In 1836 less than two-hundred men were besieged in a Spanish Missionary building near present-day San Antonio known as the Alamo. Those inside the walls of the Alamo faced the insurmountable task of fending off more than 1,500 Mexican soldiers whose numbers grew with each day of unrest. Knowing the disparity of the situation, William Barret Travis wrote a letter begging for reinforcements and stating that the only two outcomes were “victory or death.” Just a couple days after the letter was delivered, Travis and everyone in the Alamo were killed. The remaining Texas Army became inspired, attacking the weakened Mexicans. Soon after that, Travis’s final wish was fulfilled as the Mexican Army surrendered at San Jacinto to the Texas Revolutionaries.
…show more content…
The Mexican government was running low on money and the profit from the land grants would provide enough support to remain in control of the country. The only contingency that affected the immigrant families is that they were required to learn Spanish and the cultural aspects of Mexico. It seems both the Mexican government and the American colonists were receiving good terms with this agreement; so why did the attempt by the Mexican government to assimilate new American immigrants, now called Texans, fail? The significance of this question is that it pits the actions of the government against the demands of the people, a common motif through history. Americans who moved to Mexico for cheap land became politically connected and fought for democratic notions just after Mexico gained independence. The heavy democratic influence led to Texas becoming, first, it's own nation, and then receiving statehood from the United States. The naive actions of the Mexican government ultimately led to the revolution that disconnected over one third of the country. By allowing Americans to purchase cheap land, the population shifted and unequal representation in the government created conflict between …show more content…
The Texas Revolution was much more than a battle between two groups. It was a conflict of American pride and belief over Mexican nationalism. The Mexican government declined to give the American immigrants rights and did not believe that the immigrants could retaliate. Mexico was a relatively new nation with few resources and limited ability to keep the land which Texas occupied. The American immigrants felt it was their duty to protect the very principles on which the United States was founded. The ethnic makeup of those fighting for independence was primarily American middle- and lower-class who believed and fought for the American concepts of democracy and equal representation. However, it was not just the American immigrants who were fighting against the Mexicans. There were also many indigenous peoples who received no rights that fought alongside the Texans for independence. The Mexican government’s continual rejection of rights and representation for indigenous people and immigrants began a rebellion. The government failed because they valued the wealthy over the working-class, and the Mexican over the immigrant, instead of providing representation for the entire population. About a decade earlier, the Mexican revolutionaries incorporated the same ideology that caused the French Revolution. However, despite popular belief, it was not the working-class citizens who brought the ideas of revolution. Instead, it was
The Mexican government was running low on money and the profit from the land grants would provide enough support to remain in control of the country. The only contingency that affected the immigrant families is that they were required to learn Spanish and the cultural aspects of Mexico. It seems both the Mexican government and the American colonists were receiving good terms with this agreement; so why did the attempt by the Mexican government to assimilate new American immigrants, now called Texans, fail? The significance of this question is that it pits the actions of the government against the demands of the people, a common motif through history. Americans who moved to Mexico for cheap land became politically connected and fought for democratic notions just after Mexico gained independence. The heavy democratic influence led to Texas becoming, first, it's own nation, and then receiving statehood from the United States. The naive actions of the Mexican government ultimately led to the revolution that disconnected over one third of the country. By allowing Americans to purchase cheap land, the population shifted and unequal representation in the government created conflict between …show more content…
The Texas Revolution was much more than a battle between two groups. It was a conflict of American pride and belief over Mexican nationalism. The Mexican government declined to give the American immigrants rights and did not believe that the immigrants could retaliate. Mexico was a relatively new nation with few resources and limited ability to keep the land which Texas occupied. The American immigrants felt it was their duty to protect the very principles on which the United States was founded. The ethnic makeup of those fighting for independence was primarily American middle- and lower-class who believed and fought for the American concepts of democracy and equal representation. However, it was not just the American immigrants who were fighting against the Mexicans. There were also many indigenous peoples who received no rights that fought alongside the Texans for independence. The Mexican government’s continual rejection of rights and representation for indigenous people and immigrants began a rebellion. The government failed because they valued the wealthy over the working-class, and the Mexican over the immigrant, instead of providing representation for the entire population. About a decade earlier, the Mexican revolutionaries incorporated the same ideology that caused the French Revolution. However, despite popular belief, it was not the working-class citizens who brought the ideas of revolution. Instead, it was