Brands does the liberation of Texas? I’m in! At least this was my initial reaction to this book. I had read a couple of his histories so I knew the score beforehand. Brands produces serviceable histories centering around the biographies of key players(usually men) in history. He’s never too controversial, but details and analysis can feel rather thinnish. Still, while Brands may have been born in the northwest, most of his education and academic career has taken place within the Lone Star State. So, I’ll admit, I expected something special. What I got was, well, Brands. I’m not complaining. Not really. Brands covers his biographical bases well: Both Austins, Houston, Bowie, Crockett, de Santa Anna etc etc etc are trotted out in an orderly and respectful fashion. The book covers Moses Austin’s initial efforts to establish a colony within Spanish Texas to Houston’s resignation as governor due to Texas entering the civil war as a confederate state over slavery. Alamo buffs will almost certainly be disappointed by the skimpy treatment this iconic event receives in Lone State Nation. Brands takes the long view of history. Readers searching for deep and thorough details concerning specific events probably should avoid his corpus altogether. However, if you’re looking for a popular history of the Yellow Rose State before the US War Between ‘em then Lone Star Nation should serve a sufficient repast until fuller-course meals can be found ahead.

When you move to Texas, you have got to learn the history!
Great walk thru the Texans march to statehood.

The history of Texas told from Stephen F. Austin and his efforts to establish it to Sam Houston and the fight for independence. Interesting parallels with today being Election Day.

Informative and Engaging

I loved this book, and will be getting a physical copy for my library. Brands grabbed my attention and never let it go. Coving the history of Texas, from the formation of the land through the end of the Civil War, this was a thorough book that covered many different perspectives, people, and political manuverings that made Texas. Highly recommend this enjoyable history.

Well written and researched. Tells the story of the road to Texas Independence. Without the revisionist history of some other current books.

Rank it up there with Blood of Heroes by James Donovan.

Brands is a big fan of the setup to the big events. It feels like he spends more time on Stephen Austin's father and Austin's early land dealings than the actual Texas republic. The problem is, if you are writing a book about how Texas changed America, you should probably cover that in more detail than the last 2 chapters. All setup, no payoff. I felt the same about his book on Andrew Jackson. They are well written, but clearly Brands and I are on different pages of what we find historically interesting. So, looks like that's it for me reading H.W. Brands. Which stinks because he teaches at UT - Austin, my alma mater!

The book give a good history of the settlement of East Texas by American adventurers, the 15-year rush to populate Texas with American "Anglos", and the contentious showdown with Santa Anna and the Mexican army. There are many familiar characters, now legendary personalities, like Bowie, Crockett, and Houston, and the author introduces a dozen more individuals who were probably just as ornery and colorful.

But I found the political history to be the most interesting and compelling part of the book. Moses Austin, followed by his son Stephen, became Mexican citizens in order to realize their dream of establishing permanent settlements in the Mexican state of "Coahuilla y Tejas" north of the Rio Grande (Rio Bravo). Other Americans likewise swore allegiance to Mexico in order to move to the fertile farm ground along the banks of the Colorado, San Antonio, Brazos, and Trinity Rivers. But 20 years before someone coined the term "manifest destiny" Americans were already bent on taking over foreign possessions in North American by the power of immigration. "Becoming Mexican" seems to have been a big joke to the settlers.

When the new Mexican republic started to falter, Austin made a good-faith effort to keep the state of Coahuila y Tejas together under the new president, Santa Anna, but the obvious conclusion was going to be one of two alternatives: an independent Republic of Texas, or Texas as a new holding of the U.S. Having no background at all in the history of the Lone Star State, I was really intrigued to learn about Texas' ambiguous position between Mexico and the U.S. When "Tejanos" began to experience growing tension with the local Comanches, Mexican neighbors to the south, or the Mexican government, President Andrew Jackson offered no consolation, feeling no responsibility to defend or protect Americans who had willingly emigrated to the foreign territory of Spanish, then Mexican, Texas.

While Austin is portrayed as an earnest, loyal, if somewhat vulnerable speaker of the Texas settlers, Sam Houston is an enigma. He is by turn bullish with patriotism, drunken coward, egomaniacal rabble-rouser, and flake par excellence. As Texas struggled with its identity, Houston would disappear for days, months, even years, only to return in a blaze of rhetoric and bombast.

The character of the Texas army is similarly enigmatic. These guys were total mavericks unwilling to follow a command unless it suited them. Everything seems like it was totally disorganized and haphazard. The deaths of Bowie, Crockett and hundreds others at the Alamo seems to be the result of this insistence of a small band of men to go-it-alone. And when Houston finally got his act together, showed up, and was given command by the newly formed Texas Republic, the soldiers only listened to him when they felt like it.

The author shows how, at one crucial point just before Houston and the Texans achieved victory of Santa Anna and the Mexicans, Houston steered the troops into a semi-controlled situation, then appeared to let them make the decision on when, where, and what to do. The old drunk had some shrewd moves when the need arose.

Houston beat Santa Anna and Texas was free of Mexico. But what to do next? Jackson and his Secretary of State, J.Q. Adams, didn't want them at first, so Texans formed their own independent nation in 1836. But, as was the tacit understanding from the beginning, Texans themselves wanted to be part of the Union. There was finally agreement in Washington D.C., but then a major financial crisis put the country in a tizzy and Texas had to wait almost 10 years before being incorporated.

Another fascinating political development was, when Texas was still independent, the British were making moves to forge close economic relations (and maybe offers of incorporation with the Empire?) to gain a position from which to trade with the Caribbean.

THEN, when Texas was finally annexed by the U.S., Santa Anna and the Mexicans came back for one or a few more stabs at regaining control of land north of the River. This prompted the U.S. to go to war with Mexico, which resulted in the acquisition of New Mexico and California. A year later, gold was discovered near Sacramento, and Washington was all ready to make Cali a state.

All in all, a well-written story of a territory swept up in a feverish land-grab, inspired to cry for freedom, and cornered like a pawn in an intriguing, complex, and nuanced political struggle.

While I initially had some misgivings about the almost too-heroic portrayal of the Anglo Texas revolutionaries, I was pleased to see a “warts and all” portrayal by the final chapters of the book. The direct quotes from primary sources are fascinating, and the Democratic chaos of the Texan army is laid bare as the liability it truly was. Perhaps the best part, however, is saved for the chapters after the victory over Santa Ana, where the conflicting and sometimes morally reprehensible motives for independence from Mexico and annexation by the United States are closely examined (especially in dealing with the issue of slavery and the treatment of Native Americans). Ultimately, it is a worthwhile read that serves to highlight the fallibility of all sides of the conflict, showcasing some of the best and worst of 19th Century attitudes/values and of humanity in general.

I was always a sucker for Texas history, and now I'm a sucker for H.W. Brands' writing. I already knew most of the story, but the writing was excellent and compelling. I will be getting my hands on more of Brands' work soon.

Nowhere near as good as his previous works. This is a spliced narrative built around a morass of quotations.

A good narrative of the story of the Texas fight for independence and the path to statehood. Fairly informative but not dry.

Brands is an academic but he doesn't write academically, and I like that because I read history for entertainment. LSN gives nice detail about the characters of Houston, Austin, Travis, Santa Anna, and Bowie, but little about the first Texas president Burnet.