Subject: When did the Alamo get its name?
Date: 06/20/97
From: Kevin R. Young
To: Randell Tarín
What is the earliest reference you can find to the Alamo being called the Alamo? The earliest I can find (Bejar Archives) is in 1818. I note that it is still being called Valero as late as 1832.
If you read Ramsdell's San Antonio-A Pictorial History, you get the feeling that Zebulon Pike referred to it as the Alamo during his "visit" to San Antonio. I checked the reference-he mentions neither the Alamo or Valero by name, but simply reports that the soldiers are stationed "across the river" (opposite the town of Bejar).
There is in another document an agreement between the priest at San Fernando and the chaplain of the Alamo Company regarding the saying of morning mass at the Alamo(they use that name) dated 12/28/1818. There is a later witness record for a horse sale at the Pueblo de Alamo de Parras dated April 14, 1825. At this point, 1818 looks like the earliest use of the name Alamo at San Antonio de Valero.
Kevin R. Young
It's going to be hard to determine when the Valero mission building was first referred to as "Alamo." I think the reference(s) that you cite are probably addressing La Compañía as "El Alamo," which was often done. I read some where that as early as 1807 it was called "El Fuerte del Alamo", but this too was probably in reference to the troops and not the building.
I would guess that the first instance of the building being referred to as the Alamo would coincide with the Anglo incursion upon Bejar. From their basic ignorance of Spanish we get the names: Texas from Tejas, Bexar(Bear) from Bejar(Bay-Har) and if they heard it repeated enough, Alamo from "El Alamo" which as you and I know was short for "La Segunda Compañía Volante de San Carlos del pueblo del Alamo".
I would look at the time period around December 1835, with the storming of Bejar and Cos's surrender. There were Alamo troops in the mission until that time. It would not surprise me if this is the point of origin.
Randell Tarín
In reference to my question to you-from the Bejar Archives there is an agreement between the priest at San Fernando and the chaplin of the Alamo Company regarding the saying of morning mass at the Alamo (they use that name) dated 12/28/1818. There is a later witness record for a horse sale at the Pueblo de Alamo de Parras dated April 14, 1825. At this point, 1818 looks like the earliest use of the name Alamo at San Antonio de Valero.
Can you give me a source on the 1807 reference to the Fuerte del Alamo? That would translate as Fort of the Alamo, which regardless their meaning, does call the site, the Alamo. The lack of the tag-Compañía, on both the 1807 and 1818 reference is important, because it is identifying the site as the Alamo (of course, it is because of the Alamo de Parras association).
The 1818 reference clearly says "at the Alamo."
By the way, that 1807 reference would be well before the planting of the Alameda. That would really kill any hopes by the legend lovers that the name came from the nearby row of cottonwoods.
The Valero name does get lost right before the Texas Revolution. Little if any reference to Valero and lots to the Alamo. This is by the Mexican military. I think that between 1832-1835 the name Alamo really comes into play- by then, many may have simply forgotten that the Compañía came from Alamo de Parras. Then again, you still see reference to the Compañía as Alamo de Parras. So..... I think that the Texas Revolution does give strength to the Alamo name for the site.
By the way, Pike's reference never mentions the Alamo or Valero by name. Simply says across the river is the "station for troops". So no real "Alamo" reference there.
Kevin R. Young
* * *
I may have been mistaken about the Fuerte de Alamo reference. It may have been later than 1807. I'm trying to remember where I heard or read that particular bit of information, but thanks for correcting me.
I've checked the early Alamo records from the Spanish Archives that I have in my possession and the predominant name forms used from the company's arrival in 1803 until and after 1807 was "San Antonio de Valero" or "Bejar" , referring to the Presidio de Bejar to which the company had been sent as reinforcements.
However, in January of 1807, Antonio Cordero, in his correspondence to the commandant at Trinidad wrote:
...Among the 25 men from the Alamo, who in compliance with orders of the day, must go from that post to Atascosito, you will send the gunsmith of that company with his anvil and other implements...
Again in February of 1807, Nemesio Salcedo writes, "...Your Lordship, should give heed to the necessity of furnishing horses to the troops at Bejar, Bahía, and Alamo..." [SPANISH ARCHIVES TRANSLATIONS, J. VILLASANA HAGGARD. VOL.22]
I'm sure these instances refer to the Company and not the building, but do you see my point. I don't think there was a deciding moment in history when the building was called the Alamo. I think it was a gradual process evolving from references such as Cordero's and Salcedo's.
Randell Tarín
 | Kevin R. Young at the church in Viesca, Mexico. (Formerly known as Alamo de Parras) |
Subject: How the Alamo got its name, Part II
Date: 06/29/97
From: Kevin R. Young
Thanks for the citations on the 1807 reference to the Alamo. That would appear to be the earliest use that we can find in the current documentation. I agree, the names Alamo and Valero were used until around 1835.
I think the Mexican Army's occupation of the site, followed by the Texian use of the site really ended the name of Valero in favor of that of the Alamo.
As I am sure you know, Alamo de Parras became known as Viesca y Bustamante in 1830 and then, following Bustamente's removal from the presidential office, simply became known as Viesca, which was the name of the pro-Federalist governor of Coahuila. I cringed when a historian in the Real West Alamo episode on A&E referred to the "town in Mexico called Alamo" and when another history buff noted that the name was changed because of the negative aspect of the Alamo name in Mexican history (since Alamo is taken from "Los Alamos" or cottonwood). There are several towns in the region with the same name.
In his 1777 inspection of the area, Lafora noted the springs and the acequia (irrigating ditch) that flowed from Santiago Springs. He also noted that the Spanish residents had moved to La Nueva Bilboa and were building a church called Nuestra Señora de Begona.When Rick Rodriquez, Charles Lara and I arrived at Viesca in November of 1996, we visited Bilboa (which incidently is just a collection of adobe and cinder block homes and a cinder block one story-one room church) and where Santiago Springs used to be. A diversion of the Sierra Madres underground water to the larger cities killed the natural springs at Viesca in the 1940's.
The acequia is still there, and the town has re-planted an Alameda at the entrance into town on the one and only one road in. The tallest buildings are the towers at the church and the municipal building. There are hardly any cars, dirt and stone streets, but lots of adobe buildings. You could easily imagine the Compañía Volante riding down the street.
At Bilboa, there is a small modern church that holds a fantastic collection of Spanish colonial religious artifacts including a medieval painting of "Our Lady of Begona." Two little ladies care for the place, and will sing you an old song of how the "Virgin" (the painting) traveled from España to here in the 18th Century.
We found a local historian and a new priest at the Viesca church. They were most helpful and we cannot wait to make a return trip!
Looking through my records of Alamo de Parras, several observations struck me.
First, considering the movement of the compañía in the late 18th Century, I wonder how many of the soldados who eventually arrived in San Antonio in 1803 had any real connection with the pueblo Alamo de Parras.
In his book, Andres Tjerino suggests that some soldados were Tlaxcaltecan Indians, which was the Native American group that settled Alamo de Parras. I can only match on Compañía soldado's last name with that of an original Alamo de Parras settler, but the research is far from finished.
I think the period of 1812-1813 opens several interesting areas of research.
I note that Vicente Tarín , lieutenant, was in command and resigned to join the rebels. Juan Ignacio Arrambide, listed in the campo santo records as the captain of the Alamo de Parras company. He was killed at the Rosillo (Salado) on April 28, 1813 by the rebels. I would assume that Tarín took command of the compañía following Arrambide's death, and then resigned.
Juan José Mansolo of the compañía is listed as having been killed at the battle of Espiritu Santo on March 10, 1813 by a yankee from the United States [Leal's translation]. This would have the compañía participating in the siege of La Bahía (Texas' longest) on the part of the Royalists. As you know, Salcedo besieged the rebels inside the Presidio La Bahía from November, 1812 till March, 1813. The Spanish camp was at Missions Espiritu Santo and Rosario.
Before this, the Compañía left Bejar on April 1, 1812 to either serve with the Punitive Expedition between Bejar and the Rio Grande(Salcedo sent a 665-man expedition in April, 1812 to do this) or to Nacogdoches. Corona filed compañía reports there on April 30, 1812.
My interpretation of what happened to the Compañía after the Medina battle is that it was broken up. As you know, Arrendondo ordered Fray José Manuel Camacho, chaplin of the La Bahía Presidial Company to take over the records and baptisms and move them from Valero to San Fernando in 1815.
Then, on September 17, 1817, Martínez notes that the Compañía Nuestra Señora del Carmen, stationed at Presidio Rio Grande is ordered to Texas to form the Compañía Alamo de Parras with Juan De Castañeda of the Lampaso Company as captain and Juan José Calderon of the La Bahía company as lieutenant.
Martínez on the 22nd, notes that the former members of the Alamo de Parras company who are serving in the Bejar presidial company, now want to rejoin their old unit. The Carmen company is still not in Bejar, but is on its way, on November 17, 1817.
Again, these seems to suggest to me that the Alamo de Parras company did not exist from 1813-1817.
If you review the correspondence from Ruiz when he commanded the Alamo Company at Tenoxtitlan in 1832, it really becomes apparent that he was trying to keep the company and himself out of the struggle between the colonists and the Mexican military commandants at Anahuac and Velasco. Ruiz is actually ordered to march to the relief of these two posts, but replies that his company is not equipped well enough to respond and doesn't have enough horses to move. When Nacogdoches fell, Ruiz was still at the Brazos, pulling back to San Antonio.
The Alamo de Parras company offers a fantastic study of frontier troops and how a military force with strong ties to the settlement tries to keep the balance in no less than four revolutions.
You know of course that Captain Casteñeda was the last Mexican officer to command San Antonio in 1836. He literally marches his small force out of San Antonio when Seguin and his Texians arrive in June, 1836. I wonder if any of Casteñeda soldados were Alamo de Parras veterans?
Kevin R. Young
06/30/97
In some of the early census for the Alamo's environs, the district was referred to as the "Barrio del Alamo", the precursor to La Villita. This of course encompassed all of the jacales and adobes that were adjacent to but outside of the Alamo compound on the same side of the San Antonio river. Wouldn't that area have simply been known by the locals as "Alamo"?
It seems logical. As the separatist they were, Canary Island settlers and the military formed definitive social lines of demarcation separating the islenos faction (who fancied themselves as pure-blood españoles) from the mostly racially mixed soldiers.
So, you had the Villa de San Fernando, the Presidio de Bejar and the Barrio del Alamo. Each was known by its own abbreviated appellation: "San Fernando","Bejar" and" Alamo".
Randell Tarín
07/01/97
Sounds good-I think any of the area around the Alamo became the Alamo, but I seem to rememember that the 1830 census refered to the area as the Bario de Valero. Again, the interchangable names!
Of course, the Compañía de Alamo de Parras also has an interesting name problem- the Compañía was called San Carlos de Alamo de Parras, which I assume means that San Carlos was the patron saint of the Compañía.
Kevin R. Young
It's even worse than that!
The full name of their village of origin was:
Santa Yglesia, Parroquial del Pueblo del Señor San José y Santiago del Pueblo de Alamo de Parras.
So that would make their actual name:
La Segunda Compañía Volante de San Carlos de la Santa Yglesia, Parroquial del Pueblo del Señor San José y Santiago del Pueblo del Alamo de Parras. [Breath here] ;-)
Shortened to:
La Segunda Compañía Volante de San Carlos de Alamo de Parras.
Later Shortened to:
La Compañía del Alamo and finally El Alamo.
Randell Tarín
