|
Post by stuart on Mar 30, 2010 1:01:12 GMT -5
There's no misunderstanding.
We have a splendid portrait of an officer, who I will cheerfully concede (having found a larger version) appears to be a US one. Its just a combination of a gut feeling that the style of the uniform is a touch late for Fannin's militia days - and the old Great Grandpa's Trapdoor Springfield provenance thingy.
Yeah it was a bold statement, perhaps a little too bold, but I'm just aware of so many portraits of famous figures with a provenance as dodgy as this one which are blindly accepted as the real thing and have acquired a quite spurious legitimacy through nothing more than repeated reproduction.
|
|
|
Post by mustanggray on Mar 31, 2010 15:30:03 GMT -5
Steve Abolt and I had discussed this painting back the beginning of last year and I called him about it today after a brief exchange of emails. Some of the things he mentioned I had picked out but others I had not noticed, and of course his knowledge of period uniforms really helps in attempting to date this image.
Points of interest for those still following this thread;
-the hooked collar is adopted by the US Regular Army(USRA) in the late 1820's ('27 if I remember correctly) and was basically an affirmation of styles that were already common
-the slash cuff in this portrait is also found on USRA dress uniforms and militia uniforms of the period
-the false triple breasted coat is common for US militia during the period in question
-the subject in the portrait is wearing a tailcoat(also common for militias at this time) which shows off a welted seam on the trousers which would be appropriate for an officer and is seen on militia uniforms at this time
-the buttons and plate are appropriate for the 1820's-30's period(I plan on looking into the exact pattern of plate to date it soon)
-the eaglehead sword would be appropriate from the early 1800's through the 1830's-40's
-the hairstyle is very 1830's
-and while Steve made no assertations as to whether or not this is Fannin, he did mention the epaulettes in the portrait look to be the same style as those attributed to Fannin and there is an embroidered badge supposed to be Fannin's(part of the same set of personal effects) that matches the belt plate in the portrait
Whether or not this is Fannin is as with most things related to revolutionary Texas, never going to be known for sure. The portrait is however very appropriate for this period in question. Until further evidence can be presented to the contrary I think this image is still a contender for the only known image of Fannin(my statement, not Steve's).
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Apr 1, 2010 15:04:57 GMT -5
I respectfully stand corrected and will be glad if you would pass my compliments to Steve for sharing his knowledge :-)
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Aug 19, 2010 18:30:36 GMT -5
I found an interesting letter from Col. James W. Fannin that was once owned by Hays ranger John Trueheart. It was printed in the Bastrop Advertiser in the mid 1880s, but I don't have an exact date. Fannin sure liked punctuation. Has anyone seen this letter before?
Goliad, 28th Feb'y, 1836
Mr. Jos. Mims:
The advise I gave you a few days back is too true. The enemy have the town of Bexar, with a large force, and I fear will soon have our brave countrymen in the Alamo. Another force is near me and crossed the Nueces yesterday morning and attacked a party by surprise under Col. Johnson, and routed them- killing Capt. Peason, and several others, after they had surrendered. I have about 420 men here, and if I can get provisions in to- morrow or next day, can maintain myself against any force. I will never give up the ship, whilst there is a pea in the ditch. If I am whipped it will be well done and you may never expect to see me.
I hope to see all Texas in arms soon. If not-- we lose our homes-- and must go east of the Trinity for a while. Look to our property. Save it for my family, whatever may be my fate.
I expect some in about this time by Cogby and wish you to receive and take care of it.
I now tell you, be always ready. I have not as much confidence in the people of Texas, as I once had. They have been called on and entreated to fly to arms and prevent what has now been done. I have but three citizens in the ranks and tho' I have called on them for 6 weeks not one yet arrived- and no assistance in bringing me provisions. Even Texans refuse me. I feel too indignant to say more about them. If I was honorably out this service, I would never re-enter it.
But I must now play a bold game. I will go the whole hog. If I am lost- be the censure on the right heads- and may my wife and children curse the sluggards for ever. I am too mad, and too much to do anything but fight.
If my family arrive, send my wife this letter. Enquire of McKinney. Hoping for the best, being prepared for the worst. I am in a devil of a bad humor.
Farewell, J.W. Fannin, Jr.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Aug 19, 2010 20:12:16 GMT -5
I can't remember seeing this before...
|
|
|
Post by Allen Wiener on Aug 19, 2010 21:26:10 GMT -5
Many thanks for posting, RR.
Not at all the image I had of Fannin. This suggests that, thanks to Hollywood, I expect, Fannin has come in for some undeserved criticism. In fact, he appears to have good reason for not simply rushing off to relieve the Alamo, with the Mexican forces operating near him under Urrea. He also sound even more angry than Travis at the lukewarm support most Texans were giving the revolution at this point. I'm a bit rusty, but I believe Paul Lack's book has some statistics on the lack of support for the revolution on the part of most actual, long-term colonists. Here, Fannin says:
"I have but three citizens in the ranks and tho' I have called on them for 6 weeks not one yet arrived- and no assistance in bringing me provisions. Even Texans refuse me."
This would appear to support the suggestion that most of Texas did not respond or support the idea of revolution, and that most of the men under Fannin were not long-term residents of Texas, but new arrivals, as we have believed for some time (Walter Lord, among others, pointed this out long ago). The lack of broader support may have been the result of disagreement among colonists over how their grievances should be remedied: through a return to federalism and separate statehood for Texas, or complete independence. While there may have been broad support for the grievances, there was not for full indepdendence.
Allen
P.S. I knew that letter sounded familiar, especially that bit about "a pea in the ditch." It is quoted in part in H.W. Brands' "Lone Star Nation" (P. 387-8).
|
|
|
Post by Rich Curilla on Aug 19, 2010 23:10:15 GMT -5
The Fannin to Mims letter is in Jenkins' Papers of the Texas Revolution. Vol. 4; p 454; Item 2195. Except the closing says, "Forever, J. W. Fannin." rather than "Farewell, J. W. Fannin, Jr." I love, "I will never give up the ship, while there is a pea in the ditch." First time I read it, I went, "Huh? ?"
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Aug 19, 2010 23:26:25 GMT -5
Ugh! That's the one place I didn't look for the letter and was going to check Jenkins tonight. The ship, pea and farewell business are definitely in the Bastrop paper. It's still an interesting letter.
PS. You're welcome Allen.
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Aug 20, 2010 8:13:19 GMT -5
The Fannin to Mims letter is in Jenkins' Papers of the Texas Revolution. Vol. 4; p 454; Item 2195. Except the closing says, "Forever, J. W. Fannin." rather than "Farewell, J. W. Fannin, Jr." I love, "I will never give up the ship, while there is a pea in the ditch." First time I read it, I went, "Huh? ?" Ah.....
|
|
|
Post by alanhufffines on Aug 20, 2010 16:17:43 GMT -5
Steve Abolt and I had discussed this painting back the beginning of last year and I called him about it today after a brief exchange of emails. Some of the things he mentioned I had picked out but others I had not noticed, and of course his knowledge of period uniforms really helps in attempting to date this image. Points of interest for those still following this thread; -the hooked collar is adopted by the US Regular Army(USRA) in the late 1820's ('27 if I remember correctly) and was basically an affirmation of styles that were already common -the slash cuff in this portrait is also found on USRA dress uniforms and militia uniforms of the period -the false triple breasted coat is common for US militia during the period in question -the subject in the portrait is wearing a tailcoat(also common for militias at this time) which shows off a welted seam on the trousers which would be appropriate for an officer and is seen on militia uniforms at this time -the buttons and plate are appropriate for the 1820's-30's period(I plan on looking into the exact pattern of plate to date it soon) -the eaglehead sword would be appropriate from the early 1800's through the 1830's-40's -the hairstyle is very 1830's -and while Steve made no assertations as to whether or not this is Fannin, he did mention the epaulettes in the portrait look to be the same style as those attributed to Fannin and there is an embroidered badge supposed to be Fannin's(part of the same set of personal effects) that matches the belt plate in the portrait Whether or not this is Fannin is as with most things related to revolutionary Texas, never going to be known for sure. The portrait is however very appropriate for this period in question. Until further evidence can be presented to the contrary I think this image is still a contender for the only known image of Fannin(my statement, not Steve's). I realize I am late to this discussion, but the portrait has always fascinated me. I agree with Steve, it is OF the period but like all TWI items the provenance is in the pudding. Does anyone have the Georgia Militia regulations for the period to confirm if this is a Georgian uniform? Did Morse paint any other portraits? Did he keep any records? Is there a Morse scholar who can confirm his work?
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Aug 20, 2010 16:27:33 GMT -5
Steve Abolt and I had discussed this painting back the beginning of last year and I called him about it today after a brief exchange of emails. Some of the things he mentioned I had picked out but others I had not noticed, and of course his knowledge of period uniforms really helps in attempting to date this image. Points of interest for those still following this thread; -the hooked collar is adopted by the US Regular Army(USRA) in the late 1820's ('27 if I remember correctly) and was basically an affirmation of styles that were already common -the slash cuff in this portrait is also found on USRA dress uniforms and militia uniforms of the period -the false triple breasted coat is common for US militia during the period in question -the subject in the portrait is wearing a tailcoat(also common for militias at this time) which shows off a welted seam on the trousers which would be appropriate for an officer and is seen on militia uniforms at this time -the buttons and plate are appropriate for the 1820's-30's period(I plan on looking into the exact pattern of plate to date it soon) -the eaglehead sword would be appropriate from the early 1800's through the 1830's-40's -the hairstyle is very 1830's -and while Steve made no assertations as to whether or not this is Fannin, he did mention the epaulettes in the portrait look to be the same style as those attributed to Fannin and there is an embroidered badge supposed to be Fannin's(part of the same set of personal effects) that matches the belt plate in the portrait Whether or not this is Fannin is as with most things related to revolutionary Texas, never going to be known for sure. The portrait is however very appropriate for this period in question. Until further evidence can be presented to the contrary I think this image is still a contender for the only known image of Fannin(my statement, not Steve's). I realize I am late to this discussion, but the portrait has always fascinated me. I agree with Steve, it is OF the period but like all TWI items the provenance is in the pudding. Does anyone have the Georgia Militia regulations for the period to confirm if this is a Georgian uniform? Did Morse paint any other portraits? Did he keep any records? Is there a Morse scholar who can confirm his work? Sounds like a project! Go for it!
|
|
|
Post by Mark Barnett on Oct 13, 2010 11:27:12 GMT -5
I believe that this photo is the correct belt buckle (plate) seen in the Fannin painting. It's a rectangle shaped eagle design, popular with early militia from the early 1800's into the 1830's. I believe that the buttons may have had (eagles) on them -- (somewhat similar) to this one from the 1830's. May have been slightly different, but this should be close.
|
|
|
Post by mustanggray on Oct 25, 2010 10:24:00 GMT -5
Alan,
Steve(both of them) and I had talked about doing a study and presentation on the painting for my next(if I land one) TSHA session. I think there's certainly some interest in it...
SMc
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Young on Oct 25, 2010 13:03:27 GMT -5
Alan, Steve(both of them) and I had talked about doing a study and presentation on the painting for my next(if I land one) TSHA session. I think there's certainly some interest in it... SMc That would be a good one indeed...
|
|
|
Post by alamonorth on Jun 17, 2015 10:39:10 GMT -5
Not sure where to put this so this thread will do. The July issue of Military History magazine has an article on the Goliad massacre, but what gets me is how they use a picture of the execution of Maximilian in Mexico in 1867 to be representative of the end of Fannin.
|
|