This monument is dedicated to the "Niños Héroes" (Boy Heroes) - six teenage military cadets, who died defending the castle at Chapultepec in 1847.
Posted on 01/07/2017 9:09:12 AM PST by lqcincinnatus
"Commandancy of the Alamo Bejar, Feby. 24, 1836
To the People of Texas & All Americans in the World
Fellow citizens & compatriots"
There’s a sincere reason to feel optimistic about what the future might hold for Alamo Plaza. But red flags are also up. This is a critical juncture where broad strokes become all-important details. Texans know the world is watching intently.
We sense the waning of that boldness as one enters Alamo Plaza and embarks on the historic footprint. It feels as though 1836 is about to become a mere portal and not the primary focus of the reimagining of the Alamo. Are we trying to be all things to all people?
If so, this goes completely against the consistent mandates that created the project despite what lead planner George Skarmeas acknowledged: The 1836 battle is a “global event.”
Many have long advocated that this structure should be considered for a complete reconstruction. Although Skarmeas has declared such a thing is a discredited practice in preservation, we find the opposite is true. How do the planners envision this key location? The final answer to that question has huge ramifications and shouldn’t be taken lightly.
http://thealamo.org/
(Excerpt) Read more at mysanantonio.com ...
https://www.state.gov/p/io/unesco/
Ping
Wish it were possible to reconstruct the entire fort and La Villita. The city has encroached on it even since I was a kid there.
The Alamo was an American event, in English, and Spanish as spoken by several of the individuals who died therein, including Jim Bowie.
It wasn’t, “global”.
Get the UN the hell out of my country!
And go home to mama, George P.
Really. Don't waste your time. Read the book instead. It's much more inspiring.
This was some years ago, but when the wife and I entered the Alamo, we had the impression of entering a church - or hallowed ground.
I particularly liked the sign over the entrance: "Gentlemen, remove your hats, for brave men have died here."
The early 70’s is when I paid My respects at The Alamo,,,
“The Alamo is one of the least impressive historical sites I’ve ever visited. There’s very little left of the original compound, and I didn’t get any sense of the historical context of the place.”
I felt the same, but that was in the ‘60s, I was a kid, and had just seen the movie. Very disappointing. Reading the two posts following yours makes me want to revisit.
Spain has such a site in Toledo (the Alcazar fortress, which I believe was used as a military academy), where a small army garrison (with their families, cadets. and others seeking sanctuary from the communists) held out for months surrounded by communists. They took some losses but held out long enough for Franco to relieve them/break the siege. Franco was advised them relieving them might prolong the war (by delaying the attack on Madrid), but he felt it was important 1) because he had promised them he would, and 2) he felt it was important to show the communists that when the army put its mind to something it could accomplish it regardless of the resistance (which proved true).
A Red (communist) priest visited the garrison to unsuccessfully induce them to surrender, and while he was there the commander asked him to offer a Mass - the only one during the siege. Afterwards a sign was placed there, along the lines of: “In this room our Lord visited our heroes”.
I think expecting historical sites to be “impressive” misses the point. Battle fields are sacred ground. Jazzing them up to appeal to jaded modern ideas seems to me to cheapen the history of the place. To walk into the Alamo or walk the fields of Shiloh is a spiritual moment that does not need bells and whistles.
The “Alamo” building that still exists is the mission’s Church/Chapel, thus still considered consecrated ground. All of the buildings and walls that composed the original mission/fort were torn down long ago. I’ve read that the Alamo that John Wayne built west of San Antonio at Bracketville, TX, still exists but has been abandoned/closed as a tourist site: http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/texas-movie-set-john-wayne-fading-article-1.2057061
1830-36 Alamo ground plan: http://digital.library.shsu.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p243coll3/id/2316
Alamo sanctuary ground plan: http://www.tamu.edu/faculty/ccbn/dewitt/adp/history/mission_period/valero/alamo_plans1.html
I don’t mean to diminish the significance of the events that transpired at the Alamo, or the courage of the men who fought and died there. I just mean that the place itself was completely underwhelming. I don’t know if it was because it is surrounded by urban blandness, or if it’s just so decayed as to be unrecognizable, or if my expectations exceeded the reality. But while I find the story an object lesson in grit, the artifact is little more than a bus stop.
The “Shrine” is no longer to be referred to by that name. It is to be referred to as a church. The planners both with the state of Texas and elsewhere want to remove all “religious” references from the site. Actually, the Catholic monks were there as community organizers.
This monument is dedicated to the "Niños Héroes" (Boy Heroes) - six teenage military cadets, who died defending the castle at Chapultepec in 1847.
Nice; a great (and sad) story!
visited that site at bracketville back in the early ‘70s and found it much more impressive than the original
What would you expect from the half-Mexican George Bush?
Monks were spreading the Christian faith, NOT organizing a community group of folks demanding benefits from the government. Sigh
Please help me with this info...Didn’t the Texicans leave the original battle two days before the final demise of the Alamo?
I visited the Alamo and thought the physical buildings are under decay and needs to be property conserved. Isn’t the obelisk or column nearby properly maintained.
Also the location of the rivers nearby to originally part of the complex in the adjacent historical building.
Thanks for info.
I do not know. There is Tthis movie on youtube about the ‘true history’ of the Alamo, which is nearly 2 hours long and decently done. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oueKEtP1pl8
I was expecting it to be ‘revisionist’ but it was not. It did point out that many Tejanos, Mexican-Texans were in the fight on the Texican (anglo) side. It states that only multiple riders were sent out requesting reinforcements and that 1 man left after the ‘line in the sand.’
It further states that 32 men from Goliad arrived before the seige lines around the Alamo were fully closed. Those men put the total force up to about 250 defenders, an unknown number of wives and children also survived. Santa Anna ordered all of the men killed, no quarter. The memorial has a list of 189 known names of defenders, but the show indicated that another 50-60 men’s names are unknown.
The show stated that there is a report that 40-60 men escaped at the end of the attack, which was done about 4am and thus the battle was in the dark. The Mexican cavalry killed these men outside of the fort.
That video also provides two different accounts that Davy Crockett and a half-dozen others were captured alive but executed per the orders of Santa Anna.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.