The Blood of Heroes: The 13-Day Struggle for the Alamo--and the Sacrifice That Forged a Nation (51 page)

The proximity of the attackers’ heads to the guns in the windows above them is mentioned in Johnson,
A History of Texas and Texans,
vol. 1, p. 357.

The assault force’s lack of ammunition is mentioned in Joseph Lopez’s pension application, reel 226, frames 246–53, ROT (Republic of Texas) Claims (TSLA): “We… on the fifth day had not two loads of powder to each man, so short was the Texans of ammunition,” and in a letter from a participant that appeared in the
Portsmouth Journal of Literature and Politics
(New Hampshire), February 20, 1836, reprinted in PTR 3, p. 501: “Our little army had but one keg of powder, besides a few rounds in their pouches.” The action inside the Priest’s House is recounted in Mag Stiff’s “Notes on the Storming of San Antonio in December 1835,” PTR 3, pp. 388–92. Sánchez’s confrontation with Condelle is recounted in his diary, translated in Huneycutt,
At the Alamo,
pp. 13–18.

That some of the men were unhappy with the agreement is evident in Steen, “A Letter from San Antonio de Bexar,” p. 515, quoting a letter from battle participant William R. Carey: “The enemy on the third day of the siege raised a black flag (which says no quarters) and when we had whipped them by washing the flag with the blood of about 300 of them we should have made a Treaty and not a childs bargain… after we took the place and the child’s bargain made.” However, Sánchez, in his memoirs, wrote: “General Cós approved the provisions with some changes…. Never, never did he promise anything which stained our honor. And he specifically directed that two following ticklish articles be withdrawn concerning our withdrawing with all the honors of war, referring to: ‘The señor General, officers, and officials are to bind themselves not to oppose the people if they wish to declare themselves for the Constitution of 1824’ ” (Huneycutt,
At the Alamo,
p. 30). This indicates that there may have been some misunderstanding as to the exact meaning of this part of the capitulation agreement, perhaps due to faulty translation.

Though several Texian accounts mention figures of one thousand or 1,100 men marching with Cós, the general himself reported that he had 815 men (Cós’s report to Santa Anna, December 29, 1836, box 2Q173 [Texas 1835–1836], Archivo General de la Nación México, BCAH). The Mexican casualty figure is taken from Barr,
Texans in Revolt,
p. 69, the best single book on the battle. There is no dispute over the five Texian deaths.

The fact that most of the
presidiales
were unmounted is found in two places: Huneycutt,
At the Alamo,
p. 35, and Cós’s report to Santa Anna dated December 29, 1836 (box 2Q173 [Texas 1835–1836], Archivo General de la Nación México, BCAH). The list of captured items can be found in Newell,
History of the Revolution in Texas,
appendix 5.

A list of the supplies sent to Béxar by the provisional government can be found in a letter from army subcontractor Matthew Caldwell to governor Henry Smith dated December 19, 1835 (PTR 3, p. 253).

Details of the New Orleans production of
The Fall of San Antonio
can be found in Huson,
Dr. J. H. Barnard’s Journal,
p. 3; PTR 3, p. 382; Helm,
Scraps of Early Texas History,
p. 53; the
New York Evening Post,
February 1, 1836; Miller,
New Orleans and the Texas Revolution,
p. 141; and the
New Orleans Bee,
January 1, 1836. A listing for the New York production of
The Triumph of Texas
is in Joseph N. Ireland,
Records of the New York Stage, from 1750 to 1860
(New York: T. H. Morrell, 1866), vol. 2, p. 155. The New York newspaper quote is from the
New York Courier and Inquirer
(undated, probably early January 1836), in Gaddy,
Texas in Revolt,
p. 138.

S
EVEN
: “A M
ERE
C
ORRAL AND
N
OTHING
M
ORE
”

The chapter title quote is by Ramón Caro, Santa Anna’s secretary during the Texas campaign, quoted in Castañeda,
The Mexican Side of the Texan Revolution,
p. 101. The epigraph can be found in a letter from James Neill to Sam Houston dated January 14, 1836, and reprinted in Chariton,
100 Days in Texas,
p. 144.

The quoted description of Neill appears in Stiff,
A New History of Texas,
p. 277. The information regarding William Carey is from a letter from Carey to his brother and sister dated January 12, 1836, and reprinted in PTR 3, pp. 490–95.

Dances and celebrations occurred virtually every night in Béxar. For example: “You will excuse this scrawl as I have danced all night & am indeed exceedingly dull this morning” (Horatio Alsbury to Sam Houston, December 30, 1835, quoted in Chariton,
100 Days in Texas,
p. 78).

Information on Green Jameson’s activities as a sales agent is from the Brazoria
Texas Republican,
November 1, 1834, and February 14, 1835. The quote involving his plans is from his plat of the Alamo and accompanying key, reprinted in Hansen, pp. 575–76. Information on the artillery is from Lemon,
The Illustrated Alamo,
pp. 142, 144–45.

Neill’s letter to the governor and General Council dated January 6, 1836, is reprinted in Chariton,
100 Days in Texas,
p. 105. His January 8, 1836, letter to the same parties is reprinted on p. 114 of
100 Days in Texas
.

Smith’s letter to the General Council is reprinted in PTR 3, pp. 458–60. See also Chariton,
Exploring the Alamo Legends,
pp. 107–15, for a well-reasoned and insightful explanation of this episode.

Proof of Angel Navarro’s loyalty to Santa Anna and the centralist cause can be found in a letter from Cós to Navarro dated October 17, 1835, in which Cós acknowledges a patriotic address given by Navarro to the people of Béxar, reprinted in PTR 2, p. 145, and in a letter from Navarro to the commandant of Béxar transmitting evidence in the case of a man leaving Béxar without a passport and returning with one from the leaders of the revolt; see PTR 2, p. 218.

Details of the vandalism in Gonzales can be found in two letters written by Lancelot Smither to Stephen Austin on November 4, 1835, reprinted in PTR 2, pp. 318–19. A list of household possessions Susanna Dickinson left behind in her Gonzales house can be found in her 1849 petition for relief (folder 7, OS box 8, Memorials and Petitions File, TSLA).

Neill’s January 14, 1836, letter to the governor labeling his men as “easy prey to the enemy” is reprinted in PTR 4, p. 15. His letter of the same day to Houston is reprinted in Chariton,
100 Days in Texas,
pp. 144–45.

The
Telegraph and Texas Register
quote appeared in its issue of February 27, 1836.

The machinations that resulted in the army having four commanders are related in Brown,
Life and Times of Henry Smith,
p. 206. Further evidence that governor Henry Smith did not order the Alamo to be abandoned, and that Sam Houston knew it, is Houston’s January 30, 1836, letter to Smith, in which he writes: “Should Bexar remain a military post, Goliad must be maintained, or the former will be cut off from all supplies arriving by sea at the port of Copano” (
Life and Times of Henry Smith
, p. 181). Houston’s January 30, 1836, letter to Smith is reprinted in PTR 4, p. 194.

Johnson’s advice to Fannin is contained in a February 9, 1836, letter from Johnson to Fannin, reprinted in Chariton,
100 Days in Texas,
pp. 221–22.

Houston’s description of his friend Bowie and his orders to him are from his January 17, 1836, letter to Smith, reprinted in
100 Days in Texas,
p. 152.

The date of Bowie’s arrival at the Alamo has been a matter of minor dispute. A receipt datelined “January 18, 1836, Bexar,” with Bowie’s name on it as “Commandant at the post of Bejar,” was sold at auction and is now in private hands. While it is possible that Bowie left Goliad sometime on the seventeenth and arrived at Béxar the next day—riding hard and perhaps changing mounts somewhere along the way—it seems more likely, at least to me, that the receipt was either (a) signed by Bowie and predated or (b) dated in error. The distance from Goliad to Béxar was about ninety-five miles of rudimentary road, with more than a dozen creeks feeding into the San Antonio River to be crossed—normally two full days of hard riding, and very likely more, if Bowie was traveling with a group of thirty or more men, since a group of horsemen is only as fast as its slowest rider and mount. If Bowie and his men did arrive on January 18, it was at a late hour.

As stated, there is no hard evidence that Bonham (pronounced BEAU-num) and Travis knew each other in Edgefield, South Carolina, though they lived within a few miles of each other until Travis’s family left the area when he was nine. But they were acquainted in San Felipe, sometime in December or January, before Travis left for the Alamo in late January, if the memory of one woman, Clarinda Pevehouse Kegans, can be trusted. She was a young girl in 1836, and many years later remembered: “There had been a barbecue at Grandpa’s [at San Felipe] the fall before the war began. I remember it so well because it was the best ever held…. Mr. Travis everybody called him Buck except us children and his friend was with him. It was Mr. James Bonham and he was so nice and handsome he caused all the girls to swoon!” (“Memoirs,” unpublished manuscript, Haley Memorial Library and History Center, Midland, Texas).

Bonham’s letter of December 1, 1835, to Houston is reprinted in Lindley, “James Butler Bonham,” p. 3. His announcement of the opening of his law office appeared in the January 2, 1836,
Texas Telegraph and Register
. Evidence that Bonham accompanied Grant to Goliad is in the account of another member of Grant’s expedition: “Major Bonham of South Carolina, proceeded with us to Goliad, but returned to the Alamo, as he had received some appointment from Travis” (R. R. Brown, “Expedition under Johnson and Grant,” in
Texas Almanac,
1859, quoted in Mixon, “William Barret Travis,” p. 199).

Houston’s January 11, 1836, letter to James Robinson commenting on Bonham’s influence is reprinted in Chariton,
100 Days in Texas,
p. 126.

On February 2, 1836, Bowie wrote: “Capt Patton with 5 or 6 has come in” (Chariton,
100 Days in Texas,
p. 204), but many years later, sometime after 1860, Sutherland wrote that Patton’s company numbered twelve: “I proceeded, in company with Capt. Wm. Patten, and ten others to San Antonio” (Hansen, p. 138), and that number is supported somewhat by Sutherland’s audited claim, submitted later in 1836. He also claimed in his account that Patton’s company reached Béxar “about the eighteenth of January, 1836” (Hansen, p. 138), but that date is contradicted by his audited claim, in which he states that he was in Gonzales until at least January 27 (Hansen, p. 162), and by the fact that his first entry mentioning Béxar is February 1.

John Sutherland described the garrison’s sick and injured in his narrative, written sometime after 1860 and reprinted in Hansen, p. 141. Though Sutherland has been derided as a quack by some historians (most specifically by the late Thomas Ricks Lindley), the fact is that the practice of medicine at the time was primitive, and the Thomsonian system—based on the writings and practice of Samuel Thomson—was quite popular, particularly in the southern and western states. Some of that popularity was due to the fact that the system had achieved a certain degree of success. It was not that far removed from mainstream medicine of the time; there were no internists, and the only surgery was amputation or trephination—cutting a hole in the skull to relieve pressure. The understanding that bacteria and germs were the primary conveyances of disease and illness would not come until some years in the future. Doctors of the time could gain a diploma after two sixteen-week courses that featured no doctoring whatsoever, only solid lecturing and textbook study. Little was known of what caused sickness or health. It was believed (as it had been for centuries) that all disease was caused by an imbalance of the four bodily humors: blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile. Illness was thought to be the result of too much of one of these humors, and recovery depended on righting the imbalance through a variety of practices, such as bleeding, emetics, purging, etc.—a course not too dissimilar from the remedies prescribed by the Thomsonian system, which relied more heavily on the infusion of plant-based medicines. If John Sutherland was a quack, he was no more of one than most other doctors of the day.

The Napoleon statement about artillery is quoted in Stevens,
Artillery Through the Ages,
p. 47.

Neill’s estimate that four of five
bexareños
would flock to the Texian banner is contained in his January 28, 1836, letter to the provisional government of Texas, reprinted in Chariton,
100 Days in Texas,
p. 176. Bowie’s February 2, 1836, letter to Henry Smith is reprinted in the same volume, p. 204.