I have read several H. W. Brands history books. His style is assessable and well-researched. They are also books you can drop into and return to. This is how I read Brands very entertaining and interesting history of Texas.
tMy favorite book on Texas’s revolution is THREE ROADS TO THE ALAMO by William C. Davis, which covers the lives of David Crockett, James Bowie, and William Barret Travis. In Brands' book, I liked the sections on Sam Houston and Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna (whose life would make a great miniseries).
tBrands covers the issue of Slavery but mostly the impact it had on Texas’s desire to be a slave state. It impacted greatly the national debate if they would get statehood. I felt this section was well done and perhaps could be expanded into an expanded book.
tI guess my message is that readers not get their view of this history from the movies or from those who see participants through a hero-worshiping lens. For the most part, those drawn to Texas where running from something in the USA. Some left behind debts and wives.

t

A library book so...it goes to the top of the stack.


I am what is popularly called a "history buff". It means I've read a lot about history, especially the historical periods and topics that interest me...but I don't have a degree. Technically I do have a minor I suppose...but that's just saying that I took every history course I was allowed in filling the requirements for the technology degree I got.

My favorite topics tend to be American history and general military history, so I've read other books on this topic, and this period. In this case I've come to another book where I wish we had half stars or possibly a 10 star system. I would say 3.5 stars might be closer to my actual rating of this book.

This volume had it's flaws...but then most history books do. Too many (especially now) are written with an agenda (political or otherwise). Too many actually end up being "rewrites", "revisions" of history. The author here makes a great effort to tell a fair story and while he is obviously approving of the overall outcome of history he is largely successful in his attempt at a fair telling. The book is told using the eyewitness accounts we have and what I'd call mini-biographies of the people involved in and around the events. We go back and look at claims on Texas from the French, the Spanish, the native Americans, the Jefferson and later American administrations, the North American colonists ...the claims of the British. The story follows the events and looks at the Mexican Revolution, at Santa Anna's changing position, at Austin, Huston and others with their dreams for and about Texas. There were those who were scoundrels and those who were idealists and all sorts in between. This is a pretty good account of the time, the place and the events. So can't give 3.5...I'll give it 4.

Excellent and thorough breakdown of Texas history from Spain to Mexico to Texas to the USA. A detailed history of Stephen F Austin, San Houston and David Crockett and their influence on the history of Texas as it is today.

This book was a resource for Forget the Alamo: The True Story of the Myth That Made Texas so I decided to read it after I finished the other book.
This book is dry but it does give some interesting information about the Republic of Texas. I particularly liked the insight into Houston's character. I ended up feeling sorry for the Austin family. I really liked Santa Ana's story.
A friend of mine said that really good documentaries are dry because the author isn't trying to influence; the author merely presents the facts. I agree.

This is the best account of Texas history I've read. It's informative (with numerous "why was I never taught this in school?" moments) and surprisingly engaging for a chronological history book.

3.5 stars

Straightforward and streamlined history of Texas independence. Appreciated how Brands gave us more background information about the major figures like Austin, Houston, Bowie, Travis, and Fanin, as well as the political context of Mexico at the time.

I never clearly understood Stephen F. Austin's role as the "Father of Texas." Why was he a Mexican citizen? What was he doing in jail for so long? What made him turn his back on his American citizenship? After reading this book, I understand. Not only that, but the Alamo and San Jacinto now make much more sense, set in context. This is a great read. Highly recommended.

Compelling popular history of the battle for Texas's independence. Old mnyths destroyed, new ones made. Very entertaining. Loses a point for his love of his latinate vocabulary. O.K. I get it, you have a vocabulary vastly superior to mine. And I'm doubly pissed off when my 80,000 word dictionary doesn't conatin an entry on the word you used. This is only a minor distraction to a great narrative.

Amazing, amazing read. Utterly fascinating. Almost impossible to put down (except when you have to work. Stupid work). Sam Houston should get more discussion in any history class. I recommend this to all.

I found this book to be very readable and enjoyed it. I know that there is much disagreement and controversy over this subject. To me (no historian ) this book was well researched telling good and bad of all evolved. If you are curious about Texas this book is where to start. I recommend everyone read histories of their home states.

The book, while over 500 pages long and a history, nonetheless is written with such attention to the characters and storyline that it reads more like a novel. Covering Texas from the time of Mexican independence to the American Civil War it is replete with familiar names: Sam Houston, Stephen Austin, Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie, and Presidents from Jefferson to Lincoln.

While it covers political history of Mexico and the United States sufficiently to provide background it is really a story of conquest and war. While we might remember the Alamo and have a recollection of San Jacinto having a part to play historically it gives insight into how Texas was populated, developed, and achieved independence, then statehood.

Because it is well-written I gave it five stars. It probably could have been given four, but it was good and much better than I expected.

Mexico had a constitution and was supposed to be a democracy in the 1820s. Then along came Antonio de Lopes de Santa Anna who became the nation's leader. He started violating provisions of Mexico's constitution. In Texas Anglo settlers and Tejanos [hispanic Texans] where upset and tried to first restore the democracy and later fight for independence.