|
Post by billchemerka on Mar 17, 2010 17:21:21 GMT -5
Its a small point perhaps but WBT received his "marching" orders on 21 January from Gov. Smith to reinforce the Alamo, and on that same day purchased the flag along with other supplies. I don't think its necessarily given that Travis purchased the flag specifically for the corps since his orders were to ride to Bexar.
Now I have my own question...can we get a good "reading" on the size of the flag based on its price tag? $5.00 in 1836 dollars amounts to about $120.00 in 2010 dollars. No, I have to disagree, Travis was intended to operate out of Bexar, under Neill's command, and in fact was still at that point hoping to go with everybody else to the Rio Grande. There was no reason at all for him to be buying a flag to fly over Bexar and no reason to suppose it was for anything other than his cavalry unit as all the other supplies he purchased were for his men. As for the flag itself; whether $5 equates in modern terms to $90 or $120, it doesn't sound that cheap; it could have had a painted device on it, but I'd say the cost isn't at all inconsistent with the ammount of sewing needed to produce a star and stripes - has anybody got a contemporary price comparator for producing a real US flag? It is too difficult to make a worthy comparison regarding flag costs. For example, Mary Pickersgill was paid $405.90 to make the large Fort McHenry Flag; she was paid $168.54 to make the smaller battle flag. Today, American flags run the gamut of costs because of size and material (polyester and cotton remain the two major fabrics). Now then, my Civil War unit's recreated flag in silk cost about $1,500 several years ago. So, the price of Travis' flag becomes a difficult denominator in the computation of flag costs.
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Mar 18, 2010 0:29:18 GMT -5
Based upon the econometric formula used in the article"Alamoney: How Much is That in 1836 Dollars ( The Alamo Journal, #111, Dec. 1998), the general price level of all goods & services in 1836 applied to the most recent year yields a multiplier of 19. Hence, five 1836 dollars translates to approximately ninety-five 2009-10 dollars. All the best. Bill, I used the Consumer Price Index calculator on the measuringworth.com website which gave me a relative price of $119.00 for a $5.00 1836 flag. Ninety-five dollars is still a considerable cost for a flag too small to fly over a garrison, so either amount works in terms of raising the question...what size was the banner?
|
|
|
Post by sitges on Mar 18, 2010 0:32:02 GMT -5
In regards to flag costs is an incident dubiously similar to the Alamo, the Patriot Hunter movement in 1837-1838. Emulating their southern brothers in Texas, under the guise of fighting tyranny and oppression, launched several attacks into Upper Canada. Their belief being a heroic ,short term stand by Americans would inspire the Canadian people to take up arms in a Republican cause and be unburdened of their British yoke. The most ambitious attack, against Prescott was launched through Onondaga County in the state of New York. Made by Hunter ladies and given to their commander Nils von Schoultz was the flag of the Onondaga Hunters. The banner was of white silk with a dark blue border and a central device consisting of a Republican eagle with wings outstretched and two stars,beneath which was an embroidered scroll bearing the words '"Liberated by the Onondaga Hunters." (Lt. Leary RN 1838 testimony) The flag was captured and examined by Captain Hamilton Jessup who was dutifully impressed with the workmanship and estimated it cost at least $125. (Canada National Archives). Granted the Northern states were more prosperous, however Travis' $5.00 flag doesn't sound all that ostentatious anymore.
|
|
|
Post by sitges on Mar 18, 2010 1:24:12 GMT -5
In my last post I mentioned the two stars in the Onondaga Hunter flag. During that same year along the Detroit frontier was another invasion by Patriot Hunters into Windsor Upper Canada under General Putnam and Colonel Harvell. The skirmish ended with Harvell a native of Kentucky being killed wrapped in their hunters flag, "a tricolor with a crescent and two stars" (McLeod A brief Review of the Settlement of Upper Canada 1841). It dawns on me what the signifigance of the two stars are, and the two stars on the tricolored Seguin flag. The consensus has always been that the two stars represented the states of Texas and Coahila Were we all wrong, or have I stayed up way to late tonight. Due to the similarity of the three examples in the same timeline, could two stars represent: (1) the star of the United States as the beacon of liberty and the divine virtues of Republican democracy. (2 ) the star of the "new" country standing along side the U.S. embracing freedom loving peoples wherever they might be found
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Mar 18, 2010 1:24:55 GMT -5
No, I have to disagree, Travis was intended to operate out of Bexar, under Neill's command, and in fact was still at that point hoping to go with everybody else to the Rio Grande. There was no reason at all for him to be buying a flag to fly over Bexar and no reason to suppose it was for anything other than his cavalry unit as all the other supplies he purchased were for his men. As for the flag itself; whether $5 equates in modern terms to $90 or $120, it doesn't sound that cheap; it could have had a painted device on it, but I'd say the cost isn't at all inconsistent with the ammount of sewing needed to produce a star and stripes - has anybody got a contemporary price comparator for producing a real US flag? Stuart,
I'll address the second part first. The Alamo purchased a 28-star U.S. flag which is currently being flown in the Cavalry Courtyard. If memory serves me correct, it cost about $150, the stars as well as the stripes being sewn.
As for Travis, he penned a letter in San Felipe 21 January in which he wrote I am ordered off to the defense of San Antonio, which is threatened with an attack from the enemy.
Days later, having suffered the desertion of nine men, Travis wrote two letters on consecutive days (28 February/29 February) to Gov. Smith from Burnham's Ferry. The first letter makes no mention of the Rio Grande. The second I am willing, nay anxious to go to the defence of Bexar, and then later I am now convinced that none but defensive measures can be pursued at this inclement season --. Travis does mention the Nueces and San Patricio but only to send his men there, not to accompany them. At this juncture, WBT speaks of counter marching, being relieved of his orders or superintending the recruiting process. These are his hopes as written, and if nothing else, he is prepared to resign his commission.
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Mar 18, 2010 1:47:54 GMT -5
The flag was captured and examined by Captain Hamilton Jessup who was dutifully impressed with the workmanship and estimated it cost at least $125. (Canada National Archives). Granted the Northern states were more prosperous, however Travis' $5.00 flag doesn't sound all that ostentatious anymore. I don't want to wander too far off topic here but by $125, was Jessup referring to Canadian pounds or US dollars? I think in the 1820s and 1830s, the exchange rate for the Canadian pound was based on its value relative to the Spanish dollar, and even that varied between Upper and Lower Canada.
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Mar 18, 2010 2:18:48 GMT -5
As for Travis, he penned a letter in San Felipe 21 January in which he wrote I am ordered off to the defense of San Antonio, which is threatened with an attack from the enemy.Days later, having suffered the desertion of nine men, Travis wrote two letters on consecutive days (28 February/29 February) to Gov. Smith from Burnham's Ferry. The first letter makes no mention of the Rio Grande. The second I am willing, nay anxious to go to the defence of Bexar, and then later I am now convinced that none but defensive measures can be pursued at this inclement season --. Travis does mention the Nueces and San Patricio but only to send his men there, not to accompany them. At this juncture, WBT speaks of counter marching, being relieved of his orders or superintending the recruiting process. These are his hopes as written, and if nothing else, he is prepared to resign his commission. [/font][/quote] Ah, but you're still missing the point. Travis was being sent, with his cavalry regiment, to join the existing garrison at Bexar and serve there under Colonel Neill. There was absolutely no need for him to buy a big flag to be flown over Bexar as the place already had an officer commanding and its own flag. In any case, given that his account book related to the purchase of supplies for himself and for his own men, the fact that he said nothing about the flag being for any other purpose also clearly indicates it was an unremarkable purchase for his own unit.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Mar 18, 2010 4:38:56 GMT -5
Days later, having suffered the desertion of nine men, Travis wrote two letters on consecutive days (28 February/29 February) to Gov. Smith from Burnham's Ferry. [/font][/quote] I'm guessing you meant Jan. 28 and 29, seeing as Travis was already deep into the siege and holed up in the Alamo on Feb. 28 and 29, and nowhere near Burnham's Ferry. I'm just yanking your chain. I do those kinds of slips all the time. Very interesting thread, but I believe Stuart makes a strong point about command of the Alamo and a garrison flag at the time of WBT's arrival. In fact, Travis didn't have sole command of the garrison until Bowie relinquished his half early in the siege, which was long after Neill left to tend to family matters.
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Mar 18, 2010 8:51:49 GMT -5
Ah, but you're still missing the point. Travis was being sent, with his cavalry regiment, to join the existing garrison at Bexar and serve there under Colonel Neill. There was absolutely no need for him to buy a big flag to be flown over Bexar as the place already had an officer commanding and its own flag. In any case, given that his account book related to the purchase of supplies for himself and for his own men, the fact that he said nothing about the flag being for any other purpose also clearly indicates it was an unremarkable purchase for his own unit. With all due respect, Stuart, not missing the point. Just comparing your analysis of Travis' hopes with what he actually wrote on 28 January/29 January (thanks Paul!)
I'm not certain what size the Travis flag was, or what it looked like, I simply believe that Travis would have chosen to fly the flag he had purchased.
|
|
|
Post by Herb on Mar 18, 2010 11:42:53 GMT -5
Given the historical record, there are a couple of assumptions that are safe to make. First as Stuart says when Travis bought the flag all he knew was the was going to command the Texas Army's Regular Cavalry Bn. Obviously the flag purchased was met to be either the Bn flag or the guidon for Forsyth's Company. Very clearly it was not a garrison flag.
Using Hiram's modern dollars, and my personal experience of buying several guidons - the flag sounds like it was larger than a guidon but significantly smaller than Battalion colors - of course material and craftsmanship would be the deciding factor in determing its size.
If you carefully read Neill's letter of January 28th, you'll see that Neill fully intended to use Travis's command as cavalry once Travis arrived in Bexar, to delay Sesma's anticipated march along the Camino Real west of San Antonio.
|
|
|
Post by marklemon on Mar 18, 2010 18:40:13 GMT -5
The two star tricolor may have been the garrison flag by default, since it appears that it may have been the largest flag in possession of the garrison at the time. Travis' flag, be it star and stripes or something else, does after all, seem to have been intended for a cavalry troop. It probably ended up being flown, either outside his HQ, or perhaps even atop the wall near his quarters. Or, it may even have been hung on the wall inside his HQ. The NOG flag was obviously too small to have served at the main flag of the fort, and wouldn't have been appropriate for that purpose anyway (although I do believe it was flown, tied to a staff, at the battle).
|
|
nybob
Full Member
Posts: 26
|
Post by nybob on Mar 20, 2010 23:17:27 GMT -5
Pardon my ignorance but i have a two questions about the 1824 flag. Do most historians agree it existed? Do most historians agree it was never flown over the alamo during the siege as i have been reading recently? I just can't bring myself to take down the 1824 flag from my diorama. Bob
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Mar 21, 2010 4:47:46 GMT -5
There's no doubt it existed Bob, as you'll see by the references quited above, but no, it wasn't flown during the siege.
Paring the question right back, when what became the Texas revolution began, the Texians were officially lining up behind the suppressed Mexican constitution of 1824; hence the flag, which was flown over Bexar right up to the moment James Grant and his men marched out, heading for Matamoros. Those who stayed behind wanted out of Mexico - and its constitution of 1824, hence the switch to the tricolour with two stars, which may have had a significance all of its own which we can only guess at, or as I suggest the stars were simply added to cover over the Constitution of 1824.
Either way the version from John Wayne's film was only ever flown above Bracketville
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Mar 21, 2010 6:47:53 GMT -5
Either way the version from John Wayne's film was only ever flown above Bracketville I'm chuckling rather loudly on this (I'm surprised I didn't wake up my wife), only because I plugged in Wayne's "Alamo" yesterday, and thought the same thing when I saw the boys raising the "1824" flag. You are absolutely correct. Paul
|
|
|
Post by sitges on Mar 22, 2010 14:27:49 GMT -5
Yes but I did like the way the movie began with Houston riding in to San Antonio with the plain tricolor flying at the Texan headquarters. Skipping ahead to the flag raising ceremony where the 1824 was added, although the transition was unexplained (to the uninitiated), I thought very cinematically stirring.
|
|