The story of the last stand at the Alamo is a prime example of history being written by the winners.

Obviously, the doomed defenders didn't win, but in time Texas did. As did the United States. I love this story because it's one of the great real life Greek tragedies of American history, but let's not ignore the fact that if we switched the POV, if in fact Mexico had prevailed and retained control of Texas, it's unlikely they'd be celebrating this assault as anything more than a senseless slaughter of misguided insurrectionists.

Another reason I prefer James Donovan's examination of The Alamo is because I tire of media pundits, and far too many armchair non-historians, who prefer their history to be more storybook and less reality. The battle of the Alamo in 1836 was the result of the Texas settlers' desire for independence coming into conflict with the Mexican government's desire for sovereignty. The battle was bloody and often senseless, though let's not forget that history is full of skirmishes like this. Maybe many of the Texans fortified there acted heroically or maybe not? Or maybe it was both? Let's ask these questions and not insist the outcome be glorified or condemned by our shifting standards of hindsight. Though I concede it's possible, because we're only human, history will always be a story and never be real.

Lastly, one of my favorite accounts from the story of the Alamo, also unverifiable to this day, is the story of Louis "Moses" Rose. He was among a group of likely volunteers, but not soldiers, who on the eve of battle were given a chance by the battle commander to stay and fight or leave. Moses was the only one who chose to go. He escaped passed the Mexican garrison and eventually made his way about 300 miles away to Nacogdoches, Texas. There the old grump set up a butcher's shop and reportedly lived a couple more decades. The story goes, when asked about the Alamo he would reply, unashamed, that yes, he was there and that yes, he left when offered the choice. "My god, I just wasn't ready to die." ( )

This seems to be the latest and most definitive story of the Alamo. ( )

A decent enough narrative history of the Battle of the Alamo, which necessarily encompasses Stephen F. Austin's colony in 1821 through to San Jacinto in April 1836 (there are some side detours, like capsule bios of Santa Anna, Bowie, Crockett, Travis, etc.). There is nothing really new here, but it is a decently researched account, and told in a lively manner that should engage the average reader.

For Alamo enthusiasts: he says Henry Warnell died in the Alamo, probably executed after the battle; he says Davy Crockett died fighting and was not executed; he believes that Travis did draw a line in the dirt and Louis "Moses" Rose did escape the Alamo a few days before the storming of the Alamo.

The re-telling is pretty good, but the Afterword on the line in the sand that Travis drew and Louis "Moses" Rose's is worth the price of the book. While most scholars since the 1970s have debated endlessly on how Crockett died, Donovan makes the odd assertion (p. 352) that "Without a doubt, the most interesting question—and the one that has been most hotly debated since the nineteenth century—is this one: Did Travis really draw a line a few days previous to the battle and ask those who wished to stay and fight with him to cross it?" There are a bunch of books written about how Davy Crockett died and zero about Travis's line. He's stretching a bit here. But, the historiographical essay here is most scholarly and quite interesting. He even found a few new things. Donovan concludes that Travis DID draw a line (or something like it) and ask his men to cross. At least in some form or fashion. And that one man, Louis Rose (called "Moses" because of his old age), did not cross the line, and escaped the Alamo rather than fight (and die). As I said, this afterword is well worth the price of the book.

The images are pretty good. The bibliography is pretty good and quite comprehensive. The "notes" though are entirely stupid. I truly don't understand why publishers are so afraid of proper footnotes or endnotes. In this book Donovan just talks about where he found this or that thing in a weird, reverse-indented notes section. It is sort of one part bibliographic essay, one part endnote citations, and one part discursive footnote. Some of the notes are quite informative and intriguing, including an eight page (pp. 446-453) discursus on why Donovan believes Crockett went down fighting, and wasn't among those executed after the close of the battle. (His reasoning is pretty good, too.)

All in all, if you can get this used or cheap, I'd say get it. If you're an Alamo buff, the Afterword is well worth the purchase price. ( )

James Donovan's book tells the story of The Alamo the battle before, the siege and the final battle. Very well researched and covers the story and those involved with great insight. I recommend this book for those who little or nothing about The Alamo ( )

Great book, great audiobook author. Highly recommend if you are interested in the Alamo. There was some speculation but not a lot. Can't think of anything negative about the book ( )