Johnson Pillow

[ronald]

I hate to keep asking about survivors, but lately I run across people claiming to be descended from someone who got away. A former football player on a radio show stated ancestry. com told him he was related to the Panther guy I asked about. Today on historical David Crockett s Facebook page a fellow said he had a relative,Johnson Pillow who jumped over the wall on the night of the 5th and got away to start his family's tree. I do find a Johnson Pillow who fought in the Mexican American war but in 1836 he was a lawyer in Tennessee. I ask you all because I respect your knowledge , and I bet you have heard almost all of the legendary stories. I have had a big interest in the Alamo since 1960 , I have noticed a lot has came to light in the last few years especially after Mr. lindley questioned a lot that was thought wrote in stone. In the 50s and 60s heroes. In the 70s and 80s cowards bad men , and now going backwards to Heros again.
A lot of new information seems to be coming up . And maybe it is just cool to be related to someone who got away.
I bore my wife and friends talking about it so I come to you asking questions. Thank You Shark

[Rich Curilla]

I would not put any faith in either of those stories. Both definitely sound like fake B.S. on somebody's part. I'm not an expert on the garrison (like Bill Groneman and others), but my solid background on Alamology suggests that these off-handed reports fit the old bromide, "If it looks like a fish, smells like a fish and tastes like a fish, it is probably a fish."

As for the changing myth of the Alamo, I think it's a product of writers (not historians) seeing a trend in readers and rising to the occasion by tugging the Alamo story in that direction. Most details of the battle as related by contemporaries in primary accounts can be interpreted several ways. By the 70s and 80s, readers no longer believed the over-Hollywooded original telling of the story (which was in itself largely folklore), so writers tarnished the defenders and what they did and why. Sold books. However, genuine research was going on during this time (largely thanks to the inspiration those movies provided us when we were young), and slowly, facts began to emerge and the accounts of participants on both sides began to be objectively evaluated. Intense researchers like Tom Lindley provided a lot of new information (although I disagree with many of his conclusions), and we are still benefiting from this. Folks like our own Jim Boylston and Allen Wiener provided us with a thoroughly researched and engagingly written book on Crockett's time in Congress, and thus filled in an almost total void in my Crockettology. Each of these many historians has his own views and biases, but the fundamental truth is rising with their collective work. So, in spite of Jeff Long's DUEL OF EAGLES, we are moving ahead. (Sorry, it is the only book in my extensive library that I consider worthy of being burned.)

[ronald]

Thanks for the feedback. I enjoy your posts,

[Rich Curilla]

Thanks. I DO get . . . entertaining. LOL.

[loucapitano]

Among my meager collection of sixteen Alamo books in my "Man Cave" Library is Jeff Long's tome, "Duel of Eagles." I'm glad to see others have the same opinion as I do, although I would not burn it until I removed the excellent maps and illustrations. In spite of his tendency to portray the Mexican forces and leadership as noble patriots yearning to expel the foreign interlopers and pirates from their beloved northern province while illustrating as many incidents of ignoble behavior on the part of Anglo-Americans as he could find, I think he failed. The drama and passion of the times comes through his bias and does not bring about the condemnation and shame he tried so meticulously to create. The research of the past 10 years has moved the pendulum back to a middle point that seems to be closest to the truth of what happened on the chilly morning near the banks of the San Antonio.
Lou from Long Island

[Rich Curilla]

Amen.

[5thgentexan]

Their seems to be a never-ending line of people who claim relation to famous people of the past, both real and created. Until it became very easy to disprove, there were scads of people who actually claimed TO BE famous people of the past - Billy the Kid, Jesse James, John Wilkes Booth, and, yes, even David Crockett. If we were still in that era today there would no doubt be people that claimed they were D. B. Cooper, Jimmy Hoffa, Kurt Cobain, Elvis, etc. So the next best thing is claim relation.
With sites like Ancestry, just knowing and being a part of history isn't that big a deal anymore. I've known since the early 70s my great-great grandfather came over from Georgia after Texas became a state. (My cousin was a history major and did the work for her thesis.) My brother cattle ranches that land to this day. Just being a being a small blip of Texas history is more than exciting to me. But some people want that famous claim to be able post on those sites and others. And claims like Pillow are the type that still, in this time, can't be totally disproved.
Where I am from in northeast Texas there were no end of Bonnie and Clyde claims and stories when I was growing up. There is no doubt they were in the area, and they died just across the state line in Louisiana. My grandfather told a story to my brother about people looking for loot they supposedly hid in the area. Of course, none was ever found. And there is no way they had contact with THAT many people the short time they were there, which was basically just passing through.
It's like the story Sting of the Police tells. Their first show was at the famous CBGB's in New York City in 1978. There were only a few people in the crowd. But Sting said he's had hundreds of fans tell him they were there, and I'm sure thousands claim this on the Internet. And probably a few "my father was at that show!"
Or maybe, slipped out early, undetected, into the cold New York night before the Police came on...

[Rich Curilla]

I myself am related to Santa Clause, through my aunt's sister's mother's daughter.

[loucapitano]

Rich...that means we must be cousins!

[Rich Curilla]

Apr 25, 2016 10:59:29 GMT -5 loucapitano said:

Rich...that means we must be cousins!

Yeah, maybe, but you're probably one of those... elves!