Legends, Maps, Coincidences, Logic, and Hunches.

[EE THr]

As a P.S. to my previous post---

There was also another written clue which was going up a large canyon on the south end of the Supers, then down past Weaver's Needle, and Northward until you entered a canyon full of boulders. Then continuing Northward until the intersection of another creek/canyon and turning back Southward.

I do remember that it specifically used the phrase, at that point, to go up "the first drainage on the left."

I have since tried to Google that phrase, but have not been able to find it again. It was a couple years ago that I read it.

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Upgraded Night Vision Monocular Digital Infrared Monocular Telescope for 100% Darkness with 8X Zoom - Grab it through Amazon!

[EE THr]

Here is a map that I have puzzled over for quite awhile---




It depicts the traditional "pit-tunnel-cave" configuration, with the cave (casa caverna) on the opposite side of the creek as the pit mine and tunnel. And it has a big needle to the South, with the Salt River to the North.

But the rest of the map doesn't fit with anything else.

It's as though two different people contributed to making this map.

Suppose there were two different people, trying to combine what they each knew, into one map?

Suppose one guy, call him Jose, was stationed at the "Campo Mayor," and the other guy, Pancho, worked at the arrastres or placers? Maybe they were friends or related, or just met up later, and tried to make an overall map of where the mines were, by combining what each one knew?

It would make sense that the top dogs wouldn't want any one person to know everything, and thus be able to come back and lead a large group of people right to the mines.

So, Jose worked at the Campo. It's on the river, so they could monitor who was coming into the area from Northwest. And from a high point just South of Campo, they could see anyone coming in from the flat area to the West. Good spot in that respect.

And say that Jose would, among other things, help bring supplies to the mine. So he would know that they went South-Southeasterly, and started going up onto Black Mesa just as they got near the Three Red Hills. He would know that they crossed over the top of Black Mesa, and that there were three drainages emanating from about where they crossed the top, all as shown on his part of the map.

But here is where he starts guessing. They go down the other side of Black Mesa, but not right away. They don't take the first drainage down to Boulder. Instead, they follow a drainage Southward, which is one hill West of Boulder Creek. Then they drop down and cross Boulder here---




But he thinks that Boulder is just the drainage which they didn't go down (dotted yellow line), when they turned Southward on Black Mesa. So then they go over the hump to La Barge, and cross it. He asks where it goes, and someone tells him that it goes Northward, and that it, and the creek they previously crossed, come together. He assumes that they come together nearby, and that's why he shows two creeks coming together on his part of the map, after coming off Black Mesa. Then he continues on to the valley with the pit-tunnel-cave layout.

He knows about "Red River" feeding into the Salt, but he doesn't know where it comes from, exactly. Maybe at some point he went by boat or raft Eastward to the arrastres, and saw it then, or maybe was on a scouting party, or just knew of it by word of mouth. He doesn't know that it follows the contours of Black Mesa, and that it is actually what he thought was part of the first drainage. He saw the North drainage off of Black Mesa, and figured that was the source of his "Red River."


Now Jose gets together with his friend Pancho, later on, and they try to figure out where, exactly, the hard rock mines are located. Kind of triangulate it, and get their bearings on where it is, so they could possibly reach it from different directions, or relay that information to their relatives.

So Pancho tells him that he has been with the group who takes supplies to the mines, also. But his starting point is the arrastres. He says they go Southward, on the West side of Black Canyon (Tortilla Creek), then cross over a creek (Peter's canyon creek) which branches off of the West side of Black Canyon. And that is where the smaller camp is. There is a trail that continues on, in a Southernly direction to the West side of another creek, where there is a small mine.

When Pancho had asked the people in this smaller camp, where the pit-tunnel-cave is located, it's all hush-hush, so they tell him it's further up the creek (Tortilla/Black Canyon) that the small mine trail goes to. But he is not allowed to go further down that trail. When he asks where the creek, that the camp is on, goes to, they say it doesn't lead anywhere, but it just goes South (but this is the real route to the pit-tunnel-cave).

When Jose and Pancho compare notes, they assume that Peter's, which is the real "Arroyo Caverna," goes South and must be the one that Jose saw after crossing the hump between Boulder and La Barge Creeks/Canyons, so they draw it in there. After all, it's got to go somewhere, and Jose did see a creek there.


Additionally, it could be that Jose was not allowed to approach the pit-tunnel-cave, either. Maybe the rock miners came down to La Barge to pick up their supplies. So Jose only knew that the mine was on the other side of the Creek (La Barge) and up that drainage a ways. So Pancho's "creek to nowhere" must be the one that Jose saw at the "hump," because from that creek, the rock mines appeared to him to be up high, and creeks don't flow up hill, so the mystery creek couldn't be up there.


If neither Jose nor Pancho ever actually saw the pit-tunnel-cave, then there may have even been a third partner in the map making.

If so, it would probably have been a rock miner. And the miners would probably not have been allowed to go to either the Campo Mayor or the arrastres/placers, because the top dogs didn't want them mingling. This could explain why the map shows the "Arroyo Caverna" coming down off a hill on the map, because there is a drainage in the valley, on West side, where the trail in from La Barge is. The rock miner may have seen water coming down there, and thought that it was the source for Peter's Creek/Canyon, because just South of that is a very sharp bend, with steep sides, in Peter's, and it obscured his view of the real source of the flow. It may have been that those miners were made to stick to their one work spot, and were not allowed to wander around, both to get the work done and to prevent anyone from wising up to the full layout. But they would have had to mingle and talk, because whoever made that map seemed to know at least approximately what was there.

The map shows a continuation of "Canyon Negra," after the Southmost branch. But there is no major branching off of Tortilla Creek, past Peter's. Possibly, the third guy, the rock miner, told Jose and Pancho about there being a fork just North of the pit-tunnel-cave complex, and they figured it was their Black Canyon continuing on Southward.


On the other hand, maybe some drunk, in a bar in Phoenix, drew the map after hearing lots of rumors and treasure stories....

 

[cactusjumper]

As a P.S. to my previous post---

There was also another written clue which was going up a large canyon on the south end of the Supers, then down past Weaver's Needle, and Northward until you entered a canyon full of boulders. Then continuing Northward until the intersection of another creek/canyon and turning back Southward.

I do remember that it specifically used the phrase, at that point, to go up "the first drainage on the left."

I have since tried to Google that phrase, but have not been able to find it again. It was a couple years ago that I read it.

EE,

I don't believe Weaver's Needle is mentioned by name in that story. If that's so, it could be Miner's Needle or even.........Superstition Peak.

Joe

 

[EE THr]

I don't believe Weaver's Needle is mentioned by name in that story. If that's so, it could be Miner's Needle or even.........Superstition Peak.

Joe

From what I think I remember of it, there was the same reference to entering at the largest canyon on the South end of the Supers, and going past the needle, and Northward, coming into a canyon full of boulders, then turing back Southward where another creek joined it.

What I distinctly remember is that the point to turn Eastward was described as "the first drainage on the left." If anyone has a copy of that story, it would help make it more clear. I was hoping someone might recognize it, and post it.

 

[lgadbois]

I wonder how many of the maps floating around were created by Ted DeGrazia. Here is an interesting drawing that he created:

​

 

[lgadbois]

In case you don't see it, the previous drawing is based on the Perfil Map.

 

[somehiker]

lgadbois :

DeGrazia did make a treasure map,and signed it with his own name as well.
He seemed to have a belief in Jesuit Gold.Many of those who sought treasure in the Superstitions did as well.
He was after all,both an artist and a treasure hunter.Because he spent a fair amount of time in the mountains and,according to friend Joe Clemente who accompanied DeGrazia on a reported expedition in 1962..."He has been in the mountains before,and he knows them fairly well."

...DeGrazia had probably also,during his stint as a treasure enthusiast, seen many of the maps which had been circulated well before he had even been to the Superstitions.
Adolph Ruth died in the Superstitions in 1931 and one of the maps which he had obtained from Mexico prior to that year was the "Perfil Map".
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb...utchman/ruth/Fred Guirey Interview - 1976.pdf
DeGrazia was 22 years old in 1931 and still in high school in Morenci,Az.http://degrazia.org/Biography.aspx
The timeline of his life and of his career show Ettore to have been a very busy man,not likely to have spent much time in the Superstitions or making maps of any kind,including maps of stone,until the early 1950's.Most,if not all of the maps which intrigue us were well known and had been published by then.

The sketch which you posted is,I believe,related to the story of Doc Thorne.
From Oroblanco's weblog:
http://oroblanco.wordpress.com/2011...erick-and-doc-thorn-mines-be-one-in-the-same/
There are some who do believe it also to be the cave or mine or tunnel shown on the Perfil Maps.

Regards:SH.

 

[Bavarian Joe]

[/quote]

What an interesting rifle. VZ-24's weren't all that common in the 60's. Probably a vet bringback. Neither one of them have the right ammo for it either. Staged photo perchance?

Musing out loud,
Joe

 

[somehiker]

Hadn't noticed.Hard to tell what the ammo is.
Not 7.92 x 57 ?
Could be another member of the group handed it over to DeGrazia for the photo.

Regards:SH.

 

[Bavarian Joe]

Hadn't noticed.Hard to tell what the ammo is.
Not 7.92 x 57 ?
Could be another member of the group handed it over to DeGrazia for the photo.

Regards:SH.

Could be, it just looked interesting. But yeah, the ammo in the bandoliers looks rimmed like 30-30 or 45-70.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Morning gentlemen: The 30 30 can definitely be ruled out, the cartridges are not bottle necked, but straight cases. The .45 cailbre series are a more logical possibility.

In any event, certainly not for the shown rifle.

Don Jose de La Mancha

 

[Oroblanco]

Just an observation, but the rifle carried by mr DeGrazia appears to be a straight handled bolt action Mauser, of the small ring series which were not usually chambered in the 8mm (7.92) x 57mm, much more commonly in 7mm x 57mm. The round itself has a sharp shoulder, which would be concealed inside of the loops on the cartridge belt.

Here is a Spanish Mauser model 93 **(small ring)

Most of the Mausers models 91 to 96 look pretty similar in a photo, just that the most commonly available small ring in the USA for a long time was the Spanish in 7x57mm. Quite a few were brought home after the Spanish American war, but great numbers of all models have since been imported. I am working mostly from memory here but think that none of the small ring Mausers were chambered in the 8mm (7.92) except for the 1888 'Gewehr' rifle, <which was not actually a Mauser, but a Mannlicher design> and it has a characteristic box magazine that extends below the stock of the rifle; I can't tell for certain from the photo as that spot is shaded, but my money is on a Spanish Mauser (93) in 7mm. Here is a photo of that model 88 (1888 Gewehr) you can see the magazine extending below the stock fairly well.

I have to disagree (respectfully) with my amigo Don Jose too, in that we can not rule out the venerable 30-30 on the grounds that a great many Mausers have been re-chambered and re-barreled with various different calibers; I don't think a great many were converted to 30-30 Winchester, being a cartridge with a 'lip' would have presented a problem with the extractor but that can be rectified by modifying the extractor as well. I doubt this particular rifle has been re-chambered to a different caliber for it appears to have the original military issue stock, most commonly when such alterations are done the stock is either replaced or cut short to produce a 'sporter' version that is lighter and handier for use in the field.

This side discussion reminds me of a project I have put off for a long while, a rifle of this same model. My apologies for getting somewhat off topic, please do continue.
Oroblanco


.

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

Hmm interesting thoughts Oro de Tayopa, but the .30 .30 can definitely be ruled out. The cases are the same diameter on both sides of the bandolier indicating a straight case, say 38 55 on upwards in caliber.

I agree with you in that if anyone had gone to an expensive reworking of the action, rechambering, and reboring of the barrel, the stock would go or be reworked, definitely the bayonet lug would be gone.

The rifle shown is in standard military configuration, most likely 7 mm in one of it's variations..

Aux thingie, The Mausers used a 'step barrel' configution which was precisely designed to keep the vibrations in the light barrel to a minimum for accuracy with the designed round.. This seldom worked out for any accuracy 'except' for the round that it was designed for.

The rotation / whip of the muzzle and the center of impact would be changed in a clock face manner. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 for each variation from the original round specification.

Don Jose de La Mancha.

 

[Oroblanco]

I guess I have to pick nits with you Don Jose, here is a photo of a 30-30 Winchester round;

As you will note, the body of the case is considerably larger in diameter than the bullet itself, necessitating the shoulder so commonly associated with high powered rifle calibers. So the bullet will look smaller than the case, as it is.

Most of the altered Mausers which were re-chambered, did not take into account the stepped barrel design and accuracy suffered as a result, however this was not readily apparent to those making the modifications until it was too late. Then other ideas were adopted to try to deal with the barrel vibrations and stepped barrel contour by altering the way the barrel was bedded into the stock, some making a 'pillar' type bed (sanding the rest of the wood that touches the barrel so as to avoid the vibrations affecting accuracy) and others going to the extreme of free floating bedding, with no actual support of the barrel at all. Both worked (and will work) to some degree, the free floating bedding however leaves something to be desired if the rifle is used for hunting.

A side note here but in the instances where the original barrel was re-bored to a different caliber (as in changing a 7mm to a 30 caliber for example) quite often the problems with accuracy that resulted had nothing to do with the stepped barrel contour and more to do with poor boring and/or rifling having been done. A bore that is not cut true, can not give accurate shooting. A good argument against reboring old military rifle barrels to new calibers IMHO, unless the work is very perfectly done you will quite possibly ruin the accuracy of the rifle.

Oroblanco

 

[Real de Tayopa Tropical Tramp]

HOLA ORO de Tayopa: Frankly I am a bit surprised at your in depth firearms knowledge. You are correct in almost everything that you said, except, "That ain't no .30 30, nor are those finger sized straight cases .30 30's.

Incidentally the old .30 30 was used in Africa when it first came out, but it left too many Lion and Leopards well fed.

For the lost Dutchman ranges, a 30 40 was the best around the turn of the Century, however the .30 06 quickly took over for the long range open ocuntry.

Today a good S&W ,.357 will do the job nicely, if you are capable.

Don Jose de La Mancha ( El Atavistic Saint in his cave at the end of the trail)

 

[rfjj]

The rifle in the picture looks like a Czech m-24, also called the vz-24 short rifle. The ammunition in the belt may even be correct. Its hard to tell from the picture but it doesnt look like a straight case, it looks slightly smaller below the loops than above and if its the J variant of the calibur its much more rounded on the actual projectile, looking very similar to the picture. Just my opinion. sorry for continuing slightly off topic. Ralph Johnson

 

[somehiker]

Ralph:

Sounds like you know your arms and ammo.
Showed the photo to an acquaintance who collects old Mausers.
Said pretty much the same thing and origin may have been Mexico.....Mexican Mauser Modelo 1936

Regards:SH

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA ORO de Tayopa: Frankly I am a bit surprised at your in depth firearms knowledge. You are correct in almost everything that you said, except, "That ain't no .30 30, nor are those finger sized straight cases .30 30's.

Incidentally the old .30 30 was used in Africa when it first came out, but it left too many Lion and Leopards well fed.

For the lost Dutchman ranges, a 30 40 was the best around the turn of the Century, however the .30 06 quickly took over for the long range open ocuntry.

Today a good S&W ,.357 will do the job nicely, if you are capable.

Don Jose de La Mancha ( El Atavistic Saint in his cave at the end of the trail)

I don't know why you would be surprised, I did mention to you that I went to gunsmithing school and had my own shop for four years. I still disagree with you that you can tell what caliber that ammunition is in the ammo belt in the photo however, for the shoulder area of the rounds is covered by the loops.

As to the exact model of the rifle, visually all of the small ring Mausers look very similar and since his hand is covering part of the action, it is not possible to determine exactly. Small ring Mausers include models 91,93,94,95, and 96, and the Mexican 1936 which is a small ring model 98. Here is a site with good photos of a Mexican 1936 short rifle, I think we can rule it out just on the length alone:
http://www.google.com/imgres?hl=en&...nw=170&start=174&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:6,s:174

Sorry for continuing off-topic, perhaps someone connected with the DeGrazia family could settle the question for us?
Oroblanco

 

[somehiker]

Mexican Model 1936

Photo taken near straight on.

Enlargement of DG photo.
Couple of differences that might narrow it down.
Front band (bayonet mount) does look Mauser,as per wiki photo
But could be a modification as well.

 

[Loke]

I know its far off topic - but ... I just l-o-v-e the knowledge of you guys!
Plueeeze keep it going - I'm an avid 'listener'!