Massbaycolonist
Full Member
Let's say that you are doing a little research. You're looking for a few good treasure leads. You have a list of treasure legends/leads. "The Mahoney brothers are said to have buried five bazillion dollars up on Superstition Mountain."
In the 1700 's, Capt. Kidd may have buried a treasure chest in Hidden Cove".
So on and so on. Some leads have more details available than others: "In 1756, Larry Lawrence hid a cache on his property in Knowlesville. It may still be there."
"In the 1850's a stage coach was held up by the Galloway boys in Hidden Gulch. They got away with five bags of loot. Legend has it that they stashed the bags in the area."
How do you determine which lead to dismiss as dubius, and which lead do you think might have merit for further research? Do you have any kind of organization of leads other than a bunch of legends from a particular area?
I'm trying to come up with a few good leads for my area. Especially Massachusetts. I have lots of leads: Ghost towns, robberies, pirate legends, solitary misers, Forts, lost treasure, sunken ships, etc. When I read over these leads, I can't help but thinking that most of these leads were created by story tellers who would love nothing better than to see you and me go on a wild goose chase. At the same time, some leads are valid. It is difficult to determine which treasure lead is valid, and which ones are not worth following up on. Most of the time, there is a some degree of truth to a legend, but the truth is twisted or omitted. Also many of the lost/hidden treasures have practical reasons why you probably would not want to follow up on the lead (Such as the location of the the supposed treasure now being under Park Ave. in New York City.) Finally, lots of these treasure leads are pure baloney. Nothing more.
How do you determine which lead to follow up on? As I go over these leads, I notice that I tend to view each lead in terms of how probable the story is, and how possible it might be that the treasure exists, and is recoverable. But admitedly, this is a very subjective way to evaluate leads.
I think it is important to have an organized lead process. I don't have this yet. What would be a good way to organize lead generation? After some thought, I think one of the best ways to evaluate a lead is to see if there is any documentation available for the lead. A treasure map, or an archived document regarding the missing/lost treasure would be optimal. Also, Newpaper stories, and local information in books. Any kind of documentation. It will be difficult to find documentation for a lead such as 'In the 1700's, Mrs A. H. Beasley buried her families wealth on the back nine on the farm in Newcombe County, Nebraska'. Furthermore, I think to find any documentation, you have to go to the town or area library/archive of the lead.
Are there any other suggestions for determining which lead to follow up on?
In the 1700 's, Capt. Kidd may have buried a treasure chest in Hidden Cove".
So on and so on. Some leads have more details available than others: "In 1756, Larry Lawrence hid a cache on his property in Knowlesville. It may still be there."
"In the 1850's a stage coach was held up by the Galloway boys in Hidden Gulch. They got away with five bags of loot. Legend has it that they stashed the bags in the area."
How do you determine which lead to dismiss as dubius, and which lead do you think might have merit for further research? Do you have any kind of organization of leads other than a bunch of legends from a particular area?
I'm trying to come up with a few good leads for my area. Especially Massachusetts. I have lots of leads: Ghost towns, robberies, pirate legends, solitary misers, Forts, lost treasure, sunken ships, etc. When I read over these leads, I can't help but thinking that most of these leads were created by story tellers who would love nothing better than to see you and me go on a wild goose chase. At the same time, some leads are valid. It is difficult to determine which treasure lead is valid, and which ones are not worth following up on. Most of the time, there is a some degree of truth to a legend, but the truth is twisted or omitted. Also many of the lost/hidden treasures have practical reasons why you probably would not want to follow up on the lead (Such as the location of the the supposed treasure now being under Park Ave. in New York City.) Finally, lots of these treasure leads are pure baloney. Nothing more.
How do you determine which lead to follow up on? As I go over these leads, I notice that I tend to view each lead in terms of how probable the story is, and how possible it might be that the treasure exists, and is recoverable. But admitedly, this is a very subjective way to evaluate leads.
I think it is important to have an organized lead process. I don't have this yet. What would be a good way to organize lead generation? After some thought, I think one of the best ways to evaluate a lead is to see if there is any documentation available for the lead. A treasure map, or an archived document regarding the missing/lost treasure would be optimal. Also, Newpaper stories, and local information in books. Any kind of documentation. It will be difficult to find documentation for a lead such as 'In the 1700's, Mrs A. H. Beasley buried her families wealth on the back nine on the farm in Newcombe County, Nebraska'. Furthermore, I think to find any documentation, you have to go to the town or area library/archive of the lead.
Are there any other suggestions for determining which lead to follow up on?