|
|
Post by marklemon on Mar 26, 2009 18:59:54 GMT -5
This may have been covered before, but I cannot seem to find it. Anyway, I have seen several references, mostly in the film versions of the Alamo siege, about it raining , even, in the "Price of Freedom" for "five days." But looking through Almonte's journal, I cannot seem to find any references to it raining during the siege. I realize that it rained quite heavily before the siege, around February 21, a fact which was instrumental in Sesma's not being able to ford the Medina River and enter San Antonio in time to capture the garrison in town.
Does anyone know the facts about rain during the siege?
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Mar 26, 2009 19:42:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by marklemon on Mar 26, 2009 20:59:54 GMT -5
Paul,
Thanks!...looks like the "rain" lasted only a few days, and was not much more than a drizzle.
Mark
|
|
|
|
Post by cantador4u on Mar 27, 2009 0:12:45 GMT -5
Quote: "The idea has somehow developed that 1836 was one of the coldest winters in Texas history. One fact that reinforces this notion is that the Mexican Army encountered a freak blizzard in route to Texas that began on the evening of February 13 and continued throughout the next day. The weather during this storm was severe enough to kill horses, mules, men and camp followers. The snowstorm, however, did not extend into Texas."I've wondered about the freak blizzard, and one day I came across a document titled: Surface Temperature Changes Following the Six Major Volcanic Episodes between 1780 and 1980. Lo and behold, the Conseguina Volcano in Nicaragua had erupted in January of 1835, 13 months before. It makes sense that a blanket of volcanic dust dimming the sun's rays on the Earth could have caused the temperature to drop below normal causing the blizzard. I've begun patting myself on the back for making this discovery and connection. Link to the study and report: ams.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-abstract&doi=10.1175%2F1520-0450(1985)024%3C0937:STCFTS%3E2.0.CO%3B2&ct=1 Unfortunately upon closer reading the results of the study were not very conclusive. A portion of the abstract reads, ...the average temperature for the 5-year period after the eruption is significantly (at the 5% level) lower than the average temperature for the 5 - year period before the eruption, but in no case is the average temperature after the eruption significantly higher. It is proposed that cooling is not more apparent following some eruptions because of the tropospheric warming associated with strong and persistent El Niño episodes occurring shortly after the eruptions.Just as there are multiple and conflicting reports of the actions at the Alamo, there are multiple and conflicting reports from around the world on the effect of the Conseguina Volcano eruption in 1835 making it impossible to say anything about the cause of the blizzard with confidence. But isn't this like almost everything else we discuss about the Alamo? I got excited because I thought I found something that would blow the lid off the study of the Alamo, but it turns out to be smoke and mirrors. It's a definite "maybe", within the realm of possibility, it sounds reasonable but in the end you can't say for sure. Right up there with speculation and guessing. Oh NUTS! This can be soooooo frustrating. - Paul Meske |
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Mar 27, 2009 5:29:10 GMT -5
In my opinion William Fairweather Gray is a great source for East Texas, but not so much for the cold and rain that might have affected the defenders of the Alamo. Almonte gave accurate San Antone weather information because he actually experienced it. I think the links are helpful in grasping the overall Texas weather situation though.  |
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Mar 27, 2009 10:19:57 GMT -5
In my opinion William Fairweather Gray is a great source for East Texas, but not so much for the cold and rain that might have affected the defenders of the Alamo. Almonte gave accurate San Antone weather information because he actually experienced it. I think the links are helpful in grasping the overall Texas weather situation though. I agree, if there was any drizzle in San Antonio it was so insignificant as to not merit a mention by Almonte. The distance from where Grey was to the Alamo is only 20 miles shorter then the distance from Atlanta to Savanah! It is interesting, to see how Lord reached some of the conclusions that he did - though. |
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Mar 27, 2009 11:37:17 GMT -5
I can shed some minor rays of light on the 'rainstorms': In Price of Freedom, George McAllister had writen in the rainstorm. It was one of the things in the script that we questioned but got over ruled on. Film directors like rainstorms in films: to breaks things up. Paybacks are rough-and wet-because one of the scenes that got to be a rain scene was the one where I (playing George Kimball) bring in the Gonzales 32. The guy playing Smith kept flubbing his lines, and we were pretty wet down to the bone by the time it was finished. One more thing I wish we could have changed...  Having worked on the Medina, I can offer that the Medina is feed by numerous streams in the Hill County, well above San Antonio. It can pour there and not rain in SA. If those streams fill up quickly the Medina will rise. Today, there is of course a dam upstream from Castroville which somewhat controls the river, but I have still seen the Medina rise very quickly. I have also seen the crossing where Sesma got stopped flood out very quickly with very swift water. Almonte is giving a good account of weather. |
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Mar 29, 2009 11:38:14 GMT -5
While it's only indirectly tied to the differences that Grey and Almonte report, one also has to remember that Washington is in a significantly wetter portion of the state than Bexar. According to the Texas Alamanac, the mean yearly rainfall is only 31 inches in Bexar - while the mean for Washington is 41.4 inches a very significant difference.
|
|
