co monument

[Old Dog]

This is for the most part what is called a "range marker"
it shows the trail entrance to the main trails going into the mountains.
The rest of the story will show up on the trail head marker some miles away.

The seven is probably the only marker visible lower on the cliff
meant to be seen from a distance, indicated that a safe gathering/camping place was located where they could wait for a rain to fill the water sources for the journey in.

Maps and trails were not measured in days or distance so much as they were gauged in available water.
Water was and is the most valuable resource. The Spanish always marked the Water Source.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Springfield]

.....I am about 80% convinced now, besides campground, this trail markermakes some references to mining. .....

Then you should gather information re the history of mining in the area and see if you can establish correlations.

 

[desertmoons]

Springfield,
There was mining in the area. That is pretty well documented. I am not pursuing this though, at this time.


I edited this to add Let me be a little more clear. There was mining in this area by anglos. Have not looked for any Spanish mining documentation.

 

[EE THr]

I'll make my comments more clear too. I'm just guessing on a hunch, or feeling I get, when looking at this, and other photos, that certain monuments are ancient story-type territory markers. But that doesn't mean that they couldn't have other types of markings, like water, mineral, or trail markers---either as originals or added later. Whatever it is, it is what it is.

Hunches don't count for very much, but if many people get the same ideas from something, it might be interesting to consider....

 

[desertmoons]

Thanks Thom.
EE, it is an interesting subject. With few exceptions, in my experience, things have been reused, or defaced by later groups. Still..after a while one might be able to develop an eye to recognize that defacement and some of the underlying original stuff.

But a lot of questions...lets say you find a knight with a templar or crusader type of helmet carved into a wall. Does it mean it is templar or crusader? Not necessarily. The Spanish had a tradition of art and legends and stories, and cultural themes just as we do. We would all recognize abe lincoln , but if we carved him into a wall, it would be modern, not from the 1850's.

So, without artifacts or verifiable script examples available to most of us, one is left with somewhat informed speculation.

Boundary markers of great size would indicate a few things about the civilization that left them. Smaller markers less so. Boundary markers were used before the Spanish...it is true. How long before...is an interesting question.

Another example, lets say you saw a boundary marker monument in an area where no Spanish were supposed to be, and it had been identified by the archeological community as definitely, oh lets say, the WindRiver Tribe (made up).

Then you saw the same set up a 2000 miles away where the Spanish were all over the place and the WindRiver Tribe or its ancestors never inhabited the area.

Something sort of like that happened to me, by the way. Someone's history is wrong. The more likely explanation is the Spanish did both as they were all over the place.


Anyway, I think it is useful to consider boundary markers in the way that you are considering them. Also of course astronomical relations ships count too.

 

[Springfield]

Thanks Thom.
EE, it is an interesting subject. With few exceptions, in my experience, things have been reused, or defaced by later groups. Still..after a while one might be able to develop an eye to recognize that defacement and some of the underlying original stuff.

But a lot of questions...lets say you find a knight with a templar or crusader type of helmet carved into a wall. Does it mean it is templar or crusader? Not necessarily. The Spanish had a tradition of art and legends and stories, and cultural themes just as we do. We would all recognize abe lincoln , but if we carved him into a wall, it would be modern, not from the 1850's.

So, without artifacts or verifiable script examples available to most of us, one is left with somewhat informed speculation.

Boundary markers of great size would indicate a few things about the civilization that left them. Smaller markers less so. Boundary markers were used before the Spanish...it is true. How long before...is an interesting question.

Another example, lets say you saw a boundary marker monument in an area where no Spanish were supposed to be, and it had been identified by the archeological community as definitely, oh lets say, the WindRiver Tribe (made up).

Then you saw the same set up a 2000 miles away where the Spanish were all over the place and the WindRiver Tribe or its ancestors never inhabited the area.

Something sort of like that happened to me, by the way. Someone's history is wrong. The more likely explanation is the Spanish did both as they were all over the place.

Anyway, I think it is useful to consider boundary markers in the way that you are considering them. Also of course astronomical relations ships count too.

Boundary markers - an interesting subject. The native populations didn't really use them per se. In our southwest, primarily stable, place-bound pueblo people, a culture's 'boundaries' were generally 'marked' by major gateway-type natural landmarks, such as sacred mountains, rivers, etc. These folks had no reason to 'mark' their boundaries because their cosmology didn't allow that they 'owned' land, just made use of it. Same goes for the nomadic types, Navajos and Apaches in recent centuries. We found an extremely interesting engraving in a magnificent 'treasure' location that included an Apache word (indeh), and asked an Apache aquaintence if he thought his people may have been responsible. He laughed and said, 'Indians don't claim to own anything - must have been White Eyes'.

OK, White Eyes. The Kensington Rune Stone, an engraved rock found near Alexandria, MN, by a pioneer clearing his land, may well be a land-claim marker left by Europeans who were exploring there in the 1300's. If so, the legal implications of land ownership might be interesting, assuming documentation could be located that confirmed the stone's placement and purpose. Our pointy-head archies have been quick to dismiss this stone as a hoax of course, but the evidence presented by persistent investigators seems to verify the discovery as valid. Anyway, a possible boundary marker.

By the way, this opens a subject of extreme interest. The more focused TH-er's investigating the huge caches thought to exist in the Southwest speculate that these storehouses have been in place far longer than the 'Spanish' era and are owned by a group that not only placed them in their locations, but also have a 'legal claim' to ownership of North America as well. Marked boundaries? I've got a rambling book that was self-published by a guy in Utah that purports to show the 'huge manmade signs' from the 'Ancients' that he has discovered, primarily in the California deserts. The gigantic 'carved' monuments that he and others have offered show no evidence of anything other than natural phenomena. I like the idea myself, and intuitively can support the concept, but I haven't seen any evidence yet that I'd care to hang my hat on. To my way of thinking, if I were to leave a 'bounday claim', it would be obvious and unmistakable, not something you had to stand on one leg and squint at the Solstice to visualize.

You and others seem to attribute a great number of carvings found hither and yon to the 'Spanish'. As you know, I've been skeptical about a lot of this free candy. I won't bore you here with the reasons why.

 

[rangler]

steve.
good logic on this one...regarding the Amerindian non use of boundary markers.. and the Kensington rune stone, has been verified as real because of the use of certain runes, that where only used in the templar controlled islands of the nordic coast in that 1300ad time period. something that the farmer who dug it up would never know....AND the latest on the newport tower, purported to be of templar construction, has shown that a set of windows on the tower, point exactly to the location of the Kensington rune stone! and also point to Sinclair Chapel in scotland..some truly amazing stuff.
[one of the reasons is the use of a simple line, a compass bearing line pointing from the Atlantic[newport rhode island] seaboard to the middle of Minnesota over a 1000 miles away for sure...it is showing as far back as the templars othe use of symbols and signs to 'anchor' a line of site, ie compass bearing to an object..this is part of Solomons code used 3 centuries after his time and passed down to the jesuits and spanish.]

not to mention that in the days of old, placing a boundary or 'land claim' stone on a key location of mayor drainage areas..showed you claimed that entire drainage land as yours...the location of the stone on the Red River and the Mississippi..in total claiming a 'kingly' chuck of the usa~!
good stuff
rangler

ps perhaps this trail marker, or boundary stone might have some significance if it is at or placed on a drainage area of south to lower colorado...something to pinpoint on a map of the river systems. Even still boundary markers would by definition have the persons or person who the land was being claim for...
my own feeling it is natural and someone could have carved that 7, like thom said to be see from a far distance, and it is speaking of a campground, unless more true signs are found.[note: no death trap here, only natural ones caused by mother nature and gravity...no door, no priest, no cache, or the other 'kum-by-ah' stuff - however I can see how the newbee or the graffiti ones could get carried away..that is what pareidolia does to one who is not prepared with knowledge and experience.


seal for the tribunal of the holy office of the inquisition , spain
notice the use of the olive branch and the sword, similar to
the great seal of the usa with the olive branch and the arrows~!

 

[Shortstack]

Desertmoons and Springfield:
Both of you are taking the right track with this location; contrary to some "expert". Many of the mounts and monuments around the world were constructed by groups far older than the Spanish conquerors and their king. If you look closely at this one, you can see enough detail to be assured that it is not entirely a natural formation. That topmost, rounded boulder with the squaresh little rock on top of it like an apple stem is one good example. All of the material of this mount appears to be the same type rock, so how did the natural forces round off that large boulder without rounding the "stem". There is a tiny rock at the base of that boulder, just to the left of the angular boulder, conveniently placed to help hold the big sucker in place. Then, that angular boulder just in front of the "apple" one, has edges left by the same forces that ROUNDED the one next to it. The wind got a little selective with it's sculpturing. Then, that angular boulder is held up with a whole "nest" of small, angular stones.
When the wind and water got through naturally forming all of those top goodies, they decided to sculpt out large, flat slabs mounted vertically on the sides of the main mount and under cut them on the back sides for detail. That is the confirmation detail. They not only formed that large one on the near face, but put a clean vertical grove right down the middle of it and rounded the lower corners for good measure.
After forming that really LARGE, flat slab on the near face, they weren't finished. The wind and rain then decided to sculpt other flat "door" looking slabs on several different places around the mount's face. Not only did they form those door looking slabs, but decided to under cut the edges of THOSE, too, for good measure. Yessiree bobtail, that wind and rain sure know how to detail their jobs.
After forming this beautiful mount project in what is now Colorado, USA. They proceeded to a very high valley in South America to sculpt many more items. Only, there, they made some human head shapes. I guess they got a little bored with forming those simple pyramid thingies in Egypt.

 

[desertmoons]

Boundary markers - an interesting subject. The native populations didn't really use them per se. In our southwest, primarily stable, place-bound pueblo people, a culture's 'boundaries' were generally 'marked' by major gateway-type natural landmarks, such as sacred mountains, rivers, etc. These folks had no reason to 'mark' their boundaries because their cosmology didn't allow that they 'owned' land, just made use of it. Same goes for the nomadic types, Navajos and Apaches in recent centuries. We found an extremely interesting engraving in a magnificent 'treasure' location that included an Apache word (indeh), and asked an Apache aquaintence if he thought his people may have been responsible. He laughed and said, 'Indians don't claim to own anything - must have been White Eyes'.

OK, White Eyes. The Kensington Rune Stone, an engraved rock found near Alexandria, MN, by a pioneer clearing his land, may well be a land-claim marker left by Europeans who were exploring there in the 1300's. If so, the legal implications of land ownership might be interesting, assuming documentation could be located that confirmed the stone's placement and purpose. Our pointy-head archies have been quick to dismiss this stone as a hoax of course, but the evidence presented by persistent investigators seems to verify the discovery as valid. Anyway, a possible boundary marker.

By the way, this opens a subject of extreme interest. The more focused TH-er's investigating the huge caches thought to exist in the Southwest speculate that these storehouses have been in place far longer than the 'Spanish' era and are owned by a group that not only placed them in their locations, but also have a 'legal claim' to ownership of North America as well. Marked boundaries? I've got a rambling book that was self-published by a guy in Utah that purports to show the 'huge manmade signs' from the 'Ancients' that he has discovered, primarily in the California deserts. The gigantic 'carved' monuments that he and others have offered show no evidence of anything other than natural phenomena. I like the idea myself, and intuitively can support the concept, but I haven't seen any evidence yet that I'd care to hang my hat on. To my way of thinking, if I were to leave a 'bounday claim', it would be obvious and unmistakable, not something you had to stand on one leg and squint at the Solstice to visualize.

You and others seem to attribute a great number of carvings found hither and yon to the 'Spanish'. As you know, I've been skeptical about a lot of this free candy. I won't bore you here with the reasons why.

Interesting indeed. I've only anecdotal things right now. Bits and pieces from here and there. For example, a lion "idol" was taken from a mesa top..sat around the University of New Mexico for many years, then was airlifted back to its original location. The interesting thing is that it was right next to an obelisk on the mesa. I have not run across Natives using obelisks. Assuming it was a traditional obelisk. Never found a photo of it, and though it may be accessible, I think it has been disturbed quite enough by non Natives to last a life time. sheesh

Out here,Spanish land grant, and Spanish Pueblo grants can be marked by boundary markers. I imagine they confuse some folks, for they could easily be construed as "treasure signs" for many.

Once in a while i see something that stands out from the usual what i consider likely to be more modern (900ad to present) boundary markers or solar devices. Hmm...at this point though can not make any conclusion about them.
Well reading it over I just did not have much to say or add. I'm no boundary marker expert..

This thing about attributing carving to Spanish..I try to strive for the more probable explanation when it comes to things that seem ancient. You see a long bearded guy with a high pointed dome hat... um...is it more likely to be Spanish and he was referring to an old testament king? ...... or it is Assyrian. For things that seem ancient, that's my starting point..."could the Spanish, or even some other group from more modern times have done it. If you start out from the other end of the spectrum, things get to wild and speculative for me. I prefer a more leisurely route to that dangerous place.

Otherwise, in terms of other carvings you are probably right. Thanksfor your thoughts Steve.

perhaps this trail marker, or boundary stone might have some significance if it is at or placed on a drainage area of south to lower colorado...something to pinpoint on a map of the river systems. Even still boundary markers would by definition have the persons or person who the land was being claim for...
my own feeling it is natural and someone could have carved that 7, like thom said to be see from a far distance, and it is speaking of a campground, unless more true signs are found.[note: no death trap here, only natural ones caused by mother nature and gravity...no door, no priest, no cache, or the other 'kum-by-ah' stuff - however I can see how the newbee or the graffiti ones could get carried away..that is what pareidolia does to one who is not prepared with knowledge and experience.

Rangler, apparently you have yet not run into some of the Spanish shapes and markers on the co monument, out your way. You may want to keep a picture of this monument, for reference.








But getting back to "ancients"...

 

[desertmoons]

SS, thanks...I too think it is artificial in many ways.

 

[rangler]

the only thing artificial is shorties explanation , which is erroneous again- you might want to check
on the missing gap of your assessment, that is ice age glaciers touched this part of the us...and it could have done everything you say could not have been done...your seeing this pile of rocks in a static mode, when all of these boulders were rolled and scrubbed along in the ice age, and this is the debris of that era...come to rest in this odd shape, a naturally odd shape, it is called pareidolia as you really know but do deny vigorously and quite incorrectly as usual.
sorry but incomplete knowledge of geology will give you incorrect assumptions..only newbies see secret 'doors' and secret priest images..while they dream of climbing this and opening one of those doors..better get Indiana to come along to help, cause you know the nazis are in there too..yes, nazi zombies are guarding the treasure..better bring your whip as well...
rangler

 

[rangler]

kim,
"rangler, apparently you have yet not run into some of the Spanish shapes and markers on the co monument, out your way. You may want to keep a picture of this monument, for reference."

appearances can fool you kim, there is only one symbol or marker on this cliff face, that of a campground 7, the rest does not exist, so i dont need a reference to non existent [pareidolia] signs, thanks anyway, for you two though, I would keep it close as you will find billions more
graffiti type signs the harder you look.
so sorry you took that path...but then bill led the way so , not surprising.

I sincerely hope you will have an epiphany of some kind... or your intuition will lead you out of the wilderness and to the solid rock of real signs..I do hope and pray!

I suggest you look at the omega monument that I marked for you...the one you thought was a W and a water sign...those marks show the true nature of the code broken, if the goods are still there, you are the only one in the whole world who knows where that site is and those goods wait for you.....hope you dont stay lost too long.. the only thing bill can do for you is to hold the flashlight while you dig.............

rangler

 

[Springfield]

.....I've only anecdotal things right now. Bits and pieces from here and there. For example, a lion "idol" was taken from a mesa top..sat around the University of New Mexico for many years, then was airlifted back to its original location. The interesting thing is that it was right next to an obelisk on the mesa. I have not run across Natives using obelisks. .....

I have an acquaintence who told me about an obelisk, altar, throne and other things high up in the Organ Mountains east of Las Cruces. It's too much work to try to find based solely on his description (for me anyway). Maybe if he had a photo ...

Since you like unusual rocks, you'll probably like the series of eroded 'monuments' I found yesterday north of Pinos Altos. They were photographed from a mile away across a killer canyon. They're all natural, of course, but I may work my way across the canyon some day and inspect them anyway. For those with an adventurous spirit who insist they're 'markers', the 'richest gold mine in the world' is said to be up canyon another mile or so. But that's another story.

Speaking of obelisks, the lower photo was taken a year or two ago on the other side of the mountain from where the top photo was taken. Obelisk or obelisk-shaped rock?

 

[mdog]

Springfield,

That's an interesting picture of the obelisk shaped rock. Could you tell if there were any signs of it being formed with tools? I saw a show about how the ancient Egyptians cut an obelisk out of rock but I can't remember how it was done.

Rick

 

[Springfield]

Springfield,

That's an interesting picture of the obelisk shaped rock. Could you tell if there were any signs of it being formed with tools? I saw a show about how the ancient Egyptians cut an obelisk out of rock but I can't remember how it was done.

Rick

Rick,
To my eye, the stone looked natural - no apparent tool marks. I've been back to look at it three or four times, and to tell the truth, I'm not certain about it. It's location baffled me, just lying by itself nowhere near an outcropping.

 

[Shortstack]

the only thing artificial is your explanation , which is erroneous again- you might want to check
on the missing gap of your assessment, that is ice age glaciers touched this part of the us...and it could have done everything you say could not have been done...your seeing this pile of rocks in a static mode, when all of these boulders were rolled and scrubbed along in the ice age, and this is the debris of that era...come to rest in this odd shape, a naturally odd shape, it is called pareidolia as you really know but do deny vigorously and quite incorrectly as usual.
sorry but incomplete knowledge of geology will give you incorrect assumptions..only newbies see secret 'doors' and secret priest images..while they dream of climbing this and opening one of those doors..better get Indiana to come along to help, cause you know the nazis are in there too..yes, nazi zombies are guarding the treasure..better bring your whip as well...
rangler

The Great and Glorious Oz is wrong again. Ice Age glaciers didn't get down to what is now Colorado, but being wrong is nothing new to ragler; getting caught at it is another thing.
Lets see now. For ragler's idea to work, the Ice Age glaciers in what is now Canada, formed all of those boulders and stones..............then the Spanish moved them to what is now Colorado, USA where they worked their asses donkeys off to stack them; then put that big old "7" on the side to show they had to rest BIG TIME after all of that work. Hell, ragler........WORKS FOR ME!

 

[Springfield]

.... Lets see now. For ragler's idea to work, the Ice Age glaciers in what is now Canada, formed all of those boulders and stones..............then the Spanish moved them to what is now Colorado, USA where they worked their asses donkeys off to stack them; then put that big old "7" on the side to show they had to rest BIG TIME after all of that work. Hell, ragler........WORKS FOR ME!

It's an interesting and unusual geologic feature, similar to many, many others, here and there. However, it's not manmade IMHO. I think rangler is correct on that point.

 

[Shortstack]

I don't think it is completely manmade either. But, I do think it is man-modified. There are too many intricate shapes intermingled on the whole mount. Sharp, recessed edges alongside rounded surfaces with changing directions. Going by the size of the trees around the base of the mount; that is a humongous formation and that big "apple" looking boulder on top must be in the area of several hundred tons.
There are a few obviously manmade marks on this thing. The hard question is, just how much of this monument has been modified by the hand of man and how much by the hand of God. We may never know the full answer, but to be called names by someone because of their lack of vision is more than a little irritating. We know that the Great Pyramid of Giza is manmade, but the explanation of HOW it was built is not only laughable, but borders on the absurd.

 

[mdog]

Fire and water. I believe the Egyptians used fire and water to crack the stone at the quarry. Nothing to do with this rock formation but it reminds me of the obilisk that was shown on the program. Springfield, am I correct in understanding that there was nothing similar nearby?

Rick

 

[desertmoons]

Your first pic steve, of the natural hoodoos and such..I would check it out some day too. The left side of it..the left side of the picture seems a bit off and some possibilities there. But I've never seen anything like that. They do not seem angular as i would expect shaped stones to be. Still there are one or two possibilities. But the world is full of possibilities .

The obelisk. Odd all by itself. Wonder what the other end looks like. There seems to be a depression toward the other end. On this end..well..pictures can lie ..but might be a likely place for marks.

Boundary markers...I've often wondered about this "natural" pillar as to its purpose.

Here is a nice link, not conclusive, about some possible Spanish boundary markers.
http://mapas.uoregon.edu/imt/imt.la...=0.088&XfactorZoom=1.538&sections=no&books=no

As to co monument....thank goodness we all do not think alike. How boring that would be.

Err.. those big treasures..hmmm for such a tale to live on..there must have been a conclusive event sometime in the past to feed the fuel on that one. So, very interesting.

Rangler, you hound and try to insult me from thread to thread, though i never post on your threads or bother you, unless your usual silly accusations move on to slander.. Please stop.

You will not get what you desire from me, so..just chalk it up and move on.