I don't know if it is proper etiquette to post a personal email on an open forum. So here is the paraphrased version of what was related to me when I asked around:
The information about Sims making changes was related by "someone in a position to know such things."
Nobody is really sure what would have been changed, but nobody is all that concerned about this either. Primarily because there are other accounts that verify what Sims wrote and whatever discrepancies there might be are well known.
There you have it. Makes sense to me.
Thanks for your advice -
Ashton
SIMS ELY'S BOOK - The Lost Dutchman Mine
Moderator: Jim_b
-
AshtonPage
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:37 pm
- anti-spam detector: No
- The middle number please (4): 4
- Location: Sunny Portland, Oregon
-
Jim Hatt
Re: SIMS ELY'S BOOK - The Lost Dutchman Mine
It kinda leaves us without a "known" Source doesn't it Ashton?
"Someone who was in a position to know" could be debatable if we knew who that someone was.
Have you read my story about the Bark Notes yet?
http://www.desertusa.com/mb3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=398
It really throws a big monkey wrench into the whole story.
Over the years there has been a lot of effort spent on trying to discredit the validity of the information in Ely's book. Under the circumstances, we can only assume that it was done for self-serving purposes, to lead people away from the truth contained in it, or as a maneuver from someone in the Holmes camp, to discredit Ely's book, so the Holmes Manuscript would be accepted as the more true representation of Waltz's story? (or a little of both)
Best,
Jim
"Someone who was in a position to know" could be debatable if we knew who that someone was.
Have you read my story about the Bark Notes yet?
http://www.desertusa.com/mb3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=398
It really throws a big monkey wrench into the whole story.
Over the years there has been a lot of effort spent on trying to discredit the validity of the information in Ely's book. Under the circumstances, we can only assume that it was done for self-serving purposes, to lead people away from the truth contained in it, or as a maneuver from someone in the Holmes camp, to discredit Ely's book, so the Holmes Manuscript would be accepted as the more true representation of Waltz's story? (or a little of both)
Best,
Jim
-
cubfan64
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:00 am
- anti-spam detector: No
- The middle number please (4): 4
Re: SIMS ELY'S BOOK - The Lost Dutchman Mine
AshtonPage, you posted that someone told you:
Welcome to the wonderful world of "all things Dutchman" where you start trying to find the needles in a haystack the size of the Superstitions, and just about everyone knows someone who knew someone who knew someone else who had important clues but trying to track 99% of them down to actual factual sources is a lifetime task
The information about Sims making changes was related by "someone in a position to know such things."
Welcome to the wonderful world of "all things Dutchman" where you start trying to find the needles in a haystack the size of the Superstitions, and just about everyone knows someone who knew someone who knew someone else who had important clues but trying to track 99% of them down to actual factual sources is a lifetime task
-
AshtonPage
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:37 pm
- anti-spam detector: No
- The middle number please (4): 4
- Location: Sunny Portland, Oregon
Re: SIMS ELY'S BOOK - The Lost Dutchman Mine
This is getting confusing.
Jim - I read your forum on the Bark Notes the other night. That is some monkey wrench alright.
Cubfan64 - I am beginning to believe that until the LDM is found, the truth will not be known. Even when the LDM if found, there could be years of discussion of "is this really it? Because Mr. Y said it had to be (whatever)". Even with ore samples, you can bet the argument will continue.
I believe that Clay W. and Jim H. have adopted the best approach. Choose your captain and stay with the ship. The question we must each decide: is it going or be Capt. Holmes or Capt. Ely (Thomas \ Petrasch).
Each one does have some merit. Meanwhile, I'm waiting for my copy of Ely's book to arrive. More research then I will decide for myself which path to take.
The other option (which I am considering, BTW) is to simply spread out my topo map out on the table, take the plachette from a Ouija board and..... well, you get the picture.
Best,
Ashton
Jim - I read your forum on the Bark Notes the other night. That is some monkey wrench alright.
Cubfan64 - I am beginning to believe that until the LDM is found, the truth will not be known. Even when the LDM if found, there could be years of discussion of "is this really it? Because Mr. Y said it had to be (whatever)". Even with ore samples, you can bet the argument will continue.
I believe that Clay W. and Jim H. have adopted the best approach. Choose your captain and stay with the ship. The question we must each decide: is it going or be Capt. Holmes or Capt. Ely (Thomas \ Petrasch).
Each one does have some merit. Meanwhile, I'm waiting for my copy of Ely's book to arrive. More research then I will decide for myself which path to take.
The other option (which I am considering, BTW) is to simply spread out my topo map out on the table, take the plachette from a Ouija board and..... well, you get the picture.
Best,
Ashton
-
Jim Hatt
Re: SIMS ELY'S BOOK - The Lost Dutchman Mine
Ashton,
It is really hard to totally dismiss ANYTHING. When you can, it is a giant step. Clay was partners with Brownie for 20 years, and Brownie denied writing that manuscript known as the Holmes manuscript. He claimed it was written by a newspaper man named kennison that had interviewed Brownie.
I don't argue with Clay about it, but to me, the writing style is just not what you would expect from a professional writer.
The bottom line is... Who ever wrote it had no intention of disclosing anything that Waltz actually told Dick Holmes. (If he even knew)
Best,
Jim.
It is really hard to totally dismiss ANYTHING. When you can, it is a giant step. Clay was partners with Brownie for 20 years, and Brownie denied writing that manuscript known as the Holmes manuscript. He claimed it was written by a newspaper man named kennison that had interviewed Brownie.
I don't argue with Clay about it, but to me, the writing style is just not what you would expect from a professional writer.
The bottom line is... Who ever wrote it had no intention of disclosing anything that Waltz actually told Dick Holmes. (If he even knew)
Best,
Jim.
-
oroblanco
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 11:01 am
- anti-spam detector: No
- The middle number please (4): 4
- Location: Black Hills, Dakota Territory
- Contact:
Re: SIMS ELY'S BOOK - The Lost Dutchman Mine
Ashton wrote
Oroblanco
"Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?" -- Groucho Marx
The ore sample can prove or disprove it as a fact, scientifically, similarly to fingerprints. Yes folks can still debate it after a geologist says the ore specimen is a perfect match, but it would be pointless. The ore from gold mines is very individual in its makeup, grain size, metals content etc and an expert can readily identify the ores from specific mines simply by examining it with a 10X jewelers loupe. If you get the ore sample and it matches, the argument is settled on science - further debate is for those who refuse to believe.Even when the LDM if found, there could be years of discussion of "is this really it? Because Mr. Y said it had to be (whatever)". Even with ore samples, you can bet the argument will continue.
Oroblanco
"Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?" -- Groucho Marx
-
AshtonPage
- Posts: 368
- Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 6:37 pm
- anti-spam detector: No
- The middle number please (4): 4
- Location: Sunny Portland, Oregon
Re: THE HOLMES MANUSCRIPT
Sims strikes me as an honest, upright guy - as Humphrey Bogart would say "a regular Joe"
Now, it is apparent that Sims really isn't telling us everything that he knows. Was he pressured by Bark's descendents? My gut feeling is "probably". Even with that being the (most probable) case, then here's a thought fer ya: because nobody from the Bark family has found the LDM either, then how would they know what clues were the ones important enough to be omitted? They would simply be guessing as to what clue might be so important that it needed to be kept a secret. This is the LBR (looks 'bout right) method.
You can bet that nothing of earth-shaking importance was left out. By earth-shaking importance I mean something like: directions that would lead you to a specific canyon. We know this is the case because Julia and Rhiney (and especially Bark and Ely) did not confine their searches to a specific canyon.
In my mind, Sims is writing from the perspective of "this is the way it was" whereas whoever wrote the Holmes Manuscript is writing from the perspective of "here's the directions to the canyon, call me when you find it"...... BTW, anybody ever find that elusive canyon? If not (which is what I suspect) then:
"I rest my case" regarding The Holmes Manuscript.
Back to Sims perspective of writing. In the back of his book, he quotes his friend Jim Bark that it is time to turn it over to the younger prospectors. So yes, Sims does want to entice others to join in the adventure of the search. But more than that, Sims is writing to draw the reader into the action of his book (and he did a great job) and to that end he drops some clues here and there BUT the perspective of his authoring is (well....... just read the title) "The Fabulous Story of the Seven-Decade Search for the Hidden Treasure in the Superstition Mountains of Arizona". An author puts a lot of time and thought into the title of their book. That sub title is not just a random rambling to sound good, Sims thought about how he wanted to present his writing to the world - he was a pro.
Let's assume that Sims would have published his book unabridged. Would we have an entire list of new clues? Dozens of them? I don't think so. A couple clues here and there, but I think that an unabridged edition would be pretty close to what we have today. Again, I really don't think Sims was writing to give out clues as much as he was telling the story of his own quest. So anything that might be missing.... well, we'll just have to do without (like we really have a choice).
The other thing is that for all Waltz told Rhiney and Julia, they never even came close. So what could they have possible told Sims that would be of earth-shaking consequence? They simply didn't have enough info themselves - and where did Sims get his info?....... and people wonder why hasn't it been found....... uhhh - spend some time in the Superstitions and you'll know.
Let's assume that a descendent of (whomever) has all the real clues. Are they any closer than any of us? Besides, being the only guy with the "secret notes" will isolate you. You really can't spill the beans around the campfire to get other people's opinions - especially about the secret parts. I can picture it now....... "the mine is on the eastern portion of a peninsula 80 feet off the canyon floor. Anybody know a place like that?"
"oh yeah, where'd ya hear that one?"
What's he going to say now? "Uhhh, I was just guessing."
I can hear the answer now.... "well, guess again partner."
So much for getting feedback about the secret clues.
I would rather have less info and people that I can talk to, than be the loner with the secret clue.
I trust Sims - period. Give me a small amount of information that I can trust and I will go much farther than I could with tons of really good clues that contained some errors (no matter how small). And Mr. Ely tells us a ton-o-stuff in his book. With Sims alone, one could get close - maybe even close enough.
Let me show you what I mean. Now, I'm sure that most of the folks here have figured this easy stuff out. I’m just going to go over a couple of the apparent issues. I'm not trying to bore anyone, but there may be others like me that could use a little help. Here ya go:
Quoting Sims:
We rested a day on the Gila..... carefully on foot, we went toward the mine.... as we got near the top of the ridge... Quietly we crept to the top and looked down….. we crawled back to the top of the ridge. We’d shoot those two… -= end quotes =-
OK, with just the above info, we can eliminate 60% (or more) of the superstitions. I'll just touch on the highlights:
What direction did they enter the range from? That eliminates a northward approach.
Going over the ridge, they looked down and could see the mine. They also shot the two Mexicans from the top of that ridge. That tells you that the mine is in the FAR side of the ridge that you would cross over GOING IN. (bingo - 50% of the terrain eliminated). Actually is would be over 50% because you know it's on a hillside and not a canyon floor. But this is offset by a different factor - think about it, it will come to you.
Do some homework and go on. What kind of rifles did Waltz and Weiser have? How far of a shot could they make with confidence? What is the probability of them crossing over the ridge and exposing themselves before shooting? (even though the text indicates they shot from the top of the ridge). Now you know, with probability - how close to the top of an inward ridge the mine is located.
Yes, I know - there's a lot of land in the mountains. But we haven't even scratched the surface. I'm trying to show that Sims just might contain all you would need to get you close enough to find the end of the rainbow.
And that's without even getting into the info about the mine itself (this is where it gets good) WHY would the mine be such that you could walk right past it and not see it? Get it?
OK, Now you know WHERE to begin your search. AND you also know on what side of the hill to search AND you know with probability how high up the mine is toward the ridge...... whew. And that’s just the basics.
My point is: I firmly believe that Sims is reliable. With that in mind, do I want to use questionable material? At all? Anything of questionable accuracy is like shooting with a barrel that is warped. Who knows where it would hit. Maybe high, maybe low - but you can bet that you're NOT going to hit the target. For now, I believe (my opinion) that Sims just might have told us enough - even with the parts he left out.
Best to you all -
Ashton
Now, it is apparent that Sims really isn't telling us everything that he knows. Was he pressured by Bark's descendents? My gut feeling is "probably". Even with that being the (most probable) case, then here's a thought fer ya: because nobody from the Bark family has found the LDM either, then how would they know what clues were the ones important enough to be omitted? They would simply be guessing as to what clue might be so important that it needed to be kept a secret. This is the LBR (looks 'bout right) method.
You can bet that nothing of earth-shaking importance was left out. By earth-shaking importance I mean something like: directions that would lead you to a specific canyon. We know this is the case because Julia and Rhiney (and especially Bark and Ely) did not confine their searches to a specific canyon.
In my mind, Sims is writing from the perspective of "this is the way it was" whereas whoever wrote the Holmes Manuscript is writing from the perspective of "here's the directions to the canyon, call me when you find it"...... BTW, anybody ever find that elusive canyon? If not (which is what I suspect) then:
"I rest my case" regarding The Holmes Manuscript.
Back to Sims perspective of writing. In the back of his book, he quotes his friend Jim Bark that it is time to turn it over to the younger prospectors. So yes, Sims does want to entice others to join in the adventure of the search. But more than that, Sims is writing to draw the reader into the action of his book (and he did a great job) and to that end he drops some clues here and there BUT the perspective of his authoring is (well....... just read the title) "The Fabulous Story of the Seven-Decade Search for the Hidden Treasure in the Superstition Mountains of Arizona". An author puts a lot of time and thought into the title of their book. That sub title is not just a random rambling to sound good, Sims thought about how he wanted to present his writing to the world - he was a pro.
Let's assume that Sims would have published his book unabridged. Would we have an entire list of new clues? Dozens of them? I don't think so. A couple clues here and there, but I think that an unabridged edition would be pretty close to what we have today. Again, I really don't think Sims was writing to give out clues as much as he was telling the story of his own quest. So anything that might be missing.... well, we'll just have to do without (like we really have a choice).
The other thing is that for all Waltz told Rhiney and Julia, they never even came close. So what could they have possible told Sims that would be of earth-shaking consequence? They simply didn't have enough info themselves - and where did Sims get his info?....... and people wonder why hasn't it been found....... uhhh - spend some time in the Superstitions and you'll know.
Let's assume that a descendent of (whomever) has all the real clues. Are they any closer than any of us? Besides, being the only guy with the "secret notes" will isolate you. You really can't spill the beans around the campfire to get other people's opinions - especially about the secret parts. I can picture it now....... "the mine is on the eastern portion of a peninsula 80 feet off the canyon floor. Anybody know a place like that?"
"oh yeah, where'd ya hear that one?"
What's he going to say now? "Uhhh, I was just guessing."
I can hear the answer now.... "well, guess again partner."
So much for getting feedback about the secret clues.
I would rather have less info and people that I can talk to, than be the loner with the secret clue.
I trust Sims - period. Give me a small amount of information that I can trust and I will go much farther than I could with tons of really good clues that contained some errors (no matter how small). And Mr. Ely tells us a ton-o-stuff in his book. With Sims alone, one could get close - maybe even close enough.
Let me show you what I mean. Now, I'm sure that most of the folks here have figured this easy stuff out. I’m just going to go over a couple of the apparent issues. I'm not trying to bore anyone, but there may be others like me that could use a little help. Here ya go:
Quoting Sims:
We rested a day on the Gila..... carefully on foot, we went toward the mine.... as we got near the top of the ridge... Quietly we crept to the top and looked down….. we crawled back to the top of the ridge. We’d shoot those two… -= end quotes =-
OK, with just the above info, we can eliminate 60% (or more) of the superstitions. I'll just touch on the highlights:
What direction did they enter the range from? That eliminates a northward approach.
Going over the ridge, they looked down and could see the mine. They also shot the two Mexicans from the top of that ridge. That tells you that the mine is in the FAR side of the ridge that you would cross over GOING IN. (bingo - 50% of the terrain eliminated). Actually is would be over 50% because you know it's on a hillside and not a canyon floor. But this is offset by a different factor - think about it, it will come to you.
Do some homework and go on. What kind of rifles did Waltz and Weiser have? How far of a shot could they make with confidence? What is the probability of them crossing over the ridge and exposing themselves before shooting? (even though the text indicates they shot from the top of the ridge). Now you know, with probability - how close to the top of an inward ridge the mine is located.
Yes, I know - there's a lot of land in the mountains. But we haven't even scratched the surface. I'm trying to show that Sims just might contain all you would need to get you close enough to find the end of the rainbow.
And that's without even getting into the info about the mine itself (this is where it gets good) WHY would the mine be such that you could walk right past it and not see it? Get it?
OK, Now you know WHERE to begin your search. AND you also know on what side of the hill to search AND you know with probability how high up the mine is toward the ridge...... whew. And that’s just the basics.
My point is: I firmly believe that Sims is reliable. With that in mind, do I want to use questionable material? At all? Anything of questionable accuracy is like shooting with a barrel that is warped. Who knows where it would hit. Maybe high, maybe low - but you can bet that you're NOT going to hit the target. For now, I believe (my opinion) that Sims just might have told us enough - even with the parts he left out.
Best to you all -
Ashton
-
javaone
- Posts: 106
- Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 6:34 am
- anti-spam detector: No
- The middle number please (4): 4
Re: THE HOLMES MANUSCRIPT
Very nicely written Ashton. I like your way of thinking – You make a lot of sense.
Jerry
Jerry
-
Jim Hatt
Re: SIMS ELY'S BOOK - The Lost Dutchman Mine
Here is a thought for you to ponder Ashton:
re: From Chapter 8 Page 98 of Ely's Book:
The mine and cache are in those mountains you see over there to the east, the Superstition Mountains. My partner and I took the gold out of the mine, as I've told you, and we made three caches-two of them small, one large. Before leaving the place, after I saw my partner was gone, I removed the gold from one small cache. And I went back once-long after the Apaches killed my partner-and brought the gold away from the other small cache. But the large cache is still there.
Waltz's last trip to the mine (when he removed the second small cache) is believed to be somewhere around the 1884 - 1886 time period. When he died in 1891 he still had 48 pounds of that small cache left after living on it for 6 - 8 years.
It would be reasonable to assume that the small caches he spoke of were no more than 200 & 300 pounds, based a single Mules packing capability, since each one was carried out in a single trip.
What he called a "Large Cache" could have been something in the range of 500 - 1000 pounds, he never said.
My question is:
Since Waltz and his partner only had one pack mule, which was already carrying all of their supplies. Why did they work the mine so long, and dig out so much more ore than they could possibly hope to be able to carry away with them? Why not just dig all they could carry, and plan to come back for more when it ran out?
Clay and I pondered this question for about 10 years. We finally came to several possible conclusions, that I will share with you later. But first I would like to hear some of your (or anyone Else's) ideas, to see if you come to the same conclusions we did, or come up with something different.
Best,
Jim
re: From Chapter 8 Page 98 of Ely's Book:
The mine and cache are in those mountains you see over there to the east, the Superstition Mountains. My partner and I took the gold out of the mine, as I've told you, and we made three caches-two of them small, one large. Before leaving the place, after I saw my partner was gone, I removed the gold from one small cache. And I went back once-long after the Apaches killed my partner-and brought the gold away from the other small cache. But the large cache is still there.
Waltz's last trip to the mine (when he removed the second small cache) is believed to be somewhere around the 1884 - 1886 time period. When he died in 1891 he still had 48 pounds of that small cache left after living on it for 6 - 8 years.
It would be reasonable to assume that the small caches he spoke of were no more than 200 & 300 pounds, based a single Mules packing capability, since each one was carried out in a single trip.
What he called a "Large Cache" could have been something in the range of 500 - 1000 pounds, he never said.
My question is:
Since Waltz and his partner only had one pack mule, which was already carrying all of their supplies. Why did they work the mine so long, and dig out so much more ore than they could possibly hope to be able to carry away with them? Why not just dig all they could carry, and plan to come back for more when it ran out?
Clay and I pondered this question for about 10 years. We finally came to several possible conclusions, that I will share with you later. But first I would like to hear some of your (or anyone Else's) ideas, to see if you come to the same conclusions we did, or come up with something different.
Best,
Jim
-
cubfan64
- Posts: 686
- Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 7:00 am
- anti-spam detector: No
- The middle number please (4): 4
Re: SIMS ELY'S BOOK - The Lost Dutchman Mine
Jim, the first thoughts that come to mind are:
1) The mine was a real pain in the a$$ one to get to and work - they wanted "easier" access to ore and decided to just dig out as much as they could that first time and hide what they couldn't carry for easier pickup at a later time.
2) They didn't want the effort of having to cover and uncover it each time they came back for more.
3) A claim was never filed on the mine by anyone - maybe they were afraid someone would find it AND file a claim on it and they'd lost it all at once like that. This way they at least had stashed away a good sum of ore that they could recover themselves.
4) They didn't want to risk discovery by native americans or anyone else by having to go back and mine more ore - that would have definitely been more time consuming and hard work than simply recovering a cache. Best to dig out a bunch all at once (don't put all your eggs in one basket so to speak).
5) They dug most of the ore out that first trip (of course to believe that, you need to disbelieve some of the other quotes Waltz supposedly said about the vein)
I know more theories will come to mind the more I think about it - not to steal your thread Jim, but here's another question that's always bugged me...
One of the clues I always found interesting was "to find the mine, you first must find the caches" - that has to imply something no? Does it mean the caches are just in the vicinity, or does it mean the caches somehow "direct" a person to the mine (which would seem silly to me). It's just one of those clues that I haven't been able to come up with a good explanation for.
1) The mine was a real pain in the a$$ one to get to and work - they wanted "easier" access to ore and decided to just dig out as much as they could that first time and hide what they couldn't carry for easier pickup at a later time.
2) They didn't want the effort of having to cover and uncover it each time they came back for more.
3) A claim was never filed on the mine by anyone - maybe they were afraid someone would find it AND file a claim on it and they'd lost it all at once like that. This way they at least had stashed away a good sum of ore that they could recover themselves.
4) They didn't want to risk discovery by native americans or anyone else by having to go back and mine more ore - that would have definitely been more time consuming and hard work than simply recovering a cache. Best to dig out a bunch all at once (don't put all your eggs in one basket so to speak).
5) They dug most of the ore out that first trip (of course to believe that, you need to disbelieve some of the other quotes Waltz supposedly said about the vein)
I know more theories will come to mind the more I think about it - not to steal your thread Jim, but here's another question that's always bugged me...
One of the clues I always found interesting was "to find the mine, you first must find the caches" - that has to imply something no? Does it mean the caches are just in the vicinity, or does it mean the caches somehow "direct" a person to the mine (which would seem silly to me). It's just one of those clues that I haven't been able to come up with a good explanation for.