|
|
Post by elcolorado on Jun 25, 2007 21:30:46 GMT -5
I have a little trouble believing some of Ben's testimony. Not with his personal observations or recollections of Santa Anna in the early morning hours of March 6th but with him pointing out the bodies of Crockett - Bowie - Travis.
In his 1838 interview, Ben claims he was directed to go to the Alamo and point out the bodies of Bowie and Travis - "whom I had known". I'm more then a little skeptical of Ben's claim to have known either Bowie or Travis. I just don't know when or where he would have crossed paths with either of them. And even if by chance he did...I doubt he would of known who they were. We know that Santa Anna had Joe in his possession and, according to Mrs. Dickinson, was forced to I.D. the bodies. And then of course we have Ruiz and his testimony (doesn't mention Ben) stating that he was directed to I.D. the bodies.
Santa Anna also had access to the other residents of San Antonio, many of which did know Bowie and Travis and could provide positive I.D. So why would he need Ben?
In 1840, Ben is interviewed again. The big difference between this interview and the one that took place in 1838 is that this time, Crockett is added to the story. The interviewer, basing his writing on Ben's recollections, states that Ben "had seen Col. Crockett in the city of Washington many years ago, and perhaps Col. Travis and Bowie...". This implies that Ben was aware of Crockett's position as a U.S. Congressmen. If this is true, I find it a little more then curious that Santa Anna was so clueless of Crockett's status as a Tennessee Statesmen and American icon. In his after action report, Santa Anna barely mentions Crockett at all but is quick to boast about the New Orleans Greys flag. Almonte, too, is mum in regards to Crockett. So if Ben knew Crockett, as is claimed, why would he withhold information from his employers? And even if he did bump into David at some point in Washington, I remain skeptical that Ben would be able to recognize him. For sure, Crockett's appearance had been altered somewhat since Washington. He was a bloody mess, wearing different clothes, and most likely was dirty and unshaven. And to be honest, I think racial differences would also make a positive I.D. very difficult.
I believe that Ben picked up a lot of information from Joe and Mrs. Dickinson on the way to Gonzales and for whatever reason decided to spin a tale of his own.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Jun 25, 2007 22:02:45 GMT -5
I think it's likely that Joe pointed out Travis, and I think Ruiz might have made positive IDs, perhaps in more of an official capacity.
I don't see any reason why Ben would be called upon for this duty. How many ID's of the Triumvirate would Santa Anna have needed?
Tim Nieson has done a lot of research on Ben and was working on a book. I think he checks in here from time to time. Maybe he'll chime in on this question.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Jun 25, 2007 23:49:23 GMT -5
Interesting thoughts El Red. Who's this Nieson fellow, Alamo?
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Jun 26, 2007 0:20:17 GMT -5
Regarding Ben having known the trinity, assuming he did see Crockett in Washington, it is certainly possible that he knew Travis and Bowie from Texas. Ben was Juan Almonte's cook during the Texas campaign. Perhaps he came north with him on his espionage mission to Texas in 1834 (correct year?) and met them at that time. I call attention to the wording of the second interview quote you have above. It says, "had seen Col. Crockett in the city of Washington many years ago, and perhaps Col. Travis and Bowie..." Sounds like the interviewer wasn't sure he understood Ben correctly. Did he know Travis and Bowie from the same time and place as Crockett? Or was it at a different time and place: i.e. Texas in 1834?
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jun 26, 2007 1:06:00 GMT -5
Interesting thoughts El Red. Who's this Nieson fellow, Alamo? Black Ben |
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jun 26, 2007 8:29:12 GMT -5
One thing that's always puzzled me about this is why Santa Anna didn't ask some of the locals to identify the bodies. All of them had been in Bexar for some time prior to the siege and would have been known to many locals. Crockett was treated like a celeb and the local Tejanos would have had some familiarity with him and been aware that he was held in high regard. Ruiz falls into this category.
I also recall that many locals packed up and skeedaddled when they heard the Mexicans were on the way, so maybe the town was at least partly deserted.
AW
|
|
|
|
Post by billchemerka on Jun 26, 2007 8:31:57 GMT -5
Interesting thoughts El Red. Who's this Nieson fellow, Alamo? Tim Niesen first "crossed the line" of The Alamo Society in 2001. He wrote "Sen. Sam Houston and Col. James Hazard Perry" in the June 2005 (#137) issue of The Alamo Journal. He also delivered an address, "Senator Sam Houston and Rev. James Hazard Perry in 1859," at The Alamo Society 2005 Symposium at Historic Fraunces Tavern in New York. The Pennsylvania-based researcher has contributed a number of documents for both The Alamo Journal and The Crockett Chronicle over the years. |
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Jun 26, 2007 9:18:01 GMT -5
One thing that's always puzzled me about this is why Santa Anna didn't ask some of the locals to identify the bodies. All of them had been in Bexar for some time prior to the siege and would have been known to many locals. Crockett was treated like a celeb and the local Tejanos would have had some familiarity with him and been aware that he was held in high regard. Ruiz falls into this category. I also recall that many locals packed up and skeedaddled when they heard the Mexicans were on the way, so maybe the town was at least partly deserted. AW I wonder too, if some of the "identifiers" weren't simply curious townfolk or, in a worse case, people looking for plunder. Jim |
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jun 26, 2007 9:41:01 GMT -5
One thing that's always puzzled me about this is why Santa Anna didn't ask some of the locals to identify the bodies. All of them had been in Bexar for some time prior to the siege and would have been known to many locals. Crockett was treated like a celeb and the local Tejanos would have had some familiarity with him and been aware that he was held in high regard. Ruiz falls into this category. AW Ruiz is usually quoted (and sometimes argued over) as a lone eyewitness, but in fact he was only one of a substantial party of townspeople called upon to act in effect as an inquest jury in identifying the prominente amongst the Texian dead. His original account, at least in the translation which has come down to us, tells how they were originally ordered to organise the casevac of wounded Mexican personnel, but initially held back by Sesma’s cordon until the mopping up was finished, and then brought inside and ordered to identify the leaders. I’m writing this at work and so don’t have immediate access to Hansen, but I’m fairly sure he names a couple of the others in the group. What we don’t know of course is whether Santa Anna asked them to identify the Texians by name or whether they identified Travis, Bowie et al after simply being asked to point out the leaders. |
|
|
|
Post by elcolorado on Jun 26, 2007 10:02:26 GMT -5
I agree that it is possible that Ben might have traveled with Almonte during his 1834 visit...but I still think it unlikely that he would have seen Bowie/Travis or known who they were. However, if by chance Almonte and Ben did run into them, then why didn't Santa Anna just have Almonte I.D. the bodies? I think that if Almonte had come in contact with Bowie/Travis he would have wrote it down in his diary. And I would think that if Travis or Bowie had met or seen Santa Anna's personal envoy then it would have been documented by someone...but I could be wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jun 26, 2007 12:30:31 GMT -5
Part of at least one defense of the Crockett execution theory is the idea that Almonte knew who Crockett was and identified him. However, Almonte never mentions him, or any of the other leaders, in his diary during and after the siege. I believe he did mention Crockett years earlier while he was in the U.S. I'm not sure if he actually saw him or just heard about him.
AW
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Jun 26, 2007 13:32:47 GMT -5
Almonte's remarks indicate he knew Crockett by reputation, but his view was seemingly influenced by the Jackson propagandists and newspapers that painted Crockett as an uncouth hillbilly.
James Crisp suggests that Almonte may have seen Chapman's full length portrait of Crockett while it was on display when Almonte was in the US. There's no evidence that he did, however.
Jim
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jun 26, 2007 14:39:05 GMT -5
All of this, so far as I'm aware, is a complete red herring.
Almonte only comes into the story because it has been conjectured that the unknown officer referred to in the Dolson letter as confirming that Crockett was executed, may have been Almonte since he (alone out of Santa Anna's officers) may have seen Crockett during his visit to Washington and thus recognised him as one of the men put up against a wall and shot.
However as I've argued elsewhere (and in a forthcoming AJ article), all the Mexican "eyewitness evidence" of his supposed execution is so heavily contaminated by those pre-San Jacinto newspaper reports as to be completely valueless. Dolson's anonymous informant could just as easily have been a half-witted lieutenant. So many Mexicans "knew" they had killed Crockett it didn't require any elaborate theories as to who out of them all might have recognised the man from the cane
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jun 26, 2007 17:21:37 GMT -5
Ruiz is usually quoted (and sometimes argued over) as a lone eyewitness, but in fact he was only one of a substantial party of townspeople called upon to act in effect as an inquest jury in identifying the prominente amongst the Texian dead. Here we go (Hansen p500): "I, with the Political Chief, Don Ramon Musquiz and other members of the Corporation, accompanied by the Curate, Don Refugio de la Garza... Santa Anna sent one of his aid de camps with an order for us to come before him. He directed me to call on some of the neighbours to come up with carts to carry the dead to the Cemetery, and also to accompany him, as he was desirous to have Col. Travis, Bowie and Crockett shown to him." There is a slight ambiguity here - which may simply be down to the translation - as to whether Ruiz alone, or with his companions as well, was to carry out the identifications, but I don't think its significant. I'm still not convinced though as to whether Ruiz was actually asked by Santa Anna to identify all three by name before Ruiz provided those names |
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Jun 26, 2007 17:30:33 GMT -5
Taking this back to Ben, if Ben did accompany Almonte on his inspection trip of Texas in 1834, Ben may very well have met Travis and Bowie. According to Jack Jackson's Almonte when Almonte stopped in Monclova, Bowie was present, whether a meeting occurred is unknown. When Almonte stayed in San Felipe it is almost certain he met Travis, as Travis was then serving as the auymento (?) secretary. In fact, Travis references Almonte, in a letter about Austin, that Almonte had written a letter to the govt requesting Austin's release.
Almonte's ties with the future defenders goes even deeper, he once worked with Albert Martin, Travis's representative during negotiations with Almonte on the 23rd, in the same office in New Orleans, when Almonte was living there in exile.
As far as Crockett, there is no known connection, but Almonte was in the US for seven months in 1835 during the height of the first Crockett "craze". Almonte certainly knew who he was referring to Crockett as a "lunatic politician" in a secret letter to the Mexican Government.
According to Jackson, Almonte, then the Mexican Secretary of War, was the source that answered John Crockett's inquiries about his father. In an 1838 interview, published in the Philadelphia Pennsylvanian, Almonte related the events of the Alamo. "According to all that survives of the interviews, Almonte said that James Bowie 'was sick and helpless [at the time of the battle], and was butchered in bed.' "(page 421).
So IF Ben traveled with Almonte in 1834/35 it is certainly possible that he met all three, although Travis is the only one we can be reasonably sure that Almonte met.
|
|
