With Santa Anna in Texas: A Personal Narrative of the Revolution

De la Pena was an unusually courageous and principled man. He wrote the truth about his commanding officer, Presidente-Generalissimo Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana. El Presidente was an incompetent bungler who brutalized his own troops; murdered his enemies and, ultimately, proved a total coward. Not surprisingly, de la Pena writes his account from a Santa Ana prison. Yes, I know there is debate as to whether the last part of this diary are genuine "de la Pena" but, even if not, I suspect that they were taken from his testimony. Many Texas historians [and I'm a minor one] have been angered by de la Pena's suggestion that David Crockett [and others] may have surrendered at Alamo. There is absolutely no knowing the truth of it but I would have two observations. First, if they took any prisoners, the Mexican soldiers would have been operating outside of orders. Santa Ana specifically instructed "No Prisoners!" Second, So what? Imagine the situation. Your force is beaten and the enemy is climbing over the walls by the hundreds. Your weapon is a single-shot muzzle loader and you have no opportunity to reload it before the enemy is on you. The enemy attacks and, the first thing you know, there's a bayonet point an inch from your throat. What do you do? 1. You spit in your enemy's face at point he slides the blade through your throat or 2. Do you attempt to surrender? There's no question what 99.999% of people would do under this circumstance. You try to surrender and hope the enemy will accept it. It's basic human nature. The defenders at Alamo, including one David Crockett [Kwockey?] were throughly human. Some of the defenders at Alamo will have surrendered IF they had the opportunity to do so. Period. What I don't know isn't whether any of them had the chance. It's possible the Mexicans killed every one of them where they fought. Ron Braithwaite author of novels--"Skull Rack" and "Hummingbird God"--on the Spanish Conquest of Mexico.

The information presented in the book sounds reasonable, whether you believe that part about how Davy Crockett died or not. The author seems to be very open and honest about both sides during the war, based on what he knew, I believe. As with any human writing, the author may be very honest themselves and still can be misinformed or draw the wrong conclusions about various topics. So it is up to the reader to decide how much you want to believe. But it is still very, very interesting reading. I recommend it to the serious history buff. I don't see how you can leave this book out if you are going to do a good job of reading up on the complete story.

The author's attitude is sumarized in his own words - "...one has been led to believe that only those in command have a right to think. It is taken for granted that men in high posts reason best, as if one did not know how these positions have been obtained up to now, pretending that the favoritism lavished on them could also endow them the talents..." Anyone interested in the history of Texas or Mexico will want to read more of the soldier who penned those thoughts.

de la Pena was an aide to Santa Anna and recorded the events of the Texas Revolution as they happened. Here we have historical evidence of Crockett's surrender and subsequent execution at the Alamo as well as the subsequent carnage and bloodbath of San Jacinto. Must reading for anyone interested in Texas History