Alamo Archaeology

[Minimalist]

There is a diary of a Mexican officer, Col. De La Pena, who claims that Crockett was captured and executed on the direct orders of Santa Ana.

People are battling back and forth over the authenticity of the diary but it seems to have a lot going for it.

[Guest]

I don't know if this is the original source, but the expression is used in the film, "THe Man who Shot Liberty Valens

that is where i first heard it but i have heard it used in other places as well.

There is a diary of a Mexican officer, Col. De La Pena, who claims that Crockett was captured and executed on the direct orders of Santa Ana

that may have been the order but not the reality. it is possible that the dairy was written so that it seemed the order was carried out. i think it is going to boil down to which legend or text you want to believe.

[Beagle]

The De La Pena account has a few problems with it in terms of it's authenticity.

However Mrs. Dickensons account states the same thing about Crocketts demise and it is now pretty much considered factual that Crockett was executed by the Mexicans.

He was evidently bayonetted. There was a small group of defenders (probably all from the north wall - Tennesseeans) that surrendered at the last when the Mexicans took the mission from the south wall and they found themselves surrounded. They were later stood against a wall and mexicans bayonnetted them as Santa Ana watched.

This account is given both by Mrs. Dickenson and De La Pena.

In Tennessee, we're rather proud that the south wall was the only one not taken by frontal assault.

The Alamo is a story that will not go away.

[Minimalist]

It's an interesting debate.

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/040514.html

[Beagle]

The De La Pena diary not only has some genuine problems but is genuinely hated by Texans and Tennesseans alike.

However it does corroborate the Dickenson version. She identified Crockett specifically.

Plus - it makes a little sense to surrender at that point. They had held 'till the fort had fallen (not a popular position here). But in fact, they were all caught in that deathtrap unintentionally. They just hadn't finished drinking all the liquor yet. Normally it would be impossible for Santa Ana to move an army across the Rio Grande and northward at that time of year.

Some believe that it was an El Nino year. He moved north with no hindrance from rain and mud and arrived in late Feb. Probably about 6 weeks earlier than expected.

Crockett went down to own land and to be political, not to get killed in an old crumbling mission.

[Guest]

Rather, de la Peña reports, Crockett was among a group of seven Texans who were captured in the battle and summarily executed soon afterward by order of the Mexican general and dictator Antonio López de Santa Anna.

nothing dishonorable about that.

That doesn't settle the question of Davy Crockett's death, though. Just because de la Peña's diary is likely authentic doesn't necessarily make it accurate. Even if de la Peña really did see Santa Anna order the execution of some captured Texans, how could he be sure one of them was Crockett? He'd never seen the man before, and his account gives no indication of any attempt to identify the prisoners at the time. De la Peña may have heard later (he actually wrote the diary several months after the battle) that one of the men had been Crockett, but that hardly proves anything – other witnesses claimed they'd seen the body on the battlefield.

this is compelling though. yet does it matter how he died? it doesn't change the event nor diminish their bravery in any way.


then:

The real mystery, though, is why people think it matters. De la Peña never suggests the executed prisoners were cowards – on the contrary, he writes, "these unfortunates died without complaining and without humiliating themselves before their torturers

[bold mine.]

[Minimalist]

It conflicts with the heroic myth put forward by Walt Disney, Arch. People hate to have their heroes diminished.

[Beagle]

http://www.lsjunction.com/docs/appeal.htm

The letter below was written by Travis soon after the Mexicans first appeared in the area around San Antonio. It is often referenced as a supreme example of the virtues of courage and self-sacrifice.

I started gobbling up info about the Alamo right after the Disney movie. The facts are different than the movie but they're still heroes.

Nobody intended to be there when the Mexicans arrived (see my post above Archs', we posted at the same time), but performed well under adversity.

My grandson was here several hours today, and I'm tuckered out.

[Minimalist]

My grandson was here several hours today, and I'm tuckered out.

Now you know how the Alamo defenders felt.

[Beagle]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/arts/ ... ref=slogin

Some Texans sought accommodation, some hoped for Mexican statehood, but after General Santa Anna’s maneuvers, many sought independence. As the general’s army marched to Texas to crush resistance, fewer than 200 rebels armed themselves in the crumbling fort of the Alamo, where Mexicans had, not long before, suffered a temporary defeat. This time the Texans also happened to have at least two legends of the American West with them: Jim Bowie and Crockett.

From Archaeologica News.

[Forum Monk]

I and a european colleague went to vist the Alamo during some free time while waiting for a flight out of San Antonio. Throughout the entire self-guided tour, I felt an eerie sense of haunting as if walking on the bones of dead ancestors. The european guy, just saw it an old relic in the middle of a bustling city.

There is a trend these days to malign and discredit our heros; Christopher Columbus, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, and now Bowie and perhaps Crockett. **sigh** Ok we get the picture. They were faulty human beings, but they still rose up at a time when needed and did amazing tasks.

[Digit]

These men knew what they were facing and what they were fighting for. They have earned our respect, modern footballers for example don't quite qualify for the same.

[Minimalist]

Santa Ana's army took a long time to make the march to the Alamo and Travis had every expectation of being reinforced. The completion of the Mexican concentration and the knowledge that reinforcements were not arriving happened close together.

A break out from the Alamo at that time would have been fiercely opposed by the Mexicans and Travis would have had to abandon his artillery. No one looking at the place could have had much in the way of expectations that it could withstand an assault. With the massacre at Goliad, Texas already had its rallying cry...they didn't need any more and Houston could have used a couple of hundred volunteers. So, the decision to stay was probably dictated by the unlikelihood of a successful withdrawal. They knew what was coming and stayed anyway.

Nonetheless, they seriously bloodied Santa Ana's army in the assault and Santa Ana himself made tactical blunders by sending many units off on extraneous missions thereby leaving himself with an insufficient force to confront Houston.

[Digit]

I watched a programme on the subject a few weeks ago Min and as I understand it couriers came and went through the Mexican lines and at least one man elected to leave. One out of some 180!
From my reading of the history of the French Foreign Legion your lot gave them a considerable drubbing as well!

[Minimalist]

Yeah, one guy sneaking out or a courier getting through in the dead of night is one thing. A mass break out by the whole garrison is something else and it was the Mexican cavalry and light infantry which arrived first and set up the blockade...such as it was.