This is the best book I have read on the history of Texas.
Kilmeade clears up the confusion surrounding the founding of Texas.
I will begin with a bunch of confusing dates. It may be bad writing to load the details at the opening of this review, but I am writing this for my own future reference, and I want to cover this in chronological order. Not all of what follows is from Kilmeade's book--he does not get lost in the weeds on these dates, merely explaining that "Jefferson believed the Purchase to include Texas." But I am heading into the weeds for one paragraph:
You could argue the story of Texas begins with the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. Thomas Jefferson (and presumably Napoleon) believed the Louisiana Purchase to include the land of Texas, the Rio Grande being the understood (but unstated) western border. Spain later disputed that, claiming to have purchased Texas from France in 1762 (though the boundaries of that purchase were also unstated), and President John Quincy Adams surrendered Texas to Spain when he agreed to make the Sabine the border instead of the Rio Grande in 1819. When Mexico won independence from Spain in 1821, naturally it claimed Texas. Nevertheless, there remains some grounds for a US claim to Texas based on Jefferson's understanding of the Louisiana Purchase.
It is a grave misunderstanding that allows many today to believe--because of badly made movies--that America's acquisition of Texas was nothing more than a massive "land grab." In response to this, Kilmeade proves the simple truth: Spain and Mexico had long encouraged Americans to leave their homes and come settle the wilderness of Texas in exchange for land. Thousands came and put down roots, only to be kicked out a few years later by Santa Anna, the dictator who said all Americans must get out of Texas or be killed. More on that below.
This book has short chapters and makes for relatively easy reading. This is not a historical tome, but a page turner. Enjoyable and somewhat light. For those who want to go deeper, the author provides a tremendous bibliography, end notes, and more at the end of the book.
My only complaint about Kilmeade's work is that I believe the subtitle promises what the book fails to deliver. I believe he is correct in calling it "the Texas victory that changed American history," but I'm not convinced we have heard enough about that in this book. How did the victory change American history? How exactly? I believe there is a story here--not simply that America gained the land of Texas--but a story of valor and inspiration, of integrity and honor among warring nations, and more. There is a reason that for many generations Americans all over the country were inspired by the battles of the Alamo and San Jacinto. I would love to hear more about that.
What follows is not strictly a book review, per se. But these are two posts on Facebook that I wrote while reading the book....
***
I'm not a fan of the 2004 Alamo movie starring Billy Bob Thornton and Dennis Quaid. It oversimplifies the issues, making the whole battle nothing more than a land grab. The truth is, the Mexican government had encouraged Americans to move into Texas, offering cheap land if the newcomers would farm it, defend it, and settle it. Then after the Americans had moved in and built homes, villages, schools, and churches, the tyrant Santa Anna took over and decreed (among other things) that all Americans had to get out of Texas or be killed. After investing the best years of their lives carving a civilization out of a hostile wilderness, no one was interested in running back to Tennessee.
The Texians (American settlers) along with Tejanos (Mexican citizens partial to the Texian cause) eventually drafted a DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE in which they set down in print their numerous complaints against Santa Anna, the new King George to the south. Because of Santa Anna's tyranny and despotism, the entire U.S. found itself rooting for the rebels in Texas--the obvious parallels to the fight with England 60 years before lost on no one.
This was not a land grab. It was a battle for freedom and basic human rights.
NOW, why do I bring this up? Because one of my complaints about the movie is its ubiquitous use (in marketing materials) of a line spoken by Davy Crockett: "You may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas."
Even though I have the blue coffee cup with these words on it, I was convinced the line was apocryphal, made up in Hollywood.
I was wrong.
When Crockett faced a losing election, he explained:
"'I told the people of my district that I would serve them as faithfully as I had done; but if not, they might go to hell, and I would go to Texas.' After losing by 252 votes, Crockett, true to his word, lit out on the Southwest Trail." (And he then spent three months WALKING to Texas with his rifle Betsy.)
--From SAM HOUSTON AND THE ALAMO AVENGERS: THE TEXAS VICTORY THAT CHANGED AMERICAN HISTORY, by Brian Kilmeade.
***
A MOST UNUSUAL FUNERAL IN MEXICO.
Following his humiliating loss at San Jacinto (or Lynch's Ferry), Santa Anna briefly withdrew from public life. Not only had he lost the war and lost Texas, but his men could not forget he ordered them to slaughter the Texian prisoners at the Alamo and at Goliad. Following the two massacres of unarmed men, one Mexican soldier wrote home, "any more victories like this one and we shall all go to straight to Hell." The bodies of the murdered prisoners were not buried, but burned in massive pyres.
Eventually Santa Anna went to war again fighting off a French invasion of Mexico at Vera Cruz. The "Butcher of the Alamo" performed nobly (i.e., he didn't lose) and was also valiantly injured. His leg had to be amputated. The injury restored some of the shine to the name of the disgraced former president. Soon his fame and regal bearing won the people over and he would be elected president of Mexico again ...
but not before they first held a STATE FUNERAL for the butcher's amputated leg.
--Based on passages in SAM HOUSTON AND THE ALAMO AVENGERS, by Brian Kilmeade.