Analysis Of James E. Crisp Over Sam Houston's Speech

When you think Texas, what 's the first thing that comes to mind? According to a book called The Texas Left: The Radical Roots of Lone Star Liberalism written by Kyle g. Wilkinson and David O 'Donald Cullen. Texas elites revised historical consciousness to disassociate Texas from the burden of southern history and focused on the western cowboy, the great plains, and oil booming. Turning away from southern history and making it a western reality. The editors of this book argue that race, gender, and class play a huge role in the economic and social systems.

Roberts and Olson try and relate what each group is feeling, thinking, and what drove them to the extremes that were executed. It is hard to tell an author bias because so many different versions of an event were made available to the reader for consideration. It seems, however, there is an overall “tilt” toward Texas and its defenders, though the portrait of Sam Houston was, at times, harsh.

Because of this, Mexico has thrusted war upon us. We believe what James K. Polk said, “The constitution, public treaties and the laws oblige the President to regard Texas as an independent state, and its territory

After the fall of the Alamo, Sam was faced with an ethical

Everyone knows what the Alamo is and most know the story of it, how the Texans, led by William Travis, James Bowie, and Davie Crocket, had to try and fend off the Mexican soldiers led by Santa Anna. Being outnumbered all the Texans rebels had to fight for was for the pride of Texas and that is what they did and from that some famous myths about certain things were created during the fight like Travis’s line in the sand or Davie Crockets willingness to fight to the death. Randy Roberts and James S. Olson are able to relate the well-known story of the Alamo to the readers and really get into both the Mexican and American perspectives. In “A Line in the Sand the Alamo in Blood and Memory”, Roberts and Olson are able to separate what really happened

A Fight For Power “Death to the bad government! Death to the gachupines [Peninsulares]!” (doc E). Father Miguel Hidalgo, a priest from the Mexican revolution, shouts these words as he fights for his independence. The Spanish conquest in the Americas slowly started to break apart between 1810 and 1826 as the colonies were tired of Spain’s arbitrary ruling.

"He always addressed Indians as though they were children, irrespective of their age, education, or intellectual maturity. " When negotiating, Jackson would often use bribery or the threat of violence if his demands were rejected. It’s this kind of cruelty that makes people think of him as a relentless enemy of Indians. Remini follows Jackson into Tennessee where he develops into "a bold and resourceful Indian fighter, thirsting for encounters with savages.”

The words Ehrenberg used such as “racist” heart and violent imagery were deleted in Churchills speech in order for students and educators to use the book in class. All of the Angelo -Texan racist comments from Ehrenberg memoir were deleted from Churchills translation. Crisps provides a great understanding how a simple text can be very misleading from the original source. Crisps discusses the diary of Jose Enrique de la Pena a Mexican officer who entered Texas with Santa Anna. The diary contained two different versions one about the daily records

“In exchange for his freedom, Santa Anna signed a treaty recognizing Texas’ independence” (Battle of San Jacinto, 2015). General Houston and his army were heavly inspired for victory following the massacres at the Alamo and Goliad. Santa Anna lost the Battle of San Jacinto due his previous viciousness, arrogance, and misuse of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) assets effectively. Had Santa Anna not made these mistakes, the Battle of San Jacinto would have turned out differently and Texas may have not won its independence from Mexico (Wright, n.d.). Introduction

In the novel Insurgent Mexico, John Reed travels south of the border to experience the Mexican Revolution first hand while traveling in the year 1914. Reed was a journalist writing for Metropolitan and was ordered to bring back his work to publish in the United States. During this time Reed travelled to many places and met all different types of people from war generals, to peones, to Indians and many others. Reed has described his time in Mexico as the “most satisfactory period” in his life (Publisher’s Note), and it can be reflected through the stories he shares in Insurgent Mexico about his traveling companions and his experiences. Some moments were very serious, and at times even dangerous, while others were light hearted and amusing for

The words seemed so unlike Houston.” Crisp believed that this speech he heard in its entirety in 1992 to be nothing like the man he grew up learning about in history as a child. He quotes Eugene C. Barker when questioning if the Revolution is the product of racial and political inheritances of the two sides, yet goes on to say this is not what he believes despite what others think. “It seemed to me that conflict between the two groups was not as much an immediate cause as it was an eventual consequence of Texas’s separation from Mexico.” (p. 41)

In Sleuthing The Alamo, James E. Crisp investigates Sam Houston’s speech made to the soldiers at Refugio. Upon reading the speech, Crisp was in disbelieve at the vulgar, anti-Mexican words used by Houston while addressing the men of Refugio. What Crisp read had contradicted everything he had known of Sam Houston, and led him to dig deeper into the sources to find the facts. Crisp is able to restore Sam Houston’s honor by recognizing the disconnection in his speech, heavily researching the sources, and disproving Houston’s speech. Along the way, Crisp makes two discoveries that help lead to solving his case.

In order to write this book, the author clearly uses different manuscripts and papers that helped him to explain and show the situation of this social movement. He also uses and gets information from people that were living those situations, for instance in Chapter one, he mentions a note from Journalist Ruiz Ibañez: “Contrary to the common belief that those groups are composed of “punks” and hoodlums….”1. Related to him, he is an American historian and sociology that obtained his sociology and political science degrees in the University of Texas at Austin and Yale University, as well. Currently, he is a professor of Ethnic Studies at the University of California, Berkeley and he is president of the Center for Latino Policy Research. He wrote not only Quixote’s Soldiers but also, Anglos and Mexicans in the Making of Texas, 1836-1986.

For this week I decided to write a summary of chapter 11: Anglo-Saxons and Mexicans. The new political ideologies were created between 1830 to the 1840s. These new ideas were influenced by pride and obvious racism. These beliefs inspired the idea that American Anglo-Saxons were the dominant force and that they should be the ones to shape the destiny of others. The idea of the American Anglo-Saxon race was influenced by the American Mexican war.

Although the United States war against Mexico resulted in the gaining of America’s most valuable land, the war itself wasn’t legitimate because of the revolution in Texas, motivation for superiority, and the U.S. government’s actions. To begin, the Texans began an unreasonable war because they didn’t follow Mexico’s laws and conditions. When Mexico started selling cheap land, they set conditions for the people moving in. The people had to convert to Catholicism, learn Spanish, become a Mexican citizen, and have no slaves. Many Americans didn’t like being told what to do, and disobeyed the rules and laws.