The "Peralta" Stone Maps --- On Their Own

cactusjumper,
Yes. This story has many unexpected turns and "half-truths" and deception seems to surround the "Peralta" stones. I am unfortunately gravitating to the idea that the stones were made perhaps no more than twenty years before their discovery date of 1949 (if indeed this is the actual date). But the encrypted narrative of the stones and the locations they represent have a history that is much older.

Travis Tumlinson needs to be looked at again. Anyone know about Travis's social associations... education, church, military, clubs?
If Travis carved the stones he:
... transcribed images from a master map that he could not understand, or
... used an aerial photograph to map known mining locations. This is doubtful since it is known that Travis struggled to read the stones, or
... Travis was executing a hoax.

My best guess is that if Travis carved the stones, he used a master map... only he could not read it. So, where is this master map and how did Travis get his hands on it? The master map that Travis must have traced was made with an aerial photograph. A topographic map is just not detailed enough to conceive the images seen on the stones. So, that means that the earliest the stones could have been made was 1839-40. If you accept the historical record the date for a possible aerial photograph is pushed to 1860. Aerial photography via airplane pushes the date to after 1903, but realistically after 1930. This means that there was a period of app. twenty years before Travis's "discovery" for SOMEONE to create the master map.... or even the stones themselves.

Hal,

Many of the details that can't be seen from a topographic map, or even an aerial photograph, could easily be supplied by someone who lived in the Superstitions and hiked or rode them on a regular basis over the years.

Often, the simplest answer is the right one. Sometimes it's overlooked by those with too much intelligence or imagination.

Good luck,

Joe

cactusjumper,
I can not speak to intelligence, however imagination... well one can never have too much. The ability to see and reason beyond ones experience. Juggling several ideas at once.
And I am not sure that anything about the stones is simple.
Travis was certainly not a "simple" man who simply found a collection of stone charts.
Impossible odds... the grandson of a treasure hunter accidentally finding these stones.

My advice for those researchers who will listen is to consider whatever you hear or read about the stone charts as a half-truth.
On either side of the argument.

From what I've read on this forum, there are several things which are suspect concerning Travis Tumlinson and the discovery of the Stones.  I have not confirmed the accuracy of what I have read, however.

1.  His father is said to have been a treasure hunter.

2.  He did make several other stone carvings, himself.

3.  It is claimed that he was hiking around the Supers extensively, after "finding" the Stones.  And possibly before  finding them, seeing that his dad was a hunter.


Some have suggested that his father "borrowed" the Stones from an original hiding place, and Travis faked his discovery in order to legitimize his possession of them.

But why would anyone ever  make something with a high probability of value, like authentic stone maps, public?  And further, if they were authentic (to be used for finding a treasure), then why didn't they find it?  And if they did find it, where is the evidence of the wealth?


Currently, I'm favoring the position that Travis was hunting for the LDM, and didn't want to be followed, so he made fake Stone maps in hopes that others would focus their attention on them, and not on his searches in the Supers.

If Travis actually had a "master map," why would he need to make heavy Stone maps?  If he wanted a copy to take with him on his outings, stone would not be the material to carry along for that.  If he wanted to have a strong, permanent, copy of the master, then photo copies or accurate hand drawn versions could be tucked away in a safe deposit box or two.  And a small version would be much easier to carry with him in the field.  The only thing that Stone copies would achieve is to make something which would be a burden, in terms of hiding them, or anything else.  They would serve no purpose that I can think of---except to draw attention away from his real target area.


Although he didn't "publicize" having the Stone maps, right away, it seems that some people close to him were aware of them, and maybe that's  who he originally wanted to fool the most.  Too many partners?  Maybe some disagreements?  Maybe some distrust?

And later, the Stones went through all the private, corporate, and public contortions of which we are now aware of.  Whether the Stones served a purpose for anyone after they "got loose" from his original possession, or they just "rode along" with whatever was happening at those times, seems to be uncertain.  And maybe it doesn't really matter, at that point.


It just seems to me that too many things just don't jell, about the Stones being "very complex."  I simply don't see where any of that could possibly lead.  There seem to be too many speculated directions in which the ideas of "complexity" could go.  And there are too many dead ends in all of those directions, so far, with no light at the end of any of those tunnels in sight.

 




P.S.  All this, in light of the fact that the Stone Map trail does exist.  Someone involved did have experience with the Supers.

.....  But why would anyone ever  make something with a high probability of value, like authentic stone maps, public?  .....

It defies a fundamental human instinct - greed; the very act itself ought to raise a monster red flag. 

Very good EE!  Makes sense.

The problem with the idea of Travis making the stones simply to distract people from his search for the Dutchman is that the effort failed to lure people away from the Superstitions. If Travis was controlling treasure hunters with the stones, why didn't he lure people away from his search area.. outside of the SWA?

If Travis did carve the images on the chimney and the ship stone, then it makes sense that he might have transcribed an important discovery into stone. An artists attempt to understanding a thing and to preserve information for the long haul. They (the stones) have outlasted Travis. The stones would have been difficult to steal and I doubt that they were made to haul around the Superstitions.

What about the story that was told about the stones being stolen? I am still searching for a Tumlinson connection if I can ever find the story in full.
Before 1949 were aerial photographs available to the general public?

Perhaps it is outside the SWA

Perhaps it is outside the SWA

That's a possibility.  It has been said that Jake was seen North of the Salt River, at some point.  And others have suggested a few places other than the Superstitions.

Maybe Travis made it match what he and his dad already knew was in the supers, because that's what they were familiar with, and there were many convincing man-made landmarks there.  And maybe he figured that not enough people would believe that the LDM was not in the SWA vicinity.

Additionally, it would provide a good excuse to those who knew that he was puttering around in that range, either friends, family, or partners.

I guess it boils down to if they are "real" or not.  If they aren't real, then they are a hoax.  Maybe there is a third possibility, but I don't see any beyond those two choices, at this time.

So that leaves the logic of "If they are not real, then who made them, and why?"  My suggestions about Travis, and why he would have made them, seem to be the only concept that sort of fits together with what little is really known about him and the Stones, I think.

Right now, it looks like all the other possibilities, like I said before, just don't seem to me to float.

 

[pluck out the heart of my mystery]

Gentlemen,

There are just to many coincidences for these maps to relate to something outside the Superstitions.

Once more, I give you this glaring coincidence from Tom Kollenborn's "Superstition Mountain: A Ride Through Time", page 126 :  "Perhaps one of Chuck Aylor's favorite quotes best describes the Aylors and their quest for gold in the Superstition Mountains:  "You would play upon me; you would seem to know my stops; you would pluck out the heart of my mystery; you would sound me from my lowest note to the top of my compass." Hamlet Act 3, Scene 2

Chuck loved Shakespear and would often "quote(s) Hamlet's solioquy without missing a word".
Another quote from "....A Ride Through Time".

Since Chuck and Peggy were smack dab in the middle of the Stone Map Trail, as it's shown on my map, it's just a bit to much.  Just a short ride south out of Caballo Camp, and they are at the end of the Stone Map Trail and looking at the heart.

Joe

Joe---

I'm confident that the Stone Map(s) Trail is in the Superstitions.

But since I have not seen the LDM, I can't argue that it  is also in the Supes.



However, I think it is.  

EE,

Because of the story that both Julia and Rhiney told Jim Bark, I would say that the "best evidence" makes it a pretty good bet that the LDM, if it exists, is in the Superstitions.

Joe

I am 100% certain that the stones are no hoax and that they represent locations in the SWA. My understanding of the stone maps is correct, but then again Joe's map and a few other solutions might make the same claims... well, one less since the rendezvous. What we need is one map featuring the many different solutions to the trail map... for a comparison. I will work on something and post this weekend if there are no objections.

The most important question believers must ask is this: are there precious mineral deposits within the Superstition Wilderness Area? The official Government's position is absolutely not, no gold/silver/plat deposits in the SWA and JSWoods has confirmed this in writing. Well, honestly that question for me has now been resolved both scientifically and objectively. Sampling from several locations indicate a strong foundation for the many stories that have emerge from the Superstitions. So, what do these results indicate?... lots of silver, some gold and a little plat, all in locations that compliment my placement of the stones.
We are getting closer to the truth.

I have never been too concerned about the DLM, but the Haywood story and a cave off gold bars...now they are something to consider.

Hal:  the Superstitions in themselves appear to be  basically of Basalt.  This in itself does not normally lead to comercial deposits of metal, but the many intrusions, faults, etc., that are found in there, certainly do.  So yes, I personally believe that there must be many deposits of different metals in there.  Go get em guy !

Don Jose de La Mancha

Hal & Don Jose,

There are many gold deposits in association with Basalt in Arizona, I believe the Vulture mine is just one, as well as many other places in the world. I believe the combination is fairly common in Nevada and is often found in the Goldfield, Nevada workings.

Basalt does not, as I understand it, negate the presence of large deposits of gold.

One other theory that was written in stone, so to speak, was that surface ore would get richer with depth. Countless fortunes were spent and lost on this theory. The Bully Bueno mine in the Bradshaws in an excellent example of this fallacy. That belief was known as the extrusion theory.

Prior to 1850, this was accepted "fact". Between 1850-1890 the real facts began to surface, so to speak,  and ore genesis became scientifically understood and accepted by prospectors as well as
the large mining concerns.

On the other hand, it is well known that I don't know $#!t about rocks, so all of the above could
very well be in error. It's the result of wasting my youth as a treasure hunter, instead of searching for mines.

Joe

cactusjumper,
With just a little time and effort anyone could walk away from the SWA with samplings that confirms the mineral potential. It makes me concerned about the official government position. Why the wilderness designation? Officially to manage & protect the endangered species and resources in the forest, but look at the record. 85% of foot traffic using 15% of the trails. Is that good management? A growing endangered species list. Is that ample protection? But they did manage to kill all hope of mining in the SWA. Again, I believe that this whole thing is about half-truths.

In the end, when the truth is known, I think that we will see a deliberate attempt by officials to mislead the public with the intentions of protecting the Superstitions.

Hal,

I am not sure I'm ready to hang that chicken around the governments neck.  Stepping away from the conspiricy theory a bit, it seems more likely that the formation of the Wilderness area was the result of observing the destruction of landmarks, like Weaver's Needle, Black Top Mesa and Bluff Spring Mountain.

While the work being done seemed to have little empact on those landmarks, when would someone be expected to step in an stop the destruction of such a beautiful national treasure?



Is it just another coincidence that my heart leans towards the west, just as it does on the Stone Maps?






Joe

One thing I was told at the Rendezvous, by a very well known Dutch Hunter, was that the Stone Maps were created by a local man and his wife......as a joke.    Obviously, if true, it got out of hand.

That fits very well with the assumption that people who knew the Superstitions very well were needed to create such an accurate map. 

Joe Ribaudo

One place where Basalt runs through a historic mining area, is Eldorado Canyon in Nevada.  One of the biggest producers of gold was the Techatticup Mine.  While I hate to admit it, that brings us full circlel to Ben Davis and late 49er.  Roy and Paul will recognize the names.

Joe Ribaudo

I remember reading on this forum about a U.S. mineral survey, which indicated extensive mineralization, including gold and silver, all over the Superstitions.  It seems that it was not included in the official report about the SWA....

[Ritches Etched In Stone]

My apologies for the interuption in topic everyone. I am not sure if I really need to create a new topic for this quick message. I just wanted to let everyone know that the Travel Channel just aired Ritches Etched In Stone on the episode "Eastland Disaster and Smuttynose Murders". It discusses the Peralta Stones and makes a possible connection with the Lost Dutchman Mine. It is only 2:49 long but very interesting. Some of the story seems different than what I read (in relation to Waltz and the way he aquires the mine). Anyway, enjoy...



Here's the link: http://www.travelchannel.com/Video/riches-etched-in-stone-16522

.....  But why would anyone ever  make something with a high probability of value, like authentic stone maps, public?  .....

It defies a fundamental human instinct - greed; the very act itself ought to raise a monster red flag. 

Unless you're trying to find a mark. If the plan is to sell the maps to some rich sucker, making it public makes sense.

Joe

I made several posts in the "Tumlinson Profile" topic, about the color of the Heart Stone, as reported in the April-May, 1973, Frontier Times article, by Bernice and Jack McGee.

I'm not sure that my posts about the McGees article belonged in that topic, but it kind of relates to the possibility that Travis made the Stone Maps, so I'm posting this extension of it here.

I got to looking at the side view of the Heart Stone posted there, and thought that an analysis of it's own probable timeline would be interesting, and possibly revealing of something further clues.

Here is the photo I'm referring to, taken by Joe R. (cactusjumper), where the Stone Maps are on display---




While the McGee's story twice refers to the Heart Stone as a "yellowish rock," the Heart on display, as can be seen in the photo above, appears to be a reddish dark brown.  I got to wondering how this could be resolved.

The grooves in the markings certainly do look "yellowish."  So it appears that the stone material, itself, is indeed composed of yellowish rock of some kind.

The article also says "slate-type rock."  Due to the apparent layering, as seen on the side of the Heart, it does seem that this description is realistic, too.

But I find it problematic that, merely because the color in the grooves reveal the natural yellow color of the stone inside, that the authors would describe the looks  of it merely as "yellowish rock."  Seeing as there are no color photographs included in the article, if any description would be given under that circumstance, it would be much more complete,  regarding the appearance of it, to state the overall obvious color of the surface, plus note the color of the inside of it as indicated by the line marking grooves.  As it stands, the story gives the impression that the Heart they saw was yellowish all over, due to the three  different statements to that effect.

I would describe it as made from a yellowish rock which was a reddish dark brown on the outside.

Or as reddish dark brown rock, with yellowish line marking grooves.  Because it's overall appearance is the reddish dark brown, and only upon close inspection can it be seen that the lighter coloring, of the grooves of the markings, is because the outer stain was penetrated by whatever tool was used to carve the lines.

But regardless of how it is described, there is an interesting sequence of events which must have taken place in the creation of the Heart Stone, by whoever made it.  This sequence may shed some light on possible theories about who made it, and under what circumstances (as possible conditions during the making of the Stones are suggested by the McGees, in their article referenced above).

First, considering the very dark coloring of the surface of the Heart Stone.  How did that get there?

Is it a natural patina, darkened over time?

If it were a natural patina, with the yellow underneath exposed, when the marking lines were carved, then why aren't the sides of the Heart yellow also?  Unless the heart was found naturally  in that heart-shape, it had to have been carved to shape it that way, right?  If the marking lines were carved before it got patinaed, the line grooves would also be dark.

I know that skin oil, from handling, can darken stone, like the well known effect on turquoise, but not this dark, and not this consistant, all over the surface of a piece the size of the Heart.

If it was a naturally patinaed slab, the sides would be yellow.  So it was stained  at some point before it was carved.

Either that, or it was carved into a heart shape long  before the line markings were grooved into it.  If this were the case, then the Stone Trail maps would have to have been sized to fit the (much older) Heart.

An interesting thing about the darker surface of the Heart, is that it is darkened on both sides.  Was it carved into a heart, then set out, laying out in the weather for a very long time, then turned over, like a pancake,  to patina the flip side?  For what purpose?  What are the odds of that?

It seems like a conclusion can be made that the Heart Stone in the photo above, was first carved into a heart shape, then stained somehow, then the line markings were grooved into it.


But wait!  There's more!  

What about those breaks?  And the glue?

Some of the marking lines pass through the breaks.  It looks like the glue is a dark color, even darker than the stain.  But since the yellow in the marking grooves doesn't show yellow  where the glue was applied, it must have had the line marking grooves carved before  it was glued.  Also, none of the yellow of the inside of the stone shows where the breaks are glued, so the glue was smeared in such a way that it, intentionally or not, eliminated any yellow showing through.


So, from all that above, the apparent Heart making sequence (disregarding the carved-heart-aged-patina-stone-flipping scenario)---

1.  Some slate-type rock was gotten from somewhere, either at the correct thickness or trimmed to the existing thickness.
2.  The Heart shape was carved from this slab.
3.  The Heart was somehow stained a reddish dark brown, on both sides, and all around the edges.
4.  The line marking grooves were carved into the Heart, leaving the grooves yellowish.
5.  The Heart Stone was carefully  broken, in two places,  with the breaks crossing each other.
6.  The breaks were glued, using some kind of dark glue.
7.  The Stone Maps were "discovered" by Travis Tumlinson (or he discovered the first one, the Priest/Horse Stone, and made the Trail and Heart Stones) or whatever version of how he came to have them, that you prefer!


For number five, above, it doesn't really seem possible that the breaks were accidental.  There would be chips on the Heart Stone, most probably on the edges, if it was broken from a fall.  It seems improbable that the two breaks, in different directions would occur together, and be so symmetrically placed.  Although there appear to be some dents around the edge of the Heart in the photo, any chips would show yellowish stone, as the line marking grooves do.

At point number five in the sequence, is the only time that the breaks could have taken place, due to the observations listed previously in this post.

If the Heart Stone was, indeed, intentionally  broken, then those breaks were intended to mean  something.

If the Heart Stone was artificially  patinaed, then what are the possible ways of doing that?  I mean, if someone used a stain from the local hardware store, it would surely be readily detectable, right?  People do artificially patina brass objects and coins, so is there a way to do it to rocks?  Like roasting in the oven or something?  Or applying some chemical which will then evaporate or change to something which is naturally found on patinaed rock?  


All-in-all, the sequence of manufacture tells something.  It tells that the making of the Heart Stone, shown in the Photo, was far more complex than making the Trail Stones or Horse/Priest Stones.  Now the question would be, "Why go to so much trouble for that one stone?"

Another question would be, "Why did the McGees leave their description as simply 'a yellowish stone'?"  And, right after stating that color, why did they add the word "reportedly" in the sentence, "Reportedly cut from a slab of red chalcedony" (were they indicating a possible contradiction with their own observation of the Heart?)

And of course, the question of, why the McGees' drawing of the Heart Stone line markings, is drastically different than the display Heart Stone, when all of the other of their Stone Maps drawings are essentially the same as the ones on display?

And finally, that lingering question that just won't go away:  What is that confounding "needle," which matches the Needle on that copy of Julia's map, doing on the Heart Stone in the photo?  


reference photos---


Back side of the display Heart Stone



Heart Map drawing from McGees' article         Heart Stone on display




(I know, I said I was done talking about the McGees' "Yellow Heart Stone," but this adds more about the Heart on display, namely the sequence of manufacture.)  

 

All,

As you can see, a lot depends on if you are viewing the stones themselves, or pictures of them:













These pictures were taken by Steve Decker of the Mining and Mineral Museum.  He used different lighting in an attempt to bring out different details.  I can blow these pictures up 400% with little loss of quality.

Joe

Joe---

That is absolutely right.  Thanks for posting such an excellent example set of photos.

Indoor incandescent lighting tends to make a picture more yellowish-orange.  Regular fluorescent lighting has a different effect, and then there are the full-spectrum fluorescents that mimic sunlight.  Outdoor lighting depends on how cloudy it might be at the time.  So, exact colors can't be assumed when looking at photos.

Color comparisons are a little better, though.  Like comparing the color of the Heart Stone to the Trail Maps, when they are photographed together.

Overall, from the various pictures of the Stones that I've seen, the Stones that look the most likely to be the originals give the appearance that the Horse/Priest is basically gray with some staining, while the Trail Maps are generally brownish tan.  And of course the Heart always looks significantally darker.

While I'm at it, I'll add that the surface of the Trail Maps appear to have more of a sandy texture, than does the Horse/Priest Stone.

Then there are the replicas, which usually appear to be more or less dull colors.  And in each set, all the Stones seem to be the same color.  I think I've seen photos on the Web, of about a half dozen different replica sets, but I have no way to know for sure because some may be the same photos or taken of the same sets at different times.  And then there is the probability that several sets of the same reproduction run would be the same color.


 

I wanted to offer a couple of comments regarding the McGee's involvement with the Peralta Stones.

I don't believe the McGees ever laid eyes on the physical stones.

The sketches that appeared in the Peralta Stone Hoax article, that Bernice wrote, were indeed her creations. I might be able to come up with a "how" but it would be speculation. She obviously had the images in Mitchell's book and she took some things from the Pat Hainer sketches. I got the idea that Bernice was scrambling to gather "all" of the information.

Before the article was published someone who had finally seen the maps passed on some of the final information that completed her sketches.

The stone colors came from Pat Hainer's recollection, not Bernice's, and it had been over 10 years since the Hainer's had seen the stones when that correspondence took place.

Garry

Garry,

I have a huge stack of letters between the Bernice McGee and William Bent.  She discusses the Superstitions in many of those letters.  I seem to recall some comments about the Stone Maps as well.  I will skim through them tonight and see if there is anything there.

Hope all is well with you folks,

Joe

I don't believe the McGees ever laid eyes on the physical stones.

The sketches that appeared in the Peralta Stone Hoax article, that Bernice wrote, were indeed her creations. I might be able to come up with a "how" but it would be speculation. She obviously had the images in Mitchell's book and she took some things from the Pat Hainer sketches.

Before the article was published someone who had finally seen the maps passed on some of the final information that completed her sketches.

The stone colors came from Pat Hainer's recollection, not Bernice's, and it had been over 10 years since the Hainer's had seen the stones when that correspondence took place.

Garry

I had wondered why they published just drawings, and not photos (except for the Horse).  My first reaction was that they didn't have the Stones on hand to photograph.  But that doesn't mean that they didn't make the drawings at some earlier time, when they were  looking at the Stones.

That the caption under the Priest, discloses the makeshift manner of information assemblage for that particular drawing, indicates that if the other  drawings were not  from first hand viewing of those various other Stones, they would have also disclosed that.



Although anything is possible, I think this is strong evidence that whoever drew the Stone Map depictions used in their article, had direct contact with the Stones.

The Pat Hainer you mention isn't listed in the article, but there are so many aliases floating through it, that it's hard to follow.  Is he one of those?  If not, how do you link those sources you suggested to the drawings in their story?

Once again, I have found another error in my postings.  Two, actually.  Possibly.

One, is when I said they didn't mention the breaks in the Heart Stone.  I was scrolling through the article again, and there are the breaks, drawn in on the Heart Stone, but only on the back view, with the six zeros.  I was focusing only on the blow-up view of the "front" of it, with the trail, and paid no attention to the back side drawing.  Sorry about that!

The second possible error is right there in post #103, in the first clipping excerpt from the McGee's article---



Again, I just breezed over this, and didn't think it through.  The question is, does this mean that it was still being kept secret, so nobody, including the McGees, knew what it looked like at that time?  Or does it mean that it had been a secret, but it was being revealed for the first time, right there in that article?  It seems strange that it is only mentioned in passing, in either  case---because one way, it would mean that their Heart drawing of the "face" side is admittedly bogus, and the other way it would mean that this was the very first time that it had been made public!

With the special caption to explain, in a very detailed way, the makeup of the Priest drawing, it seems like they would have also added a caption like that, at the very least, to the Heart Stone face drawing.

They do then go on there, in that same paragraph, to describe what the Heart face markings consist of, and in doing so are alluding to having seen it.  But maybe not.  Maybe they are just saying that they have knowledge  of generally  what is on the Heart face, and not necessarily that they have actually seen it.

So, if they are saying that the Heart face is merely guesswork, then my suspicions about the markings being different are all for nothing.

But if they are saying that this is the first public viewing of the Heart face, then it is even more  curious!

What the heck are they saying there?

 

EE,

Your interest regarding the 1973 McGee article did cause me to look back at some of the miscellaneous documents that I have from the Bernice McGee Collection. This information is not included in the McGee correspondence posted on the LDM Documents site.

Below is a transcription of an excerpt from the last page of a 5 page document. I call it a document but it could also be referred to as a letter. The problem is that it has no date or heading. It was a bit unusual for Bernice to make a copy of a letter she was sending but I am in the dark as to who the person was, she sent it too.

I believe it was about the 1971 timeframe.

Bernice wrote:

Fortunately we have a color slide of the horse map, without tape…this can be used as evidence, but how to make the reader understand what we are trying to tell them, without use of a Florence Quad map, will pose a real problem! Our publisher thinks it can be done…we shall see!

You are the first to see our deductions. Most of the facts given here were taken from the voluminous notes we have taken over the past months…hope it makes sense to you. How we wish we could make it to Phoenix to examine the maps without tape.

The Marlowe’s showed us hours of color slides of all four maps (without tape) but we cannot remember what was beneath the word “corazon.” This all happened too many years ago, and we were unaware at that time of this story ever being written. We did pretty good to remember everything else we saw, but the story cannot be 100% complete, or accurate, until we know this one set of hidden “whatevers”.

I do have the color slide of the horse map (The Mitchell’s gave that slide to Bernice when she was preparing the invitation to a Ghost Walk Article - 1965). There are also some other working photos that I believe she was using to prepare the article. Those photos were actually cut with scissors from Mitchell’s book, “Superstition Treasures”. The text is on the back. I believe I also have the original ink drawings she eventually prepared for the article but I didn’t dig them out last night.

The Hainers were actually the Hansens from the Hoax article. For you, the Hainer letters might be worthwhile reading. I don’t remember whether I posted their sketches but I believe I probably did.

I’m working on some other projects right now and don’t have much time to devote to this part of the story but If you read the other articles written by Bernice on the Superstition Mountains, the 30 or so Mitchell letters, the 10 Hainer letters, and various other documents and articles that are posted, I suspect you can come up with a pretty decent timeline of the McGee’s involvement.

I don’t know the date when the Flagg Foundation first allowed the public to view and photograph the stones without tape but it would have probably been in the 1972 timeframe. I think in one of the Magill letters, he speaks of photographing the stones and even having the opportunity to perhaps purchase them from the Flagg Foundation. (I think this was 1973)

I apologize for not digging these details out but I just didn’t want to invest the time right now. I’m sure you can duplicate and correct any misstatements that may have crept in.

Garry

EE,

Your interest regarding the 1973 McGee article did cause me to look back at some of the miscellaneous documents that I have from the Bernice McGee Collection.  ....

Garry

Garry---

I certainly appreciate your adding information here (not to mention the expanse of info on your Website!)

[Bernice]  ..., but the story cannot be 100% complete, or accurate, until we know this one set of hidden "whatevers."

What Bernice says there, tends to support the idea of their intention to be accurate.  It looks like what she was asking for may have included the "face" side of the Heart Stone.  Excellent, and thanks for taking the time to dig that out.

The question now would be, did the person she asked there, send her a photo or drawing, or merely a written "general idea" of what was on the face?  Or did he send anything at all, and her source was elsewhere?  I would say that since she sent that person all of the info that would be going into their article, that a reciprecation, possibly including something  about the face of the Heart, is likely.

Strictly speaking, in their quest for accurate reporting, it seems that they would have listed somewhere, the source for the Heart face diagram.  But with the various levels of confidentiality shown to be involved with the Stone Maps, at different points in time, it would be entirely understandable for them not to mention any details about this.  The clipping I excerpted from their article, telling about the face side of it being kept secret, may have served as an incidental disclosure statement, as it also gave the written summarization, generally indicating what currently was  known about it, without any exact details of the placement of the markings.

So, if the person she wrote to there, was the source for their Heart face data, then what is lacking in their article is specifically whether they were sent an actual image of some kind, or just the description which they gave in the clipped excerpt.

Maybe they felt, for one reason or another, that the face of the Heart would never  be shown to the public, so absolute accuracy with that part wasn't necessary.  Their article does, at least, give a hint (in a sort of round-about way), that something may be amiss with the drawing of the Heart face.  But it only makes it ambiguous, at best.

And I guess, considering the theme of their story, they also may  have figured that the exact details of the Heart face wouldn't ever really matter to anyone anyway!

Thanks again,
Don