The Book Club

[wrmickel1]

most immigrants to this country usually changed their name to more of an American nature to better their opportunities as a new citizen. waltzer could have been change to waltz. maybe recorded as being changed. ELLis island did record immigration. they may be able to locate it.

Neigbors75

Ellis Islands first immigrant I believe was a Isrish girl around 1892 win it opened, Way after 'Jacobs Time' Before that it was the ships logs keepin track of immigrants not a very good system back then. And ellis island was just a fort to protect NY Harbor.

Wrmickel1

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Cry Of The Eagle: History And Legends Of The Cherokee Indians And Their Buried Treasure - Grab it through Amazon!

[Hal Croves]

cactusjumper,
I am hoping that the Blair book arrives soon as my recent trip has left me even more confused. If this Jacob Wisner is not the correct Wisner from the legend, I will be left with one hell of a coincidence. I want to read Blair's work before I comment on what I have found. Anyway, thank you again!

Do you know what became of Blair?

 

[cactusjumper]

Hal,

The book went out on the 25th. I should think you would have it by Monday......at the least. The address I had for you was a PO Box.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Hal Croves]

Hal,

The book went out on the 25th. I should think you would have it by Monday......at the least. The address I had for you was a PO Box.

Take care,

Joe

cactusjumper,
Yes, thanks.

 

[Hal Croves]

"We have probably at least 30 "documents" (Deeds, Census, Registers, Tax Records, Newspaper Articles, etc.) where Jacob Waltz is referred to Waltz. We have none that refer to him as Walzer or Waltzer?"

Garry,
Are there any variations in the spelling of "Waltz" in these 30 "documents"?
Thanks!

 

[cactusjumper]

Hal,

Dr. Glover addresses the documents, and the variations in how others spelled his name. Jacob never used anything other than Waltz.

Read chapter 14 in Dr. Glover's book.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Hal Croves]

View attachment 753208

Jacob S. Wisner - the Dutchman's partner?

I have been going over the Walker story reading what I can about the man (Walker). I can find no description of him that would discredit his trustworthiness. In fact, it seems that Walker would have been the right man to see if a fellow veteran were injured and looking for help. If the Wisner that I am researching (Jacob S. Wisner) turns out to be the Dutchman's partner, it means that Wisner survived his attack in the Superstitions only to vanish with the help of Walker. Walker buried Wisner, but only in his retelling of the story. Who knows, even the attack may have been a tale designed to discourage people from searching for Wisner. It is a long shot, but there is quite a bit of circumstantial evidence surrounding Jacob S. Wisner that should not be ignored.

Why didn't Walzer pack Wisner's remains out for burial? He had years to do it for his "closest friend" Swilling attempted to do this same thing for a close friend, which turned out to be the beginning of his end. Walzer quite possibly created the terrifying Apache attack story simply to discourage people from searching for Wisner... and indirectly his site. For Walzer, it must have been the ultimate betrayal.

Barnard mocked the Walker story as a complete fabrication. I believe that here, Barnard got it wrong. Wisner would have known of the dangers involved in betraying Walzer, or returning to the Superstitions, or even just knowing the location of Walzer's site. Walker's story would have erased Wisner's trail until a time when he (Wisner) felt safe enough to reemerge. That time was just after Walzer took ill... after being caught in the Feb 18-26th, 1891 flooding of the Salt. At the age of 61, Wisner filed for a U.S. Civil War Pension on May 20th, 1891 from an unknown location in Arizona. It may just be coincidence, or Wisner may have felt that Walzer was no longer a threat. That same year, in September of 1891, Walker was institutionalized.

If 1878 was the year of Wisner's disappearance, doesn't it seems suspicious that Walker suddenly formed a prospecting and mining partnership in 1879, then filed on the Vekol or Lost Pima Silver Mine in Feb of 1880. Was this Walker's reward for helping Wisner, the location of a lost silver mine already rediscovered by Walzer & Wisner? It seems reasonable (see post #6).

Until the Blair book convinces me otherwise, in my mind, Jacob S. Wisner was the Dutchman's partner.

 

[cactusjumper]

Hal,

The story is, that Walker married a Pima woman and was welcomed into the tribe. He became well liked among the Pima, and they eventually showed him the location of the Vekol.

Good luck,

Joe

 

[Hal Croves]

Hal,

The story is, that Walker married a Pima woman and was welcomed into the tribe. He became well liked among the Pima, and they eventually showed him the location of the Vekol.

Good luck,

Joe

cactusjumper,


That would make sense, but here it is a Papago who gave the directions to Walker. I don't know enough about the division between Pima and Papago, but I thought that they were two distinct groups in Walkers time. Could this be a type-o?

"Walker formed a prospecting and mining partnership with P.R. Beady and Juan Jose Gradello in 1879. He and his two friends filed on the Vekol silver claims on February 5, 1880 and the Vekol Mine made Walker a rich man. A Papago Indian led Walker and his partners to this rich outcrop".

Source: http://www.ajpl.org/aj/superstition/stories/John D Walker.pdf

And it seems that Walker was never legally married to Chur-ga, the Pima woman, which nullified Juana Walker's (his child) claim to her father's estate. Page 67 -70.

Source: http://books.google.com/books?id=2Q...kQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=john d walker AZ&f=false

 

[Hal Croves]

cactusjumper,
It is just like Christmas morning today. Thank you so much! Fragile but already amazing.

 

[cactusjumper]

Hal,

Glad you got the book.

There may be some historical confusion concerning the Vekol. I have seen that the name comes from the Pima word for "Grandmother". In addition, there may have been two (2) "Vekol" mines. One silver and one copper. I have not done that much research into the Walker story.

Good luck,

Joe

 

[Loke]

Joe,
Just finished reading the Blair-book as well - fascinating reading - but ...
I can't but help that he has a fair share 'logically this cant be the case' - its like hunting for gold - it is where you find it no matter what logic says.
That being said, though, he still makes a convincing case - guess I have to re-read it ...

Hope all is well with you and your wife!

Per

 

[Hal Croves]

Hal,
I look forward to your comments after you have read Blair.....a few times. I have three copies, one a flat signed first edition. The one I usually peruse is a soft cover that is falling apart.

cactusjumper, ...Garry,

I am not sure what to say about the Blair book. It is definitely the most thorough book on the Dutchman and perhaps the best written, but with only a first read, I have very big concerns. From the 1864 census on, it is a great "body" of work, but before 1864, Blair is obviously writing with an agenda. That is never good. Perhaps one of you kind gentleman can tell me why Blair was so focused on singling out and discrediting Barnard and his/the use of the name Walzer?

Very strange behavior from an academic in the know.

Anyway, I now have an understanding of the intentional name change from Walzer to Waltz… in recent times. What a disappointment.
True history isn't written that way.

My money is on Barnard's Walzer.

 

[cactusjumper]

Per,

Good to hear from you. We are doing fine and are looking forward to a visit from Beth and Roy.

Like all books, Blair's is not perfect. While I might disagree with his conclusions, I can't fault the path he took in reaching them.

Dr. Glover also finds Blair's work worth using as a source for many of the "facts" in his own work.

I hope you and your's are in a good place in your lives.

Take care, my friend,

Joe

 

[cactusjumper]

Hal,
I look forward to your comments after you have read Blair.....a few times. I have three copies, one a flat signed first edition. The one I usually peruse is a soft cover that is falling apart.

cactusjumper, ...Garry,

I am not sure what to say about the Blair book. It is definitely the most thorough book on the Dutchman and perhaps the best written, but with only a first read, I have very big concerns. From the 1864 census on, it is a great "body" of work, but before 1864, Blair is obviously writing with an agenda. That is never good. Perhaps one of you kind gentleman can tell me why Blair was so focused on singling out and discrediting Barnard and his/the use of the name Walzer?

Very strange behavior from an academic in the know.

Anyway, I now have an understanding of the intentional name change from Walzer to Waltz… in recent times. What a disappointment.
True history isn't written that way.

My money is on Barnard's Walzer.

Hal,

Just because someone has an "agenda", does not necessarily mean they are wrong. Blair continues with the other two thirds of his book, laying out the groundwork to support his "facts". I believe Blair made it pretty clear why he considered Barnard's pamphlet "flawed". He also stated that "The booklet is not altogether worthless....", which is, pretty much, what I said.

If you feel that putting your money on Barnard's research is a safer bet than Blair's research, by all means stick with "Waltzer".

Blair "singled out" Barnard's publication because of the many errors that it contained. He did have a few choice words for a number of other authors. I'm not sure why you consider twenty or so lines, from a book of 167 pages, "focused", but many others received much more attention.

Glad to see you are finding some value in the book.

Take care,

Joe

 

[Hal Croves]

cactusjumper,

Honestly, I was a bit pissed off last night after putting down Blair's book. I absolutely see the value in his research and his writing, but Blair was playing connect the dots when it comes to Walzer pre-1864. There is absolutely NO proof of a connection between the Jacob Waltz who filed the Declaration of Intention in Natchez in 1848 and the Jacob Waltz who appears on the census of 1864.

And talk about balls, the 1850 J.W. Walls at dwelling No. 717 is obviously not Waltz. Look again at the footnotes. Even if "Walls" was absent when the enumerator took the census, there was another German present to fill in the details; Michael Mashburger, age 23. He seems to have been home at the time and Germans are sticklers for accuracy (if I am permitted to stereotype).

And Blair writes that Waltz was often called "Walls" in Arizona. This seems to contradict the "30 documents" that Garry wrote about. And even Blair admits that the age given for Walls is "ten to many".

Then Blair has Waltz at the Follow's Camp in 1860, but amazingly James McManus, another enumerator makes the same mistake replacing Waltz with Walls. Only this time, Jacob is added and the age changes. To add insult to injury, Blair wrote "- beyond a doubt the real Jacob Waltz". Really? If I had written this and offered it here as fact, TN members would have "ripped me a new one".

Blair then has Jacob Waltz being certified as a naturalized American citizen at LA Court house with Anton Fruchtmann as witness. There were several men named Jacob Waltz in California at the time. This could be any one of them. Jacob Waltz the tailor, Jacob Waltz the seaman...

Jacob Waltz (Walzer) never filed on his site in the Superstitions. Why not? That is an important question. Arriving from California as a naturalized citizen, one would think that Waltz would have had all the confidence in the world to secure his site. Legally as well as physically.

I asked if anyone here knew the fate of Robert Blair. I would feel more comfortable knowing the man was alive to defend himself against my criticism. But from where I stand, Blair presents himself as a desperate bully, wrapped in a cloak of academia and who was absolutely intimidated by one simple man and his poorly written "booklet".

Blair was writing with an agenda, perhaps dictated by the very people who published his book. He used conjecture and slight of hand to make his theory complete.

Am I upset? Yes. Blair set the tone for me right from the beginning on page #8. "Barnard consistently refers to Waltz as "Walzer", a really unforgivable mistake".

Just obnoxious considering the source.

I will calm down after my morning tea. Thank you again for sending the book.

 

[Garry]

Hal,

While Doug Stewart's web site may not be the absolute last word on publications relating to the LDM, it certainly is the first. Doug and Greg Davis along with contributions from others, have put together a formidable collection of well researched information.

Tale of the Lost Dutchman: bibliography, notes and chronology

Make sure to follow all of the links contained in your area of interest.

You will find that much of what appears in Barnard's pamphlets can be traced to Higham. If you decide to follow Barnard as a serious source you should spend some time digesting Stewart's information. The provenance of "anything" related to the LDM is critical to anyone's agruguments. If someone has not tackled the provenance, be it a map, story, etc. they are likely wasting their time.

Since you have Blair's book, you might also take a look at his review.

I couldn't resist adding this line from one of Barnards' additions:

"Forty-four luckless men and women have paid with their lives for their mad search for the hidden wealth of Jacob Walzer, famed Dutchman of the Superstition who, according to Records shipped, direct to the mint, more than a quarter of a Million; during which time he killed a known twenty-seven men to keep his secret, later to die a lone death from natural causes in 1891; never revealing his secret but carrying it into that mysterious "Life Which Lies Beyond The Grave."

It sounds like Barnard knew a lot of things to which no one else was privey.

There are a couple to short reviews but Stewart only includes the reviewer's initials. (IMHO the anonymity of the reviewers is something that Doug should address as it certainly makes the words more suspect). Maybe he has addressed it somewhere on his page but why not just use the names and avoid being mysterious. I have no idea who TB and CM are which makes their comments suspect.

"TB: "Bernard's contribution appears to have been the addition of a series of news clippings from his Dutchman scrapbook. The booklet is not altogether worthless, but is flawed by serious historical inaccuracies and by such grotesque misspellings of proper names that the reader will wonder who the author is really talking about." CM: "Illustrated and co-ordinated by Charles Frederick Higham, this work gives a good, but brief history of the Superstition area and deals with legends surrounding Jacob Walzer. There have been several new editions in recent years." So ... The Rancho Del Superstition! The B bar B. The singing cowboy. (The location of the Rancho Del Superstition guest ranch is shown on Higham's map as well as Rosecran's.) A real character. Not a serious book at all. Great stuff. A real artifact now. I could go on and on about this one"

Garry

 

[Garry]

Hal,

Just saw your post. You are asking the right questions and I would only hope you are as rigerous with Bernard.

I agree that Blair is mistaken in the 1850 California Census but otherwise he is close. I suspect you will also be able to contact the dots as you become more familiar with the history. The 1848 Natchez Declaration of Intention document is a great place to start. (Blair was working backward while you have the luxury of working forward) Can you get from the Declaration of Intention to the Naturalization document in 1861 in California and convince yourself it is the same Jacob Waltz?

One step at a time.

Garry

 

[Hal Croves]

Thanks Garry.

I have always pointed out Barnarnd shortcomings and I have read about his relationship with Higham. Garry, who would you trust more? A simple cowboy who spent most of his life scratching out an existence in the shadow of the Superstitions, or an obscure writer commissioned to patch-work history. By the way, it is clear that Blair had a great many resources available to him in the staff of Arizona Historical Foundation and that his book had the advantage of editing. This was Barnard's biggest mistake.

Barnard had many years to develop a relationship with the people in his booklet. Are some of his number inflated? Absolutely. But exaggerated numbers and core un-truths(?) are not the same things.

Regarding your question, I am not sure that I understand it... I have no doubt that the Waltz in California is the same Waltz that requested copies of his naturalization papers from Natchez. I am questioning the assumption that this Waltz (LA Waltz) was the same Waltz from the '64 census. There is no link, no conclusive proof. And this is the foundation for Blair fans? The fact that Blair gets top shelf for "presentation" is a real pisser.

But, there is quite a bit to learn from the Blair book. Top shelf if you rip out the supposition and place it along side Barnard's and Dr. Glover's work.

 

[Azhiker]

Hal Croves,

If you really want to get a handle on what was going on in Robert Blair's head while writing his book, his entire collection of personal notes, research, and letters can be found at the Arizona Historical Foundation, Robert Blair Collection, Call Number MSS24 (F817.59B5x).
The Az. Historical Foundation collection is located at the Arizona Historical Society Museum Papago Park, Tempe, Arizona.

The Blair collection is 6 boxes, stuffed with notes, documents, letters, newspapers and scribblings the author compiled while researching and writing his book. It gives a clear picture of where Blair was coming from and why, as well as his intent and agenda with publishing his book. He clearly went through several phases of belief, disbelief and back again to belief over the course of his research.

I wish you luck in your research.

Azhiker