Ulloas Trinidad

[whiskyninja]

So do you mind telling us where these photos are from?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

DR.ÖTEK Metal Detector, Waterproof Gold Detector, Pinpoint & Terrain Modes, Professional Metal Detector - Grab it through Amazon!

[Mackaydon]

Do you realize you added to a thread that has been silent for 8 years?
I hope you get a response. Meanwhile, I enjoyed rereading the entire thread; a lot of history there.
Don....

 

[Golden_Crab]

Remember 400 years ago ocean levels were significantly lower than present day because more was locked up as ice at the poles. Should narrow down your search a bit.

 

[pegleglooker]

So do you mind telling us where these photos are from?

From the Imperial Valley press during the late 1960's

PLL

 

[pegleglooker]

I remember seeing a picture of Markey and the skulls and it took me forever to find it, but here it is!!!


Enjoy
PLL

 

[pegleglooker]

Markey's article also appeared in the California Historical Quarterly back in March of 71.. Her is the text from the article...

Francisco de Ulloa, Joseph James Markey,
and the Discovery of Upper California

By Stephen T. Garrahy and
David J. Weber



Francisco de Ulloa's 1539-40 voyage along the California coast has long
^represented a minor mystery for historians. Outfitted by Hernan Cortes,
Ulloa had set out from Acapulco on July 8, 1539, with three ships: the Santa
Agueda, the Santo Tomds, and the Trinidad. Cortes apparently had in-
structed Ulloa to investigate rumors of wealth to the north— to search for
the elusive Strait of Anian and the Seven Cities of Cibola.

Soon after the journey began, the smallest of Ulloa's ships, the twenty-ton
Santo Tomds, sank off of Culiacan. The Santa Agueda and the Trinidad
kept on, following a northerly course to the head of the Gulf of California.
Ulloa briefly explored the mouth of the Colorado River, then turned south
along the coast of Baja California, becoming the first European to observe
that California was a peninsula and not an island. With considerable difficulty
his two ships rounded the tip of Lower California and ventured up its
Pacific coast into uncharted waters. By January 5, 1540, the vessels had beat
their way up the coast to Cedros Island in latitude 28V

For some three months Ulloa used Cedros Island as a base while preparing
to push farther north. When supplies dwindled, Ulloa decided to send the
Santa Agueda back to Mexico with a report. "I have determined," Ulloa
wrote to Cortes, "with the ship Trinidad and these few supplies and men, to
go on, if God grant me weather, as far as I can, and the wind will permit." 2

Thus, in early April, 1540, the Trinidad and the Santa Agueda sailed
from Cedros Island in opposite directions. It is known that the Santa Agueda
reached Acapulco and that Ulloa's report found its way to Cortes. Exactly
how far north the wind and weather permitted Ulloa and the Trinidad to
travel, however, remains a disputed question.

Since the sixteenth century, some chroniclers and historians have held that
Ulloa and the Trinidad never returned to Mexico. Hence, the northernmost *
point of the journey will never be known. This inteipretation has lingered



David J. Weber, an associate professor of history at San Diego State College, is on
leave as a Fulbright-Hays Lecturer at the Universidad de Costa Rica.

Stephen T. Garrahy is a graduate student in Latin American history at the University
of Texas at Austin.



73



74 California Historical Society Quarterly

to the present day. As recently as 1959 a widely-read survey of California
history asserted that Ulloa "and his vessel, with all on board, vanished into
the empty seas." 3

This standard explanation of Ulloa's fate was first seriously challenged in
the 1920's by Henry R. Wagner. In his California Voyages Wagner offered
impressive, if admittedly circumstancial, evidence of a cartographic and
documentary nature that Ulloa returned to Mexico. Wagner also described
errors in translation that had led some writers to suppose that Ulloa had not
returned. Furthermore, Wagner noted that at least one chronicler, the
famous Bernal Dfaz, had recorded that Ulloa returned to the Mexican port
of Jalisco where one of his own soldiers killed him. 4 Wagner might also have
added that the chronicler Francisco Lopez de Gomara also reported Ulloa's
return to Mexico. 5

By 1940 Wagner had found further evidence to confirm his thesis. Tha:
year, in an article entitled "Francisco de Ulloa Returned," Wagner presented
a convincing argument that Ulloa found his way back to Tehuantepec about
mid- August, 1 54 1 . Wagner's evidence consisted of testimony in a lawsuit
between Cortes and Juan de Castellon, chief pilot on the Ulloa expedition
and captain of the Santa Agneda. Castellon had brought the suit against
Cortes for alleged failure to fulfill a contract. Among those who testified in
the case was Francisco de Ulloa himself. Ulloa testified in May, 1542, in
Valladolid, Spain, to which he had traveled from Mexico in company with
Cortes's son. There can be little doubt that this Francisco de Ulloa was the
same Francisco de Ulloa who captained the Trinidad. Hence, Wagner was
hardly immodest in concluding that Ulloa's testimony "settles for all time
the question whether Ulloa returned or not."

Henry R. Wagner could not, however, have anticipated the claims of
Joseph James Markey, a physician from Oceanside, California, who has
stated flatly that Ulloa never returned to Mexico. Without directly refuting
Wagner's evidence, Markey has advanced the thesis that Ulloa sailed the
Trinidad north from Cedros Island to discover Upper California. Ulioa,
according to Markey, went as far north as Santa Barbara. Then, on the return
toward the south, Ulloa dropped anchor at the mouth of the San Luis Rey
River near today's Oceanside. There Ulloa and most of his crew died of
scurvey, dysentery, or a combination thereof. Hence, argues Dr. Markey,
when Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo reached California in September, 1542, his
was only the second European expedition to do so. Francisco de Ulloa, Dr.
Markey says, was "the first white man to set foot on California soil." 7

Markey's theory rests on fascinating and seemingly impressive archaeo-
logical and documentary evidence. His first "discovery" of Ulloa's presence
in the San Luis Rey Valley occurred in 1927 when he found the skeleton of a
white European buried along with a knife, buttons, and a piece of breast-
plate. These artifacts, Markey says, date back to the era of the Spanish con-



Ulloa and the Discovery of California 7 5

quest of Mexico and tests supposedly revealed the skeleton to be about 400
years old. 8

Markey's search for an explanation of his find led him to suspect that
the artifacts might have come from the missing Trinidad. His suspicion
was nurtured in 1950 when a chance meeting in Paris with one Miguel de
Ulloa, a descendent of Francisco de Ulloa, brought forth the information
that two members of the Ulloa expedition had survived. The storv had been
handed down through the generations. 9

Acting on Miguel de Ulloa's suggestion, Markey traveled to Spain in 195 1
to search for archival evidence of Ulloa's fate. Finally, three hired investi-
gators turned up an account by Pablo Salvador Hernandez, one of three
survivors of the Trinidad.

The Hernandez document, according to Markey, chronicles in consider-
able detail Ulloa's journey north from Cedros Island to Santa Barbara and
to the San Luis Rey River Valley, where the Trinidad took shelter near the
river's mouth. On August 21, 1540, the scurvy-stricken crew set up camp
near an Indian village on an inland lake. Contracting dysentery from the
fouled waters of the lake the men began to die. Although the living took
shelter in a nearby hillside cave, disease continued to claim lives, including
that of Ulloa. Meanwhile, Hernandez and two other crewmen seem to have
escaped infection by remaining most of the time on the ship and by drinking
only wine. On Hernandez's final visit to the cave, only a dying prostitute
remained alive. To end her misery, Hernandez is said to have dropped a
stone on her head, then sealed the cave entrance with rocks. With two other
surviving crewmen, Hernandez rowed the Trinidad's longboat safely to
Acapulco.

The Hernandez account, Dr. Markey tells us, was accompanied by three
maps. These showed the location of the Trinidad at anchor, the location of
the cave, and the location of some gold that Ulloa had asked Hernandez
to bury.

In late July, 195 1, with the Hernandez maps to guide him, Markey located
a cave containing skeletons, including one of a female with a crushed skull.
In September, 1957, with the arrvial of the third Hernandez map from Spain,
Markey was able to locate a treasure of 2,000 gold coins which date from
the 1 st century B.C. to about 1500 A.D.

These finds in the San Luis Rey Valley, Markey contends, irrefutably
illustrate the validity of the Hernandez account and prove that Ulloa per-
ished near Oceanside. The Trinidad remains the final piece of evidence that
evades Markey. Yet, he is confident that the ship lies along the coast between
San Diego and Oceanside and that its discovery will place the capstone on
his argument.

Since Markey made public the contents of the Hernandez account in a
speech before the San Diego Historical Society in January, 1952, his theory



I



76 California Historical Society Quarterly

has received a wide hearing. His claim that Ulloa discovered California has
appeared in publications ranging from the Los Angeles Times to the Dodge
News, and the story has been heard over radio, television and in public
forums. 10 An independent diving crew has placed such confidence in Markey
that since 1968 they have been investing time and money to probe the ocean
floor near Oceanside in search of the Trinidad. Although nothing substantial
has been found to date, the search continues to attract attention to the theory
that Ulloa discovered California. 11

Yet, despite the considerable publicity that Markey has received, only
one historian has evaluated the Ulloa theory in a serious study. Maurice G.
Holmes, in From New Spain by Sea to the Califomias, 1 519-1668, published
in 1963, indicates that he was unable to locate the Hernandez document in
Spain and implies that he doubts the document exists. 12 This is the position
which most historians, including Holmes, privately assume. Yet, Holmes and
others have not publicly challenged or impugned Dr. Markey.

The public silence of the experts has led some of Markey's supporters to
conclude that a conspiracy exists among professional historians to ignore
Markey. 15 In fact, the doctor himself seems to entertain this notion. In a
scathing letter to the San Diego Independent, in May, 1968, Markey took
to task what he termed the "so-called historians" of San Diego for failing to
agree with him that Ulloa discovered California. Historians, Markey con-
temptuously charged, spread "six textbooks out on a table . . . copying facts
that have been coming down to us for a hundred years. This way an in-
accuracy is perpetuated from generation to generation. To steal from one
author is plagiarism but to steal from six is 'research.' "

For his part, Markey boasted that he had "spent the last 2 5 years in original
research. Not writing." His May, 1968, letter promised, nevertheless, "a 500
page document [book | (with 300 illustrations) which will appear in the next
year or so." This forthcoming book, Markey opined, would immortalize
Ulloa and give the "authorities . . . something new to copy. And lecture
about." 14

To date, the promised book has not appeared. When it does, perhaps it
will attempt to resolve the discrepency between Wagner's evidence that
Ulloa returned to Spain and Markey's conviction that he is buried in the San
Luis Rey Valley. Yet, a book authored by Dr. Markey will probably not
convert many professionals to his point of view. As Markey himself has
noted, "any would-be 'authority' can have a book published. " ls

What is needed, if Dr. Markey wishes to prove his theory, is that the
account by Pablo Salvador Hernandez be made available to other scholars.
Markey's archaeological evidence is not, in itself, sufficiently convincing.
The Hernandez account, however, which Markey claims to have drawn
from extensively and which he has quoted from at times, constitutes the
foundation of his entire argument and needs to be made public.












Ulloa and the Discovery of California jj

Had Dr. Markey wanted to withhold the Hernandez document indefi-
nitely, it would have been his prerogative. However, in view of his derision
and contempt for historians who do not accept his thesis, and in view of the
widespread publicity that he and his theory enjov, it appears to us that Dr.
Markey has engendered a responsibilitv to put forth his evidence. Merely tell-
ing a story over and over again is hardlv sufficient to establish its credibility.

At this time, we can only conclude that Francisco de Ulloa discovered
California because Joseph James Markey says that he did. To a person as
intellectually vigorous as Dr. Markey, it ought to be apparent that this ex-
planation is not satisfying to an inquiring mind.



NOTES

i. The facts of Ulloa's voyage as far as Cedros Island are well-known and agreed
upon.

2. Quoted in Henry R. Wagner, ed., California Voyages, 1539-1541 (San Francisco,
1925), 60, which contains Ulloa's report.

3. Robert Glass Cleland, From Wilderness to Empire: A History of California, ed.
by Glenn S. Dumke (New York, 1959), 5-6. For a discussion of Ulloa and the
chroniclers see Wagner, California Voyages, 5-12.

4. Ibid. Wagner first suggested that Ulloa returned in "The Discovery of Cali-
fornia," California Historical Society Quarterly, I (July, 1922), 43.

5. Francisco Lopez de Gomara, Cortes: The Life of the Conqueror By His Secre-
tary, trs. and ed. by Leslev Byrd Simpson (Los Angeles and Berkeley, 1965), 403.

6. Henry R. Wagner, "Francisco de Ulloa Returned," California Historical Society
Quarterly, XIX (September, 1940), 240-244.

7. "Francisco de Ulloa, not Cabrillo, Discovered California," Southern California
Rancher (February, 1952), 7. This article reproduces much of a talk that Markey
gave before the San Diego Historical Societv in January, 1952.

8. Although Markev has not directlv published his thesis, it is possible to recon-
struct the story from reports of talks and interviews that he has given. A succinct state-
ment is the previously- cited article in the Southern California Rancher. The most
detailed published report of an interview with Markey is Vincent H. Gaddis, "He
Found the Trinidad's Tantalizing Treasure," True (July, 1965), 52-55, 74-76. Brad
and Choral Pepper, The Mysterious West (New York, 1967), 175-184, is another
recounting of Markey's story based on information provided bv Markey. Our own
interview with Dr. Markev failed to elicit any details not already treated in these
published accounts. Thus, the account which follows is a composite from the above
sources.

9. San Diego Union, February 5, 1950.

10. A collection of clippings in the San Diego Historical Society's Serra Museum
and Librarv is illustrative of the media's response to Markey's theory.

11. In 1968 the City of Oceanside issued a permit to Aztec Six, Inc., to explore
nearby waters and work has continued through this writing (September, 1970). The
Independent (San Diego), September 26, 1968.

12. Holmes, From Neiv Spain, 89.

13. See, for example, Bettv McKaig in The Independent, September 26, 1968.

14. J. J. Markev, letter to the Editor, The Independent, May 5, 1968.

15. Ibid.

 

[InflictionOfConviction]

I still think the Trinidad is the lost ship of the desert, or mud. The flag ship Cruising up the Gulf of California at a good clip, most likely encountered Indian Villages on both sides, wanting to get by quickly and thinking he saw relatively open water in front of him, did not have enough time to take depth measurements, and slammed into a shallow mud bar in the middle of the Colorado river. Probably high enough onto the mud bar that the rudder got buried deep into the mud bank. If the tide was receding at the time, all the weight from the men, gear, and provisions would of sank it into the mud further. Even after unloading they wouldn't of been able to get her out. The Trinidad was the flagship so it was probably the heaviest and biggest of the ships, Not wise for the largest of the ships to be leading the way down a gulf, probably the fatal error of the voyage. They probably loaded everything onto the 2 smaller ships and left everything else for the natives.

Adieu

 

[InflictionOfConviction]

Ulloas ship could of quite possibly of been moved later. It might of been moved on a later expedition, If they sawed the rudder off. They might of got it moved to the dry sand. To use as a temporary Fort or Outpost. Since that area was short on trees it would of made the best available option for semi-permanent shelter. The sails were probably gone or shredded by that time, and with the rudder gone it never would of sailed again anyways. It probably served as an outpost between Ensenada and the Colorado River on The Baja Peninsula in The Gulf Of California. Would of been upkept for awhile before eventually being abandoned, along with the arid dry environment which would explain the ships ability to sustain such a long term status of holding together. Old Ships have been used like that at other times in history. ie. San Francisco mid 19th century. The ship probably wasn't moved far, maybe 2-3 hundred yards.

It probably wasn't the Trinidad if reports in this thread are right? but The Santa Agueda 240 barrels was apparently Ulloa's Flagship on that Voyage I guess the name Trinidad makes for a flashier story.

At Least That's my theory.

From this map the Spanish obviously thought it necessary to map the mud bars in the Gulf of California and the Colorado River, they must of learned from experience.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/California_island_Vinckeboons5.jpg

https://yankeebarbareno.files.wordp...-de-californie-et-du-nouveau-mexique-1705.jpg

Ensenada might want to pick up some relics and build a ship replica, they could probably make some coin for the tourist industry

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...arth-ancient-shipyard-of-Chinas-Columbus.html

https://www.google.com/maps/@31.7128753,-114.6946716,22733m/data=!3m1!1e3

https://www.google.com/maps/@31.868535,-115.1180821,22695m/data=!3m1!1e3

https://www.google.com/maps/@31.5999,-115.9420567,182086m/data=!3m1!1e3

https://www.amazon.com/North-Califo...:+The+Spanish+Voyages+of+Discovery,+1533-1603

 

[Kauziamos]

Pegleg-the article accompanying the picture of Markey with the skulls-it says the coins found would be donated to the Southwest Museum-might it be possible to track them down?! Could help in solving this possible mystery!