|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Mar 26, 2011 21:13:23 GMT -5
A sidebar will be inserted here. As researchers, we typically approach a subject with a predisposed opinion of what we will find and what our conclusions will be. We are consciously, or more often, subconsciously, seeking the information, which will confirm our feelings and opinions.
That being stated, I think it is imperative that we fight that natural urge when confronted by conflicting information, and that we weigh the information on its own merits, and then try to come to a rational conclusion.
This is by no means the final word, and like most aspects of the Alamo, the work continues…
This is so true. Beware the black swan. There are far more exceptions than absolutes. |
|
|
|
Post by Jake on Mar 29, 2011 13:40:39 GMT -5
Hiram, I read back through the article I co-wrote on the statues that you gave the link to, over in the Compania Volante archives. It has this: "Thomas Falconer, who visited the Alamo on April 22, 1841, indicated that only two statues remained on the front of the church by that date, both in the upper niches. The lower niches were empty, but the two statues that had been in them were still nearby. One was lying 'in a stream of water near the building [the church] & the other was in the workshop of an Englishman who made pipes, vases & various ornaments as remnants of the Alamo ...'" Sounds like he's talking about your man Harvey Adams.
But, vases of wood? Still sounds more like stone than wood (you'd think wooden statues lying on the ground would have rotted away by then) ... indulge me, Hiram: go back and look at the Adams story about pipes again and tell us, does it specifically mention "wood" as the material the pipes were made of? You can make pipes of stone (meerschaum, isn't it? Fine, white limestone-like stuff?) as well as clay (kaolin, pipeclay), so I want to be sure you're not reading "wood" into Adams's statements because that's what pipes should be made of.
|
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Mar 29, 2011 14:01:40 GMT -5
I don't know how long this was the practice, but whenever I go to Williamsburg I'm surrounded by nothing but long-stemmed, white clay pipes. You can even buy them and smoke them (I've done it). As I recall, people would share these pipes in taverns in the late 18th century. After using them, they'd break off the part of the stem they'd been puffing on, leaving the remainder for the next person. When the stem was all gone, they pipe was tossed away. Hence, those very long stems on the new pipes.
Does anyone know when wooden pipes caught on in the U.S. and how common they were in the west by early 19th century?
Allen
|
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Mar 29, 2011 17:47:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Mar 29, 2011 17:56:01 GMT -5
Hiram, I read back through the article I co-wrote on the statues that you gave the link to, over in the Compania Volante archives. It has this: "Thomas Falconer, who visited the Alamo on April 22, 1841, indicated that only two statues remained on the front of the church by that date, both in the upper niches. The lower niches were empty, but the two statues that had been in them were still nearby. One was lying 'in a stream of water near the building [the church] & the other was in the workshop of an Englishman who made pipes, vases & various ornaments as remnants of the Alamo ...'" Sounds like he's talking about your man Harvey Adams.
RangerRod,
The Alamo monument which you referred to was carved by a English lapidarian by the name of Wm. Nangle, which when finished, toured the state and later found permanent residence in Austin.
A description of said monument is found in D. W. Baker (Compiler), A Texas Scrapbook, New York, A. S. Barnes & Company, 1875.
It reads as follows:
"This monument is ten feet high, and made from stone taken from the Alamo. The style of architecture is the Composite, and it is divided into ten sections. The 1st section, or base of the monument, is one solid piece, bearing the whole structure. The second section is a square plinth, neatly empaneled. The 3d section is a sub-plinth, with Gothic molding and roped head, symbolical of binding the whole structure firmly. The 4th section is the die, or main body of the monument, consisting of four panels in recess, supported by rude fluted pilaster sat each corner. On two of these panels are raised shields, on which are inscribed, in raised letters, the names of every man fell at the ever-memorable battle of the Alamo. Each shield is suspended from a beautiful wreath, in the center of which is a bouquet of flowers. The shields and wreaths sustaining them are encircled by honeysuckles and vines. On the other panels of section 4th is represented the skull and bones crossed. Above the skulls are two angels facing each other, blowing trumpets. Below the crossbones are the symbols of Time -- the hour-glass, scythe, and wings. Section 5 is a solid cap facing on the main body, projecting with Gothic moldings handsomely carved, representing oak leaves at the corners. At the top of the cap is a square facia forming recesses in which it is inscribed , in large raised Gothic letters, the names of the gallant spirits who fell at the head of the heroes of the Alamo. Each name -- that of Crockett, Bonham, Travis, and Bowie -- stands out singly in bold relief, on each of the four fronts. From the center of this shaft springs the main shaft or spire, and upper structure. Section 6 is a Corinthian base, supported at the corners by the tails of the dolphins, and at each side by the bomb-shells. In the panels of the base and over the bomb-shells, are raised hands in the grasp of friendship. Section 8 is the 1st division of the shaft, with raised fluted corners and panels in recess. At the base of each panel are cannon crossed in bold relief. Above these cannon, on each panel, is the Cap of Liberty, surrounded by branches of oak and laurel. Immediately above these, in raised letters, is inscribed, in each of the four fronts, March 6, 1836, the date of the memorable battle. On the top of this section is a cap, with raised fluted corners and recessed panels. On tow of these panels stand in relief, the heads of angels with wings. On one of the other panels is, in relief, a heart pierced with two crossed daggers; and on the other panel is a skull with twigs crossed underneath. Section 9 is the second division of the shaft, with the devices in raised Gothic letters, as printed on each side of the wood-cut of the monument above. Section 10 is a cap on section 9, forming four Gothic points; and in each, a recess panel, stands in bold relief THE LONE STAR OF TEXAS. Underneath the stars are raised daggers. In the center of the cap above the stars stand an urn with flame issuing from it; and at each corner of the cap on which the large urn rests, are four smaller urns, out of which also issues flame." |
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Mar 29, 2011 18:07:58 GMT -5
I doubt my gut feeling is going to help me reach a satisfactory conclusion, but my overall suspicion at this point, is that folks were grabbing whatever Alamo-related items they could get their hands on, and making all kinds of stuff with them, stone and wood alike.
I still like the theory that wooden statues might have been added at a later date than the original statues as a relatively inexpensive act of devotion. However they got there, Adams is describing something wooden in 1842. But of course, since the statues were already on the ground when Adams saw them, it could well be his assumption that they had come from the niches and not some other spot (perhaps inside the church.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Sylvain on Mar 29, 2011 18:21:07 GMT -5
My gut says the original statues were stone, not wood -- at least those in the outside niches. My guess is they had been there for a good many years BEFORE the siege and battle, and possibly there for several years afterward. I find it hard to believe that wooden statues would have survived all those decades exposed to the elements without rotting away. I mean, anything is possible, but I feel it is highly improbable. Anybody who has lived in San Antonio (I lived there for three years in the mid '90s) will attest to the fact that it can get humid and be hit with heavy rains, and so on.
If there were wooden statues found on the site in the 1840s, there's no saying where they might have come from. Is anyone familiar with any reports of such statues being inside the church at the time of the battle, perhaps in one of its small inner rooms which had a roof (since the middle did not)?
Paul
|
|
|
|
Post by Jake on Mar 29, 2011 18:22:07 GMT -5
Yeah, the white clay (kaolin) pipes are an archaeological prize when you find them, because there's a strong relationship between the size of the little hole that runs down the stem to the bowl (through which you suck the smoke) and the date of manufacture, so they're useful for dating archaeo. deposits.
In this country, Native Americans made pipes of catlinite and argilite, both soft siltstone, as well as soapstone, steatite, gypsum, and soft limestones. Making pipes from these stones and others is an ancient tradition here, and maybe anywhere that tobacco or other smokables are available. The requirement seems to be that the stuff be soft enough to be workable with the available tools -- the better the tools, the harder the stone can be. In the San Antonio area, we have quite a range of good fine-grained stone from a hard white limestone that is strong and fairly weather-proof and takes a good polish, to soft white stuff called caliche or caliche block (there's also a soft white clay called caliche, as well) that's pretty much chalk. So given good tools, you could make a pipe out of almost any of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jake on Mar 29, 2011 18:43:03 GMT -5
Yes, Hiram, you're right, the Adams references specify wood -- and the same reference link you gave us includes a footnote that mentions Nangle and his stone-carving operation, making pipes and vases from stone from the Alamo.
And yes, Kevin, there were several statues on the altar in the sacristy being used as a church, some of them pretty big (three or four feet high, if I recall correctly). Certainly some of the wooden statues being talked about in the Adams quotations could be some of those.
But like Hiram says, it remains possible that wooden statues were placed in some of the niches on the front of the Alamo during the period of renewed interest in the place in the period from 1803 or so to maybe 1810 or 1815 (or maybe later) when statues were placed in the upper niches. We just don't know enough about the history of the place in this period to know what might have happened.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joy Manuel on Mar 30, 2011 7:47:54 GMT -5
I read on this link below that the statues were made of Sand Stone. Could possibily be as alot of sand stone here. I think lime stone would have been better though. Quote from the link below : The exterior of the church was adorned with the statues of several saints carved out of sandstone www.tamu.edu/faculty/ccbn/dewitt/adp/archives/feature/statues.htmlJoy |
|
|
|
Post by Jake on Mar 30, 2011 12:25:21 GMT -5
Yeah, that was Ehrenberg who called it that -- but in German, which he wrote in originally, the word "sandstein" can mean either sandstone or an easily-carved stone of any kind, so he would probably call any of the local limestones by that same word.
|
|
|
|
Post by Joy Manuel on Mar 30, 2011 15:44:36 GMT -5
Thank you Jake, for enlightening me on that as I didn't know.  Joy |
|
