 |
| W.C. Walsh article from 1924 |
NOTE: this is a work in progress towards a possible historical marker for the story of the Tonkawa in early Austin. It is in no way a review of Tonkawa history. Rather, it is a critical review (trying to make sense) of a specific article written in 1924 by W.C. Walsh, and speculations / suppositions / historical errors made by film maker Bob O'Dell based on that article.
#tonkawathemovie #Tonkawa #Austin-TonkawaFriendshipDay
Overview
Sept. 12, 2024 members of the Tonkawa tribe from Oklahoma
were in Austin for Austin-Tonkawa Friendship Day, a recognition of the
friendship that has endured since Austin became the Texas Capital in 1839. The
event was initiated by filmmaker Bob O’Dell who is working on a documentary
about the tribe. Prior to the event O’Dell did an interview published in the
newspaper, subtitled “Thanking the Tonkawa for saving the capital of Texas” (Austin
American Statesman, May 7th, 2024, page D01). It was based on a white paper written by O'Dell and filed with the Austin History Center ("How The Tonkawa Tribe Came to Live in Austin Texas", Bob O’Dell, August 2, 2023 Version 1.0).
The Statesman piece
ran before TCHC and
O’Dell met to discuss a potential future historical marker. In this
article I’ll discuss a number of concerns about historical claims that
were discussed with
O’Dell, but unfortunately after the American Statesman article had already been
published, and after O'Dell had reached out to the City of Austin's mayor, conducted podcast interviews, etc.
These clarifications are important for any potential future historical marker, but in general to also correct, clarify and suggest further research needed on claims made in the article(s) which have already been made public.
Here are the major sections of this article:
- I. Problems with 1924 William C. Walsh Article
- II. Problems with O'Dell's Claims on Tonkawa Camp in 1842-1844
- III. Did Walsh Confuse / Conflate 1842 with 1862?
- IV. Tonkawa Oral History
- V. Conclusion
- VI. Links, References, Notes
I. Problems with 1924 William C. Walsh Article
The most serious problem begins with the Walsh article itself. The sole source for O’Dell’s claims with respect to 1842 is a single paragraph from a news article by William C. Walsh (1836-1924) published in 1924, and in particular a single sentence in that paragraph.
Again citing the Handbook of Texas, Capt. William C. Walsh was a Civil War officer (CSA) and Texas land commissioner, born in Dayton, Ohio in 1836. He moved to Austin in 1840 with his father, a blacksmith, and his mother. In 1924, the year he died, he was interviewed for a series of 14 articles on the early days of Austin. In his preface to the series Walsh said upfront “... I shall endeavor to tell the truth and nothing but the truth [about old Austin], but I fear to trust the memory of an old man..." (The Austin Statesman, Jan 27, 1924). In 1924, the year he died, Walsh was 88 years old, remembering events 82 years prior when he was only 6 years old.
Here’s the entirety of what Walsh said about the Tonkawa camp as published in the newspaper:
Odds and Ends—Indians.
The Tonkaway (sic) Indians were, from the first settlement, friendly to the whites and thereby secured the enmity of the Lipans, Comanches and other inimical tribes. In 1842, these Indians made an united attack on the Tonks (sic) and almost entirely wiped them out. A short time afterwards, the remnant, about two hundred and fifty, came to Austin and for mutual protection camped in the city limits. Their camp was situated in a liveoak grove on West Fourth Street, on ground now occupied by what is known as the "Walker Properties." [generally today's Republic Square] The treaty was brief. The Tonks (sic) were to refrain from pilfering, were to act as watchmen and give the alarm if danger approached; were also to join in pursuit of depredators and act as guides. In return, they were privileged to trade meat and pecans and wild fruit for corn, potatoes and other foodstuff. During the next two years of their residence in the city they held faithfully to the above terms. (Austin American-Statesman, 20 Apr 1924, Sun, Page 8)
In describing the matters of 1842 Walsh straightaway begins with what O’Dell admits is a "possible" mistake, underlined above: Walsh confuses or conflates the Tonkawa Massacre of 1862[1] with events of 1842. Walsh himself warned about trusting his memory.
From O'Dell's white paper, in reference to this sentence, "It is possible
that Walsh was mistakenly thinking about a united attack that happened
much later in 1862", i.e. the Tonkawa Massacre of 1862.
Walsh's mixup
Confusing the Tonkawa Massacre of 1862 with 1842 is a significant mix-up and a problem for the credibility of the Walsh article's 1842-claim as a whole. Let's see why. We seem to be left with three possibilities:
- there was no mix-up, something like the 1862 massacre as described by Walsh did take place in 1842, or
- the date of 1842 is right, but the description of events (which O'Dell himself points out sounds oddly like 1862) is wrong, or
- the description of events is right (surely the 1862 massacre) but the date is wrong, so 1842 is not right
There really is no way around this ("possible") mix-up; any claims based on this mix-up are likewise going to be ("possibly") wrong. As the rest of this article shows, there are a lot of unresolved questions that appear to stem from this mixup.
Let's
use "reductio ad absurdum" to move Walsh's sentence above (highlighted)
from "possibly" wrong to definitely wrong. At face value, what Walsh presented (#1) is that the Tonkawa experienced an 1862-like event in
1842; so once in 1842, then again in 1862, the latter known as the
Tonkawa Massacre of 1862. Which means:
- given the known impact on the tribe from 1862
alone, two such events would have surely, as Walsh puts it, "wiped them
out" .. the fact they were not wiped out implies two such events did not happen
- such an 1842 event would surely have found it's way into the history
books, just as the 1862 event did, and be part of their oral history just as 1862 is
- and a "united attack" by tribes in 1842 that included the Comanche and their then enemies is not believable.
Possibility #2 would mean the date is right, and something happened in 1842, but we don't know what.
Possibility #3 would mean Walsh was clearly thinking about the 1862 massacre and just got the date wrong, so what, if anything, happened in 1842? We don't know.
Possibilities #2 and #3 combined shed a lot of question on what if anything happened in 1842.
Simplest explanation: 1842 should have been 1862
The simplest explanation (Occam's razor) may be #3, that the date is wrong: 1842 was a slip of the tongue (or memory) or a newspaper typo. A one digit typo (1842 should have been 1862) and Walsh's story largely fits, and most of the questions raised go away, i.e. it explains why we see nothing (thus far; more research needed by O'Dell) written about the Tonkawa camped at Republic Square in Austin from 1842 through 1844 (we'll discuss the Mary Mitchell article below). If you read the Walsh article carefully, he never refers to the Mexican Army taking San Antonio, and Austin being evacuated. The events of 1842 and the evacuation of Austin are never brought up in the article. It is odd that Walsh would mention 1842 -- a defining part of Austin's early history -- then never explain to the reader what the significance was. Further arguing for #3.
Quickly (we'll look at this in more detail below) let's look at what Walsh said, but plug in 1862 rather than 1842:
"In [1862] these Indians [Comanches and other tribes] made an united attack on the Tonks (sic) and almost entirely wiped them out. A short time afterwards [ca.1863], the remnant, about two hundred and fifty, came to Austin..."
This fits the documented history of the Tonkawa after the 1862 massacre well. This may also explain an otherwise curious quote from Walsh; the Tonkawa were encamped in Austin for "mutual protection" for two years. Why two years? Consider that 1863 + 2 = 1865. The Civil War ended in 1865 and Austin, a Confederate State, was then surrendered to the Unite States and occupied by Union troops. No more need for "mutual protection". And at this time management of "Indian affairs" passed from the C.S.A. to the United States.
Later we'll explore in more detail the case for a camp in 1862.
Why did the Tonkawa leave in 1844?
Related
to the above, just as a camp from 1863-1865 makes sense of Walsh's camp
of two years duration, it's seemingly a problem for a camp from
1842-1844: why would the Tonkawa have left in 1844? Austin was
not re-designated the capital until the the Convention of 1845,
and annexed by the United States that same year. In 1844 Texans had no
way of knowing if Austin would or wouldn't resume as the capital so
early residents like Francis Dieterich (1815–1860) who had left in 1842
did not return to
Austin until 1845 (Handbook of Texas)(Merchant to the Republic). So if
mutual
protection was the reason for the camp, why leave before Austin's fate
was known and it was re-populated? If Austinites needed protection the
Tonkawa were providing, asking the Tonkawa to leave before Austin's fate
was known doesn't seem reasonable.
Further arguing for #3, the camp was ca.1863-1865.
William Bollaert's eye witness account
To
illustrate this issue of the lack of reports of Tonkawa in Austin
1842-1844 at the Republic Square camp, William Bollaert, an English
explorer, writer, chemist, geographer, and ethnologist traveled
through Texas in 1842 to 1843. He is known for his journal and copious
notes; he is a primary source and eye witness to Austin during this
period.
He is in both Bastrop and Austin in August 1843 on consecutive days. Passing through Bastrop enroute to Austin he meets with Chief Campo, sees families camped, goes to a store "full" of Tonkawa trading. The next day he's in Austin for 2 nights, nearly 3 days (leaves the evening of the 3rd day) .. records nothing about seeing Tonkawa. None camping. None trading with residents. (more below: William Bollaert's Notes on Tonkawa 1843). The almost total focus on documenting the Tonkawa in Bastrop compared with the complete lack of reference to any Tonkawa in Austin by Bollaert begs the question of whether they were there in Austin in 1843.
Walsh's mixup in summary: we don't know what happened when
To conclude, from the Walsh article we don't know what happened when. Without more evidence claims based on the article are suspect.
To overcome what certainly does appear to be a mix-up and defend O'Dell's 1842 claims would require primary evidence, or at least evidence from someone connected with someone known to have been there (Austin in 1842-1844) like Mary Mitchell (extended family of Robertson who was there; more on her article below). That level of evidence has not yet been presented by O'Dell, nor have I found it. There are other primary sources one could research; that would be a next step for O'Dell.
In the rest of the article we'll start with possibility #2. Then towards the end look at the period ca. post-1862 during the Civil War when the Tonkawa are known to have returned to Austin, i.e. consider possibility #3.
II. Problems with O'Dell's Claims on Tonkawa Camp in 1842-1844
In
this section we look at possibility #2 above: the date of 1842-1844 is
right, although O'Dell admits Walsh confused what happened with events
that actually happened in 1862. O'Dell also makes a number of
unsubstantiated claims. We'll explore these issues here.
1842 in Austin
Let’s
back up and look at what was happening in 1842 in Austin; later we'll
also look at Austin post-1862 during the Civil War as it relates to the
Tonkawa.
From the Handbook of Texas: “In the years following the battle of San Jacinto, Mexican leaders periodically threatened to renew hostilities against Texas. Lacking the resources to attempt reconquest, the Centralist government of Antonio López de Santa Anna, who had returned to the presidency in the fall of 1841, ordered the army to harass the Texas frontier; his policy was intended to discourage immigration and foreign capital investment in the young republic. Accordingly, a force of 700 men under Gen. Rafael Vásquez marched into Texas and seized San Antonio on March 5, 1842. Forewarned of the Mexican advance, most Anglo-American residents had already evacuated the area allowing Vasquez to enter the town unopposed.” It was during this period that much of Austin’s population left; it was during this period the infamous “Archives War” took place.
To paraphrase O’Dell’s interview published in the American Statesman: in 1842 while Austin was largely evacuated, the Comanches kidnapped two children, William and Jane Simpson, who lived on West Pecan today's W 6th St. O’Dell claimed in his interview the kidnapping was a “triggering event” for Austinites to invite the Tonkawa into the city to protect against further raids. He then claimed that in the period they were camped in Austin all raids stopped, and their presence prevented Austin from being destroyed, e.g. by the Comanche, i.e. they “saved Austin”, or as expressed in a pod-cast,“How the Tonkawa Tribe Saved Austin's Capital Status”.
There are a number of historical problems with this. Again, the article was published before O’Dell scheduled a meeting with TCHC so this will hopefully clarify things as we work towards a possible historical marker.
Simpson Children Abduction: 1844, not 1842
First, although O’Dell cited The Indian Papers of Texas
and the Southwest 1825-1916 he failed to notice that the Simpson kids were
kidnapped in 1844, not 1842, after the Tonkawa had left. This is abundantly
documented in Republic of Texas correspondence on the matter, as well as
various newspapers across Texas that reported on it. So, abduction of the
Simpson children was not a “triggering event” for Austin inviting the Tonkawa to Austin as O'Dell suggested.
 |
| Republic of Texas correspondence on the abduction of the Simpson children in 1844 |
.jpg) |
| Congressional resolution for ransom of Simpson children, 1844 |
 |
| The Standard (Clarksville, Texas) 4 Dec 1844, Wed |
Further documentation in the Indian Papers shows the children were abducted by Comanches, but that it caused a rift with bands that were at this time trying to pursue peace with Texas. Michno (Fate Worse than Death) summarizes the story (p.82) “Apparently a significant number of Comanches [under Chief Cut Arm] were trying to remain at peace with Texans. They knew who [Comanches under Chief Mopechucope] had led the raid on the Simpsons”; those responsible were confronted resulting a fight in which Cut Arm was killed, along with the son and father responsible for the abduction. So in a rare case, the specific individuals, a father and son, were actually identified. A report is available in The Indian Papers of Texas and the Southwest 1825-1916: Volume 2 pp. 283-84 & 298-99. I think this -- some Comanches were pursuing peace -- may help explain why they did not burn Austin, or San Antonio for that matter, to the ground ca. 1842. More on that below.
No Evidence of an "Invite"
What about O’Dell’s claim the City of Austin invited the Tonkawa? He concedes (private communications) there is no evidence of an invitation. Walsh makes no mention of an invite. Some of Walsh’s derogatory language about “pilfering” suggests this was not just an omission, rather he never meant to imply an invite was extended (you do not generally extend an invite to someone then ask them to refrain from pilfering). One would think something as important as this would have been reported somewhere, notably correspondence of the Republic of Texas as documented in The Indian Papers. I’ve found no evidence of an invite thus far.
Texas Army ("a force of sufficient strength to defend Austin")
Another fact that brings to question an invite by Austin. March 5th, 1842 the Mexican Army under Gen. Rafael Vásquez marched into Texas and seized San Antonio. Within days Texas Secretary of War, George W. Hockley, ordered a battalion of Col. Henry Jones' regiment to Austin. That, with the men already in Austin, were thought to "...constitute a force of sufficient strength to defend Austin..." (ATTACK AND COUNTERATTACK: The Texas-Mexican Frontier, 1842. Nance, pp.55-56. Retrieved from Texas State Historical Association 10/4/2024).
Mexican General Woll then invaded San Antonio in September. While still not clear how much of or when the Texas Army was withdrawn from Austin (more research needed), if present through September (Woll retreated after the Battle of Salado Creek) that is a large part of 1842 where an "invite" to the Tonkawa to protect Austin makes little sense.
 |
| A battalion of Col. Jones' regiment ordered to Austin in March of 1842 for protection of Austin, the capital. The Standard (Clarksville, Texas), Sat, Sep 3, 1842. |
Deaths of Dolson and Black, Killed at Barton Springs
Walsh
describes the deaths of Captains Dolson and Black. While his details
surrounding their death differs a bit from one newspaper obit, their
date of death can be confirmed with their burial at Oakwood Cemetery, as
well as probate records for Dolson on file with the Travis County
Clerk's office, Austin.
Their date of death was August 1st, 1842.
As an aside and for clarification, at the time of his death Dolson was presumably no longer a captain; in 1841 he and a Mr. King filed deeds for a saloon (Travis County Deed Records: Deed Record A Page: 398). https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1595810/m1/442/ George M. Dolson appears in a number of interesting write ups like "Did David Crockett Surrender at the Alamo?" (Connelly, The Journal of Southern History, 1960. Has a short bio on Dolson; he was not active military when he died)
Back to the main story ..
In
other reports of their death, and indeed as reported by Walsh himself,
there is no mention of Tonkawa involvement: no raising alarm or tracking
the "depredators". As in the next section on the 1843 raid on
Austin, this brings up questions as to whether the Tonkawa were at the
time encamped, in this case quite close to Barton Springs.
O'Dell
has explained this lack of reference (private communications) by saying
their deaths were not within the city limits. While I find that
explanation lacking, the same could then be said of his speculation (a
later version of his white paper) that had the Tonkawa been present in
Austin in 1844 perhaps the Simpson kids would have been saved (this was
after he learned they weren't abducted in 1842); the kids were in Shoal
Creek which is west of West Avenue, the city limits of the time. There
are certain locations that even in 1842, while technically not within
the city limits, have I would argue always been considered "Austin":
Mount Bonnell, Shoal Creek, Treaty Oak (all west of West Ave.), and
Barton Springs being in this category.
Regardless,
if the Tonkawa were encamped at Republic Square in August, and if
Dolson and Black were killed at Barton Springs as recalled by Walsh, one
might expect some mention if only to say "the Tonkawa wanted to track
the depredators but were discouraged as it was outside the city
limits". I find the complete lack of reference to the Tonkawa, even by
Walsh, raises questions that I'll explore more in the next section in
the context of the year 1843.
 |
| Obit
from newspaper for Dolson and Black. Details differ a bit from what
Walsh describes, i.e. they had gone swimming at Barton Springs. Obit
pulled from https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/63887231/george-m-dolson |
1843 Raid on Austin
Concerning O’Dell’s interview claim there were no raids on Austin while the Tonkawa were encamped; he is ignoring the sizable raid of 1843 (number in the party range as high as 40), probably by Comanches, and documented in several books (Wilbarger's Depredations; John Holland Jenkins, Recollections of Early Texas, p.166; Andrew J. Sowell, Rangers and Pioneers of Texas, pp.58-59; Frank Brown, Annals, X p.46, 49) and by early Austin resident and historian Julia Lee Sinks (Quarterly, Texas State Historical Association, 1900). We even have an eye witness account by James Smith and son John (their homestead is today’s Boggy Creek Farm; second oldest homestead in Austin, thought built same year as French Legation). John Smith documented the raid in a letter; a copy is on file at the Briscoe Center for American History. By accounts (which do vary on details and I suspect Sinks was trying to piece it all together in her paper for TSHA) the raid came from the east, passing Robertson Hill in Austin’s out lots, then north along Waller Creek through the eastern part of Austin, then escaping into the “mountains” (a reference to the hills west of Austin) after a skirmish with Austin residents. Residents of Austin were killed in the raid. Brown comments that when Bell and Coleman were assaulted, a Mrs. Browning and daughter, standing in their door near Waller Creek on East Avenue were within two hundred yards of the raiding party.
None of the half dozen accounts above mention Tonkawa involvement: raising alarm, help in pursuit, or engaging the raiding party which happened toward dusk with some (three?) of the raiding party killed.
More on this below as we revisit the raid of 1843.
 |
| A
compilation of a few sources on the 1843 raid on Austin. Details of the
handwritten note by John Smith suggest to me the raiding party was
Comanche, and perhaps even some that had been involved in the events of
1840 (they wore "American" clothing; maybe from Linnville?). If indeed
Comanche, the raid may well have been on-going retribution for the
Council House Massacre of 1840. The raiding party appears to have
approached from the east, headed west. Keep in mind, the old entry to
Austin was from the east via Bastrop, Webberville and Hornsby Bend; old Fort Colorado
was on this eastern entry to what would later be Austin and was the
location of many Texas and Comanche skirmishes, but also a treaty for
peace by the Comanche in 1837. |
 |
| Page from John Smith letter |
 |
| Key
locations based on accounts of the 1843 raid on Austin including eye
witness description of James Smith and son John, described by John in a
letter on file with Briscoe. |
William Bollaert's Notes on Tonkawa 1843
William
Bollaert, writer, chemist, geographer, and ethnologist traveled through
Texas in 1842 to 1843. His detailed journals (posthumously compiled
into a book in 1956) provide a primary source of information on Texas
during its early days as a republic; his journal includes notes on
Tonkawa, including one on one meetings. (William Bollaert's Texas, paperback printing 1989)
In August through September of 1843 he traveled from Houston to Austin and back.
August 22nd just outside Bastrop Bollaert spends time with a young Tonkawa man, "Mr. M", then later with Tonkawa Chief Campo, encamped there with "four or five" families. Campo reported having just recently returned from buffalo hunting, and that later that summer planned to "visit the coast .. to see the ocean and hunt mustangs and deer". That same day Bollaert then went into Bastrop where there was a dry goods store "full of Tonkeways (sic)" bartering for goods including "beads, and such finery" for their wives, and even whiskey from the "tippling shop".
He arrived in Austin August 23rd, spent all of August 24th and most of August 25th, leaving that evening for Webber's Prairie where he spent the night. His brief stay in Austin may have (he does not elaborate) been in part due to health (he became ill the 26th) but also perhaps the poor shape Austin was in, which residents blamed on Sam Houston.
By far, documenting the Tonkawa in Bastrop was Bollaert's main focus.
Of
all the observations he made on Austin -- he mentions visiting the
French Legation, the Capitol, the President's house, residences, some
businesses -- there is no mention of having seen any Tonkawa
camped anywhere (Republic Square being just .2 miles off Congress Ave)
or trading with residents. Maybe all the men were out hunting? That
still leaves the women and children, say 2/3 of the tribe, that would
presumably still be in Austin tending camp? In a depopulated Austin
surely a camp of Tonkawa that size would be hard to miss just off
Congress Ave.?
These
two reports a day apart seem to paint a different picture of the
Tonkawa in 1843 than that of Walsh's article (per possibility #2), and
O'Dell's claims, of a tribe of some 250 in a weakened state huddled in
Austin's city limits for protection.
The fact that Campo had just returned from buffalo hunting, and was then planning a visit to the coast to see the ocean, almost like a vacation!, with other members of the tribe bartering for "finery" and whiskey? It's almost like Walsh confused Austin for Bastrop. I'm not suggesting that is so, just that Bollaert's description of the Tonkawa in Bastrop vs. Austin (no mention) is not what one might infer from Walsh's article and O'Dell's claims.
The
description of the Tonkawa in Bastrop does raise a question. Per Walsh,
some 250 Tonkawa 2/3 of which were probably women and children, by
Walsh's account not in great shape, needing refuge. With Austin largely
depopulated and itself in weakened condition, why would anyone go to
Austin for safety if indeed you suspected that it was the bullseye for
an attack by the Comanche? The residents of Austin that stayed did so
because their lives were rooted in homesteads and businesses (as
Bollaert commented on). The Tonkawa were mobile and could have gone
anywhere .. like Bastrop .. which some including Campo obviously did. As well as the coast to see the ocean.
I'll reemphasize, Bollaert's description of the Tonkawa in Bastrop in 1843 seems to show a tribe that is still mobile and not afraid to move about. Bollaert is a primary source, eye witness account to Austin in 1843, from a man known to document details.
The almost total focus on documenting the Tonkawa in Bastrop compared with the complete lack of reference to any Tonkawa in Austin by Bollaert begs the question of whether they were there in 1843.
Why Austin Was Not Destroyed
O’Dell’s interview (and podcast interview; see below) implies that if not for the Tonkawa encampment, Austin would have been destroyed by the Comanche, or nearly so, as to rule it out as the future Capital of Texas; see “How the Tonkawa Tribe Saved Austin's Capital Status”. Their presence saved Austin. Again no evidence of this, and there are other plausible explanations.
On the face of it, it’s hard to reconcile that the Comanche and their allies, who thwarted Texas westward expansion for another three plus decades, would have been dissuaded from burning Austin to the ground as they had done with Linnville just years before by a force of some 250 Tonkawa, 2/3 of which were likely women and children. Despite the number of chiefs killed in the Council House Massacre in 1840, the Penateka (much less the other Comanche divisions) still had powerful chiefs remaining: Buffalo Hump, Yellow Wolf, and Santa Anna (no not that one!) to name a few.
I would also point out that San
Antonio wasn’t leveled either even while under the command of the
Mexican army
who might well have helped. San Antonio was, after all, the location of
the
Council House Massacre of 1840. With Houston back as Texas’ president,
and
given the events of 1840 (Council House Massacre, Raid on Linnville,
Plum Creek
Battle, and Moore’s raid into Comancheria), many of the Penateka were
ready for
peace. This is a documented fact. The Comanche had already approached
Fort Colorado in 1837 asking for a treaty of peace (Smithwick).
Frank Brown also weighed in on this question speculating "... they [the Comanche] probably considered the place [Austin] doomed and the game not worth the candle." (Annals of Travis County and of the City of Austin Volume 4, p.9 or p.57 on the portal). In other words, Texas itself (Houston et.al.) was doing a pretty good job of trying to shut Austin down; it wasn't worth risking additional casualties and any potential peace treaties with Houston that might be in the near future. Work smarter, not harder. Let Houston -- or the Mexican army -- finish it off.
This is ultimately a question best addressed by historians of the Pekka Hämäläinen caliber, and indeed may likely never be answered.
Even if the Comanche had burned Austin to the ground, O'Dell is making a forgone conclusion (“How the Tonkawa Tribe Saved Austin's Capital Status”)
that the destruction would have prevented Austin from continuing as the
capital; that is a claim that would be hard to substantiate. The
Archives War is a simple example of the desire of Austin residents to
remain the capital. There were lots of political moving parts during
this period.
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth841238/m1/57/
 |
| Frank Brown, Annals of Travis
County and of the City of Austin, speculation as to why the Comanche
didn't destroy Austin in 1842. While he doesn't mention the Comanche by
name, his reference to Linnville clues us in. |
III. Did Walsh Confuse / Conflate 1842 with 1862?
We've already discussed that Walsh confused events from 1862 with 1842; a confusion O'Dell references. Confusing the Tonkawa Massacre of 1862 with 1842 is a significant mix-up. This brings up a question: did the Tonkawa camp at Republic Square actually take place in 1842, or was it perhaps before or after the 1842 evacuation, or both, i.e. Walsh conflating an earlier camp with later events post-1862 when some Tonkawa did return to Austin.
An even
simpler explanation: was 1842 a slip of the tongue or a newspaper typo. A
one digit typo and Walsh's story largely fits, and most of the
questions raised go away.
Let's run through some more
questions about this Tonkawa camp date of 1842-1844, but also look at
what was going on with the Tonkawa and Austin post-1862 during the Civil
War.
1843 Raid on Austin Revisited
As noted above, the 1843 raid on Austin was recorded in a number of sources (I'll make what I think is the reasonable assumption they were Comanche). And as noted there is no reference to Tonkawa involvement in the half dozen sources referenced above. The fact that all these sources are silent on Tonkawa involvement is puzzling. Ritualistic cannibalism around the death of enemies in combat was discussed (sensationalized) by so many chroniclers of the 1800s and early 1900s, and a topic of academic research (anthropologists and historians). The fact that Comanches were killed begs the question, why is there no mention of Tonkawa ceremony surrounding these deaths by any of the sources documenting the 1843 raid on Austin? If Tonkawa were indeed encamped in Austin in 1843, they would by accounts had time to reach the location (as did some Austin residents) where the battle culminated and where the Comanches were killed? There is the possibility that the Comanche retrieved the bodies of their dead comrades as they were known to do after battles, but in such a case there would surely have been mention of Tonkawa pursuit, again as they were known to have done in previous battles; retrieving fallen comrades takes time increasing the chance a pursuing band of Tonkawa could have pursued and even engaged the raiding party. The complete absence of reference to Tonkawa involvement would seem to suggest that in 1843
- a) they were not in Austin, or
- b) were in such a weakened condition they opted to not be involved, in which case their presence was not a reason why Austin was not burned to the ground (above discussion), or
- c) of the half dozen sources cited that described the raid none thought it worth mentioning.
Walsh Remembered a Camp at a Different Time
Previously noted, the Tonkawa presence in the Austin area predates Austin's founding. Surely they had a camp or camps in Austin before it was established in 1839. Could one of those be the camp Walsh remembers from his childhood having arrived in 1840 at age 4 years old?
Dr. Joseph W. Robertson and the Mary Mitchell Article of 1905
Joseph
William
Robertson, namesake of Robertson Hill and previous owner of the French
Legation, was fifth mayor of Austin in 1843; part of the period in
question. In 1839–40 he
represented Bastrop County in the House of Representatives of the Fourth
Congress of the Republic of Texas. At the end of his term Robertson
moved to
Austin (Handbook of Texas). He was also apparently the physician
attached to the battalion of Col. Henry Jones' regiment in Austin in
1842.
Robertson's son-in-law, Robert A. Smith, was the brother of Mary Smith Mitchell. Far from being a random reporter, she was part of the Robertson extended family and in 1905 wrote about the Tonkawa camp at Republic Square: "Early Days In City Of Austin" (The Austin Statesman, Apr 2, 1905). This was another of O’Dell’s cited sources (white paper). In the same article she also wrote about Austin during the evacuation of 1842. But,
- she never gives a date on the camp
- never gives a duration for the camp
- never makes a connection between the two events, i.e. the camp and Austin evacuation
- and the stories
appear in two separate parts of her article
Surely someone (Mary Mitchell) who was part of the extended family of Robertson, Robertson having been attached to the Jones battalion as physician and then the mayor of Austin during this period, would have heard about and recorded a story about the Tonkawa camp being associated with the 1842 evacuation, and the City of Austin extending an invitation to the tribe for protection.
Post-1862 Return of Tonkawa to Austin During Civil War; Was 1842 Walsh's Confusion, Conflation or Typo?
If
you read the Walsh article carefully, he never refers to the
evacuation of Austin in 1842 as the event from which Austin and the
Tonkawa were requiring "mutual protection". A little odd that he would
refer to 1842, but then not mention to the reader the significance of
the year. With that in mind, let's revisit Walsh's confusion /
conflation of 1842 and 1862.
After the attack on the Tonkawa in 1862, "Tonkawa had begun drifting further south into Texas by the summer of 1863 ... Some survivors found their way back to central Texas including near Austin ..." (TxDOT Tribal Histories, Tonkawa Tribe, p.22). O'Dell also mentions this in his white paper with additional references.
Had Walsh conflated the events post-1862 with 1842; was he remembering a camp in Austin after their return in 1863?
If you look at what Walsh said, but plug in 1862 rather than 1842, it fits the documented history of the Tonkawa after the 1862 massacre well; let's do that below:
"In [1862] these Indians [Comanches and other tribes] made an united attack on the Tonks (sic) and almost entirely wiped them out. A short time afterwards [ca.1863], the remnant, about two hundred and fifty, came to Austin..."
This may also explain an otherwise curious quote from Walsh; the Tonkawa were encamped in Austin for "mutual protection" for two years.
What is the significance of two years? Consider that 1863 + 2 = 1865.
The Civil War ended in 1865 and Austin, a Confederate State, was then
surrendered to the Unite States and occupied by Union troops. No more
need for "mutual protection". And at this time management of "Indian
affairs" passed from the C.S.A. to the United States.
The figure below is from the Texas Indian Papers documenting the removal of Tonkawa from Austin
north to Jacksboro in 1867. If the Tonkawa started migrating to Austin
and surroundings ca.1863, a camp in Austin of Walsh's cited two years
seems plausible (See also TxDOT Tribal Histories, Tonkawa Tribe, p.24).
This abstract shows the stops on the way to Jacksboro. Vouchers on each day show expenses and also number of persons. The number shrinks from 135 to 103 by trips end, presumably in part some deciding this wasn't such a good idea after all. A starting number of 135 begs the question, how many were in Austin to begin with -- 250? -- some of whom may have decided up front that having made the long trip south to Austin after the 1862 massacre they were simply not going to go back and left on their own for elsewhere they deemed safer (like Mexico, out of the reach of the U.S. Gov't).
 |
| Texas Indian Papers document that from March to April 1867 members of the Tonkawa tribe were being escorted back north out of Austin. See also TxDOT Tribal Histories, Tonkawa Tribe, p.24 |
So
what would Walsh's claim of "mutual protection" mean if the Tonkawa
camp from his story was during the Civil War post-1862 massacre?
Remember, Walsh's story never spells out "mutual protection" from whom.
First,
one of the factors (there are others) cited for the 1862 Massacre was
the Tonkawa support for the Confederacy, while the tribes that attacked
them were pro-Union. So fleeing to Austin, a fortified city in the
Confederacy during the Civil War, makes sense. Fort Magruder and other
fortifications were constructed in Austin anticipating Union attack (https://www.hmdb.org/m.asp?m=69091).
In this sense "mutual protection" takes on a different meaning: for
Austinites it is protection from Union forces, and for the Tonkawa
protection from pro-Union tribes. And to be sure, during the Civil War,
Texas experienced increased raiding by tribes hostile to the Tonkawa and
trying to push back Texas settlement. Post-1862 during the Civil War
being inside Austin's fortifications rather than outside would have made
sense for the Tonkawa. This makes more sense than seeking refuge in
Austin in 1842 when it itself was in a weakened state and Bastrop would
have been a better safe place (see Bollaert above).
IV. Tonkawa Oral History
There was hope some oral history among the Tonkawa Nation
itself would help. The TxDOT Tribal Histories project worked with the tribes
that TxDOT, THC, TMD et.al. interface with today on issues such as NAGPRA;
unfortunately the report developed with the Tonkawa is silent on this topic
(link below).
More research needed.
V. Conclusion
This chapter of the Tonkawa / Austin history is definitely an undertold topic. While this article is a critical review of the Walsh article of 1924 and O'Dell's published newspaper interview and white paper, I do appreciate the work being done on a documentary film. But it is also important to honor the Tonkawa by telling as truthful a story on this topic as is historically possible as we move forward with a possible historical marker. That is literally one of the jobs County Historical Commissions are tasked with.
On balance, a camp after the 1862 massacre from
1863 through 1865 when the Civil War ended, seems more plausible, jives
with Walsh's story (other than the date mishap) and is better
documented.
The adage "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence"
applies to history. Much more evidence is needed to
justify many of the claims being made by O'Dell. Another adage goes, "repeat something often enough and it becomes the truth", the corollary being "once the genie
is out of the bottle...". Austin has plenty of stories that simply are
not true but which having been repeated so often are taken to be so; the
genie is out of the bottle. I do wish O'Dell's white paper had been
better vetted, but again the genie is out of the bottle so we need to
strive to ensure any possible marker is carefully thought through.
Austin owes that to the Tonkawa.
VI. Links, References, Notes
Snippet of Bob O'Dell interview “How the Tonkawa Tribe Saved Austin's Capital Status”. O'Dell describes how Austin "invited" the Tonkawa to Austin for protection thereby ensuring Austin remained the Capital of Texas. https://youtube.com/shorts/MVjKm5s24W4?si=sCnYf0nF7gDnvrl2
"Tonkawa Tribe honored for pivotal role in Austin's foundation after 140 years", by John-Carlos Estrada, CBS Austin:
‘Austin has done almost nothing’. Thanking the Tonkawa for saving the capital of Texas. Michael Barnes' interview of Bob O'Dell, Austin American Statesman, 05/07/2024
How The Tonkawa Tribe Came to Live in Austin Texas. Bob O’Dell, August 2, 2023 Version 1.0
'Austin
has done almost nothing': Time to thank the Tonkawa for saving the
capital of Texas. Bob O'Dell's film website. Retrieved 10/4/2024.
There is another news article from 1913 that references the Tonkawa in Austin, but O'Dell has I believe rightly chosen to not cite that article. It is anonymously written, and appears to be parroting other sources which are uncited, plus gives numbers of Tonkawa in the camp that don't jive with Walsh, and uses derogatory language in describing their presence: "HERE IS STORY OF AUSTIN FROM DAYS WHEN STOCKADE WAS PROTECTION FROM INDIANS",The Austin Statesman, Jan 19, 1913
Some Other Sources Referenced (no particular order)
ATTACK AND COUNTERATTACK: The Texas-Mexican Frontier, 1842. Nance
Buffalo Hump, Shilz and Shilz
Did David Crockett Surrender at the Alamo?", Connelly, The Journal of Southern History, 1960 (relates to George M. Dolson)
Evolution of a State, Smithwick
Fate Worse Than Death, Michno
Frank Brown, Annals of Austin and Travis County
Historical Marker Database (HMDB.ORG)
John Holland Jenkins,
Recollections of Early Texas, Andrew J. Sowell,
Rangers and Pioneers of Texas
John Smith letter on 1843 raid on Austin, Briscoe
Julia Lee Sinks, Quarterly, Texas State Historical Association, 1900
Newspapers, Historic. Misc
Oakwood Cemetery records
Republic of Austin, Jeff Kerr
Seat of Empire: Embattled Birth of Austin, Jeff Kerr
Texas Under Arms, Pierce
The Indian Papers of Texas and the Southwest 1825-1916
The Texas Tonkawas, McGowen
Travis County Clerks' probate records; deed records
TxDOT Tribal Histories, Tonkawa Tribe (written in conjunction with tribe)
Wilbarger's Depredations
William Bollaert's Texas, paperback printing 1989
1981, The Tonkawa People: A Tribal History, from Earliest Times to 1893.” Thesis. Texas Tech University. Newlin.
1962, THE CULTURE AND HISTORY OF THE TONKAWA INDIANS, Plains Anthropologist , November, Hasskarl.
Merchant to the Republic,
book,
1958;
San Antonio, Texas.
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1013938/:
accessed October 16, 2024)
[1] An incident in Oklahoma in which reservations Indians of various tribes -- Shawnee, Delaware, Kickapoo, Caddo, Comanche, and Kiowa -- attacked the Tonkawa on their reservation killing by some estimates nearly half the Tonkawa tribe. See TxDOT Tribal Histories report developed in conjunction with tribes. https://www.txdot.gov/business/resources/environmental/compliance-toolkits/historic-resources/tribal-histories.html
