|
Post by Jim Boylston on Jan 5, 2008 17:14:00 GMT -5
Here's a link to another interesting blog on the subject fo the letter: blog.myfinebooks.com/davy_crockett/index.htmlBe advised that the writer gets some details wrong...the Alamo does not hold the original of the Flowers letter. The DRT library had a photostat on file of the Tennessee version of the Flowers letter (which also doesn't match Crockett's handwriting). Trust me, we've been over this Flowers letter issue more than once with the DRT library, and no one has ever suggested that they hold the original. As Allen mentioned, the Texas fake is likely an attempt to copy the Tennessee letter. Jim
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Jan 8, 2008 3:16:35 GMT -5
With the long history of Alamo/Texas Republic document forgery in this state, it's almost like some collectors and depositories want to be fooled. I just don't get it.
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jan 8, 2008 11:14:29 GMT -5
There probably was a desire to believe the letter was authentic, but the THC rushed ahead due to the fear of losing budgeted funds if they weren't spent before the deadline. I think they were cautious in stipulating that the sale was conditional on verifying the letter and, in the end, they didn't spend anything. So, it could have been worse.
The fact that it's clearly a forgery raises increased doubt as to the letter's authenticity at all. The only other known versions are hand-written copies (not in Crockett's hand) and various typescripts. No original has ever been found and the letter has very sketchy provenance. And there are the internal problems in the letter itself, which Jim has mentioned.
Until someone comes up with some new evidence regarding this letter's authenticity, there remain serioius doubts about this letter.
AW
|
|
|
Post by bobdurham on Jan 11, 2008 0:41:55 GMT -5
I was doing some research in old newspapers and just found a reprint of Crockett's letter to the Mississippi convention -- a tongue in cheek letter saying that he didn't want to be nominated for president and recommending Martin Van Buren instead. I tried to find a reference to the letter in "Three Roads to the Alamo" but couldn't, although it does talk about the Mississippi convention. Jim and Allen -- do you know if this letter was actually penned by Davy or ghost written by some political hack?
It was sort of interesting -- the newspaper (from Urbana, OH) printed the letter in January 1835 but the letter was originally sent to the convention in December 1833 -- I don't know why they printed it over a year later. Maybe it was just a slow news day and they found it in their files and decided to go with it. . .
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Jan 11, 2008 10:31:37 GMT -5
Bob,
In 1833 the Mississippi State Convention asked Crockett for permission to offer him as a candidate for the presidency. Crockett declined, quite possibly in writing, but, if he did, the letter has not survived. However, he used the offer a year later to help lampoon the Jacksonians.
In 1834, the same Mississippi Convention asked Thomas Hart Benton to run for Vice President on an anti-Van Buren ticket. Most of the Tennessee congressional delegation asked Judge Hugh Lawson White to head the ticket, which was a slap in Old Hickory’s face, since he had designated Van Buren as his successor. Many in the south preferred a southern president, rather than New Yorker Van Buren.
Benton turned down the offer and upended the Whigs by endorsing Van Buren!! This, of course, helped the Van Buren campaign and his supporters got Benton to publish a letter explaining his reasons for supporting Van Buren, which provided terrific anti-Whig fodder. Crockett’s letter is a satirical spoof of that Benton letter. It is dated 1833 to suggest it was actually written at that time, when the same convention had asked Crockett to run, but it had to have been written after Benton’s letter appeared. Parodying Benton, Crockett also “endorses” Van Buren, but says that it will be his turn to run next time.
How much of the letter was written by Crockett and how much was edited or enhanced by others isn’t clear, as with most of Crockett’s published letters. Crockett does appear to have played some role in drafting the letter, but it was very likely a team effort by the Whigs. In other correspondence he mentions drafting such a letter and later of having seen it published in the Whig press. So he certainly wrote something, but it was likely polished either by other Whigs, newspaper editors (common at the time), or both.
AW
|
|