cje
Full Member
Posts: 60
|
Post by cje on Dec 2, 2012 22:18:32 GMT -5
After the surrender of the Texans in Goliad, what happened to all of the weapons captured?
|
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Dec 3, 2012 17:09:30 GMT -5
After the surrender of the Texans in Goliad, what happened to all of the weapons captured? Maybe they buried them, but not the hatchets.  |
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Dec 4, 2012 6:46:33 GMT -5
Good question, but what do conquering armies do with captured weapons? What did the Texians do with the mexican weapons taken from Cos in Bexar?
There might have been some souvenires. Because of differences in calibers, and so on, most might have been useless to the victors. Perhaps most were simply destroyed or rendered unusable and left behind. At least that's what I would expect.
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Dec 4, 2012 15:08:44 GMT -5
I see it as simply a logical balance between the logistics of taking stuff along with the army, the potential need (if any) and the value of the items to them.
Cannon, of course, would be dragged along -- if the fort was abandoned and the draft animals were available. If not, then they would be "disabled for all time" (Filisola's order regarding Andrade at the Alamo, I believe) and dumped in the nearest river of well or trench.
Small arms? Why not take them along?
|
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Dec 4, 2012 15:55:06 GMT -5
I imagine some junior officer, some NCOs, and a detail made a quick inspection and everything that was remotely usable at least started on the way to Mexico, the rest were hastily disabled and probably dumped in the river. Army's are notorious for holding on to even outdated weapons. The Confederate Armies in the Civil War relied on muskets seized from Federal Arsenals during secession for much of the war. It wasn't until 1863 that the two main armies had enough captured and smuggled weapons to be fully rifle equipped.
Versions of the Springfield (WWI) were used in Vietnam. The army still sells surplus WW2 M1s to the civilian marksmanship program. It would be surprising if the Mexican Army did not attempt to take the seized small arms back with them. Of course given all the difficulties they experienced on the retreat, they very well could have been abandoned at some river crossing, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Dec 4, 2012 16:11:56 GMT -5
It would be surprising if the Mexican Army did not attempt to take the seized small arms back with them. Of course given all the difficulties they experienced on the retreat, they very well could have been abandoned at some river crossing, etc. I agree. As for outdated or other people's weapons, the Mexican army was stocked with them. Brown Besses, British Baker Rifles...... |
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Dec 4, 2012 16:17:32 GMT -5
It would be surprising if the Mexican Army did not attempt to take the seized small arms back with them. Of course given all the difficulties they experienced on the retreat, they very well could have been abandoned at some river crossing, etc. I agree. As for outdated or other people's weapons, the Mexican army was stocked with them. Brown Besses, British Baker Rifles...... The Texians could improvise too. Remember the "Infernal Machine" at Goliad? An improvised gate guarding weapon created from "68 musket barrels mounted" and, I think, fired all at once like Widmark's volley gun in THE ALAMO. The old Texas addage is: If you can't do what's best, do what you can." |
|
|
|
Post by estebans on Dec 6, 2012 0:39:37 GMT -5
Found this from General Isidro Reyes in the SEDENA archive, about two months after the Woll raid; any transcription errors mine, and I'm not sure about the part in parentheses:
Los rifles, pistolas y demas armas quitadas en Bejar a los enemigos, el Senor Gral D. Adrian Woll las repartio como que no eran de calibre, entre los SS Gefes y oficiales que concurrion a la accion: habiendo o tenido la bondad de (sedarme uno para mi hueso).
"Because the rifles, pistols and other arms taken from the enemies in Bexar were not of proper calibre, General Woll divided them among the senior officers who participated in the action, they having had the goodness to (give me one for my bones)."
If I deciphered the handwritten Spanish part in parentheses correctly, I don't know whether it's an idiom that means they actually gave him a weapon as a trophy, or simply pleased him mightily with their exploit, or means something else entirely; but the first part is pretty clear. The date suggests they waited till they got home, and then the top officers took their pick of the booty.
In this case, they captured fifty-odd Texians, including many leading citizens, who were expecting a fight--so it was probably good-quality weaponry in good working order, plus some cutting-edge, top of the line stuff: IIRC correctly, the list of captured arms includes several repeating rifles and quite a few pairs of pistols. Might even have had their bullet molds along, etc. But they weren't of standard-issue Mexican calibre, so the arms didn't go into the Mexican armory.
In Fannin's case, weren't there several hundred new muskets that would have been useful in Mexico if there were bullet molds for them? Enough to equip several companies? But the above suggests what they might have done with captured personal weapons at Goliad, if in fact they had the chance to do so.
Apologies for being coy about precisely where the Reyes quote came from, but it's part of some work in progress--just struck me as relevant to this discussion. I don't know how often the Mexicans did that, but that's what they did that time.
Stephen Schneider
|
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Dec 6, 2012 13:32:52 GMT -5
I love how the 11 September 1842 inventory of captured Texan weapons from the Woll raid lists among other things "14 Cuchillos llamados Buys naifs" (14 knives called Buys naifs).
|
|
|
|
Post by alamonorth on Dec 6, 2012 17:02:12 GMT -5
While not exactly referring to Goliad, General Urrea did make this comment on other captured weapons " Nevertheless, I ordered several barrels of powder and more than 200 rifles that were found at Columbia and which I could not take with me to be thrown in the river"
|
|
|
|
Post by estebans on Dec 6, 2012 22:07:39 GMT -5
I love how the 11 September 1842 inventory of captured Texan weapons from the Woll raid lists among other things "14 Cuchillos llamados Buys naifs" (14 knives called Buys naifs). My favorite part of that too. I understand that the ones made in Sheffield, England were often shipped up U.S. rivers on "stimbots." The famous Texas ranger Capt. "Gez" carried one, along with his pistol and rifle. I'm not ridiculing those phonetic spellings--I really enjoy them because to me it seems a moment where a living voice emerges from the text and gets into your head and stays there. And it makes you realize they knew Hays by word of mouth first. I got the impression from Brian DeLay's War of a Thousand Deserts that the centralists were perennially reluctant to supply long arms to the northeastern states in Mexico, which makes me think substantial captures of long arms in Texas would have needed to be carted deep into Mexico, and the centralist generals might rather just dump them like Urrea did and free up the wagons and livestock for other uses. I can't help thinking those guns Urrea destroyed might have saved quite a few northeastern Mexican citizens' lives over the next decade. |
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jan 29, 2013 9:17:52 GMT -5
There probably isn't an easy answer to this one in that it will have depended on what was captured. Individuals coming to Texas under their own steam (David Crockett Esq. being an obvious example) no doubt brought their own rifles and there are references to "public" rifles being supplied to other volunteers. Not being of military calibre these will have been of no use whatsoever to the Mexican Army, although de la Garza's irregulars and perhaps some of the Lipans probably took their pick of the best pieces before the rest were dumped or burned.
However those volunteers who came to Texas as formed units, such as the Alabama Red Rovers, had often equipped themselves from their state arsenals before leaving and were therefore armed with 1816 Pattern Springfields which were perfectly compatable with Mexican types and could therefore be "assimilated".
I also have a recollection that the Sea of Mud excavations turned up what had been buck and ball ammunition, which must originally have come from American sources.
|
|
|
|
Post by mustanggray on Aug 14, 2015 16:21:48 GMT -5
We have in our collections (which all came from within the walls of Presidio La Bahia or just outside them) LOTS of India pattern Bess parts. Some appear to have been intentionally damaged/destroyed and some even show signs of having been in a high heat fire. Were these weapons those belonging to the vanquished Texians or were they part of the Mexican arsenal for the local troops? Quien sabe?
SMc
|
|
|
|
Post by rayjr on Aug 21, 2015 23:08:10 GMT -5
Estebans,
I am curious about your "coy" source from General Isidro Reyes in the SEDENA archive, - do you have much from here?
My ancestor was amongst those captured 911, 1841 and marched to Perote Prison. Edward Brown.
I am interested because of the potential of source documents that describe this.
Perhaps you are working on this - I would be very interested. Don't intend to steal your thunder here...
Best,
Ray
PS. As an aside to the destiny of Goliad weapons, it seems it must lie with Sr. Urrea or with Lt. Colonel José Nicolás de la Portilla; I notice Stuart's always brilliant notice on the "Sea of Mud", but I am not sure Urrea retreated through mud, even though others certainly did.
|
|
