Just got done reading James E. Crisps excellent and well-reasoned defense of the controversial De La Pena accounts of the Texas War of Independence in Sleuthing the Alamo: Davy Crockett's Last Stand and Other Mysteries of the Texas Revolution.

Not the least of Crisp's arguments in support of the authenticity of the De La Pena writings is the fact that correspondence generally accepted as being from De La Pena were written in another person's hand, including the signiature, answering the most obvious objection to authenticity.

Comparing and summarizing De La Pena's account, the memoir of Santa Anna's personal secretary (who was also present at the Alamo), two letters to different Eastern newspapers independently written by Americans in contact with Mexican prisoners after San Jacinto, Crisp comes up with the following sequence of events....

At the very end of the bloody fighting between five and seven (depending on the account) Alamo defenders, including Davy Crockett retreated to the very back of the Alamo church, prepared to sell their lives dearly. General Castrillon, who contemporary accounts speak well of, restrained his men from killing them and offered the men protection if they would surrender.

Castrillon brought the men to Santa Anna who, much as he would order carried out on the 340 Texian prisoners at Goliad two weeks later, flew into a rage and ordered the men executed immediately. This was carried out by the members of Santa Anna's own entourage using swords and bayonets on the helpless unarmed men.

All sources do agree that the men died well and courageously, despite in the ignominious circumstance of their execution.

Birdwatcher

Alamo defenders, including Davy Crockett retreated to the very back of the Alamo church, prepared to sell their lives dearly... AND then this >.... flew into a rage and ordered the men executed immediately. This was carried out by the members of Santa Anna's own entourage using swords and bayonets on the helpless unarmed men.
I need to "get on/learn " my history!

The thing that struck me about the Alamo was walking around the outside walls of the Mission; there are many thousands of little round impressions in the walls - the impact marks of balls. It is obvious a hard battle was fought there, regardless of the exact sequence of the defender's deaths.

It still pisses me off that Santa Anna was allowed to live

For sure, Steel.

Sam Houston wanted Texas more than he wanted Santa Anna's life. He made that decision, Santa Anna, was defeated, his army destroyed to the extent that it was not a viable army after San Jacinto.

I will say that the movies all get him wrong. At the time of the Alamo Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna was only 44 years old, reportedly tall, charming in manner, and totally amoral. One legend entirely in character is that, during the siege, he had one of his men dress up as a priest so he could "marry" an attractive local girl, and sent her off to his enormous land holdings west of Veracruz when the siege was over.

In some ways he was the best friend the US ever had: Captured at San Jacinto he orders his forces out of Texas in exchange for his life. A year later, in exchange for his freedom, re "officially" signs off on Texas independence tho' not actually President of Mexico at the time.

1842, back in power, his armies invade Texas and occupy San Antonio TWICE. Convincing a great many Texians that Texas needed to become part of the greater United States for its own protection.

1846 war breaks out, Santa Anna brung back from exile in Cuba, raises several armies, loses every battle, at the close of that war the United States gets most of New Mexico and Arizona, and all of California. Santa Anna sent off to exile again.

1853, called back into power, this time from Columbia, Santa Anna sells us Southern Arizona and New Mexico, straightening the Border line allowing room for a railroad. Santa Anna pockets the cash, gets kicked out again.

1869, having outlived most of his enemies, the 74 year-old Santa Anna is living comfortably in New York City. While there he introduces chicle, chewing gum, to the United States. Finally dies at age eighty-one in Mexico in 1876, survived by at least eleven children by eight different women.

He should have his own mini-series, "the Most Interesting Man in the World's" evil doppelganger.

Birdwatcher

On the contrary, Houston had every reason to worry. MOST of Santa Anna's forces were still in the field, under the command of the able generals Urrea and Filisola. Indeed, one cam make the case that had any of his generals been in command instead of Santa Anna at San Jacinto things could have come out very different.

Most of the men present at San Jacinto despised Houston, and Houston himself barely retained authority, this being precisely why the seriously wounded Houston was treated so dismally after the battle.

As it was, had the at best loosely organized and poorly disciplined Texian Army met the likes of a Urrea even in the aftermath of San Jacinto my money would be on the Mexicans. Even though the Mexicans were out of supplies at the end of a very long supply line, and even though they suffered great privations on the long retreat, at the time of San Jacinto the Mexican Army was still dangerous.

YMMV,
Birdwatcher

General Sam Houston was a Freemason, as was General Santa Ana: he gave a distress signal and was given reprieve.

Sam Houston was a puss.

...and he was an opium-eater!!

I don't know about that, but he certainly sold Texas down the road.

I thought Houston and Santa Anna were both members of the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderbergers. They get a free pass about everything.

L.W.

So, uh, you do opium too.

I am sorry to admit, this is true.

Nah. A couple of scotches on Friday evening are about all I can handle.

L.W.

I've read a bit about it in the Freemason's history. It was rumored that Santa Anna gave ole Houston the "secret" handshake. Most of the articles I have read suggests that it is simply not true. But what is true is that Houston was smart enough to know that Santa Anna would give up Texas to save his own life.

Thanks, Birdie. Good thread on two fascinating subjects, The Alamo and the personalities involved. Too bad though there isn't a blanketing "kook-blocking" function and thus avoid the idiocy...

They didn't need to kill Santa Anna...but it would have been cool to hang him from his wrists while the guys did the Pinata thing for a little while.

Don't forget their work founding the International Zionist Banker Conspiracy.

Killing Santa Ana would have been the emotional but not rational thing to do. As stated, SA still had two or three armies in the field all capable of defeating the rabble that was Houston's Army. Houston wisely made him sigh over the entire state of Texas to the Rio Grande AND kept him alive to ensure the document's credibility to the Mexican generals in the field.

I'd still have killed the SOB.

After independence and he attempted a comeback, then for certain.

The thing that amazes me is how small the Alamo is. Much smaller than it seems on TV Movies.

I never understood why Santa Ana didn't just use artillery to level the place.

this

Thanks Jorge, I shoulda wrote the Mexican army withdrew from Texas after San Jacinto, as at that point there was no coherent Texian force under arms to chase them out, or even accompany them out.

Sam Houston was a consumate politician, and opportunist, but he did have a long-range vision and an ability to see past immediate circumstance. Many people would have killed Santa Anna out of hand, Houston evaluated the possibilities, and milked the situation for all it was worth (a lot, as it turned out).

To Houston goes the credit of defusing the idiot Rusk (??) Expedition immediately prior to Santa Anna's invasion, that being that force of some 200 Texian and American freebooters that had stripped the Alamo of its supplies to mount an attack on Matamoras, while flying an "1824" flag on behalf of the Mexican Federalist faction.

Houston did convince many men to leave that expedition, if only to preserve some semblance of a Texian army to command, even though many of these same men were later snapped up with Fannin by Urrea. Those who did continue on towards Mexico ran head on into Urrea coming north and were quickly killed, captured or dispersed.

Houston was widely condemned for waffling while the Alamo was under siege, choosing that time to go of and negotiate with the Cherokees. A little unfair I think, I dunno that Houston had ever seen the Alamo, or much of Texas for that matter, and he was far too cagey a politician to put all his eggs in that particular basket.

Hindsight is 20/20, and events were just sprung on people at the time, but the best guess seems to be that Houston's original fallback plan was to retreat ahead of Santa Anna clear to Nacodoches. Houston's mentor Andrew Jackson had the very able General Edmund P. Gaines waiting just across the Sabine with a considerable force, with orders to "intervene if necessary" to preserve the integrity of the US border.

And just as an aside, IIRC Santa Anna merely ordered his troops out of Texas while in Houston's captivity on the field of battle, his formal recognition of Texas independence didn't happen until 1837, IIRC AFTER he had already been to Washington and conferred with President Monroe (???).

Birdwatcher

You must be aware that the front of the Mission Church actually faced INTO the compound, almost all of the present walled-in grounds lying OUTSIDE the original defended compound. Seems like after the Fall of the Alamo, neither side wanted to ever have to take it back again. The walls being torn down by both Mexican and Texians in their turn so that, more than the other four missions, the original compound quickly disappeared.

The original west wall foundations now lie under a row of late 19th Century buidlings across the street, and the location of the cannon emplacement where Travis fell on the north wall now lies under the tall Post Office building. There have been recent proposals to restore the original Alamo grounds, but purchasing and demolishing these buildings would cost many millions.

On the south wall, the wooden stockade defended by Crockett and his Tennesseans could be restored, along with the original gateway and the nearby rooms where Bowie died, the thing is though, the present Alamo facade itself (not original) has become such a recognised image, its hard to know the public would support such a recommendation.

Also, hate to say it, but the standards for UN recognition as a historic landmark preclude extensive replication or rebuilding of the structures in question.

Yes that was brought up at a public meeting hosted by the mayor.

Anyhow, to get some idea of the size of the original Alamo compound go see Missions San Jose, San Juan or Espada, all of which are in a far better state of preservation than the Alamo and all of which figure prominently in thhe events of those times.

Birdwatcher

Birdy, I read the book you reco'ed some years back about the Alamo, particularly, Travis, Crockett, and Bowie. It was dry in parts and a big volume, but I really enjoyed getting the view of their normal lives that led up to their participation in the Alamo.


that Bowie, by those accounts was a scammer!

Mr.Crockett did a lot more than die at the Alamo, and had a huge influence on the attitude of Texans until this day.

Bowie was comfortable in the company of the most dangerous and lawless men of his era. He had killed rough men in hand to hand combat, and likely would have again had he lived.

Likely he never saw a classic "Bowie" knife though, the ones his brother Rezin was giving out around that time (Jim got his original one from Rezin) was pretty much a big, straight-backed, single-edged butcher knife.

In terms of perspective, few recall the Mexican point of view: The majority of the Texian residents like Bowie and Austin, Spanish citizens all, were originally fighting as Mexican citizens for the restoration 1824 constitution.

Independence had not yet been declared by the beginning of the Alamo siege and neither side would hear of it before the fall.

Still, by the time of the siege the majority of people in arms against Santa Anna, including inside the Alamo, were American citizens or other foreign nationals who had actually been IN Texas for less than six months, sometimes much less. A description that certainly applied to Crockett and his Tennesseans.

And yet these recent illegal immigrants were fighting to remove about 20% of Mexico from Mexico to form an independent state. Hence the term "pirates" applied to these men by Santa Anna, and their summary executions as such.

Birdwatcher

The thing to recall about Davy Crockett is that he had voted his conscience AGAINST Indian Removal, despite the wishes of Andy Jackson and the majority of his constituents.

In that important career-defining event he definitely weren't aligned with the majority of Texians.

Thomas Lindley in his exhaustively researched "Alamo Traces" cites evidence that Crockett actually left the Alamo during the siege to recruit and guide in new volunteers, this even though he knew the odds against them. Crockett was definitely one of the good guys of his era.

For general interest Lindley is officially a De La Pena skeptic but IMHO Crisp convincingly refuted all of Lindley's arguments; citing De La Pena's known letter entirely written by someone else, the fact that the earlier translations of the De La Pena diary that Lindley used were simply incorrect, and the fact that the diary was not published in the time frame originally believed.

Birdwatcher

There were a lot of 'volunteer's' from Tennessee who went to Texas and fought and died for Texas...Davy Crockett and Sam Houston were the one's that were the most noteable..... at this point in Texas history I can think of no other man who did more for Texas than Sam Houston...just my opinion.