3 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
4 жыл бұрын
Пікірлер
@vale6513 19 күн бұрын
My ancestors...Ybarbo, de la Cerda, Chireno
@texaskidzuk 29 күн бұрын
I've told my Georgia friends this, but they think I'm just a bragging Texan. It ain't bragging if you've done it.
@Jubilo1 3 ай бұрын
YOung Dr. F.- superb.
@johnadams5489 3 ай бұрын
That Mexican that showed up dressed in a Mexican Uniform is obviously still upset with that FACT that the United States won the Mexican War, which Mexico STARTED. They US Conquered Mexico and COULD have taken the entire country, but did not. In addition. the US Government PAID Mexico 15 million dollars for the land it had already captured. This is an OLD Story and Mexico is now invading US.
@Trolleyatthestation Ай бұрын
Polk provoked Mexico. The Mexicans did what anybody else that was getting invaded would because they knew the silly games that were being played on them. Then when Polk didn't get his way he played victim and waged an illegal war that eventually led the US into a civil war. What goes round really does come around.
@cherrera1010 3 ай бұрын
Liberals= Masons= Luciferians
@mikeclark1830 4 ай бұрын
Thanks for the info! I really enjoyed your presentation!!
@hillaryduff5398 5 ай бұрын
The first Texas constitution established slavery. One of the first laws was to expel all free Blacks from Texas. The Texas revolution was all about slavery.
@RichardSmith-gl6kj 8 ай бұрын
Has Dr Hardin ever once stood his ground against an overwhelming force - or even stood over looking any enemy force where his life may end on that day? The answer is an obvious NO!! 189 men stood their ground against some 3,000 knowing that death was eminent, yet they fought to the last man killing at least 600 Mexicans. Hardin is filled with bluster and a disdain for the military because he himself is a coward who never served. As for the line in the sand - It was drawn the moment these men entered the Alamo. Why is it that so many liberals make it their just cause to destroy things like honor and loyalty? because they have none of their own....
@talos2373 8 ай бұрын
So there was historically speaking a time when a KING was acknowledged to have ruled here. COTTON?
@Mutifidus 8 ай бұрын
The rapid development of technology combined with the avarice surely contributed to the continuation of slavery. 1786 steam power is invented and the cotton gin in 1793. These inventions made the large scale production of cotton cloth possible. Governments were attempting to eliminate slavery. England abolished the importation of slaves in 1807 and America in 1808. Money, however, trumped morality for a time though. Neither the Alamo nor the War Between the States were inevitable. I recently visited the Alamo. Slavery and Mexican sovereignty are not themes presented there. Yes, the victorious often write history.
@hopecardonagutierrez4619 9 ай бұрын
A great learn and experience.. ya'll come out!
@JesusRoblesMaloof 10 ай бұрын
Also why don't talk about Lorenzo de Zavala?
@cherrera1010 3 ай бұрын
Because they will open a can of worms!😂😂😂
@JesusRoblesMaloof 10 ай бұрын
Great lecture but Why wait until Q&A to talk about slavery?
@coahuiltejano 10 ай бұрын
unbearable. This guy is trying way too hard....
@ricardozamudio2985 11 ай бұрын
Un "liberal" que ayudo a crear un República con Esclavistas, además, fue falso que hubiera un dictadura: el congreso emitió un decreto y siguió existiendo, solo se cambió la forma de administrar el país. El señor, que no era precisamente una "blanca paloma" seguramente buscaba fusionar ese nuevo país a EEUU, para adquirir la nacionalidad y seguir haciendo carrera política en USA, ya que en México estaba muy desprestigiado.
@kenkaplan3654 11 ай бұрын
This is an excerptional talk in using the Alamo to explore how myth, legend and imagination , how we interpret events, often are more mportant than the facts of the event itself. My only concern is the lack of mention of slavery as part of the function of that event.
@kenkaplan3654 11 ай бұрын
To try to diminish slavery as a significant and crucial driving aspect for Texian Independence is willful blindness. Was it the only factor? No.Was it central? Yes. Just look at the number of slaves that flooded Texas after independence. There is a forest and there are trees. Austin's constant behavior is telling. What was part and parcel of "Texas general defiance attitude" .A ream of data and the Texas Constitution which is incredibly extensive abiout slavery, says otherwise. The beliefs of a part of the garrison does not tell the entire story. Individual soldiers in Vietnam may not have fought for American imperial or anti Communist reasons in a war for naional independence by the Vietnamese, but those who shaped the policies and those who profited from it did. The stated aims of policy makers often leave great truths unsaid.
@davidstanford9933 9 ай бұрын
Except it can’t even be a central reason because it’s not even mentioned in the Declaration of Independence for the Republic of Texas. It list tons and tons of reasons having nothing to do with slavery
@kenkaplan3654 9 ай бұрын
@@davidstanford9933 Do you seriously think this document would emphasize slavery. (It dos say "property"). Read the Texas Republic Constitution. It says quite a bit and is very explicit about slavery.
@kenkaplan3654 9 ай бұрын
@@davidstanford9933 By the time the got to secession in 1861it's all over the place 'She was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time. Her institutions and geographical position established the strongest ties between her and other slave-holding States of the confederacy. Those ties have been strengthened by association. But what has been the course of the government of the United States, and of the people and authorities of the non-slave-holding States, since our connection with them? The controlling majority of the Federal Government, under various pretences and disguises, has so administered the same as to exclude the citizens of the Southern States, unless under odious and unconstitutional restrictions, from all the immense territory owned in common by all the States on the Pacific Ocean, for the avowed purpose of acquiring sufficient power in the common government to use it as a means of destroying the institutions of Texas and her sister **slave-holding States.* *.... For years past this abolition organization has been actively sowing the seeds of discord through the Union, and has rendered the federal congress the arena for spreading firebrands and hatred between the slave-holding and non-slave-holding States. By consolidating their strength, they have placed the slave-holding States in a hopeless minority in the federal congress, and rendered representation of no avail in protecting Southern rights against their exactions and encroachments. They have proclaimed, and at the ballot box sustained, the revolutionary doctrine that there is a "higher law" than the constitution and laws of our Federal Union, and virtually that they will disregard their oaths and trample upon our rights. There s more. Enough.
@davidstanford9933 9 ай бұрын
@@kenkaplan3654 but that being on the constitution is not the same thing as being the cause of the revolution. And why wouldn’t it mention slavery if it was a central cause? This is just moving the goal post
@kenkaplan3654 9 ай бұрын
@@davidstanford9933 It was not the only cause, but a highly significant cause. Do you really think a document about " freedom", "liberty" and "independence" is going to feature slavery? Come to the Constitution, the nuts and bolts, and it's bedrock solid in there. The American situation is the same. an incredibly high minded Declaration. "ALL men are created equal. ALL deserve life, liberty and pursuit of happiness." Not really. Slaves and women did not qualify. Come to the Constitution and slavery is ingrained. in the 3/5 clause and the second amendment as well as inherently everywhere. The Bill of Rights did not apply to slaves. It took an incredibly bloody war to *start* to get that stuff out. It's still there.
@yoelyancypompa-ramon3844 11 ай бұрын
MY 7 GREAT GRAND FATHER TOMAS SANCHEZ (FOUNDER OF LAREDO)AND MY 8 GREAT GRAND FATHER JOSE VASQUEZ BORREGO FOUNDER OF : San Juan de Casta, Las Encinas, El Borrego, Las Sardinas, Hacienda San Juan del Alamo, San Ygnacio, Corralitos, Hacienda del Rosario and Nuestra Senora de los Dolores
@kalebnbrown Жыл бұрын
Amazing talk!
@JimWill-bx9de Жыл бұрын
Let me say this, you keep pushing people to the point where people go rise
@JimWill-bx9de Жыл бұрын
😢😢😢😢
@HarvestReapersComm Жыл бұрын
Dr. Conrad was my professor and this video demonstrates his scholarship, contribution to Native American studies, and his influence on several fields. As I watched this video, I learned several components about Native American, Texas history, and U.S. history! Dr. Conrad did an outstanding job!
@miguelagonzalez7332 Жыл бұрын
This guy knows very well that slot of what he says is not true. Juan Seguin was turned on against by the traitor Texans and forced to go back to the country he had fought against. He is full of shit.
@mkl62 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for posting.
@Jubel06 Жыл бұрын
Why not call Joe Travis a slave? It's not like he was there for the pay...
@javierramirez744 Жыл бұрын
Should see the video history of the Texas rangers
@davidgarcia-jk6nt Жыл бұрын
Need to clear why USA excluded ownership of Mexican American owned land. Results of treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo promised they could keep
@davidgarcia-jk6nt Жыл бұрын
Very informative all Mexican Americans need to know this.
@haroldharwell7078 Жыл бұрын
Typical for thems , hide & wait to runaway.
@Ralphie5023 Жыл бұрын
Too bad JOE didn't have the brains to snuff out Travis during the fighting at the Alamo !
@Ralphie5023 Жыл бұрын
Fighting for " liberty " while owning a slave ? That sounds about right ?
@ferdinandsiegel8967 Жыл бұрын
Sam Houston didn't do it for Texas. A traitor before Texas becomes a country.
@ferdinandsiegel8967 Жыл бұрын
The typical down play of whites in Texas.
@ferdinandsiegel8967 Жыл бұрын
What about Navarro?
@ferdinandsiegel8967 Жыл бұрын
Mexico wanted immigrants from the USA because they couldn't get Mexicans to settle Texas because of the indians like the Comanche, Apache, Karankawa and others.
@ferdinandsiegel8967 Жыл бұрын
A Texan is somebody born in Texas.
@ferdinandsiegel8967 Жыл бұрын
The Americans helped Mexico win it's independence from Spain.
@ferdinandsiegel8967 Жыл бұрын
Cattle originally from Europe.
@cherrera1010 3 ай бұрын
Were in Europe?
@woof3598 Жыл бұрын
just picked up the " Texas Illiad " any thought on this book ?
@stewiegriffin12341 Жыл бұрын
Oh my god this guy was my US history professor. He was one of the best teachers I've ever had. So glad to have found this; it's like I get to be back in his class again.
@456zounds Жыл бұрын
This is fascinating material....but, after revealing the mythical nature of the Alamo story, the speaker seemed to "cop-out" at the very end...which kind've blew me away.
@lyartbane2115 Жыл бұрын
She was only half Tejana and was raised in Anglo culture. She didn’t even speak Spanish.
@lyartbane2115 Жыл бұрын
The battle of the Alamo is the most important and most significant historical aspect of those missions. Without the battle and the greater Texas revolution, most people wouldn’t care about those missions at all. It’s like you’re trying to downplay the battle. When it’s the entire reason we remember the Alamo in the first place. You’re trying to uplift others while rendering Anglo Texans to a lower status. The Cowboy hat was invented by Stetson an American. In fact while the American Cowboy originated with Mexican Vaqueros. It soon took on a life and culture of its own. A mixture of frontier and Victorian values with vestiges of chivalry. Another point is that you seem to be disregarding the whole reason that Anglos were invited in the first place. It was because the land was very sparsely populated. Yet you make it seem like it was very densely populated by non Anglos. As if there were just as many Tejanos as there were Anglos. If that were the case there would have been no reason to invite Anglos in the first place. The fact is that by the time of the Texas revolution the Anglos were easily the overwhelming majority. The Anglos were the founding population of the Texas Republic. Steven F. Austin is the father of Texas an Anglo. Now I’m not trying to downplay the Tejanos many of them fought bravely and deserve to be remembered as Texas heroes. However I find it odd that you never mentioned the many Tejanos that were against the Texas revolution and independence from Mexico. Now what is a Texan ? Well that can be defined through Texan culture. Some aspects of Texas culture and identity are in no particular order as follows. 1.) Cowboys and country music. 2.) Chili and especially with no beans. 3.) Blue bonnets. 4.) Texas English. The founding fathers of Texas spoke English. So it makes sense that they would found an English speaking nation. 5.) supporting the right to keep and bare arms. 6.) Chicken fried Steak. 7.) Texas legends and myths like the Marfa lights, El Muerto, Lechuza, and the tales of various Texas outlaws. Like John Westly Hardin, Sam Bass and Bonnie and Clyde. 8.) remembering the Alamo. 9.) the belief that everything is bigger (and better) in Texas. And these are just off the top of my head.
@lyartbane2115 Жыл бұрын
@@beachcomber1able Most historians agree that Slavery was not a major cause of the Texas revolution. It was a peripheral issue.
@lyartbane2115 Жыл бұрын
@@beachcomber1able Santa Anna was a ruthless dictator that styled himself “the Napoleon of the west”. He abolished the Mexican constitution and there were uprisings against his rule all over Mexico. There were also many cultural differences between the Anglos and Mexicans not least of which were political. According to historian H.W Brands on page 204 second paragraph “where the right of assembly and petition was part of the Americans English inheritance, it had no counterpart in the Spanish tradition.” As a result , convening itself-regardless of what might be said or done at the convention-connoted sedition to the Mexican authorities and put them on alert.” The Spanish language is alluded to as an alien tongue in the Texas Declaration of Independence. And there were many parallels between the Texas revolution and the American revolution. That were not lost on the Texians.
@lyartbane2115 Жыл бұрын
@@beachcomber1able Santa Anna was a ruthless dictator that styled himself “the Napoleon of the west”. He abolished the Mexican constitution and there were uprisings against his rule all over Mexico. There were also many cultural differences between the Anglos and Mexicans not least of which were political. According to historian H.W Brands on page 204 second paragraph “where the right of assembly and petition was part of the Americans English inheritance, it had no counterpart in the Spanish tradition.” As a result , convening itself-regardless of what might be said or done at the convention-connoted sedition to the Mexican authorities and put them on alert.” The Spanish language is alluded to as an alien tongue in the Texas Declaration of Independence. And there were many parallels between the Texas revolution and the American revolution. That we’re not lost on the Texians.
@mariocantu4720 11 ай бұрын
Yeah its o.k we know your butt hurt by hearing the truth.
@cherrera1010 3 ай бұрын
They spoke English, specially Lorenzo de Savala!😂
@lyartbane2115 Жыл бұрын
12:30 Alamo strategic value
@wes2262 Жыл бұрын
Were the Alamo defenders angels. No Were Alamo defenders flawed and pro slavery. Very Were Alamo defenders brave. Yes Did several Alamo defenders surrender. Yes Davy was cool but washed out looking for a fresh start. Travis was a player. Bowie was scammer who made a new knife he never got any rolyalties for and was depressed and drunk about his wife dying. Were Mexicans evil. No (many forced to fight) Did Mexicans give defenders a a chance to surrender at first. Yes Was Santa Ana himself evil? Not at first but by the time of Alamo, yes Was Mexican government abusing new settlers? No, they actually spoiled them at first In Santa Ana’s defense he started by appeasing the Americans. He gave them rights Mexicans didn’t even have. And the Americans spit in his face and still rebelled bc they get paranoid if even there is a hint they might lose their slaves. So he was not mad, he was f*cking furious but I can’t condone killing prisoners. Myself and the world as a whole draws a line, even in war, and we have to label people, bad or evil, when they kill people who have surrendered. Throw them in a Mexico City jail but you can’t kill them cold blooded like that.
@marthagomez7335 5 ай бұрын
They had accepted Mexican citizenship and were not only treasonous traitors, renegades but terrorists on what was Mexican soil.
@wes2262 Жыл бұрын
Only now do I realize most of Texas History I learned in school was a lie. Granted history is written by the winners so it’s nothing new…
@mesomemore97 Жыл бұрын
??? C'mon....
@Abhbruthahuud Жыл бұрын
shout out lacson
@stubaker2574 Жыл бұрын
13 days to raise and train soldier's? that's undoable at anytime ...except 2175 when it could happen.