|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Oct 24, 2009 7:37:14 GMT -5
Well, we do know that Crockett was placed in command of his Tennesseans and assigned the defense of the picket between the church and Low Barracks. So, while he might not have been a commander in the same sense of Travis or Bowie, he could still generally be considered a "commander".
If we agree about that, then, in my opinion, Crockett did had the responsibilities of being a man in charge, even if his command was only over the group of Tennesseans who rode in with him. As such -- and as a former Congressman and as a nationally known and recognized celebrity -- Crockett would have been highly regarded with much respect by the folks at the Alamo. Putting myself in the position of one of the average defenders at the Alamo, if Crockett asked me to do something, it would be done without question, whether I was under his direct command or not. That's the kind of respect he, well, commanded, I think.
We probably will never know, with certainty, if his role as a commander went beyond the Tennesseans, but I have no doubt that Travis certainly tapped into Crockett's many skills in a number of ways, none of which may not have been more important than having Crockett do whatever he could, in his inimitable way, to keep the defender's collective spirit and morale up during the grind and utter hopelessness they must have felt as the seige wore on to its climax.
Paul
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Oct 24, 2009 10:15:08 GMT -5
I think the problem here is in trying a assign a formal role to Crockett. So far as we know he didn't hold any kind of position within the garrison; all the command slots were already filled and he was probably a bit past the drudgery of active command 24/7. However he was a respected "elder statesman" who could and probably did arbitrate between Travis and Bowie and could be asked to undertake specific short term assignments, and who could "be seen at all points" encouraging the defenders generally rather than be tied to the command of a particular unit assigned to a particular post. That's how I see it. As far as Crockett's palisade posting goes, that comes from Sutherland. Crockett may have been posted there at one time, but there's no evidence that he was there throughout the siege and battle. I'm still of the opinion that the palisade wasn't the site of a direct assault. The area in front of the palisade was probably the most deadly ground in the compound since it was one of the few spots where enfilading fire could be delivered. Why waste men? Plus, there was no need to attack the palisade once Morales captured the SW corner. Jim
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Oct 24, 2009 11:40:21 GMT -5
Paul,
There's a couple of problems with this portion of Sutherland's account, first of these is Crockett wasn't in command, CPT Harrison was, the second was there were no 12 Tenneseans, that accomapnied Crockett. Crockett left Memphis with only about 6 men - and most of them either turned back, or dropped off somwhere long before Crockett reached Bexar (according to Bill Groneman none of them accompanied Crockett to Bexar). Harrison's company numbered 16 men of whom five men were originally from Logan County, KY (Lexington). This group included Daniel Cloud and had been travelling for some time (prior to enlisting in Nacogdoches they had gone trough Illinois, reportedly looked at settling in Missouri, then moved through Arkansas and Lousianna). Harrison himself was from Ohio.
Based on Sutherland, it is extremely possible that Harrison's company was assigned the palisade on FEB 23rd and was probably there during the fighting on the 25th. Beyond that it's impossible to say .... Like, Jim, I believe it is highly unlikily that Travis did not shift and rearrange his defenses as the siege progressed. Surely he would adapt as the situation changed.
See Bill Groneman's Alamo Defenders where possible he includes what company the men were assigned to.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Oct 24, 2009 12:57:09 GMT -5
In researching our book on Crockett, I came across a letter from Atlas Jones to his brother Calvin dated November 13, 1835. Atlas had seen Crockett as he passed through Jackson, Tenn., on his way west. Most of the letter has nothing to do with Crockett, but in a postscript he says:
"Col. Crockett went on some time ago at the head of 30 men well armed and equipped."
This is the only reference I've seen to Crockett leading any large group. At first glance, it might seem that some of these men simply wanted to ride along with Crockett for a while, but if that's true, why were they all so heavily armed and equipped? What happened to them? Or, was Atlas Jones inaccurate in his head count? We know that Crockett wrote to his brother-in-law, George Patton, on the eve of leaving for Texas that he was to be accompanied only by 3 others ("I am on the eve of Starting to the Texes—on tomorrow morning my self Abner Burgin and Lindsy K Tinkle & our Nephew William Patton from the lowar country this will make our Company"). Crockett left home on November 1 and Atlas's letter is dated nearly two weeks later. Crockett could conceivably have picked up more men along the way. Cobia (Journey into the Land of Trials) suggests that young men in Jackson saw in Crockett a leader and, based on that, willingly joined him on his way to Texas, assuming (along with most newspapers) that Crockett intended to join the Texas fight. This does not appear to be true, however, as Crockett said he was only going to explore Texas and planned to then return home. His family was surprised (and, no doubt, alarmed) when they received his letter from Texas, dated January 9, 1836, telling them that he had enlisted.
Calvin Jones, who saw Crockett when he passed through Bolivar, Tenn., wrote to Edmond D. Jarvis on December 2, 1835:
"Crockett, who cannot blow his nose without acquiring remark or observation, was regarded as a passing comet, not to be seen again, and every eye was ('strained to catch a glance of him' crossed out) bent upon him, and every hand extended either in curiosity or regard. This occasion proved him to be more of a Lion than I had supposed."
The remarks about Crockett as a "passing comet" may have been a reference to Halley's Comet, which appeared at that time. The high regard for, and recognition of Crockett reflects how big a national and international celebrity he really was by this time. This is the sort of greeting he received wherever he went.
Regarding his service at the Alamo, there's every reason to believe that Travis would have wanted him in visible positions where he could inspire the men, as he no doubt did. Whatever role he played in the skirmishing, Travis would want to make a point of mentioning him in his correspondence so that Texian leadership knew that Crockett was there, perhaps adding some degree of incentive to send help.
Jones's letter notes that emigrants were passing constantly on their way to Texas, some staying with him or others in Bolivar (in Three Roads Davis says Crockett stayed with Jones). Jones remarked that "Armed men are passing to ('Texas' crossed out) take part in the domestic (dissentions?) of another country and it seems generally to be regarded as an act of patriotism and is sanctioned I believe by the common practice of the (?) though such (intermeddlers?) have been hanged by Jackson in Florida and by the Spaniards in (California?). . . ."
Allen
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Oct 24, 2009 13:32:46 GMT -5
I suspect Crockett picked up some followers on his way to Texas, but there's no way of knowing how long they accompanied him. No doubt, some were there for the novelty of being in the company of a celebrity, but how many people could really latch on and stay for the duration? Not many, I'll wager. Some of these men likely had responsibilities at home and couldn't leave at the drop of a hat. If reports of some of Crockett's stops along the way are any indication though, it's understandable why they would hang for a while. The Crockett route to Texas was something of a rolling party; lots of drinking and hell raising. Once Crockett got into Texas and began scouting the land and getting serious, a lot of the hangers-on probably said "adios," and headed home. Jim
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Oct 24, 2009 14:27:27 GMT -5
I'm very much inclined to agree. We know that Crockett was coming to Texas looking for land rather than a fight and while, if I recall correctly, his last letter from Texas referred to heading for the Matamoros rendezvous - before being diverted to Bexar, at no point does he refer to "his" men or being in command of anything. Likewise there is no reference I'm aware of in official documentation to his being in charge of a party far less a military unit and yet the standard procedure in the event of volunteers turning up who didn't already belong to a company was to appoint somebody to take charge; an obvious example being a guy called Samuel Sprague who was appointed an acting lieutenant and ordered to take nine other volunteers forward to join Fannin's command, where they enlisted in different companies.
Thus, I suggest, the absence of anything similar relating to Crockett clearly suggests he was never more than a "high private" and the fact that a number of men tagged along at one time or another is not the same thing as joining or forming a company under his command.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Oct 24, 2009 15:41:30 GMT -5
I doubt it was anything resembling a military unit, or a unit of any kind. Crockett did not plan to join the war when he left Tennessee, only to explore Texas and then return. It would not be surprising to see 30 or more men tag along at least as far as Memphis to join in the party that Jim described. It does not appear that he had nearly that many with him when he got to Memphis, where things really got rowdy, so some of the hangers-on must have returned home by then. Ultimately, Burgin and Tinkle went back; only Patton joined up when Crockett did.
Regarding where Crockett was heading after taking the oath, the actual text of the letter reads as follows:
"I have taken the Oath of the Government and have enrolled my name as a volunteer for six months and will set out for the Rio Grande in a few days with the Volunteers of the United States, but all Volunteers is entitled to vote for a member of the Convention are to be voted for; and I have but little doubt of being elected a member to form the Consititution for this Province."
Most of the letter describes the fertile, potentially valuable land that could be had in Texas and the future opportunity that offered Crockett as a land owner and agent. No down payment was required to the land (4,438 acres!) and payment could be made from money raised by selling, leasing or cultivating the land. That, and the chance for a new political office, seemed to be on Crockett's mind, not military matters. He says nothing about being put in charge of anything.
Allen
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Oct 24, 2009 17:18:31 GMT -5
Great discussion all. Certainly, Crockett was in no grand hurry to get to San Antonio, and I have always felt that San Antonio offered the last chance for him to get elected as a delegate to the Convention (of course he was to late for that). He comes through Arkansas and then into Choctaw Country, passing Fort Towson, and then crossing the Red River at Clarksville. If he was in a hurry to get the Nacogdoches, he could have simply went south from Washington down to Fort Jesup and then over. But instead, he kind of takes the scenic tour of SE Oklahoma and NE Texas. Then he heads down to Nacogdoches, before taking the Camino Real toward San Antonio (or as some have suggest Goliad to link up with the Matamoros bound folks). His stop at what is now Crockett was to see some old friends who had settled there.
While I have considered Crockett an active member of the garrison and go with the "high private" concept.
By the way, Ben McCullough was among those who was suppose to link up with Crockett and failed to make the connection.
|
|
|
Post by andrewkent1830 on Oct 25, 2009 18:01:43 GMT -5
" Ben McCulloch".
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Oct 25, 2009 19:22:44 GMT -5
Ben MacCulloch, never heard of him. Sounds like a war dodger to me. ;D
|
|
|
Post by andrewkent1830 on Oct 25, 2009 19:39:28 GMT -5
Well, I live in McCulloch County, Texas, named for Ben McCulloch. And I have a copy of an Honorable Discharge for my GGGrandfather, Bosman Kent, dated October 2, 1846, Monteray Mexico, Army of Occupation, and signed, BEN McCULLOCH, Capt., TEXAS RANGERS soooooo.................whatcha got? besides my mispelling and typos? Mark, 6th Gen. Texan
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Oct 25, 2009 20:53:08 GMT -5
That's what I love about this place. I can throw something out here, that I always thought was known fact, and learn that, in fact, it may not necessarily be so. Certainly, I have an open mind and don't mind being corrected, as was the case with the pallisade post made above.
I, too, have heard of this rolling party thing as Crockett made his way to Texas from Tennessee. It's also reasonable to believe that not everyone in his party was willing to commit to a possible fight in this then-foreign land, so they opted to go back.
Good stuff and good discussion. Keep it going.
Paul
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Oct 25, 2009 21:30:45 GMT -5
Oh no!-my bad! That is one of the names I really do know! What was I ever thinging about! RangerRod and Mustang forgive me!
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Oct 25, 2009 22:52:11 GMT -5
It's also reasonable to believe that not everyone in his party was willing to commit to a possible fight in this then-foreign land, so they opted to go back. Let's not forget that Crockett himself did not leave for Texas with the intention of joining the fight, but set out only to explore Texas. It was after he arrived and saw bright prospects for himself that he made that decision. As to Ben M., here's the skinny from TSHA online; says he planned to join up with Crockett in Texas, but had to delay his departure from Tenn., then arrived too late for their planned rendezvous in Nacagdoches, then became ill with measels and was spared the Alamo, but later helped avenge it at San Jacinto. www.tshaonline.org/handbook/online/articles/MM/fmc34.html#Allen
|
|
|
Post by marklemon on Oct 25, 2009 23:15:44 GMT -5
It was the custom in those days to travel with a party, both for companionship as well as security, and Crockett's celebrity and charisma must have soon attracted a larger than normal following as he rode through Tennessee. Therefore I don't have any reason to doubt Atlas Jones' 30-man head-count. After Memphis, when some of the Tennessee travelers vectored off or turned back after having the experience of riding with Crockett, there still must have been a number who wanted to continue on west. Certainly there still would have been the need to seek safety in numbers especially against the Comanches in Texas.... In truth, there were probably men joining, and dropping away, as their particular necessities demanded, all along the way, with the overwhelming majority never having any intention of sticking with Crockett to the bitter end.
|
|