Kidd-Palmer Treasure Maps SOLVED by Oliver D. Smith

[Cryptid1990]

The copy of Louis Tracy's book Rainbow Island I ordered arrived in my post today.

I opened up the book to find.......

Now compare to Skeleton Map:

There is no doubt the Kidd-Palmer maps were based on Rainbow Island.

@gjb , @CapnGeorge , @Randawg72 - will any of you now admit you were wrong and I was right?

 

[Cryptid1990]

In the next few days I will be providing the solution to the directional clues (instructions) on the border of the Skeleton Map.

I almost certainly now know the answer. Stay tuned.

 

[Cryptid1990]

Still I tend to think that Shiel owned or created those maps and Tracy took the details and inspiration from them to write his story. The details in the book are less realistic than in the maps. Geological details most of all. For example the book gives the depth of the lagoon at 20 fathoms (it couldn't have sharks in it otherwise) - not really believable - but I could never find any details on the maps that pointed to something just out of imagination.

In any case your discovery should get the deserved attention even if it leaves still questions to answer.

I am pleased to say I found the original map (see my above post). The reason I did not know about this before is the map does not appear in the US edition (Wings of the Morning), at least not in the reprints I read. I first read the book (US edition) in a library I visited and found online (here). Instead, the map was published in the UK edition and reprints under different title (Rainbow Island). The map has not before (until now by me) been digitised anywhere online. The book seems to have sold better under the US title and the UK edition (especially first edition) is harder to find a physical copy. The map I scanned was from a reprint (undated but likely 1920s) that arrived in my post today.

Whoever drew the Kidd-Palmer maps heavily borrowed or copied the map of Rainbow Island from the UK edition of Tracy's book. There are fairly minor changes. For example, the annotation "ledge occupied" was changed to "Anchorage", while the words "Valley of Death" were removed and replaced with a small drawing of skull or bones.

Even the compass on the maps is almost identical.

I am interested in the editions and reprints of Tracy's book in regards to the map so will buy more copies of the book. I guess I will end up like Jerry Fletcher in the film Conspiracy Theory (1997) who owns dozens of copies of The Catcher in the Rye.

 

[Carl-NC]

Stellar job Mr. Smith.

 

[Crow]

I am pleased to say I found the original map (see my above post). The reason I did not know about this before is the map does not appear in the US edition (Wings of the Morning), at least not in the reprints I read. I first read the book (US edition) in a library I visited and found online (here). Instead, the map was published in the UK edition and reprints under different title (Rainbow Island). The map has not before (until now by me) been digitised anywhere online. The book seems to have sold better under the US title and the UK edition (especially first edition) is harder to find a physical copy. The map I scanned was from a reprint (undated but likely 1920s) that arrived in my post today.

Whoever drew the Kidd-Palmer maps heavily borrowed or copied the map of Rainbow Island from the UK edition of Tracy's book. There are fairly minor changes. For example, the annotation "ledge occupied" was changed to "Anchorage", while the words "Valley of Death" were removed and replaced with a small drawing of skull or bones.

Even the compass on the maps is almost identical.

View attachment 2255740
View attachment 2255741
I am interested in the editions and reprints of Tracy's book in regards to the map so will buy more copies of the book. I guess I will end up like Jerry Fletcher in the film Conspiracy Theory (1997) who owns dozens of copies of The Catcher in the Rye.

The great irony of all of this? The name says it all. Rainbow, the elusive gold at the end of the rainbow.

How many lives have been wasted chasing rainbows over the Palmer maps? Thank you for a stellar job in researching this topic. It's nice for a change to get to the truth of such stories rather than wallowing in self-perpetuating delusions. That is why it takes deep, dedicated, thankless research to go where the evidence takes you.

Crow

 

[releventchair]

 

[Cryptid1990]

The great irony of all of this? The name says it all. Rainbow, the elusive gold at the end of the rainbow.

How many lives have been wasted chasing rainbows over the Palmer maps? Thank you for a stellar job in researching this topic. It's nice for a change to get to the truth of such stories rather than wallowing in self-perpetuating delusions. That is why it takes deep, dedicated, thankless research to go where the evidence takes you.

Crow

Well said. I will just add that some individuals have been delusional about the Kidd-Palmer maps for so long, they will not admit they are wrong. I think this is partly explained by the sunk cost fallacy. I will not name names, but a few posters on this forum have stated they have been trying to solve the Kidd-Palmer maps for over 50 years. This includes planning or launching 'expeditions', hiring drones, publishing books about their ideas, creating websites, and so on. Aside from the huge amount of time they have spent on trying to solve these maps (or rather wasted since they were always wide of the mark), they have invested a lot of money. The maps have now been solved but these people cannot accept this, and will continue with their delusions (despite having been proven wrong). The so-called sunk-cost fallacy is a cognitive bias that causes people to continue a failing endeavour because they have invested so much time, money, and effort into it.

 

[Randawg72]

The map I scanned was from a reprint (undated but likely 1920s) that arrived in my post today.

Undated you say? This book has been reprinted many times. As recently as 2024. I suggest you do some research and find out the date of when your copy was published.

(Update: Your copy was published between 1935 and May 19, 1936. Sorry, but this is well after Palmer found Kidd's charts).
Link:

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.hnp1jw&seq=5

 

[Cryptid1990]

Undated you say? This book has been reprinted many times. As recently as 2024. I suggest you do some research and find out the date of when your copy was published.

(Update: Your copy was published between 1935 and May 19, 1936. Sorry, but this is well after Palmer found Kidd's charts).
Link:

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.hnp1jw&seq=5

The map appears in the first edition published in 1903 and the (UK) reprints throughout 1910s, 1920s, and 1930s. For unknown reasons, a name (Robert Jenks) was removed from underneath the map in the 1920s reprints. The map in the undated copy I own does not mention it was drawn by Robert Jenks (a fictional character in the book) [this detail was removed]. Compare these two maps:

The following is described as circa 1910s by someone selling the book:

The name I have highlighted in the red box. If you are desperately hoping the map only appeared in the mid-1930s reprints to argue Tracy copied it from the Skeleton Map (1933) owned by Palmer, you would be mistaken. This also makes no sense since it is patently obvious the Kidd-Palmer maps were based on the Rainbow Island map and not vice-versa. Furthermore, we do not actually need the above map to prove the Kidd-Palmer maps were based on Tracy's Rainbow Island since the Kidd-Palmer maps very closely resemble Tracy's textual visual descriptions and the cannister drawing. There is no doubt the cannister drawing was published in 1903 and it appears in the US edition.

 

[Cryptid1990]

For confirmation the map appears in a 1912 reprint:

Now search "Plan of the Island":

Or you can search words annotated on the map.
For example, I searched "Turtle Beach":

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.hnp1jw&seq=5&q1=Plan+of+the+Island&start=1

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.hnp1jw&seq=5&q1=Turtle+Beach&start=1

On page 6, the map of Rainbow Island ("Plan of the Island") therefore appears. Note that Chapter 1 begins on page 7 which is the same for the reprint I own a physical copy of. This is proof the map of Rainbow Island was published in the 1912 reprint. The first edition (1903) is quite expensive and rare. I intend to purchase a copy and scan to verify the Rainbow Island map but the book will cost me £75 or more.

 

[Carl-NC]

Undated you say? This book has been reprinted many times. As recently as 2024. I suggest you do some research and find out the date of when your copy was published.

Wow. I gotta ask, is there any evidence whatsoever that would convince you the Kidd-Palmer maps are fake?

 

[Cryptid1990]

Wow. I gotta ask, is there any evidence whatsoever that would convince you the Kidd-Palmer maps are fake?

He claims to have "discovered the correct island" the Kidd-Palmer maps depict and is planning an expedition:

Hi Blak bart,
I apologize that this thread has become a forum for ridicule rather than a place to discuss the topic of Kidd's treasure intelligently. I do have an island targeted and I do plan an expedition there. I'm very much aware that even if I'm on the right trail, the odds of success are slim.
I not only believe that I have discovered the correct island, but I have matched some of the geographic landmarks that pinpoint several key locations in which to search.
While I have the means to visit the island, my health and stamina are not what they used to be. I need to sort out the logistics, like arranging transportation, and purchasing a drone. And I want to invest in a new handheld GPS device.
I also need to renew my Visa and get all the vaccinations required before scheduling such a trip.

Crow summed this up well as "wallowing in self-perpetuating delusions." I think the reason why Randawg72 is so adverse to evidence and objectivity is the sunk-cost fallacy, I mentioned above. The guy has spent a lot of time and money trying to find a real island to match the Kidd-Palmer map island, to the extent he is planning an expedition and wants to "invest in a new handheld GPS device", as well as travel to exotic locations. If he admits he is wrong (which he demonstrably is), he would have to admit he wasted his time and money, but the sunk-cost fallacy mindset prevents him from doing that.

 

[Crow]

Sadly, many people go through the sunk cost fallacy, which is a cognitive bias where people continue an endeavor—such as a failing business, project, or relationship—simply because they have already invested resources (time, money, or effort) into it. It is the irrational drive to "throw good money after bad" to avoid the feeling of wasting the initial investment.

I have a really good friend who is an excellent researcher, but he has no business concept and no understanding of the cost fallacy.

In economics, a "sunk cost" is any past expense that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered. Logically, because that money or time is gone forever and or emotionally invested, it should not influence any future decisions. The only rational way to make a decision is to look at future costs vs. future benefits. The fallacy occurs because our brains hate to feel like we've wasted resources, leading us to stick with a bad choice just to justify our past decision.

( Hell, I am not ashamed to say I have fallen for that many times. I did that in a relationship once. Another time on a sinking ship. And another time, trying to save my house from burning down. That one nearly killed me. And trying to save someone from dying. But such is life. And many years ago, with a treasure story. It is an easy trap to fall into.)

Understanding this phenomenon highlights why it is a trap and how it shows up in real life.

Crow

 

[Randawg72]

Wow. I gotta ask, is there any evidence whatsoever that would convince you the Kidd-Palmer maps are fake?

Hi Carl-NC.
In the given context Webster defines evidence as "something that furnishes proof".
So I suppose somebody would have to provide me with "proof" which to date nobody has..
I'm actually a little relieved that many of you believe that Mr. Smith has solved the charts.
The real solution is based on facts, not vague similarities from a fictional story book.

 

[Cryptid1990]

You would need to define what you mean by proof and standard of proof. From what I read in the other thread, you define it as 100% indisputable truth meaning absolute certainty. This definition is typically used by flat-earthers and creationists. It is not a definition or standard in use in empirical science like physics (look up five sigma), history, law (civil and criminal), or even mathematics (any mathematical system starts with axioms meaning there are starting assumptions; this means 2 + 2 = 4 is a conditional truth not an absolute truth in a vacuum). Truth is relative, not absolute. My understanding of something proven or established as a fact or being true is along the lines of:

"We have gathered enough compelling evidence that it is now completely unreasonable to act or believe if it were false."

I have clarified when I said something is proven, solved, or I colloquially have said I have "no doubt" - I am defining proof in the sense of pragmatical very high probability or extreme degree of confidence hence I often define the standard of proof as beyond a reasonable doubt (>99% probability), not all doubt (absolute certainty). In the real world, absolute certainty is a theoretical ideal rather than a practical reality.

It really depends what your threshold of "prove" (proof) is. If "prove" means "beyond a reasonable doubt" (say >99% probability), the criminal standard of proof - the maps are hoaxes (not authentic), at least the map that came in the Hardy Chest. However, if by prove/proof you mean "beyond all doubt" (absolute certainty), then no, they are not proven hoaxes (we cannot be 100% sure). Another way to look at this is the total absence of evidence the maps are authentic. Inductive reasoning provides proof from probability rather than certainty, and the maps are proven hoaxes by the criminal standard of proof. As I said, it depends on how "proof" is defined or its threshold (very high probability but not certainty).

The funny thing, is people like yourself who use the standard of proof as absolute certainty (which no scientist, historian, legal professional or mathematician does) almost never consistently apply it. There is no absolute proof you or the room you are using a computer or another electronic device to access this forum exist - you cannot prove the room you are sitting actually exists since your brain could be receiving fake electrical signals and you are in a simulation. Do you wake up everyday thinking that?

 

[Cryptid1990]

The real solution is based on facts, not vague similarities from a fictional story book.

Can you explain why there is a unique cartographic anomaly on both maps?

Rainbow Island Map (1903)

Skeleton Island Map (1933)

On standard maps, a North arrow points vertically (straight up) or near vertically (because of magnetic variation, there is sometimes a slight angular difference between True/Grid North and Magnetic North). In contrast, the North arrow on the highly unconventional compass rose on the Rainbow Island/Skeleton Island Maps is at a 45-degrees angle to the right so the North-East diagonal axis is utilised as the primary directional line. Not only do these two maps share this unique cartographic anomaly, but the latitude is identical on both maps (9.16 N) [the longitude is similar], not to mention both islands are depicted in the China Sea, the shape of the island is practically the same on both the maps, the lagoon is in the same position, they both mention "Smuggler's Cove" and "North Cape" in the same locations on the island, etc.

Rainbow Island Map (1903)

Skeleton Island Map (1933)

The obvious explanation for the cartographic anomaly is these maps are fictional. You do not find the highly unconventional compass rose that appears on the Rainbow Island/Skeleton Island Maps on actual nautical charts. However, unconventional compass roses are sometimes found on fictional maps. For example, the Land of Oz features an inverted compass.

 

[Cryptid1990]

Sadly, many people go through the sunk cost fallacy, which is a cognitive bias where people continue an endeavor—such as a failing business, project, or relationship—simply because they have already invested resources (time, money, or effort) into it. It is the irrational drive to "throw good money after bad" to avoid the feeling of wasting the initial investment.

I have a really good friend who is an excellent researcher, but he has no business concept and no understanding of the cost fallacy.

In economics, a "sunk cost" is any past expense that has already been incurred and cannot be recovered. Logically, because that money or time is gone forever and or emotionally invested, it should not influence any future decisions. The only rational way to make a decision is to look at future costs vs. future benefits. The fallacy occurs because our brains hate to feel like we've wasted resources, leading us to stick with a bad choice just to justify our past decision.

( Hell, I am not ashamed to say I have fallen for that many times. I did that in a relationship once. Another time on a sinking ship. And another time, trying to save my house from burning down. That one nearly killed me. And trying to save someone from dying. But such is life. And many years ago, with a treasure story. It is an easy trap to fall into.)

Understanding this phenomenon highlights why it is a trap and how it shows up in real life.

Crow

There is another reason why some people refuse to admit they are wrong about these maps. They are making money from publishing books about their far-fetched and sensationalist ideas about the Kidd-Palmer maps (e.g., the maps are authentic pirate treasure maps drawn by Captain Kidd, contain clues to a buried treasure on exotic islands, are related to a deposit or underground vault with booby traps on Oak Island, Knights Templar conspiracy theories, etc). If they admitted the much more mundane reality the maps are a hoax and were based on Tracy's (1903) fictional map of Rainbow Island, they would not publish another book. This begs the question, why not publish a book that is fact-based and grounded in reality, proving the maps are a hoax? The answer is most of the general public do not want to read the correct mundane solution. I have been involved in the ufology and cryptozoology communities for decades. The most rational and evidence-based books on UFOs and cryptids - sell poorly* because buyers tend to want sensational content involving UFOs being of an extraterrestrial or interdimensional origin or Bigfoot a real species (unfortunately). One author I know of sceptical books on cryptids is living in near-poverty.

*To provide another example: Erich von Däniken’s pseudoarchaeology 'ancient astronaut' books have sold over 70 million copies; his book Chariots of the Gods? (1968) alone sold around 30 million copies. In contrast, books debunking his claims notably Some Trust in Chariots: An Assessment of Erich von Däniken's Chariots of the Gods? (1972) and The Space-Gods Revealed: A Close Look at the Theories of Erich von Däniken (1976) [both are great books in my personal collection] sold only a few thousand copies, primarily distributed to university libraries and educational institutions; these texts are not widely known to the general public or laypersons despite they refute Däniken (1968).

 

[Oak Island Sage]

There is another reason why some people refuse to admit they are wrong about these maps. They are making money from publishing books about their far-fetched and sensationalist ideas about the Kidd-Palmer maps (e.g., the maps are authentic pirate treasure maps drawn by Captain Kidd, contain clues to a buried treasure on exotic islands, are related to a deposit or underground vault with booby traps on Oak Island, Knights Templar conspiracy theories, etc). If they admitted the much more mundane reality the maps are a hoax and were based on Tracy's (1903) fictional map of Rainbow Island, they would not publish another book. This begs the question, why not publish a book that is fact-based and grounded in reality, proving the maps are a hoax? The answer is most of the general public do not want to read the correct mundane solution. I have been involved in the ufology and cryptozoology communities for decades. The most rational and evidence-based books on UFOs and cryptids - sell poorly* because buyers tend to want sensational content involving UFOs being of an extraterrestrial or interdimensional origin or Bigfoot a real species (unfortunately). One author I know of sceptical books on cryptids is living is near-poverty.

*To provide another example: Erich von Däniken’s pseudoarchaeology 'ancient astronaut' books have sold over 70 million copies; his book Chariots of the Gods? (1968) alone sold around 30 million copies. In contrast, books debunking his claims notably Some Trust in Chariots: An Assessment of Erich von Däniken's Chariots of the Gods? (1972) and The Space-Gods Revealed: A Close Look at the Theories of Erich von Däniken (1976) [both are great books in my personal collection] sold only a few thousand copies, primarily distributed to university libraries and educational institutions; these texts are not widely known to the general public or laypersons despite they refute Däniken (1968).

Hi Cryptid1990, there is also reason you refuse to admit you are wrong about the China Sea map and the Deadman Island, it's because you can't decipher them.

I picture you as a lonely frustrated person sat by your computer, who is totally self opiniated with some sort of grudge against any person who dared to disagree with you. You petulantly throw your toys out of your pram when they won't give you vital information on a plate.
My motive for writing a book was to sort of blaze a trail for better writers and researchers to follow - not to make money.

Have you actually written a book yourself yet?

Oak Island Sage

 

[Cryptid1990]

Hi Cryptid1990, there is also reason you refuse to admit you are wrong about the China Sea map and the Deadman Island, it's because you can't decipher them.

I picture you as a lonely frustrated person sat by your computer, who is totally self opiniated with some sort of grudge against any person who dared to disagree with you. You petulantly throw your toys out of your pram when they won't give you vital information on a plate.
My motive for writing a book was to sort of blaze a trail for better writers and researchers to follow - not to make money.

Have you actually written a book yourself yet?

Oak Island Sage

The 'Deadman Island' map was created in 1946 by Edward Rowe Snow as part of a marketing gimmick for a dairy products company as a premium or mail-in-item. I have already proven that here. It is getting boring you are goofing around in multiple threads falsely claiming a map created in 1946 as a novelty item is an authentic 17th century pirate map that needs "deciphering". Get a grip on reality.

 

[Carl-NC]

The real solution is based on facts, not vague similarities from a fictional story book.

The island map in the book isn't a vague similarity, it depicts the same island as the Kidd-Palmer maps. Put this in front of a jury of 12, and you will get a unanimous conviction. Every time.