fede
Full Member
Posts: 19
|
Post by fede on Jun 14, 2009 4:08:04 GMT -5
I've read that the Yucatan battalion whas composed of Mayan indians who didn't understand Spanish nor could Handle a musket properly...is it true ? Also I know the names of all the infantry coronels present in the Alamo campaign,but who was the Yucatan's colonel ? I haven't found his name! Finally I know there were 3 Active battalions from Mexico City in 1835-36,which was present in Texas ? The "primero", "segundo" or "tercero" ?
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jun 14, 2009 8:13:17 GMT -5
Commander of the Yucatan Batallon if I remember correctly was Colonel Garay, I'll check it next time I'm up in the attic. There were certainly Mayan indians amongst the rank and file but I tend to think stories that they were incapable of handing muskets etc are an exaggeration.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Jun 14, 2009 13:04:20 GMT -5
and the Yucatan battaliion was not in the Alamo Campaign. It was with Urrea in what we term the Goliad or Southern Campaign, and fought at the battle of Refugio.
|
|
fede
Full Member
Posts: 19
|
Post by fede on Jun 14, 2009 16:15:20 GMT -5
Yes, I know....and regarding the cavalry;there where presidial companies with Urrea or only Permanente and Activo units?
|
|
fede
Full Member
Posts: 19
|
Post by fede on Jun 14, 2009 16:18:06 GMT -5
Also I 've read that with Urrea there was a German colonel,Holzinger,who was an engineer.....but I don't know in which unit he was posted.....
|
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jun 15, 2009 0:20:17 GMT -5
Urrea's force included the regular Cuautla regiment, but according to Filisola it wasn't very strong and was in poor condition - about 180 strong. In addition there were another 70 from the San Luis Potosi and Bajia Activo companies. Whether he actually had any of the latter with him by the time he got to Goliad may be a moot point as Filisola accused him of constantly scattering detachments all over the place.
There don't appear to have been any presidiale companies with him - apart from the detachments serving with Santa Anna, it appears a fair few of the northern ones had earlier defected to the Federalistas - but he did have a lot of local irregulars under Carlos de la Garza.
Going back to your original question by the way; it was 1/Mexico that served in Texas
|
|
