What do you think?
Rate this book
Lone Star Nation: How a Ragged Army of Volunteers Won the Battle for Texas Independence - and Changed America
From bestselling historian and long-time Texan H. W. Brands, a richly textured history of one of the most fascinating and colorful eras in U.S. history--the Texas Revolution and the forging of a new America.
"For better or for worse, Texas was very much like America. The people ruled, and little could stop them. If they ignored national boundaries, if they trampled the rights of indigenous peoples and of imported bondsmen, if they waged war for motives that started from base self-interest, all this came with the territory of democracy, a realm inhabited by ordinarily imperfect men and women. The one saving grace of democracy—the one that made all the difference in the end—was that sooner or later, sometimes after a terrible strife, democracy corrected its worst mistakes."
--from Lone Star Nation
Lone Star Nation is the gripping story of Texas's precarious journey to statehood, from its early colonization in the 1820s to the shocking massacres of Texas loyalists at the Alamo and Goliad by the Mexican army, from its rough-and-tumble years as a land overrun by the Comanches to its day of liberation as an upstart republic. H. W. Brands tells the turbulent story of Texas through the eyes of a colorful cast of characters who have become a permanent fixture in the American Stephen Austin, the state's reluctant founder; Sam Houston, the alcoholic former governor who came to lead the Texas army in its hour of crisis and glory; William Travis, James Bowie, and David Crockett, the unforgettable heroic defenders of the doomed Alamo; Santa Anna, the Mexican generalissimo and dictator whose ruthless tactics galvanized the colonists against him; and the white-haired President Andrew Jackson whose expansionist aspirations loomed large in the background. Beyond these luminaries, Brands unearths the untold stories of the forgotten Texans--the slaves, women, unknown settlers, and children left out of traditional histories--who played crucial roles in Texas’s birth. By turns bloody and heroic, tragic and triumphant, this riveting history of one of our greatest states reads like the most compelling fiction, and further secures H. W. Brands's position as one of the premier American historians.
"For better or for worse, Texas was very much like America. The people ruled, and little could stop them. If they ignored national boundaries, if they trampled the rights of indigenous peoples and of imported bondsmen, if they waged war for motives that started from base self-interest, all this came with the territory of democracy, a realm inhabited by ordinarily imperfect men and women. The one saving grace of democracy—the one that made all the difference in the end—was that sooner or later, sometimes after a terrible strife, democracy corrected its worst mistakes."
--from Lone Star Nation
Lone Star Nation is the gripping story of Texas's precarious journey to statehood, from its early colonization in the 1820s to the shocking massacres of Texas loyalists at the Alamo and Goliad by the Mexican army, from its rough-and-tumble years as a land overrun by the Comanches to its day of liberation as an upstart republic. H. W. Brands tells the turbulent story of Texas through the eyes of a colorful cast of characters who have become a permanent fixture in the American Stephen Austin, the state's reluctant founder; Sam Houston, the alcoholic former governor who came to lead the Texas army in its hour of crisis and glory; William Travis, James Bowie, and David Crockett, the unforgettable heroic defenders of the doomed Alamo; Santa Anna, the Mexican generalissimo and dictator whose ruthless tactics galvanized the colonists against him; and the white-haired President Andrew Jackson whose expansionist aspirations loomed large in the background. Beyond these luminaries, Brands unearths the untold stories of the forgotten Texans--the slaves, women, unknown settlers, and children left out of traditional histories--who played crucial roles in Texas’s birth. By turns bloody and heroic, tragic and triumphant, this riveting history of one of our greatest states reads like the most compelling fiction, and further secures H. W. Brands's position as one of the premier American historians.
582 pages, Hardcover
First published November 12, 2003
154 people are currently reading
1331 people want to read
About the author
H.W. Brands
103 books1,176 followersH.W. Brands is an acclaimed American historian and author of over thirty books on U.S. history, including Pulitzer Prize finalists The First American and Traitor to His Class. He holds the Jack S. Blanton Sr. Chair in History at the University of Texas at Austin, where he earned his PhD. Originally trained in mathematics, Brands turned to history as a way to pursue his passion for writing. His biographical works on figures like Franklin, Jackson, Grant, and both Roosevelts have earned critical and popular praise for their readability and depth. Raised in Oregon and educated at Stanford, Reed College, and Portland State, he began his teaching career in high schools before entering academia. He later taught at Texas A&M and Vanderbilt before returning to UT Austin. Brands challenges conventional reverence for the Founding Fathers, advocating for a more progressive and evolving view of American democracy. In addition to academic works, his commentary has featured in major documentaries. His books, published internationally and translated into multiple languages, examine U.S. political, economic, and cultural development with compelling narrative force. Beyond academia, he is a public intellectual contributing to national conversations on history and governance.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 124 reviews
August 21, 2025
The Lone Star State of Texas was once a nation – the Republic of Texas. For nine years, from 1836 to 1845, Texas was every bit as much a country as Belgium, France, Great Britain, the Netherlands, and the United States of America (all of which officially recognized Texan nationhood). The story of Texas, from Spanish province to Mexican territory to revolution to republic to U.S. statehood, has an epic quality to it, and H.W. Brands captures that epic quality well in his 2004 book Lone Star Nation.
Brands, a University of Texas historian, recounts, in a manner that is both engaging and critical, the saga of How a Ragged Army of Volunteers Won the Battle for Texas Independence – And Changed America (the book’s subtitle). Instead of going straight to the Alamo and the thirteen-day siege there, Brands takes the reader back into the historical context within which Americans began leaving the United States and moving, legally or otherwise, into Mexican Texas.
In 1821, when Mexico gained its independence from Spain, Mexican officials seem to have seen Texas as a inconveniently rugged border region – a place where hostile Comanches made it difficult to establish missions and advance the work of converting Indigenous people to the Catholic faith. Consequently, when an American named Stephen F. Austin presented in 1823 a proposal for establishing an Anglo-American colony in southeastern Texas, most Mexican officials had no serious objection. The general feeling seems to have been that the Anglos could provide a temporary buffer against Comanche depredations, and that the rest of Texas would eventually fill up with Mexicans anyway.
Stephen F. Austin “took his obligations as a Mexican citizen quite seriously” (p. 96). Therefore, when some initial Anglo-Texan discontent with Mexican rule flared up in the Fredonian Rebellion of 1826-27, Austin wanted no part of the Fredonians’ secessionist ways. “Austin’s settlers held title to their land and lived in as much peace and order as they had any right to expect so far from real civilization. Independence couldn’t improve their condition or his; on the contrary, it was likely to throw everything into turmoil” (p. 107).
Mexico was concerned about the increasing influx of Anglo-Americans into Texas; Brands, perhaps with an eye toward current U.S. politics, cleverly refers to the Mexicans’ deepening worries about “illegal immigrants” from the U.S.A. Meanwhile, the United States became increasingly interested – unofficially – in the possibility of acquiring Texas. An important figure in that regard was Sam Houston, a highly successful Tennessee politician who experienced a series of personal setbacks in Tennessee and transferred his home address and his allegiances to Texas.
Travelling in Texas in late 1832 on President Andrew Jackson’s behalf, Houston “learned more [at Nacogdoches] about…the hostility of the Americans toward Mexico.” Among other things, the settlers had called a convention, and “The mere calling of the convention reflected the cultural rift between the Americans and the Mexicans, for where the right of assembly and petition was part of the Americans’ English inheritance, it had no counterpart in the Spanish tradition” (p. 202), and therefore the Mexican authorities saw the settlers’ actions as seditious. Brands illustrates well the causes and consequences of these differences in cultural perspective.
Throughout Lone Star Nation, Houston’s life and career are counterpointed with the life and career of his future adversary, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna – a charming and mercurial figure who could be a Spanish Empire royalist or a Mexican Republic revolutionary, a liberal or a conservative, a federalist or a centralist – depending on which way the winds were blowing. And, having seen examples of mass executions of captured rebels during earlier conflicts in Mexico, he eventually displayed a willingness to utilize the same sort of brutality.
Brands chronicles well the movement toward open conflict between Texans and Mexicans. He sets forth the somewhat checkered personal histories of future Alamo heroes like James Bowie, David Crockett, and William Barret Travis, and emphasizes that the Texans were not exactly united on the question of seeking independence: “While Bowie, Travis, and Houston were doing their best to start a war, Stephen Austin was trying just as hard to stop it” (p. 243).
Eventually, armed conflict broke out at Gonzalez. The Texans besieged San Antonio de Béxar, and took it in late 1835, and Santa Anna moved his Army of Operations north toward San Antonio in response. Yet the expedition north showed Santa Anna’s deficiencies in the quartermaster and commissary aspects of tactical warfare. “Napoleon knew that an army travels on its stomach; if the Napoleon of the West knew that, he apparently forgot. Midway through the march, he ordered the five thousand men of the army placed on half rations.” Small wonder that Santa Anna’s own secretary “called the order unjust”, or that a lieutenant colonel of engineers “thought the expedition poorly conceived” (p. 309).
The story of the thirteen-day siege and battle of the Alamo is, of course, legendary in American annals. Brands tells the story of the Alamo well, and describes its overall significance eloquently:
Texas wouldn’t be taken easily. Santa Anna lost some six hundred men in achieving his victory, and though at this stage of the war he could afford the losses, he might not enjoy that luxury for long. On a different plane, the glorious demise of the Alamo garrison gave the Texans a rallying cry that lifted their political struggle against Santa Anna to the moral realm. In life, Travis and Bowie and Crockett were hardly the sort to inspire reverence, hardly the kind parents would name their sons after. But in death they transcended their flaws; absolved of their sins, they entered the pantheon of American heroes….Santa Anna’s great blunder at Béxar was not to lose so many of his own men but to kill so many of the enemy (and after the battle to burn their bodies, which added to the sacrificial significance). A military struggle, he might win; a moral struggle, never. (p. 384)
Not all of the Mexican officers, as Brands makes clear, shared Santa Anna’s bloodthirsty proclivities. Three weeks after the fall of the Alamo, 400 Texans who were supposed to march to the relief of the Texan garrison were instead surrounded at Goliad. General José de Urrea, who had already received Santa Anna’s no-quarter orders, negotiated the Texans’ unconditional surrender, with a tacit understanding that the Texans would be repatriated to the United States; he then notified Santa Anna of what he had done, with a recommendation that the surrendered men be shown mercy. Brands thus describes Santa Anna’s response:
Santa Anna grew livid on receiving this message, probably less from Urrea’s failure to follow orders than from his presumption in trying to push the commander into a corner. The whole point of the no-quarter policy was to kill the rebels on the battlefield, where such killings could be rationalized as occurring in the heat of the fight. By taking prisoners, Urrea had maneuvered Santa Anna into having to give a positive order for a mass execution, which Urrea apparently believed Santa Anna wouldn’t do. (p. 404)
But Santa Anna would and did give just such an order, and about 400 Texians were executed en masse. It is for that reason that, in the great Texian victory at San Jacinto weeks later, the Texians’ battle cry was not only “Remember the Alamo!” but also “Remember Goliad!”
Sam Houston does not come across as a terribly heroic leader during the Texans’ long retreat eastward after the Alamo and Goliad (Texans of later generations would call the flight of Texan soldiers and civilians the “Runaway Scrape”). And the Battle of San Jacinto that defeated Santa Anna and secured Texan independence on 21 April 1836 sometimes seems as if it came about quite spontaneously, as lots of angry, vengeance-minded Texans simply decided it was time to stand and fight. Brands points out that Houston “never succeeded in shaping his men into a regular army. From the beginning of the Texas Revolution to the end, the rebel troops were irredeemably democratic” (p. 283). Perhaps so – but on that day, those irredeemably democratic rebels whipped a properly trained regular army, and decisively, too.
Brands acknowledges that “hindsight would hallow the years of Texas nationhood”, and reminds the reader that “Texas schoolchildren would be taught to cherish the fact that their state, alone of the eventual fifty, had once been a separate republic”; but he wants the reader to be aware that “to those who lived through them, [the Texas Republic years] were fraught with danger and confusion” (p. 493).
The republic’s finances were “a bad joke” (p. 501), and “the underlying insecurity of the republic” (p. 502) was a more severe problem; Mexico still wanted Texas back, and showed that desire by twice raiding San Antonio during the early 1840’s. The republic was a disorderly, violent place where young men constantly drank, gambled, and fought; “crime – lethal and lesser – was a major problem”, and at times, “individual crime escalated to irregular warfare” (p. 504). Most Texans very much wanted annexation to the United States, but increasing Northern opposition to the addition of new slaveholding states meant that Texas’s accession to the Union was delayed.
The politics of slavery not only delayed Texas’s accession to the Union by several years, but also contributed to Texas’s leaving the Union just 16 years after attaining statehood. Brands captures well the dilemma that Governor Sam Houston faced when civil war broke out – “He, the man who had done more than any other to attach Texas to the Union, was now required to approve the severing of Texas from the Union” (p. 527). Ultimately, Houston refused to align with the secessionists, and as a result he was impeached and removed from office.
I found Lone Star Nation in a bookstore in San Antonio, and read it on a road trip across the Lone Star State, from Texarkana to Dallas to the Hill Country to South Padre Island. It is a book of epic scale and scope, fitting for the great state whose early history author Brands chronicles with care.
Brands, a University of Texas historian, recounts, in a manner that is both engaging and critical, the saga of How a Ragged Army of Volunteers Won the Battle for Texas Independence – And Changed America (the book’s subtitle). Instead of going straight to the Alamo and the thirteen-day siege there, Brands takes the reader back into the historical context within which Americans began leaving the United States and moving, legally or otherwise, into Mexican Texas.
In 1821, when Mexico gained its independence from Spain, Mexican officials seem to have seen Texas as a inconveniently rugged border region – a place where hostile Comanches made it difficult to establish missions and advance the work of converting Indigenous people to the Catholic faith. Consequently, when an American named Stephen F. Austin presented in 1823 a proposal for establishing an Anglo-American colony in southeastern Texas, most Mexican officials had no serious objection. The general feeling seems to have been that the Anglos could provide a temporary buffer against Comanche depredations, and that the rest of Texas would eventually fill up with Mexicans anyway.
Stephen F. Austin “took his obligations as a Mexican citizen quite seriously” (p. 96). Therefore, when some initial Anglo-Texan discontent with Mexican rule flared up in the Fredonian Rebellion of 1826-27, Austin wanted no part of the Fredonians’ secessionist ways. “Austin’s settlers held title to their land and lived in as much peace and order as they had any right to expect so far from real civilization. Independence couldn’t improve their condition or his; on the contrary, it was likely to throw everything into turmoil” (p. 107).
Mexico was concerned about the increasing influx of Anglo-Americans into Texas; Brands, perhaps with an eye toward current U.S. politics, cleverly refers to the Mexicans’ deepening worries about “illegal immigrants” from the U.S.A. Meanwhile, the United States became increasingly interested – unofficially – in the possibility of acquiring Texas. An important figure in that regard was Sam Houston, a highly successful Tennessee politician who experienced a series of personal setbacks in Tennessee and transferred his home address and his allegiances to Texas.
Travelling in Texas in late 1832 on President Andrew Jackson’s behalf, Houston “learned more [at Nacogdoches] about…the hostility of the Americans toward Mexico.” Among other things, the settlers had called a convention, and “The mere calling of the convention reflected the cultural rift between the Americans and the Mexicans, for where the right of assembly and petition was part of the Americans’ English inheritance, it had no counterpart in the Spanish tradition” (p. 202), and therefore the Mexican authorities saw the settlers’ actions as seditious. Brands illustrates well the causes and consequences of these differences in cultural perspective.
Throughout Lone Star Nation, Houston’s life and career are counterpointed with the life and career of his future adversary, Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna – a charming and mercurial figure who could be a Spanish Empire royalist or a Mexican Republic revolutionary, a liberal or a conservative, a federalist or a centralist – depending on which way the winds were blowing. And, having seen examples of mass executions of captured rebels during earlier conflicts in Mexico, he eventually displayed a willingness to utilize the same sort of brutality.
Brands chronicles well the movement toward open conflict between Texans and Mexicans. He sets forth the somewhat checkered personal histories of future Alamo heroes like James Bowie, David Crockett, and William Barret Travis, and emphasizes that the Texans were not exactly united on the question of seeking independence: “While Bowie, Travis, and Houston were doing their best to start a war, Stephen Austin was trying just as hard to stop it” (p. 243).
Eventually, armed conflict broke out at Gonzalez. The Texans besieged San Antonio de Béxar, and took it in late 1835, and Santa Anna moved his Army of Operations north toward San Antonio in response. Yet the expedition north showed Santa Anna’s deficiencies in the quartermaster and commissary aspects of tactical warfare. “Napoleon knew that an army travels on its stomach; if the Napoleon of the West knew that, he apparently forgot. Midway through the march, he ordered the five thousand men of the army placed on half rations.” Small wonder that Santa Anna’s own secretary “called the order unjust”, or that a lieutenant colonel of engineers “thought the expedition poorly conceived” (p. 309).
The story of the thirteen-day siege and battle of the Alamo is, of course, legendary in American annals. Brands tells the story of the Alamo well, and describes its overall significance eloquently:
Texas wouldn’t be taken easily. Santa Anna lost some six hundred men in achieving his victory, and though at this stage of the war he could afford the losses, he might not enjoy that luxury for long. On a different plane, the glorious demise of the Alamo garrison gave the Texans a rallying cry that lifted their political struggle against Santa Anna to the moral realm. In life, Travis and Bowie and Crockett were hardly the sort to inspire reverence, hardly the kind parents would name their sons after. But in death they transcended their flaws; absolved of their sins, they entered the pantheon of American heroes….Santa Anna’s great blunder at Béxar was not to lose so many of his own men but to kill so many of the enemy (and after the battle to burn their bodies, which added to the sacrificial significance). A military struggle, he might win; a moral struggle, never. (p. 384)
Not all of the Mexican officers, as Brands makes clear, shared Santa Anna’s bloodthirsty proclivities. Three weeks after the fall of the Alamo, 400 Texans who were supposed to march to the relief of the Texan garrison were instead surrounded at Goliad. General José de Urrea, who had already received Santa Anna’s no-quarter orders, negotiated the Texans’ unconditional surrender, with a tacit understanding that the Texans would be repatriated to the United States; he then notified Santa Anna of what he had done, with a recommendation that the surrendered men be shown mercy. Brands thus describes Santa Anna’s response:
Santa Anna grew livid on receiving this message, probably less from Urrea’s failure to follow orders than from his presumption in trying to push the commander into a corner. The whole point of the no-quarter policy was to kill the rebels on the battlefield, where such killings could be rationalized as occurring in the heat of the fight. By taking prisoners, Urrea had maneuvered Santa Anna into having to give a positive order for a mass execution, which Urrea apparently believed Santa Anna wouldn’t do. (p. 404)
But Santa Anna would and did give just such an order, and about 400 Texians were executed en masse. It is for that reason that, in the great Texian victory at San Jacinto weeks later, the Texians’ battle cry was not only “Remember the Alamo!” but also “Remember Goliad!”
Sam Houston does not come across as a terribly heroic leader during the Texans’ long retreat eastward after the Alamo and Goliad (Texans of later generations would call the flight of Texan soldiers and civilians the “Runaway Scrape”). And the Battle of San Jacinto that defeated Santa Anna and secured Texan independence on 21 April 1836 sometimes seems as if it came about quite spontaneously, as lots of angry, vengeance-minded Texans simply decided it was time to stand and fight. Brands points out that Houston “never succeeded in shaping his men into a regular army. From the beginning of the Texas Revolution to the end, the rebel troops were irredeemably democratic” (p. 283). Perhaps so – but on that day, those irredeemably democratic rebels whipped a properly trained regular army, and decisively, too.
Brands acknowledges that “hindsight would hallow the years of Texas nationhood”, and reminds the reader that “Texas schoolchildren would be taught to cherish the fact that their state, alone of the eventual fifty, had once been a separate republic”; but he wants the reader to be aware that “to those who lived through them, [the Texas Republic years] were fraught with danger and confusion” (p. 493).
The republic’s finances were “a bad joke” (p. 501), and “the underlying insecurity of the republic” (p. 502) was a more severe problem; Mexico still wanted Texas back, and showed that desire by twice raiding San Antonio during the early 1840’s. The republic was a disorderly, violent place where young men constantly drank, gambled, and fought; “crime – lethal and lesser – was a major problem”, and at times, “individual crime escalated to irregular warfare” (p. 504). Most Texans very much wanted annexation to the United States, but increasing Northern opposition to the addition of new slaveholding states meant that Texas’s accession to the Union was delayed.
The politics of slavery not only delayed Texas’s accession to the Union by several years, but also contributed to Texas’s leaving the Union just 16 years after attaining statehood. Brands captures well the dilemma that Governor Sam Houston faced when civil war broke out – “He, the man who had done more than any other to attach Texas to the Union, was now required to approve the severing of Texas from the Union” (p. 527). Ultimately, Houston refused to align with the secessionists, and as a result he was impeached and removed from office.
I found Lone Star Nation in a bookstore in San Antonio, and read it on a road trip across the Lone Star State, from Texarkana to Dallas to the Hill Country to South Padre Island. It is a book of epic scale and scope, fitting for the great state whose early history author Brands chronicles with care.
July 28, 2022
This readable history tells the story of how Texas got settled, was part of Mexico and became an independent country. It concludes with a short summary of statehood. The author puts the pieces together in an interesting and informative way.
Having lived in San Antonio for 6 months, I marveled at how the colonists could make a go of homesteading. While the land is very flat it is also very dry. It did not look fertile to me. There is little to sustain life while waiting for crops to grow. Heat is a huge factor in any endeavor. Brands refers to plentiful game, which had to be the case or no one would survive, but is hard to imagine with such limited water and plant life.
There are two areas needing more elaboration. The big area is slavery the other, less consequential, but important is the portrait of Sam Houston.
There are many who feel the Texas rebellion was totally about slavery. Brands discusses the turmoil in Mexico, Santa Anna's shredding of the constitution and cultural/religious differences between the "Anglo" north and its Spanish government as the causes of this rebellion. It seemed that the Texans, while frustrated, were working within the system to change it. Brands does not show how these issues trump slavery. While he mentions slavery he does not at all discuss it as a cause. Because this is a common opinion, Brands needs a better discussion of the role of slavery in this fight.
The portrait of Houston is very engrossing but learning towards the end that he had 8 children is a surprise. Fatherhood had hardly been mentioned up to that point. It isn't that the story hangs on this, but it implies he had roots. Where were the children and their mother(s?) living? Were they in a town of settlers? Living with a migrating or settled tribe? In American Legend: The Real-Life Adventures of David Crockett"American Legend" Crockett is shown to be enabled by spouse operating independently of him (but not his debts which she was stuck paying off). Was this true for Houston as well? The back story is needed to get a full measure of this man.
I wonder how much flack this Texas based author caught for his portraits of William Travis and Jim Bowie. They are considered heroes in Texas. Their lives before the Alamo, as told by Brands, were not the stuff of heroes. While I have toured the Alamo, and read its literature and came away from it knowing that Houston put a low priority on defending the Alamo, I don't remember learning that his strategy (ignored by the Alamo defenders) was to abandon it... in fact they were to blow it up to deprive Santa Anna of its use. This makes the story of the Alamo a story of a renegade operation. Given that Texas needed militias for defense, there was nothing Houston could do about it. I wonder how all this sat (and continues to sit) in Texas that adores its heroes and its Alamo legend.
I came to this from having finished the Brands' Pulitzer Prize nominated 'Traitor to His Class: The Privileged Life and Radical Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt which is clearly the better book. Lone Star Nation" is good, and if you're interested in this ten year or so window, it is a must read, otherwise, read the FDR.
Having lived in San Antonio for 6 months, I marveled at how the colonists could make a go of homesteading. While the land is very flat it is also very dry. It did not look fertile to me. There is little to sustain life while waiting for crops to grow. Heat is a huge factor in any endeavor. Brands refers to plentiful game, which had to be the case or no one would survive, but is hard to imagine with such limited water and plant life.
There are two areas needing more elaboration. The big area is slavery the other, less consequential, but important is the portrait of Sam Houston.
There are many who feel the Texas rebellion was totally about slavery. Brands discusses the turmoil in Mexico, Santa Anna's shredding of the constitution and cultural/religious differences between the "Anglo" north and its Spanish government as the causes of this rebellion. It seemed that the Texans, while frustrated, were working within the system to change it. Brands does not show how these issues trump slavery. While he mentions slavery he does not at all discuss it as a cause. Because this is a common opinion, Brands needs a better discussion of the role of slavery in this fight.
The portrait of Houston is very engrossing but learning towards the end that he had 8 children is a surprise. Fatherhood had hardly been mentioned up to that point. It isn't that the story hangs on this, but it implies he had roots. Where were the children and their mother(s?) living? Were they in a town of settlers? Living with a migrating or settled tribe? In American Legend: The Real-Life Adventures of David Crockett"American Legend" Crockett is shown to be enabled by spouse operating independently of him (but not his debts which she was stuck paying off). Was this true for Houston as well? The back story is needed to get a full measure of this man.
I wonder how much flack this Texas based author caught for his portraits of William Travis and Jim Bowie. They are considered heroes in Texas. Their lives before the Alamo, as told by Brands, were not the stuff of heroes. While I have toured the Alamo, and read its literature and came away from it knowing that Houston put a low priority on defending the Alamo, I don't remember learning that his strategy (ignored by the Alamo defenders) was to abandon it... in fact they were to blow it up to deprive Santa Anna of its use. This makes the story of the Alamo a story of a renegade operation. Given that Texas needed militias for defense, there was nothing Houston could do about it. I wonder how all this sat (and continues to sit) in Texas that adores its heroes and its Alamo legend.
I came to this from having finished the Brands' Pulitzer Prize nominated 'Traitor to His Class: The Privileged Life and Radical Presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt which is clearly the better book. Lone Star Nation" is good, and if you're interested in this ten year or so window, it is a must read, otherwise, read the FDR.
April 29, 2024
Lone Star Nation by H.W. Brands
This is a nice easy-going history of the revolution fought by Texans to gain their independence from Mexico 1835-36. It goes into how and why the war began, who the major players were, including Crocket, Travis, Fannin, the Austins—father and son, Bowie, Santa Ana and Sam Houston, even Menchaca, who is a distant relative of mine. .
Brands is generous but disciplined in giving us a good picture of these characters and the typical Tennessee frontier fighter along with the trained but poorly led Mexican soldier. Having grown up near the San Jacinto Battlefield just outside Houston and stayed nearly drunk on Texas history during elementary school through college, I still found that “Lone Star Nation” enlightened me on what really happened and how it affected the formation of the United States.
“Lone Star Nation” can be read in tandem with “Three Roads to the Alamo: The Lives and Fortunes of David Crockett, James Bowie, and William Barret Travis” by William C. Davis, which I have reviewed on Good Reads, both of which should give fellow Texans and other interested parties a clearer picture of Texas’ difficult beginnings as a nation, then a state within a nation.
Based on the reading of Brands’ “Lone Star Nation” and before that his “The Age of Gold: The California Gold Rush…” I feel safe in agreeing with Brands that there would not have been a California had there not been a Texas first.
This is a nice easy-going history of the revolution fought by Texans to gain their independence from Mexico 1835-36. It goes into how and why the war began, who the major players were, including Crocket, Travis, Fannin, the Austins—father and son, Bowie, Santa Ana and Sam Houston, even Menchaca, who is a distant relative of mine. .
Brands is generous but disciplined in giving us a good picture of these characters and the typical Tennessee frontier fighter along with the trained but poorly led Mexican soldier. Having grown up near the San Jacinto Battlefield just outside Houston and stayed nearly drunk on Texas history during elementary school through college, I still found that “Lone Star Nation” enlightened me on what really happened and how it affected the formation of the United States.
“Lone Star Nation” can be read in tandem with “Three Roads to the Alamo: The Lives and Fortunes of David Crockett, James Bowie, and William Barret Travis” by William C. Davis, which I have reviewed on Good Reads, both of which should give fellow Texans and other interested parties a clearer picture of Texas’ difficult beginnings as a nation, then a state within a nation.
Based on the reading of Brands’ “Lone Star Nation” and before that his “The Age of Gold: The California Gold Rush…” I feel safe in agreeing with Brands that there would not have been a California had there not been a Texas first.
January 22, 2016
My girlfriend thinks it's amusing that kids in Texas have to take at least one year of Texas History in junior high or high school. She's from Florida -- but I'm from Texas and it never struck me as that weird. Don't kids in Iowa have to take an Iowa History class? Maybe not.
Anyway. Regardless of the class, growing up in Austin, Texas a lot of Texas history works its way into your brain. Everyone knows the core elements of the revolution, for example: The Alamo. Goliad. San Jacinto. Houston. Crockett. Travis. Bowie. Santa Anna.
This book fleshed out that vague history very nicely. It provides a wide breadth of historical context, starting several decades in advance of the revolution with Moses Austin's arrival in the region and takes us up to Sam Houston's death during the US Civil War. Most of the book does, though, take place during the 1830s. And it does a great job of presenting these characters and situations in a realistic light, rather than as glowing-gold statues of perfection. The slavery issue, for example, is not shied away from and much discussion is given to how many in the US found the idea of annexing Texas repellent for this and a variety of other reasons.
It's also the first time I've really felt like I understood what the real situation in Texas was at that time. It was a fucking mess, for lack of a better term. Very little centralized control. Lots of crime and speculation. Continuing conflicts with the Native American populations. A mess.
Finally, one of the very interesting things about this book: It's the first time (I think) that I've really seen the Heroes of the Texas Revolution painted as real people. I knew kind of who belonged where. Travis, Bowie, Crockett = Alamo. Houston = General, later President. But I guess I hadn't been aware that Crockett had been a legitimate celebrity before he ever came to Texas. Or that William Travis was only 26 when he commanded the troops at the Alamo. I also hadn't been aware of the closeness of many of these guys to the power structure in the US Government. Both Crockett and Houston were at times considered viable candidates for the US Presidency. I guess when Texans present Texas History they keep it a bit artificially isolated from American History.
Anyway: Very good book. And continuing along my US history reading kick that started last year...
Anyway. Regardless of the class, growing up in Austin, Texas a lot of Texas history works its way into your brain. Everyone knows the core elements of the revolution, for example: The Alamo. Goliad. San Jacinto. Houston. Crockett. Travis. Bowie. Santa Anna.
This book fleshed out that vague history very nicely. It provides a wide breadth of historical context, starting several decades in advance of the revolution with Moses Austin's arrival in the region and takes us up to Sam Houston's death during the US Civil War. Most of the book does, though, take place during the 1830s. And it does a great job of presenting these characters and situations in a realistic light, rather than as glowing-gold statues of perfection. The slavery issue, for example, is not shied away from and much discussion is given to how many in the US found the idea of annexing Texas repellent for this and a variety of other reasons.
It's also the first time I've really felt like I understood what the real situation in Texas was at that time. It was a fucking mess, for lack of a better term. Very little centralized control. Lots of crime and speculation. Continuing conflicts with the Native American populations. A mess.
Finally, one of the very interesting things about this book: It's the first time (I think) that I've really seen the Heroes of the Texas Revolution painted as real people. I knew kind of who belonged where. Travis, Bowie, Crockett = Alamo. Houston = General, later President. But I guess I hadn't been aware that Crockett had been a legitimate celebrity before he ever came to Texas. Or that William Travis was only 26 when he commanded the troops at the Alamo. I also hadn't been aware of the closeness of many of these guys to the power structure in the US Government. Both Crockett and Houston were at times considered viable candidates for the US Presidency. I guess when Texans present Texas History they keep it a bit artificially isolated from American History.
Anyway: Very good book. And continuing along my US history reading kick that started last year...
October 30, 2020
From a historiographical perspective, this book was such a disappointment. Brands relies heavily on secondary sources and just a few primary sources to support a mythological history of the Texas Revolution. The perspectives of Mexicans, abolitionists, and non-whites were either ignored or smugly derided. I wanted to learn more about the history of my new home, but I can't help but feeling that I've been misinformed or too narrowly informed to give me a very balanced education on the subject.
September 22, 2017
This book presents a very engaging history Texas leading up to its annexation by the United States. I enjoyed this well-written account of some familiar characters and events, and I look forward to my next read by Mr. Brands.
September 8, 2012
Rarely does a title do justice to the story. This one does. You will finish this book with a deep understanding of how the Texas War for Independence totally re-shaped the development of the modern U.S. as we know it. You may find yourself wondering, "what would the western U.S. look like today if events had taken a different turn?" Oh, and for you non-Texans who still don't get our fiercely independent, self-reliant, this-country-would-be-a-total-mess-without-us attitude, GET THIS book and read it thoroughly!
January 16, 2011
A library book so...it goes to the top of the stack.
I am what is popularly called a "history buff". It means I've read a lot about history, especially the historical periods and topics that interest me...but I don't have a degree. Technically I do have a minor I suppose...but that's just saying that I took every history course I was allowed in filling the requirements for the technology degree I got.
My favorite topics tend to be American history and general military history, so I've read other books on this topic, and this period. In this case I've come to another book where I wish we had half stars or possibly a 10 star system. I would say 3.5 stars might be closer to my actual rating of this book.
This volume had it's flaws...but then most history books do. Too many (especially now) are written with an agenda (political or otherwise). Too many actually end up being "rewrites", "revisions" of history. The author here makes a great effort to tell a fair story and while he is obviously approving of the overall outcome of history he is largely successful in his attempt at a fair telling. The book is told using the eyewitness accounts we have and what I'd call mini-biographies of the people involved in and around the events. We go back and look at claims on Texas from the French, the Spanish, the native Americans, the Jefferson and later American administrations, the North American colonists ...the claims of the British. The story follows the events and looks at the Mexican Revolution, at Santa Anna's changing position, at Austin, Huston and others with their dreams for and about Texas. There were those who were scoundrels and those who were idealists and all sorts in between. This is a pretty good account of the time, the place and the events. So can't give 3.5...I'll give it 4.
I am what is popularly called a "history buff". It means I've read a lot about history, especially the historical periods and topics that interest me...but I don't have a degree. Technically I do have a minor I suppose...but that's just saying that I took every history course I was allowed in filling the requirements for the technology degree I got.
My favorite topics tend to be American history and general military history, so I've read other books on this topic, and this period. In this case I've come to another book where I wish we had half stars or possibly a 10 star system. I would say 3.5 stars might be closer to my actual rating of this book.
This volume had it's flaws...but then most history books do. Too many (especially now) are written with an agenda (political or otherwise). Too many actually end up being "rewrites", "revisions" of history. The author here makes a great effort to tell a fair story and while he is obviously approving of the overall outcome of history he is largely successful in his attempt at a fair telling. The book is told using the eyewitness accounts we have and what I'd call mini-biographies of the people involved in and around the events. We go back and look at claims on Texas from the French, the Spanish, the native Americans, the Jefferson and later American administrations, the North American colonists ...the claims of the British. The story follows the events and looks at the Mexican Revolution, at Santa Anna's changing position, at Austin, Huston and others with their dreams for and about Texas. There were those who were scoundrels and those who were idealists and all sorts in between. This is a pretty good account of the time, the place and the events. So can't give 3.5...I'll give it 4.
October 29, 2012
Brands does a splendid job narrating the story of Texas from the early settlements of Austin in the 1820s to the successful revolution of 1835-36. His sympathies are definitely strongest for the American presence, particularly Austin in the outset and Houston later, but Brands is generally fair and complimentary of most of the Mexican military and political figures, only having it out on the megalomanicial Santa Anna. I found myself wanting a discussion on the book's biggest begged question: suppose the 1824 Constitution had been honored in Mexico City, and that the Austin-esque strategy of good Mexican citizenship paid off? Would much of American and Mexican history been extremely different? A solid book, if a bit unbalanced.
April 29, 2015
This book traces the history of Texas from the earliest explorations by the Spanish through the establishment of the republic and the annexation into the United States. It details the efforts by Moses Austin to get a land grant from the Spanish and the beginnings of settlement under his son Stephen.
It follows the efforts of Mexico to get independence from Spain and the efforts to set up their republic. It then traces the conflict between Texas and Mexico that results in the Texas war for independence. It details the parts played by Houston, Travis and Crockett in the fight. It carries the story through the annexation by the United States.
It follows the efforts of Mexico to get independence from Spain and the efforts to set up their republic. It then traces the conflict between Texas and Mexico that results in the Texas war for independence. It details the parts played by Houston, Travis and Crockett in the fight. It carries the story through the annexation by the United States.
November 26, 2012
As a native Texan, I took Texas History in order to graduate from High School. This book mainly focuses on the main characters involved in the struggle for independence, i.e., Houston, Travis, Bowie, Austin, Santa Ana and others. It is told in story form and is very interesting.
Helped to demystify some of the legends that Texans hold about the glorious days of the war of independence and of the Republic.
Helped to demystify some of the legends that Texans hold about the glorious days of the war of independence and of the Republic.
September 6, 2018
Engaging read on the build up to the Texas Revolution. The stories of key personalities like William B Travis, Davy Crockett, Stephen F Austin Sam Houston etc were very engaging and well written. I also appreciated the fact that he didn’t spend too much time on the Alamo. He also wasn’t scared to point out that defending the Alamo was of very little if any strategic importance.
Overall a good book. I will look for others from this author.
Overall a good book. I will look for others from this author.
October 15, 2010
A great historical account of Texas in its formative years - I enjoyed the fine blend of historical facts and the insight into the people who were caught up in these times. I was reminded of another life I lived as 7th grade Texas History teacher.
December 22, 2010
This is a well written book about the history of Texas. The author does a great job of making it not seem like a text book. After recently visiting Austin and San Antonio, it was especially interesting to read.
September 25, 2016
Brands is an academic but he doesn't write academically, and I like that because I read history for entertainment. LSN gives nice detail about the characters of Houston, Austin, Travis, Santa Anna, and Bowie, but little about the first Texas president Burnet.
May 10, 2024
I’m going to keep this review simple. I love H. W. Brands. I’d love to sit and listen to a whole semester of that guy’s lectures. I thought I understood the history of Texas pretty well having lived there for 10 years, but I was wrong. Brands set me straight. Another job well done.
October 5, 2024
A must read for every Texan! I learned more from this book than all the Texas history courses and units from school combined.
September 25, 2020
H.W. Brands, of the University of Texas Austin, is one of America's most prolific historians. One could even say, without too much injustice, that he might be a little too prolific. He's written and edited dozens of books. Most of these cover well-trodden territory, from half a dozen of the most popular and most famous presidents (FDR, TR, LBJ, and so on.) to a smattering of grand narratives (the California Gold Rush, capitalism in the last half of the nineteenth century). In this book on the fight for Texas independence, Brands shows he is a pellucid and accomplished writer, but he leaves the reader without any signposts as the reasons or importance of the events he describes.
Brands begins the book, with nary a thesis or explanation, with Moses Austin, and his son Stephen, going West from Virginia to start a lead mine outside St. Louis, then under Spanish suzerainty. After the land underneath him was a given from Spain to France and then to America, he cemented another deal with newly independent Mexico to start a colony in yet-unsettled Texas. When Moses died in 1821, heavily indebted, his well-educated son took over the debts and project. Austin would spend the next 15 years turning Texas into a thriving colony of Americans (and American slaves), which mainly, on his part, involved constant negotiations with the Mexican government. His colonies attracted people like the inveterate drunk, but already nationally-famous fighter, Jim Bowie; the former law partner but soon-to-be resistance leader William Travis, and the ex-Andrew Jackson confident, Whig Congressman, and all-around wild man Davy Crockett. All three of these men would be killed by Mexican dictator Santa Anna at the Alamo in 1836, after they had helped declare independence against him for abrogating the old Mexican Constitution of 1824. Sam Houston, a giant of a man who once lived for years living with the Cherokee but who also spent years as a self-pitying drunk, got Texas's revenge by taking over the army and capturing Santa Anna at the battle of San Jacinto soon after, ensuring Texas independence.
In the end, the profusion of names and battles leaves one wondering why it all matters, and Brands does little to add to the drama or explain its significance. Still, at its best, the book has surprisingly forthright letters and diary entries from settlers and leaders like Austin himself, explaining how they used their luggage as cover against Indian attacks and offensive fires, or how they captured smugglers and engaged in impromptu country justice trials. Brands would have done better to let more of these people tell the story, and then help explain it all to the reader.
Brands begins the book, with nary a thesis or explanation, with Moses Austin, and his son Stephen, going West from Virginia to start a lead mine outside St. Louis, then under Spanish suzerainty. After the land underneath him was a given from Spain to France and then to America, he cemented another deal with newly independent Mexico to start a colony in yet-unsettled Texas. When Moses died in 1821, heavily indebted, his well-educated son took over the debts and project. Austin would spend the next 15 years turning Texas into a thriving colony of Americans (and American slaves), which mainly, on his part, involved constant negotiations with the Mexican government. His colonies attracted people like the inveterate drunk, but already nationally-famous fighter, Jim Bowie; the former law partner but soon-to-be resistance leader William Travis, and the ex-Andrew Jackson confident, Whig Congressman, and all-around wild man Davy Crockett. All three of these men would be killed by Mexican dictator Santa Anna at the Alamo in 1836, after they had helped declare independence against him for abrogating the old Mexican Constitution of 1824. Sam Houston, a giant of a man who once lived for years living with the Cherokee but who also spent years as a self-pitying drunk, got Texas's revenge by taking over the army and capturing Santa Anna at the battle of San Jacinto soon after, ensuring Texas independence.
In the end, the profusion of names and battles leaves one wondering why it all matters, and Brands does little to add to the drama or explain its significance. Still, at its best, the book has surprisingly forthright letters and diary entries from settlers and leaders like Austin himself, explaining how they used their luggage as cover against Indian attacks and offensive fires, or how they captured smugglers and engaged in impromptu country justice trials. Brands would have done better to let more of these people tell the story, and then help explain it all to the reader.
April 3, 2023
4.5 stars
I grew up in Texas and took the Texas History course that all public school 7th-grade students take, and I know more than the basics of the history of my state; however, this book had information and facts that were completely unfamiliar to me. For example, while I knew that Sam Houston had been a Congressman from Tennessee, I did not know that he had close ties to Andrew Jackson. I also did not know that Davy Crockett had close ties to Jackson at one point and then had a falling out with him and all the Jacksonians.
The book reads as a compelling adventure story focused primarily (at least for the first half of the book) on the Americans, led by Stephen F. Austin, who settled in Texas in the 1820s. If there was one thing I disliked about the book, it was that there seemed to be too much focus on Austin and his followers when I had hoped for more on the actual revolution and fight for independence against General Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana and Mexico. The battle of the Alamo, the massacre at Goliad, and even the final battle at San Jacinto received very few pages comparatively, and that was disappointing. The Alamo is the most famous of those, but my keener interest is in Goliad as my great-great-great grandfather was among the approximately 350 men who were murdered there on Santa Ana's orders. I appreciated that Dr. Brands painted the Mexican president and general as the self-aggrandizing narcissist that he was and didn't try in any way to make him anything else.
The narrator for the audiobook was Don Leslie, and I mostly enjoyed his reading. He gave some (but not all) of the main characters specific voices, and that was done fairly well, Davy Crockett's being the most fun. There were some inconsistencies in his pronunciation of some of the Spanish names in that some he pronounced as they would be in Spanish (Brazos, San Jacinto, Santa Ana, for example, even though most Texans that I know don't pronounce them that way) while others he pronounced as most English speakers would say them (Rio Grande, San Antonio, etc.). There were other names from the Spanish that he just pronounced weirdly, specifically Brazoria (Bra-zor-EE-a instead of Bra-ZOR-ee-a) and Mexia (MEX-ee-a instead of Me-HE-a). Someone from outside of the state might not notice, but those really stood out to me. Overall, I'd give his performance 4 out of 5.
I'm not sure how interesting someone who is not a Texan would find this book, but I enjoyed reviewing some of the things I already knew as well as learning a number of new things about the history of my state. Dr. Brands, as always, does an outstanding job of bringing history to life.
I grew up in Texas and took the Texas History course that all public school 7th-grade students take, and I know more than the basics of the history of my state; however, this book had information and facts that were completely unfamiliar to me. For example, while I knew that Sam Houston had been a Congressman from Tennessee, I did not know that he had close ties to Andrew Jackson. I also did not know that Davy Crockett had close ties to Jackson at one point and then had a falling out with him and all the Jacksonians.
The book reads as a compelling adventure story focused primarily (at least for the first half of the book) on the Americans, led by Stephen F. Austin, who settled in Texas in the 1820s. If there was one thing I disliked about the book, it was that there seemed to be too much focus on Austin and his followers when I had hoped for more on the actual revolution and fight for independence against General Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana and Mexico. The battle of the Alamo, the massacre at Goliad, and even the final battle at San Jacinto received very few pages comparatively, and that was disappointing. The Alamo is the most famous of those, but my keener interest is in Goliad as my great-great-great grandfather was among the approximately 350 men who were murdered there on Santa Ana's orders. I appreciated that Dr. Brands painted the Mexican president and general as the self-aggrandizing narcissist that he was and didn't try in any way to make him anything else.
The narrator for the audiobook was Don Leslie, and I mostly enjoyed his reading. He gave some (but not all) of the main characters specific voices, and that was done fairly well, Davy Crockett's being the most fun. There were some inconsistencies in his pronunciation of some of the Spanish names in that some he pronounced as they would be in Spanish (Brazos, San Jacinto, Santa Ana, for example, even though most Texans that I know don't pronounce them that way) while others he pronounced as most English speakers would say them (Rio Grande, San Antonio, etc.). There were other names from the Spanish that he just pronounced weirdly, specifically Brazoria (Bra-zor-EE-a instead of Bra-ZOR-ee-a) and Mexia (MEX-ee-a instead of Me-HE-a). Someone from outside of the state might not notice, but those really stood out to me. Overall, I'd give his performance 4 out of 5.
I'm not sure how interesting someone who is not a Texan would find this book, but I enjoyed reviewing some of the things I already knew as well as learning a number of new things about the history of my state. Dr. Brands, as always, does an outstanding job of bringing history to life.
November 21, 2023
This is a well written story of how Texas broke away from Mexico, became an independent nation and was later annexed by the U. S. Mostly though it is a story of interesting characters who were, according to Brands, opportunists. Santa Anna and his generals used Texas as an opportunity to consolidate their power in Mexico by suppressing rebels who were seen as American invaders. Stephan Austin saw Texas as an opportunity to become both powerful and wealthy as a land agent who brought in immigrants to settle the Texas area. This would develop the land and thus bring in more taxes for Mexico but also be a buffer to the Indian tribes, mostly Comanche. Travis saw Texas as an opportunity to start over and get away from familial obligations and debt in the US. Bowie saw this as an opportunity to make money. His swindling had gotten him into trouble in Louisiana and he had to flee. Davey Crockett hoped to revive his failed political career and reputation. He nevertheless was already a living legend. Finally, Sam Houston left behind a failed marriage and political career and saw Texas as an opportunity for renewal. Most gave their lives for Texas. Brands does an excellent job telling about the struggles immigrants had during the rebellion against Mexico and how many became refugees in their own land. The one person who shines through and foresaw the problems Mexico would have with the Texas settlers was Mexican General Teran`. His suggestions of how to regain control of the area were not heeded. He also saw Texas as critical to the economy of Mexico. During the rebellion there were two struggles going on at the same time; one fighting the Mexican government to be recognized as an independent province within Mexico and the other fighting for independence from Mexico and hoping to become a part of the United States. Sam Houston was a reluctant military leader, slow to act. He had to deal with Texan rebels who were very independent and difficult to control. They had a mind of their own and often disobeyed Houston’s orders which actually led to a victory at San Jacinto over Santa Anna and independence for Texas. One cannot overlook the brutal massacres that took place at the hands of Santa Anna at Goliad and the Alamo. For this he was never really held accountable but rather used as an agent to negotiate Texan independence with Washington D. C. Two items permeating the story is the problem of slavery that came with Texan independence and whether it would become a state. The other factor behind the scenes was former president Andrew Jackson who in his dying days lobbied heavily for Texas to become a part of the U.S., his legacy. A good read by H. W. Brands.
May 18, 2024
By a large margin, my greatest issue with this work is the title. It reads as being overtly jingoistic and perpetuates that dumb stubborn pride many associate with Texans who share their stately heritage in a way that isn't negative. Even the subtitle is misleading, as the mentioned "Ragged Army of Volunteers" didn't actually obtain Texas Independence; they simply captured one threatening and powerful head of the politically conflicted hydra that was the Mexican Government.
That issue addressed and shelved, the content within this book was incredible. Obviously it's coverage of Texas history is limited, but it honors the complexity of the events and people within its established scope. It does not shy away from or dumbly revere the harsh history and reality associated within its timeline. Selfishness, greed, political duplicity, racism, and many other ugly traits are fully demonstrated here; as are more beautiful and venerable ones.
Nothing is ever presented as to be so one-sided that terrible deeds go without some deeper human understanding, or that great accomplishments ride on without some deplorable aspect clinging on. Mexicans living in Texas fought in tandem with white Americans at the Alamo against Santa Anna's army and the troublesome laws of his dictatorship. Santa Anna established said dictatorship largely in part because of how conflict-laden and slow the newly independent Mexican government was. The Mexican government was so slow and conflict-laden because they had just achieved independence from the Spanish Empire, whose century old traditions had become to burdensome and complicated to carry forth into the new world. So on, and so on. This kind of complexity (of which I'm just grazing some surfaces) is tactfully and entertainingly approached by author H. W. Brands.
If there's any other issue that absolutely has to be addressed outside of the title, it would probably be pacing / attention to detail. While most of the detail is centered around 1836-1845, areas outside of that are sometimes grazed over while others are focused on in a way that feels inconsistent. Ultimately, I think that these detail laden detours and quick summary express lanes dispersed throughout are necessary.
The last thing I'll share is how inspired I am by the history and all those involved. I feel a greater awareness, appreciation, and understanding for the world I am a part of and come from. If there continues to be great changes within my life that I pursue, it will be in some part due to this work and the history of the world that I continue to engage with.
That issue addressed and shelved, the content within this book was incredible. Obviously it's coverage of Texas history is limited, but it honors the complexity of the events and people within its established scope. It does not shy away from or dumbly revere the harsh history and reality associated within its timeline. Selfishness, greed, political duplicity, racism, and many other ugly traits are fully demonstrated here; as are more beautiful and venerable ones.
Nothing is ever presented as to be so one-sided that terrible deeds go without some deeper human understanding, or that great accomplishments ride on without some deplorable aspect clinging on. Mexicans living in Texas fought in tandem with white Americans at the Alamo against Santa Anna's army and the troublesome laws of his dictatorship. Santa Anna established said dictatorship largely in part because of how conflict-laden and slow the newly independent Mexican government was. The Mexican government was so slow and conflict-laden because they had just achieved independence from the Spanish Empire, whose century old traditions had become to burdensome and complicated to carry forth into the new world. So on, and so on. This kind of complexity (of which I'm just grazing some surfaces) is tactfully and entertainingly approached by author H. W. Brands.
If there's any other issue that absolutely has to be addressed outside of the title, it would probably be pacing / attention to detail. While most of the detail is centered around 1836-1845, areas outside of that are sometimes grazed over while others are focused on in a way that feels inconsistent. Ultimately, I think that these detail laden detours and quick summary express lanes dispersed throughout are necessary.
The last thing I'll share is how inspired I am by the history and all those involved. I feel a greater awareness, appreciation, and understanding for the world I am a part of and come from. If there continues to be great changes within my life that I pursue, it will be in some part due to this work and the history of the world that I continue to engage with.
October 3, 2021
Texas history is fascinating. This author does a great job combining the lacking story of Native Americans, who were divided in loyalties, the sparse Mexican population in Texas, and the complicated founding of the colony by Austin and his father. Many Americans were welcomed into Texas as Mexican citizens in order to populate the area and to provide a buffer between powerful native tribes like the Comanches and the native Mexicans. The conflict of Mexican citizenship made Austin and many colonists torn, but it was the usurpation of power by Santa Anna that cut the final ties of loyalty. Dictatorship exacerbated the many differences between the two peoples and pushed the Texans into rebellion.
Oftentimes, Texas history lacks the broader political context of the Mexican nation and Austin's position as founding father and colonial governor put him the middle of domestic political chaos in Mexico City. This political turmoil and Santa Anna's feckless dictatorship (including his severe flaws) are key factors as to why the Texans, as stubbornly independent as they were, could declare independence and keep it. His discussion is also important regarding slavery (as protected property)as it added to the motivation to rebel against an anti-slavery Mexican government (though it certainly tolerated Americans calling their slaves as workers. It also virtually enslaved native Americans for various purposes). Slavery caused Houston's his greatest heartache later when he refused to support secession in order to protect it.
Finally, Brands carefully explains the foolish decision of the Texan absentee rebel commanders to deploy at the Alamo, the cravenness of Santa Anna in insisting on executing hundreds of prisoners at Goliad overruling the objectors within his chain of command, his stupidity and vanity, and how the thirst for revenge in the face of no quarter motivated the Texans to win.
Oftentimes, Texas history lacks the broader political context of the Mexican nation and Austin's position as founding father and colonial governor put him the middle of domestic political chaos in Mexico City. This political turmoil and Santa Anna's feckless dictatorship (including his severe flaws) are key factors as to why the Texans, as stubbornly independent as they were, could declare independence and keep it. His discussion is also important regarding slavery (as protected property)as it added to the motivation to rebel against an anti-slavery Mexican government (though it certainly tolerated Americans calling their slaves as workers. It also virtually enslaved native Americans for various purposes). Slavery caused Houston's his greatest heartache later when he refused to support secession in order to protect it.
Finally, Brands carefully explains the foolish decision of the Texan absentee rebel commanders to deploy at the Alamo, the cravenness of Santa Anna in insisting on executing hundreds of prisoners at Goliad overruling the objectors within his chain of command, his stupidity and vanity, and how the thirst for revenge in the face of no quarter motivated the Texans to win.
July 11, 2022
A detailed and well documented history of Texas, from the time of Mexican province, to Independent Republic to a state in the Union, touching on the start of the US Civil War. While that covers from approximately the 1820's to 1861, the largest section covers the war of Independence against Mexico from 1835-36.
Brands is an historian and college professor (UT-Austin) who has written dozens of books in the last 35 years. He has great attention to detail and seems to heavily source his material from writings of the times and from those who were directly involved. He does a good job in bringing the historical icons to life - not as men and women to be revered but as human beings following their hearts, minds, pursuit of riches and freedom. In doing so, he paints real pictures of real people (warts and all). He writes of those who came to Texas for all the above mentioned reasons, with a focus on those who helped start the migration from the United States to Texas (Austin, Bastrop), those who fought to gain independence (Houston, Fannin, Travis, Milam, Crockett, Bowie, Burleson), those who fought against it (Santa Anna, Cos, De La Pena) and the politicians who worked to use the cause of Independence for their own reasons (Houston, Jackson, Adams).
Brands makes a compelling case that Texas' independence and then annexation into the United States helps to bring to the surface, divisions that 20 years later lead to the US Civil War based on several things: Slavery was outlawed in Mexico, US settlers brought their slaves into Texas when they settled, US politicians debated the annexation of Texas largely from the point of slavery - would it be allowed or not (abolitionist vs. secessionist; states rights vs. big government).
While it took me a long time to read, a chapter at a time between other less intellectual books, it was thoroughly enjoyable and enlightening - as my previous grasp of Texas history pretty much began and ended at The Alamo.
Brands is an historian and college professor (UT-Austin) who has written dozens of books in the last 35 years. He has great attention to detail and seems to heavily source his material from writings of the times and from those who were directly involved. He does a good job in bringing the historical icons to life - not as men and women to be revered but as human beings following their hearts, minds, pursuit of riches and freedom. In doing so, he paints real pictures of real people (warts and all). He writes of those who came to Texas for all the above mentioned reasons, with a focus on those who helped start the migration from the United States to Texas (Austin, Bastrop), those who fought to gain independence (Houston, Fannin, Travis, Milam, Crockett, Bowie, Burleson), those who fought against it (Santa Anna, Cos, De La Pena) and the politicians who worked to use the cause of Independence for their own reasons (Houston, Jackson, Adams).
Brands makes a compelling case that Texas' independence and then annexation into the United States helps to bring to the surface, divisions that 20 years later lead to the US Civil War based on several things: Slavery was outlawed in Mexico, US settlers brought their slaves into Texas when they settled, US politicians debated the annexation of Texas largely from the point of slavery - would it be allowed or not (abolitionist vs. secessionist; states rights vs. big government).
While it took me a long time to read, a chapter at a time between other less intellectual books, it was thoroughly enjoyable and enlightening - as my previous grasp of Texas history pretty much began and ended at The Alamo.
February 18, 2021
(Audiobook) For me, this was a review of my 7th grade Texas History class. The saga of how a former Spanish buffer territory became its own independent nation is quite a tale even among the 50 other states in the Union. Of course, this is not a middle school textbook, but an adult history book, one that looks to dispel just as many myths as tell the history. It is primarily focused on Texas from Mexican Independence to Texas independence and its eventual entry into the US as a state. Many of the Texas “heroes” are not quite the virtuous figures my 7th grade history class made them out to be. Scalawags, ruffians, and near criminals seem to be better labels for men such as Travis and Bowie. Crockett and Houston were once rising Tennessee political stars, but their stocks fell hard and Texas as a chance for resurrection. For Houston, his political fortunes did improve, albeit after a near-run victory. Crockett did not rise again in life, but he became arguably the biggest martyr from the Alamo. Of course, all tales much have a villain, and for Texas, that is Santa Anna. While not the pure devil of 7th grade history, he was not that virtuous, more akin to the dictators of Europe and of other eras.
Overall, a very readable history of the critical times in Texas history. It does not gloss over the role of slavery in the founding of the Texas Republic, nor does it whitewash it when it comes to why Texas could not immediately join the Union. It shows that Sam Houston was extremely luck on the field of battle and that Santa Anna made some major mistakes with his campaign. One or two things change, Texas may yet have remained part of Mexico, and perhaps, Juneteenth does not happen in Texas, but in another part of the US. Worth at least one read, but would be interesting to get a take from someone who was not raised in Texas.
Overall, a very readable history of the critical times in Texas history. It does not gloss over the role of slavery in the founding of the Texas Republic, nor does it whitewash it when it comes to why Texas could not immediately join the Union. It shows that Sam Houston was extremely luck on the field of battle and that Santa Anna made some major mistakes with his campaign. One or two things change, Texas may yet have remained part of Mexico, and perhaps, Juneteenth does not happen in Texas, but in another part of the US. Worth at least one read, but would be interesting to get a take from someone who was not raised in Texas.
August 6, 2020
This is one of those books that somehow slipped through the cracks.....it came out 16 years ago and I never picked it up. Now, thanks to the coronavirus, I was looking for something to read and came across a brand new copy and wondered how I had missed it since I will buy just about anything and everything relating to Texas history.
Exhaustive 526-page tome with hundreds of footnotes and sources cited which takes the reader back to the days before the Spanish came, then through the Spanish conquest of what was to become Texas, through the turbulent Santa Anna years and the battle for independence, culminating with the Civil War.
Highly readable and enjoyable with many sources cited that don't get cited in your standard "history of" books. If there is one problem, it is the author's over-reliance perhaps on the diaries of Jose De la Pena which some people still question as to whether or not it is an authentic first-person narrative written at the time (1835-36) or later. Presumably, the diaries are authentic, in which case they do offer an in-depth look at the battle for Texas independence, but there will always be those who question the authenticity of them.
If you're looking for a concise history of the Lone Star State in it's early formative years and are interested in more than just the battle of the Alamo, Goliad and San Jacinto, it's never too late to pick up a copy. If you're more interested in those battles, there are many, many books written about them, particularly about the Alamo.
Exhaustive 526-page tome with hundreds of footnotes and sources cited which takes the reader back to the days before the Spanish came, then through the Spanish conquest of what was to become Texas, through the turbulent Santa Anna years and the battle for independence, culminating with the Civil War.
Highly readable and enjoyable with many sources cited that don't get cited in your standard "history of" books. If there is one problem, it is the author's over-reliance perhaps on the diaries of Jose De la Pena which some people still question as to whether or not it is an authentic first-person narrative written at the time (1835-36) or later. Presumably, the diaries are authentic, in which case they do offer an in-depth look at the battle for Texas independence, but there will always be those who question the authenticity of them.
If you're looking for a concise history of the Lone Star State in it's early formative years and are interested in more than just the battle of the Alamo, Goliad and San Jacinto, it's never too late to pick up a copy. If you're more interested in those battles, there are many, many books written about them, particularly about the Alamo.
June 11, 2024
Lone Star Nation (LST) is possibly my favorite book about about the Texas Revolution. So far, I have read three books by H.W. Brands (Heirs of Our Founders, Andrew Jackson, and now LST) and he is an excellent historian and author. LST covers most of the same period as Heirs and Jackson and, as he demonstrates, it is next to impossible to understand the revolutionary experience in Texas without understanding Andrew Jackson, the war of 1812, and (equally important) Mexico's struggle for independence.
LST covers all areas of the Texas Revolution, but specifically digs into Austin's role in found the colony, what led him there and how it influenced the revolution. He also covered Sam Houston's background focusing on his experience in the war of 1812, as the governor of Tennessee, his long-standing relationship with Andrew Jackson and his leadership as he guided the republic into statehood. The background added to Santa Anna, was very important in developing his thesis, as well. Without a full understanding of how Santa Anna came to be you really cannot understand the Texas Revolution.
This book also demonstrates that the Texas Revolution is much more than a war of slavery and free land. The road to independence, as he demonstrates, is the culmination of American settlers' incessant need for more land, their drive to bend the rules and buck taxation when confronted with a corrupt government, and ultimately the settlers drive to make sense of a newly formed nation (Mexico) that was racked by continued revolution (ultimately, it was better to go it alone rather than continue dependence on a despotic nation that couldn't decide on a constitution).
Lastly, I really appreciated that LST did not focus heavily on the mythos of Texas history. This book dug into all the angles.
LST covers all areas of the Texas Revolution, but specifically digs into Austin's role in found the colony, what led him there and how it influenced the revolution. He also covered Sam Houston's background focusing on his experience in the war of 1812, as the governor of Tennessee, his long-standing relationship with Andrew Jackson and his leadership as he guided the republic into statehood. The background added to Santa Anna, was very important in developing his thesis, as well. Without a full understanding of how Santa Anna came to be you really cannot understand the Texas Revolution.
This book also demonstrates that the Texas Revolution is much more than a war of slavery and free land. The road to independence, as he demonstrates, is the culmination of American settlers' incessant need for more land, their drive to bend the rules and buck taxation when confronted with a corrupt government, and ultimately the settlers drive to make sense of a newly formed nation (Mexico) that was racked by continued revolution (ultimately, it was better to go it alone rather than continue dependence on a despotic nation that couldn't decide on a constitution).
Lastly, I really appreciated that LST did not focus heavily on the mythos of Texas history. This book dug into all the angles.
August 1, 2022
H.W. Brands is a masterful writer and has a gift for putting pen to paper spellbinding historical retellings. This book is not just about the Alamo and the main characters we all remember: David Crockett, Jim Bowie; and William Travis. While it amply provides that important part of Texas history and details those three larger-than-life figures, there’s a lot more to it than that. Even before the reader gets to the Alamo, Brands starts at the beginning of what we know as Texas and how it was from geologically formed and the early history of it. It’s a fascinating foundation that patiently and carefully bring the story in full focus as the pages keep turning.
There are so many fascinating events and colorful characters that Brands explores and delves into which makes this book a very worthwhile read. The reader will learn about, not limited to, Moses and son Stephen Austin, Sam Houston, James Fannin, Andrew Jackson, and the charming but cunning dictator of Mexico, Santa Anna. The battles that lead up to the disastrous Alamo are key to understanding it better, and of course the aftermath: one cannot be sentient and not be flipping pages furiously wanting vengeance over the massacre. The book is well-written, educational, fascinating, and full of suspense and drama. I would highly recommend this book to readers as well as H.W. Brands’s other works as they also are unfailingly entertaining.
There are so many fascinating events and colorful characters that Brands explores and delves into which makes this book a very worthwhile read. The reader will learn about, not limited to, Moses and son Stephen Austin, Sam Houston, James Fannin, Andrew Jackson, and the charming but cunning dictator of Mexico, Santa Anna. The battles that lead up to the disastrous Alamo are key to understanding it better, and of course the aftermath: one cannot be sentient and not be flipping pages furiously wanting vengeance over the massacre. The book is well-written, educational, fascinating, and full of suspense and drama. I would highly recommend this book to readers as well as H.W. Brands’s other works as they also are unfailingly entertaining.
June 18, 2023
Another great piece of American history, annotated by an author, who is a joy to read.
Probably should go back and re-read this book straight through. This was such an on again off again read that I’m not able to do it justice in this review. I am giving it a three-star review as I didn’t hold my attention as well as other books he’s written such as the Ben Franklin biography.
I was very interested in the history of Texas and it’s involvement with becoming part of the United States. And I think this book hits on all that history very well, including bringing to light the roles and personalities of the “larger than life“ figures, such as Davy, Crockett, Jim Bowie, Sam Houston, Santa Anna, & Stephen F Austin.
I would not put too much credence in my star rating. I enjoyed the book while I was reading it but I always found other things to read or just not pick it up to finish it over the 4 months. Still a good book covering a little known part of American history -at least little known to me.
Probably should go back and re-read this book straight through. This was such an on again off again read that I’m not able to do it justice in this review. I am giving it a three-star review as I didn’t hold my attention as well as other books he’s written such as the Ben Franklin biography.
I was very interested in the history of Texas and it’s involvement with becoming part of the United States. And I think this book hits on all that history very well, including bringing to light the roles and personalities of the “larger than life“ figures, such as Davy, Crockett, Jim Bowie, Sam Houston, Santa Anna, & Stephen F Austin.
I would not put too much credence in my star rating. I enjoyed the book while I was reading it but I always found other things to read or just not pick it up to finish it over the 4 months. Still a good book covering a little known part of American history -at least little known to me.
May 4, 2018
Brands does the liberation of Texas? I’m in! At least this was my initial reaction to this book. I had read a couple of his histories so I knew the score beforehand. Brands produces serviceable histories centering around the biographies of key players(usually men) in history. He’s never too controversial, but details and analysis can feel rather thinnish. Still, while Brands may have been born in the northwest, most of his education and academic career has taken place within the Lone Star State. So, I’ll admit, I expected something special. What I got was, well, Brands. I’m not complaining. Not really. Brands covers his biographical bases well: Both Austins, Houston, Bowie, Crockett, de Santa Anna etc etc etc are trotted out in an orderly and respectful fashion. The book covers Moses Austin’s initial efforts to establish a colony within Spanish Texas to Houston’s resignation as governor due to Texas entering the civil war as a confederate state over slavery. Alamo buffs will almost certainly be disappointed by the skimpy treatment this iconic event receives in Lone State Nation. Brands takes the long view of history. Readers searching for deep and thorough details concerning specific events probably should avoid his corpus altogether. However, if you’re looking for a popular history of the Yellow Rose State before the US War Between ‘em then Lone Star Nation should serve a sufficient repast until fuller-course meals can be found ahead.
June 28, 2020
Typical Brands, which is to say a thoroughly engaging tour de force deploying biographies to elucidate history. In this case the Anglo settlement/invasion of Texas, the move toward independence, annexation to the US, slavery, and secession. The Austin family, Sam Houston, Santa Anna are prominently highlighted but cameos from the like of Jim Bowie, Davey Crockett and Andrew Jackson help explain the emergence and evolution of this most complicated state.
Brands also presents a mostly sympathetic, albeit brief, view of the plight of Native Americans in the region (particularly the Comanche) but can be legitimately criticized for a Eurocentric emphasis. That is even more true with respect to slavery, which Brands perfunctorily laments, but presents in passing as a catalyst for friction between Mexico, the US and, ultimately, the Confederacy.
All that said, read this and understand a lot about how Texas came to be what it is.
Brands also presents a mostly sympathetic, albeit brief, view of the plight of Native Americans in the region (particularly the Comanche) but can be legitimately criticized for a Eurocentric emphasis. That is even more true with respect to slavery, which Brands perfunctorily laments, but presents in passing as a catalyst for friction between Mexico, the US and, ultimately, the Confederacy.
All that said, read this and understand a lot about how Texas came to be what it is.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 124 reviews