|
Post by rayjr on Feb 9, 2014 8:52:39 GMT -5
Rich, I mentioned earlier the possible location for Juan Antonio Chavez. But I just read on the "johnwayne-thealamo" forum the reference to Jack Jackson's map which shows as number 22, a residence of Francisco Chavez - this could be what Juan was referring to - but it seems to be in a different place - and not in the direct line of fire. I have to wait till I get back to Texas to check my volume, plus the image they posted did not show the key for residences above 23. I did not want to mis-direct you. Probably requires a double-check. Regards, Ray
|
|
|
Post by rayjr on Feb 9, 2014 12:25:31 GMT -5
Estebans,
Do you have the independent source reference for the beating of Matias? I just checked a section of Seguin's memoirs again. It mentions that he was beaten by Goodman, as they had left him there in the house while they went to find out the source of the "treason", they were dismounted. He says they ran back to the house from Main Plaza when they heard of the beating. So, this would indicate that the house is in walking distance to the main plaza. He also suggests that the houses of Guilbeau, Twohig, and Van Ness might be near by.
Regards, Ray
|
|
|
Post by estebans on Feb 9, 2014 18:19:49 GMT -5
Ray,
That comes from an unpublished source that is not an eyewitness account of the beating, but a relation of news in the Bexareno community up to around April 1, 1842, so it helps narrow down the chronology more definitely than the geographical location. It says that Seguin and Antonio Perez did lead forty Tejanos in the pursuit of Vasquez back to the Rio Grande, but the Tejanos had to split up on return due to Anglos seeking to lynch Seguin, Perez, Manuel Flores and Ambrosio Rodriguez for alleged collusion with Vasquez, and that the Anglos had beaten Curbier, mistaking him for Seguin. It is all hearsay from the community, but I believe it's relatively reliable. I don't think the writer would know the leader(s) of the lynch mob(s), but I think the fact that there's a contemporary account of the Curbier beating as mistaken identity points to the adjacent Goodman & Seguin properties, when taken together with Seguin's account. I think it's logical to assume that the mob found Curbier somewhere they expected to find Seguin, i.e. that adjacent house or its yard or streetfront, but it's just a guess using the added detail of mistaken identity.
As far as chronology, if you allow time for a pursuit to the Rio Grande and return, starting around March 9 or 10, then the Tejanos were probably back in Bexar for the last week or ten days of March, and that would be when the Curbier/Goodman incident happened. After that, Seguin was ordered to forage along the lower ranchos, and his April 18 resignation as mayor probably indicates he'd had enough of what was happening out there as well.
There should be a private message in your inbox--Stephen
|
|
|
Post by rayjr on Feb 23, 2014 15:54:35 GMT -5
Stephen,
What you say makes tremendous sense - as usual!
Thanks, Ray
|
|
|
Post by rayjr on Feb 23, 2014 16:27:57 GMT -5
Hello, I did find some additional "location" testimony: Sylvestor S. Callender on a Court of Claims filing in Louisianna. He says he is one of the Mobile Grey's that "took possession of the "Priest's House", fronting the public square in said town of San Antonio". I thought I would include them. Regards, Ray 24700554Callenderpriesthouse.pdf (273.62 KB) 24700555callenderpriesthouse.pdf (303.51 KB)
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Feb 27, 2014 1:07:54 GMT -5
...plus the image they posted did not show the key for residences above 23. This might help.
|
|
|
Post by edward on Feb 27, 2014 23:20:15 GMT -5
...plus the image they posted did not show the key for residences above 23. This might help. Thanks Ray/Rich, for the map. Juan Antonio Chavez, born 14 Feb 1827, was the grandson of Lt. Francisco Chavez. Francisco (d.1832) owned the block labeled 22. Ignacio Chaves and Maria Leonarda Montes de Oca, Juan's parents, were living at the corner of Flores and Obrajo Streets during the siege of Bejar. Leandro Chavez who participated in the siege, as noted earlier in this thread, was Ignacio's brother. Francisco's first wife was Juana Padron who was the Granddaughter of Maria Robaina Bethencourt (Granado/Armas) who lived on the corner of Commerce and Soledad. Census Report of Barrio del Norte, June 23, 1831. "Ignacio CHAVES, married, age 39, farmer, has 11 cows, 4 bulls, 20 Oxen, 2 horses, 1 mare." "Maria Leonarda MONTES, married, age 34." "Margarita CHAVES, age 18." "Tomasa CHAVES, age 14." "Juana Francisca CHAVES, age 12." "Agustin CHAVES, age 10." "Jose Maria CHAVES, age 7." "Juan Antonio CHAVES, age 3." "Pilar CHAVES,age 1."
Also, Francisco Chavez as well as Andres Courbiere knew the Indian languages and customs and helped to keep the peace with them.
|
|
|
Post by rayjr on Mar 1, 2014 9:05:27 GMT -5
Edward,
This is useful. It would seem that Juan and his parents resided north of the squares then. I presume that Obrajo might be the same as indicated as "Obraje" on Jackson's map. This would mean he is located north of #53 and west of #52.
I apologize if I missed it - has it been noted that Jackson's map locating these residences is inaccurate? The reason I ask is that he indicates #29 as being the residence of Vicente Travieso located at the purported location of the "Garza Priest House".
Thanks for finding the map, Ray
|
|
|
Post by rayjr on Mar 1, 2014 9:29:22 GMT -5
Edward, I also found from: Census Report of Barrio del Norte, June 15, 1832. (North) Ignacio CHAVEZ, married, age 40, farmer, has 25 cows, 8 bulls, 28 oxen, 1 horse, 1 mare. Maria Leonarda MONTES, married, age 38. Margarita CHAVEZ, single, age 20. Tomasa CHAVEZ, single, age 18. Juana CHAVEZ, single, age 11. Agustin CHAVEZ, single, age 12. Jose Maria CHAVEZ, age 2. Juan Antonio CHAVEZ, age 5. Pilar CHAVEZ, AGE 3. In 1 year he has doubled his cows and bulls and added 8 oxen! Successful rancher perhaps Regards, Ray
|
|
|
Post by edward on Mar 1, 2014 21:26:03 GMT -5
Edward, This is useful. It would seem that Juan and his parents resided north of the squares then. I presume that Obrajo might be the same as indicated as "Obraje" on Jackson's map. This would mean he is located north of #53 and west of #52. I apologize if I missed it - has it been noted that Jackson's map locating these residences is inaccurate? The reason I ask is that he indicates #29 as being the residence of Vicente Travieso located at the purported location of the "Garza Priest House". Thanks for finding the map, Ray Ray, I think the Jackson map is fairly accurate. I recently purchased his book, Los Tejanos, that contains this map. The problem could be that the property ownership is dynamic and is hard to take a ‘snapshot’ representing a certain time period as other events might have occurred that are noteworthy but do not fall within the margins of the ‘snapshot’. I have noticed some items that look wrong but I have not done enough research to verify my assumptions.
The Priest House -- From what I have put together the Vicente Travieso property is the second property to the west of Soledad being the 2 story house depicted in Samuel's painting in 1849, Painting Texas History to 1900, S.D. Ratcliff, opp-pg. xliv, (The original house was damaged/destroyed in the flood, MSA pg. 163). The will of Vicente Travieso’s wife, Luisa de Luna, she states that the Padre Garza is renting the property from her in 1828 (BA U1:453, Spanish). To the east is the Arocha property (MSA pg.163). To the west are two lots, the adjacent lot belonged to Josefa de Niz and her husband A. Rodriguez Mederos. The lot adjacent to Acequia street belonging to Manuel de Niz and wife. Joseph Rojas acquired both of these properties. After one other transaction, the properties were acquired by Simon de Arocha (this matches Jackson’s map). Yturri then acquired this property from Simon de Arocha (BA F1:110, Spanish).
In my Bexar model the Padre house is the 2-Story house depicted.
Below: From Rodriguez Memoirs, 1913. This looks to be a modified copy the Samuel's painting but I could not find any information to determine its source.
(Note: West should read North)
|
|
|
Post by rayjr on Mar 3, 2014 10:44:45 GMT -5
Edward, This information is noteworthy. You make a great point about the snapshot effect. It mentions that the map is taken from the Menchaca Memoirs. I have the 1937 publication by Chabot and it does not contain enough information to complete such a map. Jackson must have had access to the portions of the memoirs that have not yet been published. And it is possible that Menchaca is working from memory depending on when the memoirs were composed. I would like to see the unpublished memoirs. Unfortunately, I also don't have access to the MSA documents. Menchaca also mentions a severe flood in which 25 persons perished. He says it occurred in 1819. So, I presume that the 2 story structure you show in the 1849 painting (modified copy from Rodriguez) is a re-construction of the damaged site. The rental by Garza in 1828, would seem to validate this being the Priest House later at the time of the siege. Are we sure the 2 story structure rented by Garza is a re-construction? Also, if not a rebuild, then the house would seem to violate specific provisions regarding window openings onto adjacent structures(although not depicted with any). After looking closely at the modified copy it appears that the structure to the west of Acequia is a 2-story as well (one that follows the provisions for windows). Also Rodriguez mentions that his families' house was the first 2-story on Commerce street (is this indicated on any model yet?) - and while I can't conform when it was built - the Bexar Archives contains a petition for the first 2-story house on the Main Plaza (today on Commerce)made by the parish priest Pedro Fuentes, the approval in 1780 contains instructions relative to the provisions for windows, adjacent structures, permissions, etc...I suppose that due to the lack of its exact location on any model as of yet, that we assume it was never built after having applied for and receiving permission over a 2 year span by the priest. Or that if fell in the flood. So if I try a decisions tree:(I am sure incomplete attempt ). 1) The Fuentes House was never built. 2) The Fuentes House was built - but we don't know where. 3) The Fuentes House was built and it is the 2-story on the corner of Acequia or it is the 2-story indicated as Garza's, subsequently occupied after Fuentes departed. 4) The Fuentes House was built, but destroyed in Flood, replaced by single story, subsequently occupied. 5) It was built but after flood destroyed, never rebuilt. The priest was active up until 1791 - so I wonder if the house was built as permitted and occupied until this time - before transferring to others. It seems that the Priest House is not deemed a private property (although this may have changed), as the original plat for the square designated such a place for a public structure near the Church. I guess I remain confused. But encouraged by all of the excellent modeling efforts. Regards, Ray
|
|
|
Post by edward on Mar 3, 2014 14:02:27 GMT -5
Ray, The exact way the buildings in this area looked like in 1835/1836 is still unknown to me. I could not find any source information on the Rodriguez Illustration. We have the Samuels paintings done over a decade later to base or assumptions on but I do not believe anyone can say for certain what they looked like with 100% accuracy.
The Fuentes House: "Along the east side of the Military Plaza was the property reserved for the church; the central portion of the ramparts, being selected for the school. To the south was the first-two story house built in San Antonio, that of the Padre, Pedro Fuentes, whose lands extended along the west side of Flores Street, opposite the old Perez homestead, acquired from the Cabrera family..." San Antonio and its Beginnings, page 28/29, by Chabot, 1936.
The Cabrera family received the block south of the church with Galan Street between (13th family, Canary Islander).
The Rodriguez 2-story house was in the Potrero on the south side of Commerce, facing north, about mid-way between Soledad and the SA River.
|
|
|
Post by rayjr on Mar 14, 2014 18:38:54 GMT -5
Hello,
I did discover that there was indeed an unpublished portion of Menchaca's Memoirs. An edited publication was just produced by University of Texas Press by Timothy Matovino and Jesus F. de la Teja, titled "Recollections of a Tejano Life: Antonio Menchaca in Texas History". So Jackson must have seen this unpublished portion. The editors provide a terrific work on this important source document.
One thing that might be worth checking is - is Chabot's descriptions in "San Antonio & It's Beginnings" taken from this same source as well or not. Clearly, Chabot published the first half of the memoirs - but it is not clear if he had access to the second half of the memoirs (if so - why did he exclude it from his Yanangua publication?) - and yet his approach to describing where the families reside around Military and Main plaza looks very similar to the unpublished portion of Menchaca's document. I am not saying it did come from here - but perhaps. If so - this would help date the ownership of these properties - at least to the extent that they are memories from Antonio, rather than perhaps sourced from other archive materials. Or a combination of both?
I'll let you know - when I get a chance to go line by line.
Regards, Ray
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Mar 17, 2014 0:29:57 GMT -5
There was also significant damage done to the Priest's House from Cos' battery either on the roof of the church or in the yard in front. This is clearly stated in at least one of the primary accounts of the final stages of the Battle of Bexar. As a result of this severe cannonading at point-blank range, I see no possibility that the two-story in the William Samuel painting was the original 1836 house. Whatever the pre-revolution condition or construction of Padre de la Garza's rented house was (one-story or two-story), it was nearly leveled in December, 1835. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Mar 17, 2014 0:47:59 GMT -5
...in the meantime I'll talk anybody's ear off about it in person, so consider that fair warning if you run into me at HHD or wherever. Stephen Schneider Sorry I didn't have time to take advantage of this, but I did enjoy meeting you and look forward to much more. I am only now beginning to get my legs back under me.
|
|