Paul Lyon's Alamo (7 Viewers)

IMG_2143-2.jpg

Some defenders were caught outside the walls trying to make it to the church.

IMG_3286.jpg

Sanctuary: the safety of the church sought by those caught outside.

IMG_2880.jpg

Trying to get a wounded defender to safety.


Three views of the old mission kitchen, which may not have been standing during the battle, or fell down completely thereafter:

IMG_2845.jpg


IMG_2749.jpg


IMG_2433-1.jpg
 
Some analog structures and scenes I used to make my model.

01olmsted4.jpg

"Jacales" or shacks.

004CommerceStreetbridgeolmsted3.jpg

Commerce Street, San Antonio.

003SanAntonio.jpg

More jacales, San Antonio.

YaquirecruitsinMexicanArmy1890.jpg

Yaqui Indian recruits in the Mexican army.

002Maverick_stone_home_Alamo_Plaza_.jpg

The Samuel Maverick house, built at the Alamo near the big pecan tree.

BleedingKansas01_jpg-1.jpg

Bleeding Kansas.

RichardCatonWoodvilleWarNewsfromMex.jpg

R.C. Woodville, "War News from Mexico."

SJuanCapistranoCalifbyJohnWalkenbac.jpg

Wall in San Juan Capistrano mission
 
20080217_SanJuanCapistrano_Mission_.jpg

San Juan Capistrano

alamo-233.jpg

John Wayne's Alamo

falconer.jpg

The famous Falconer sketch

SJCapistranoTXsxcllT_fs.jpg

San Juan Capistrano (Texas)

GateatPresidioSanSababyNefarious.jpg

San Saba Presidio gate
 
There was an artist named McArdle who collected all of the available information about the Alamo for an epic painting in 1875; it was finished and destroyed in a fire in the State capitol in 1881. So he picked up and did it again. Central to both paintings is a shaky platform in the midst of the holocaust, and it is apparently being pulled down by the Mexican soldiers. The building isnt the kind of detail he would invent, place centrally in the painting, and repeat in the restored version, all without some evidence that it existed.

Nevertheless, there is no other mention of it that I have ever found in years of Alamo research, and it is included in no other pictures or descriptions. This is not unusual for the Alamo, though: many details of the architecture are known from a sole source, often an artist or writer, or from rumor. For example, though the McArdle "platform" isnt in any of the current artists' rendition, and in no other diorama, these usually nowadays include a peak-roofed building midway along the West wall, a cannon platform midway along the North wall, put the "Crockett palisade" at the wrong angle and position contrary to archeological excavation, and put an absurd "observation tower" at the corner of the church, with the Alamo flag, contrary to all of the written accounts of the placement of the flag on the convent. These details are now included in the orthodox model and painting based on the slim evidence of, in most cases, a single ancient sketch or map, contradicted by the majority of others.

It should come as no surprise then that I have installed McArdle's platform in my diorama. I have not done this without first looking to see how such a structure might have existed. I believe that if it was there, it was the remnant of a stone house, part of a row of houses which once existed facing the inside of the West wall (which was itself at first just a row of houses). This demolished row no doubt provided the building materials for rubble-filled ramps and fortifications elsewhere, but a house that held much of itself together by the time of the battle might well have been exploited as an observation platform. It might well have been rickety; McArdle shows it as it must have been, braced by timbers.

1.png

The original McArdle "Dawn at the Alamo" 1875. This is the only image of the lost original. The platform is the central structure shown.

2-Copy.jpg

The restored, recreated painting.

The placement of such a structure in the North end of the plaza is ideally suited to see much of the approach at the Northwest angle of the perimeter, a view otherwise partially obscured by the familiar giant pecan tree.

When there is a dispute about Alamo architecture, as with the "connecting wall" entry (a dispute that got real nasty a while back on an Alamo forum), it is incredibly helpful to build a model of what you are talking about. As you put up the walls and barricades, you realize why they did things the way they did them, and how the random circumstances of the ruins and grounds explained their heroic conduct. For example, you understand why the Mexicans suffered greater casualties inside than outside the fort. With the "connecting wall," I built the model in two parts, one section of the wall on the west side to represent the original, thicker wall, and one on the east adjoining it an angle to stand for the later, thinner one. Where these joined was a giant "crack," which you can see in some paintings and photographs. And below the arc of the crack is an entryway to the convent yard, clearly depicted in early drawing by Seth Eastman. When you build the model, if you follow the likely building of those at the time, you can recreate the crack, the entry, and see why it was needed and how it was used.

It was the passageway to the church, the front door of the famous church being barricaded at the time of the battle.

IMAG0048.jpg

My platform under construction late last year.

IMAG0046.jpg

It would have been the northernmost stone house in the demolished row.

IMAG0047.jpg


IMAG0049.jpg


IMAG0050.jpg

The reason such a platform was necessary: the view to the northwest, the route of assault of one of the main Mexican assault columns.
 
That is a very nice piece of work and, an interesting dialogue for those of us who know nothing about this event
Mitch
 
Thank you the information. Your research is thorough, and your conclusions make a lot of sense. I am trying to close my eyes and imagine your model overlayed on my recollections of visiting the Alamo back when I was in college and again when I was a Federal Judge's Law Clerk in Texas in the early 1990's.
 
I have always wondered what that stucture in the middle of that painting was supposed to be. This is the first time I read an explanation of it, thank you.
I am making very good progress on my 40mm Alamo range. My compound is strictly for wargamming purposes though, so I have taken lots of liberties with all the structures. Your research and attention to detail is very inspiring.

Walt
 
I missed this thread and just read through it. A true labour of love. The time to do the research, planning the diorama, purchasing the figures, painting the figures, creating the buildings and scenic pieces, and photographing the diorama - add the level of detail and it is awe inspiring. Wish I had your patience and skills, not to mention a "mansion." :smile2: Congrats and look forward to seeing more.
 
IMG_0916.jpg

Looking across to the north wall. Convent on the right; the "platform" way off to the left.

IMG_0810.jpg

The platform is the building in the center. From this position, to the east of the fort, you can see why it was a valuable structure.

After a few more months, I am beginning to think of it as a full building.
 
Would that be the moon just over the structure in the dawn sky? It's a nice touch!
 
Paul,
How far do you think you are from completion?70%?50%?40%?
Mark
 
I have about 700 figures on the board or ready to be mounted, and I wanted to have 2000 in the end. Most of the 1300 are at this time unpainted plastic, and in pretty poor condition. The main problem is the very low diversity of poses; and the problem of the mass painting. I used to be able to paint about 25-30 over a period of about a week, but it is almost impossible to do even that much while living a whole life otherwise. As a result, I have begun to collect the new painted metal lines. Currently, I see about $3,000 in lancers and Mexican infantry I want to buy from King & Country, Britains, and the others. I figure I will get them all eventually, one or two at a time.

It's worth it to use the more expensive ones for me, because the poses are all different (or mostly) and no painting is required. They are hefty, too: fully sculpted figures with facial expressions and period equipment. They are even slightly amenable to modifications.

I started to build the model by painting figures in the early 90s, when I first found recast Marx sets for sale. The buildings were put up starting 1998-2001. As of now, that's 20 years of work, and a lot of it is waiting for free time to work on it. Everything else comes first.

My daughters used to put dinosaurs and Barbies in the fort. One time one of our dogs was mad at me and went into the model and chewed the hell out of some buildings and plastic parts. It was clearly revenge, since he never did it at any other time. And sometimes a cat will use the plaza for a... well, at time in the past it's been a large, flat area with a lot of sand in it. The plaza now is mostly worked landscaping, glued down stones, etc., so it's not attractive for that.

Ideally, I would have all of the new figures I want and disguise duplicates with positioning and some modifying, and had the time to finally fasten the plywood platforms together and finish the landscaping. I might eventually redo the large convent building. Ideally I could finish this year, but I'd have to skip a few car payments.

I would say it's about 70-80% done though, and more so for just photography. The pictures make it look more finished than it is.

I have been trying to figure out how the moon got into the pictures I took from the rear of the model, and found out that it's a hole in the backdrop. Behind the backdrop are the garage doors, and the light is pretty strong, here serving as moonlight. I don't know what the moon would have looked like that morning or what shape it was in. That position is to the NNW; sunrise is behind you to the left. Anybody know?
 
Here's something I just discovered. I think that the little house in the photograph is one of the ones in the drawing. These would be the only pictures of the upper end of the west wall, the drawing from 1848-49 and the photograph as in the descriptive materials.

I am now pretty sure about the tree, and think that it is indeed the large pecan, the only tree near or in the Alamo at the time of the battle, standing just outside the walls near the northwest corner. This places the "peaked roof" house nearer the corner than it is depicted in most of the current paintings, models, and public image of the Alamo.

Copyofex004_14c_gs150.jpg


[sp. jacal, not jacale]


The photgraph has these annotations in the digital library:

Title Jacal beside stone ruins, San Antonio
Description Photograph shows retouched copy print of view of jacal beside ruins, possibly a wall at one of the missions. Jerky drying on line on right.
Date-Original 1870 - 1879?
Subject Jacals - San Antonio (Tex.); Mexican Americans
Location San Antonio, Tex.
Lender Thomas W. Cutrer.
Type Image
Format tiff
Digital Identifier CD # 995 ; 081-0514.tif.
Identifier 081-0514
Rights http://lib.utsa.edu/planning-a-visit/ph ... ompliance/

My version: the house is to the left, can only see the north end of it in this picture. The arcade must not have been an arcade in front of any house on the west wall.

IMAG0050.jpg



Currentplaza1-Copy.png

Red line shows the original Alamo fort. The upper left "notch" is the location of the original Maverick property, and the left hand perimeter going down from that position is the location of the tree and house in the picture.

HoustonStWfromPlazaMaverickBldgonright1885cdm9020cdmhostcom.jpg

Maverick building on the right in 1885. This shows the approximate view of the Eastman drawing, by this time Houston Street and Plaza.

Slide29JPG-1.jpg

The Maverick house in the 1850s. That's the tree: you can see the same shapes in it in all three pictures here. The viewpoint in this picture is actually outside the red line near the upper left corner, looking up at the Alamo north wall.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top