While the popular and most accepted belief was that Crockett died heroically in battle (as was clearly depicted in numerous films), the emergence of a diary written by Enrique de la Peña, a Mexican officer, who claimed “to be an eyewitness to the capture and execution of Davy Crockett in the immediate aftermath of the Battle of the Alamo” was about to send shockwaves to the historical circles. The first source that Crisp analyzed was Bill Groneman’s Defense of a Legend: Crockett and the de la Peña Diary. Groneman, a police detective and a historian, who latter would become one of Crisp’s lifelong colleagues, argued that the de la Peña diary was a forgery, thus the claim of Crockett surrendering was not accurate. The controversy surrounded Crockett’s death intrigued Crisp, who later on uncovered that de la Peña manuscripts came from J. Sánchez Garza, who had privately published them under the title La Rebelión de Texas: Manuscrito Inédito de 1836 por un Oficial de Santa Anna. After carefully studied Garza’s publication, Crisp felt that they were more questions raised than answered. Upon more digging, he discovered that de la Peña had written two separate manuscripts while he was imprisoned so Crisp arranged to get both copies and study them meticulously. Additionally, a second description of Davy Crockett’s execution, which would to be known as the “Dolson Letter” was accidentally discovered by a Rice University graduate student, would come to reinforce the claim that Davy Crockett surrendered rather than died fighting. After examining and analyzing all the sources Crisp could master, he concluded that based upon all the evidence, Crockett most likely surrendered, after General Castrillón promised him a safe conduct, but was condemned to death by an infuriated Santa
While the popular and most accepted belief was that Crockett died heroically in battle (as was clearly depicted in numerous films), the emergence of a diary written by Enrique de la Peña, a Mexican officer, who claimed “to be an eyewitness to the capture and execution of Davy Crockett in the immediate aftermath of the Battle of the Alamo” was about to send shockwaves to the historical circles. The first source that Crisp analyzed was Bill Groneman’s Defense of a Legend: Crockett and the de la Peña Diary. Groneman, a police detective and a historian, who latter would become one of Crisp’s lifelong colleagues, argued that the de la Peña diary was a forgery, thus the claim of Crockett surrendering was not accurate. The controversy surrounded Crockett’s death intrigued Crisp, who later on uncovered that de la Peña manuscripts came from J. Sánchez Garza, who had privately published them under the title La Rebelión de Texas: Manuscrito Inédito de 1836 por un Oficial de Santa Anna. After carefully studied Garza’s publication, Crisp felt that they were more questions raised than answered. Upon more digging, he discovered that de la Peña had written two separate manuscripts while he was imprisoned so Crisp arranged to get both copies and study them meticulously. Additionally, a second description of Davy Crockett’s execution, which would to be known as the “Dolson Letter” was accidentally discovered by a Rice University graduate student, would come to reinforce the claim that Davy Crockett surrendered rather than died fighting. After examining and analyzing all the sources Crisp could master, he concluded that based upon all the evidence, Crockett most likely surrendered, after General Castrillón promised him a safe conduct, but was condemned to death by an infuriated Santa