Signs, Signs, Everywhere a Sign...

[Old Dog]

Thom... forgive this question - but please tolerate it.

It would follow then, based on what you just wrote, that it would take entire seasons to make an accurate trail, that would take seasons to follow. That being the possible case - why not just take the damned treasure with you for it would take so long to build a trail that you could have loaded all the treasure onto ships and left with it!

Seasons to build a trail that takes seasons to follow... is this right?

Several reasons for the trails.

1) The trails were made by royal decree

2) The miners often dug out more in one season than they could haul out.

3) The quint was always kept separate and was hauled out by the king's men,
Hence, it was cached and usually retrieved by the king's men at a later date.
this made the trails a necessity.
(Not to make the trails according to the rules laid out by the King was a death sentence)

Given my choice I think I would haul mine first before I hauled the king's.
Much of what treasure hunters go after is the quint (royal fifth) that they were not able to retrieve.

Thom

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

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

[Montana Jim]

Thom... forgive this question - but please tolerate it.

It would follow then, based on what you just wrote, that it would take entire seasons to make an accurate trail, that would take seasons to follow. That being the possible case - why not just take the damned treasure with you for it would take so long to build a trail that you could have loaded all the treasure onto ships and left with it!

Seasons to build a trail that takes seasons to follow... is this right?

Several reasons for the trails.

1) The trails were made by royal decree

2) The miners often dug out more in one season than they could haul out.
3) The quint was always kept separate and was hauled out by the king's men,
Hence, it was cached and usually retrieved by the king's men at a later date.
this made the trails a necessity.
(Not to make the trails according to the rules laid out by the King was a death sentence)

Given my choice I think I would haul mine first before I hauled the king's.
Much of what treasure hunters go after is the quint (royal fifth) that they were not able to retrieve.

Thom

Gotcha.

 

[Kentucky Kache]

Supplying documentation would help even the stringant skeptic understand why men would risk life to repel down a cliff to carve a boulder into a monkey with a helmet

Nope, not to the skeptic. Only to those who are willing to believe in possibilities.

 

[Montana Jim]

Supplying documentation would help even the stringant skeptic understand why men would risk life to repel down a cliff to carve a boulder into a monkey with a helmet

Nope, not to the skeptic. Only to those who are willing to believe in possibilities.

Regardless... does anything exists outlining that? It would make a great read... maybe there was also a band of quality control people who reported back? An interesting concept to be sure...

 

[Old Dog]

Yes Jim,

By royal decree the miners who operated here at the whim of the King were obligated to set aside a quint or 20%.
this quint is usually marked by two Xs side by side or XX.

The kings share as it is also called took on the name "Royal Quint" or the "Kings Fifth"

This was set up as part of the rules of operation in the new world.
There were groups of surveyors and stone masons who worked for the king setting up trails and cache sites.
Not to use them was at risk of execution.
That is why the signs are as consistant as they are.
Not just here in our Southwest but all over the world.
No matter where the signs are on a global scale
they are always the same... If Spanish

 

[Montana Jim]

Yes Jim,

By royal decree the miners who operated here at the whim of the King were obligated to set aside a quint or 20%.
this quint is usually marked by two Xs side by side or XX.

The kings share as it is also called took on the name "Royal Quint" or the "Kings Fifth"

This was set up as part of the rules of operation in the new world.
There were groups of surveyors and stone masons who worked for the king setting up trails and cache sites.
Not to use them was at risk of execution.
That is why the signs are as consistant as they are.
Not just here in our Southwest but all over the world.
No matter where the signs are on a global scale
they are always the same... If Spanish

Thank you... That helps me see the entire operation in a broader sense...

 

[desertmoons]

Montana, besides taxing purposes, at least in some parts of the world there was imminent danger from the natives.

And in parts of the southwest there were triannual supply expeditions up from the south (at least before 1680 -afterwards i have not been able to determine yet). I suspect on the return trips these caravans may have been hauling some interesting cargo and they were an opportunity to get an armed escort.

Would tend to think they would use well layed out trails that offered advantages against attacks, besides passing the polling spots..

ps that monkey in a helmet is surrounded by manmade signs carvings and no rapelling needed though it might have been used. It can and has been walked up to. . Some decent ladders would have done the trick.


I'm sure there is a manual or paper somewhere that explains spanish *trail* layout somewhere. However not being very fluent in colonial spanish it seems hard to find.

 

[MD Dog]

I love to lurk on this board and for the most part keep my mouth shut as I know so little. But these are the places I find material to dream of, the fantasy of oh so many boys and girls. The appeal of an actual adventure for hidden gold or treasure has a certain appeal that can be satisfied in no other way but to actually get out and explore. Never knowing what may be around the very next corner or under that next rock.

I am in no way an eternal optimist in fact I'm most usually though to be a very dedicated pessimist. It is with these eyes which I read these posts and have to now and again chime in. I see so many time the disbelievers or the pessimistic posting challenging questions, some times I think maybe actually challenging themselves for the permission to believe that it might be/ maybe could be, True ?
I have but one usually optimistic aspect to my life that is my religious beliefs. But that to me is based not just on faith but even on what I would call mathematical science. It is simply the science of odds. What are the odds that we evolved vs being created by a highly developed intelligence that exists beyond our three dimensional realm ? This is a hypothetical question it need not be answered.

My point is, that based on what I have seen in the wide open spaces of this incredible country in which we live. The odds are in favor of some treasures of vast amounts being hidden within it's depths, some where and in many places. I mean it could be as simple as a solid gold nugget of hundreds of pounds or a Ancient gold and jewel encrusted object of religious faith tucked into a nook some where. So if the odds of this are in favor for it being true then the following also seems to have the odds in it's favor as well.

Who would hide these things and not provide some way for themselves or someone else to later return and recover said items. What are the odds that they wouldn't vs would ? There are no disputes as to the historical aspects of the Spanish as well as the French and English being in this country over many years. What are the odds that they would not have looked to reap the resources besides coal and trees and beaver skins etc. ? Gold being a resource as well as many other types of things like fruit and Gems, animals even slaves.

It's true that their are many things reputed to be sign and markers that very often don't pan out or are incorrectly interpreted. But I see no harm in the effort to try and disseminate such info and learn from one another what may or may not work. And why some would find this as a bad idea I do not know. It is a free country, at least for a little while longer and only to some degree. So why bother arguing, the validity of anything here ? Isn't there a better conspiracy theory to argue against ? I for one hate the whole witchcraft, spiritualist, ghostie area and it seems such a natural place to focus such inquiries. Or how about those UFO nut jobs, now there's a chance to fight the evil of spreading such inaccuracies.

 

[rigmover2307]

Here is some interesting reading regarding mining in the New World. Although void of any repelling, boulder carving or other claimed oddities, it tells of the Spanish mining industry standards.
http://pdmhs.org/PDFs/ScannedBullet...e Mining Ordinances of New Spain - A Stud.pdf

That was actually a pretty good read. Thanks for the link

 

[Old Dog]

Thanks SWR.
Very nice link

 

[Montana Jim]

Here is some interesting reading regarding mining in the New World. Although void of any repelling, boulder carving or other claimed oddities, it tells of the Spanish mining industry standards.
http://pdmhs.org/PDFs/ScannedBullet...e Mining Ordinances of New Spain - A Stud.pdf

That was actually a pretty good read. Thanks for the link

I agree - good read, and thanks.

 

[rmptr]

Yah, good info!

 

[desertmoons]

Thanks swr.

 

[MD Dog]

I have, however, failed to find any references to groups of surveyors or stone masons who worked for the King, setting up trails and cache sites. Most articles make mention of the taxes being paid, how to qualify or apply for a mining permit, staking a claim and so on. Furthermore, I have not found any documentation that mentions the separation/division being done in the field and the King's put in a separate location. You were taxed from what your mine produced, and you paid the taxing agent.

So because you failed to find the information presented by others in perfunctory search of internet sites it is therefore deemed not viable ?

 

[MD Dog]

So you don't put much stock in those pesky Historical society records and libraries, do you ? Not to mention that some people here have spent years researching something that you have done all of what twenty minutes of Internet search for. Do you really think your opinion a valid one in comparison ? Really SWR, I give you credit for far more intelligent posts and arguments than you are displaying here. As you know, I am a big skeptic myself about many things, but I try not to post such things without at least some validity as to my skepticism. But many things like this subject would require much more research (years) to have a viable opinion in regards to it other than to say, good luck to those who wish to pursue it. In other words I don't know enough to have an informed opinion so I keep out of it and just watch and listen. How's that old saying go. Better to keep your mouth shut and let them think you a fool rather than open it and prove them right.

 

[MD Dog]

What I have a problem with is unsupported Naysayers like yourself using a different tactic to get around the term of use about calling people liars or calling their claims false as you are obviously trying to do. What you post is tantamount to saying what someone finds isn't a real find. Although I too don't personally agree with this policy it is none the less "the policy". Opinions are only allowed up to a point as has been said time and again by Marc and Jeff. But good posters like Crackbadger get tired of having to defend their posted finds from people who find clever ways to post their own unsupported naysaying "Opinions", which in turn causes them to leave. Too many of the really good knowledgeable people from the past have left for this same reason. So if you have any proof that what these other posters are saying is not true then post it or it is you who is posting Garbage. The lack of proof goes both directions. Your as Guilty as those you suppose to out. Me thinks you are hoisted by your own Pittard !

(Edited for clarity.)

 

[Springfield]

... Too many of the really good knowledgeable people from the past have left for this same reason. So if you have any proof that what these other posters are saying is not true then it is you who is posting Garbage. The lack of proof goes both directions. ....

Extraordinary claims require demonstrations of validity to be taken seriously by rational observers. However, those who repeatably claim on public forums to know all the answers refuse to substantiate those theories because they are just that - unvalidated ideas. If these same theories had been posted as mere possibilities, then fine and dandy. When they are posted as 'proven', then let's see the proof instead of attacking the questioner (oldest flim-flam trick in the book). Of course, the truly knowledgable people do not post on puiblic forums for obvious reasons. By the way, requiring a questioner to disprove a fallacious claim is a little like asking the tail to wag the dog, no? Reminds me of the Inquisition's famous witch test.

 

[MD Dog]

... Too many of the really good knowledgeable people from the past have left for this same reason. So if you have any proof that what these other posters are saying is not true then it is you who is posting Garbage. The lack of proof goes both directions. ....

Extraordinary claims require demonstrations of validity to be taken seriously by rational observers. However, those who repeatably claim on public forums to know all the answers refuse to substantiate those theories because they are just that - unvalidated ideas. If these same theories had been posted as mere possibilities, then fine and dandy. When they are posted as 'proven', then let's see the proof instead of attacking the questioner (oldest flim-flam trick in the book). Of course, the truly knowledgable people do not post on puiblic forums for obvious reasons. By the way, requiring a questioner to disprove a fallacious claim is a little like asking the tail to wag the dog, no? Reminds me of the Inquisition's famous witch test.

To say I doubt or don't believe because I have proof vs to say I doubt or don't believe because I can't find any proof is not the same. IE: I say that doing something is against the law. You say no it isn't because you can't find that law. Especially if you say you only looked for a couple of minutes online. While I may have been a Lawyer or even a judge. Who would you be more inclined to believe ? (Not withstanding the standard Lawyer jokes )

 

[MD Dog]

Judges may not know every law written, but only a fool would question a Judges knowledge about a law, based on the fact they couldn't find that law online.

 

[Springfield]

...To say I doubt or don't believe because I have proof vs to say I doubt or don't believe because I can't find any proof is not the same. .... Who would you be more inclined to believe ?....

Personally, I don't operate from a faith-based orientation. I support those ideas that are demonstrated to be valid. Unproven ideas make for good whiskey talk, sure, but blind faith in them risk wasted energy.