Post Office Burials Unearthed in 1935

[bmoses]

First U.S. Federal Post Office erected in 1886 on the Alamo grounds immediately north of Houston Street.


Image on the left shows excavation under way for one of the Roosevelt oaks. On the right, horticulturalist B. P. Roberts displays a handful of human remains.


One of the more interesting chapters in the history of San Antonio de Valero was the discovery in 1935 of human remains on the land of the Federal Post Office at the corner of Houston Street and Avenue E. Unlike formal archaeological work, information about these discoveries is largely restricted to newspaper articles. The exhumations of the burials were not recorded methodically and thus little is know about their condition and orientation at the time of the construction project.

The unearthing of 27 burials (or 28, as cited by a few sources) would not in and of itself be all that mysterious; burials around Alamo Plaza are numerous. In fact, records show that between 1724 and 1763, burials on the Alamo grounds included 867 Native Americans, 40 Spaniards, and four mulatos. There are also the remains of participants of the Battle of the Alamo which have remained largely unaccounted for. However, the “Post Office burials,” as they have come to be known, appear to have been something entirely different.

In 1886, the first U.S. Federal Post Office was erected on the site north of Houston Street and by 1890 it was opened for business. An extensive examination of San Antonio newspapers of the period made by George Nelson found no mention of the recovery of human remains during this initial construction. By 1932, Congress was prepared to appropriate funds for a new U.S. Post Office and Courthouse in Bexar County. The new building was to be the product of the Federal Public Works programs which had been enacted to relieve widespread unemployment during the Great Depression.

Before construction could begin, several oak trees said to have been planted between 1898 and 1905 by Theodore Roosevelt were scheduled to be moved. Transplanting began near the end of July, 1935, but the discovery of bones by horticulturalist B. P. Roberts halted the project. The first bones were identified at the base of a root ball near the southeast corner of the post office block. Soon other bones, all in relatively poor condition but clearly human, were pulled from the earth. The burials were described as being found at a depth of approximately four to five feet below the ground surface. News of the discovery quickly spread and rumors began to build about the origins of the individuals buried near the northeast corner of the Alamo. Local newspapers followed the excavations closely.

In the meantime, discussions were underway between the construction manager at the Post Office, the DRT, and the diocese of San Antonio about how to proceed. A contract was soon written and signed by the custodian of the Alamo to allow crews from the diocese to take over excavations and hold the skeletal remains prior to reburial. The diocese was also given rights to any Catholic articles found during the excavations (such as a crucifix or rosary beads). All other artifacts were to become property of the DRT and the Alamo. By August 9, bones representing 16 persons had been exhumed and gathered in several boxes by the excavation team. The majority of bones recovered were either skulls or larger bones as all others were had disappeared with time.

Excavations were halted on August 10, 1935, when it became too dangerous for excavators to work as the old post office was being razed. Test holes made for the new post office and subsequent steam engine work were monitored. By September, 1935, steam shovels were hard at work demolishing what remained of the old post office. No additional human remains were found but various historic artifacts including a branding iron marked “IX”, a doll, china and glass were collected by Mr. Roberts.

Just as quickly as the discovery of the burials had made the newspapers, talk of the burials soon dwindled and the construction of the new Post Office pushed forward. On the “feast of All Souls” day, November 2, 1935, a service was held for the individuals found buried beneath the trees of the old Post Office and their remains were reinterred in the new San Fernando Cathedral Cemetery, Number 2, located at the intersection of Castroville and Cupples Road. The bones remained there for the next 22 years when, for reasons that are a bit unclear, they were exhumed and reinterred at a new location in the cemetery some 100 yards away.

In 1989, the Texas Historical Commission contacted Dr. David Glassman of Southwest Texas State University (SwTSU, now Texas State University) at San Marcos and asked whether he would consider conducting a thorough examination of the remains. Dr. Glassman agreed and on April 11, 1989 the remains were once again exhumed from San Fernando Cemetery, Number 2.

Glassman’s letter report produced in February, 1994, outlined the general number and condition of the remains. “The bones were highly fragmentary with few exceptions, only small hand and foot bones along with teeth were recovered complete.” Glassman stated that he was unable to tell whether natural deterioration or previous excavation techniques were most responsible for the condition of the remains. He also noted that many of the bones exhibited pitting that could have originated from sever infections.

The remains were curated at SwTSU until January, 1994, when they were returned to San Fernando Cemetery. The remains were then reinterred with both a Catholic mass and an Inter-Tribal Indian ceremony.


Conclusions

Individuals who saw the excavation of the burials in 1935 said they believed the bodies had been dropped there in-mass. I could find no direct accounts describing the orientation of the burials and whether the bodies were laid prone, flexed, bundled, or in some other positions. Speculation as to the origin of the burials included early Texas settlers, Alamo defenders and victims of a cholera epidemic. Two competing theories tossed back and forth in the 1935 newspapers included Mexican soldiers and interments in an early church cemetery. Let’s look at these theories one at a time.

Mexican Soldiers

The argument for the bodies being those of Mexican soldiers was laid out in a 1935 newspaper article that claimed “…documentary research had revealed that the old post office site was the graveyard of 28 inexperienced Mexican soldiers who met their death probably without seeing their enemy.” General Almonte’s manuscript was cited as justification for the claim. The author of the article continued “…the attack on the north and northwest walls was confided to troops who had never received the baptism of fire before, and who were very much hampered by the cold weather of that northern state. After three parallel assaults and as many continuous retreats, it was decided to reinforce them with a few veteran troops from the other fronts of attack.”

While Dr. Glassman’s assessment that the individuals are Native Americans does not rule out the possibility that the burials could have been the bodies of Mexican soldiers, the presence of infants, children, and adults as well as members of both sexes greatly reduces this possibility. Also, the absence of military items as well as the presence of native and mission related items (projectile point, bone pendants, etc.) indicate conclusively that the individuals were in fact Native Americans. The idea that the burials had anything to do with the Battle of the Alamo (or the Siege of Bexar the previous year for that matter) can thus be ruled out.

Native Americans at an Early Jacal Church

Another argument put forward in 1935 newspaper articles was that the burials were related to a long forgotten cemetery of a first jacal church constructed in 1727. According to the article, this first church lasted for 18 years until a second church (this time made of stone) could be constructed in 1745 at or near the church's current location. The article also suggested that there were 685 burials at the first church location.

But historians are relatively certain that the locations of most structures have been accounted for and a “first church” in this area would truly be a surprise. As Jake Ivey noted in a personal communication, ”… because all the churches we have reference to have been accounted for, more or less, down by the standing church, that leaves burials that were not consecrated. Mr. Ivey went on to point out the possibility “…that some of the occupants of the village were living there but not baptized and therefore buried in a non-Christian area near the temporary houses.”

One must also consider the plausibility that somewhere in the vicinity of the Alamo is an as yet unaccounted for site, the original settlement, the "Indian village" of Valero. I will speculate no further…only scientific investigations and thorough historical research can begin to shed light on this uniquely San Antonio mystery. It is possible that additional burials and other valuable archaeological information may be present in the vicinity of Houston Street and Avenue E.

[Jim Boylston]

Thanks for posting this, Bruce. These burials have long been a cloudy topic of discussion, and it's good to have some details on the find.
Jim

[stuart]

Yes indeed, very useful although for the sake of completeness it should also be worth including that 1935 San Antonio Express article in which Charles Herff claimed 13 or 14 headless bodies were found 50 years earlier when the Post Office basement was dug.

As we know he also claimed to have been told by old-time Tejano residents that some defenders were buried there.

Without any other evidence its probably most likely that they were also associated with this possible mission cemetary but the headless business is still interesting and I wonder if rather than Alamo defenders they may have been earlier rebels from the 1810-20 period executed in Bexar and then buried in what was still remembered as a proper burying ground.

[bmoses]

The Charles Herff article is one I have heard of but never actually seen. George Nelson tried to verify Herff's account by rifling through the 1886-90 newspaper articles. George was hoping to find some mention of burials at the time of the basement excavation but came up with nothing. He said that he went through so many newspapers, (I believe he worked for two or three weeks scanning through microfiche) that by the end it all just zipped by in a blur. He was able to find numerous article reporting on the construction of the building but absolutely nothing on burials at the site. I would have to think that at least some passing mention would be made of numerous headless burials discovered during the excavation.

I'm not saying that Charles Herff was a liar, but there seems to be no verification of his story. Skulls were well represented in the sample studied by Dr. Glassman (607 cranial fragments, a relatively proportionate amount of the overall skeletal remains).

I did notice that whenever a burial theory was put forward in each of the 1935 newspaper articles I read, skeptical critique of the information was notably absent. Each author put forward their own theory as if it were the only possible one in the world. I would like to see a copy of the article that discusses Charles Herff's memories. Better yet, I would love to see some other source that might verify (or refute) his claims. Either way, Glassman's study and the grave goods mentioned in the 1930s clearly points toward a Mission Indians scenario.

[Jim Boylston]

Just for convenience, here's a link to our previous discussion of the headless bodies to which Stuart refers.
alamostudies.proboards58.com/index.cgi?board=alamohistory&action=display&thread=1178812814
Jim

[stuart]

Bruce, all I have is the transcript by Tom Lindley in his Alamo Traces 328-30, citing the San Antonio Express September 1 1835

[TRK]

This is the Herff account, from the San Antonio Express, Sept. 1, 1935:


Pioneer Says Bones Were Texas Texas Heroes

Slain Men Beheaded After Battle of the Alamo,
Spared Funeral Pyre By Foes

There is no rest for the numerous skeletons unearthed at the site of the old post office!
Now comes Charles A. Herff of Seguin, a resident of San Antonio fro 81 years, who, from conversation with men who lived in the last century, claims the bones belong to Texans which the Mexicans decapitated following the Battle fo the Alamo.
Mr. Herff Declares:
"On Alamo Plaza in 1870 I had a conversation with a Mr. Menchaca and a Mr. Losoya, a Mr. Castañola and a Peter Gallagher, whose residence, by the way, was immediately back of the Alamo facing Nacogdoches street.

Place of Slaughter
"All of these men, who lived in the beginning of the last century, declared that the Texans, to a man, were slaughtered in front of the church, in a space between the Alamo proper and a building known as the powder house, which extended east and west in the center of Alamo plaza. This building was constructed of stone with very thick walls and was about 70 feet long, 20 feet wide and approximately 15 feet high at the highest point and stood exactly on the space where now stands a hollow imitation cypress stump on the plaza.
"The building was connected with the church proper by high cedar palisades and I can remember well some of these still standing. They were gradually whittled down by campers who spent the night in the open space of the plaza.

Used as Barracks
"My informants told me that not a single Texan fell on top or inside of the building where the long wall has been reconstructed running north and south from Houston street to the Alamo chapel. The building which stood on the garden site was occupied by a Spanish garrison when Texas still belonged to Spain and the few dismal chambers which were connected with the building were not used as places for either nuns or priests to do penance but were used entirely as prisons for refractory soldiers.
"They further stated that after the Battle of the Alamo Mexican soldiers began cutting off the heads of the Texans, but they were soon stopped by the Mexicans.

Bodies Cremated
"It became imperative by reason of the already existing unsanitary conditions to bury the dead as quickly as possible, but to do this was slow proceeding by reason of the rock bottom which is all around the Alamo. It was thereupon decided to cremate the bodies and a great funeral pyre served this gruesome purpose, which took place on ground located from Blum street south across the block to the Alameda, now East Commerce street, including the site where now stands the Halff building on the corner of Commerce and Rusk streets.
"I was told by Menchaca, Losoya and a noted Mexican woman by the name of Candelaria that the Mexican officers flet remorse for the soldiers having mutilated the dead bodies of the Texans and those were buried where the post office now stands.
"Those particular bodies were not burned. They were not buried where they fell, but were buried at the post office where there is a gravel formation which made the burials much easier. I can recall when the basement of the post office was excavated over 50 years ago, that 13 or 14 headless bodies were found at that time, which would confirm the statements made to me."


Just for convenience of comparison, let me add what Jim Boylston noted in the "Beheaded Defenders" thread concerning Herff:

"I found something in Hansen [The Alamo Reader], p. 539, that may add a twist to this Herff business. In a March 26, 1911 story about the funeral pyres from the San Antonio Express, this:
"The other pyre, which was of equal width, was about 80 feet long and was laid out in the same direction, but was on the opposite side and on property now owned by Dr. Ferdinand Herff, Sr., about 250 yards southeast of the first pyre, the property being known as the site of the old Post House or the Springfield House." (emphasis mine)
Could be that Charles Herff has his 1935 story confused with this earlier report. Perhaps his later mention of the "post office" is confused with "Post House" in this earlier incident, that was apparently on Herff property. The 1911 report also mentions bones from the pyres being moved, etc.
If remains were turned up in 1935 during post office construction (something we have yet to verify), Herff's explanation might have been based on a faulty recollection of this earlier story.
Jim

[bmoses]

Could be that Charles Herff has his 1935 story confused with this earlier report. Perhaps his later mention of the "post office" is confused with "Post House" in this earlier incident, that was apparently on Herff property. . . If remains were turned up in 1935 during post office construction (something we have yet to verify), Herff's explanation might have been based on a faulty recollection of this earlier story.

Thanks so much Tom for posting the article about Herf, its really nice to have all of the information together so that viewers can draw there own conclusions. I believe Jim nailed it on this one - and even without seeing the additional information about ther 1935 burials!

[stuart]

Right, so just to clarify things in my mind, we apparently have two different burial sites:

In 1935 what appears to have been an early campo santo associated with the mission was disturbed outside the Post Office

About 50 years earlier some other bones (headless ones?) were uncovered at the site of the old Post House on the Herff property

1. Have I got this right?

2. Where is/was the Herff property in relation to the fire house?

[TRK]

Just to be sure, I'd like to know where the "old Post House"/"Springfield House" was located.

I tried searching the Bexar County deeds for the location of Herff's property, but punked out when I saw the sheer bulk of land deals he did. Maybe a city directory or 19th century panoramic map of San Antonio will divulge the location.

[bmoses]

I just tried the same thing and ran into around 250 potential transactions for a Ferdinand Herff. There was only one conveyance that I saw from Ferdinand Sr. to Ferdinand Jr., however, this seems it could be the general location. I'll have to look at a city map to see exactly where this is.

...one fraction of Lot No. 3, Block 19 on the southeast side of Avenue C in the City of San Antonio. Said fraction of Lot No. 3 having a front of 15 feet more or less and bordering on Lot No. 2 owned by Ferdinand Herff, Junior and on the remaining fraction of Lot No. 3 sold to me by Adolph Herff on 8th day of September, 1884.

[Jake]

Avenue C is up north of the Emily Morgan -- the Liberty Bar is close to it.

Bruce, the 1727 report by Sevillano de Paredes does say that the temporary church in use at the time was a jacal structure (which could be either of wooden post covered with mud, or of any cheap construction, including stone) -- and we haven't a clue as to where it was, unless these burials are the clue. We have several other buildings of this period scattered in the area of the two courtyards north of the church, not following any particular alignment, and we have a small section of what was probably the original line of the acequia -- actually, zanja, in this case -- running across the north courtyard (this would have been the alignment before the big right-angled kink was built into it to go around the new rows of Indian quarters along the sides of the new plaza. Because these earliest structures and the ditch are all pre-plaza and don't follow its alignment, that means the church could have easily been over where the PO later went in.

[bmoses]

jivey said:

Bruce, the 1727 report by Sevillano de Paredes does say that the temporary church in use at the time was a jacal structure . . . and we haven't a clue as to where it was, unless these burials are the clue . . . We have several other buildings of this period scattered in the area of the two courtyards north of the church, not following any particular alignment, and we have a small section of what was probably the original line of the acequia . . .

Jake, have you ever had a chance to analyze these early adobe structures as a whole? I realize we have only gotten a very limited look at them but perhaps some patterns could begin to emerge if all of the collected data were considered together. It's interesting that so many early structures have been identified in the two courtyards - and the post office burials are right there, too. I'd sure love to get a look at what's under Houston Street!

[bmoses]

There is one additional article from the San Antonio Express relating to the burials that I had overlooked. The article is interesting enough to post here in it's entirety. The copy I have does not have a date on it but must have ran in late August or early September,1935.

Excavator Denies Bones of Soldiers

Finding of Skulls of Infants Indicate Indian Burial Ground, He Says

B.P. Roberts, who discovered a number of skeletons and human bones while excavating to remove a tree from the premises of the old federal building, takes issues with those who have given it as their opinion the remains are those of Mexican soldiers, buried there during an attack on the Alamo.

Roberts said there were no signs that the bodies had been given a church burial. They were found in many positions, some face down and lying across each other, Roberts said. After a careful search he was unable to find a button, nail, or any sign of wood or cloth having been used in the burial, he said.

"I found several children, some very small, and one in particular that had all the milk teeth in the lower jaw, below them the complete set of permanent teeth, which is proof that the children were not more than six or seven years of age," Roberts said. "I also found skulls of infants so small that the skull bones could not be taken up in pieces as large as a silver dollar. Judging from the teeth and general outlines of the skulls several evidently were females.

"I found two bodies that had been buried with beads on their necks. The beads were not rosaries. One had a copper ring on a finger. One very fine-sharp arrowhead also was found. There was some shell money and quite a few pieces of small shell carvings."

The bones were taken in charge by H.M. Flores of San Fernando Cemetery and the relics were given to the Alamo.

Roberts said those familiar with the history of the area said there was a wall that crossed near where the bones were found, built about the same time as the Alamo. Traces of the wall were found, Roberts said, and it came into the excavations from the east side, and has a depth of about three feet below the surface. He said some of the bodies were a foot below and underneath the wall, indicating the bodies were placed there before the wall was built.

"It is my belief that the bones are the bones of Indians who were killed and buried hurriedly, either by their own tribe or the very earliest settlers," Roberts said. "I certainly feel Mr. Flores is correct about this being a cemetery at one time. I know there are more bodies there and as excavations proceed they will be found buried, as they would be by the church."

The passage here that I find most intriguing is the reference to a wall crossing ". . . near where the bones were found, built about the same time as the Alamo." I thought it might be the eastern portion of the northeast perimeter wall north of the courtyards until Roberts added that ". . . it came into the excavations from the east side, and has a depth of about three feet below the surface." This clearly identifies an east/west trending wall north of the North Courtyard but too far south to be the northern wall of the compound. Any adeas?

[TRK]

This clearly identifies an east/west trending wall north of the North Courtyard but too far south to be the northern wall of the compound.

Bruce, your map in the Alamo Archaeology Overview thread locates the site of this find (albeit giving the year as 1931) as within the main compound of the Alamo, a bit south of the north wall and to the east of the centerline of that wall. By "North Courtyard" are you saying that you believe the bones were actually found to the north of the convento and cavalry courtyards, outside of the 1836 compound walls?