A Different Alamo, A Different Texas

[mikegold]

What happens if the Texians win the Siege of the Alamo?

Specifically, Fannin, or someone replacing him, does not dawdle and marches his forces to the Alamo, which holds out until Houston can arrive with his large volunteer army. (Does this POD work? How long can the Alamo hold out with more defenders?)

Alternatively, precisely the opposite POD: abandoning the Alamo. Bowie does not get sick and prevails in his struggle with Travis for command. Bowie leads an "active defense" of the Alamo, commanding night raids that throw off the Mexican army. After one such raid, the Texians retreat east, meeting up with Fannin's and then Houston's men and eventually turning on Santa Anna, winning a *San Jacinto* like victory at the Brazos.

Alright, here's my question. What is Texas like without the martyrs of the Alamo and Goliad? This Texas Revolution has one big battle, and its a *San Jacinto* - an overwhelming victory. Is Texas identity stronger without this defeat, or weaker without this symbol? (I tend toward the latter).

Also, I imagine that the US and European powers take Mexico less seriously in such a scenario. OTL, 1836 featured a severe defeat following a series of victories. Here, Mexico badly looses its first battle with an "American" army - and a hastily assembled volunteer army at that. Could the US, still under a very pro-Texas Jackson, push for a faster annexation?

Secondly, what are Texas politics like, with Crockett, Bowie, Travis, Bonham, and Fannin still alive (in addition to Houston and, for a short while, Austin)? Is there even room for Lamar, or does one of these others take his place as the Nationalist leader? Alternatively, is the annexationist movement even stronger? I imagine that Crockett, for one, would be a strong annexationist, but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

 

[dgharis]

What happens if the Texians win the Siege of the Alamo?

Specifically, Fannin, or someone replacing him, does not dawdle and marches his forces to the Alamo, which holds out until Houston can arrive with his large volunteer army. (Does this POD work? How long can the Alamo hold out with more defenders?)

Alternatively, precisely the opposite POD: abandoning the Alamo. Bowie does not get sick and prevails in his struggle with Travis for command. Bowie leads an "active defense" of the Alamo, commanding night raids that throw off the Mexican army. After one such raid, the Texians retreat east, meeting up with Fannin's and then Houston's men and eventually turning on Santa Anna, winning a *San Jacinto* like victory at the Brazos.

Alright, here's my question. What is Texas like without the martyrs of the Alamo and Goliad? This Texas Revolution has one big battle, and its a *San Jacinto* - an overwhelming victory. Is Texas identity stronger without this defeat, or weaker without this symbol? (I tend toward the latter).

Also, I imagine that the US and European powers take Mexico less seriously in such a scenario. OTL, 1836 featured a severe defeat following a series of victories. Here, Mexico badly looses its first battle with an "American" army - and a hastily assembled volunteer army at that. Could the US, still under a very pro-Texas Jackson, push for a faster annexation?

Secondly, what are Texas politics like, with Crockett, Bowie, Travis, Bonham, and Fannin still alive (in addition to Houston and, for a short while, Austin)? Is there even room for Lamar, or does one of these others take his place as the Nationalist leader? Alternatively, is the annexationist movement even stronger? I imagine that Crockett, for one, would be a strong annexationist, but I'm willing to be proved wrong.

Possibility #1: Fannin reinforces Travis, Bowie, et al at the Alamo. With a proper garrison (nearly 500 men) the Alamo can hold out against a direct assault. A seige is a different matter; the defenders ran short of provisions as it was and even raided the Mexican army's supplies at one point to replenish their own. Santa Ana can simply starve them out; he can well afford to leave a thousand men or so to keep the defenders bottled up while the remainder of his forces deal with the main Texian army. Within a couple of weeks the defenders would have eaten everything edible inside the Alamo and would either have to attempt a breakout or surrender.

The result would be similar to OTL, except the defenders would have bought an extra two weeks or so for Houston. Whether that would be enough is questionable, given Mexican numerical superiority.

Possibility #2: Travis listens to Bowie and abandons the Alamo, links up with Fannin's force, and both withdraw, eventually linking up with Houston. The addition of their forces gives Houston roughly 1400 men, which may be enough to fight Santa Ana to a draw. (Santa Ana has upwards of 2500 men available, so a Texian victory is unlikely. IOTL their victory at San Jacinto was primarily due to Mexican stupidity.)

In either case Austin and Houston are still the main actors; Travis, Fannin, Bowie, and company are decidedly secondary. Their survival is unlikely to change Texian politics to any great extent.

 

[mikegold]

Possibility #1: Fannin reinforces Travis, Bowie, et al at the Alamo. With a proper garrison (nearly 500 men) the Alamo can hold out against a direct assault. A seige is a different matter; the defenders ran short of provisions as it was and even raided the Mexican army's supplies at one point to replenish their own. Santa Ana can simply starve them out; he can well afford to leave a thousand men or so to keep the defenders bottled up while the remainder of his forces deal with the main Texian army. Within a couple of weeks the defenders would have eaten everything edible inside the Alamo and would either have to attempt a breakout or surrender.

The result would be similar to OTL, except the defenders would have bought an extra two weeks or so for Houston. Whether that would be enough is questionable, given Mexican numerical superiority.

Possibility #2: Travis listens to Bowie and abandons the Alamo, links up with Fannin's force, and both withdraw, eventually linking up with Houston. The addition of their forces gives Houston roughly 1400 men, which may be enough to fight Santa Ana to a draw. (Santa Ana has upwards of 2500 men available, so a Texian victory is unlikely. IOTL their victory at San Jacinto was primarily due to Mexican stupidity.)

In either case Austin and Houston are still the main actors; Travis, Fannin, Bowie, and company are decidedly secondary. Their survival is unlikely to change Texian politics to any great extent.

Maybe, but Austin isn't long for this world. And Crockett, in particular, was a legend in his own time. I can't see him quietly fading away.

 

[Jasen777]

The most probable outcome is that Mexican forces smash Fannin before he gets to the Alamo.

In the unlikely event that Fannin sneaks/fights his way into the Alamo, that's not going to help much once Mexico brings the large cannons to bare. The Alamo holds out 2 to 3 more days.

 

[Dave Howery]

Houston won't be marching to the aid of the Alamo... he specifically ordered that it be rendered useless, and it's equipment sent to Goliad. He knew full well he couldn't stand up to the main Mexican army, and he pulled back from Santa Anna's approach over and over, until he felt he was ready to risk a battle (and then, he succeeded mainly because SA didn't listen to his high priced generals and split up the force he had). Also, Bowie won't have any affect on Texan politics, because he was already dying at the time of the Alamo (no one is quite sure just of what, but he grew steadily worse during the siege, became incoherent at the end, and was likely killed as he lay senseless in his bed). Crockett, though, will be a big contender for political office...