|
|
Post by cantador4u on Jan 27, 2010 10:17:51 GMT -5
I was rereading earlier posts about the final deposition of the final resting place (s) of the the cremated Alamo defenders, and as with so many Alamo events, the more I tried to clarify it in my mind, the murkier it became. Summarizing the various reports I came up with the following multiple resting places.
1. Juan Seguin gathered remains and placed some in a wooden box and buried them somewhere around the Alameda or peach orchard, and some were put into an urn and buried in the San Fernando church. The San Fernando remains were dug up in the 30's. Are these the remains currently in the sarcophagus in San Fernando? If not where did these remains come from? When did the sarcophagus appear?
2. I read snippet of a thread that said a group of Rangers gathered remains and buried them (in the peach orchard I think). I may be confusing this with something else and hope that someone has more information about it.
3. And then there is the alleged burial site in the Odd Fellows cemetery. Where did THESE remains come from?
The earlier discussion mentioned that it was likely that Seguin's ceremony was largely symbolic and likely that no every scrap of bone was picked up, but enough to honor and memorialize the defenders. This could account for subsequent collections by others. I have no idea how much would remain after such a crude cremation. It would probably depend upon the amount of fuel/wood available and how it is arranged.
4. OOPS!, one more. It is alleged that the DRT has a skull buried in the Alamo shrine and is sworn to secrecy about it.
- Paul Meske, Sun Prairie, Wisconsin
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Nuckols on Jan 28, 2010 0:54:41 GMT -5
The skull's not a secret. Something makes me think it's kept at UT-San Antonio. It was found in a relatively recent dig (last 10 or 15 years?). It came from a trench in the horse/cattle pen area in a soil stratum contemporaneous with 1836. It bears evidence of sword blows or other violence, so experts opined it belongs to a 3/6/1836 combatant. But they don't opine whether it's attacker or defender. However, those experts concluded it was cast in the trench when the Mexican army abandoned Bexar and backfilled the Alamo's trenches after San Jacinto. From that, I don't see how it's not a defender's skull. Would Mexican soldiers preserve a comrade's skull, only to cast it in a trench and bury it later. No. Would they preserve a foe's skull as a trophy and bury it in a trench after San Jacinto? Definitely. It ought to be DNA tested for comparison with known defender descendants.
|
|
|
|
Post by bmoses on Jan 28, 2010 9:53:57 GMT -5
Yes, the fragmentary skull recovered during the 1979-1980 excavations along the north wall of the Cavalry Courtyard (Ivey and Fox 1997) is curated here at the Center for Archaeological Research, UTSA (although I haven't seen the cranium myself). The DRT had possession of the skull for a number of years, but I am told that Virginia Van Cleave, then DRT Alamo Committee Chairwoman, returned it some time ago. The osteological study of the cranium by Glassman and Steele arrived at a somewhat ambiguous conclusion. They both agreed that the individual was most likely a young adult male between 17 and 23 years of age and of unknown ethnicity. However, Glassman felt that “…the individual may have been subjected to antemortem trauma of the head including a possible knife or saber wound above the left eye” while Steele argued that the “…damage to the frontal above the eye represents postmortem damage.” They both also agreed that the cranium had been dumped into the trench and buried quite some time after death. Here are a few sections of from their report: Skeletal Description
The recovered fragments of the 41BX6 cranium are pieced and glued to approximate normal articulation. The cranium is missing the entire region of the face inferior to the frontal border, except for portions of the left and right nasal bones. The neurocranium (comprised of the frontal, parietal, occipital, and temporal bones) is present although a few areas are fragmentary, particularly on the base of the skull and in the pterion (spheno-frontal) areas. The zygomatic arches are fragmentary and consist solely of portions of the zygomatic process of the temporal bones for both the left and right sides. Portions of the sphenoid bone are present on the cranial base and sides of the neurocranium. The left and right mastoid processes are present, as are portions of both auditory canals. Neither the mandible nor any of the dentition is present.
The preservation of the cranium is very good. A minor degree of distortion is present and is attributable to external pressure compressing the skull while it was buried. This pressure appears to have caused some cracking of the cranial surface, particularly in the region of the sagittal suture where a series of cracks is found to radiate laterally. Burial pressure may also be responsible for the complex network of surface cracking on the frontal bone. There is little or no indication of animal activity on the bones and little alteration from the infiltration of vegetation. The color of the cranial bones is a light brown to tan, indicating little or no exposure to the sun during the interment period.
Morphological Observations
The overall appearance of the cranium is small and gracile. The metopic (medio-frontal) suture is retained on the frontal bone. This suture, which separates the two infant frontal bones, generally becomes fused and obliterated within the first two years after birth. The retention of this suture into adolescence or adulthood is rare, occurring in less than 10 percent of the individuals in most populations. The neurocranial sutures remain unfused ectocranially (the outer surface of the cranium) .It appears that initial endocranial fusion of the neurocranial sutures had begun, although this is difficult to determine given the present condition of the cranial remains. The spheno-occipital synchondrosis (basilar suture) appears to have been unfused.
General morphological characteristics of the cranium include a slight appearance of the supraorbital ridges, a blunt superior border of the eye orbit, small to moderately sized mastoid processes with a small supra-mastoid crest on the left side only, a small to moderately sized foramen magnum with small to moderately sized occipital condyles, and a small degree of frontal bossing. Cranial musculature indicated by the development of the areas of muscle attachment (principally the attachment areas of the temporal and nuchal muscles) is not pronounced.
Age at Death
Age at death of the individual represented by the 41BX6 cranium is estimated from the degree of closure of the neurocranial sutures. These sutures appear to have begun initial fusion endocranially, yet remained distinct on the exterior surface of the skull. Subsequently, it is noted the fragmentation pattern of the skull occurred primarily along the suture lines. This pattern would not have been expected if the neurocranial sutures had been completely fused prior to death.
The degree of suture closure indicates an estimated age of 17 to 23 years. This age estimate is supported by the morphology of the spheno-occipital synchondrosis which suggests having not been completely fused by the time of death. This synchondrosis closes and is obliterated by approximately 23 years of age in most individuals. The lack of other skeletal material which is more diagnostic of age makes this assessment tentative.
Gender
Gender determination of the 41BX6 cranium is difficult due to a mosaic pattern of gender-related morphological traits. The overall appearance of the cranium suggests a young adult male. However, individual characteristics such as the absence of pronounced supraorbital ridges, mastoid processes, and development of the areas of muscle attachment suggest a more female appearance. The presence of the frontal eminences is also more typical of females than males. The young age of the individual might, to some extent, explain the lack of muscular development. In addition, gracility may be a genetic condition more common in some populations, such as Mexican Americans. It is best to suggest the cranium probably belonged to a younger male with the possibility of female not being totally ruled out.
Biological Affinity
Determination of the biological affinity of the 41BX6 cranium is of interest given its historical importance. Morphological differentiation is therefore sought between Hispanic, non-Hispanic Anglo, and Native American patterning. Unfortunately, few traits which can be used for this ethnic differentiation exist, particularly in the 41BX6 cranium which is lacking the entire facial region. Furthermore, it is possible that tri-populational (Hispanic, Anglo, and indigenous Native Americans) interbreeding occurred among the populations which existed in this region. This intermixing of genes from different groups would result in diminishing definitive biological affinity characteristics.
Nevertheless, the sagittal and lambdoidal sutures are both simple, a feature not typical of Native Americans and more typical of individuals of European derived ancestry. Similarly, the gracile nature of the cranium is more typical of European ancestry (and more so of Mexicans) than Native American.
These few features suggest that the cranium most likely did not belong to a Native American. Whether the 41BX6 cranium represented a Hispanic, a non-Hispanic Anglo, a mestizo or other population cannot be determined with confidence.
Cause of Death
Numerous cracks, holes, and depressions on the 41BX6 cranium deserve consideration in assessing the cause of death. The missing face itself may be indicative of some antemortem trauma or a time interval between death and burial in which the skeleton was subjected to a myriad of taphonomic forces resulting in modification of the bone. Certainly disarticulation occurred as well as desiccation. Most of the surface cracks can be attributed to ground pressure sustained by interment and therefore not indicative of the manner of death. The largest holes (missing areas, exclusive of the facial elements) in the cranium are located in the left and right pterion regions, the left parietal near lambda, the region of the right mastoid, posterior to the foramen magnum, and surrounding the basilar portion of the occipital bone. The holes range to approximately 2 cm in diameter. Whether the holes were formed ante- or postmortem is unknown.
A final feature of interest is a modification to the left frontal. Here, a depression or gash, measuring 2.6 cm long and 0.2 cm wide at its widest point, runs obliquely over the left eye. The depth of the defect is generally shallow, but in the center reaches the diploe layer. The gross pattern of this defect is consistent with sharp trauma. However, under microscopic examination of the area, neither crushing in the region nor smooth cut edges appear, both of which would have been suggestive of a sharp blow occurring to the region while the bone was fresh. This leads to a conclusion that the defect mayor may not reflect antemortem trauma.
No other features found on the 41BX6 cranium were considered possibly associated with the cause of death.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jan 28, 2010 10:53:36 GMT -5
That's very interesting Bruce; thank you for posting the info. Somehow brings the battle much closer and humanizes it in a way few things can.
Allen
|
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Jan 28, 2010 11:17:26 GMT -5
The supposed Odd Fellow remains come from the following:
The remains of Mexican War soldiers Richard A. Gillespie (Texas Mounted Volunteers killed at the Bishops Palace, Monterey in 1846) and Samuel Hamilton Walker ( US Regt Mounted Rifles killed at Huamantla in 1847) were returned to San Antonio in 1847 and 1848 and buried on Commernce Street area in a location that was very close to one of the funeral pyre spots for the Alamo dead. The original concept was that there was to be a sort of Texas heroes burial ground, and apparently some discussion of moving Ben Milam there. Plans never got off the ground. When the commercial growth of the area threatened the site, the two Mexican War veterans were moved up to the Odd Fellows Cemetery in 1856.
August Biesenbach, later City Clerk, remembered in an July 6, 1906 article San Antonio Daily Express, that as an eight year old boy, he witnessed the move. He started that in the process of unearthing Walker and Gillespie, burnt human remains were also found that were part of the Alamo funeral pyre and were moved up to the new gravesite. Biesenbach stated that those particular remains were placed between the two monuments at the Walker/Gillespie gravesite. Charles M. Barnes did a fairl;y detailed article in the Express on 3/26/1911 concerning the burning sites at the Alameda (Commerce Street). Adina de Zavala placed a marker there in 1917 that was taken down when the building it was on was torn down. That marker was put back up on the wall by the foot bridge over the Riverwalk on Commerce.
The whole Odd Fellows deal came up in 1995 when an attempt to move Walker to Waco was made(they actually were already digging at the site). One of the way the restraining order was obtained was to have Lee Spencer, an Alamo defender descendant, object because of the possibility of the Alamo remains being there. The digging was stopped, Walker stayed put, and Wayne Cox and the Southern Texas Archaeolgical Society came in and shifted through the dirt that hand already been dug to check and see if anything was there. Did find a couple of possible small bones, but that was about it. Since then the entire gravesite has been restored and the ADDA put up a marker about the possible Alamo remains being there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Jan 28, 2010 16:10:15 GMT -5
The plaque reads as follows:
San Antonio Daily Express July 6,1906
August Biesenbach, city clerk of San Antonio states that when he was an 8 year old boy playing on the Alameda (Commerce St.) he witnessed the exhuming of bodies or remains consisting of bones and fragments of bones, of victims of the siege of The Alamo that had been interred near the place where the bodies had been burned and originally buried, and saw their transfers from that place to the old cemetery, on Powder House Hill (Oddfellows Cemetery) this he states happened in 1856. The fragments of these bodies had been first buried in 1836 and some in 1837. Mr. Biesenbach states that these bodies are buried midway between the monuments of Capt. R.A. Gillespe (sic) and Capt. Samuel H. Walker.
The plaque was erected by the Alamo Defenders Descendants Association on March 6, 2004.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Jan 28, 2010 18:10:21 GMT -5
That is it! Thanks Hiram!
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Jan 31, 2010 22:54:16 GMT -5
The supposed Odd Fellow remains come from the following: The remains of Mexican War soldiers Richard A. Gillespie (Texas Mounted Volunteers killed at the Bishops Palace, Monterey in 1846) and Samuel Hamilton Walker ( US Regt Mounted Rifles killed at Huamantla in 1847) It's been a common mistake over the last hundred or so years, but that would be Robert Gillespie, not Richard. I had Mike Cox correct this little mistake in his recent ranger book, but old names die hard. I remember this whole conflict and took part in a small way. The Walker/ Gillespie tombstone had been chipping away for years and actually looked like it was melting. The first time I visited the dilapidated Odd Fellows graveyard and other San Antonio Cemeteries in the area, there were drug dealers and prostitutes walking the roads. Upon parking my vehicle near the monument to these immortal Hays' Rangers, I noticed all the overgrown grass and trash around the weathered stone and it just made sick. As I was about to vacate my car, a scraggily pack of wild dogs (at least 7) walked through a hole in the chain link fence and caused me to remain seated until they departed. I shot a few photos of the big tombstone in its sad condition and took notes. While I was there the police staked out the cemetery next door where Hays ranger and the first Bexar County Sheriff, James Nathaniel Fisk is buried. When I got home I sent a nasty letter to some San Antonio agency and complained about the state of the Walker/ Gillespie monument. I also suggested that if the city wasn't going to refurbish the stone then maybe the rangers should be buried in the State Cemetery in Austin. Years later I heard that the Walker/ Gillespie monument was being restored and I was eventually invited to the 2004 re-dedication ceremony with Ray Martinez and other noted rangers. I believe the only reason San Antonio agreed to refurbish the odd site was due to ranger fans, who were threatening to steal the Walker and Gillespie remains in the dead of night, then bury them under a proper monument in Austin or Waco. I think some armed militia had guards watching over the graves at night. Maybe we should try this little threat with the Old Alamo. ;D |
|
|
|
Post by pff on Feb 16, 2010 19:23:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Feb 18, 2010 21:40:37 GMT -5
Some Alamo defender remains were probably reduced to even further ash within an old urn during the tragic 1881 Texas Capitol fire. A lot of historic relics and documents were also lost.  |
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Feb 19, 2010 10:54:47 GMT -5
Some Alamo defender remains were probably reduced to even further ash within an old urn during the tragic 1881 Texas Capitol fire. A lot of historic relics and documents were also lost.
The Alamo monument which you referred to was carved by a English lapidarian by the name of Wm. Nangle, which when finished, toured the state and later found permanent residence in Austin.
A description of said monument is found in D. W. Baker (Compiler), A Texas Scrapbook, New York, A. S. Barnes & Company, 1875.
It reads as follows:
"This monument is ten feet high, and made from stone taken from the Alamo. The style of architecture is the Composite, and it is divided into ten sections. The 1st section, or base of the monument, is one solid piece, bearing the whole structure. The second section is a square plinth, neatly empaneled. The 3d section is a sub-plinth, with Gothic molding and roped head, symbolical of binding the whole structure firmly. The 4th section is the die, or main body of the monument, consisting of four panels in recess, supported by rude fluted pilaster sat each corner. On two of these panels are raised shields, on which are inscribed, in raised letters, the names of every man fell at the ever-memorable battle of the Alamo. Each shield is suspended from a beautiful wreath, in the center of which is a bouquet of flowers. The shields and wreaths sustaining them are encircled by honeysuckles and vines. On the other panels of section 4th is represented the skull and bones crossed. Above the skulls are two angels facing each other, blowing trumpets. Below the crossbones are the symbols of Time -- the hour-glass, scythe, and wings. Section 5 is a solid cap facing on the main body, projecting with Gothic moldings handsomely carved, representing oak leaves at the corners. At the top of the cap is a square facia forming recesses in which it is inscribed , in large raised Gothic letters, the names of the gallant spirits who fell at the head of the heroes of the Alamo. Each name -- that of Crockett, Bonham, Travis, and Bowie -- stands out singly in bold relief, on each of the four fronts. From the center of this shaft springs the main shaft or spire, and upper structure. Section 6 is a Corinthian base, supported at the corners by the tails of the dolphins, and at each side by the bomb-shells. In the panels of the base and over the bomb-shells, are raised hands in the grasp of friendship. Section 8 is the 1st division of the shaft, with raised fluted corners and panels in recess. At the base of each panel are cannon crossed in bold relief. Above these cannon, on each panel, is the Cap of Liberty, surrounded by branches of oak and laurel. Immediately above these, in raised letters, is inscribed, in each of the four fronts, March 6, 1836, the date of the memorable battle. On the top of this section is a cap, with raised fluted corners and recessed panels. On tow of these panels stand in relief, the heads of angels with wings. On one of the other panels is, in relief, a heart pierced with two crossed daggers; and on the other panel is a skull with twigs crossed underneath. Section 9 is the second division of the shaft, with the devices in raised Gothic letters, as printed on each side of the wood-cut of the monument above. Section 10 is a cap on section 9, forming four Gothic points; and in each, a recess panel, stands in bold relief THE LONE STAR OF TEXAS. Underneath the stars are raised daggers. In the center of the cap above the stars stand an urn with flame issuing from it; and at each corner of the cap on which the large urn rests, are four smaller urns, out of which also issues flame."
That must have been something to see back in the 19th century. Its a shame most of it was destroyed in the fire.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Feb 19, 2010 16:05:00 GMT -5
There is an 1852-1853 Map of San Antonio that has the Gillespie/Walker grave site on Commerce Street marked.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Feb 19, 2010 16:10:18 GMT -5
Well, wack me in the back of the head with a 2x4! Should have double checked Heitman who has him listed clearly as Robert. Also, double checked the SA City Council Records for 1848, and they have him as R.A. and the Wilson speach at the reburial refers to him as Ad. In the file was an 1900 artcile on the grave says Robert as well. I certainly will make sure of the correction in the future! Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom Nuckols on Feb 20, 2010 0:55:27 GMT -5
My instincts tell me that the various post-3/6 exhumations and interments of defenders' remains were always more symbolic than funereal. Think about it: At no point could anyone have ever reasonably expected to give all of the remains decent treatment. I think Seguin's was the first effort at any consecration, but even at that early date it would've taken months and a dozen archaeology grad students with as many sifters to cull bone from stone, etc. No, in terms of who's buried where, don't look for anything historically verifiable. Some swallow a wafer on Sunday and trust it's the body of Christ. For those who engaged in burial rituals for the defenders, I think the dust they scooped and buried was pretty much like that wafer on Sunday. It was sacred remains to them, period. I'm okay with it...even thankful.
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Feb 20, 2010 2:35:10 GMT -5
RangerRod, The Alamo monument which you referred to was carved by a English lapidarian by the name of Wm. Nangle, which when finished, toured the state and later found permanent residence in Austin. A description of said monument is found in D. W. Baker (Compiler), A Texas Scrapbook, New York, A. S. Barnes & Company, 1875. Thanx for the detailed description of the first Alamo Monument. I had never seen it and found it interesting. I actually have a Jan. 26, 1842 article on Nangle's work from the Telegraph n' Texas Register. It mentions Nangle's intention of placing his acquisition of Alamo defender ashes in the vase and his hope of moving the thing into the first Republic Capitol in Austin. I've seen a couple images of the monument and don't share Mr. Baker's enthusiasm for the sculpture's design. It's a little too gaudy and macabre for my artistic tastes. It is too bad it was virtually destroyed. |
|
