Hello, Joe.
Boy... You still have it in your mind that Waltz "lied" to Holmes to throw him off. I will contend that at one time time Jacob Waltz wanted Julia Thomas to have a good chance of finding the mine. (Or cache...) But, because of circumstances during his final hours, what may have started off as a death-bed "confession" of crimes turned into instructions on how to get to the mine. I think it is highly probable that what Waltz said to Roberts and Holmes then was indeed correct. Afterall, history supports that version of the story - and NOT the Thomas version with partners and Mexican Dons and card games and Apache's killing people and stuff like that... If anything, Waltz was talking (confessing) to Gideon Roberts - a long time friend - a person who had been part of his life for decades - and not young Dick Holmes. Holmes was there - and able to get to the mine - and maybe because of that Waltz talked - but it was because of Roberts' presence that Waltz "opened up..."
We can make conjectures all day long about where the Two Soldiers went. But today we will never know for sure anything. Let alone what route they took.
Deering Comments
SC
The problem I think Joe has is the following (and Joe forgive me for paraphrasing).
If the Holmes directions are correct........ If both the Soldiers and Deering stories are true.....and if these directions send one to a specific area in the mountains.... then why in Hades has the LDM not been found , as that area, however rugged and remote it might be, has been gone over by experts for 100 years?
There may well be something to this line of reasoning, and Joe asks a reasonable question through all his dander and bluster. I believe (and of course I could be wrong)the answer to Joes question and to the location of the mine can be summed up in 3-4 well placed sentences...but I wouldnt be doing Joe or anyone else any favors uttering them on this forum.
The problem I think Joe has is the following (and Joe forgive me for paraphrasing).
If the Holmes directions are correct........ If both the Soldiers and Deering stories are true.....and if these directions send one to a specific area in the mountains.... then why in Hades has the LDM not been found , as that area, however rugged and remote it might be, has been gone over by experts for 100 years?
There may well be something to this line of reasoning, and Joe asks a reasonable question through all his dander and bluster. I believe (and of course I could be wrong)the answer to Joes question and to the location of the mine can be summed up in 3-4 well placed sentences...but I wouldnt be doing Joe or anyone else any favors uttering them on this forum.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
The Trail
Peter,
The directions on how to find the mine are fairly specific, once you find the Joe Deering camp area and trail. The trick is no trick, only a hole which is on the trail. No mention of side canyons, forks in the trail or any other things which might lead you astray once you are on the correct trail.
The Two Soldiers stumbled on the mine by accident. Joe Deering found it by accident. With eye witness accounts of the stories of both the Two Soldiers and Joe Deering, and with visual confirmation that both had very rich ore, there is little doubt that they found something. With the accounts of both parties, and the discovery of Deerings Trail, countless searchers have been unable to locate the mine in over one hundred years of constant hunting. Like you, I find Jim Barks notes worth quoting in this story. He had the best witnesses and wrote down what they told him. If anyone had the true story, it was Jim Bark. If no one has found the mine in one hundred (plus) years, when it was found twice by accident, something is wrong with the story, not the searchers. That has led me to question the original story. The most obvious suspicion
should fall on the description of how they found the mine. With the Two Soldiers, common sense regarding what route they took to the Silver King makes their story questionable. A lot has been added to both stories over the years. I am not sure much of it was truthful. Two accidental findings of the LDM, nothing since. Does that give you any doubts as to the truth of the stories, at all?
Since you are the accepted authority (on this forum) concerning these two stories, it would be interesting if you would address this post and give us all the benifit of your knowledge. That comment is not made "tongue in cheek" but with real respect for the research you have done.
I have made every effort to remove any signs of "dander and bluster" from this post. I have never been angry or had a temper here, so I am not sure "dander" was appropriate.
Joe
The directions on how to find the mine are fairly specific, once you find the Joe Deering camp area and trail. The trick is no trick, only a hole which is on the trail. No mention of side canyons, forks in the trail or any other things which might lead you astray once you are on the correct trail.
The Two Soldiers stumbled on the mine by accident. Joe Deering found it by accident. With eye witness accounts of the stories of both the Two Soldiers and Joe Deering, and with visual confirmation that both had very rich ore, there is little doubt that they found something. With the accounts of both parties, and the discovery of Deerings Trail, countless searchers have been unable to locate the mine in over one hundred years of constant hunting. Like you, I find Jim Barks notes worth quoting in this story. He had the best witnesses and wrote down what they told him. If anyone had the true story, it was Jim Bark. If no one has found the mine in one hundred (plus) years, when it was found twice by accident, something is wrong with the story, not the searchers. That has led me to question the original story. The most obvious suspicion
should fall on the description of how they found the mine. With the Two Soldiers, common sense regarding what route they took to the Silver King makes their story questionable. A lot has been added to both stories over the years. I am not sure much of it was truthful. Two accidental findings of the LDM, nothing since. Does that give you any doubts as to the truth of the stories, at all?
Since you are the accepted authority (on this forum) concerning these two stories, it would be interesting if you would address this post and give us all the benifit of your knowledge. That comment is not made "tongue in cheek" but with real respect for the research you have done.
I have made every effort to remove any signs of "dander and bluster" from this post. I have never been angry or had a temper here, so I am not sure "dander" was appropriate.
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
confusion
Peter,
Sorry I did not make that clearer. I should have said if the crow flew in straight lines. He would make a number of changes of direction, without making every turn on every switchback on the trails. He would just follow the approximate trails that would actually be taken by the Two Soldiers. I could send you a topo with both trails outlined, if necessary. They would be almost identical in length, if you take out the switchbacks and the up and down parts. Why would you inject Florence into this theory? Perhaps you should look at a map before you dismiss this possible route. You are much too eager to put down anything I say. You could be using your skills and obvious intellect to prove me wrong by presenting facts. You choose instead to take the easy way out, by attacking the messenger and not the message.
Just where would the appropriate forum be, for your "3-4 well placed sentences"? I have no problem saying everything I want to say on this forum. You have already said everything you can concerning your opinion of me and my theories, I hope. The only thing left, would be more dangling secrets.
S.C.,
I admit it is tough to use the logic of today to solve this mystery. I am only trying to use the information available to sort out the truth, at least in my own mind. The old conclusions and stories have not led anywhere. A new outlook on the combined legends and evidence may be called for.
Thank's for your input.
Joe
Joe
Sorry I did not make that clearer. I should have said if the crow flew in straight lines. He would make a number of changes of direction, without making every turn on every switchback on the trails. He would just follow the approximate trails that would actually be taken by the Two Soldiers. I could send you a topo with both trails outlined, if necessary. They would be almost identical in length, if you take out the switchbacks and the up and down parts. Why would you inject Florence into this theory? Perhaps you should look at a map before you dismiss this possible route. You are much too eager to put down anything I say. You could be using your skills and obvious intellect to prove me wrong by presenting facts. You choose instead to take the easy way out, by attacking the messenger and not the message.
Just where would the appropriate forum be, for your "3-4 well placed sentences"? I have no problem saying everything I want to say on this forum. You have already said everything you can concerning your opinion of me and my theories, I hope. The only thing left, would be more dangling secrets.
S.C.,
I admit it is tough to use the logic of today to solve this mystery. I am only trying to use the information available to sort out the truth, at least in my own mind. The old conclusions and stories have not led anywhere. A new outlook on the combined legends and evidence may be called for.
Thank's for your input.
Joe
Joe
Last edited by Joe Ribaudo on Sat Dec 06, 2003 8:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Joe
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
<<"As the crow flies, both routes are approximatly 70.5 miles long.">>
My apologies. I was foolish to assume that when you said
the above you REALLY meant that a crow would really fly in a SERIES of "straight lines", magically making the distance from McDowell to Pinal equal whether one took the shortcut or the long-way around. I was silly enough to simply find the shortest route between McDowell and Pinal and measure distance thusly. I had always been under the impression that a crow flew in a straight line...as far as measuring distances goes.
My fault.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
<<"As the crow flies, both routes are approximatly 70.5 miles long.">>
My apologies. I was foolish to assume that when you said
the above you REALLY meant that a crow would really fly in a SERIES of "straight lines", magically making the distance from McDowell to Pinal equal whether one took the shortcut or the long-way around. I was silly enough to simply find the shortest route between McDowell and Pinal and measure distance thusly. I had always been under the impression that a crow flew in a straight line...as far as measuring distances goes.
My fault.
Old Stuff
Joe,
Perhaps you are correct. So far, no one has used the old stuff and been able to find anything. New approaches are always needed. However, I have not given up on some of the old stuff - no matter how debateable to others a lot of it might be.
SC
Perhaps you are correct. So far, no one has used the old stuff and been able to find anything. New approaches are always needed. However, I have not given up on some of the old stuff - no matter how debateable to others a lot of it might be.
SC
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Circles
Peter,
A crow seldom flies in a straight line. It appears this concept is beyond you, but trying to have a man travel in a straight line from Fort McDowell to Pinal is not possible on the ground. You have replied three times and said nothing. I assume that is all you can think of. No sense in giving this theory another thought, as I think you have run out of them. The idea was not to get a crow from the fort to Pinal, but a man. Your thinking is purposely linear rather than abstract. A closed mind is apparent in that thinking. I am sure there is no way, other than what has been repeated all these years. Linear thinking may or may not be enough to find the LDM, but in your case, it will have to do.
Joe
A crow seldom flies in a straight line. It appears this concept is beyond you, but trying to have a man travel in a straight line from Fort McDowell to Pinal is not possible on the ground. You have replied three times and said nothing. I assume that is all you can think of. No sense in giving this theory another thought, as I think you have run out of them.
The idea was not to get a crow from the fort to Pinal, but a man. Your thinking is purposely linear rather than abstract. A closed mind is apparent in that thinking. I am sure there is no way, other than what has been repeated all these years. Linear thinking may or may not be enough to find the LDM, but in your case, it will have to do. Joe
Joe
You see...this is the problem with you.
If I was speaking to any other person in America they would understand
that the phrase "as the crow flies" implies the shortest distance between 2 points. You, however, have this inner need to go into convulsions over explaining away a minor flaw in your theory that I pointed out.
So I scored a debate point or two. Who cares?
And yes I am aware that a crow or raven generally does not fly in a straight line. I have observed the movements of those animals with interest on more than one occasion.
You see...this is the problem with you.
If I was speaking to any other person in America they would understand
that the phrase "as the crow flies" implies the shortest distance between 2 points. You, however, have this inner need to go into convulsions over explaining away a minor flaw in your theory that I pointed out.
So I scored a debate point or two. Who cares?
And yes I am aware that a crow or raven generally does not fly in a straight line. I have observed the movements of those animals with interest on more than one occasion.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Good Point?
Peter,
You have made an excellent point. Trying to draw a comparison between how a crow flies and how a man travels through the mountains was just too confusing. I surrender the debate points to you, without making a single point (in your mind) concerning the merits of any other possible route for the Two Soldiers. Your single minded absortion with semantics, spelling and scoring debate points, while sacrificing the exchange of ideas and common courtesy is relentless. As I look back on our recent posts, trying to find a reason for your intelectual demise, I wonder if my comment on the spelling of Mangas or my correction of your statement that the Apache did no farming was the catalyst for your blank mental expression. Speaking of corrections, did you just admit that Joe Deering found the mine by accident? That would be a change from your previous statement. Would that be a point for me on your debate scorecard? I have no idea of what our scores are, but I am certain you have it recorded somewhere. You have completely enticed me off the topic here, so I am sure that must be a point in your favor. If you bring your own level of discourse to a more respectful exchange, I will be happy to reciprocate. I find no point or value in continuing this nonsense, and I admit I have had no small part in its continuance. I will give you the final word (and score) in this little vendetta of words, as opposed to ideas.
Joe
You have made an excellent point. Trying to draw a comparison between how a crow flies and how a man travels through the mountains was just too confusing. I surrender the debate points to you, without making a single point (in your mind) concerning the merits of any other possible route for the Two Soldiers. Your single minded absortion with semantics, spelling and scoring debate points, while sacrificing the exchange of ideas and common courtesy is relentless. As I look back on our recent posts, trying to find a reason for your intelectual demise, I wonder if my comment on the spelling of Mangas or my correction of your statement that the Apache did no farming was the catalyst for your blank mental expression. Speaking of corrections, did you just admit that Joe Deering found the mine by accident? That would be a change from your previous statement. Would that be a point for me on your debate scorecard?
I have no idea of what our scores are, but I am certain you have it recorded somewhere. You have completely enticed me off the topic here, so I am sure that must be a point in your favor. If you bring your own level of discourse to a more respectful exchange, I will be happy to reciprocate. I find no point or value in continuing this nonsense, and I admit I have had no small part in its continuance. I will give you the final word (and score) in this little vendetta of words, as opposed to ideas.Joe
Well...I will accept your surrender and try to be a kinder, gentler soul for now on.
The question as to whether or not Deering found the mine by accident is an interesting one. He was in the mountains for a purpose: to find the trail that the Soldiers cut that lead them to a rich mine. However, he stumbled upon that same trail by accident (allegedly looking for his burro). So
did he find the mine by accident also? Depends upon your point of view I guess.
P
PS <<As I look back on our recent posts, trying to find a reason for your intelectual demise.>>
Not too sure you should be so worried about my "intelectual" demise.
Perhaps a quick consultation of a handy dictionary every now and then might aid in halting your own.....
The question as to whether or not Deering found the mine by accident is an interesting one. He was in the mountains for a purpose: to find the trail that the Soldiers cut that lead them to a rich mine. However, he stumbled upon that same trail by accident (allegedly looking for his burro). So
did he find the mine by accident also? Depends upon your point of view I guess.
P
PS <<As I look back on our recent posts, trying to find a reason for your intelectual demise.>>
Not too sure you should be so worried about my "intelectual" demise.
Perhaps a quick consultation of a handy dictionary every now and then might aid in halting your own.....
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
By Design
Peter,
What is your source for Joe Deering searching for the Two Soldiers trail? Could it be that version was added at a later date? You have quoted Jim Bark "verbatim" recently. Do you believe he is something of an authority on this subject or do you just use portions of his notes on the Joe Deering story? This story has been changing since Joe told John Chuning. It is still changing today.
I have always had a problem understanding the English language, and apologize for those shortcomings.
Joe
What is your source for Joe Deering searching for the Two Soldiers trail? Could it be that version was added at a later date? You have quoted Jim Bark "verbatim" recently. Do you believe he is something of an authority on this subject or do you just use portions of his notes on the Joe Deering story? This story has been changing since Joe told John Chuning. It is still changing today.
I have always had a problem understanding the English language, and apologize for those shortcomings.
Joe
Joe
Sources I use for Deering include Bark, Chunning, Holmes, Reser, Reid
and a couple of others that I have come across. What interests me is that some of the more offbeat sources dont quote Bark directly...perhaps they gleaned their info from contemporaries of Chunning? I cant say for sure.
If you have difficulty with English try dabbling in Apache..now thats a fun language to learn. Love those glottal stops and nasal pitches....
Sources I use for Deering include Bark, Chunning, Holmes, Reser, Reid
and a couple of others that I have come across. What interests me is that some of the more offbeat sources dont quote Bark directly...perhaps they gleaned their info from contemporaries of Chunning? I cant say for sure.
If you have difficulty with English try dabbling in Apache..now thats a fun language to learn. Love those glottal stops and nasal pitches....
The Crow
I would like to us the "what would I do method" of deduction for this quandry. From the obvious when simply looking at a map I would walk to the south of the mastif if I were the two soldiers in question. The point of crossing the Salt, weather the flat or somewhere nearer to the fort is irrelivant considering the terrain on foot. Anyone would have simply walked around the mountains, simply because the energy expended would have been far less than that consumed over the mountains. Ten miles around the mountain would probably have been the same time wise, as four miles over the mountains and probably been far easier to hike. Since the soldiers were not looking for anything, they just wanted to get to the Silver King the shortest way possible would have been around the range. In fact, the traditional reason given for the soldiers deviating from the "trail" was the tendency for the trail to head north! Doesn't the trail from the flat take you south? Doesn't the trail from the crossing which Joe describes direct you south, maybe southeast? Where would north ever come into play for a hike from the Fort to the Silver King???? As for Peter's bringing Florence into the discussion.....why? Florence has nothing whatsoever to do with traveling to the Silver King or even Pinal. What was "the trail to the Silver King" they were advised to use?
Joe and Peter,
Have either of you noticed the lack of postings on this thread other than the two of you? I find the juvenile bickering back and forth is degrading to the intent of this forum. You both have a lot of relavent information to offer but you do not seem to be able to communicate it without snide, cutting remarks to the other. Why can't you take it off line as private messages to each other? My interpretation of the intent of this forum is to discuss the LDM and the lore associated with the Superstions, not as a private battle field. Several people have tried to gently request a halt to this "childish" behavior and many others have just removed this forum from their favorites list. I hope you will start contributing to a constructive forum discussion again. If not I am going to join the growing ranks of those finding new sources for discussion of our favorite subject.
You claim it is all in fun or just your way but most of us do not see it the same and you are not the only two people wishing to use the forum. Please do not take personally what I have said and stop posting legitimate discussion points. If you personally need this type of communication take it off line. Thank you.
azmula
Have either of you noticed the lack of postings on this thread other than the two of you? I find the juvenile bickering back and forth is degrading to the intent of this forum. You both have a lot of relavent information to offer but you do not seem to be able to communicate it without snide, cutting remarks to the other. Why can't you take it off line as private messages to each other? My interpretation of the intent of this forum is to discuss the LDM and the lore associated with the Superstions, not as a private battle field. Several people have tried to gently request a halt to this "childish" behavior and many others have just removed this forum from their favorites list. I hope you will start contributing to a constructive forum discussion again. If not I am going to join the growing ranks of those finding new sources for discussion of our favorite subject.
You claim it is all in fun or just your way but most of us do not see it the same and you are not the only two people wishing to use the forum. Please do not take personally what I have said and stop posting legitimate discussion points. If you personally need this type of communication take it off line. Thank you.
azmula
<<In fact, the traditional reason given for the soldiers deviating from the "trail" was the tendency for the trail to head north! Doesn't the trail from the flat take you south?>>
I AM ASSUMING BY "FLAT" YOU MEAN THE CROSSING AT MORMON FLATS? IN 1884 TRAILS LEAD SOUTH, SOUTHEAST AND EAST (ISH) FROM HERE.
Doesn't the trail from the crossing which Joe describes direct you south, maybe southeast?
YES.
Where would north ever come into play for a hike from the Fort to the Silver King????
IF ONE FOLLOWED TODAYS APACHE TRAIL (WHICH BARK CLAIMS IS THE TRAIL THE SOLDIERS FOLLOWED) THE TRAIL TURNS NORTH AND UPHILL IN THE VICINITY OF TORTILLA FLATS.
As for Peter's bringing Florence into the discussion.....why?
IF YOU READ MY POST ON FLORENCE CAREFULLY, I SIMPLY MENTIONED IT IN PASSING AS A WAYPOINT BETWEEN AJ AND PINAL, SO FOLKS COULD FIGURE OUT THE MILEAGE IF THE SOLDIERS WENT THE LONG WAY ROUND. SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE SPECIFIED THAT.
Florence has nothing whatsoever to do with traveling to the Silver King or even Pinal.
CORRECT
What was "the trail to the Silver King" they were advised to use?>>
SEE ABOVE. THE APACHE TRAIL.
[/i]
I AM ASSUMING BY "FLAT" YOU MEAN THE CROSSING AT MORMON FLATS? IN 1884 TRAILS LEAD SOUTH, SOUTHEAST AND EAST (ISH) FROM HERE.
Doesn't the trail from the crossing which Joe describes direct you south, maybe southeast?
YES.
Where would north ever come into play for a hike from the Fort to the Silver King????
IF ONE FOLLOWED TODAYS APACHE TRAIL (WHICH BARK CLAIMS IS THE TRAIL THE SOLDIERS FOLLOWED) THE TRAIL TURNS NORTH AND UPHILL IN THE VICINITY OF TORTILLA FLATS.
As for Peter's bringing Florence into the discussion.....why?
IF YOU READ MY POST ON FLORENCE CAREFULLY, I SIMPLY MENTIONED IT IN PASSING AS A WAYPOINT BETWEEN AJ AND PINAL, SO FOLKS COULD FIGURE OUT THE MILEAGE IF THE SOLDIERS WENT THE LONG WAY ROUND. SORRY, I SHOULD HAVE SPECIFIED THAT.
Florence has nothing whatsoever to do with traveling to the Silver King or even Pinal.
CORRECT
What was "the trail to the Silver King" they were advised to use?>>
SEE ABOVE. THE APACHE TRAIL.
[/i]
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Old Tracks
Azmula,
I asked for someone to join the discussion, without results. The thread, for me, was the trail of the Two Soldiers. The mean spirited banter between Peter and I was pointless nonsense, which is what I stated a few posts ago. We had put it behind us, but I appreciate your bringing it up again. There was not much action anywhere on the forum during this time, but your point is well taken. Had anyone made a comment on the trail of the Two Soldiers, it might have changed the tone of the conversation. What is your opinion concerning the two trails?
I made a mistake with my map program. If anyone is interested, the most direct route between the fort and the King, using straight lines and not counting the up and down or switchbacks is around fifty miles plus or minus a couple of miles.
Knun,
You have voiced my points on the merits and problems of the two possible trails quite well. I believe Peter is the most qualified to address these questions with some facts, if we can clearly state our positions. I have a few more points to make here.
Peter,
What was the route the Two Soldiers intended to take, before deciding to cut through the Superstitions? Does that seem like a reasonable or prudent way to get to the King from Fort McDowell to you? If not, why did they go that way at all? If it seems logical to you, what were the advantages in going that way?
Florence, as you have just restated, is not a waypoint between Apache Junction and Pinal or the Silver King. You need to reread your (all in capitals) passage on this. That's why I suggested you might want to take a look at a map before considering, or dismissing, my theory.
Jim Bark does not say that Joe Deering was looking for the Two Soldiers Trail, but states that Deering was on his way to the Silver King. No mention in the Joe Deering section of Barks Notes concerning the Two Soldiers. When he found the trail he said "it excited my curiosity", no mention that he suspected it might be the trail of the soldiers, in fact no mention of the Two Soldiers, whatsoever. It does sound like Deering found the mine by chance. I believe Bark made the first written account of these facts, and they have been changing with every writer who followed him. I only have one copy of the Bark Notes, so it's possible one of the others says something different.
Sticking with Bark, he says " they struck out toward the King". If I were to strike "out toward the King", from Fort McDowell it would be southeast not east. Here is the important part of the quote; "So they struck out toward the King, crossed Salt river..." That sounds like they crossed the Salt fairly quickly and he makes no mention of their crossing the Verde. After that, they "struck a trail which they had been told was the proper one to take..." It could be argued that the generally accepted trail to the King makes no sense at all. Whoever gave them that advise was engaging in a possibly lethal joke. Once again, looking at a map makes all the difference in the world, at least it does to me. Once they hit the Apache Trail in the popular consensus on this story, the rest makes perfect sense. It just make no sense to go that way in the first place. I doubt the soldiers were surprised by the short run to the north that the Apache Trail takes in the Tortilla Flat area. But that is just more conjecture.
It would not hurt to reread Knun's post and consider the points he made in a positive manner just to see if the positives outweigh the negatives.
Joe
I asked for someone to join the discussion, without results. The thread, for me, was the trail of the Two Soldiers. The mean spirited banter between Peter and I was pointless nonsense, which is what I stated a few posts ago. We had put it behind us, but I appreciate your bringing it up again. There was not much action anywhere on the forum during this time, but your point is well taken. Had anyone made a comment on the trail of the Two Soldiers, it might have changed the tone of the conversation. What is your opinion concerning the two trails?
I made a mistake with my map program. If anyone is interested, the most direct route between the fort and the King, using straight lines and not counting the up and down or switchbacks is around fifty miles plus or minus a couple of miles.
Knun,
You have voiced my points on the merits and problems of the two possible trails quite well. I believe Peter is the most qualified to address these questions with some facts, if we can clearly state our positions. I have a few more points to make here.
Peter,
What was the route the Two Soldiers intended to take, before deciding to cut through the Superstitions? Does that seem like a reasonable or prudent way to get to the King from Fort McDowell to you? If not, why did they go that way at all? If it seems logical to you, what were the advantages in going that way?
Florence, as you have just restated, is not a waypoint between Apache Junction and Pinal or the Silver King. You need to reread your (all in capitals) passage on this. That's why I suggested you might want to take a look at a map before considering, or dismissing, my theory.
Jim Bark does not say that Joe Deering was looking for the Two Soldiers Trail, but states that Deering was on his way to the Silver King. No mention in the Joe Deering section of Barks Notes concerning the Two Soldiers. When he found the trail he said "it excited my curiosity", no mention that he suspected it might be the trail of the soldiers, in fact no mention of the Two Soldiers, whatsoever. It does sound like Deering found the mine by chance. I believe Bark made the first written account of these facts, and they have been changing with every writer who followed him. I only have one copy of the Bark Notes, so it's possible one of the others says something different.
Sticking with Bark, he says " they struck out toward the King". If I were to strike "out toward the King", from Fort McDowell it would be southeast not east. Here is the important part of the quote; "So they struck out toward the King, crossed Salt river..." That sounds like they crossed the Salt fairly quickly and he makes no mention of their crossing the Verde. After that, they "struck a trail which they had been told was the proper one to take..." It could be argued that the generally accepted trail to the King makes no sense at all. Whoever gave them that advise was engaging in a possibly lethal joke. Once again, looking at a map makes all the difference in the world, at least it does to me. Once they hit the Apache Trail in the popular consensus on this story, the rest makes perfect sense. It just make no sense to go that way in the first place. I doubt the soldiers were surprised by the short run to the north that the Apache Trail takes in the Tortilla Flat area. But that is just more conjecture.
It would not hurt to reread Knun's post and consider the points he made in a positive manner just to see if the positives outweigh the negatives.
Joe
Joe and Knun
Oops..my apologies. I did not mean mean Florence, rather FLORENCE JCT,
which is marked on my map as being along Highway 60 between Globe and AJ. Florence is some distance south of HWY 60 and of course, would not figure in this discussion. Glad you both had me scrambling for my map again !
Oops..my apologies. I did not mean mean Florence, rather FLORENCE JCT,
which is marked on my map as being along Highway 60 between Globe and AJ. Florence is some distance south of HWY 60 and of course, would not figure in this discussion. Glad you both had me scrambling for my map again !
Sources
Besides the sources Peter mentions several posts back, there are other sources dealing with the Two Soldiers. Not all of this stuff comes from Bark as Peter pointed out. And they do not imply knowledge of Bark or Ely - meaning they appear to come from sources contemporary to Chunning.
There is the Aylor Manuscript, the Williamson Manuscript, and also the newspaper articles of James McCarthy from the 1920s just to name a few.
There is the Aylor Manuscript, the Williamson Manuscript, and also the newspaper articles of James McCarthy from the 1920s just to name a few.
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Das Map
Peter,
Now that you have a map handy, did you want to reconsider some of those remarks you made concerning the feasability of the route around the south side of the Superstition Range? Not saying they went that way, just that it might be a better way to go considering the terrain. I know you have (simi-secret) information that proves they went east out of McDowell, still can't figure out why the went that way. Even if you intended to cut through the mountains, right from the start of the trip, it still does not make good sense.
Apology accepted, but I knew what you meant all along, just as I believe you usually know what I mean.
Lots O'Maps Joe
S.C.,
Do you put a lot of faith in those other sources, or do you think they may have added to the story. Newspapers were a little more colorful in those days, and Chuck Aylor was know to tell a good story on occasion. Don't you all come out of the woodwork now, man just needs to know his Shakespeare.
Joe
Now that you have a map handy, did you want to reconsider some of those remarks you made concerning the feasability of the route around the south side of the Superstition Range? Not saying they went that way, just that it might be a better way to go considering the terrain. I know you have (simi-secret) information that proves they went east out of McDowell, still can't figure out why the went that way. Even if you intended to cut through the mountains, right from the start of the trip, it still does not make good sense.
Apology accepted, but I knew what you meant all along, just as I believe you usually know what I mean.
Lots O'Maps Joe
S.C.,
Do you put a lot of faith in those other sources, or do you think they may have added to the story. Newspapers were a little more colorful in those days, and Chuck Aylor was know to tell a good story on occasion. Don't you all come out of the woodwork now, man just needs to know his Shakespeare.
Joe
-
Joe Ribaudo
- Expert
- Posts: 5453
- Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 10:36 pm
Sticking to your guns?
Peter,
Feasability was the key word there. You still think the Salt River Canyon is the best route to the Silver King? I think I am begining to see the problem here. No need to say they took another route, just that they may not have taken the logical one. I thought my post gave you a lot of possible replies, without your having to give an inch, but you may have something else that prevents you from (just) comparing the southern route to the northern one.
Why is the Salt River Canyon the best way to get to the King from McDowell? This will be the last time I try to get that answer from you.
Perhaps someone else (S.C., Aurum, Wiz, Azmula, Knun) has an answer.
Joe
Feasability was the key word there. You still think the Salt River Canyon is the best route to the Silver King? I think I am begining to see the problem here. No need to say they took another route, just that they may not have taken the logical one. I thought my post gave you a lot of possible replies, without your having to give an inch, but you may have something else that prevents you from (just) comparing the southern route to the northern one.
Why is the Salt River Canyon the best way to get to the King from McDowell? This will be the last time I try to get that answer from you.
Perhaps someone else (S.C., Aurum, Wiz, Azmula, Knun) has an answer.
Joe
<<Not saying they went that way, just that it might be a better way to go considering the terrain. I know you have (simi-secret) information that proves they went east out of McDowell, still can't figure out why the went that way. Even if you intended to cut through the mountains, right from the start of the trip, it still does not make good sense. >>
Joe
I hope the concerned forum members are taking note of how fine and genteel we are responding to each other. As you so sagely pointed out:
its not like a whole lot of folks waded in on this thread anyhow.
Now if it was ME and I was heading for the King by way of Mormon Flats,
and decided I wanted to take a shortcut thru the interior..I might cut down Boulder/LaBarge. These fellows, according to legend, decided to head further east...THEN south. Why? Well they were "scouts" for the Cavalry.
Perhaps they were aware of an old "military" trail that was high up and fairly free of Indian ambuscade? Just speculating here........
Joe
I hope the concerned forum members are taking note of how fine and genteel we are responding to each other. As you so sagely pointed out:
its not like a whole lot of folks waded in on this thread anyhow.
Now if it was ME and I was heading for the King by way of Mormon Flats,
and decided I wanted to take a shortcut thru the interior..I might cut down Boulder/LaBarge. These fellows, according to legend, decided to head further east...THEN south. Why? Well they were "scouts" for the Cavalry.
Perhaps they were aware of an old "military" trail that was high up and fairly free of Indian ambuscade? Just speculating here........