|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 25, 2010 13:05:35 GMT -5
Well, the silence here seems to indicate that this old death list is a well-known document even though I can't find it published anywhere. There's also apparently no mystery to Quartermasters Anderson and Burnell, although I wish they were recognized somewhere for their sacrifice.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Apr 25, 2010 13:48:34 GMT -5
RR-
Marty Brazil posted some copies of some documents from
Osterhout Family Papers, MS 355, Box 4 folder 7 item 2, Woodson Research Center, Fondren Library, Rice University
This includes a hand written muster roll of the Alamo dead, which I believe is copied from the 24th March, 1836 Telegragh and Texas Register. Your two lads on are it. I am not sure why your two guys are on these early lists and get taken off the later ones.
|
|
|
Post by alamonorth on Apr 25, 2010 19:25:30 GMT -5
I think that Neil's muster roll indicates an Anderson but not a Burnel.
|
|
|
Post by Chuck T on Apr 25, 2010 20:30:46 GMT -5
Anyone who has any pre-Alamo knowledge on Marcus L. Sewell in partiular where his familiy was from in England please post. This has to do with a promise I made to my grandson, whose last name is also Sewell, and his dad's familiy originated in England. He saw the Sewell name at the Alamo and asked as only a seven year old can his grand dad to check it out. I have some friends in England who are willing to look up a few records on that side of the pond but I need a starting place. Thanks in Advance -----Chuck
|
|
|
Post by alamonorth on Apr 25, 2010 22:31:43 GMT -5
RR, you have probably demonstrated that Henry Warnell, might not have been in the Alamo. Anyway in Neil's muster roll he has a J Wurnull listed in his artillery company. Is this the same as Burnell ?
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 26, 2010 2:18:23 GMT -5
Thanks fellas. I was beginning to think everyone was mesmerized by Tucker's tall tales. I havn't seen the Osterhout hand-written muster roll, but as I said on the other page, I've seen the early printed lists. QM. Sgt. A. Anderson appears at the top of Col. Niel's Feb. 14, 36 roll, but not Burnell as AlamoN stated. I was wondering why these gentlemen are exluded (books, websites, etc.) from modern lists of the defenders for no apparent reason. It seems like an injustice to me.
I don't think Coleman ranger Henry Warnell was anywhere near the Alamo because no contemporary record ties him to the place. J. Warnull (Wornel, Warnal or Wurnall) is apparently the soldier that served in Carey's artillery company and later died inside or outside the fort. His name is always spelled with a W, so I doubt is the same person as Burnell. There was a William Burnett in Capt. John York's 1835 Bexar Co. Volunteers, who may have hung around. At some point some recruiter or commander may have forgot to cross the TTs and it stuck like glue, making him Burnell. I'm just speculatin' on that type o' (typo) scenario, but it sounds good.
|
|
|
Post by alamonorth on Apr 26, 2010 11:53:23 GMT -5
Amelia Williams discusses both Anderson and Burnell
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Apr 26, 2010 21:24:33 GMT -5
Well, the silence here seems to indicate that this old death list is a well-known document even though I can't find it published anywhere. There's also apparently no mystery to Quartermasters Anderson and Burnell, although I wish they were recognized somewhere for their sacrifice. Anderson was added two or three years ago (perhaps someone on the Forum can pin down the exact year, to the list of Alamo dead recognized by the Alamo Defenders Descendants Association.
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Apr 27, 2010 4:40:18 GMT -5
Ugh! I checked Williams in The Southwest Historical Quarterly awhile back, but somehow skipped over the section where she's analysing Anderson and Burnell. I thought you were crazy until I looked over it again and there it was plain as day. It's interesting that we had some of the same thoughts on these two guys, but still not much information.
I looked at the Alamo defenders descendants Association website but I didn't see Anderson listed among the 195 or so defender names. I lapse over things sometimes. Thanks for directing me to it.
|
|
|
Post by Del Groves on May 31, 2010 18:45:12 GMT -5
Please note that I posted this in the Texas Rangers: William E Summers forum. Hello All, I am happy to have found this forum today! I am a Summers [from Maryland] researcher and believe that I am related to William E Summers d. at the Alamo, in fact, a 2nd cousin 7x removed. Our Summers kin began with John Summers who was transported 1671 [presumably from England] into Maryland. Just before and following the Rev War, descendants began migrating into other states, namely NC, SC, TN and elsewhere. Rev. Joseph Summers m. Eleanor Clary had migrated to SC and one of his sons was Jesse Summers m. Sarah Coate(s) and is my 1st cousin 6x removed. I descend from Rev. Joseph's brother Dent Summers. My particular Summers migrated about 1805 into Monongalia Co, (W)VA where I was born. Jesse & Sarah had several children: I have not identified any daughters but the sons are those listed in the 1861 document previously noted wherein they were making claim to any land bounty awarded William E for his service at the Alamo. Jesse & Sarah were in Edgefield District, SC in 1800 & 1810 census; by 1820 they had moved to nearby Newberry District and between 1820-1830 they had relocated to Clarke Co, AL. Some of their sons, including William E and Henry C G (and others) migrated to TX. All their sons would have been born in SC including William E so the official accounts of him being from TN are erroneous although understandable considering all the TN folks who came to the area and were at the Alamo. William E & Henry CG received Mexican land grants in 1835 in Lavaca Co; I'm not certain if they were part of the DeWitt Colony? As has been established. Henry CG was the Clerk for the elections in 1836 of delegates to the convention regarding succession from Mexico to form the Republic. Also, William E was a member of the Gonzales Mounted Rangers who answered Travis' call for reinforcements. Shortly after the fall of the Alamo, the Runaway Scrape took place as Anglos fled, most toward the relative safety of the NE corner of Texas where there was a concentration of Anglos and military. Also, Henry CG quickly sold his plot in Lavaca Co and thereafter, his trail has gone cold; I found a 1901 Federal court case brought by descendants of the man who purchased Henry CG's plot and it mentions Henry CG and William E. There are many descendants of this Summers family in Texas. Interested persons may view my genealogy gedcom online at this link: wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/cgi-bin/igm.cgi?db=delgrovesI have been in contact with another Summers researcher who has been in contact with the folks at the Texas State Archives. He questioned them about the 1861 document of the heirs (brothers) inquiring if was genuine and in the State's opinion it is. Of course, there is always the remote possibility that the claim itself was fraudulent i.e. the brothers heard of someone named Summers who had died at the Alamo. However, the details in their claim support that they are genuinely related. This document thus serves as further proof that William E Summers is a son of Jesse & Sarah Coate(s) Summers and that he no doubt was born in SC (probably in Edgefield District). .
Another question was asked of the Texas State Archives concerning the 1861 claim by the brothers; does the listing of all the brothers mean that they were necessarily alive at the time the document was filed? The State thinks they likely were which was an important element in my search for Henry CG and his descendants.
Based upon the number of acres of their respective 1835 land grants, it is presumed that William E was single and that Henry CG was married (and, may or may not have had children).
It is unknown what happened to William E's orginal grant; there is some info online that it was sold or that descendants were swindled out of it by an unsavory character.
It should be noted that the orginal land grant to William E in Lavaca Co is not the subject of the claim in 1861 by his heirs for bounty land awarded subsequently for William's service at the Alamo. Nor is it known if this subsequent bounty was actually issued or to whom (the brothers?) or what happened to it later.
I did find current (2007) state documents online of property valuations which still lists the original 1835 Lavaca Co plots in the name of William E and Henry CG. Apparently, this is the custom in Texas. I called emailed the Comptroller's Office who published this valuation but they had no additional information. They stated that original titles transactions are sent to the State level but that subsequent transactions (sales, etc) are only recorded in the respective counties. So, I guess a trip is in order to try to find out what happened to William's original land grant.
The silver bullet concerning William E's lineage would be to find birth records which likely do not exist for the time period of his birth. His grandfather Rev. Joseph Summers was a member of the Dunkards/Tunkards and I had hoped baptismal records remain but I have been unsuccessful in locating any documentation.
I welcome any comments and assistance. I especially welcome any Summers researchers to contact me.
Best regards, Del Groves grovesdel@gmail.com
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on May 31, 2010 19:51:33 GMT -5
Welcome to the group. One thing I do know with certainty is that there were no "Sylvains" at the Alamo. I envy folks who do have a connection to this moment in history. Moment, indeed. It is a "moment" for the ages that we still remember. You have a lot to be proud of.
Paul
|
|
|
Post by cav on Jul 1, 2010 9:51:39 GMT -5
There is a question, that I've been attempting to correct with some assistance. Lewis Johnson is noted to have been from Wales. Wrong!!! Lewis Johnson would be a Great Grand Uncle to me. And from what I've found, whomever put his birth place as Wales, didn't do any research. Thus, I'm attempting to clear up this mess.
|
|
|
Post by greatbigmike on Jul 1, 2010 11:10:44 GMT -5
Here is what the Texas Handbook has:
JOHNSON, LEWIS (ca. 1813–1836). Lewis Johnson, Alamo defender, was born around 1813, one of five known children of James Johnson, Sr., a Virginian who moved to Texas in 1829 with his family. On September 24, 1835, Lewis, from the Trinity jurisdiction, entered service as a volunteer in Capt. Robert M. Coleman's First Company of the revolutionary army. He undoubtedly was one of the thirteen privates in that company at Camp Cibolo on October 17, 1835, and one of the eighteen noncommissioned officers and privates of that company in the First Division of Col. John H. Moore's regiment at Camp Salado on October 21, 1835. He and his brother Frank participated in the siege of Bexar, after which his brother was honorably discharged and returned to his family in the Nacogdoches Municipality. Lewis, who was unmarried, chose on November 24, 1835, to remain at Bexar under the command of Gen. Edward Burleson. On December 14, 1835, he volunteered to garrison Bexar under the command of Lt. Col. James C. Neill. In February 1836 he was one of those at the Alamo who participated in the election ordered by the General Consultation for members of the coming convention. On March 6, 1836, Lewis was killed at the battle of the Alamo. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Audited Military Claims, Republic of Texas, Texas State Archives, Austin. Thomas L. Miller, Bounty and Donation Land Grants of Texas, 1835–1888 (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1967). Original Land Grant Collection, Texas General Land Office, Austin. Telegraph and Texas Register, March 24, 1836. Johnie Lee Reeves
(NOTE: "s.v." stands for sub verbo, "under the word.") The Handbook of Texas Online is a project of the Texas State Historical Association (http://www.tshaonline.org). Copyright ©, The Texas State Historical Association, 1997-2002 Last Updated: May 30, 2010
|
|
|
Post by gtj222 on Jul 18, 2010 23:01:49 GMT -5
I have a question. When Travis retreated into the Alamo, he writes that he had 150 men. Is this a figure that is accepted? I know there were 186 known men that fell in the battle and that Gonzales sent 32. Also 250 is a figure accepted for the total defenders. But my question is what number retreated into the Alamo on the first day of the siege?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Jul 19, 2010 5:35:09 GMT -5
I don't have a definitive number, but one of the things that tends to confuse the issue, at least for me, is how many sick and wounded from the Battle of Bexar in December, or from other causes, were among the numbers cited?
Several Mexican sources counted about 250 bodies that were collected and burned. Travis states 150 and, as you mention, the later 32 from Gonzales, brings the number closer to the oft-cited 186 or so defenders. My guess is that perhaps some of the wounded and sick were already in the Alamo and under treatment there, but I'm not certain.
Also (for some of our more learned members) hasn't there been some speculation that a second group of reinforcements made it inside the walls after the Gonzales 32, within a day or so of the assault, and is thought to be why the final body count by some of the victors was about 250? Having said that, I don't believe there's much substantiation for the second group, but I've read that somewhere.
Paul
|
|