Howdy All

I had this idea about playing 'Armchair Quarterback' with past battles that were fought throughout history. I know that we've probably all taken our turn at sitting our duffs down in a chair of this type and sharing our own personal input on the changes we would have made in this particular engagement or that particular historical event, but I thought I'd take a shot at creating a [hopefully] central point where those of us who feel compelled to share our 'Armchair General' decisions with the world can do so and take advantage of the wealth of knowledge those of us here at Armorama are so generous to share with one another.
This exchange of thoughts and ideas has always been [for me at least] one of the things that has always drawn me back to this place.
I think that we can all benefit, and if we're lucky, even be enlightened by one another's input on some of these subjects......sooooooo, here it goes;

Up for Discussion {and to prime the pump}; THE ALAMO

I will assume for the time being that most here are familiar with the general configuration of the Alamo itself, as well as the Mexican Army's assault on the Mission itself.
The question I pose is; Staying within the confines of the historically accurate ingredients of the Mission compound, and the known assault plan of the Mexican Army on the Mission, what would/could have been done to alter the outcome of this engagement?

A) Could the cannons have been better deployed?
B) Was there anything that could have been done by the Texicans beforehand?
C) With the defense perimeter being incomplete as it was, was it best to defend the outer walls
equally?
D) Should a better 'fallback' position have been built?
E) Preemptive nighttime assault on Santa Ana's command post?
F) Should the Mexican soldiers been drawn into the inner courtyard {a smaller space} and been
caught in a deadly downward crossfire of fleshette cannon rounds?
G) Should they all have pretended to be asleep?
H) Should they have called in an air strike?........whoops!.....wait, that's not within the "confines of the historically accurate ingredients" now is it?....sheeeeeeeesh.

Opine's anybody?

Warm regards,

Tread.

Here are a couple thoughts. I dimly recall reading something about the Alamo many years ago where it was said the volunteer soldiers weren't too big on doing "busy work" like cutting loop holes in the wall and such. The seems to have been a no brainer, having more loop holes. I don't have any info on how much powder they had available, though I seem to think they had quite a bit. The area outside the walls, especially the palisades, could have been mined. (What is it David Crockett, Billy Bob Thornton" called it, a 'pile of sticks.'

One thing I keep thinking though, is what if they had done what Bowie supposedly wanted to do, abandon the place and contest every river crossing between San Antonio and wherever the Texican congress, or Sam Huston was.

I think it could be said that as an irregular army facing regulars, they broke the first rule of guerrila warfare, which is never stand & fight regular troops toe to toe. While there were a few regulars or at least ex-regulars at the Alamo, the majority of the 150-odd defenders were untrained volunteers. Under the circumstances, if any kind of stand was to be made, it was best made in some sort of fortification, but the Alamo was only an extempore fortification not a genuine fortress, & this is born out by the fact that it once his main body arrived, it took Santa Ana less than 2 days to take it. The Alamo is therefore almost a reverse situation to Rorkes Drift. It could be argued that the Texans could have slowed Santa Ana more by continued "hit & run" tactics at his laborious slow-moving columns, particularly using the sharpshooting skills of the Tennessee riflemen. By fighting a skirmishing action, Santa Ana would have been frequently forced to deploy time & again, dislocating the march somewhat, & the casualties caused would have been as great or even greater than those incurred as a result of storming the fort, while the casualties to the Texan would be significantly less or non-existant. The only problem with this course of action would be the Mexican cavalry. However what can't be denied is the emotive effect of the stand at the Alamo, & the effect on morale.

The cut and slash guerrila warfare was what Bowie favored. It was Travis that demaded the fort be held, because that was what he was ordered to do. I would have sent troops out to scout an harass the column as it crossed the Rio Grande. But we are talking irregulars so there is no garantee that they would not disband in the field even with Bowie commanding.

Dig pits in the haciendas of the fort and out buildings and mine the place with every keg of powder. Remove the guns and leave a force behind to set off the powder when it was occupied by Santa Ana's forces. Then set up ambush sites if they give pursuit.

Sam Houston was the master planner he knew the Alamo would buy him more than time. It would insense the Texican populace and the American press that these few men gave their lives to die for the cause of freedom.

Imagine if you will a battle like San Jaciento further down the Brazos river, before the Alamo had been taken? Early morning hours striking just as breakfast was about to be served but most everyone was still asleep. The army was altogether then so it would have to be precise. One or two cannon balls from a field piece then cut slash run. Consistantly demoralizing the superior enemy force then lead them to an empty fort an blow it out from under their feet when they least expect it. Then the ambush sites.

Standing at the Alamo was a hopeless tactic. Numbers alone decided that. Some tactics might have made it more costly to Santa Ana, but in the end, he was sure to prevail. The best riflemen could only get of a shot every 20-25 seconds and they were outnumbered some 20:1 in a mission complex.

Howdy fellas,

Thx for the well thought out comments so far. The general consensus seems to be that abandoning the fort would have been the better decision as opposed to defending it. But they chose to stay, so........a couple of someone's mentioned possibly mining certain areas. Would anyone want to expand on that maybe?

to HalfYank: First, hiya buddy! Continuing,,,,I like your thoughts on increasing the amount of loop holes in the outer walls. Good point. How about placing multiple, pre-loaded muskets at strategic points at the outer wall, and assigning some of the noncombatant's as quick reloaders?

to Hohenstaufen: Your post was very well thought through. And even though you agree with the consensus of leaving the fort, you accurately brought up the point of the Mexican Cavalry and the devastating affect that would have on any "guerrila" tactics attempted by the retreating Texicans. It needs to also be mentioned [and considered] that there were women and children who would have to be considered in the event of any retreating/hit-and-run action decided upon.

to JackFlash: Well....I'm grateful to have your opinion on this wee debate there Stephen, your grasp of history is always welcome My apologies though for the absence of any early AC's, but they hadn't really been invented yet.
Anyways, you obviously grasp the fact of the matter. That being that the fort was held because Travis was under orders to do precisely that. I also like your idea of using the powder kegs in some way. They had plenty of powder to be creative with....
I can't shake the feeling that some sort of drawing tactic should have been employed......it's right there, floating at the perimeter of my thoughts...just can;t reach it with these old fingers of mine

to AJLaFleche: Thx for piping in as well Al And as you said, the numbers were indeed overwhelming. So winning the engagement really wasn't in the cards, but.....maybe there was a way to simply make it too costly an engagement for Santa Ana, and force him to maybe give the Mission a 'pass'?.........different tactics might have accomplished this end....ya never know. Hence this wee discussion

Warm regards to all you History 'Buffs', and Thx for stopping by!

Tread.

Having been there many times I can tell you it was pure stupidity tryng to defend it. I know I'm considered Texan by now and it is OUR national shrine but...

T o Rodger. The Mexicans came at them from all sides at once. Half the walls were no more than shoulder high sticks woven together or piles of stone. The walls made up of adobe about a foot and a half thck such as the mission and the Long Barracks. Same with the parapats

To Jackflash. The Rio Grande was several hundred miles away. The folks in the Alamo didn't even know he was coming until he was almost on top of them. He hit them in March which as the rainy season. He had been on the March since early February

Best tactics from the Texaican side is as every one has stated was to desert and guerilla. But they would have been slashed to pieces by the Mexican calary. The land around the aera is made up of occasional small rivers and not much vegitation so to speak and it was sparsely populated. It probably wouldn't have bee ay more effective than having Santa Anna laying siege for 13 sdays.

No one has discussed what the Mexican best tactic was.

I think Santa ANna ran a brilliant siege. He pounded them all night for days keeping them awake The last night he didn't. The Texicans fell asleep and then got woken when the Mexicans were almost at the wall. If Santa Anna had more and better artillery he should have focused a section of it on one area and pounded that one area to rubble It would have made it a bit easier to breech.

In the southern part of Texas, in the town of San Antone,
There's a fortress all in ruin that the weeds have overgrown.
You may look in vain for crosses and you'll never see a one,
But sometime between the setting and the rising of the sun,
You can hear a ghostly bugle as the men go marching by;
You can hear them as they answer to that roll call in the sky:
Colonel Travis, Davy Crockett and a hundred eighty more;
Captain Dickenson, Jim Bowie, present and accounted for.

Back in 1836, Houston said to Travis:
"Get some volunteers and go fortify the Alamo."
Well, the men came from Texas and from old Tennessee,
And they joined up with Travis just to fight for the right to be free.

Indian scouts with squirrel guns, men with muzzle loaders,
Stood together heel and toe to defend the Alamo.
"You may never see your loved ones," Travis told them that day.
"Those that want to can leave now, those who'll fight to the death, let 'em stay."

In the sand he drew a line with his army sabre,
Out of a hundred eighty five, not a soldier crossed the line.
With his banners a-dancin' in the dawn's golden light,
Santa Anna came prancin' on a horse that was black as the night.

He sent an officer to tell Travis to surrender.
Travis answered with a shell and a rousin' rebel yell.
Santa Anna turned scarlet: "Play Degüello," he roared.
"I will show them no quarter, everyone will be put to the sword."

One hundred and eighty five holdin' back five thousand.
Five days, six days, eight days, ten; Travis held and held again.
Then he sent for replacements for his wounded and lame,
But the troops that were comin' never came, never came, never came.

Twice he charged, then blew recall. On the fatal third time,
Santa Anna breached the wall and he killed them one and all.
Now the bugles are silent and there's rust on each sword,
And the small band of soldiers lie asleep in the arms of The Lord.

In the southern part of Texas, near the town of San Antone,
Like a statue on his Pinto rides a cowboy all alone.
And he sees the cattle grazin' where a century before,
Santa Anna's guns were blazin' and the cannons used to roar.
And his eyes turn sort of misty, and his heart begins to glow,
And he takes his hat off slowly to the men of Alamo.
To the thirteen days of glory at the seige of Alamo.

Howdy fellas,

Thx for the continuing input on this historically valiant battle

My thanks go out to blaster76 {Steve} for taking the time to add your learned and firsthand experience of the Alamo. It gives all of us a chance to envision what the area looks like, for that we are grateful I'm sure.
Having established that the choice by Travis was to defend the Mission because of Orders, your physical descriptives of the area are most helpful.

Submitted as just an 'opinion' my thoughts are, that an advancing footbourne regiment armed with muskets would not necessarily engage defenders stationed at the wall of a fort. Especially when that potential target is literally a head high. Considering the option of reloading one of these single-firing muskets while on-the-run, one would think that each advancing soldier would hold his fire until he was at least close to the wall. So, {maybe} having a number of talented Tennessee sharpshooters armed with multiple, pre-loaded rifles stationed right at the wall beside them may have made a difference? Read; difference, not victory......

As to Santa Ana's methodology. Yes, he did well. And his plan as you described it soumds almost error free. But then, armed with almost five thousand troops against an enemy numbering an almost laughable 182 men and 'irregulars', he could almost do no-wrong couldn't he?

tp JackFlash: Your included drumbeat Brace was welcome indeed!!
Many thx for finding, and posting it's verse for us all to see

Tread.

My only "experience" with an assault like you suggest is reading the book Sharpe's Siege by Richard Cornwell. In the book the hero has to conduct not one, but two assaults on heavily defended forts. Granted it's fiction, and the forts are honest to goodness forts, but I think there are some very good points to it. First of all, unlike most of the movies made of the battle, I believe the assault was made at night. The long range of the Tennessee riflemen would have been a non factor. What might have helped more was to have fast loading muskets, not rifles, to lay down a heavy fast fire. Still I don't think that would have helped all that much. True the assaulting infantry wouldn't have tried to fire and load on the run. They may not have even had their weapons loaded to begin with, to avoid any accidental firing that could ruin any surprise. With all that said the defenders were actually pretty effective the way they were. Didn't they beat off two assaults before the "fatal third time" in the song below? As I remember the one book I've read on the subject it was only by chance that the Mexicans realized after the second assault that when the attack columns on two of the wars accidentally merged into one that they made more headway. The third charge planned it that way, and succeeded. I doubt that multiple rifles, or muskets, would have helped in that case.

I must disagree with you Steve. Houston was keenly aware that the Mexican army would return. His own journals bemoan the fact that he could not get Burnett (the erstwhile president of the Texas republic) to understand that the war was NOT over. While the Big Bend region is sage brush and sand not so the fertile valley between San Antonio and the area SW of Corpus Christi. The Texican scrimishers familar with the area would have had a greater advantage than the Mexican army that did not. There are portions of the Texas landscape that have rivers that breech over the roads in the rainy season. imagine a Mexican cavalry unit chasing after some Texas scrimishers who knew where these swollen streams were. The old saying...you can lead a horse to water takes on a whole new meaning.