How many people died at San Jacinto? In school they told us six actually died there. Did they all die there or did some die later?

Joshua Blake Young
Weatherford, TX

According to family legend, George A. Lamb was killed in the first charge on 21 April. Dr. Mottley, aid to Gen. Rusk, died in the evening of 21 April. Trask was mortally wounded serving with Lamar's Cavalry in the skirmish of 20 April and according to Dr. Labadie who treated him, died several weeks later in Galveston.

NINE KILLED OR MORTALLY WOUNDED

Lemuel Stockton Blakey, Benjamin Rice Bingham, George A. Lamb, John C. Hale, Thomas Patton Fowle, Dr. William Junius Mottley (mortal wound), Mathias Cooper, Ashley R. Stephens (mortal wound), Olwyn J. Trask (mortally wounded, 20 Apr)

THIRTY-FOUR WOUNDED

C.D. Anderson, Washington Anderson, Mosely Baker, Jesse Billingsley, James Cooper (died late 1836), James Cumba, Joséph Smith Edgar, Calvin Gage, Albert Edward Gallatin, Giles A. Giddings (died Jun 1836), Samuel Houston (severe), Allen Ingram (severe), W.F. James (severe), George Washington Lewis (Lonis) (severe), Thomas H. Mays, James C. Neill (severe 20 Apr), James Nelson, William A. Park, Michael (Mitchell) Putman, Elbridge Gerry Rector, George Washington Robinson (severe), William H. Smith, Alphonso Steele (severe), John F. Tom (severe), Thomas Utly (severe), Logan Vandever (severe), Elijah Votaw, Martin Walker (severe), William S. Walker (severe), George Waters, Leroy Wilkinson, William C. Winters (severe), Devereaux J. Woodlief (severe 20 Apr), William Foster Young (severe) [reference]

[TRANSLATION]

Republic of Texas, Military Commandency of Galveston
List of Mexican Officials who died in the action of San Jacinto, the 21 of April of 1836

Manuel Castrillon, brigidier general

José Batres, Antonio Treviño, Agustin Peralta, José Avenas, Esteban Mora, colonels

Marcial Aguirre, Dionisio Cos, Santiago Luelmo, Cirilio Larambe, Maríano Olazabal, Manuel Valdez, Francisco Aguado, Miquel Velasquez, lieutenant colonels

Nestos Guzman, Benito Rodriquez, Ignacio Berra, Ramon Herrera, Alonzo González, Antonio Frias, Juan Manjorra, Ramon Rocha, captains

José María Puelles, Luis Vallejo, Trinidad Santiesteban, Juan Santa-Cruz, Pedro Gonzaléz, Antonio Castro, José Sousa, Ignacio Brasail, Antonio Navarro, Francisco Molino, lieutenants

Joaquin Pavalta, Basiho Espira, Juan Montaño, José María Torrices, Victoriano Martínez, Secundino Rosas, sublieutenants

Total, 38 dead officials.

Official prisoners (the numbers indicate their respective age)

Martin Perfecto Cos, brigadier general, 33

J. M. Romero, 38; Manuel Cespedes, 38, Colonels.

Juan Bringas, 35; Manuel Partilla, 32; Pedro Delgado, 43; Eulogio Gonzales, 34, Lieutenant Colonels brevetted to the rank of Colonel.

José María Castillo, 37; Ignacio Perez Valiente, 42; Lorenzo Areos, 46; Nicolas Encino, 35; José Ma. Villafranca, 40; Vincente Avila, 55; Salvador Mojica, 30, Captains with the grade of Colonel.

Nicolas Telles, 26; Juan Baraneli, 26; José Lisanta, 49; Miguel Bachillet, 28, capitanes - Cayetano Villasenor, 28, Lieutenants with the grade of Lieutenant Colonel.

Martin Estrada, 23; Isidro Campos, 35; Tedesforo Carrion, 37; Felipe Briones, 23; José María Ortega, 34; Severiano Vences, 31; Ignacio Arenal, 25; lidefanza Vega, 29, Lieutenants with the grade of Capitan.

Maríano González Vega, 30; Mexicano Arias, 32, tementes Juan Ignacio Caranza, 25; Torribio Casares, 30; Juan Nieto, 19; Promoted to grade of Lieutenant.

Estanislao Piro, 28; José María Obregon, 36, Maríano Reyes, 29; Nicolas Diez, 28; José María Castro, 21; Rafael Arcunzia, Sub-Lieutenants.

Joaquin Aguirre, 19; Cadet
Agustin Ganza 44, Chaplain.

Injured and Sick

Felipe Romero, First Adjutant with the grade of Lt. Colonel.
Geronimo Colatayud, Agustin Sánchez, Lieutenant.
Miguel Perres, Manuel Cosio, Rafael Castillo, Matel Peraza, Sub-Lieutenants

Total 40 officials.

Copy - Galveston 26 May1836

[signed] Jorge Fisher

Reference: Djorde Ribar's (Jorge Fisher)

All compilations are subject to change with new information.

I need answers, please, to the following questions:
 

1. What was the approximate distance from the cemetery of Campo Santo in Bexar to the Veramendi house in town?

2. The approximate distance from the Veramendi house to the Alamo?

3. The approximate distance from the cemetery to the Alamo?

4. Was Bowie's late wife Ursula Veramendi buried in Campo Santo?

5. The approximate size of the cemetery?

Steve Hedgpeth
Bristol, Pa.

[The distance] from the Campo Santo (at the SE corner of Santa Rosa Hospital) to Veramendi house (Solo Serve) is approx 2200'.

[The distance] from the Campo Santo to the Alamo is approximately 4600'.

The size of the cemetery is approx 1/4 of a city block (I have the exact dimension on the old deed at the office, but doubt that it is that critical).

As far as I know Ursula was buried in Monclova, as least I've never found her entry in the records of San Fernando.

Waynne Cox,  Archaeologist UTSA
Archeaological Consultant to Alamo de Parras

In the older, more "traditional" accounts of the siege of the Alamo, James Butler Bonham returned to the Alamo on March 3rd, bringing the news that Fannin was not coming and that no help could be expected from any quarter. The men of the garrison knew that their fate was sealed.

More recent accounts, however, tell a different story. (These "recent accounts" include, among others, William C. Davis' "Three Roads to the Alamo", the History Channel's recent production of "The Alamo", which featured commentary by both Stephen L. Hardin and Kevin R. Young, and Hardin's recent article "Where Was Bonham?", which appeared on the Alamo de Parras web site.) According to these sources, Bonham arrived on the third bringing a letter to Travis from Robert "Three-Legged Willie" Williamson. This "Williamson letter" stated unequivocally that help was on the way, and begged Travis to hold on at all costs until this help could arrive.

As best I can piece the story together, (and please correct me if I'm wrong), this newer version of the story is based on the recent discovery of an article in a Mexican newspaper that was printed shortly after the fall of the Alamo. The article apparently claims that the Williamson letter was found in the Alamo after the battle, (Davis claims it was in Travis' pocket), and then presents the letter's entire text.

Obviously, the Williamson letter, if genuine, is an incredibly important document to students of the Alamo siege, weighing heavily upon our interpretation of the motivations and actions of the Alamo garrison during the siege's final days. That being the case, I have a few questions about the letter, and would greatly appreciate any help anyone could give me:

1) When and where was this newspaper article discovered, and by whom?

2) Is the original of the Williamson letter known to exist, and if so, where?

3) How much credence do historians now give to the authenticity of the letter? What criteria do they use in their determination? Any chance this might have been simply a Mexican "propaganda piece"?

4) I would very much like to see the full text of the article and the letter, both in the original Spanish in which it was published, and with an appropriate English translation. Where could I obtain a copy? Any chance that it could be included here on the Alamo de Parras website? Maybe in the "Archives"?

Like all of us "Alamo fanatics", I've spent quite a few years collecting all the information I could, trying to sort out what really did happen during those days of the siege, and this website has been a godsend. Keep up the good work, and I'll be very grateful for any help you can give me in fitting in this piece of the puzzle. All the best!

Brad Hayford
Springfield, VA

This file contains an English translation (translator unknown, but it seems okay) from the Spanish. Follow the sequence: The Mexican victors found Willimson's letter in Travis's pocket after the fall of the fort; they dispatched the letter to Mexico City where the editors of El Nacional translated it into Spanish and printed it in a broadsheet, Suplemento al Numero 79; the University of Texas obtained a copy of the original broadsheet and a staff member translated the Williamson letter (now in Spanish) back into English. Williamson's original letter to Travis does not seem to have survived.

The letter is not Mexican "propaganda." It simply states facts that Texas historians already had in evidence. They knew, for example that Robert M. Williamson and J.C. Neill were raising a relief force at Gonzales. This was the unit that Sam Houston found when he arrived in that settlement on 11 March 1836. Indeed, this Alamo relief force became the nucleus of the San Jacinto army.

Mr. Hayford is correct. This letter is important—but not "incredibly" so. The letter reveals that Travis and the garrison were expecting help to arrive until almost the last moment. The defenders had not resolved to die in a hopeless cause. Instead, they hoped that help would arrive and such a sacrifice would prove unnecessary. Should we then think less of them? Of course not. When the smoke cleared, they had all died for Texas. The men of the Alamo gave all they were and all they would ever be for a cause they believed it and that is more than plenty. That they did not want to die—but were, nonetheless, WILLING to—makes their sacrifice all the more heroic. The history and the provenance of the letter are both solid and it should now be included in the Alamo epic.

Dr. Stephen L. Hardin,
Historical Consultant to Alamo de Parras

Your opening statement reads:

 
"The phrase "Remember the Alamo", an often misquoted reference to the 1836 battle, actually does very little to help us remember the real Alamo."

How is the reference misquoted?  What is the history behind the development of the slogan, if it was not related to the 1836 battle?

Pauline Newton
Texas

Our point was that although this is the history of the Alamo that most people remember, it's not the complete history.

Subject: The significance of the Alamo
Date: 07/22/99
From: David Vickers

I must agree with Kevin R. Young's assessment of the significance of the Alamo. History occurs because of  accidents of fate, time and place. The Alamo and the Texas Revolution was one of histories most outstanding examples of small events leading to incredible changes in the status of nations. It is significant even without the popular myth that has grown up around the event.

However, I feel that regardless of the popular culture, political agendas, and emotional aspects of the Alamo myth, we must continue to hammer out the truth as best we can, even with our own perspectives.  Not that emotion has no place in history.  Without the emotion and drama of these stories, we would never have become interested.  Barbara Tuchman stresses that history without emotion is stale, but that " The primary duty of the historian is to stay within the evidence".

Too many historians have vilified one side or the other of the Texan Revolution,(Jeff Long comes to mind) or tried to use the Alamo as proof of political, social or racial agendas. It is our duty as historians and educators to dispel popular myths and write and teach history that "stays within the evidence".

David Vickers
Sinton, Tx