Commandancy of the The Alamo
- Thread starter Wildthings
- Start date
I have kinfolk on that list. Admittedly, I have not been to the Alamo in years, rationalizing that driving/parking downtown is a PITA and the kids go there on field trips and such. One of the more well known but one of many incredible displays of selfless sacrifice in the service of a greater cause by patriots.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #65
April 12th, 1836 the Runaway Scrape is in full accord - Texians fleeing from the advancement of General Santa Anna's army marching eastward from San Antonio, left all their belonging behind and in some cases set their homes on fire to keep the Mexicans from getting any valuables. Santa Anna arrived at the Brazos river and needed a way to cross...
April 12th, 1836 -- Mexican forces under Santa Anna capture key Brazos crossing
On this day in 1836, Mexican forces under General Santa Anna captured Thompson's Ferry, on the Brazos River between San Felipe and Fort Bend. As Sam Houston's army retreated eastward, a rear-guard under Moseley Baker at San Felipe and Wyly Martin at Fort Bend sought to prevent the Mexicans from crossing the Brazos. On April 9, 1836, Gen. Antonio López de Santa Anna, not wishing to be delayed by Baker's men at San Felipe, led a column downriver toward Thompson's Ferry. The Mexicans arrived at the crossing on the morning of April 12 and spied a black ferryman on the east bank of the Brazos.
Mexican colonel Juan N. Almonte, who spoke good English, hailed the ferryman, who was on the east bank. Probably thinking that Almonte was a countryman who had been left behind during the retreat, the ferryman poled the ferry across to the west bank. Santa Anna and his staff, who had been hiding in nearby bushes, sprang out and captured the ferry. By this means the Mexican Centralists accomplished a bloodless crossing of the Brazos. Twelve miles downriver, Martin and the Texans guarding the Fort Bend crossing learned that the Mexicans had crossed in force at Thompson's Ferry; outflanked and outnumbered, they had no choice but to abandon Fort Bend and join the rest of Houston's army in retreat. Baker, also outflanked, was now obliged to end his dogged defense of the San Felipe crossing and join the rest of the Texans in their retreat. José Enrique de la Peña reported that after the battle of San Jacinto, 1,500 Mexican troops and four cannons were stationed at or near Thompson's Ferry under the command of Gen. Vicente Filisola. Peña asserted that if Filisola had force-marched his troops from Thompson's Ferry to San Jacinto, a mere two day's march, he might have undone the effects of the Texan victory.
and for @Kenbo
April 12th, 1836 -- Mexican forces under Santa Anna capture key Brazos crossing
On this day in 1836, Mexican forces under General Santa Anna captured Thompson's Ferry, on the Brazos River between San Felipe and Fort Bend. As Sam Houston's army retreated eastward, a rear-guard under Moseley Baker at San Felipe and Wyly Martin at Fort Bend sought to prevent the Mexicans from crossing the Brazos. On April 9, 1836, Gen. Antonio López de Santa Anna, not wishing to be delayed by Baker's men at San Felipe, led a column downriver toward Thompson's Ferry. The Mexicans arrived at the crossing on the morning of April 12 and spied a black ferryman on the east bank of the Brazos.
Mexican colonel Juan N. Almonte, who spoke good English, hailed the ferryman, who was on the east bank. Probably thinking that Almonte was a countryman who had been left behind during the retreat, the ferryman poled the ferry across to the west bank. Santa Anna and his staff, who had been hiding in nearby bushes, sprang out and captured the ferry. By this means the Mexican Centralists accomplished a bloodless crossing of the Brazos. Twelve miles downriver, Martin and the Texans guarding the Fort Bend crossing learned that the Mexicans had crossed in force at Thompson's Ferry; outflanked and outnumbered, they had no choice but to abandon Fort Bend and join the rest of Houston's army in retreat. Baker, also outflanked, was now obliged to end his dogged defense of the San Felipe crossing and join the rest of the Texans in their retreat. José Enrique de la Peña reported that after the battle of San Jacinto, 1,500 Mexican troops and four cannons were stationed at or near Thompson's Ferry under the command of Gen. Vicente Filisola. Peña asserted that if Filisola had force-marched his troops from Thompson's Ferry to San Jacinto, a mere two day's march, he might have undone the effects of the Texan victory.
and for @Kenbo
Last edited:
Kenbo
Self proclaimed expert of nothing
Staff member
Global Moderator
Founding Member
Full Member
Forum Moderator
Actually, I can honestly say that I just finished reading the entire thread. It took me 4 evenings though. (I put aside a little time each night to read some) I've never really understood the Alamo or it's history and I have to say that it is very fascinating. We could only ever hope to have a fraction of the bravery and dedication of the men that stood to defend what they thought was right. I did get confused at some points in time and had to backtrack in my reading to straighten myself out but I'm glad I did. Can't even imagine what it was like to have lived through the experience......very mind boggling. With that being said.......I'm looking forward to the next instalment. Did anything happen on the 13th of April?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #68
Nothing significant for a few days
Kenbo
Self proclaimed expert of nothing
Staff member
Global Moderator
Founding Member
Full Member
Forum Moderator
I guess I will wait patiently.
Ken that's fantastic you took the time to read it. I was hounding you just to give you the hard time routine but I'm sure you knew that. I understand how hard it is to carve out time to read things. I scarcely read the threads I'm involved with because of time constraints much less the ones I'm not. You're right though times back then were extremely difficult. I'm not sure it's even possible for us comparatively blissninny softies to be able to comprehend what life was like back then.
A lack of constant threat to our very survival tends to make us as a whole softies. take the Crusaders for example. The first generation of Crusaders amassed significant territory and wealth to rival King Solomon, and dominated the middle eastern foreign lands for years. These were Frankish and other European Knights that knew only a lifetime of war and constant exertion, but their descendants grew up in a time of relative luxury, surrounded with all the trappings of the elite and dwelt mainly on the many pleasures of the East. They didn't have the motivation or need to fight and learn to rule and they were soon swept away by the Saracen hordes.
We're several generations removed from those men of the Alamo, and we're still "in power" around the globe due mostly to the leverage we have in technology which can be a multiplier of the projection of power. In the War between the States the deciding advantage in a battle or a campaign could be as simple as which side had the best shoes on their feet, the most oats in their horse's feedbags or the most gunpowder.
I have forgotten what point I was going to make, but I think it had something to do with the fact that we all have it really, really easy today. Reading this thread has been a reminder of that. Looking forward to the next episode . . .
Kenbo
Self proclaimed expert of nothing
Staff member
Global Moderator
Founding Member
Full Member
Forum Moderator
I am also looking forward to the next post. Although I am fully aware that you guys were just ribbing me, I'm glad that you did because I don't think that I would have read the post otherwise. It was kind of a "oh yeah?!?!?! I'll show you who can't read this post!!!" Really enjoying the history lesson. As Canadians, we were never exposed to this sort of history in school. It wasn't part of our heritage and it surely wasn't important to the Canadian educational system. It would appear that I have sadly been missing out on this fascinating piece of history for all this time.
Kevin beat me to the punch on this. I was amazed you took the time to read this. I know why it fascinates me, it took a lot on your part to read through it and I salute you. I can't imagine what it was like to live through these events. Hell, I get tired driving the routes these people walked under horrendous conditions! Tony
Don't feel bad, most kids in the USA have no idea that we had a war with Canada at one point. (I have no idea whether most Canadian schools teach that or not. I know the kids I knew in Quebec learned it though.)
Kenbo
Self proclaimed expert of nothing
Staff member
Global Moderator
Founding Member
Full Member
Forum Moderator
Yup!! Canada kicked the State's butt. The problem was, they felt bad for doing it so they started apologizing and while they were busy apologizing, Texas blind sided them. We've never been the same since. LOL
Not really Alamo related but I though it was interesting ...
The Arcane Texas Fact of the Day:
On May 2, 1902 the current-day Zapata, Texas was re-named in honor of Col. Antonio Zapata. Prior to that, Zapata had been called "Carrizo" because of the Carrizo Indians who originally inhabited the area. Antonio Zapata had been born in poverty in Guerrero Viejo (which is now under Falcon Lake) but eventually accumulated a fortune in sheep. He evolved into a well-known Indian fighter and Mexian Federalist who advocated a strong Mexican central government, one in line with the government envisioned in Mexico's 1824 Constitution. In March, 1840, Zapata and 30 other Federalists were trapped by opposing Centralista forces at Santa Rita de Morelos, upriver from Laredo. . Zapata surrendered, only to be told he would be executed if he did not join the Centralists. He refused. Then he was asked to at least refuse further cooperation with the Federalists but, again, he refused. The army executed Zapata, severed his head, and floated it in a cask of brandy. His head was displayed in Laredo, then on a spike in Guerrero Viejo for three days as a warning to all others who might support the Federalists and their cause.
The Arcane Texas Fact of the Day:
On May 2, 1902 the current-day Zapata, Texas was re-named in honor of Col. Antonio Zapata. Prior to that, Zapata had been called "Carrizo" because of the Carrizo Indians who originally inhabited the area. Antonio Zapata had been born in poverty in Guerrero Viejo (which is now under Falcon Lake) but eventually accumulated a fortune in sheep. He evolved into a well-known Indian fighter and Mexian Federalist who advocated a strong Mexican central government, one in line with the government envisioned in Mexico's 1824 Constitution. In March, 1840, Zapata and 30 other Federalists were trapped by opposing Centralista forces at Santa Rita de Morelos, upriver from Laredo. . Zapata surrendered, only to be told he would be executed if he did not join the Centralists. He refused. Then he was asked to at least refuse further cooperation with the Federalists but, again, he refused. The army executed Zapata, severed his head, and floated it in a cask of brandy. His head was displayed in Laredo, then on a spike in Guerrero Viejo for three days as a warning to all others who might support the Federalists and their cause.
That's standing firm for what you believe. I would've agreed long enough to form another company and fight another day, but I guess that wasn't considered honorable.
I'm glad he got a town named for him. No matter if his and my political views agree or collide - you have to respect a man like that.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #77
On this day in 1836 -
April 18th, 1836 -- Texian forces under General Houston arrive in the Harrisburgh area where Mexican forces already have arrived three days earlier.
Harrisburgh -
Harrisburg is a community that is now (originally documented as Harrisburgh then shortened to Harrisburg in 1892) located within the city of Houston, Texas
The community is located east of Downtown Houston, south of the Brays Bayou and Buffalo Bayou junction, and west of Brady's Island. It was founded before 1825 on the eastern stretches of the Buffalo Bayou in present-day Harris County, Texas, on land belonging to John Richardson Harris. In 1926, Harrisburg was annexed into the city of Houston. The original name of Harris County was Harrisburg (Harrisburgh) County until it was shortened after the demise of the City of Harrisburg
On April 16, 1836 during the Texas Revolution, almost all of Harrisburg was burned by the forces of General Antonio López de Santa Anna.
I feel a fight brewing!.......
April 18th, 1836 -- Texian forces under General Houston arrive in the Harrisburgh area where Mexican forces already have arrived three days earlier.
Harrisburgh -
Harrisburg is a community that is now (originally documented as Harrisburgh then shortened to Harrisburg in 1892) located within the city of Houston, Texas
The community is located east of Downtown Houston, south of the Brays Bayou and Buffalo Bayou junction, and west of Brady's Island. It was founded before 1825 on the eastern stretches of the Buffalo Bayou in present-day Harris County, Texas, on land belonging to John Richardson Harris. In 1926, Harrisburg was annexed into the city of Houston. The original name of Harris County was Harrisburg (Harrisburgh) County until it was shortened after the demise of the City of Harrisburg
On April 16, 1836 during the Texas Revolution, almost all of Harrisburg was burned by the forces of General Antonio López de Santa Anna.
I feel a fight brewing!.......
Kenbo
Self proclaimed expert of nothing
Staff member
Global Moderator
Founding Member
Full Member
Forum Moderator
I'm digging this stuff.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #80
It's fixing to come to a climax pretty soon!
I'm digging this stuff.