soldiers and Deering followed from the northern part of the Superstitions? I have seen several theories about which mountain(s) the trail followed, which area it lead from and speculation as to where it lead our worthy heroes.

I, of course, have drawn my own conclusions, but would be interested if anyone else wants to chime in with their own take on the matter.
señor x
Greenhorn
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 8:52 pm

Post by señor x »

I don't know if I can add anything to this, but no one else is taking the bait yet so...

You have only two known points : Fort McDowell, and Barkley Basin where the body was supposedly found. You would assume that if they had spent any amount of time as soldiers patrolling the area, they would start out on known trails. From what I've read, the two main crossings of the Salt River were the ferry at Maryville and Mormon Flat. In some of the accounts, there is mention that the main trail in the area roughly followed the Apache trail, and then went south to the east of Tortilla mountain. After this, it?s anybody's guess.

On their return trip, they supposedly were going through Barkley Basin when they were killed, although one of the bodies may have been found at Bluff Spring. One puzzling thing is why there aren?t any more accounts of this from the ranchers in the immediate area. According to Kollenborn?s chronology, Bark was ranching in the Superstition area starting in 1883. Caveness and then Marlowe were ranching in the Barkely Basin before Bark. So wouldn?t one of them have been living there when one of the soldiers was killed very near their ranch house in the early to mid 1880s? Maybe I?ve got the timeline wrong, but wouldn?t one of these ranchers have been able to confirm the story as to the year and location of the soldiers? deaths? This seems like an important element of the story to confirm, since if they went this far west before entering the Superstitions, it rules out a lot of territory.
Peter
Expert
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 7:47 am

Post by Peter »

Estee Conatser did some interesting speculating about the Soldiers coming out the first time 'round at Miners Needle Pass. Her theory made sense to me. She theorized that the soldiers curled around the eastern end of Tortilla Mtn, struck an old Spanish Trail in the area and ended up at Miners Needle. Whether she was correct or not, I do not know.

Another interesting location in the whole tale is the location of Deerings Camp when he went looking for his wayward burrow and located a trail high up on a mountain. Some have said he was camped in lower LaBarge. Others near Tortilla Spring. Still others over in Fish Creek!

Logic seems to indicate that he cut the trail either on Geronimo Head or more probably Tortilla Mtn. Quien sabe...
S.C.
Part Timer
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 10:45 am

Post by S.C. »

I am somewhat surprised that this topic has not generated much discussion. Perhaps it has been discussed here before and all has been said.

However, I have always felt that of all the supporting stories of the LDM the one of the Two Soldiers has been the strongest. I, for one, have waddled through all the historical evidence that support the tale of the Soldiers and am convinced beyond doubt that the Soldier tale was a historic event. This, for the most part, is the information hinted at by Glover in his book. However, there are other things as well. Through the help of some friends, I have been able to get a lot of those things into my hands. While some are "indirect" - to me, they only add to supporting the tale.

Keeping that in mind, to ponder the supposed whereabouts of the Soldiers' trail is not a waste of time. Many have tried to backtrack the trail. That is - they start at the Silver King and then go back to the mine. I feel one should, instead, start at the starting point and go from there. Thus, if one were to start at Fort McDowell and follow the description of their travels one tends to be led to the areas Peter refers to. It is the specifics of the "journey" that matter in hitting the "right spot" - a mine. However, that is irrelavent - as the mine is very much probably covered.
señor x
Greenhorn
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 8:52 pm

Post by señor x »

I'm curious about the statement that "logic seems to indicate that he cut the trail either on Geronimo Head or more probably Tortilla Mtn". Specifically, what clues you interpret as leading to these specific mountains.

There are several well known clues to work from: the cross cut in the willow tree, the 4 monuments, that its 1 to 1.5 miles south of the Salt River, a deeply worn trail 6 - 7 miles long, or the famous "trick on the trail".

Looking at the Kollenborn 1979 map in the maps section of this web site, his interpretation of the "trick on the trail" clue led him up to Geronimos Head. Also according to the map,he was following a monumented trail.

Bark, Brownie Holmes, and Glover all seem to have found what they thought were the willow tree and/or the 4 monuments. So perhaps knowing where these were found leads to the conclusion of it being Geronimo Head or Tortilla Mtn?
Peter
Expert
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 7:47 am

Post by Peter »

I am simply going on the probable area of Deerings camp when he lost his burro and followed it up a mountainside. I have heard knowledgeable people indicate that Deering was camped either at Lower LaBarge or in the Tortilla Spring area. If this is true its a logical assumption to beleive that either Tortilla Mtn (from the Tortilla Spring camp) or Geronimo Head (from either the Tortilla or Labarge camp) were the areas where he cut the trail.

If those were the mountains, good luck trying to trace the trail today. They are as rough and inaccesible today as they were in Deerings time. Chances of cutting the trail today are remote.

As to Deerings Willow and the 4 (or 5?) markers..who can say for sure.
I have seen accounts state that the Willow was either cut down by Jim Bark or lost in a flash flood. As to its location, those vary too...Tortilla Creek, Labarge Canyon, Peters Canyon, Fish Creek...take your pick.
Same goes for the markers. Some swear they are still around today. Some think they no longer exist and some think they NEVER existed.
One could point to any mountain in the range and say "I found one of Deerings markers there".

Course, someone bound to be right sooner or later....
S.C.
Part Timer
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 10:45 am

Markers

Post by S.C. »

While my knowledge of the Superstitions is far from complete, I am "a little" experienced with parts the mountains' interior. I have been in areas that did not have defined forest service trails and have seen markers - some fitting the description of the Deering Markers. But were they? Probably not due to their location (such as in Tortilla Creek - along the creek bed on the way to its junction with Peters Canyon, etc.). And some looked old, too. I assumed they were simply hikers' cairns. So, that is difficulty. What is modern and what is not...
señor x
Greenhorn
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 8:52 pm

Post by señor x »

One of the things mentioned in the Bark Notes (as quoted in Helen Cobin's book) on this subject is something about an old hatchet picked up by a man named Wright. This seemed to have something to do with where Bark found the willow tree with the cross in it. He says that it was found on a trail that was monumented until it left Havalina Canyon and dropped over into the horse country.

Anybody know where Havalina Canyon is?
Peter
Expert
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 7:47 am

Post by Peter »

I went on a personal "Havalina Canyon" hunt some years back. Met lots of interesting folks in the quest and dont mind sharing what I have found out on here. Might be wrong anyways but here goes.

Like everything else LDM... searching out something simple like an old canyon name, presents a series of difficulties. It helped some to read the source of the Havalina Canyon excerpt from the Bark Notes:

( And Lord forgive me there are supposed to be SEVEN versions of the Notes, and the copies I have are not labeled...lol)

Anyway from the version I have in my lap:

"Their next trail was the one Deering found and followed, went up Havalina Canyon over into the horse country, down Peters Mesa to the Charlebois Trail and thence to Marsh Valley(their camp) a roundabout way but always high up and fairly free from favorable spots for Indian ambuscades."

So in the above context Havalina Canyon is linked with both the "horse country" and Peters Mesa . With that in mind I began my search.

First I tried to figure out how Havalina Canyon linked Peters Mesa with the Horse Country. Was it simply the upper end of Peters Canyon which links the two? That seemed logical, but I beleive I was inncorrect in the assumption. So I began asking questions. And beleive me I bugged everyone I could about Havalina Canyon (email is a wonderful tool) lol.

What I came back with is the following. There are (surprise, surprise) SEVERAL Havalina Canyons that the old timers knew about. One was on top of Bluff Springs Mtn, one near Trap Canyon, one branching off of Music Mtn, one on Peters Mesa, one named by Hoolie Bacons cowboys in the Tortilla Country. So which one is the Havalina Canyon Bark refered to?

I beleive it is the canyon that myself and a couple of other LDM hunters have dubbed "Soldiers" canyon. (this way we know which Havalina we are talking about) I dont think the LDM is in that particular canyon, but could be nearby. Then again, I could be completely wrong and it could easily be someplace else.

Another note: what Bark referred to as the "horse country" is probably NOT the Horse Country marked on modern maps. Any folks who claim they found "cut-tree stumps" in the modern day Horse country found em in the wrong spot..lol
señor x
Greenhorn
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 8:52 pm

Post by señor x »

Don't know how much more you're willing to expound upon this, but as usual I have more questions.

As to what Bark means by Horse Country, the description Ely gives seems to be in the vicinity of modern-day Horse Camp Basin. He say that the soldier camp and cut trees are on the western end.

Glover also described the cut trees being in the this area. He has a reference to Carleson's Hikers Guide trip 41. Their map shows the location as being in this area, a little Northwest of of Horse Camp Basin, north of Music Mtn, near the head of Peter's canyon.

So when you say the the stumps are not in modern-day Horse country, do you disagree with these author's interpretations? Or just that its not exactly in the Horse Basin area marked on the topo, but nearby?

Also, if you're willing to tell a little more about where the "Soldiers" Canyon is located, I'd be interested. Although I'd guess I'm pressing my luck on getting more info on that subject.
S.C.
Part Timer
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 10:45 am

Stumps

Post by S.C. »

There are references, I believe, to Tex Barkley referring to "Horse Country" actually being the Peters Mesa area. There are also cut tree stumps there. I do not think Peter wanted to imply that there are NOT cut tree stumps at Horse Camp Basin. They are just not probably the ones referred to as a "clue" to the LDM. For example, the ones Brownie Holmes claimed to have found.
Peter
Expert
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 7:47 am

Post by Peter »

The "cut-tree stumps" question is an interesting one. Once again there are several areas that might be candidates for the legend. The modern day Horse Country, Needle Canyon, Tortilla Country,Peters Mesa, Fish Creek, all sport groves of "cut stumps". Walt Gassler claimed that Tex Barkely found a pile of cut logs near the head of Peters Canyon, and surmised this was the pile that Waltz used to cover his mine shaft. Candidates for the type of tree are also varied..mesquite? laurel? Who knows.
S.C.
Part Timer
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 10:45 am

RE:

Post by S.C. »

And palo verde and iron wood....
Wiz
Expert
Posts: 643
Joined: Fri May 24, 2002 2:55 am

Post by Wiz »

Just to jump-start this topic again:

Remember, the soldiers went up the creek for a ways, then encountered a waterfall/obstacle that prevented them from going further. They then retraced their steps until they found a way around the obstacle, and proceeded up the creek and up a high rough mountian.
Peter
Expert
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 7:47 am

Post by Peter »

To pick up where you left off, let me quote the following from Jim Bark:

"They ran onto a trail, and such a queer place for a trail. They concluded to follow it and see if it would lead them out of that God-forsaken country. They followed but a short distance and were in high hopes when the trail led them through a cave between the peaks. It must have been a foot trail, as animals could not go through the cave. They went a little further, and came to a tunnel that had been walled up, with a working above and over."

Clearly the Soldiers ran into their trail in an unexpected place. They followed it and it lead to the mine area. Simple, yes? Deering did the same thing. Same result...voila the mine! Why hasnt someone else done it since? Land changes? A human agent covered the mine? Who knows. Still its mighty peculiar that the mine was found twice in the early to mid-80s, then vanished for the next 120 years.


Note:
The Bark Notes resound with a search for a "lost" cave, crack or hole that Jim Bark thought was they key to the mines location. This "cave" is mentioned in at least 8 different anecdotes in seperate accounts involving different people. Bark clearly thought there was something to this clue.
I have wondered if he hadnt gotten " tunnel vision"..pun intended... (that is trying to see this very clue in all accounts that he collected).
Wiz
Expert
Posts: 643
Joined: Fri May 24, 2002 2:55 am

Post by Wiz »

You mean until he got tired of the hole thing...
señor x
Greenhorn
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 8:52 pm

Post by señor x »

I see how the mine could have been covered up, but wouldn't the trail still be there? Even after much time, the vegetation would only grow back slowly. I guess by now even if a faint trail was there, it appears to lead to nothing. I wonder if anyone has tried to use Landsat or other satellite photos to locate old trails. I know archeologists have used this method to find old caravan trails thousands of years old. They also use different spectral scans to identify vegetation changes. Of course, the satt photos I've seen of the Superstition region have such deep shadows in them due to the rugged terrain that they might be useless for this purpose.

On the issue of using things like old trails or cut trees as clues to mining activity, how did the searchers know that these are not of Indian origin? If you found a "deeply worn trail" in the Superstitions in the 1880s, wouldn't it be more likely from Indians who used the area over the course of decades rather than relatively brief use by mining parties? Any of the signs of Anglo use (horse shoes, spurs, barrels, etc) could easily be from Indian tribes since they raided and made off with all of these things. As for groves of cut trees, are there really no reasons that Indians could have done this? Perhaps for building brush shelters?
Peter
Expert
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 7:47 am

Post by Peter »

Your remarks about the trail are on the mark. The problem , of course, is the interim of time that has passed and this along with the land changes (whether this means eathquake, fire or flood) must have wreaked havoc along whatever faint trails still exist. I agree with you though, it was much easier covering a mine shaft(s) and tunnel than it was covering an old trail. The microstructure of the soil gets so out of whack the trail (which I beleive still exisits in some places) can still be faintly seen today.

As for satellite and aerial photos...

I have a collection of photos from various areas of the Superstition Wilderness. SOME trails (such as the trails in Barkley Basin) are very easy to pick out. Trails in the area that might hold the mine are..well lets just say LESS easy. lol (actually nonexistent on most photos).

Were Indians (and in this case we are talking Apache) responsible for groves of cut trees in the Superstition Wilderness? Absolutely not.
None of the Apache bands made the Superstitions their permanent home.
Whatever shelter transient bands of Apache might use in the Superstitions
simply didnt involve hard physical labor..that is: chopping down groves of trees. They might throw together some brush shelters (gowas) but that was about it.

Apache men simply did not do any physical labor. That was for the women to do. The men busied themselves with warfare, hunting, religous practice and the preparation for those activities. The thought of an Apache chopping down a tree (to an old-time warrior) would be ludicrous. In fact the last Chiricahua hold outs of the late 1880s had a hard time adjusting to reservation life because of the male disdain for physical labor....though they eventually found a profession they were quite good at: ranchers and cowboys. They ended up having huge profitable herds of cattle at both Ft Sill and later Mescalero in N.M.

Another interesting anecdote since I am on the subject..the Chiricahua were talented, natural athletes and their teams reguarly played (and defeated..to their great delight) teams of troopers and people from surrounding towns in Americas pastime....baseball!
Roger
Part Timer
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 5:00 pm

Two Soldiers - What Was Their Path?????

Post by Roger »

Quote from Bark Notes on Two Soldiers:
"So, they struck out toward the King, and struck a trail which they had been told was the proper one to take. They followed it for several miles to a creek crossing, where there was water. The trail after that, appeared to run nearly north and the King was nearly south, so while they felt certain that the trail would eventually land them at the King, it must be a long way around, and they were tired. They decided to make a short cut, went up this creek for a distance, CAME TO A WATERFALL, and could go no further. They came back down the creek, and finally go out on the side of the creek toward the King and up on a very rough and high mountain. There was no trail. They struck out, always trying to work toward their destination, but making very slow progress. They ran onto a trail and such a queer place for a trail. They concluded to follow it and see if it wouldn't lead them out of that God-forsaken country. They followed it but a short distance, and were in high hopes when the trail led them THROUGH a cave between the peaks. They went on a little further and came to a tunnel that had been walled up, with workings above and over"

Assuming that the trail the two soldiers took out of Ft. McDowell was the Apache trail, then where would the above description put them?
One interpretation would be that they left the Apache trail at the Tortilla creek crossing and they went up Tortilla creek into Tortilla Mtn. There is a good sized falls on Tortilla Creek there and if it was running would be difficult to pass. If they backed up and got out on the mountain to the South (towards the King), they would have been up on Tortilla Mtn. Since they did not travel far on the mtn they got onto, this would indicate they found the trail on the northern end of Tortilla Mtn and the mine was in that region. People have written that gold can be panned below the falls on Tortilla Creek.

In doing research on the LDM, I do believe that Jacob Waltz was a cagey old dog and gave many clues that were correctly stated but would in fact throw the searcher off the trail. Two examples:

1. Al Morror says in his book that Herman Petrasch quoted Jacob as saying the "Old Jake's mine was where no pack animal could ever go. A double pack trail led right up to the tunnel." Sounds like double talk - right? But based on the Bark notes, he was probably correct. A double pack trail could have led up to the cave (read tunnel) entrance that one must go through to get to the mine. Bark also indicates that animals could not go through it.

2. " Setting sun would shine into the entrance to the mine". This clue would place the mine on the East side of a mtn above a North-South running canyon if directly read. However, if Jake was using the cave that one must go through as the "entrance" to the mine, this could have resulted in a different answer. If one had to go through the cave a short distance and then down to the mine, there is a good chance the cave entrance faced East but the mine was on the West wall of the canyon.

Did Jake give these "correct clues" to throw serarchers off? I would suspect he was a lot smarter than people give him credit for.

Comments?

Roger
Peter
Expert
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 7:47 am

Post by Peter »

Excellent post. Not because you are right or wrong but because you bring up some points that cause folks to think and work themselves toward a logical conclusion.

Your Tortilla Creek idea is quite possible in my opinion. I beleive the Soldiers turned off the Apache Trail in the vicinity of Tortilla Creek. Travelling towards the perceived direction of the Silver King would have sent them down Tortilla Creek to the waterfall in that vicinity. Is the LDM up in the high country on Tortilla? Many respected searchers think this is a distinct possiblity.

The Morrow/Petrasch clue concerning the "double pack trail" that lead up to the tunnel can also be looked at in a different light. Perhaps it wasnt double speak, but meant to be taken literally with Waltz meaning that the tunnel and MINE AREA (read this as the area of the shaft(s)) were seperate entities in his mind. Perhaps an animal trail lead up to the tunnel..BUT the area ABOVE the tunnel (where the "mine" was located)was so rough that no animal could possibly reach it.

I am not terribly sure how valid the "cave" clue or the "setting sun" clue are. Those are clues that never really rang true with me...but I may well be wrong.
señor x
Greenhorn
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 8:52 pm

Post by señor x »

One key to deciphering this is to figure out the alignment of the trails at the time of the story. The soldier story refers to it as the "proper one to take" to get to the Silver King; the key being where the trail seemed to swing northward away from the general direction of the King.

Brownie Holmes refers to the government trail to San Carlos, and finding a spot where the trail turns south. (or did he reverse the direction to be tricky, and its also where the trail turns north?). In his manuscript, his father describes this trail as running past Hackberry, 2nd Water, NE to Tortilla, then SE to the head of Peters.

After reading Glover's book, you get a sense of how difficult it is to find the alignment of the old trails in the areas. Even with an old military map, its still a guessing game due to the lack of named landmarks, name changes over the years, etc. It's almost as difficult as trying to decipher one of the LDM maps!
Peter
Expert
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun May 19, 2002 7:47 am

Post by Peter »

I agree, just trying to find the place the soldiers turned south is difficult.
Mormon Flat? Tortilla? Fish Creek? Seeing the terrain up close and personal is helpful. I have always considered the soldiers cutting off trail from the vicinity of present day Tortilla Flats. The climb up the Apache Trail at that point (towards the east) is a steep one and the trail does cut back north from there. If they were tired and looking for a short-cut, Tortilla Creek might have seemed a logical route..until they hiked down it for about 1/2 mile or so ..lol
Joe Ribaudo
Expert
Posts: 5453
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm

Deering/Soldiers Trail

Post by Joe Ribaudo »

The Joe Deering story has always bothered me. "Half way up the side of the mountain.....he came across an old trail, a very old trail worn deeper into the rock than any other trail he had seen in that country". WORN INTO THE ROCK! "He followed it for probably six or seven miles". I have possesed areial pictures taken for topographic maps for many years. I have also flown over the mountains several times in a chopper and taken my own pictures with camera and Palmcorder. It's amazing how faint trails that are on the soil, not rock, still show up. Sometimes you have to use a magnifying glass to follow them. A trail worn into the rock is a very well traveled trail. The LDM did not get worked to the point that such a trail would have been created. Think about how long it would take to wear a trail into solid rock. A trail on the side of a mountain would be used by animals and would be around for a very long time. Do you really believe there is an UNKNOWN trail in the Superstitions longer then the six or seven miles he described? He does not say he found the begining of the trail, and states he took another trail on his second trip back to his camp. There are a limited number of "ghastly, creepy places" in the Supes. Anyone care to name them?
Last edited by Joe Ribaudo on Fri Sep 27, 2002 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
don
Part Timer
Posts: 403
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2002 12:17 pm
Location: united kingdom

two soldiers?

Post by don »

is there any evidence the two soldiers ever existed?apart from the statements of mason that is. i find it curious that while theyre trail directions are remembered - the amount of gold they supposedly recovered is remembered- even what they were wearing is rembered. but minor points such as their names or the date this happened are forgotten. pretty convenient i would say.could it be that this is just another contrived tale?
S.C.
Part Timer
Posts: 339
Joined: Mon May 20, 2002 10:45 am

Two Soldiers...

Post by S.C. »

As background to move the topic along, I offer the following. A lot of this maybe was presented before in this forum. Maybe even exactly as I am presenting again now – because this issue keeps coming up. Those of you familiar with the literature on the subject might have already encountered some of it before as presented by others - like Robert Blair, Tom Kollenborn, and Thomas Glover. Maybe it is not new, but it is maybe presented in a different way. I think a few things might even be new…

The tale of the Lost Dutchman and all associated stories attached to it have come under criticism from skeptics. The tale of the Two Soldiers is no less a victim of such criticism. Was there a historical basis of the Two Soldiers tale? The skeptics might easily try to say there wasn’t. Some would say that it was at best a perverted evolution of some other tale. However, there is a large body of direct and indirect evidence that indicate the Two Soldiers tale was an event with a basis in reality.

Robert Blair, for one, assumed the Two Soldiers tale never happened. He assumed it was a perversion of something else entirely different. His claim is that the real event of a soldier (Sullivan) finding ore at a site that would one day become the Silver King was the basis of the tale. He claims the story simply was an elaboration of this event – but twisted way out of proportions – and most certainly could not be used to support the existence of a gold mine in the Superstition Mountains. Blair goes so far as to claim that while there might have been an erroneous “oral tradition” of the perverted soldier tale going around central Arizona, the first time that the tale now known as the Two Soldiers actually appeared in print was in Barry Storm’s “Trail of the Lost Dutchman” published in 1939. Quite simply, Blair did not look hard enough. There are several old newspaper articles that reference the Two Soldiers tale. They all date years before Barry Storm’s book.

So, if Blair and the other skeptics are possibly wrong, then what might be correct? Perhaps the exact opposite. There is much direct and indirect evidence that the tale of the Two Soldiers had a basis in a real historical event. This consists of references in early newspapers, unpublished manuscripts, private journals, and testimony of individuals that were at the Silver King at the time the Two Soldiers came through. Much of this has been presented by Thomas Glover in his first book and is implied by others. However, I present below this information again as a listing of these primary and secondary sources.

"Primary Source"/"Secondary Source"

Frank Beston/“The Williamson Manuscript” – circa 1900

Dan Flahrity/Jim McCarthy - “Indian Fighting, Gold, Silver, and Adventures in the Superstition Mountains” - May 17th, 1931 (Arizona Daily Star – Tucson, AZ)

Jack Frazier/Barry Storm - “Trail of the Lost Dutchman” (1939) and “Thunder Gods Gold” (1945)

Bob Bowen/Sims Ely - “The Lost Dutchman Mine” – 1953

Col. A.J. Doran/Sims Ely - “The Lost Dutchman Mine” – 1953

Wiley Holman/Jim Bark - “The Bark Notes” – circa 1914 to 1938

John Chunning/Jim Bark – “The Bark Notes” – circa 1914 to 1938
and Sims Ely - “The Lost Dutchman Mine” - 1953

Aaron Mason/C.C. Mason - Mason Family Historian (Glover Interview - circa 1990s)

So, we have eight different primary sources relating their tales through six different secondary sources with all essentially telling the same story. So, as Thomas Glover aptly put it, were Beston, Flahrity, Frazier, Bowen, Doran, Holman, Chunning, Aaron Mason, Williamson, McCarthy, Storm, Ely, Bark, and C.C. Mason all wrong? Hardly…

Also, there is an interesting reference in an unpublished manuscript written by long time Dutch Hunter, Chuck Aylor, back in the 1940s. His manuscript references that John Pipps (THE John Pipps mentioned in the Holmes Manuscript) was part of the search party that found the soldiers’ bodies. Pipps was a member of the group that had backtracked and found the second soldier near Bluff Springs Mountain. Where Aylor got this information is not known. But he must have got it somewhere. The same reference is also found in an unpublished manuscript written by another long time Dutch Hunter, Abe Reed. Reed wrote his document in the 1950s. Where Reed and Aylor got their information is not known. But it appears to be a common source.

It is interesting to note that both Jim Bark and Barry Storm claim to have actually seen a copy of the corners’ inquest into the death of the soldier found near the old Marlowe Ranch. What became of that inquest is not known. Recent efforts to locate it have failed. We can only assume it was lost with time.

There is also what I call “indirect” evidence supporting the Two Soldiers. I consider it “indirect” in the sense that it is not explicit. Judge for yourself.

On July 27th, 1893 the Arizona Daily Star printed a story called “Rich Nuggets.” In it, it tells of Robert Bowen of Tempe, formerly with the Silver King mine, having spent 3 months, 13 years or so ago looking for “the lost treasure of the Superstitions…” (Remember Bowen was one of Ely’s sources for the Two Soldier tale.) What were they referring to? The Dutchman had only been dead a little over a year and a half. His mine was not “lost” until his death. So, what could they have been referring to that was “lost” 13 years before? The only thing could have been the Two Soldiers’ lost mine. Thus, the story had been in the public consciousness for about 10 to 13 years.

There is another story. On August 4th, 1893 the Phoenix Daily Herald ran a story called “Superstition Nugget.” It mentions that a prospecting party found a large gold nugget in the Superstition range and the reader should remember that the Superstition range was the same range that “two men on a prospecting expedition entered and the fate of them has never been known”… While not explicit, it implies a public consciousness of an event. Two men. Their “fate never known”… Death? Murder? Was this a reference to the Two Soldiers? (The story mentions men – not soldiers. But remember, actually they were “ex-soldiers” at the time…)

On Sept. 12, 1901 the Arizona Weekly Republican ran a story entitled “LOST SOLDIER MINE – A Much Talked of Property Found by a Tucson Man.” In it is stated that the “celebrated Lost Soldier Mine has been the object of so much careful search and much heated discussion regarding its location…” The story relates that a man supposedly “found” the mine.

Another article that ran in the Arizona Republican on May 5, 1904 was titled “PINAL COUNTY MINES – Ash Creek Strike Believed to be the Old Soldier Property.” Yet again, someone claimed to have found the Soldiers’ Mine. Did they? No. But, like the other story, these people thought they did, too. The article states the mine that was found could be “the Lost Soldier Mine for which hundreds have searched for in vain…”

There is yet another gem. There was an article in the Arizona Republican on May 1, 1922 entitled “Third Map Leading to Famous Lost Dutchman Mine Uncovered in Globe.” The story references Ernest Pankinin (he is not explicitly named, though), the murder of two prospectors (the soldiers), a military connection to Ft. McDowell, and the swamper that supposedly trailed and murdered the two soldiers.

These implied that a knowledge of the tale as we know it today existed decades prior to Storm’s supposed “creation” of the tale and putting it to print.

One might ask, where there any contemporary (“contemporary” meaning happening at that time frame, 1879-1884) newspaper references to the story of the Two Soldiers? After all, murder is a pretty serious matter and would make an interesting story for a newspaper. To that question, I can only give a “mystery” in response. During that time frame in question, and during no other, for some reason there are “missing issues” of newspapers. This includes the entire region surrounding the Superstitions. The “old” forum had posts speculating what could have happened. I will not get into that. But, the fact is, finding such articles would indeed be difficult at this late of a date.

Like all thing involved with the LDM, we can never be 100% sure of anything. However, I think there is reasonable data to assume the Two Soldiers tale had a basis of some kind in historic fact.
Post Reply