Montezumas Treasure: Colorado Leads

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Gentlemen, regarding Tiberon, just to the east is San Estaban another uninhabited island, only used by the Narcos occasionally to guard their northern water route. Frankly An excellent place to hide anyhing

.I doubt that it was moved very far A huge migration or movement such as this would require many many bearers plus much more worriors to guard it.,Itwould certainly go down in the sing sing, of any tribe to be guarded by the older females who also guarded heriditary data verbally.
.
Even today these females can spout off hereditary lines and other important bits of tribal history faster than you can call it up on a computer.

The Yaqui or Apache never had the numbers to attack such a large sized group.

on Jose ---> half asleep.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

A Handbook of Civil War Bullets and Cartridges - Grab it through Amazon!

[austin]

since my education is meaningless and prone to gathering insults....please read yahoo's answer to the question of gold among the Aztec and maya.

Mayan and Aztec Mining? - Yahoo Answers[/QUOT


Wait a minute buddy. We've had some words, but your education is not meaningless. You are well versed in many subjects and quite intelligent. AND you make some great points in this discussion. You would make a wonderful teacher and I promise you there are jobs out there. I know you talked about what happened, but it is really a non-issue here. I have worked with people who had a lot more trouble than you will ever have and they were good teachers too. You have what it takes so go for it. I'll help any way I can. (But I ain't goin lookin for no Aztec treasure no matter where it is.) I respect your opinions more than you know. See, I'm an old geezer(Red's words), but I did 30 years in a high school and now about 10 part time in a college. I'm old and tired. Now, it's your turn.

 

[coazon de oro]

clearly my ability to communicate is substandard.

THE AZTEC VALUED OTHER MATERIALS ABOVE GOLD.
yes, they did mine, smelt and form gold...a simple task compared to shaping turquoise or jade or obsidian.
you willnotice in the following photomontage that GOLD, while found, is noticeably absent from most maya graves.
it is my belief that people are confusing continents and cultures...please examine inca culture for grave goods made of gold.

http://www.famsi.org/reports/01081/01081Wrobel01.pdf
View attachment 917295
View attachment 917296
View attachment 917297
View attachment 917298
View attachment 917299
View attachment 917300

Howdy Don,

Seems like gold was just too precious to bury.

Homar

 

[Oroblanco]

Just a point here - while the danger of hostile tribes could have been a roadblock, or obstacle at least, to the Aztecs moving a mass of treasure valuable to the invading Spaniards, I do question whether the Apaches would have been a problem. There is some evidence that they were not present in AZ/NM at all at that time period. Spanish maps dating even later than the Aztec conquest, show much of what later became known as Apacheria, as "Despoblado" - vacant with no people living there. Also, the Navajos were occupying a larger area than two centuries later, extending farther out than their current reservation boundaries. Also even if tribes like the Apaches we consider to have been aggressive and hostile, were present, we do not know that they were hostile to the Aztecs.

Please do continue -
Oroblanco

 

[piegrande]

Dec 23, 2013, 11:23 PM Randy Bradford

>>As a Latter Day Saint, it's difficult for me to imagine having the faith to abandon my home and my property to pull handcarts and my family across the 1800s Midwest to a remote valley in Utah based on nothing more than faith in leaders

Actually, that long trip based on faith makes all the sense in the world. I have seen nothing but conjecture from local legends in the USA that the Aztecs even knew where they came from. Just as scientists go to great pains to avoid contaminating samples on Mars with Earth bacteria, local legends are very risky due to modern contamination. This was true hundreds of years ago as well.

Dec 24, 2013, 03:47 AM Oroblanco

I don't want to seem like I am dogging you. I do agree one needs to consider they moved the gold months away, with no expectation of ever getting it back, just to keep it from the Spanish. I have considered it, which is why I reject it, heh, heh.

Yet, if you find gold in AZ or NM, does it really matter where it came from? I do not doubt gold caches in those States. I just doubt they came from Tenochtitlan.

It has been stated by historians (don't have the sources at this moment) that the Aztecs had a system of mirrors and could communicate with Vera Cruz in a few minutes, and did in fact know within a very short time when the ships of Cortes landed. A government with that standard of communications would not be likely to send an extremely valuable treasure to a place with no record of any system of communications, not even the standard runner system. I do not know if they had mirrors to my village, though the terrain would make it possible.

Or, at least send a mirror message to a relay place much closer, then runners a fairly short distance.

Um, Randy, there is plenty of oral tradition in my village, heh, heh. From time to time I bump into historical or physical evidence to back it up. Someone has said here that with all the legends no gold has been found at any of the sites. My wife's grandfather told her that around 1910 (dates by oral tradition are very unreliable, it has been stated his mother, a Moctezuma, died in 1911, but Mormon copies of church documents shows she died in 1916) he dug in the floor of the house of Moctezuma and found a skeleton with a heavy gold neck piece, which he donated to the church and it was sold to buy a new bell.

I happen to have a scanned picture post card dated 1908, and the local church tower has platforms for workers to repair major damage. This, again, is not absolute proof, but is another example of consistency. That is, around 1910 they would have indeed been praying for a new bell. Everyone would have been discussing the need for a new bell, thus when he found that gold piece, it didn't take him long to figure out it could buy the new bell. This sort of thing is where knowledge of an area's history and culture can give you important clues.

I do have my own wild conjectures. Moctezuma II was killed, but the location of his body was not recorded. I would love to find where in the local cemetery they buried that skeleton and do DNA testing. Yeah, I conjecture that Moctezuma II could have been brought out here and buried in the floor of his own house. How's that for wild conjecture, sports fans? Add in the wild conjecture phrase, "right on top of his treasure" if you want thrills and chills.

In any case, a person buried with a large gold piece on his neck had to be a very important person.

 

[piegrande]

Local tales report that my wife's grandfather, three times president of the municipio, allowed people to dig on his property looking for the treasure. Local oral tradition legends are that strong they actually want to dig for it. In fact, my garbage hole was dug by two men who got drunk one day and concluded the treasure was buried at that exact location. I told them when the hole is full of garbage, I am going to buy them another bottle of whiskey.

People asked grandpa why he let them dig. He always answered, "First, they are not going to find any gold there." A very interesting statement if you contemplate it a while. So, how does he know they won't find it there?

Anyway, he then added, "Besides it's good for my avocado trees to have the soil turned up once in a while. And, if I don't let them dig, they may kill me and dig anyway."

 

[piegrande]

Grandpa also said if he knew where it was, he wouldn't dig it up. He said, "If I didn't put it there, it's not mine." His grandsons, now owners of that property, have pretty much the same view.

And, so do I. If I find the treasure, I am going to frantically cover it up and forget about it. At best the Federal government is going to confiscate it all, and probably the land around it, and I might get kidnapped and killed. Why bother? I am sort of like Randy. It is only the curiosity that keeps me going. If I did get part of it, I'd probably donate it to the current family, or if it's on my own property to the people who sold the land to my brother-in-law. The old people are obnoxious, but the young kids are absolutely wonderful, and I could not deprive them of anything.

 

[youcefkouidri1]

I know this post is 10 years late but oh well. In regards to peoples assumption that the Aztecs would not have travelled that distance, well if they travelled north they would have come to the rio grande river, follow that and you end up in Colorado. The river would have been a source of fresh drinking water as well which could have sustained there journey!

 

[piegrande]

And fish...

There is plenty of evidence the Aztecs were fish eaters.

It is maybe 700+ miles from Tenochtitlan to the Rio Grande (Mexico calls it Rio Bravo). I am not sure, because my odometer records a bit over 800 miles from my home to Reynosa and the Anzalduas bridge. So, maybe it is even less, like 600 miles. But, I get to drive on a paved highway. Those marching, well, if you have never seen the terrain in between, you are missing a real treat. Very rough terrain.

And, probably no maps at all. I assume Aztecs had people who could navigate by the stars. They were great astronomers.

earlier posting >>>>One of the few things we can be certain of about this story is that there was indeed a treasure to be had.

That exact story showing the treasure existed was the main key which finally convinced me the treasure is right here on Moctezuma property. It took me 30 years to eliminate all the inconsistencies. Once I did, I am convinced it is here. And, the more y'all explain why it might be in the USA, the more apparent it is that the logical place is right here. Love it!

And, the one thing this location has, is GOLD HAS BEEN FOUND HERE. Which those supporting other places admit is not available for those places.

A reminder that the man who reported the finding of gold here, was three times municipio presidente. Not a drunk or bum. His mother was a Moctezuma who died in 1916 of typhus during the epidemic. His father died in 1937 at which time he became owner of the property where I believe the treasure is buried. His son now owns it and has no desire to dig, even though he has to know there is a chance it is there.

He was noted for hating liars. And, once he even tossed his own son in jail for public intox.

But, the big key to my decision was trying to duplicate the thinking processes of military geniuses. Two months to the north to be buried in a non-secure place with zero probability of future retrieval is not consistent with military genius.

Two days to Moctezuma property to be buried in a known secure place where it can be retrieved is consistent with military genius.

Plus unlike the northern option, there is indeed local oral tradition here. Tons of it.

I really wish I could share everything I know about this location. Anyone who came here and spent time studying this issue as I have done would almost certainly arrive at the same conclusion. Readers must reasonably ignore my writings as the invention of one man.

 

[Randy Bradford]

And fish...

There is plenty of evidence the Aztecs were fish eaters.

It is maybe 700+ miles from Tenochtitlan to the Rio Grande (Mexico calls it Rio Bravo). I am not sure, because my odometer records a bit over 800 miles from my home to Reynosa and the Anzalduas bridge. So, maybe it is even less, like 600 miles. But, I get to drive on a paved highway. Those marching, well, if you have never seen the terrain in between, you are missing a real treat. Very rough terrain.

And, probably no maps at all. I assume Aztecs had people who could navigate by the stars. They were great astronomers.

They didn't have to have maps, the Aztecs had well established trade routes from thecapital city in Mexico all the way to Northern Arizona. Established trade routes would include navogable pathways, consistant and dependable sources of food, water and shelter. More importantly, they would put the Aztecs on direct paths with villages friendly to the Aztec traders. For me this is one of the easier parts of the story to make sense of from a pruely common sense perspective. It just would have been another trading party but on a much larger scale. Things don't get real sticky until they get to the Grand Canyon with the minor possibility being (depending on the sixze of the transport party) that many of the resoruces they were exploiting weren't designed to support so many people. Ultimately while that many people would be difficult to supply and support, it's easy to assume that intermitent villages were able to contribute (willingly or otherwise) to the Aztec groups needs.

earlier posting >>>>One of the few things we can be certain of about this story is that there was indeed a treasure to be had.

But, the big key to my decision was trying to duplicate the thinking processes of military geniuses. Two months to the north to be buried in a non-secure place with zero probability of future retrieval is not consistent with military genius.

Two days to Moctezuma property to be buried in a known secure place where it can be retrieved is consistent with military genius.

That assumes military genius was necessary. There's a good chance the treasure was hidden with no goal in mind of ever retreaving it, but simply as a means of removing it from the grasp of the Spaniards or as a means of drawing the Spaniards away by giving them something to follow. Many beleive the Azte were fulfilling a quest of signnificant spiritual and prophetic qualities. In this context, the need to fulfil relligious symbolism or dictates could easily overshadow the necessity for "military genius." One could easily argue, why bother hiding a treasure so close to where the Spanish had been one might not reasonably expect it to be safe.

Keep in mind piegrande, I've never argued that you're wrong in your assumptions. I've never challenged your credentials, your expeirence, your theories or your evidences. I cannot confirm them much less challenge them. In my paradigm, tere is plenty of room for both theories to exist simultaneously because at the end of the day neither can be exploited to once and for all. Keep in mind also, the military genius of the Aztec is not supported by the historical narrative either. They were capable warriors with numbers on their side which was sufficient to overpower and subjigate other tribes but no the numericly inferior Spaniards. How much of that is attributed to military genius, dumb luck, divine intervention, or a myriad of other factors is certainly open for discussion.

Plus unlike the northern option, there is indeed local oral tradition here. Tons of it.

I would wholenardedly agree this is a significant weakness of the theory that the treasure came into the United States. However, because I know of no oral tradition to indicate it happened does not mean the oral tradition is not there. That's definatley somethign I haven't been in a position to explore throughly and the only thing I have to go by is what others have said. How much they have researched the topic is anyone's guess. In my mind, it's highly possible some aspects of oral tradition simpy are not shared outside of a select few, perhaps these stories exist but are not shared as openly as other tales. Who's to say.

I really wish I could share everything I know about this location. Anyone who came here and spent time studying this issue as I have done would almost certainly arrive at the same conclusion. Readers must reasonably ignore my writings as the invention of one man.

Or they can accept them as one more possibiity that's just as difficulty to verify or authenticate as any other. This isn't an either or situaiton, for my part your story has as much merit as any other. I don't dismiss the possibility, I simply have no way to act on it to establish if it has any more legitimacy then any other story I've investigated. Thanks for the feedback sir, always interesting...

 

[piegrande]

>>That assumes military genius was necessary.

I am not saying military genius was necessary to hide the gold. But, the military genius was present therefore would have been used once Moctezuma was dead.

>>One could easily argue, why bother hiding a treasure so close to where the Spanish had been one might not reasonably expect it to be safe.

True. but in an uncharted primitive area of 300,000 square miles in harsh mountains, it can be awfully hard to find anything. I note in the USA where people are looking, it is apparently necessary to set up signs visible miles away. The gold hunters spend lots of time looking at photos including satellite photos hoping to find a clue. Carvings or painted signs. The terrain here isn't much different.

>>and subjigate other tribes but no the numericly inferior Spaniards.

The only reason the Spanish won was the help of the thousands of warriors from tribes who had been abused and tortured by the Aztecs. The Spanish alone weren't a significant force. And, Cortes well knew it. He was also a military genius, and a political genius. He knew how to get the other tribes on his side.

I forget where I read it, but I did read a paper which said while Cortes thought the tribes were helping HIM conquer the Aztecs, the tribes thought Cortes was helping THEM conquer the Aztecs. They had no idea the large number of people available to come over from Spain. They had assumed once they conquered the Aztecs with the help of Cortes that they could then drive away the Spanish. It didn't work out real well for them.

>> In my mind, it's highly possible some aspects of oral tradition simpy are not shared outside of a select few, perhaps these stories exist but are not shared as openly as other tales.

In support of this, I have noticed that the most detail comes directly from my wife's family. Those who were raised on the Moctezuma property. The oral tradition of the buried treasure of Moctezuma is all over town, but the most detail comes from the Moctezuma direct descendants.

They are the only ones who reported the gold found in 1910 with the skeleton. For example, the people who own the old picture post card from 1908 with the damaged church tower almost certainly do not know that the new one was built with the gold that was discovered around 1910 on the property.

The people in this town are somewhat close-mouthed in a way. Or, at least my wife's family is. My wife said she would even be punished as a little girl if she told someone they had eaten chicken for supper. Her grandma told her that it's no one's business what we eat. Thump! Beat! Hit!

My wife is in her 70's and is still very close-mouthed. She is always criticizing me for telling too much about myself. Even though the sorts of things I tell would be normal in the USA. As a result, I make friends much more easily here than she does.

>>Or they can accept them as one more possibiity that's just as difficulty to verify or authenticate as any other.

If I dared to out this location, much of what I am saying could easily be authenticated or verified. My obvious need for tight security is what precludes the verification of at least the oral tradition aspect. If you visited here, and won the confidence of the people and listened to their oral tradition for a while, that would be apparent that the oral tradition exists even though that does not prove the gold exists.

And, Google searches for this location supplies considerable information on the Moctezuma family history in this region.

###
Before I forget again, let me repeat my theory that there was more than one treasure. The one Moctezuma II had came from his father. His [great]grand-father was Moctezuma I. [three men], neither father of II nor son of Moctezuma I, was Emperor between them. [edited: Moctezuma I was great-grandfather of II. and three rulers were between them.]

The fact that the father of II, who was not Emperor, received it from I then was allowed to leave it as heir to II indicates it was personal property of [great-]grand-father; then father; [then 2 uncles] then son, rather than being property of the Empire itself.

The one where I live is clearly that treasure that was owned by II. So, since I can't imagine the men in between not having their own treasure accumulated during their time as Emperor, there had to have been several treasures. Again, nothing else makes sense.

And, another treasure may well have been moved North for reasons having nothing to do with the Spanish. And, maybe not at the time of the Conquest. At the time of the Conquest was not a time to be sending thousands of people off on treasure burying errands.

So, I cannot only believe there was more than one treasure, but am totally convinced of it. Nothing else makes sense.

I now realize there is more to the Aztec government than a total dictatorship by the Emperor. I think I once read that the Emperor had to be elected from the most important men. Which also agrees with different Emperors having their own treasures.

Now, did the Emperor get money from the government activities? Or, as Emperor did he own certain properties which produced his income? Or, was he sort of a person with a lease to certain properties in addition to his own properties? The only thing we can be sure of, is he was most definitely not owner of everything and everyone.

 

[piegrande]

I don't know if I mentioned or not. My wife's grandma, born 1891, died 1985, year of the big earthquake in Mexico City, told them that before 1918 she saw the deed to the property, and the first owner listed was Moctezuma. She did not say I or II, but they acted as if it were II. This area was not yet conquered by the Aztecs until 1503.

Again, this was consistent with the presence of Moctezuma's family here.

In 1918, there was a major insurrection in rural Mexico. Raping; pillaging; and looting. The people in rebellion against the government burned all the government documents or at least most of them, including deeds and other government records.

I got the impression from genealogy work that the births' and deaths were copied each year and sent to the state capitol. But, the deeds would not have been copied. Which is why grandma's memory is rather interesting.

 

[Randy Bradford]

>>That assumes military genius was necessary.

>>and subjigate other tribes but no the numericly inferior Spaniards.

The only reason the Spanish won was the help of the thousands of warriors from tribes who had been abused and tortured by the Aztecs. The Spanish alone weren't a significant force. And, Cortes well knew it. He was also a military genius, and a political genius. He knew how to get the other tribes on his side.

I forget where I read it, but I did read a paper which said while Cortes thought the tribes were helping HIM conquer the Aztecs, the tribes thought Cortes was helping THEM conquer the Aztecs. They had no idea the large number of people available to come over from Spain. They had assumed once they conquered the Aztecs with the help of Cortes that they could then drive away the Spanish. It didn't work out real well for them.

You are indeed correct on that fact, and it's a fact that cannot be udnerstated. Though it is important to note that even with the assistance of the tribe memebers they picked up as they went, the Spaniards were still out numbered. The downfall of the Aztec empire cannot be solely attributed to this though, but it is certainly an aspect of history that is often overlooked 9though less so now than in the past). The idea of more than one treasure is also consistant with the beleif that the Aztecs might have hidden the treasure in 7 locations as a way to pay homacge to their ancestral home, the place of the 7 caves.

 

[youcefkouidri1]

Respect both points of view. I agree that looking at maps the terrain going north is very difficult, however if the Aztecs had followed the east coast going north than they would have travelled across much flater ground, not to forget the fact that the Aztec empire was very large so they would have initially travelled through their own territory. I don't belive that a already known location would have been suitable as the aztecs may have antipicated that if their empire fell the Spanairds would have been able to force the location out of the population through torture (someone would have cracked if it was a widely known location). Plus if the Gold went North they could have coorporated with local Indian groups who had cultural links from earlier periods. The Gold could have also gone South along the West Coast, as going east would have been suicide (to close to tlaxacan territory who were hostile), however the exact location remains unknown.

 

[youcefkouidri1]

There is also the theory about the Aztecs retracing there initial migration back to Aztlan (their homeland) to hide their treasure. Aztlan is dubbed "land of the White Herons", and given the fact that names often relate to there geology or environment, it is most probably a place where White herons have a permanent location, maybe on a island. The South-Western and South-eastern USA are all home to White Herons as well as the eastern and Western Coasts running South- infact I have found some interesting locations which also supports the logical route for the treasure!

 

[piegrande]

Keep those ideas coming, folks. Though so far they all reinforce my opinion the gold was not taken that far away.

Have you driven east of Mexico City to the coast then north? I have. As you leave Mexico City you climb to around 11,000 feet, then through mountains and eventually back to 7200 feet in Puebla.

Then east, back up to 8200 feet, then all heck breaks loose. It is an 'interesting' drive down to Orizaba even on a high speed highway with tunnels drilled through the mountain. On that downhill run on a great highway, my fuel injection shuts off for much of 17 miles in a 5000 foot drop in altitude.

Once you get to Vera Cruz then on North is not too bad, except a lot of water problems in the Tampico area.

As bad as the terrain is going north from Mexico City, I would say that is the optimum direction.

Let me add an oral tradition note here. Local oral tradition says that when the Tenocha's traveled to Vera Cruz, (the family not the messengers who probably had to follow more closely the current high speed highway as Cortes did,) they stopped here.

I did not realize until right now this may have been prompted by the presence of Tlaxcala on the northern route, making it unsuitable for VIPs. I have long wondered why they would go on such a long route.

I have no independent information pro or con on this tidbit of news. except to point out that would be why the Tenochas would all be aware of this as a hiding place, including good security provisions. They had all been here on recreational outings...

Also, let me add a possible connection between this and the six skeletons found by a cousin when digging.

If you remember, there were six skeletons side by side, but their ceremonial cups were stacked up, which would seem to indicate they were buried at the same time. That could have been a mass killing of bearers. Or a mass sacrifice which could also involve the bearers, er, witnesses.

Without running a GPR over the site of the six skeletons, how do we know there aren't many such skeletons within a few meters? We don't.

Let me mention here that the skeletons were found no more than 4 miles from a mound called today the tetele de Moctezuma. Which is a few hundred meters from a known ancient burial ground. Known only by locals; never registered with the government But still interesting.. Sure. I know the name Tetele de Moctezuma would be used all over Mexico, because Moctezuma had descendants all over Mexico. My own interpretation of the tetele is that it existed as an observation post, not as a burial mound. I came to this opinion based on what I could see when I was standing on top of it which was miles and miles.

Very close to the six skeletons is a tetele belonging to the same uncle who owns the Casa de Moctezuma, though they are not on the same property. A year or two ago someone got permission to dig in the tetele and found something which caused the uncle to cancel permission. But, being close mouthed as have shown, I can't find out what they found.

Note that the brain-storming on this comment does not rise to the elimination of inconsistencies as my main proposal does.

 

[youcefkouidri1]

Very interesting feed piegrande. I happen to be going on a quest to try and find the lost Aztec gold on my gap-year, which I hope to start around January next year. I am looking into a number of sites and possibilities for the Gold all over Mexico as well as the Southern USA and down into Central America. You seem to have acquired local knowledge which is very interesting. I understand that you may want to keep certain facts to yourself but I would be very thankfull if you could send me some more detailed information on your theory about the Gold being located close to ancient Tenochtitlan (now mexico city), it would greatly aid in my research. Thanks

 

[piegrande]

I think my explanation of the theory the treasure is here was pretty complete. As complete as it could be without telling you where it is.

Within the Aztec region so it could be retrieved if need be. A place where the treasure can be buried without the nearby natives seeing it done. On property of Moctezuma II. A place known to the members of the Moctezuma family because they went there from time to time. But, a place probably unknown to the Spanish, and this is supported by the fact no definite evidence of it was found by people of Spanish descent for over 400 years.

All supported by local tradition and reinforced around 100 years ago by the discovery of a large piece of gold on a skeleton. As reported by a local leader of some import. And, reinforced by a foto which gave credence to the need for a new church bell at that time.

If you re-read all my postings, you will find a wealth of theory on why it may be buried here. And if you read the other theories, you pretty much find: nothing but dreams and conjecture.

So, what am I missing? Oh, yes, the gps coordinates, right? Hee, hee. How could I have forgotten them?

If I find any more useful information supporting my theory/beliefs it will be posted for all to see. The location will not be posted.

 

[piegrande]

Here is some additional information. I bumped into my copy of MOCTEZUMA'S CHILDREN. It is a fairly recent book out of academia in the USA, with research ties to AGN in Mexico and Spain as well as Texas libraries. The author and his helpers go to see documents in closed collections in different places.

My memory is gone. According to the chart on page 23 Tenochtitlan only had 11 rulers over its pre-Spanish existence.

I thought there was one ruler between Moctezuma I (my wife's Tenocha ancestor) and II. Not so. I was ruler #5. II was #9. II was the great-grandson of I, not the grandson.

II's father was #6. The brothers of II's father according to the chart were #7 and #8. So there were 3 rulers between I and II. Oops!

I am not counting females who were temp rulers during short selection times.

I need to dig through the text and scribble the dates of those rulers on that chart to save time.

 

[youcefkouidri1]

Very much appreciated, I will go through all the information and add it to my research plan! And just out of interest, have you mounted any expeditions in search of the gold in Motecuzhoma's country ?