| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Rich
Commander-in-Chief
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - October 15 2002 : 06:58:44 AM
|
Poll Question:
At the Alamo, how do you believe Davy Crockett met his death?
|
|
|
|
glennv
Recruit
USA
Status: offline |
 Posted - November 25 2002 : 8:51:50 PM
|
After watching the Discovery Channel show on the possible Mexican account of Crockets death after the battle by execution-
It said that some 50 men had escaped the Alamo and run out to the road, where they were stopped by the Mexican dragoons. A few survivors were brought to S.A, who had them executed.
This Mexican officer did not see these men surrender. In fact, without having a translation, it is possible that it does not say they surrendered, but says captured. If 50 men made it to the road, but only 7 survived to be captured, they may have been knocked out, physically held down, or dropped from exhaustion, or wounded.
While the show made a good case for the Mexican account being true (good, but not sure), it does not provide much data for examining how Crocket survived the initial battle. |
Your humble servant,
Glenn Valis
Outwater's militia |
  |
|
|
frankboddn
Major
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - February 06 2003 : 02:13:23 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by glennv
After watching the Discovery Channel show on the possible Mexican account of Crockets death after the battle by execution-
It said that some 50 men had escaped the Alamo and run out to the road, where they were stopped by the Mexican dragoons. A few survivors were brought to S.A, who had them executed.
This Mexican officer did not see these men surrender. In fact, without having a translation, it is possible that it does not say they surrendered, but says captured. If 50 men made it to the road, but only 7 survived to be captured, they may have been knocked out, physically held down, or dropped from exhaustion, or wounded.
While the show made a good case for the Mexican account being true (good, but not sure), it does not provide much data for examining how Crocket survived the initial battle.
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster4266
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - May 11 2003 : 2:46:43 PM
|
I have been studying the Alamo since I was eight years old. I have never seen any account that stated that 50 men escaped from the fort only to be caputred and killed. Pena and a few others say that six were captured by Castrillon, who guaranteed their safety. He brought them to Santa Anna who ordered them killed.
Pena says that one of them was Crockett, but he calls him a "naturalist," and Crockeet was anything but. Plus, we have no way of knowing why or how Pena could even identify Crockett. Jeff Long even gives us what crockett said, but we have no source for this, either. Also, all accounts of this execution state that it took place after the fighting had ended, but Susanna Dickinson testified that she saw Crockett's "mutilated" body lying by the palisade, which he and his men were assinged to defend before the shooting had ended. She was even shot in the leg as she was led over the pailisade by a Mexican officer. Thus, we know that Crockett fell just as legend tells us he fell. Revisionist historians like to say that Crockett was captured or surrendered, since they hate heros, but Crockett was not a hero. He was just the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time. They were not fighting for freedom, just the reinstatement of the 1824 constitution that Santa Anna had nullified. Crockett died fighting. The evidence proves it. One should read Exploring the Alam Legends by Charitan. He demonstrates that the myth of crockett's capture or surrender is just that, myth. Nuff said. |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster4401
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - June 14 2003 : 07:45:45 AM
|
| My inclination is to credit Susanna Dickinson (who knew who Crockett was and what he looked like) with telling he truth when she testified that she saw his body where he fell fighting. |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - July 31 2003 : 12:31:39 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Anonymous Poster4266
I have been studying the Alamo since I was eight years old. I have never seen any account that stated that 50 men escaped from the fort only to be caputred and killed. Pena and a few others say that six were captured by Castrillon, who guaranteed their safety. He brought them to Santa Anna who ordered them killed.
The Mexican Archives were recently opened up to researchers, and among the new finds was an after-action report by General Ramirez y Sesma, describing the doings of the Mexican cavalry under his command. He indicated that about 50-80 men left the fort in three distinct waves after the Mexican soldiery entered the compound. These were all killed on the alameda by lancers. The Sesma report corrobates another account published in an 1878 newspaper by Sgt. Manuel Loranca, stating that 62 Texans were killed outside the walls by the cavalry. Other Mexican officers noted that some Texans were killed while "attempting in vain to fly," though without specifying a number.
quote:
Pena says that one of them was Crockett, but he calls him a "naturalist," and Crockeet was anything but. Plus, we have no way of knowing why or how Pena could even identify Crockett. Jeff Long even gives us what crockett said, but we have no source for this, either. Also, all accounts of this execution state that it took place after the fighting had ended, but Susanna Dickinson testified that she saw Crockett's "mutilated" body lying by the palisade, which he and his men were assinged to defend before the shooting had ended. She was even shot in the leg as she was led over the pailisade by a Mexican officer. Thus, we know that Crockett fell just as legend tells us he fell.
Mrs. Dickinson never specified where her wounding took place, and to my knowledge, she mentioned it in only one of her many accounts, so I don't know where you picked up this story of her being shot at "over the palisade" ---- in fact, I don't know where you picked up this information that she was led over the palisade at all. Furthermore, in the only interview in which she specified the time of her removal, she stated she was led out of the chapel "after the fall". I really don't know how you can reach such certain conclusions from the evidence you cite.
quote:
Revisionist historians like to say that Crockett was captured or surrendered, since they hate heros, but Crockett was not a hero. He was just the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time. They were not fighting for freedom, just the reinstatement of the 1824 constitution that Santa Anna had nullified. Crockett died fighting. The evidence proves it. One should read Exploring the Alam Legends by Charitan. He demonstrates that the myth of crockett's capture or surrender is just that, myth. Nuff said.
This is a long disproven canard, first put forth (and later retracted) by Reuben Potter in 1860. The letters written by the Alamo defenders before the siege make it abundantly clear that they were all independence men. On February 1, they elected (virtually unanimously) two delegates, Jesse Badgett and Sam Maverick, to the Constitutional Convention, both staunch independence men. Men like Joseph M. Hawkins and Amos Pollard and William B. Travis would have been insulted to learn they were fighting to restore Texas to the Mexican Federation. As for Crockett being "at the wrong place at the wrong time," he knew exactly what he was doing and what he was there for. He had enlisted in the Texas Voluntary Auxiliary Corps on January 14, and at the time of his swearing in he made the judge note specifically that he was enlisting to fight for republican government. After arriving at San Antonio, it is known that Crockett was made privy to many officers' consultations (despite his status as a "high private"), and Travis's letter of February 25 specifically commends Crockett for his actions in the skirmishes that took place that day. "Wrong man" indeed.
|
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - August 22 2003 : 11:41:27 AM
|
8169:
Not sure about Ms. Dickenson and the palisade, but she did say that she saw Crocketts body. Which would not have been possible had Crockett surrendered.
So she is either correct, mistaken, or lying. Again, since she did know who Crockett was, I would tend to credit her with accurately reporting what she saw. I believe her very first original testimony also mentioned Crockett's hat.
However--it's also true she changed her account of what happened at the Alamo many times over the years--so, who knows??? |
Edited by - Brent on August 22 2003 11:50:55 AM |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8166
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - August 24 2003 : 7:11:53 PM
|
| Susanna Dickinson stated that she saw Crocketts "peculiar" cap laying by his side immediatly after the battle. Let us take it from one who was there and who knew the man first hand. If there is no concrete evidence to the contrary I for one, will believe that Crocket died defending the Alamo plaza, with a malevolent grin on his face, swinging "old Betsy" over his head just as long as he had a breath left in him. There are some parts of the country that a man might go and to suggest otherwise........... |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - August 26 2003 : 11:48:03 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
8169:
Not sure about Ms. Dickenson and the palisade, but she did say that she saw Crocketts body. Which would not have been possible had Crockett surrendered.
I don't see how one follows from the other.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 01 2003 : 07:31:58 AM
|
Believe that the Pena story is that Crockett and those who allegedly surrendered with him were "brought before Santa Anna" (just prior to Santa Anna's speech to his assembled units, which probably took place in some central location), attacked, and then killed. My guess is that if true, they would have then been gathered up and immediately tossed on the general pile and burned with the rest of the bodies.
Extremely un-likely that all that could have happened, and then have Davy (and his hat) lying at the spot where Dickenson saw (and would have sort of expected to see) Crocketts body. |
Edited by - Brent on September 01 2003 07:36:40 AM |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - September 01 2003 : 12:05:06 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
Believe that the Pena story is that Crockett and those who allegedly surrendered with him were "brought before Santa Anna" (just prior to Santa Anna's speech to his assembled units, which probably took place in some central location), attacked, and then killed. My guess is that if true, they would have then been gathered up and immediately tossed on the general pile and burned with the rest of the bodies.
You need to provide evidence that these bodies were "immediately" burned, and that Mrs. Dickinson could never have seen them.
quote:
Extremely un-likely that all that could have happened, and then have Davy (and his hat) lying at the spot where Dickenson saw (and would have sort of expected to see) Crocketts body.
I don't find it unlikely at all, but then I'm not mixing known historical statements with hypothetical "would haves".
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 01 2003 : 2:37:25 PM
|
If I had "evidence" I'd be the guy who really knew what happened!!
No--just using some logic, is all. If Pena's story is true, Crockett was brought before Santa Anna just before he was to address his troops. That leads me to believe it was in some central, open location, where those troops might be assembled. And if that's true, I find it hard to believe Ms. Dickenson would have seen the body (and that doggone hat!!) where she claims to have seen it.
The trouble with all of these "historical record" staements is that they often conflict with (and contradict) each other in certain ways. |
Edited by - Brent on September 01 2003 2:59:35 PM |
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 02 2003 : 1:05:42 PM
|
Been giving the matter further thought. There are conflicting stories as to what Anna Dickenson said (and when she said it) but a # of accounts have her being led from the Chapel while at least some lingering fighting is going on. One account has her actually wounded in the ankle. This is all at about the time when she says she saw Crocketts body and hat, about where it might reasonably be expected to be found if he was killed fighting.
The execution story has him brought before Santa Anna (along with several others) where the group is killed by sword-weilding Mexican officers. If so, I would hardly expect the Generalissimo to be inside the Alamo when there is still some fighting. By then ,the fighting would have very likely been all over. According to Pena, Santa Anna was geting ready to address his troops. Again, not likely if fighting is still going on. |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - September 02 2003 : 4:59:53 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
If I had "evidence" I'd be the guy who really knew what happened!!
No--just using some logic, is all. If Pena's story is true, Crockett was brought before Santa Anna just before he was to address his troops. That leads me to believe it was in some central, open location, where those troops might be assembled. And if that's true, I find it hard to believe Ms. Dickenson would have seen the body (and that doggone hat!!) where she claims to have seen it.
The trouble with all of these "historical record" staements is that they often conflict with (and contradict) each other in certain ways.
All de la Pena said was that the executions happened "shortly before" the speech. There is no information about where it happened, or even really how soon it take place before this speech of Santa Anna's. It could have happened a minute before, while Santa Anna was clearing his throat, or it could have happened a half-hour earlier, when Santa Anna could have been anywhere. The point is that these "what ifs" do not constitute evidence, and are hardly of enough substance to make it "unlikely" that Mrs. Dickenson could have seen a murdered Crockett.
R. Larsen |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - September 02 2003 : 5:09:25 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
Been giving the matter further thought. There are conflicting stories as to what Anna Dickenson said (and when she said it) but a # of accounts have her being led from the Chapel while at least some lingering fighting is going on. One account has her actually wounded in the ankle.
By the soldiers charging into the chapel during the final assault. Like I said earlier, in the only account I know of in which Mrs. Dickinson gives an approximate time for when she was taken out of the building, she said it occurred "after the fall".
quote:
This is all at about the time when she says she saw Crocketts body and hat, about where it might reasonably be expected to be found if he was killed fighting.
The execution story has him brought before Santa Anna (along with several others) where the group is killed by sword-weilding Mexican officers. If so, I would hardly expect the Generalissimo to be inside the Alamo when there is still some fighting. By then ,the fighting would have very likely been all over.
By the same token, "I would hardly expect" that any officer would be so irresponsible as to lead a woman out into the middle of the compound while there was still some fighting.
quote:
According to Pena, Santa Anna was geting ready to address his troops. Again, not likely if fighting is still going on.
That isn't what he said. He said it happened "shortly before" Santa Anna did his speech. That's it. Saying Santa Anna was "getting ready to address" the troops at the time of the incident is adding something to Pena's account that is not there.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 03 2003 : 06:42:17 AM
|
If Pena had said "brought to Santa Anna" (and nothing more) then I'd need to rethink it. But he does say "shortly before the speech", which leads me to believe it was very shortly before. Why else even mention it?? It seems to connect the two events, and on purpose. Pena mentions Generals Castrillion and Sesma, as well as "commanders and officers"--suggesting this gathering was a large one... reinforcing my belief that it all took place VERY shortly before the speech, and probably in a larger, more open area. If so, then Crockett was executed and his body tossed onto one of the 3 funeral "pyres". The only other 2 possibilities are that he was executed just outside the chapel (and then left lying for Dickinson to see) or after he was executed his body (and hat!!) were returned to the chapel area. Neither seems plausable to me...and that's if you think the Pena events took place before Dickinson left the Chapel--which I don't.
All of which is more than sufficent for me to continue to believe that if Mrs Dickenson actually saw Crockett's body (and cap/hat) WHERE and WHEN she saw them, he could not have been executed as described in Pena.
But you know the old saying "Believing something dosn't make it true"--so I guess the sad part is that we'll never really know what happened. |
Edited by - Brent on September 03 2003 08:36:26 AM |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - September 03 2003 : 5:58:41 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
If Pena had said "brought to Santa Anna" (and nothing more) then I'd need to rethink it. But he does say "shortly before the speech", which leads me to believe it was very shortly before.
De la Pena's description allows no specificity about how much time intervened. It's too vague. Ultimately, it tells us nothing about the likelihood or unlikelihood of Crockett's execution.
quote:
Why else even mention it?? It seems to connect the two events, and on purpose.
Exactly. De la Pena's point is to stress the irony (and hypocrisy) of Santa Anna praising the glory and courage of his enterprise, when only shortly before he had ordered and overseen the commission of a war crime. De la Pena goes on to deliver a long rant about this.
quote:
Pena mentions Generals Castrillion and Sesma, as well as "commanders and officers"--suggesting this gathering was a large one... reinforcing my belief that it all took place VERY shortly before the speech, and probably in a larger, more open area.
I don't see how the "commanders and officers" present reinforce your belief that it took place "VERY shortly" (however long that is) before the speech, and why (if the area Mrs. Dickinson described isn't big enough for this hypothetical "larger, more open area") Santa Anna couldn't have taken the handful of minutes necessary to walk to it --- wherever "it" was. None of the stuff that is actually in the de la Pena account makes it "unlikely" that Mrs. Dickinson could have seen the victims. Constructing a large edifice of hypotheticals around de la Pena's words doesn't change that.
quote:
If so, then Crockett was executed and his body tossed onto one of the 3 funeral "pyres". The only other 2 possibilities are that he was executed just outside the chapel (and then left lying for Dickinson to see) or after he was executed his body (and hat!!) were returned to the chapel area. Neither seems plausable to me...and that's if you think the Pena events took place before Dickinson left the Chapel--which I don't.
There's no evidence that it did or didn't. There's also no evidence that Mrs. Dickinson left the Chapel *before* the executions took place. This no-evidence is evidence of nothing. I also don't understand what in the historical record would make it implausible that the executions could have taken place somewhere near the Long Barracks and Chapel. We don't know where the executions took place --- anywhere's a possibility.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 04 2003 : 11:22:54 AM
|
Well-not ANYwhere, but SOMEwhere!!
To change the subject (and I am asking for your opinion on this)--didn't Santa Anna detail some fellow named Ruiz to enter the Alamo and search for bodies of the "leaders" and did he not say he "found" Travis, Bowie and Crockett? (Crockett at about where Dickenson places him, but there does seem to be a ? about his description of the spot so it could be elsewhere)
So I guess I am wondering that if Crockett was executed as described by Pena, would not Santa Anna have already known where his body was, and so there would have been no need for Ruiz to go and "find" him along with the others?
And I'm going to assume that Pena knew who Crockett was. I know that many feel he could not or would not have known, and on sight, that's perhaps so. But no reason Crockett could not have told his captors who he was, and maybe some at least of him. And if Pena knew, I would asume Santa Anna would have been told.
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - September 04 2003 : 4:29:55 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
Well-not ANYwhere, but SOMEwhere!!
To change the subject (and I am asking for your opinion on this)--didn't Santa Anna detail some fellow named Ruiz to enter the Alamo and search for bodies of the "leaders" and did he not say he "found" Travis, Bowie and Crockett? (Crockett at about where Dickenson places him, but there does seem to be a ? about his description of the spot so it could be elsewhere)
So I guess I am wondering that if Crockett was executed as described by Pena, would not Santa Anna have already known where his body was, and so there would have been no need for Ruiz to go and "find" him along with the others?
And I'm going to assume that Pena knew who Crockett was. I know that many feel he could not or would not have known, and on sight, that's perhaps so. But no reason Crockett could not have told his captors who he was, and maybe some at least of him. And if Pena knew, I would asume Santa Anna would have been told.
For all we know, Santa Anna may not have been told who these men were, at the time; according to an anonymous soldier whose account appeared in 1836 newspapers, Castrillon brought up the prisoners, saying "Sir, here are six prisoners taken alive; how shall I dispose of them?" To which Santa Anna replied, "Have I not told you before how to dispose of them? Why do you bring them to me?" Upon which the executions immediately ensued. This doesn't suggest Santa Anna had a chat with the congressman. We don't know what Santa Anna knew.
According to Ruiz, he was asked by Santa Anna to identify the bodies of Crockett, Bowie, and Travis. Joe, evidently, was used to do the same thing. If Santa Anna had been told Crockett was one of the victims, he may only have wanted positive confirmation. If he hadn't, he presumably just wanted to know for sure he (along with Travis & Bowie) was killed and get a look at him.
The authenticity of Ruiz's account, funnily enough, has been questioned by Thomas Ricks Lindley, who is an outspoken opponent of the Crockett execution story. Ruiz does say some pretty weird things (like only 130 of 800 Toluca Battalion soldiers surviving), so maybe he was a tale-spinner. Confusion, sloppiness, or perversion on the part of the translator (J. A. Quintero), though, may also be a factor.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
Brent
Lt. Colonel
USA
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2003 : 06:55:02 AM
|
Intersting tho--he was concerned/interested enough in Crockett to at least want a look at him, or proof he was dead. And I guess a question is-how would Ruiz be expected to recognize the body? Did he know him prior to the seige?
Assuming Pena REALLY knew it was Crockett who surrendered (and knew it before he was executed), I wonder how they would have kept it from Santa Anna?? If I had captured such a "prize" (and knew it), I'd be falling all over myself to let the Generalissimo know.
Or-could be they didn't know it until after the execution, when Ruiz/Joe identified the body---
Or--??
Anyway--I'm still believeing Crockett was killed fighting, mostly based on the fact that Dickinson saw the body where she saw it. Am not persuaded that he would have been executed and his body left there.
But I'm curious-how do you think Crockett died?
|
Edited by - Brent on September 05 2003 08:37:58 AM |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - September 05 2003 : 10:17:25 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Brent
Intersting tho--he was concerned/interested enough in Crockett to at least want a look at him, or proof he was dead. And I guess a question is-how would Ruiz be expected to recognize the body? Did he know him prior to the seige?
Ruiz was a local official, and sympathetic with the rebels, so presumably he knew them to some degree. He doesn't explain in what way he was familiar with them, however.
quote:
Assuming Pena REALLY knew it was Crockett who surrendered (and knew it before he was executed), I wonder how they would have kept it from Santa Anna?? If I had captured such a "prize" (and knew it), I'd be falling all over myself to let the Generalissimo know.
Or-could be they didn't know it until after the execution, when Ruiz/Joe identified the body---
Or--??
Exactly. A lot of details are missing. This hasn't stopped some people from trying to create some, such as Jeff Long, who in his "Duel of Eagles" spins a magnificent (and uncorroborated) tale of Crockett groveling and embarassing himself in front of the enemy, based solely on his additions to (and deviations from) De la Pena's narrative.
quote:
Anyway--I'm still believeing Crockett was killed fighting, mostly based on the fact that Dickinson saw the body where she saw it. Am not persuaded that he would have been executed and his body left there.
But I'm curious-how do you think Crockett died?
I don't know. I think the evidence leans towards him being executed, but not so much that some people couldn't have been mistaken in the fog of war.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster4897
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - December 15 2003 : 02:18:52 AM
|
| The reason the blue haired old ladies of the Daughter's of the Republic of Texas debunk this view on how Crockett died, is because it sheds light to the FACT that not all the defenders died to the last man fighting as "legend" says. And being a History major I have posed questions about the deaths to those who give the tours of the Alamo. No one wants to believe the De La Pena diary as well because it was not written by an Anglo. That is the consensus I got from these so called peudo-historians. The one question I ask that leaves them speechless and angry is this. "If none of the defenders survived, do you know how they died?". |
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster4897
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - December 15 2003 : 02:28:51 AM
|
Hero's? They were slave owners and greedy for land. Also, how do you knwo Crockett really died fighting. Who saw him die as you think he did. Oh the Dickinsoin lady. yes a credibel source seeein as that she was not takign partiun the battle and "claims" to have seen the body laying by the pallisade. I think the truth is there, yet the legsn or shoudl I say lies, seem to cover up the truth. And if none of the survivors survived as legend says, then how does anyone really kwno hwo Crockett died. The Alamo may have been a symbol of freedom for some, but it was a symbol of oppression and racism for others.
quote:
Originally posted by Anonymous Poster4266
I have been studying the Alamo since I was eight years old. I have never seen any account that stated that 50 men escaped from the fort only to be caputred and killed. Pena and a few others say that six were captured by Castrillon, who guaranteed their safety. He brought them to Santa Anna who ordered them killed.
Pena says that one of them was Crockett, but he calls him a "naturalist," and Crockeet was anything but. Plus, we have no way of knowing why or how Pena could even identify Crockett. Jeff Long even gives us what crockett said, but we have no source for this, either. Also, all accounts of this execution state that it took place after the fighting had ended, but Susanna Dickinson testified that she saw Crockett's "mutilated" body lying by the palisade, which he and his men were assinged to defend before the shooting had ended. She was even shot in the leg as she was led over the pailisade by a Mexican officer. Thus, we know that Crockett fell just as legend tells us he fell. Revisionist historians like to say that Crockett was captured or surrendered, since they hate heros, but Crockett was not a hero. He was just the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time. They were not fighting for freedom, just the reinstatement of the 1824 constitution that Santa Anna had nullified. Crockett died fighting. The evidence proves it. One should read Exploring the Alam Legends by Charitan. He demonstrates that the myth of crockett's capture or surrender is just that, myth. Nuff said.
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster8169
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - December 15 2003 : 5:07:24 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Anonymous Poster4897
The reason the blue haired old ladies of the Daughter's of the Republic of Texas debunk this view on how Crockett died, is because it sheds light to the FACT that not all the defenders died to the last man fighting as "legend" says.
It has been known that some defenders were murdered by Mexican soldiers for 167 years, so your speculation about their motives is not very convincing.
It has never surprised anybody that some people were taken captive and slain; frankly, it's a scandal that all those men were killed, not just the prisoners but the wounded and sick. Civilized nations don't kill every last opponent.
quote:
And being a History major I have posed questions about the deaths to those who give the tours of the Alamo. No one wants to believe the De La Pena diary as well because it was not written by an Anglo. That is the consensus I got from these so called peudo-historians. The one question I ask that leaves them speechless and angry is this. "If none of the defenders survived, do you know how they died?".
They're probably amazed at why a young man would take such morbid, gloating satisfaction in the victims of a war crime.
R. Larsen
|
|
|
|
Anonymous Poster2338
Forum Guest
Status: offline |
Posted - January 06 2004 : 12:20:31 PM
|
| The death of Davy Crockett is full of mystery and myth. But it really comes down to 2 stories. One, he either died outside of the church fighting, or he was captured and executed later. Both are very hard to prove. Mrs's Dickenson's story of him "dying fighting" could be true, but may have been made up to keep the myth alive. Del la Pena's version could be very true, but surpressed, because no one likes to beleive that Crockett DIDNT die fighting! But there he died.All though the Alamo is a story of bravery almost unmatch in this country's history, it is also a story of this country's racsim and greed. Santa Anna wanted no parts of "North Americans" in Mexico. He saw what they had done to the Indians in their OWN country. He knew of the slavery that was an American institution. He didnt want Mexico to be taken over by encroaching white American imperialism. The 2 slaves at the Alamo were spared death. Why? Because the Mexicans had "no beef" with black people. Santa Anna had a black cook at the time of the Alamo, and he was no slave! The movie of the Alamo that John Wayne invented went through great pains to NOT show the slave that Travis owned. And Jim Bowie DIDNT give his slave his freedom at the Alamo. Bowie didnt die killing tons of Mexicans from his sick bed. He may have gotten one before he was bayonetted to death and shot at least 8 times. I guess Hollywood didnt think the truth would be exciting enough? Ilove history and enjoy reading and learning about the Alamo, but let all the facts be known and let the TRUTH be the real story! |
|
|
|
joseph wiggs
Brigadier General
Status: offline |
Posted - June 03 2004 : 9:36:01 PM
|
| David Crockett,the man, was a victim of his own reputation. Seen by his peers as "hero" of the common man, he desperately attempted to live up to that image. He did not always succeed. Davy, the immortal, performed every wonderful deed that one could imagine, to include swinging "Ole Betsy" on the ramparts until he was finally overcome. The death of the Crockett you believe in is dependant upon your personal need. Hero or human? Sadly, reality is often an abrupt departure from myth. |
Edited by - joseph wiggs on June 03 2004 9:39:52 PM |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
David Crockett's Death 
