|
Post by elcolorado on Jun 2, 2008 9:53:27 GMT -5
Well, he did employ pickets outside the walls, so Travis must have anticipated an assault was going to be made. Sooner rather then later.
On March 3rd, Travis wrote as if he knew the end was near ("Take care of my little boy"). Sensing doom, he gave his ring to Angelina Dickinson. These are indications that Travis was expecting an imminent attack by the Mexicans and what the outcome would be.
I don't think Sutherland's statement about the garrison spotting the Mexicans constructing ladders should be dismissed. After all, he did interview several people who were there. These individuals could have passed this information on to Sutherland.
It is possible the Mexicans were spotted making ladders. The materials used in the construction of the ladders does not appear to be of good quality. Since we believe cut lumber was a scarce resource, it's reasonable to assume the Mexicans were forced to utilize small saplings growing by the river. And De la Pena stated that the ladders were poorly constructed (Hansen, pp. 423-424). If the Mexicans did use saplings gathered by the river, it is possible they could have been spotted.
The ladder construction could have been seen from the walls of the Alamo or as Sutherland says: "...plainly seen from the church...". It's possible a forward picket could have observed the construction. It's even possible the garrison was alerted by a sympathetic tejano from town.
I'm not so sure Santa Anna really cared if the Texans saw the ladders being constructed. It was a foregone conclusion that Santa Anna was, at some point, going to attack the Alamo. And after raising the red flag, it was no secret he was intent on killing all the combatants. The unknown to Travis and the garrison was when would the assault be made.
I strongly doubt the "Travis waiting for a breach" theory for a couple of reasons. First, as I said before, Travis was an untrained amateur and unlikely to be knowledgeable in the art of siege warfare. He knew next to nothing about "fort'in-up." If anything, he was more interested in the utilization of cavalry tactics. Secondly, I don't believe Travis had any illusions of Santa Anna offering terms for a surrender - again. The Texans spilled Mexican blood. Mexican honor and pride were at stake. Santa Anna made it quite clear he was going to have their heads. The opportunity to surrender was over and I think Travis realized it.
Lastly, I don't buy the breach/surrender theory simply because there is no evidence to support the conclusions. The March 3rd letters of Travis indicate he believed the end was near and he was preparing to meet his fate. There isn't any talk of siege protocols in his last letters or in any of Travis' preceding corrospondence.
Glenn
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jun 3, 2008 8:15:27 GMT -5
Nah… I’m not buying that one Glenn. The “rules” of siege warfare I’m talking about were the ones which would have been familiar to Travis through popular and even romantic literature. If he had been professionally trained/read he might have been more wary of the possibility of an escalade. While I certainly agree that his last known letters exhibit a certain depression and a feeling that the end was nigh; that came from the growing conviction that he and the garrison had been abandoned to their eventual fate, there is no hint that he thought an actual assault was imminent.
On the ladders we still come back to both the total absence of any contemporary testimony that the garrison, sometime after March 3, saw ladders being constructed, and the sheer implausibility of the Mexicans building them within sight of the garrison. And then, if the garrison really did see such an obvious indicator that an assault was not merely possible but imminent, why weren’t they more ready for it?
At the end of the day there’s no dispute that Travis and the garrison were surprised by the assault. That’s how it happened; what this thread is currently doing is not trying to argue that they were surprised but trying to explain why they were surprised.
|
|
|
Post by elcolorado on Jun 3, 2008 18:19:49 GMT -5
Stuart
I agree that Travis theoretically could have gleaned some information on siege warfare from a novel he may have read. My point is that there isn't any evidence he did. The claim that Travis was knowledgeable in siege warfare is based on speculation and not fact.
Ok. I don't think we're too far apart on this one, Stuart. Travis certainly didn't know about the planned assault on March 6th. But he, as well as the entire garrison, must have realized Santa Anna wasn't going to wait much longer before launching an all out attack. Although Travis didn't (and couldn't) know when the Mexicans were going to storm the Alamo, it didn't take a military genus to conclude that an eventual assault was coming. It was not a question of if...but when. This was the point I was making and why I feel Travis believed an attack was "imminent."
I won't say the garrison "did" or "did not" observe the Mexicans constructing ladders...I wasn't there. All I can do is reiterate what Sutherland wrote in his account. He interviewed the survivors and based his narrative on their testimony, their words, and their stories. And since I decline to dismiss Sutherland's statement, I have to acknowledge the possibility the event may have occured as he reported. Unless, of course, factual evidence comes to the surface and contradicts Sutherland's claim.
Something hypothetical to consider. If Santa Anna purposely allowed the Texans to "observe" the construction of the ladders, wouldn't that have had an effect on one's nerve and moral? Like psychological warfare? Just something to think about.
Good question. I wish I had the answer. Again, I feel the garrison must have understood that Santa Anna was not going to wait indefinitely. That sooner or later the Mexicans were going to attempt to take the Alamo and make good on his threat of "no quarter."
I'm not sure what Travis could really do. He couldn't keep the garrison at-the-ready 24/7. Men have to sleep. Pickets were placed outside the walls to give warning. And there appears to have been some sentries on the walls. Other then that, I honestly don't know what else an amateur cavalry officer in charge of untrained and undisciplined volunteers could do. Santa Anna had the initiative and all the cards.
I think the garrison was surprised (in part) because they were duped. They were played by Santa Anna. Herb and Allen both touched on the theory that the garrison was "set-up," possibly lulled into complacency by the routine of the siege. If Herb's analysis of the Mexican bombardment is correct, then it does appear Santa Anna was working to "condition" the Texans. Effectively using mind control in hopes the garrison would let their guard down.
So I would have to say that Santa Anna's apparent stratagem, combined with sheer exhaustion were contributing factors to the "why" the garrison was surprised.
Glenn
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Jun 3, 2008 19:07:34 GMT -5
I can't say what books Travis read or didn't read but I do not believe he was all that knowledgeable in the art of siege warfare. Well, let's look at what books Travis is documented to have read: some Herodotus; Henry St. John Bolingbroke’s Letters on the Study of History; Asa Green's A Yankee Among the Nullifiers; and Eliza Leslie's Pencil Sketches, a manual on manners. Travis also devoured works of historical fiction: John Richardson's Wacousta, concerning Pontiac’s conspiracy; Jane Porter's The Scottish Chiefs, concerning William Wallace; and at least three novels by Sir Walter Scott: Rob Roy, Guy Mannering, and Black Dwarf. That's all of Travis' reading list I know of; anybody able to identify any others? Bolinbroke's Letters were basically a tirade against Christianity. From what I know of the Scott novels, they don't touch on siege warfare. Rob Roy has a couple of passing references to 13th-century sieges, and Herodotus' History has numerous references (but nothing too technical) on sieges in ancient Greek history. It seems hard to imagine that Travis didn't have at least a limited understanding of siege warfare from his (undocumented) readings in books, newspapers, and journals, but until other volumes of his diary or long-lost letters surface detailing his reading interests, it's just speculation.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jun 3, 2008 22:33:33 GMT -5
Travis wasn't the only one in the fort who may have known about siege warfare. I don't know what condition Bowie was in by that point, or how much Crockett knew about anything military, but there were other men in the fort who might have. In any case, once the heavier guns arrived and began punching holes in the walls, it wasn't hard to figure out that the Mexicans were trying to knock down the walls, open a breach, make realistic defense no longer possible. There was no reason to believe that an attack was imminent when, as Glenn says, Santa Anna held all the cards. With 12 days or so of a continual siege pattern, it's not surprising that the Texians likely didn't expect the pattern to change unless and until a breach in the walls was made, thus no need for extra alert on the night of March 5. I don't buy the idea that the Mexicans would have wanted them to see the construction of ladders or any other sign of an immenent assault. If you wanted to rattle the Texians, the arrival of more Mexican reinforcements, while no more Texian help had arrived, would have done it. I think Santa Anna just decided to throw away the book and totally surprise the Texians with a nighttime assault, catch them unaware, end the thing quickly and minimize his own losses. Had he waited for a breach, the Texians would definitely been aware that an attack was then imminent (unless they chose to surrender, which at that point they knew would mean execution). Some of Santa Anna's staff objected to the assault as well, although a lot of that criticism was after the fact, when everyone ganged up on Santa Anna and blamed the loss of the war on him.
AW
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Jun 4, 2008 7:25:04 GMT -5
[quote author=elcolorado board=alamohistory thread=83 post=4672 time=1212535189 The claim that Travis was knowledgeable in siege warfare is based on speculation and not fact.
Glenn [/quote]
The point I'm making Glenn is that Travis wasn't "knowledgable in siege warfare" beyond what was popularly known in the newspapers etc. remember the Napoleonic Wars had ended only 20 years earlier and although Travis himself was a mere stripling a lot of those involved in the Texan Revolution had grown up during those wars and some, like Bowie, Grant and Houston to name but three had been involved. To citizens of the time the language of siege warfare; the summoning of fortresses and the defence of breaches wasn't as alien a concept as it is to us today. On hearing that such and such a place was "invested" folks expected to hear that terms had been offered and rejected; that a breach had been made and stormed, or that the garrison had surrendered with the honours of war. It was all the small change or ordinary reportage. And anyway, even if Travis himself was a little unsure about the form (which I still argue was unlikely), he had one Green B Jameson at his elbow who certainly pretended to be an expert on fortifications.
Most of what's on this thread is speculation; except the fact that Travis allowed himself to be surprised when Santa Anna escaladed on the morning of March 6. As I said above all I'm doing is suggesting that the most likely explanation is that with the walls as yet unbreached Travis thought that he wasn't in imminent danger.
And no I still don't believe Sutherland's story. Santa Anna disn't take the decision to escalade until after March 3 and that against the advice of those officers who wanted to wait for the artillery. Those ladders weren't made until hours... no more than a day before the attack as part of all the other prep. (a) as I've said, nobody is known to have gotten out alive in that time period apart from Jim Allen who didn't say anything, far less anything so exciting as "they wuz preparing to attack as I left" (b) the work will have been done within the streets of Bexar not in the open in plain sight of the church, and (c) leaving aside the foregoing and especially (a), if the garrison really did see such an obvious preparation, then William Barret Travis should have been taken out and shot for gross dereliction of duty and half a dozen other charghes related to criminal negligence rather than celebrated as a hero.
|
|
|
Post by elcolorado on Jun 4, 2008 9:16:39 GMT -5
Stuart
I agree Travis and the garrison were expecting a breach to be made in the walls before Santa Anna attacked. After all, Santa Anna did have a battery pounding the north wall. So it's understandable why Travis was anticipating a breach before the inevitable assault. It was an obvious conclusion.
It's certainly possible Travis acquired some minimal knowledge on siege warfare from available sources prior to his arrival in Bexar. But one thing I think we can all agree on, he was receiving a heck of an education from Santa Anna.
Taking all of this into consideration, a few questions come to mind.
a) Did Santa Anna have a "grand plan" in regards to taking the Alamo or was he just winging it?
a) Was Santa Anna truly interested in making a breach in the wall? If so, why didn't he wait for the bigger guns? Did he get frustrated with the lack of progress or did he just tire of the siege?
b) Was the "breach first then assault" his plan all the time or was it a deception? In other words, was it Santa Anna's initial objective to lull the garrison into a sense of routine before an assault. Or was he just taking advantage of the opportunity the routine of the siege created?
Glenn
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Jun 4, 2008 10:54:25 GMT -5
We do know what Santa Anna's intent was, it was to surprise the garrison on Feb 23rd. He had configured his forces for that operation, and when that failed, he had to wait until other forces arrived which happened on March 3rd.
Like any reasonable commander, Santa Anna, didn't just sit on his heals until help arrived, he used what he had at hand to do what little he could. Which wasn't much. The most important thing he did was reconned, and probably wargamed in his mind and perhaps with Almonte, the various options that he had once, additional forces arrived.
As Stuart points out, the evening after the first additional forces arrived (March 4th) Santa Anna held a Council of War to hear what his subordinates thought he should do. Santa Anna's mind was probably 90% made up before the Council of War, but as there is always a chance the commander has overlooked something, listening to the views of his subordinates can clarify the decision as well as making the subordinates feel that they are vested in the plan.
Santa Anna's subordinates were pretty evenly divided between conducting an escalde now and waiting for the heavier cannon to arrive due on March 7 (note, the cannon that arrived on March 3rd were just some more 8 pounders and howitzers, the difference in their effectiveness from the first battery was how close this second battery was erected to the walls of the Alamo, not to them being larger cannon). While it is certainly possible that Santa Anna had men building ladders prior to the decision being made to conduct an escalde - I tend to doubt it. Between, erecting fortified camps, the probing attack, marching to interdict Fannin, etc. and normal field routine, the Mexican Army seems to have been fairly busy.
IF, ladder construction was put off until the 5th when attack preparations would have been going full swing, I agree with Stuart, it would have been incredibly stupid to construct them anywhere but under cover.
Glenn, I fully expect Travis understood the basics of siege warfare, this was an age in America, especially the South and West, when to be politically active also met you had to be active in the military - at least the militia - and to somewhat familiar with the duties of an officer.
There is a considerable difference, between knowing the basics and understanding the nuances. Did Santa Anna "plan" from the first on taking advantage of the defenders being lulled into a routine - probably not. But, as time went on, he was probably much more cognizant of the routine that had developed then Travis, and Santa Anna probably did determine to use that to his advantage.
|
|
|
Post by billchemerka on Jun 10, 2008 17:07:18 GMT -5
One can only speculate as to Travis' knowledge of siege warfare. To be effective (which, unfortunately, he was not), he would have had to have been well aware of Chapter 12 in E. Hoyt's Practical Instructions of Military Officers which is concerned with such topics as attacking redoubts, field-forts and other detached posts. Of course, that chapter's contents were clearly followed by Santa Anna.
Keep in mind that Santa Anna's men probably were not responsible for providing all ladders via in-camp construction. Every tall ladder from the town was probably confiscated; in fact, this is a premise used in the forthcoming History Channel program on the Alamo.
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Jun 11, 2008 16:57:46 GMT -5
Keep in mind that Santa Anna's men probably were not responsible for providing all ladders via in-camp construction. Every tall ladder from the town was probably confiscated; in fact, this is a premise used in the forthcoming History Channel program on the Alamo. Bill, that's a real good point. I practically forgot until just now, how back in the bad old days of the Cold War, we had lists of where we could find stuff in stores, gas stations, etc. on our projected battlefields in Germany. In Saudi Arabia in 91, a lot of our support came from the civilian infrastructure and of course Iraq stripped Kuwait City bare. While the US Army generally pays for what it takes, an army will always take what it needs or think it does from the surrounding civilians.
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Jun 15, 2008 9:17:44 GMT -5
I don't know much about scaling walls or building ladders, but maybe Sutherland was taken too literally. Since wood was scarce, perhaps the Mexicans simply notched some logs the day before the assault. This type of crude log ladder can be quickly constructed and is just as effective. It also allows an ascending pedestrian to keep their hands free for numerous purposes. I would have a bolo in one hand and a Tech-9 in the other. Notched Log Ladder www.inquiry.net/images/sss169.gif
|
|
|
Post by bobdurham on Jun 15, 2008 17:13:55 GMT -5
Great picture -- I'd never considered that possibility for a ladder. This thread has had some interesting posts.
|
|
|
Post by marklemon on Jun 16, 2008 18:40:45 GMT -5
While it's certainly within the realm of possibility, I rather doubt the notched-log ladder scenario. While it looks good and simple in theory, I'm trying to put a soldado on one in the darkness of March 6th, overwhelmed with adrenaline and fear, carrying a Brown Bess with bayonet, and all I can see is him slipping off the "steps" or the whole thing rolling around from side to side. I think that the best scenario, and the one that takes the time-honored military philosophy of "why make it if you can take it," is that the Mexicans scoured the town for ready-made ladders, took what they found, and made the rest. The only type of ladder that really works in such a scenario (darkness, mixed with combat) is the basic old standard-looking ladder, as we know it today, only in wood.
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Jun 16, 2008 19:11:53 GMT -5
One thing about Mexican architecture--and this hasn't changed much since 1836--is that the roofs of the better houses are flat and cemented with plaster or other cementitious materials. These roofs need replastering and other maintenance periodically, which requires ladders. Plus, back in the day, Mexicans liked to relax on their azoteas (flat roofs), and, except in cases where there was a built-in stairway to the roof, they got up there using movable ladders.
Years ago in Saltillo, I watched a crew of plasterers renewing the surface of a flat roof. They had a home-made ladder, very lightweight, with rungs lashed to the uprights with shrunken rawhide. It was tall enough to just reach the top of a one-story wall. The workmen let me climb their ladder up to the top of an adjacent roof to take some photos. It was a rickety affair, and plenty scary to climb, but it got the job done.
I bet when the Mexicans entered Bexar 1836, there were plenty of such ladders around for the taking.
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Jun 17, 2008 22:11:43 GMT -5
Great picture -- I'd never considered that possibility for a ladder. This thread has had some interesting posts. Thanks. It was just a thought that came to me based on the stated shortage of wood and time constraints. I had not considered their serviceability at night and during combat, so I guess it's a log shot. I'm glad you enjoyed the picture.
|
|