Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Alamo buffs here will really like this (yikes)...

Yes. Difference being that the colonist WERE following Mexican laws. Truth be known, it was Santa Anna’s centralist govt. that wasnt. They were making laws up as they went along. There certainly wasn’t any mass colonization in the states of Zacatecas or Yucatan! Only open revolt against the same centralist government.

That's what happened.

But facts be damned.

kamo gari;
Good afternoon to you my friend, I hope the day's been as bright, clear and calm in your part of the world as we have here and that all in your world are well.

It's tough for me to be objective about the Alamo, as for whatever reason from a very young age - perhaps the Disney record of Davy Crockett dying at the Alamo - I have been fascinated with the subject and have read as much as possible about the subject.

Before going further, I'll say that for this Canadian - no Tim Horton's planting, hockey playing in Alaska Canadian either mind you - a trip to the Alamo was a bucket list thing for me personally.

We accomplished that about 4 years ago I want to say it was, though too it might have only been 3. Nonetheless sir, we went there and although my wife isn't as steeped in the lore, we were both very much moved by the event.

I've visited battle sights in a few places in North America and this was definitely different in how it felt to be there.

According to one of the better books I've read on the subject, "Texian Iliad" by Prof. Stephen L. Hardin, there were about 1 in 6 Tejanos in the Army of Texas. That's admittedly not half, but it's not insignificant either in my view.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/91150.Texian_Iliad

As well, when one reads the list of the dead at the Alamo, one sees Tejano names too.

It's only a guess on my part, but I would hazard that many Tejanos such as Juan Segin that might disagree with the authors if they were able to contend with them in person today. It'd be an interesting meeting anyways, that's no guess work on anyone's part.

That's just one Canuck's view on things Alamo and early Texas related and worth not even as much as a Tim's Double Double truly, but there it is.

All the best to you all.

Dwayne

Some great points you made there Dewayne !

Santa Anna started out being a staunch constitutionalist. Matter of fact when he became prez of Mexico in 1832 there were big celebrations in San Felipe, Nacogdoches and Velasco. All had large anglo populations. They saw him as a savior. But ol’ Antonion Lopez had other plans.

As I mentioned in the other thread. Vice President Valentin Gomez Fárias was running Mexico.( Santa Anna was drinking and eatin back at his hacienda at Vera Cruz) . Fárias was a constitutionalist and saw to massive reforms concerning the military, the Church, and education. He was well aware of the coup d’état powers that the military had used time and time again.
Long story short, basically the military and the church got together and said that these people do not have the ability to lead themselves. So ol Antonio Lopez steps up and says I better act like the prez again. So for starters he does away with the constitution of 1824 and he bans further immigration to Texas.

Where's birdie ????

Texans claims to have pride in the Alamo but I’ve never seen it first hand.

The surrounding area is a schit hole.

The Mexicans never owned Tejas, it belonged to the Nermernuh, Comanche in our parlance. The Mexicans huddled in Bexar, afraid to stick there noses out of the stockade. Comanche raided at will into Mexico killing and taking livestock. Americans were invited to settle as a buffer against Comanche raids.

We need to be Comanche again, the name comes from the Apache word for “man who tries to kill me all the time”.

Holding a cup in front of the Alamo?

I believe they relocated to the west side of Chicago.

Quite true. The Spanish and then, the Mexicans could not stand up against the Comanche. The Comanche were centered in northern Texas up towards present day Austin, but they frequently made raids down to San Antonio. Why do we now have the city of Nuevo Laredo? Because the Comanche burned the town on the n. side of the river, Laredo, to the ground so the Spanish built Nuevo Laredo, hoping the river would give some protection from the Indian raids.

The Spanish would not let the citizens have firearms, these were kept in a central armory, and they were antiques anyway. So the incessant Comanche raids were devastating, they kidnapped young Spanish boys and girls and drafted them in to the Comanche nation and made full fledged Indians of them. They slaughtered and tortured adult Spanish, they made an art form of raping adult Spanish women, and they stole lots of cattle and especially, horses.

The Mexicans only admitted the Anglos into central Texas in the hope that these Gringos could fight off the incessant Comanche raids.

One of the liberal policies of the constitution of 1824 was the creation of states in Mexico. Before that they had been provinces with a local leader but basically all was run by Mexico city. After states were created, they were given some manner of home rule, like in the USA. Texas was a joint state with Coahuila.

All government paperwork from Texas had to be taken to Saltillo for approval. Land grants and surveys had to be recorded there. All manner of official paperwork had to be sent and recorded there. In return permission for all manner of public works, etc had to be put on hold until the governor gave his approval. Major stumbling block. The alcaldes and empresarios saw the need for Texas being its own state w/o having to sent stuff all way to Saltillo and wait months for a reply.

Under mexican law Texas did not have the necessary population numbers to be a mexican state. (Ok anyone see where this is going?). Stephen Austin was thrown in prison in Mexico City ( remember he’s a Mexican citizen, following Mexican law) while trying to negotiate for Texas Statehood.

My first exposure to Texas history started in the 3rd grade when I lived in the Rio Grande Valley.
This isn't the 1st time the Alamo story revision has been tried, and I'm sure it won't be the last time.
No matter how many times the Alamo story is changed one fact will always stand.
Thirteen days of glory for 186 men against over 4,000. That is the essence of of it.
REMEMBER THE ALAMO

“Them damn Mexicans ain’t got no bitch comin! By God we stole Texas from ‘em fair and square and aint nuthin they gonna do bout it!”

Out of a Texas state legislators mouth!!

And one of my ancestors.

Several of you need to realize that The Comanches are relative newcomers to the area. While not necessarily stangers to the area, they really didn’t establish a strong foothold in the Edwards plateau area until almost 1760.

The reason that the Spanish did not populate any further north ( not referring to Spanish East Texas. It had it’s own issues) was due to several reasons. One being their rampant inefficiency at getting things done and the bureaucracy that went with it. Another being personal rivalries and greed, and another just bad luck.

A prime example are the San Xavier missions in present western Milam county texas. 3 missions when finally established ( took ten years to receive kings approval) so they were running without royal charter. And just as things Were almost going, boom! Drought! The san Gabriel river dried completely up!!! Just an example.

The only difference is these days the Mexican Army is run by drug cartels, and Mexico is just as corrupt and dangerous as it was then. Ask the old original Spanish families living in Texas if they are sad about being in the US and see how many want to be part of Mexico.

Bryan Burrough (born August 13, 1961 in Tennessee) is an American author and correspondent for Vanity Fair

Jason Stanford was the communications director for Austin Mayor Steve Adler. Previously, he was a Democratic strategist, commentator and author based in Washington, D.C.[2][3][4] He is a syndicated columnist with Cagle Cartoons and a regular contributor to both the Austin American-Statesman.[5][6]

Stanford co-authored Adios Mofo: Why Rick Perry Will Make America Miss George W. Bush in 2011 with James Moore.[7][8][9] He has also written for Texas Monthly and the Texas Tribune.[10][11]

Stanford is the founder of Stanford Caskey, a political research and crisis communications firm based in Austin, Texas and Chicago, Illinois.[12][13]

I applaud the work of these historians. It has long been known in knowledgeable circles that many of Texas' Founding Fathers were slavers, and how appropriate to have this discussion on the eve of the day we celebrate when freedom finally came to all Texans.

Vice President Fárias most ardent supporter was Lorenzo de Zavala!

https://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/entries/zavala-lorenzo-de