|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jul 28, 2007 14:53:38 GMT -5
Gary,
Among other things, this raises the question of where the funeral pyres were located and how many of them there were. Long ago I'd been told that the Cenotaph is located on the spot where the bodies were thought to have been burned. But more recently I've read that there were two pyres located in the Alameda area, south and a bit east of the Alamo.
I wonder why they'd bother to shlep the bodies from the compound to the Alameda. However, if 60 or more defenders bolted the fort once it was breached, they may have died in that area and thus were burned there. Those who died in the fort may have been burned there.
You've raised an interesting question regarding the movement of bodies, which may further cloud the final battle position of Crockett.
Another question I have about Crockett ending up at one of the northeast gun emplacements is: what was he doing there? Would he have been helping to man a cannon? Was he a likely candidate for that job? Or, was the garrison largely taken by surprised, roused suddenly from a deep sleep, and hurried to the most seriously threatened spot in the fort -- the north wall? If so, Crockett could have been among them and just ended up fighting there. The fact that so few Mexicans attacked the south end of the fort makes me think that most of the defenders would have hurried to the north to try to stemp the tide or, having seen that as hopeless, begun retreating into the long barracks.
All speculation, of course.
AW
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Jul 28, 2007 15:15:54 GMT -5
I've often wondered if Crockett might have been quartered somewhere along the west wall. Mark's studies might shed some light on whether or not that's even possible. Jim
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jul 28, 2007 15:36:22 GMT -5
There are actually two very simple answers for those questions. Potter states that he was posted there as a sharpshooter, which makes sense enough, especially if he was high up on the NW corner.
As to why he was seen on the west despite Gary's observations about it being exposed, there's always the Travis scenario, ie; he was killed there very early on. I can't buy the suggestion that he was found there because the bodies were laid out there prior to disposal. Practicalities aside I'd have expected Ruiz to say that was where he was discovered. The way his account reads, that was where he fell.
Remember that in his account he certainly tells how they were at first turned back, but it was only after he and the rest of the town council were brought in that they were given instructions to round up some men and dispose of the bodies. The way I read it SA had Ruiz and the others go round doing the inentifications while they were waiting for those guys to come out from Bexar and begin work.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jul 28, 2007 15:39:43 GMT -5
Also, when did Santa Anna order the bodies burned? Wouldn't the soldados have waited to be told what to do with them? And there were the Mexican dead and wounded to attend to, which would have taken priority. There was a period of time after the battle during which the Mexicans were still firing into corpses and sort of running amok; no idea how long that went on, but I have to agree that moving the bodies or considering how to dispose of them would not have been an immediate priority.
AW
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Jul 28, 2007 16:13:53 GMT -5
Stuart and I agree on this one. It seems to me that the identifications were made in the interim, perhaps while the Mexican casualties were being tended to. Jim
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Jul 28, 2007 17:38:48 GMT -5
Among other things, this raises the question of where the funeral pyres were located and how many of them there were. Long ago I'd been told that the Cenotaph is located on the spot where the bodies were thought to have been burned. But more recently I've read that there were two pyres located in the Alameda area, south and a bit east of the Alamo. The Alamo Reader, pages 200-203 has Juan Seguin's Official Report to Albert Sidney Johnston, then commander of the Texas Army, and a newspaper account about the ceremonial burial of the ashes. In both the official report and the newspaper account three pyres are mentioned, two small ones along the "principal street" presumably Commerce/Alemeda, and the main pyre at a different unspecified location. Interestingly, both accounts say that the ceremonial burial of the ashes took place at site of this third main pyre and not in San Fernando. Matovina page 115, the Rodriguez account says the burial took place east of the Menger.
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jul 29, 2007 9:46:19 GMT -5
I think this one's the old story of different events being compressed. Without going and pulling books down as I remember it from Potter, Seguin did indeed bury the ashes properly in what became a peach orchard, but by the time Potter was writing the exact location had been lost. The supposed burial in San Fernando is I think a bit problematic. Seguin may well have organised some kind of service there but the catholic church in those days was very touchy about burying non-catholics in its churches/churchyards - something much resented by British troops in Spain during the Peninsular War.
I seem to remember some discussion on the old Alamo de Parras site about speculation that the ashes in San Fernando were actually older and might have been connected with the earlier troubles in 1816 or thereabouts.
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Jul 29, 2007 10:00:34 GMT -5
Seguin claimed in an 1889 letter that he placed the ashes in an urn and had them buried in San Fernando.
However, his official report and the newspaper account both from 1837 are very specific that the burial occurred at the site of the third/main pyre.
The mention of an orchard is interesting, while it could be referring to the Alameda, it might also be referring to the orchard east of the Alamo where some skirmishing took place early in the siege. That, and possibly the Alameda, tie in with the Rodriguez account
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Jul 31, 2007 9:53:46 GMT -5
Going back to the idea, of Ruiz's account and Crockett's body being relocated/collected prior to burning to the site Ruiz mentioned. While certainly a possibility, it seems to me unlikely for two reasons. First is that Ruiz identifies where Travis and Bowie were also - their bodies had not yet been collected. The second point is that the bodies were collected and burned by the citizens of Bexar and the Dolores Cavalry Regiment - as I recall its commander, Mora, was being punished by Santa Anna.
Ruiz mentions in an 1861 deposition (Page 503, Hansen) going to get additional help to move/burn the bodies after identifying the three, and also as cited above mentions that initially his movement to the Alamo was stopped by the cavalry. In his 1860 published account (pages 500- 501), he states that the citizens were assisted by one company of Dragoons, he also states that they began building the pyres at 3:00 PM and it was ignited at 5:00 PM.
|
|
|
Post by elcolorado on Aug 5, 2007 17:53:23 GMT -5
The Ruiz account is an interesting one. The more I read it the more questions I have. I'm probably in the minority here, but I find Ruiz's story vague, deficient in detail, inaccurate in some places and with "borrowed" testimony in others. Although I disagree with some of TRL's theory's and conclusions, I'm actually beginning to think that TRL may have been right...or at least close to the truth in regards to Ruiz's presents in San Antonio during the battle.
Here's an example. We believe that there were two or three funeral pyres used to burn the bodies of the defenders...all outside the Alamo compound. Two pyres along the Alameda and possibly a third pyre in the vicinity of the peach orchard.
In reading Ruiz's account, it is clear he is talking about a single pyre, not two or three. And although Ruiz fails to say where the pyre was located, his story implies that it was in the Alamo compound.
Ruiz states that "Santa Anna, after all the Mexicans were taken out, ordered wood to be brought to burn the bodies of the Texians."
That statement, along with the fact that Ruiz makes no mention of removing the bodies of the defenders, leads one to assume that the bodies of the Texans were burned on a single funeral pyre inside the Alamo compound.
We believe, as the evidence indicates, that the defenders were removed from the Alamo and taken to the Alameda and burned on at least two funeral pyres. So I find it rather curious that Ruiz's account would omit such important and obvious details...especially since Ruiz claimed to be the person charged with the disposal of the bodies.
This is just one instance where Ruiz's account gives me reason to pause and causes me some doubt as to the veracity of his story.
Glenn
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Aug 5, 2007 18:19:20 GMT -5
I'm not where I can access my library for a few days, but it might be worthwhile reviewing what was reported about the pyres from different sources. Which primary reports mention the specific location(s) of the pyre(s)? Jim
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Aug 5, 2007 19:20:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Aug 5, 2007 20:44:34 GMT -5
I don't know anything about funeral pyres, but is it possible to stack 200+ bodies on a single pyre? Wouldn't that get a little too high to toss the bodies onto at some point, whereas multiple pyres make more sense. Also, from prior posts, it sounds plausible that the bodies were not carried hither and yon to various points for burning, but rather were burned where they were killed. Ruiz's account is a translation, so we have to make allowances for that.
In reviewing Ruiz's statements in Hansen, in his deposition re: identification of Losoya, the translation or transcription of his testimony only says that he was ordered by Santa Anna to identify the bodies of Travis, Bowie and Crockett; to prepare carts and ment to make a "funeral pile" of the Texans, which order he carried out; and that in collecting the bodies he recognized Losoya. It doesn't say where the "pile" was and the passing rerfernce to it does not necessarily mean there was only one, but that he was ordered to burn the bodies. The use of carts indicates the bodies were to be taken somewhere and not burned in the fort.
In his 1860 account (an interview) he says Travis was found on the north battery on the gun-carriage; that "toward the west, and in the small fort opposite the city, we found the body of Col. Crockett." Bowie was found in his room on the "south side." Santa Anna "ordered wood to be brought to burn the bodies of the Texians. He sent a company of dragoons with me to bring wood and dry branches from the neighboring forest." He then describes the laying of a layer of wood, then a layer of bodies, and finally kindling "distributed through the pile," and then it was lighted. The description sounds like one of a single pyre, but the location is not mentioned. He says that 182 bodies were burned, that he was an eye-witness and that he and some neighbors had collectedthe bodies and piled them on the pyre.
AW
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Aug 6, 2007 1:20:47 GMT -5
I think there's probably too much being read into this given that it is an account based on an interview conducted in a different language.
In the first place all we've got is what the interviewer wrote up from his notes after speaking to Ruiz, not a verbatim transcript
Secondly that interview was conducted in Spanish, either through an interpreter or translated afterwards.
The basic outline of the story is clear enough, but given those caveats its unwise to pounce on discrepancies which may not actually be there but arise out of faulty translation, mistinterpretation or misunderstanding.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Aug 6, 2007 7:43:37 GMT -5
Such is the case with so much of the Alamo documentation -- second and third hand accounts, interviews with third parties, translations, copies of original documents that have been lost. What's a historian to do? You can only make the most logical or sensible conclusions based on what consistency can be found among all the evidence. Coupled with the Sequin informatoin, Ruiz (such as his account is) seems to essentially confirm the burning of the bodies somewhere; there seem to have been 3 locations; the use of carts and several people involved in the process suggests that those bodies found within the compound were moved for burning. Sounds like two groups that broke out of the Alamo were burned where they were killed; those inside were burned in a third location.
AW
|
|