| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6 |
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4408
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
the 2 "parallel" tracks of Camino real west of Mision Santa Gertrudis Crosby is referring to, are not Camino Real
They are early 1900's dozer tracks by El Boleo (the French mining company out of Santa Rosalia)
the tools available to the early Baja experts were quite crude
now we have Google Earth and other even more potent visual tools
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 19456
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
Quote: Originally posted by Lance S.  |
Characteristics of man trails and mule trails are summarized in Fig. 7. The fracturing and subsequent erosion of the surface of the mule trail is
almost surely due to iron-shod hooves. |
Do you guys know what type of equine were used by the early folk? Donkeys/burros were unlikely to be shod. Mules are shod less frequently than
horses. Not sure your iron shoe trail hypothesis should be applied unless you know horses were significantly in use.
[Edited on 2-11-2025 by mtgoat666]
Woke!
Hands off!
“Por el bien de todos, primero los pobres.”
“...ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.” “My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America
will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.”
Pronoun: the royal we
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by 4x4abc |
Camino Real from Loreto to Mision San Javier does not run through Las Parras!
It was the route to the first San Javier site.
Camino Real from Loreto to San Javier runs through Primera Agua and Rancho Incha |
That implies the Spanish found the route through Incha to be better than their previous route (the route that you say was used to reach the first San
Javier mission site, reportedly a few km north of the present San Javier site).
Looking at the area on Caltopo, it is easy enough to reach Incha from Loreto. And, it is easy enough to reach the present San Javier site from Los
Dolores. But, connecting Incha with Los Dolores looks like more of a challenge. There are a number of possibilities, but none look better than
reaching the present San Javier site via the route marked by Crosby and others (the old route).
Harald, can you cite a source for your information that the 'new route' to the new and present San Javier site is through Incha? Also, how would you
get to San Javier today if going through Incha? Canada El Manchon? Canada La Presa?
A plausible route (on paper they often look better than they do on the ground) might be from Incha, south through Canada El Manchon, up and over to
Arroyo Las Cargas de Lena, following this south-west past Las Higueras to El Pua and then on to Los Dolores and San Javier.
The possible routes from Incha look like they have a lot of brush, on Google Earth, and I don't see an trace of trails.
[Edited on 2-12-2025 by cupcake]
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by mtgoat666 | | Quote: Originally posted by Lance S. |
Characteristics of man trails and mule trails are summarized in Fig. 7. The fracturing and subsequent erosion of the surface of the mule trail is
almost surely due to iron-shod hooves. |
Do you guys know what type of equine were used by the early folk? Donkeys/burros were unlikely to be shod. Mules are shod less frequently than
horses. Not sure your iron shoe trail hypothesis should be applied unless you know horses were significantly in use.
[Edited on 2-11-2025 by mtgoat666] |
I think they had everything. All the images of the Spanish 'leather soldiers' I see show them on horseback. The 'shod hypothesis' was put forward by
Dr. Ives. I don't know how our knowledgeable resident ECR members feel about that hypothesis. Myself, I don't yet know enough about the subject to
have an opinion.
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4408
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by cupcake | | Quote: Originally posted by 4x4abc |
That implies the Spanish found the route through Incha to be better than their previous route (the route that you say was used to reach the first San
Javier mission site, reportedly a few km north of the present San Javier site).
Looking at the area on Caltopo, it is easy enough to reach Incha from Loreto. And, it is easy enough to reach the present San Javier site from Los
Dolores. But, connecting Incha with Los Dolores looks like more of a challenge. There are a number of possibilities, but none look better than
reaching the present San Javier site via the route marked by Crosby and others (the old route).
Harald, can you cite a source for your information that the 'new route' to the new and present San Javier site is through Incha? Also, how would you
get to San Javier today if going through Incha? Canada El Manchon? Canada La Presa?
A plausible route (on paper they often look better than they do on the ground) might be from Incha, south through Canada El Manchon, up and over to
Arroyo Las Cargas de Lena, following this south-west past Las Higueras to El Pua and then on to Los Dolores and San Javier.
The possible routes from Incha look like they have a lot of brush, on Google Earth, and I don't see an trace of trails.
[Edited on 2-12-2025 by cupcake] |
Cuesta Incha 25.899668°, -111.471612° and Cuesta El Tular 25.902595°, -111.474244°. Cuesta El Triunfo also has a visible trail 25.905130°,
-111.478959°.
Arroyo El Triunfo seems like an easy, but longer walk from San Javier.
There is a trail in a nameless canyon leading to a Cuesta at 25.903759°, -111.499789° that is much shorter.
More direct, following Jesuit philosophy
can I cite a source for the information of the 'new route'?
yes, Harald Pietschmann
been studying the trail for the last 10 years
many hours every day
here is one of the indications that the Jesuits used that route - it has many locations with date palm trees
they don't seed themselves and are hard to grow
not a guarantee but a strong indication of Jesuit involvement
below all visible trails and the date locations
 |
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by 4x4abc |
Cuesta Incha 25.899668°, -111.471612° and Cuesta El Tular 25.902595°, -111.474244°. Cuesta El Triunfo also has a visible trail 25.905130°,
-111.478959°.
Arroyo El Triunfo seems like an easy, but longer walk from San Javier.
There is a trail in a nameless canyon leading to a Cuesta at 25.903759°, -111.499789° that is much shorter.
More direct, following Jesuit philosophy
|
Harald, Thanks for posting these possibilities and their GPS coordinates. It looks to me that these possibilities represent original research by you.
It would be good to find reports of contemporary (18th century and early 19th century) travelers taking any of these routes.
Have you been on the ground at any of these areas, or had a report from someone who has?
I am posting a Google Earth screen shot of the Cuesta Incha GPS coordinates you posted. This is labeled with a question mark at the top of the image.
I see no evidence of a questa here, and there is very steep terrain below this point, towards (Rancho) Incha, which is also marked. I have marked a
better pass, but there is what looks like rock bands below this, towards (Rancho) Incha. I suspect I could negotiate this with a day pack, and
possibly also a full pack. But, I don't know how loaded pack animals would do. Once at this pass, I think the travel is good all the way to Mission
San Javier. I see no evidence of old (or any) trail in this area. Click on the image for an enlargement.
[Edited on 2-12-2025 by cupcake]
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4408
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
you are pointing out Cuesta El Triunfo
it has a visible trail
however, I have not been bale to find a connecting trail in Arroyo El Tular
might be washed out or hiding in the vegetation
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4408
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
you are right - there are a number of possibilities in that area
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
David K
Honored Nomad
Posts: 65165
Registered: 8-30-2002
Location: San Diego County
Member Is Offline
Mood: Have Baja Fever
|
|
Not sure if this applies still, but I saw it mentioned...
You can read in my book (page 35), the mission was first established at what we know today as Rancho Viejo (in 1699), 5 miles north of the final site
(where it was moved to between 1710 and 1730) which was a farm named San Pablo.
The huge stone church was built from 1744 to 1758. The Year 1751 is carved above the doorway.
Most sources gave 1710 as the move year, but when I read the diary of Mission San Juan Bautista de Ligüí's missionary made in 1720, he still called
the (future) place San Pablo, during his return from La Paz.
San Javier's missionary, responsible for the move (Juan de Ugarte), was there from 1704 to 1730. So, I am more inclined to call the move happening
between 1720 and 1730.
I am not seeing enough to guess where the other route tom San Javier may be, but as a rule, the Jesuits took the shortest, most direct route even if
steeper. Rancho Viejo (the first San Javier site) was called 'Biaundo' by the Natives who lived there.
The slightly humorous story about 'La Vigge', in my chapter comes from Choral Pepper, of Desert Magazine and the very interesting Baja missions book
>>>
1973 edition:
1975 edition:
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
I would try Canada El Manchon. I have marked the top of its headwall:
25.8806656, -111.4583865
You can plug the GPS coordinate for the headwall top into Google Earth and then zoom in to see that slope (and follow the drainage on the other side
all the way to Los Dolores and San Javier). To me, this looks more promising for people and animals (toggle back and forth from 2D to 3D to really see
the slope up the headwall). Once at the headwall top, the traveling is good all the way to Los Dolores and on to San Javier.
[Edited on 2-13-2025 by cupcake]
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by David K |
I am not seeing enough to guess where the other route tom San Javier may be, but as a rule, the Jesuits took the shortest, most direct route even if
steeper.
|
I haven't yet seen a route that looks certain to have had the missionaries abandoning their first route. I probably would need to try the most
promising alternatives on the ground, to really know what they entail, before having a confident opinion.
The route from Rancho Incha to the top of Arroyo El Triunfo, then on to San Javier, is shorter than the Canada El Manchon-Los Dolores-San Javier
route. But, the Triunfo route has some shaded areas on Goggle Earth that I can not see well enough to feel confident about what is there. It could be
easy hiking, or there could be some steps that present difficult obstacles. The longer route, through Canada El Manchon-Los Dolores, I feel I can see
on Google Earth more clearly. It doesn't take me too long to walk an extra two or three miles, and animals have always been faster in my experience
(on easy ground).
[Edited on 2-13-2025 by cupcake]
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4408
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
OK - I ran all 3 routes trough elevation profile etc
San Javier through Las Parras to Loreto - 30km
San Javier short route (north of San Javier) through Rancho Incha to Loreto - 31km
San Javier long route through Arroyo El Triunfo (southern most) and Rancho Incha to Loreto - 36km
the Incha route has a much easier path towards Loreto - but a high mountain and a nasty Cuesta
going through Arroyo El Triunfo skips the high mountain, but adds 5km
so yes, the Incha routes exist, but we can safely assume that the Las Parras route was the main Camino Real route
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
Harald, Those elevation profiles are interesting. This morning, I took a look at the Incha area on Caltopo, in hopes of getting a better 'look' at the
'Three Cuesta' and 'Better Pass' area, to see if there are any 'steps' in the drainage that serves these features. I don't see any steps leading up to
the 'Better Pass'. Zooming in on this area, and selecting 10 foot contour intervals gives a look at what a person on the ground would face.
In doing this, I noticed that Arroyo El Triunfo was mismarked on my Google Earth screen shots from yesterday, and Cuesta El Triunfo was missing. In
the Google Earth screen shot I am attaching to this post, I have relocated the mark for Arroyo El Triunfo where I feel it belongs, marked Cuesta El
Triunfo, and marked 'Unnamed Drainage 2' where Arroyo El Triunfo was previously. Following this 'Unnamed Drainage 2' down to the west, it reaches the
paved road to San Javier from Loreto a short distance before the Mission.
Note that Arroyo El Triunfo and 'Unnamed Drainage 1' meet a short distance below El Manglito.
This Google Earth screen shot is looking south. Click on the image for an enlargement.
[Edited on 2-13-2025 by cupcake]
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by 4x4abc | OK - I ran all 3 routes trough elevation profile etc
San Javier through Las Parras to Loreto - 30km
San Javier short route (north of San Javier) through Rancho Incha to Loreto - 31km
San Javier long route through Arroyo El Triunfo (southern most) and Rancho Incha to Loreto - 36km
the Incha route has a much easier path towards Loreto - but a high mountain and a nasty Cuesta
going through Arroyo El Triunfo skips the high mountain, but adds 5km
so yes, the Incha routes exist, but we can safely assume that the Las Parras route was the main Camino Real route
|
I believe your "San Javier short route" is my 'Unnamed Drainage 2' route.
Your 'San Javier long route' is my 'Arroyo El Triunfo / Unnamed Drainage 1' route.
My 'Canada El Manchon-Arroyo Las Cargas de Lena route' would be about the same distance as the 'San Javier long route' (Arroyo El Triunfo / Unnamed
Drainage 1), but possibly over less difficult ground. I am seeing what looks like many more points of water on this route, which might also serve to
recommend it.
My estimate for the time needed to walk the extra 5km is one hour. I am calculating for the easier terrain at the end of the route. I believe over
this type of ground, animals would be faster, whether loaded with supplies or humans. In my prime, using pack animals on trips in the Andes of South
America, I was normally not able to match the speed of the animals.
[Edited on 2-13-2025 by cupcake]
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
Your Date Palm hypothesis for identifying missionary routes is interesting.
If a metal detector could find artifacts from missionaries, along these routes, that might be solid evidence.
I wonder if evidence for these routes might exist in the writings of the missionaries.
[Edited on 2-13-2025 by cupcake]
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4408
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
How Cuesta El Triunfo got its name
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4408
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
the elevation profiles from Google Earth
Las Parras route
Incha route
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
I have corrected my Arroyo El Triunfo mark, and added a mark for Cuesta El Triunfo. My previous Google Earth screen shot of today has been updated to
show these.
I still do not see evidence of a trail for Cuesta El Triunfo, so have labeled it with a question mark.
Your profile images for the two routes seems to indicate that Las Parras would be more 'animal friendly'.
[Edited on 2-13-2025 by cupcake]
|
|
|
4x4abc
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4408
Registered: 4-24-2009
Location: La Paz, BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: happy - always
|
|
| Quote: Originally posted by cupcake | I have corrected my Arroyo El Triunfo mark, and added a mark for Cuesta El Triunfo. My previous Google Earth screen shot of today has been updated to
show these.
I still do not see evidence of a trail for Cuesta El Trinfo, so have labeled it with a question mark.
Your profile images for the two routes seems to indicate that Las Parras would be more 'animal friendly'.
[Edited on 2-13-2025 by cupcake] |
the Incha route has a nasty climb over a 900 meters pass and a gruelling drop into Incha. Advantage is the low elevation change between Incha and
Loreto
the Parras route has comfortable terrain between San Javier and Las Parras. The drop is steep but manageable. But the terrain between the bottom of
Las Parras and Loreto has not a single comfortable route to Loreto - unless you follow the river bed.
Even though animals and Jesuits avoid river beds, it seems like in the Loreto region river beds have been used and are still in use as they have no
waterfalls and feature small, firm walkable gravel.
But there had to be a backup for times when the river bed was wet.
I haven't found a suitable route.
There are not even hints of a route.
Our resident experts Kevin and Genevieve haven't located one either.
Harald Pietschmann
|
|
|
cupcake
Nomad
Posts: 343
Registered: 4-23-2024
Member Is Offline
|
|
I would like to see the profile of my Incha-Canada El Manchon-Arroyo Las Cargas de Lena route.
On Google Earth, I see many more possible points of water on this route than on the others.
[Edited on 2-13-2025 by cupcake]
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
