tayopa, legend or reality ...?

[Oroblanco]

Blindbowman mi amigo perhaps that is my problem in understanding your theories? I assume this is your reply to my first question:
"You have now made a statement that "without a doubt" your discovery is the Sombrero mine - how can you be that sure? " = self control multi-presonality remote veiwing ?

I will also presume by your silence that your reply to my second question is a resounding "no" - you would not care to describe any of the old workings. Correct?

The next 'hurdle' that you might have to deal with is locating a sample of the ore from the El Sombrero mine, to compare to ore samples you retrieve. There are a couple of examples of the ore from the Lost Dutchman, if you are certain that El Sombrero and the LDM are one-in-the-same then they will do for comparison, but obtaining them is not going to be easy. If a geologist should state, after examining both your samples and the known examples from the Lost Dutchman mine - that they come from the same source, then it would prove (to me) that you had in fact found the Lost Dutchman mine. (In truth it is ONLY the gold itself that can prove whether anyone has found the Lost Dutchman.) I don't know of any ore sample in any museum that came from El Sombrero, which could be argued that it is because the legend of El Sombrero is fiction.

Oroblanco

 

[the blindbowman]

HOLA buscadores del tesoro,

MUCH to cover so this will be yet another long-winded post, apples to those who hate such things...

Blindbowman wrote:

the dutchman left very clear discription of the mine it self and related the site to the peralta . this is that mine , i dont think it is , i know for a fact it is , by its discription alone . there is little to no chance it could be misteaken for any other mine .. so yes without adout this is the Sombrero mine ..

I beg to differ on whether the Dutchman left a clear description, though that could be a matter of personal choice, I would say that his description is so un-clear and hazy that treasure hunters have failed to find it for over 100 years. Hardly what I would call a "clear description". You have now made a statement that "without a doubt" your discovery is the Sombrero mine - how can you be that sure?

Blindbowman also wrote:

yes ,i have seen many digings by treasure hunters ... even some nice shafts and workings , even some tailing piles ... in fact , i found dozens of them over a 9 mile area ..

Hmm well that statement opens the door to many questions. Would you care to describe any of those old workings?

Real de Tayopa wrote:

Do you like animals? If so, may I invite you to go for a ride with me into the desert on my lovely Mule under a full tropical moon ?

Oro turned me down, so did djuicy, sniff, they'll be sorry..when they see me riding off with a beautiful gal

Well amigo I would never begrudge you having a beautiful gal, and would point out that my choice NOT to join you via mule-back was due only to your choice of mount. I have ridden on a mule and found it to be a most un-comfortable ride, quite different from riding any kind of horse. A horse's shoulder joints move (mostly) in the horizontal plane, resulting in a relatively smooth ride; a mule's shoulder joints move in both horizontal and vertical planes, making them a bit more sure-footed on cliffs and rocks yes, but making for a quite jarring ride - even the shape of their back is different enough that if you are accustomed to riding a horse, you will almost feel like you are heading "downhill" all the time! I did honestly contact the border authorities about bringing my own horse south, and the red tape stymied me. Getting the horse into Mexico was not that difficult (a current vet's health certificate they did ask for though) the problem was getting the horse BACK into the USA. Don't write me off quite yet amigo, I cannot promise anything but am trying...

Gossamer, in case I neglected to say this earlier - welcome. I hope that our sometimes 'heated' banter doesn't give the impression that we are not friends, I believe all of us here are friends. Finding any two treasure-hunters who can agree on anything related to treasure though might be more difficult than finding the Lost Dutchman! We do sometimes forget how much we have in common interests though.

Gossamer wrote:

BB I find that your words and expressions speak of a gentle/angry (?) full/lonely (?) soul. Trust of course is earned. Has anyone gained it from you?

I know this question is directed to our mutual amigo Blindbowman, but I would say that I trust him even though we have never met in person. (I do hope to rectify that too in the future, with a little luck. Cactusjumper's annual Dutch-hunters rendezvous might do the trick to meet several of our friends here.)

Gossamer also wrote:

Hi... please forgive my ignorance, but could someone direct me to the Dutchman's exact words describing the mine?

There are multiple sources with multiple versions and some of these are online. A good deal of what is available is material that cannot be traced to Jacob Waltz however. Here is a site with a list of some 100 "clues" to find the mine:
http://www.thelostdutchman.net/
Some of the statements can be traced not to the Dutchman but to one of the early Dutch-hunters, which has a little less value than a direct statement. Of the many "clues" the one that I believe is the most striking, and perhaps the most important statement was something Waltz said to his young friend Reiny (Reinhard) Petrasch, when he was trying to describe how to find it - quote:

"Reiny, you better listen! That mine is hard to find, even when you know where it is!"

Unfortunately for Reiny, he did not pay close attention and he failed to find the mine.

Good luck and good hunting amigos I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
your friend,
Oroblanco

"I beg to differ on whether the Dutchman left a clear description, though that could be a matter of personal choice, I would say that his description is so un-clear and hazy that treasure hunters have failed to find it for over 100 years. Hardly what I would call a "clear description". You have now made a statement that "without a doubt" your discovery is the Sombrero mine - how can you be that sure? "


"clear description" of the mine not of the location ...the location was given in code...

i think the description fits the site 100% but it only fits one site many places out there misleed people by fiting some of the clues .. that were most try to make it fit when in reality it dosent ..

i looked at the full time line of this site lableing it unknown and then listed all known clues and facts known for each legend ... made a out line of what defines each site and found even if i have 70% evidence that the site could be the gonzalo site or tayopa . or the dutchman site or any combanation of those . one thing was clear i have 100& evidence to show it is the Sombrero mine there was one clue that no one even noted was a clue ..some one translated it and everyone else beleived their translation ... they were wrong .. when you knew the real sight the translation is with out a dout to one dirrect location that matches the LDM yet clearly matches the Sombrero mine ,,,as far as proveing it is the tayopa or gonzalo mine or the LDM is to much confussion ... but the Sombrero mine had a set of details and that one translation that gave its location away if you knew where the other legends collectively matched

.. tell me what you know about the sombrero mine .?..i found two massacres related to this site alone , both gold and silver had been found at the sombrero mine ...but one thing stands out about the sombrero, peralta blew up the mines and coverd it , that is what is diffrent at this site , the building were destored and coverd up and the site was well hiddend but the mine it self was coverd with the use of explosives in a controlled sequence ,, on one in their right mine would have tryed to do this the way it was done
...

we know the tayopa was active at 1603-1646, this sombrero mine was on one peice of land owned from 1608 to 1845 .. i think we are looking at the same mine and peralta renamed the tayopa when he found it in 1845 , you have to remember the indain destoryed the building and church well over 200 years earlyer , this dose in fact explan why the mine was not active between the years of 1646 to 1845 , "

"Miguel Peralta was a descendant of Pedro Peralta de Cordoba (Governor of Santa Fe in 1608) and heir to the land that contained the Superstition Mountains. In 1845, while exploring the family lands, he discovered a vein of almost pure gold on Superstition Mountain. He made himself a map and based the location on a peculiar peak he called the Sombrero. He returned to Mexico and gathered up a workforce and returned to his mine, which he referred to as The Sombrero Mine."

just because pedro own the land dose not mean he knew the church was out there and it vanishes without a trace just after the 1646 date ..

i know its the same mine tayopa then becomes the peralta and then the dutchman but i can prove its the sombrero mine , why becuse its the center of the legends that are related to this site and this site alone ...

i beleive this is why it was confuseing , the site was changed 3 times and named 3 diffrent names over a 350 year time span ...

i kept trying to define one history of one mine to this site yet the fact is 3 diffrent legends fit the site at diffrent times and the site changes from one name to the next ..

got thew right site and the right time line and after looking at all the research layed out i know this explans what the site is and why ...


this is the Sombrero mine , and yes i beleive i have enough evidence to out right prove it is ...

 

[the blindbowman]

Blindbowman mi amigo perhaps that is my problem in understanding your theories? I assume this is your reply to my first question:
"You have now made a statement that "without a doubt" your discovery is the Sombrero mine - how can you be that sure? " = self control multi-presonality remote veiwing ?

I will also presume by your silence that your reply to my second question is a resounding "no" - you would not care to describe any of the old workings. Correct?

The next 'hurdle' that you might have to deal with is locating a sample of the ore from the El Sombrero mine, to compare to ore samples you retrieve. There are a couple of examples of the ore from the Lost Dutchman, if you are certain that El Sombrero and the LDM are one-in-the-same then they will do for comparison, but obtaining them is not going to be easy. If a geologist should state, after examining both your samples and the known examples from the Lost Dutchman mine - that they come from the same source, then it would prove (to me) that you had in fact found the Lost Dutchman mine. (In truth it is ONLY the gold itself that can prove whether anyone has found the Lost Dutchman.) I don't know of any ore sample in any museum that came from El Sombrero, which could be argued that it is because the legend of El Sombrero is fiction.

Oroblanco

dont asume .. i was typeing the next reply ! and no that remote veiwing is remote veiwing not fact it is only a learning tool not real ...evidence !

 

[the blindbowman]

Blindbowman mi amigo perhaps that is my problem in understanding your theories? I assume this is your reply to my first question:
"You have now made a statement that "without a doubt" your discovery is the Sombrero mine - how can you be that sure? " = self control multi-presonality remote veiwing ?

I will also presume by your silence that your reply to my second question is a resounding "no" - you would not care to describe any of the old workings. Correct?

The next 'hurdle' that you might have to deal with is locating a sample of the ore from the El Sombrero mine, to compare to ore samples you retrieve. There are a couple of examples of the ore from the Lost Dutchman, if you are certain that El Sombrero and the LDM are one-in-the-same then they will do for comparison, but obtaining them is not going to be easy. If a geologist should state, after examining both your samples and the known examples from the Lost Dutchman mine - that they come from the same source, then it would prove (to me) that you had in fact found the Lost Dutchman mine. (In truth it is ONLY the gold itself that can prove whether anyone has found the Lost Dutchman.) I don't know of any ore sample in any museum that came from El Sombrero, which could be argued that it is because the legend of El Sombrero is fiction.

Oroblanco

no the legend of Sombrero mine is real . he left a unmisteakable clue to its location and i can prove this is the same location as the dutchman describes ...

the match is unmisteakable . i was talking with my brother about this , this morning and we agree to go back once more to collect samples of the ore and the black compound , search for the vault area and inspect the church site and hunt for clovis pionts ,,,we would like about 10 days at the sites this expedition

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigo Blindbowman (and everyone),

First I want to add a Post-Script to my last post, for anyone 'new' to searching for the Lost Dutchman and working through the various "clues":

PS - one of the "clues" on the site mentioned above, specifically this one:

20) One needs to climb up about 40 feet to see Weavers Needle to the south. (Waltz)

Is different from what I found when I was researching, what I found was...

"...from above my mine, a pointed peak to the south"

Many treasure hunters have made a leap of logic in this statement to make the "pointed peak" into Weaver's Needle, which is a pointed peak. However if you are a serious Dutch-hunter, you should not rule out the several OTHER pointed peaks in the same region, including Miners Needle, Picket Post mountain etc. Caution in your research can save you a tremendous amount of time and resources in your search for lost treasures and especially lost mines.

Blindbowman wrote:

tell me what you know about the sombrero mine .?..

Not much amigo, all I have on it are a couple of legends, one of which says this is what Peralta named a gold mine because of the shape of the mountain, which looked like the famous Mexican hat:

a second version has a different set of Mexicans as the discoverers, but a similar reason for the name.

Blindbowman also wrote:

we know the tayopa was active at 1603-1646, this sombrero mine was on one peice of land owned from 1608 to 1845 .. i think we are looking at the same mine and peralta renamed the tayopa when he found it in 1845 , you have to remember the indain destoryed the building and church well over 200 years earlyer , this dose in fact explan why the mine was not active between the years of 1646 to 1845 , "

"Miguel Peralta was a descendant of Pedro Peralta de Cordoba (Governor of Santa Fe in 1608) and heir to the land that contained the Superstition Mountains.

I respectfully disagree with this statement and hope that you are not relying on that source, for there is no evidence that any Peraltas ever owned any lands in the Superstition mountains. Can you prove that wrong? I was never able to find one iota of evidence that any Peraltas were ever in the Superstitions - however I was able to find evidence of real Peraltas in Mexico and Arizona as well as California, and yes they did own and operate both a rich silver mine (in Mexico) and a rich PLACER gold mine in Arizona (in the Bradshaws, unfortunately for the Superstition legends) and even Peraltas involved with the great Reavis land-fraud scheme. I learned that whenever we find the name Peralta associated with legends of old mines and lost treasures - watch out for the BS! (For the un-initiated, the Lost Dutchman was a LODE gold mine, which is gold still contained in the host rock, placer is gold in loose, un-consolidated materials like river gravels, creeks etc - it was once held in host rock but has weathered out by natural erosive actions.)

You warn me not to assume, but what else can I do when I ask a question and then get what appears to be an answer to the question? I would welcome further explanation on your part, as well as answers to many questions, but don't wish to test your patience to that degree.

Oroblanco

 

[the blindbowman]

think about the time line here at the site , just for the debate , tayopa is active in 1603 . but so are the indains raids at the time so peralta dose not inspect the mts or the land in detail when he owns the land in 1608, and dose not know the tayopa church is hidden out there , the indains destory the church and cover the mine up ,some time shortly after 1646 , here come peralta and finds the mine in 1845 and names it the Sombrero mine not knowning it was the tayopa . the tayopa vanishes under the sombrero name . then the lost dutchman legend covers the area with a new legend and a lot of confussion ...


its last documented name was the Sombrero mine . even if the legend of the dutchman was so great , and the fact remains .. even if peralta renamed the mine to the Sombrero mine , it is in fact the tayopa mine and if i can prove this is the case . it will be the tayopa mine again and the peralta Sombrero mine will not be the just name for this mine , in fact the dutchman mine is no more then high gradeing the tayopa mine , but he had no way of knowing that at the time .. he most likely felt he had stold the sombrero mine from the peraltas , and they may not have known it was the tayopa at the time the dutchman took the mine ...

piont is the peralta never stated they built a church and i know there is a church at this site that matches the tayopa trove list of 1646 see my piont the church could have been destoryed in a indain raid after 1603 and the trove list not show up untill 1646 when it was made from another sorce . but its in a area where the peralta would not have seen it ...and this explans why the 1603 date and the 1608 date may be only 5 years apart but yet the tayopa is coverd over already before the land is owned in 1608 , they dont find the site till 1845 , this explans where the tayopa went and why and where it is today ...

 

[the blindbowman]

HOLA amigo Blindbowman (and everyone),

First I want to add a Post-Script to my last post, for anyone 'new' to searching for the Lost Dutchman and working through the various "clues":

PS - one of the "clues" on the site mentioned above, specifically this one:

20) One needs to climb up about 40 feet to see Weavers Needle to the south. (Waltz)

Is different from what I found when I was researching, what I found was...

"...from above my mine, a pointed peak to the south"

Many treasure hunters have made a leap of logic in this statement to make the "pointed peak" into Weaver's Needle, which is a pointed peak. However if you are a serious Dutch-hunter, you should not rule out the several OTHER pointed peaks in the same region, including Miners Needle, Picket Post mountain etc. Caution in your research can save you a tremendous amount of time and resources in your search for lost treasures and especially lost mines.

Blindbowman wrote:

tell me what you know about the sombrero mine .?..

Not much amigo, all I have on it are a couple of legends, one of which says this is what Peralta named a gold mine because of the shape of the mountain, which looked like the famous Mexican hat:

a second version has a different set of Mexicans as the discoverers, but a similar reason for the name.

Blindbowman also wrote:

we know the tayopa was active at 1603-1646, this sombrero mine was on one peice of land owned from 1608 to 1845 .. i think we are looking at the same mine and peralta renamed the tayopa when he found it in 1845 , you have to remember the indain destoryed the building and church well over 200 years earlyer , this dose in fact explan why the mine was not active between the years of 1646 to 1845 , "

"Miguel Peralta was a descendant of Pedro Peralta de Cordoba (Governor of Santa Fe in 1608) and heir to the land that contained the Superstition Mountains.

I respectfully disagree with this statement and hope that you are not relying on that source, for there is no evidence that any Peraltas ever owned any lands in the Superstition mountains. Can you prove that wrong? I was never able to find one iota of evidence that any Peraltas were ever in the Superstitions - however I was able to find evidence of real Peraltas in Mexico and Arizona as well as California, and yes they did own and operate both a rich silver mine (in Mexico) and a rich PLACER gold mine in Arizona (in the Bradshaws, unfortunately for the Superstition legends) and even Peraltas involved with the great Reavis land-fraud scheme. I learned that whenever we find the name Peralta associated with legends of old mines and lost treasures - watch out for the BS! (For the un-initiated, the Lost Dutchman was a LODE gold mine, which is gold still contained in the host rock, placer is gold in loose, un-consolidated materials like river gravels, creeks etc - it was once held in host rock but has weathered out by natural erosive actions.)

You warn me not to assume, but what else can I do when I ask a question and then get what appears to be an answer to the question? I would welcome further explanation on your part, as well as answers to many questions, but don't wish to test your patience to that degree.

Oroblanco

do you see the word pedro on the horse stone he did in fact own a rancho in the supers between the years of 1608 -1845 the stone tablets suport this clam besides that i read the full " http://www.us-census.org/pub/usgenweb/census/az/pima/1870/indx-p-r.txt" ,

"Miguel Peralta was a descendant of Pedro Peralta de Cordoba "
the name is listed under "Cordoba"


but this dose not matter because you would not have found it under peralta anyway ,.....



tom kollenborn stated

"John always claimed the
Peralto Massacre, not the Peralta Massacre as some called it, occurred on the northwest
slopes of Superstition Mountain."

this is one of the reason i was confused about the massacre sites and the data related to the massacres it self . at the time i did not under stand there had been 3 massacres related to this site under 3 diffrent names 300 years apart from each other ...


1. one takes place in the early times of tayopa- gonzalo .1571

2." tayopa -peralto" is when the tayopa church is destoryed and the mine is coverd over 1603-1608

3 . then the last is when the Sombrero - peralta are massacred ,, 1845



look at what it says this mine was never worked very much at all ...it was coverd over for over 200 years

the dutchman only work the site a few years very lemited yeild ...i think your looking at a fair out line of this mine , call it the Sombrero mine or what ever you want .. this is the history as i see it ...

besides that say the shaft is 14ft deep by 4 by 4 that is 224 cubic ft of ore say the peralta and the dutchman took out 24 cubic ft ,that means the tayopa yeilded around 200 cubic ft , this is beleiveable , not only beleiveable but logical

 

[cactusjumper]

bb,

Just to pick one thing out of the mix:

"Miguel Peralta was a descendant of Pedro Peralta de Cordoba (Governor of Santa Fe in 1608) and heir to the land that contained the Superstition Mountains....."

Would you mind telling us the source for that statement?

Thanks,

Joe Ribaudo

 

[the blindbowman]

http://treasurestories.com/NorthAmerica/Arizona/ThePeraltaLostVein.htm

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigo Blindbowman,

So are you taking me in circles again? First, I would respectfully disagree with that early date for Tayopa, our mutual amigo Real de Tayopa could give a more definitive date for the first discovery but I am fairly certain it is after 1620, closer to 1630. This point is not a huge problem however.

Next

so peralta dose not inspect the mts or the land in detail when he owns the land in 1608, and dose not know the tayopa church is hidden out there

Peralta does not inspect the mountains because Peralta doesn't own them, and those Peraltas I was able to find came into the general region in the 1700's not the 1600s. Tayopa church hidden in the Superstition mountains? I do wish that you would do a little research on the history of Tayopa, and not base all of your info pertaining to it, on that one list of Tayopa treasure document. I presume you have considered the possibility that the Tayopa Treasure List is a fraud? If it proves to be a fraud, how will that affect your theory?

Blindbowman also wrote:

the indains destory the church and cover the mine up ,some time shortly after 1646 , here come peralta and finds the mine in 1845 and names it the Sombrero mine not knowning it was the tayopa . the tayopa vanishes under the sombrero name . then the lost dutchman legend covers the area with a new legend and a lot of confussion ...

Whew there is a lot of speculating amigo! I believe that Indios did in fact destroy the village/reale Tayopa, but have no evidence that they spent any energies in trying to cover up any of the workings. Then we have to have our "Peralta" - a man who passed through without leaving any records anywhere, discovering this alternate Tayopa without noticing any trace of a former church and we must presume also housing for the people? We then are to have our Jacob Waltz then re-discover the very same mine, ruins etc? I am having problems with this scenario amigo.

Blindbowman also wrote:

its last documented name was the Sombrero mine

May I ask where this documentation exists?

Blindbowman also wrote:

in fact the dutchman mine is no more then high gradeing the tayopa mine

Well Jacob Waltz has been accused of being nothing but a high-grader by a number of treasure hunters, including some of our members here, but there are reasons not to believe him guilty of this crime - and to be high-grading in Tayopa? Please do a little more research on Tayopa amigo? It will be worth your time and effort and will certainly be helpful in your own quest.

Blindbowman also wrote:

piont is the peralta never stated they built a church and i know there is a church at this site that matches the tayopa trove list of 1646

Do you know of any church records of any kind of church being located in the Superstition mountains? The reason I ask this is because if any such church existed, it would be in church records. They did keep records of their various churches, and the old Tayopa church was in Mexico, but we have covered this before. What if it IS a church, but NOT Tayopa? Are you willing to try to find out the truth?

So now we have another theory, which you have said is "fact" and that you can prove it, which involves the legendary El Sombrero mine, the Peraltas, hostile Indios and massacres, a lost church, the infamous Tayopa mine complex, not to mention those 'fabulous' Peralta Stone Maps and lastly the most famous lost mine of all - -the Lost Dutchman - and this theory, like several you have presented, has them ALL ROLLED INTO ONE. Hmm.

Blindbowman you once mentioned that you were trained as a Navigator. Then you should be able to tell me what happens when a ship's navigator makes a very small mistake, but the ship doesn't find out about it for a long time, just keeps sailing 'full-speed-ahead"? The amount of error grows with each passing mile right? This little problem is the same in carpentry, the same in treasure hunting and in many pursuits. When one makes one relatively small mistake, then proceeds forward from that mistake, the error grows and grows. Your evidence of Peraltas in Arizona is one I also found, and you seem to underestimate my 'ability' as a researcher, for I do know about the Spanish habit of surnames with the last name being that of the mother's family, the middle name being the father's family name. This Peralta you have found is far too late to be directly involved. Then I would suggest that you look up how many "Pedro" names are to be found in any Mexican phone book - to find the name "Pedro" does NOT automatically equate to a Peralta!

You have yet another interesting theory there amigo, and it will make for a great story, however I have to admit that I am unable to agree with it. I think this one, like the others, will be a very tough one to prove up.


Blindbowman mi amigo, and anyone who is interested in the infamous Guadeloupe de Tayopa, I would like to suggest "Apache Gold and Yaqui Silver" by J. Frank Dobie - it is a great read and has much information about Tayopa. If you can't find a copy to purchase, you can get it through interlibrary loan - here is an online tool to locate a copy (so you can request it) http://worldcat.org/wcpa/oclc/00334580

Good luck and good hunting, I hope that you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

 

[the blindbowman]

HOLA amigo Blindbowman,

So are you taking me in circles again? First, I would respectfully disagree with that early date for Tayopa, our mutual amigo Real de Tayopa could give a more definitive date for the first discovery but I am fairly certain it is after 1620, closer to 1630. This point is not a huge problem however.

Next

so peralta dose not inspect the mts or the land in detail when he owns the land in 1608, and dose not know the tayopa church is hidden out there

Peralta does not inspect the mountains because Peralta doesn't own them, and those Peraltas I was able to find came into the general region in the 1700's not the 1600s. Tayopa church hidden in the Superstition mountains? I do wish that you would do a little research on the history of Tayopa, and not base all of your info pertaining to it, on that one list of Tayopa treasure document. I presume you have considered the possibility that the Tayopa Treasure List is a fraud? If it proves to be a fraud, how will that affect your theory?

Blindbowman also wrote:

the indains destory the church and cover the mine up ,some time shortly after 1646 , here come peralta and finds the mine in 1845 and names it the Sombrero mine not knowning it was the tayopa . the tayopa vanishes under the sombrero name . then the lost dutchman legend covers the area with a new legend and a lot of confussion ...

Whew there is a lot of speculating amigo! I believe that Indios did in fact destroy the village/reale Tayopa, but have no evidence that they spent any energies in trying to cover up any of the workings. Then we have to have our "Peralta" - a man who passed through without leaving any records anywhere, discovering this alternate Tayopa without noticing any trace of a former church and we must presume also housing for the people? We then are to have our Jacob Waltz then re-discover the very same mine, ruins etc? I am having problems with this scenario amigo.

Blindbowman also wrote:

its last documented name was the Sombrero mine

May I ask where this documentation exists?

Blindbowman also wrote:

in fact the dutchman mine is no more then high gradeing the tayopa mine

Well Jacob Waltz has been accused of being nothing but a high-grader by a number of treasure hunters, including some of our members here, but there are reasons not to believe him guilty of this crime - and to be high-grading in Tayopa? Please do a little more research on Tayopa amigo? It will be worth your time and effort and will certainly be helpful in your own quest.

Blindbowman also wrote:

piont is the peralta never stated they built a church and i know there is a church at this site that matches the tayopa trove list of 1646

Do you know of any church records of any kind of church being located in the Superstition mountains? The reason I ask this is because if any such church existed, it would be in church records. They did keep records of their various churches, and the old Tayopa church was in Mexico, but we have covered this before. What if it IS a church, but NOT Tayopa? Are you willing to try to find out the truth?

So now we have another theory, which you have said is "fact" and that you can prove it, which involves the legendary El Sombrero mine, the Peraltas, hostile Indios and massacres, a lost church, the infamous Tayopa mine complex, not to mention those 'fabulous' Peralta Stone Maps and lastly the most famous lost mine of all - -the Lost Dutchman - and this theory, like several you have presented, has them ALL ROLLED INTO ONE. Hmm.

Blindbowman you once mentioned that you were trained as a Navigator. Then you should be able to tell me what happens when a ship's navigator makes a very small mistake, but the ship doesn't find out about it for a long time, just keeps sailing 'full-speed-ahead"? The amount of error grows with each passing mile right? This little problem is the same in carpentry, the same in treasure hunting and in many pursuits. When one makes one relatively small mistake, then proceeds forward from that mistake, the error grows and grows. Your evidence of Peraltas in Arizona is one I also found, and you seem to underestimate my 'ability' as a researcher, for I do know about the Spanish habit of surnames with the last name being that of the mother's family, the middle name being the father's family name. This Peralta you have found is far too late to be directly involved. Then I would suggest that you look up how many "Pedro" names are to be found in any Mexican phone book - to find the name "Pedro" does NOT automatically equate to a Peralta!

You have yet another interesting theory there amigo, and it will make for a great story, however I have to admit that I am unable to agree with it. I think this one, like the others, will be a very tough one to prove up.


Blindbowman mi amigo, and anyone who is interested in the infamous Guadeloupe de Tayopa, I would like to suggest "Apache Gold and Yaqui Silver" by J. Frank Dobie - it is a great read and has much information about Tayopa. If you can't find a copy to purchase, you can get it through interlibrary loan - here is an online tool to locate a copy (so you can request it) http://worldcat.org/wcpa/oclc/00334580

Good luck and good hunting, I hope that you find the treasures that you seek.
Oroblanco

"This point is not a huge problem however."

i hope noty because the date on the treasure trove list is 1603 , and if the bells were made at this site it had to be there well before the 1603 date...


"I presume you have considered the possibility that the Tayopa Treasure List is a fraud?" i would be shock of corse because i now the church fits this discription and the area around the church as well as the gardens and mines ,, right down to the curcifix....if the list was a fraud . what is the odds i could find these things in this given order, remember the stone tablets came from the same site as the list and they took me back to the supers to a given site ..

i am not saying RDT has not found a tayopa .. i am saying this is a tayopa of the list & the stone tablets and the gonzalo ruth map ,and the dutchman legend . one mine past from one to another

"I am having problems with this scenario amigo. "the dutchman dose find the mine he took the mine by killing the 3 peralta ...all he did was high grade the sombrero mine , i know just why peralta never saw the church .... or did he ... we dont know he never said he had if he did , but that dose not mean he didnt find it ether , and if he found the mine after would play around with a old church when you just found a rich gold and silver mine . hell no ! lol


"May I ask where this documentation exists"

i mean the documentation for the sombrero defines this site 4

"Do you know of any church records of any kind of church being located in the Superstition mountains? The reason I ask this is because if any such church existed, it would be in church records. They did keep records of their various churches, and the old Tayopa church was in Mexico, but we have covered this before. What if it IS a church, but NOT Tayopa? Are you willing to try to find out the truth?"

the fact remains i have found a church and it dates from around the ealry 1600's or older and it fits the discription of the trove list , i have seen no other church built in this given order that matches site 4 in this manner ...yes i will defind the truth and you ask as many questions as you want it will not change the site or the detail of this site .. if i am wrong i will except it but i details and i will define this site untill someone proves this site is not tayopa then it is posable and look at the clams of finding the sombrero in the red mts .. total foolishness .... if the dutchman was stated to have been posably high gradeing the sombrero , dose it make any sense he would go to that distence to confuse people i dont think that is even a logical choice ...

not when this site fits the evidence and the dutchman knew where this site was . and yes i can prove that when its time ..

who has stated there is the tayopa..? , where are the bells ...? where is the mine it self ..? these things take time and there is no evidence i have seen to date that out right prove the tayopa has been found yet ! by any one ....so this site could in fact be tayopa ....if this site is not tayopa then why dose the stone tablets take you here and they came from the same location as the list ...? i have evidence at this site that says it could be the tayopa ...htis is why i defind the site to what i can prove , the sombrero mine . it dose mean its not a tayopa mine ....


where is the evidence to prove the tayopa has been found ...?

 

[Oroblanco]

Blindbowman wrote:

if the list was a fraud . what is the odds i could find these things in this given order, remember the stone tablets came from the same site as the list and they took me back to the supers to a given site ..

Well the things you mentioned, or the actual treasure type things? If just those items you listed earlier, then I would say it is fairly probable to fit with many old churches - if however we are to include such things as the cast bells, silver etc then the odds would be LONG. You are saying that the stone tablets came from the exact same site as the Tayopa Treasure List? You do know the origins of the Tayopa List right? A man named Flipper found it in Mexico - while the stone tablets (according to the first story) were found not far from a modern highway south of the Superstitions. What are you saying amigo? It just isn't clear to me.

Blindbowman also wrote:

i am saying this is a tayopa of the list & the stone tablets and the gonzalo ruth map ,and the dutchman legend . one mine past from one to another

Ah, and these fabulous mines are in fact ALL ROLLED INTO ONE, correct? Hmm....... (Need more COFFEE)
Oroblanco

 

[Oroblanco]

Cactusjumper - you have a good library viz treasure and southwest history close at hand right? If you have the time I would appreciate if you could look up something for me? What do you have on El Sombrero? Thank you in advance,

Blindbowman I hope that nothing I have said is of any offense - no offense was intended. I consider us friends, regardless of whether we can agree on some things (like legends for instance) and would bet that I have a few outrageous theories that you would have difficulty in agreeing with too. Perhaps we can switch 'chairs' here in a new thread some evening, so you can be the 'skeptic' while I try to defend a theory of mine? I don't really like playing the 'skeptic' so much, for I am convinced that there are fantastic treasures still lying un-discovered in many places including Arizona, but there is also a tremendous amount of 'chaff' or to be blunt, BS that has been layered on quite thick by so many treasure writers over the years that we treasure hunters have a tough time trying to filter out the BS from the pearls. (Yes I also write treasure stories, but I do TRY to filter out as much of the BS as I can - the truth is often far more astonishing than any fiction anyway! That reminds me, and the fresh pot of coffee is ready...... )

Good luck and good hunting amigos, I hope you find the treasures that you seek.
your friend,
Oroblanco

POST script - just a thought:
Blindbowman wrote:

htis is why i defind the site to what i can prove , the sombrero mine

Perhaps we ought to start a new thread with that title?

 

[the blindbowman]

Blindbowman wrote:

if the list was a fraud . what is the odds i could find these things in this given order, remember the stone tablets came from the same site as the list and they took me back to the supers to a given site ..

Well the things you mentioned, or the actual treasure type things? If just those items you listed earlier, then I would say it is fairly probable to fit with many old churches - if however we are to include such things as the cast bells, silver etc then the odds would be LONG. You are saying that the stone tablets came from the exact same site as the Tayopa Treasure List? You do know the origins of the Tayopa List right? A man named Flipper found it in Mexico - while the stone tablets (according to the first story) were found not far from a modern highway south of the Superstitions. What are you saying amigo? It just isn't clear to me.

Blindbowman also wrote:

i am saying this is a tayopa of the list & the stone tablets and the gonzalo ruth map ,and the dutchman legend . one mine past from one to another

Ah, and these fabulous mines are in fact ALL ROLLED INTO ONE, correct? Hmm....... (Need more COFFEE)
Oroblanco

"You are saying that the stone tablets came from the exact same site as the Tayopa Treasure List? You do know the origins of the Tayopa List right? A man named Flipper found it in Mexico - while the stone tablets (according to the first story) were found not far from a modern highway south of the Superstitions. What are you saying amigo? It just isn't clear to me."

i am sorry Oro i forgot you did not get the Ray dillman DVD , he stated feddy cystall had gtten the maps from a small chruch in mexico that when i found the trove list had came from the santa ana churh and took note that flipper had been at the santa ana church the same year freddy crystall had stolden his maps from the church , see it is my theory freddy stold the stone tablets and try to take them to utah but they were to heavy and he stoped and made paper maps of them and then hide them side the road and went to utah , this explans why the tayopa words were coded on the stone tablets , because they were part of the church documents of santa ana church were the trove list was found ..

this dose put the tablets and the trove list at the santa ana church at the same time just in side mexico with in rage of freddy crystall's bike ..lol ,, it dosent have to be so confusing . its the tayopa mine and people just change the name of it so they didnt look like they were high gradeing ore from some one elses clam , that would get them hanged

 

[the blindbowman]

i hope to be able to have 5 or 6 people on expedition 3B ..

if i am right , i agree with you, no one would have seen this comeing .. and few could have found it under these conditions .. yet untill the posablity is ruled out its posable , and in this case i have found evidence that dose suport the site i agree with you it is out right shocking this mine set out there for 200 years and no one found it then , would you like to be there if this is found to be the sorce of the lost dutchman gold ...?

this will be my last expedition .. its the 9th inning and the bases are loaded .. win or lose i have enjoyed every mintue to its fullest ,, and i hope others have enjoyed the research as much as i have ...

 

[the blindbowman]

its 3,18 in the morning and its past my bed time .. stay safe stay free

ps if you want to PM me your address Oro i will send you the ray dillman DVD to watch .. i have watched it about 60 times so far ...lol

 

[Oroblanco]

HOLA amigo,

I think I would enjoy it, and I would try to 'pull me own weight' as they say. (You have mentioned that you usually cover a lot of mountain in a very short time, not sure I could match that but I can cover some miles.)

As things stand I will have less free days as the weather warms (I work for a local rancher, I suppose I could say I am a 'cowboy' without stretching the truth, and many things have to get done in the warm weather including haying - but thankfully it is the large round bales not the small rectangular type you must handle by hand) and have to get a cabin put up some time before next winter sets in - however if your next expedition should be during winter there is a good chance I could go along. Who knows, by that time I might have a new pack horse (or mule or burro) so ought to be able to keep pace and not ask anyone to carry anything for me! (Can't head into the Superstitions or any wild area without a good supply of COFFEE you know!) Just a side note but are you considering taking pack animals along on this expedition? If you have never used them, it might seem like a major problem but really it is just leading along an animal (you don't have to ride on their backs, that would mean needing an extra horse for each person besides a pack animal) and they can go about anywhere you can walk - plus they can carry considerably more weight than a man. Just a thought....

I keep forgetting about the time difference - I think you are two hours ahead of us here in SD and three hours for AZ. Sorry about that, we can pick this up again anytime. Thanks for the discussion, it is always interesting!

Thank you for the offer (Dillman DVD) amigo - and this gives me an idea -
Oroblanco

 

[the blindbowman]

after 8-9 miles its gets to be a hike and last time with a torn ham string its was not much fun at all ...lol


i dont plan to work hard ...lol

collecting test samples and ore samples , covering a over lay of the site , this time i am not leaveing till i have proven or dis proven the site .. i dont care if it takes 20 days ... i got some real questions and i know just where to look for the answers ...

 

[Oroblanco]

Dang Ed, once you start talking about camping in the 'tall tules' longer than two weeks, the MENU starts to get pretty restricted. I have never had Machaka, but it sounds good. (Of course I have never prospected in Mexico either, but I hope to correct that in the next year or two.) A jackrabbit or two can help to break the routine of beans/pasta/rice which is what I have ended up with in the 'pantry' after a few weeks, if you are lucky enough to find some, wild fruits are really nice (prickly pears for instance) but if you can afford it, some of those dehydrated meals they sell in the camping supply outfitters sure can be good even if only once a week. That reminds me - I wanted to ask our amigo Real de Tayopa -

Jose' - have you heard anything about that group which had filed on ALL available govt lands in Mexico? Have their claims been approved/accepted or have they been dis-approved? It would not be worth the trip just to end up being a claim jumper!
Oroblanco

 

[the blindbowman]

M.R.E. .....lol