@Katzztar:
The Alamo IS a source of Texas Pride, even for those not living in Texas anymore, such as myself. Please do NOT link it to current idiots in the state as they forgot their history and what the Alamo really stands for. It's not a 'fort' to fight off the enemy, it was a portion of a last stand to die fighting to buy time for rest of the army.
The defenders KNEW they would not win the battle of the Alamo.
I've lived in San Antonio my entire life and I always hear that story and its just… no.
We lost that battle. Badly. We were slaughtered by a huge force.
But its always played up as a moral victory. "Those days bought time elsewhere, and it served as a battle cry elsewhere and gave everyone the moral imperative to win!" Maybe? I guess? That made sense in second grade? I know it's local legend at this point and its a good story, and its tied into the legend of Davy Crockett but...
It WAS considered a stategic stronghold, believed that if Santa Anna held it it would be impossible to break his fortifications later. It wasn't about stalling for time, especially not in a time where it would take days or weeks for messages to travel.
How many days did the battle of the Alamo last? 12? Mexican forces actually gathered there and became a larger force while winning other battles elsewhere. (The numbers are usually stated to be 100 against 1,500, but it was ultimately more like 250 against 3,000.) The day the Mexican army actually decided to use their overwhelming numbers, it ended pretty quickly and they scaled the walls fast. They didn't really buy much in the way of time, the Mexican army just wasn't trying very hard.
And the battle at San Jacinto was what, a month later? And it was a battle that was a surprise attack that supposedly lasted 18 minutes that killed 700 Mexicans with almost no casualties on the Texas side? Stalling at the Alamo had little to do with catching an army while they were napping without sentries a month later, war cry of "remember the Alamo!" or not. Obviously, EVERY battle has an effect of some sort in the outcome of a war, so it may have led to that ideal timing, but the actual Alamo battle didn't affect the decisive win much.
Mostly it seems like a battle we horribly lost that we try to spin now 180 years later later since we ultimately won and the winners get to write the history. We're proud of it as a moral victory but... that just doesn't make sense to me.
That was the whole point of the line drawn in the sand. Those that crossed over it decided to fight and die .
The entire story of Travis drawing a line in the ground is probably made up. Most historians discount it, since there is no primary source evidence to support it, and the story only surfaced decades after the battle in a third-hand account. There was no doubt a discussion about the dire situation, but the bit with the line is Hollywood and myth.
