Preface: Tres, my grandson, expressed an interest in the Alamo before he was very old. Kernie found an Alamo fort with soldiers to match and that was his go-to toy when at our home for years. Many soldiers were added: Japanese, American, British, German (all WWII vintage) , not to mention cowboys and Indians. They all joined in the fight in front of the Alamo. I could relate this. I had the same obsession as a child. I threw in a Robbin Hood set of figures—knights and archers. Tres invited me to battle one day; we divided the soldiers, set them up and when the battle started, he started making gun noises and knocking my soldiers down. I followed suit. “Wait a minute,” he said. “You can’t kill my guys.” I was dumbfounded. “You mean you get to kill my guys and I can’t kill your guys?” I asked. “Yes,” was his reply. Tres was probably four years old. This was an important grandfather moment. “Well, Tres, that is not how war works,” and I proceeded as before. He called the battle off asking for a truce. We agreed to negotiate a peaceful end to the battle of the Alamo and we never repeated that battle again. I would sing an old Kingston Trio song celebrating the real Alamo: “A hundred and eighty were challenged by Travis, to Diiiiieeeeeeee……Ahhhh Santa Ana were killin’ your soldiers below, so the rest of Texas will know, remember the Alamo , remember the Alamo, Remember the Alamo………”
My grandson Tres and I joined Kernie for a bike ride today. I learned that this thirteen year old needs a pair of my biking shoes to avoid pinched feet. We rode 16 miles through mostly tree lined bike paths. When on the streets, despite my promise to demonstrate through action, responsible biking habits, I performed a few short cuts without thinking.
I am not proud.
We survived.
Tres and I share a love of military history and of antiquity. In his case, he relies on modern books of mythology as well as modern cinema. So we have a problem. We dissected the movie Troy for not sticking to the script. I remember moaning in disgust when Menelous was killed. If you read the Odyssey, which occurs after Troy, the narrative finds Telemachus, the son of Odysseus visiting Menelaus and Helen in Sparta years after the war. Tres caught that; it was OK in that the battle scenes in the movie were pretty cool. I ask about Spartacus and Ben Hur. Nope. He watched Gladiator after our bike ride and froze a scene that was fascinating in that a chariot on its side in a fast paced sequence, once frozen, demonstrated in the wink of an eye, an oxygen cylinder within the chariot. While Gladiator is a good movie, relying on it for your history is not recommended. On our bike ride, he mentioned the movie 300. I gagged. I told him that movie was a comic book and did not do the history justice. The image of Xerxes as an effeminate pierced, bald monster was ridiculous.
Tres then wanted to discuss the battle and the tactics. He wondered why the shield formation (not exactly a testudo, mind you) to ward off arrows couldn’t have been used indefinitely. I mentioned, by that final scene, they knew that the Persians had flanked them and were coming from behind; it just was not feasible for the formation to stand up to that—it was intended for when you had your flanks and rear protected which was originally the point of choosing that site. He understood that.
We then discussed how the Greeks had a counter for the strengths of the Persian army. The Persians had more cavalry—the Greeks had long spears—and mountains. The Persians had many archers; the Greeks had heavy shields. I mentioned that the Hoplites were more heavily armored than Persian. The formations used were clearly important, we both agreed. I brought up that the Greeks would choose battle sites that made the calvary of the Persians sub optimal. I asked if he knew about Salamis. He did. Did he know of Platea? He did not.
I had to ask: “While we think what those Spartans did was glorious, did it matter as a strategy? The intention was to delay the Persians and give the home forces a chance to organize and defend. The delay was minor—three days of battle and seven overall— the Spartans died and before long, Athens was sacked. The unexpected naval victory at Salamis put the Persians on the defensive. If you read a history of that war from the Persian side, it might go like this: “We encountered a small holding force at a narrow pass and the enemy was totally destroyed after three days. We killed an important king in that battle! We proceeded and then sacked Athens and much of Attica.” In other words, it would sound like a minor action of no consequence. It took much longer for the Greeks to unite enough to take on the army of the Persians who without their fleet were less mobile and less supplied. Platea saw their defeat after a large part of the original army had gone home.
Tres thought the delay was worthwhile. Other than the psychological point of that delay and the image of a last stand, which had unquantifiable value, I pushed on this. A significant number of Greek soldiers left Thermopylae and fought another day; the small rear guard of Spartans among others fought the final battler. “I think Texans think of the Alamo the way we think of the Greeks at Thermopylae. It was a glorious sacrifice associated with a larger conflict. Did the Texans really need the time that the siege at the Alamo gave them to organize an army with all the Americans who wanted a revolution?” Tres liked this question. “A difference here, is that no soldiers were sent back at the Alamo to escape to fight another day. They all stayed and died, basically.
The prime difference for Tres was the scale of violence given the more modern weapons. He seemed to assume that the battle of the Alamo had many more casualties. I countered with the casualties reported in the Greek histories (which can’t be taken at face value) but were very very high—likely more than the size of Santa Ana’s army. I pointed out that the notion that the Greeks killed tens of thousands of Persians does not make logistical sense on that battle field. “Can we accept that as defenders, their losses were large but dramatically less than reported?”
"How about 100 to 1,”he asks.
Not likely, I think. I move on—“You remember the arrows blotting out the sun. I think that sounds more formidable that muzzle loaded rifles by the hundreds. The Mexican infantry had rifles, swords, and pikes. Their calvary used sabres and lances. The Texans had rifles and a few cannons. No one is too clear about the Mexican casualties that battle.” Again “I wonder if the time actually made a difference at San Jacinto, the next battle in the war of Texan independence. Maybe it would have been better to have those Alamo guys at that battle.” Tres wants to believe they made a difference so I give it to him. “You know, Texas was part of Mexico and the Mexican army showed up to put down a rebellion. It was an army—organized as an army and capable. The Texans had a lot of individuals, some with military experience but making an army out of volunteers is no small thing no matter how brave they are or how good a shot they might be. George Washington got his comeuppance on this point at the Battle of Brooklyn Heights—he praised his troops as citizen soldiers fighting for their homes and they would beat foreign mercenaries. Those mercenaries were well trained and organized and kicked major ass that day! George Washington had to get out of Dodge fast! He figured out that he needed to organize an army to function as an army if he was going to keep fighting the British Empire. And the rest, Tres, is history. So I don’t know if the two weeks or so let Sam Houston hammer out an army that functioned well or if all would have fallen into place regardless.”
“I think a difference between the Texans and the Greeks is what they got when they won,” said Tres.
“I agree. Who do you think got the best deal?”
Tres replies, “I think the Greeks; they got to keep their homes and freedom.”
I wrestled with the question. “You know, the Greeks were fighting for their homes in their country and in winning, they got to keep what they already had. It would stimulate them to think larger about themselves and what they could accomplish. It opened the door for Alexander the Great’s imagination and the conquering of Persia. The Texans? They not only got to keep their homes, they got to keep their slaves which had been illegal in Mexico and take about 20% of the land that was Mexico for themselves. I think the Texans got the better deal at the end of the war.”
Tres’ heart remains with the Greeks and their legacy.
I am cool with that. Their ancestors would conquer Persia in spectacular fashion—-and like us modern Americans, leave the area. The Texas Republic would be on the verge of bankruptcy within a decade or so and escaped that problem by joining the United States, setting up the Mexican American War where more than half of Mexico’s land area would become that of the United States.
Comments