Where you go into the range

[Joe Ribaudo]

Knun,

"And how long would unshod horses last in the Sup's?"

The Apache did not really care about the hooves of their horses. Most of their stock was stolen, and was already shod. The idea that they rode unshod ponies needs to regress back a few hundred years.

Usually, the first sign of a rancheria was a band of horses. As you know, the horse was a great deal more important to the Apache than a mode of transportation. They were also an important food source.

Matthew's assessment of the way battles were usually fought in that time period is correct, IMHO.

Don't mean to step on anyone's toes here, just a little idle chatter while we wait for the topic to get back on track.

Joe Ribaudo

[djui5]

2. Helen Corbin includes in "The Bible on the LDM" on pages 276 to 285 excerpts from Wm. Edwards diary. He details how he returned to the Massacre Site and then back tracked the battle to Marsh Valley, finding signs of the battle back along the trail. He also found evidence of mining/milling on top of Peters Mesa. This would indicate that the battle started in La Barge and then went up toward First Water and out onto the Massacre Grounds for the last stand. The Peraltas would have known that this is the most open route to the desert where they could escape on horses/mules - suspect the Indians were afoot.

Roger

This would actually make a lot of sense if the battle started up there. What about Bluff Springs mountain? If the battle started on Peters Mesa, we can "assume" either of 2 scenarios.

1: The Mexicans using Bluff Springs Mountain and the Mexicans killed in the massacre MIGHT not have been the same

2: The Mexicans using Bluff Springs Mountain might have been the same, and were headed to Bluff Springs Mountain with packs of ore on their final draw out of the mountains, and were caught off guard by attacking Indians.

My problem with the story is I've read somewhere that the battle happened as the Mexicans were headed South, to the East of the main range, were turned around, and the battle continued North along the East side of the main range ending around the corner at Massacre Grounds. The Mexicans were killed along the East end of the range with the last batch killed at Massacre Grounds.

This discounts the Marsh Valley scenario entirely, but which scenario is true?

I'd also be one to believe the Indians were on foot. I've known them to rarely battle from horseback. They lived on foot for thousands of years, and battling from horseback was not in their nature.

We still have to guess as to why the massacre happened in the first place. Were they just sic of the Mexicans being in the range all together? Was there a rape incident?

This calgary talk has been educational

[TGH]

Ahorse or afoot, grizzled oldster or youngster on his first raid, Tonto, Yavapais or Bedonkohe, no matter...the ONE force that drove all Apache warriors.....was vengeance.

TGH

[Joe Ribaudo]

Knun,

You said:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe,
I thought you were referring to specific people not bands or tribes. Oh, well.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It seems my words are often confusing, so welcome to the club, so to speak. Here is part of the post in question:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Few of us really know much about the Apache, but wouldn't we want to know which ones were in the Superstitions before 1850, rather than after?
I know who was in there, but would be interested in who you think was there, and why you feel it's important "from 1850 on".
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We were discussing the Apache, so I assumed no other "people" had entered the thread, at that point.

You are incorrect in your placement of the Yavapais. We are talking about the area of the Massacre Grounds, as far as I know. Would you care to give a source for your information, or are you writing a book?

How many Yavapais were around in 1873 seems well beyond the point. Where each of the subdivision of that tribe were in 1873, also seems inmaterial. If you feel it is important to break my statement down further, I will be happy to tell you where those sub-tribes were located during the period we are interested in.

Before I do that, I would like to know your sources for what you have stated as "fact".

Don't mean to step on anyone's toes here, just trying to follow the thread.

Joe Ribaudo

[Joe Ribaudo]

Peter,

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

TGH
Expert


Joined: 05 Nov 2004
Posts: 677

Posted: Thu Aug 17, 2006 8:49 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ahorse or afoot, grizzled oldster or youngster on his first raid, Tonto, Yavapais or Bedonkohe, no matter...the ONE force that drove all Apache warriors.....was vengeance.

TGH

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry, Peter, that is not a correct statement.

There is a distinct difference between a "raid" and a "war party". You have described a "war party" not a raid. A raid was for "things", not "vengeance". I am surprised you would make such a simple mistake.
Before you speak about the Apache, you should confir with Matthew, as others do.

He has been a good source for me, in the past, and you would do well to run your "Apache" posts by the real expert on this Forum before making any rash statements.

"Yavapais"? I made that mistake myself, once.

Joe Ribaudo

[Knun]

Joe,
The point of your last post to me is what?

Have I written something you can add to?

Please try to stay on topic. It's to the benefit of all the other forum members.

As for a source you only have to look at the sources you used.

[zentull]

There are several questions that cannot be answered..........
What set the Apaches off is just the first. Was it a small party saw where the Peraltas had moved their operations and they became aware of it?
It could be a war party or with the amount of plunder a huge raiding party as well.

The Peralta presence in a particular area could have been a surprise to the Apaches. With a number of possible sites to pick from, which is the one that would raise or catch their interest ?

[djui5]

That's a highly likely scenario. The Mexicans were intruding on a sacred land, maybe a burial ground...

You're right, we'll never know.

[azmula]

Deleted

[Joe Ribaudo]

Knun,

Like many of my posts, the point was to explain what I said in a previous post, to someone who has a hard time understanding what they have just read. Our topic, at the time, was the Apache. You thought, for some unknown reason, we might have been talking about others.

I brought quotes from both of our posts, hoping that would allow you to understand what we were talking about. Seeing both together, not having to go back and forth, seems to have been no help.

That's the best I can do without pictures.

Pre-conquest, is the period we were discussing. You are mixing in "post-conquest". Reread my sources, and pay a little more attention to the dates.

If you need it, I will run down the history of the Yavapais, in one of the new forums.

Joe Ribaudo

[Joe Ribaudo]

Knun,

"To pick out the Iiwilkamepa as the primary clan is correct but misleading. They were not the only clan nearby."

Actually I was "correct", but not "misleading. I was not trying to name every branch of Yavapais within riding distance, or in this case, walking distance.

Pre-conquest is the key word here.

"...Yavapai and Pai families considered each other outsiders or foreigners and, oftentimes, enemies.......the preconquest Yavapais were decidedly not a unified population.....Preconquest Yavapais lived and worked in relatively small groups formed around nuclear and extended families.....the preconquest Yavapai past is best viewed as the activity of many small independent camps". (Timothy Braatz)

Are we now saying that the massacre took place after 1850? I happen to believe that is what happened, but it does put a different light on the entire story.

Glad to see you picked up some of the books I recommended.

Joe Ribaudo

[azstomper]

Although i have never hunted the LDM...as i considered it to risky of a situation to get myself into when i lived down there (west phx) for 12 years....plus the story the owner (elaine?) of pro mack told me of her husband getting shot out there over his claim. I firmly believe the spaniard end of things...ie markers etc. How the peralta's came across the mines i know not. But reading this post sparked a memory of something i read or heard when i lived there. The story was situated somewhere near prescott....and an old man claiming to be a perallta and having issues with the new owners of his spanish land grant. Can anyone shed some light on that nugget of info? Last time i was doewn working my markers was in march and i was amazed at the new apache casino where i stopped for fuel. I wonder if there are any written or recorded histories from the apaches themselves and their dealings with the spaniards.

Also someone mentioned to me i have a pic of an arrasta that looks like one i have found in an area aways from the supers...can someone send me there pic to compare and see if they might have ended up in my area...? [email protected].

DW

[Joe Ribaudo]

DW,

Welcome to the LDM Forum.

The Apache did not have a written language in the Spanish era, thus they have no "historical" writings. The best you can do, without personal contact with Apache Historians, is to read the many books written by "others".

Without giving away the location, can you tell us which direction "away(s) from the supers" you took that "arrastra" picture? Not how far......just what direction.

Thanks,

Joe Ribaudo

[azstomper]

I would assume you have seen the pic of the arrasta i have posted on another forum....

It would be NW of the supers. I'm convinced much more was going on in az than the records kept by the spanish we all are familiar with. Hispanic arizona is an excellant book to learn how far north the settlements where and what familys had the land grants.

Allthough i have a real arrasta i can not be certain it was built by the spanish and or mexicans in the time frame we all work within. However with the amount of markers in the area i would say its a good bet it is...if not by the markers...then the ID of the drill hole in the stone that was dragged in the arrasta as it seems to be a repeating theme in some of the other markers in the area. I just need to learn to dechiper what the holes mean as far as direction....depth...and distance...and how to read them to come up with that info.

The pic i took was over 6 years ago...and the other forum where i posted the arrasta it was mentioned it looks exactly like one posted here...i would still like to see those pics.

DW

[djui5]

They're gone. It was an identical picture though. I remember it quite well, having photographic memory and all. It is a very unique picture.

[azstomper]

Very strange as there are less than 4 people who have seen that picture....i'm looking for another i have of me in my battle rattle crouched down next to it....once i do i may post it.

DW