Doc Hardin is a recognized author and historian of the Texas Revolution and the battle of the Alamo. I suspect his detractors are usually much less so. I've heard him speak on a few occasions and I've always found him knowledgeable and entertaining.
what of taking the piss he now believes lapenna diary yet mrs dickinsson saw crocketts mutilated body and joe the slave and the alcalde had to show santa anna the 3 leaders bodys and the way hes talking there like a school kid when santa anna was disposed why didn't lapenna come forward then over 100 years and up they pop and he bites like the hitler and jack the ripper diarys they were fake
I'm surprised that the story of Travis drawing a line is of such great importance. Whether he drew the line or not, every man inside the Alamo effectively stepped across a line when they decided to fight to the death to defend it.
Died to defend the right to own slaves. Mexico abhored the idea. And if Mexicanos died defending the Alamo, what a waste of human life. Like the Mexicsnos that died in WWI WWII, Vietnam and Middle Eastern Wars. For what? For nothing. Hispanics are still the invisimal Americans.
@@mariomillansr63 The vast majority of the men (virtually all of them) in the Alamo did not own slaves. They were fighting for liberty and self government, and they must have been on to something. There must be some reason why tens of millions of Hispanics are trying all kinds of things, both legally and illegally, to get here. And Hispanics are not hidden Americans. They hold all kinds of private and political positions in America and receive all kinds of public aid. What you say is false.
What un uneducated ignorant perception you have. Santa Anna did not advertise his well borne need or use of slaves. In the world of despotic dictators the whole populace is considered brainless slaves to adhere to the dictators every whom
@@dabliss101 what you say is false and true. False in the sense that the fight wasn't for true liberty for all , but liberty of choice. In the modern times many hispanics have succeeded, but are still treated like they're are invisible. Just look how much more influence the African Americans have and are catered, portrayed etc. Illegals can not receive social security and public aid , they are not citizens, but those who are can , they work for it. The United States has many more benefits and the migration problem must be resolved. And the gun problem. The united states was safer before, but it was because of the less availability and production of guns. Policeman did not have to dress like soldiers in the 1970's
I'm glad he pointed out that the survivors didn't even talk about the Battle until 35-45 years after the fight. No one will ever know what happened. The myths about the Battle and of the Defenders became legend. One thing that should be pointed out here... the Texians really didn't think that the Mexican Troops would get back to San Antonio until later in the Spring. After the first confrontation, the troops had to march back to the Mexican interior. Informing the Government, mustering and outfitting the troops to return back to the Alamo during the winter, would have taken much longer. They believed that they had more time before the Army arrived.
How 'bout we just ask Mexico? They survived. His Alamo account is a red herring. He knows it attracts attention but this guy's issue is really about land grabs and slavery, which he downplays as relevant and tries to rewrite genuine history. (when the audience begins to applaud)
@@perkinsvalentine Bull Crap. Slavery was NOT mentioned in the declaration of independence from Mexico. PERIOD. Stop Spreading manure and find a different hobby, you suck at this one.
You know the truly ironic thing is that John Wayne was married to three Latinas, all of his children are half Latin. And yet John Wayne was Davy Crockett in the Alamo movie.
This presentation is well done. I have one cavil. He dismisses the "line in the sand" because of a supposition that the fictitious bit admitted to MUST have referred to Travis's saber line (if not, then Louis Rose witnessed the act and decided to leave). Two eyewitnesses besides Rose corroborate the line; and although Mrs. Dickenson may not be the most reliable witness of the battle scenes (not actually seeing them), it does not follow that nothing she remembered was factual. She was not actually present to see the Mexicans overwhelming the walls and so might have been confused; but the battle was not going on at the time of Travis's drawing of the line, and she might well have been there and seen it as she claimed. And another man who was there also remembered the line in the sand; for what valid reason should his witness be discounted?
I was wondering the same thing! I always warn others that one can never know enough history by hearing one lecture or by reading one book. They have to explore the same subject through different perspectives with all available sources
Massacres are always controversial. Contradictions, even by the same witness, and lack of corroboration between witnesses only prove the confusion of battle. The speaker delivers an excellent understanding of various matters, but his insistence on hard documentation simply leads to the problem of interpretation - an issue he conveniently avoids.
5 ปีที่แล้ว +2
As each run-of-the-mill professor knows: publish or perish!!!
I purchased the Texian Iliad yesterday. I'll certainly be looking for his so called description of 80% of the Texians as "illegal rebels". I suspect the man at the end is misremembering that line, or taking it out of context. Either way he is clearly biased in favor of Mexico. He was just trying to be defiant. In the face of an esteemed Anglo Texan Historian.
His Alamo account is a red herring. He knows it attracts attention - his issue is really about land grabs and slavery, where he tries to rewrite genuine history. (when the audience begins to applaud)
@@perkinsvalentine The majority of historians agree that Santa anna's rule and abolishing of the 1824 constitution, as well as other cultural differences pertaining to government. Were the prime reasons for the Texas revolution. In many ways it was similar to the American revolution. Which was not lost on the Texians. Did you also know that there were uprisings all over Mexico against Santa Annas rule ? To say that Slavery was the main or prime issue is the actual revisionist history. Let's also not pretend that Mexico was some kind of multiracial paradise. Vicente Guerrero (Mexico's first and only Afro Mestizo president) was assassinated for abolishing Slavery. Also your ad hominem attack on Mr. Hardin is further evidence of your ignorance.
Now why would a professional historian rely on myth for anything, let alone the Alamo? A REAL historian in spirit would just use the truth for his works, and nothing else. Good thing the Bible does not use myth..we all be in trouble!
His Alamo account is a red herring. He knows it attracts attention but doesn't really care. Your question of course is the most accurate of record. This guy's issue is really about land grabs and slavery, which he downplays as relevant and tries to rewrite genuine history. (when the audience begins to applaud)
Hardin probably doesn’t care about Mexican archives, as these would possibly contradict his view that the Texas Revolution was all about freedom and honor.
@@kennethmorgan6516 H.W Brands uses many Mexican sources, in his book "Lonestar Nation". He provides a very balanced narrative. And still comes to the conclusion that the Texas revolution was legitimate. I wonder how many Mexican historians use Texas sources as well, concerning the war ?
Were the Alamo defenders angels. No Were Alamo defenders flawed and pro slavery. Very Were Alamo defenders brave. Yes Did several Alamo defenders surrender. Yes Davy was cool but washed out looking for a fresh start. Travis was a player. Bowie was scammer who made a new knife he never got any rolyalties for and was depressed and drunk about his wife dying. Were Mexicans evil. No (many forced to fight) Did Mexicans give defenders a a chance to surrender at first. Yes Was Santa Ana himself evil? Not at first but by the time of Alamo, yes Was Mexican government abusing new settlers? No, they actually spoiled them at first In Santa Ana’s defense he started by appeasing the Americans. He gave them rights Mexicans didn’t even have. And the Americans spit in his face and still rebelled bc they get paranoid if even there is a hint they might lose their slaves. So he was not mad, he was f*cking furious but I can’t condone killing prisoners. Myself and the world as a whole draws a line, even in war, and we have to label people, bad or evil, when they kill people who have surrendered. Throw them in a Mexico City jail but you can’t kill them cold blooded like that.
Now for some truth: Crockett surrendered to the Mexican soldiery, only to be killed moments later. Travis committed suicide at the north wall, when he saw all was lot, and Bowie died on his bed under his bed covers, begging for his life! Some heroes folks!
@@lyartbane2115 If you do not know the original sources, then you don't know Texas/Alamo historiography, this tells me a lot about your Alamo knowledge. Are you a historian? And your credentials?
@@SKY-jv9ue Who said I didnt know the original sources ? I asked you if you did. Rather than answer me you try to turn the question around on me ? Surely that says more about your own so called knowledge than mine. The fact is your claims about Crocket and Travis and Bowie are the definition of lies. You ought to leave these things to the experts. Can you name historians that back up your claims ?
@@lyartbane2115 The so-called historians who have paddle lies and tales about the revolt are NOT experts, because they keep saying the same ole' things over and over again, that are just plain wrong. My sources are the people who were there, not an historian who's speaking lies 150, 180 years later. Ever hear of Colonels Jose Enrique de la Pena & Navarro? General Sesma, Anselmo Vergara, Andres Barcena (Houston knew these two personally), etc., etc.? Of course not, because you have left history to the 'experts'...bad thing to do. Do you have any official credentials, or are you just sticking for the false Texan historians?
How dare you make light of these young men's honorable death. You guy obviously know nothing about the heart and soul of true Texans , this is also God's country sir and we appreciate they're sacrifice,, so tone your fng sarcasim!!
Lowrider Oldies I believe these were brave people but the leading figures were not Texans. Travis left a wife and child in Alabama to face his creditors alone, Bowie was on the run from the law in New Orleans for selling phony land grants and Crockett had just gotten there from Kentucky. He had lost re-election and saw him self rising in political stature in Texas. Also Sam Houston had ordered them to abandon the mission and join him, Travis disobeyed that order. Did they have courage ? Yes they did. But they were also just like everyone else. They had their faults
How 'bout we just ask Mexico? They survived. His Alamo account is a red herring. He knows it attracts attention but this guy's issue is really about land grabs and slavery, which he downplays as relevant and tries to rewrite genuine history. (when the audience begins to applaud)
wow what's wrong with this guy he couldn't find something more sacred to pick apart ? is he from Oklahoma? .I know hes a "professional historian" but he's trying to tear all this down for his own sake and the only people that really know what happened died bravely after defending for 13 days .
dale mckenzie stfu The only sacred thing is truth. The fact that they were willing to die was go honorable enough. But let's not confuse the fact that this was inn fact a land grab by illegal immigrants unwilling to follow the laws of the land and unwilling to assimilate
dab0331 ...hey keyboard Rambo ...why don't you make me stfu ?...did I hurt the poor little SJW's wittle feelings ? unwilling to assimilate huh? that sounds like your talking about the trash that's coming across our southern border now but not for much longer . get a life millennial this is still America and we have a right to free speech even if it hurts your transgender, Antifa, sjw , socialist feelings
Get on his ass dale.l can't stand these Anti-Americans.Ship their ass to a country of their choice.And get rid of the liberal professors also.They are nothing but a bunch of lily livered liars.
@@dab0331 BS The Mexican government asked for settlers because the Mexicans really didn't want to settle Texas because of the indians. Then Mexico back out of the deal.
Hell yeah brother! And to add to that: music should never be played by musicians! Patients should never be operated on by surgeons! And electrical schematics shouldn't be made by electricians either! They should just let loud mouth dummies on the internet produce every work or artifact that serves humanity...
Who believed the grace gospel?? All others were doomed. The grace gospel 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 and read Romans 5:9 & 10:9-10. Use the KJV bible. Romans 5:1 Peace with God.
This is fascinating material....but, after revealing the mythical nature of the Alamo story, the speaker seemed to "cop-out" at the very end...which kind've blew me away.
His Alamo account is a red herring. Colonel Sanders real message was that the battle had little to do with a land grab for slavery. Thus exposing himself as a revisionist, yet is careful to instruct listeners to not believe "non historians". He is what he is, an entertainer with an uncontested thesis for an agreeable audience - note where his applause lines take place. Most people know the Alamo to be legend already, and quite frankly don't care.
Most other comments are in agreement with this simple assessment. The few who don't should stick to teenage chat rooms where they may sound wise. Especially those who use clichés like its their original perspective (ie; those who ignore history..?). Can it.
Isn't is strange, that you have posted the exact same or nearly identical comments over and over again ? It seems to me that you are trying to convince YOURSELF. Not anybody else. And then you don't reply back to those like myself that have called into question and challenged your claims. Clearly it's because you don't have a defensible argument. So why don't you admit as much and stop the bullshit ?
@@lyartbane2115 Altogether - 🤠from the top: "Daniel Boone was a man.. Yes a big Man, with an eye like an eagle and as tall as a mountain was he" . Convinces me.
@@thunderbirdmessenger2813 Daniel Boone had nothing to do with the Alamo or Texas revolution. Are you even more ignorant than Johnny ? That would be impressive !
The last man that posed a question to Dr. Hardin was dressed in a Mexican Uniform, sword and all. He said that one of his ancestors was at the Alamo. It is apparent that he's still pissed off that the Americans (that were invited by the Mexican Government) took Texas away from Mexico. I submit that Santa Anna was power hungry, he led the over throw of the elected President of Mexico, and decided to CRUSH the Americans in Texas. Previous to his change of position (he had been a federalist. The Colonists had supported Santa Anna. He was a brutal Dictator whose sole purpose of marching into Texas was to kill everyone that stood in is way. He was a 19th Century mass murderer.
What a joke of a comment. I guess you didn't understand the video. It was about MYTHS!! Santa Anna was vilified to make the story more convincing. He was coming to Texas to get back from savages who had turned that back on their obligation as immigrants. He was making Tejanos upset and other Mexicans sure, but the Americans were just in it to bring slavery. Not true?? Look at what Texas became after that, a legitimate, brutal slave state. The only ones fighting for true glory and freedom were the Tejanos. They had been in Texas land for centuries. Even in 2023, the Tejanos and their ancestors are in Texas longer than Americans. Stop believing the lies!!
When did this guy become a expert. He talks like he was there. Nobody actually knows the fact is brave men gave their lives. This guy acts like he knows what happened
Rick Golden Dr Hardin has read every document he has gotten his hands on about the Alamo for the last 30 years. STFU. He forgot more about what happened then you're ever know.
It's time the truth was told. Good for Dr. Hardin.
Doc Hardin is a recognized author and historian of the Texas Revolution and the battle of the Alamo. I suspect his detractors are usually much less so. I've heard him speak on a few occasions and I've always found him knowledgeable and entertaining.
what of taking the piss he now believes lapenna diary yet mrs dickinsson saw crocketts mutilated body and joe the slave and the alcalde had to show santa anna the 3 leaders bodys and the way hes talking there like a school kid when santa anna was disposed why didn't lapenna come forward then over 100 years and up they pop and he bites like the hitler and jack the ripper diarys they were fake
"Honor, virtue, and patriotism." Those are what are important about the story, aren't they?
“If I owned both Hell and Texas, I would live in Hell and rent out Texas”.- William T. Sherman
I'm surprised that the story of Travis drawing a line is of such great importance. Whether he drew the line or not, every man inside the Alamo effectively stepped across a line when they decided to fight to the death to defend it.
Died to defend the right to own slaves. Mexico abhored the idea. And if Mexicanos died defending the Alamo, what a waste of human life. Like the Mexicsnos that died in WWI WWII, Vietnam and Middle Eastern Wars. For what? For nothing. Hispanics are still the invisimal Americans.
@@mariomillansr63 The vast majority of the men (virtually all of them) in the Alamo did not own slaves. They were fighting for liberty and self government, and they must have been on to something. There must be some reason why tens of millions of Hispanics are trying all kinds of things, both legally and illegally, to get here. And Hispanics are not hidden Americans. They hold all kinds of private and political positions in America and receive all kinds of public aid. What you say is false.
What un uneducated ignorant perception you have. Santa Anna did not advertise his well borne need or use of slaves. In the world of despotic dictators the whole populace is considered brainless slaves to adhere to the dictators every whom
I read that a few escaped before the battle. 9 men
@@dabliss101 what you say is false and true. False in the sense that the fight wasn't for true liberty for all , but liberty of choice. In the modern times many hispanics have succeeded, but are still treated like they're are invisible. Just look how much more influence the African Americans have and are catered, portrayed etc. Illegals can not receive social security and public aid , they are not citizens, but those who are can , they work for it. The United States has many more benefits and the migration problem must be resolved. And the gun problem. The united states was safer before, but it was because of the less availability and production of guns. Policeman did not have to dress like soldiers in the 1970's
I'm glad he pointed out that the survivors didn't even talk about the Battle until 35-45 years after the fight. No one will ever know what happened. The myths about the Battle and of the Defenders became legend. One thing that should be pointed out here... the
Texians really didn't think that the Mexican Troops would get back to San Antonio until later in the Spring. After the first confrontation, the troops had to march back to the Mexican interior. Informing the Government, mustering and outfitting the troops to return back to the Alamo during the winter, would have taken much longer. They believed that they had more time before the Army arrived.
How 'bout we just ask Mexico? They survived. His Alamo account is a red herring. He knows it attracts attention but this guy's issue is really about land grabs and slavery, which he downplays as relevant and tries to rewrite genuine history. (when the audience begins to applaud)
@@perkinsvalentine
Bull Crap. Slavery was NOT mentioned in the declaration of independence from Mexico. PERIOD. Stop Spreading manure and find a different hobby, you suck at this one.
You know the truly ironic thing is that John Wayne was married to three Latinas, all of his children are half Latin. And yet John Wayne was Davy Crockett in the Alamo movie.
How is that ironic?
just picked up the " Texas Illiad " any thought on this book ?
This presentation is well done. I have one cavil. He dismisses the "line in the sand" because of a supposition that the fictitious bit admitted to MUST have referred to Travis's saber line (if not, then Louis Rose witnessed the act and decided to leave). Two eyewitnesses besides Rose corroborate the line; and although Mrs. Dickenson may not be the most reliable witness of the battle scenes (not actually seeing them), it does not follow that nothing she remembered was factual. She was not actually present to see the Mexicans overwhelming the walls and so might have been confused; but the battle was not going on at the time of Travis's drawing of the line, and she might well have been there and seen it as she claimed. And another man who was there also remembered the line in the sand; for what valid reason should his witness be discounted?
I was wondering the same thing! I always warn others that one can never know enough history by hearing one lecture or by reading one book. They have to explore the same subject through different perspectives with all available sources
Richard Boone was great in the 'Alamo'...
Why?
Ultimately, Dr. Hardin, we would know the truth, warts and all.
Massacres are always controversial. Contradictions, even by the same witness, and lack of corroboration between witnesses only prove the confusion of battle. The speaker delivers an excellent understanding of various matters, but his insistence on hard documentation simply leads to the problem of interpretation - an issue he conveniently avoids.
As each run-of-the-mill professor knows: publish or perish!!!
I purchased the Texian Iliad yesterday. I'll certainly be looking for his so called description of 80% of the Texians as "illegal rebels". I suspect the man at the end is misremembering that line, or taking it out of context. Either way he is clearly biased in favor of Mexico. He was just trying to be defiant. In the face of an esteemed Anglo Texan Historian.
His Alamo account is a red herring. He knows it attracts attention - his issue is really about land grabs and slavery, where he tries to rewrite genuine history. (when the audience begins to applaud)
@@perkinsvalentine The majority of historians agree that Santa anna's rule and abolishing of the 1824 constitution, as well as other cultural differences pertaining to government. Were the prime reasons for the Texas revolution. In many ways it was similar to the American revolution. Which was not lost on the Texians. Did you also know that there were uprisings all over Mexico against Santa Annas rule ? To say that Slavery was the main or prime issue is the actual revisionist history. Let's also not pretend that Mexico was some kind of multiracial paradise. Vicente Guerrero (Mexico's first and only Afro Mestizo president) was assassinated for abolishing Slavery. Also your ad hominem attack on Mr. Hardin is further evidence of your ignorance.
13:47 just making a time stamp.
Now why would a professional historian rely on myth for anything, let alone the Alamo? A REAL historian in spirit would just use the truth for his works, and nothing else. Good thing the Bible does not use myth..we all be in trouble!
Ha ha ha...yes it SURE WOULD be a problem IF the Bible used myth!!! ; )
@@456zounds And the Bible doesn't, the Greeks, Romans, and Texas history used myths in their histories, hence they made a mess of their histories!
12:30 Alamo strategic value
What do the Mexican archives say.
His Alamo account is a red herring. He knows it attracts attention but doesn't really care. Your question of course is the most accurate of record. This guy's issue is really about land grabs and slavery, which he downplays as relevant and tries to rewrite genuine history. (when the audience begins to applaud)
Hardin probably doesn’t care about Mexican archives, as these would possibly contradict his view that the Texas Revolution was all about freedom and honor.
@@kennethmorgan6516 H.W Brands uses many Mexican sources, in his book "Lonestar Nation". He provides a very balanced narrative. And still comes to the conclusion that the Texas revolution was legitimate. I wonder how many Mexican historians use Texas sources as well, concerning the war ?
Were the Alamo defenders angels. No
Were Alamo defenders flawed and pro slavery. Very
Were Alamo defenders brave. Yes
Did several Alamo defenders surrender. Yes
Davy was cool but washed out looking for a fresh start. Travis was a player. Bowie was scammer who made a new knife he never got any rolyalties for and was depressed and drunk about his wife dying.
Were Mexicans evil. No (many forced to fight)
Did Mexicans give defenders a a chance to surrender at first. Yes
Was Santa Ana himself evil? Not at first but by the time of Alamo, yes
Was Mexican government abusing new settlers? No, they actually spoiled them at first
In Santa Ana’s defense he started by appeasing the Americans. He gave them rights Mexicans didn’t even have. And the Americans spit in his face and still rebelled bc they get paranoid if even there is a hint they might lose their slaves. So he was not mad, he was f*cking furious but I can’t condone killing prisoners. Myself and the world as a whole draws a line, even in war, and we have to label people, bad or evil, when they kill people who have surrendered. Throw them in a Mexico City jail but you can’t kill them cold blooded like that.
They had accepted Mexican citizenship and were not only treasonous traitors, renegades but terrorists on what was Mexican soil.
Historians lie about history all the time.
Now for some truth: Crockett surrendered to the Mexican soldiery, only to be killed moments later. Travis committed suicide at the north wall, when he saw all was lot, and Bowie died on his bed under his bed covers, begging for his life! Some heroes folks!
What are your sources ? Are you an Historian ? What are your credentials ?
@@lyartbane2115 If you do not know the original sources, then you don't know Texas/Alamo historiography, this tells me a lot about your Alamo knowledge. Are you a historian? And your credentials?
@@SKY-jv9ue Who said I didnt know the original sources ? I asked you if you did. Rather than answer me you try to turn the question around on me ? Surely that says more about your own so called knowledge than mine. The fact is your claims about Crocket and Travis and Bowie are the definition of lies. You ought to leave these things to the experts. Can you name historians that back up your claims ?
@@lyartbane2115 The so-called historians who have paddle lies and tales about the revolt are NOT experts, because they keep saying the same ole' things over and over again, that are just plain wrong. My sources are the people who were there, not an historian who's speaking lies 150, 180 years later. Ever hear of Colonels Jose Enrique de la Pena & Navarro? General Sesma, Anselmo Vergara, Andres Barcena (Houston knew these two personally), etc., etc.? Of course not, because you have left history to the 'experts'...bad thing to do. Do you have any official credentials, or are you just sticking for the false Texan historians?
@@SKY-jv9ue So let me see If I understand you correctly. You dont trust the experts and arent an expert yourself ? That sound about right ?
How dare you make light of these young men's honorable death. You guy obviously know nothing about the heart and soul of true Texans , this is also God's country sir and we appreciate they're sacrifice,, so tone your fng sarcasim!!
..."guys"..."Their"..."sarcasm"...That's the point, nobody knows what happened for sure...
Lowrider Oldies I believe these were brave people but the leading figures were not Texans. Travis left a wife and child in Alabama to face his creditors alone, Bowie was on the run from the law in New Orleans for selling phony land grants and Crockett had just gotten there from Kentucky. He had lost re-election and saw him self rising in political stature in Texas. Also Sam Houston had ordered them to abandon the mission and join him, Travis disobeyed that order. Did they have courage ? Yes they did. But they were also just like everyone else. They had their faults
How 'bout we just ask Mexico? They survived. His Alamo account is a red herring. He knows it attracts attention but this guy's issue is really about land grabs and slavery, which he downplays as relevant and tries to rewrite genuine history. (when the audience begins to applaud)
wow what's wrong with this guy he couldn't find something more sacred to pick apart ? is he from Oklahoma? .I know hes a "professional historian" but he's trying to tear all this down for his own sake and the only people that really know what happened died bravely after defending for 13 days .
dale mckenzie
stfu
The only sacred thing is truth.
The fact that they were willing to die was go honorable enough. But let's not confuse the fact that this was inn fact a land grab by illegal immigrants unwilling to follow the laws of the land and unwilling to assimilate
dab0331 ...hey keyboard Rambo ...why don't you make me stfu ?...did I hurt the poor little SJW's wittle feelings ? unwilling to assimilate huh? that sounds like your talking about the trash that's coming across our southern border now but not for much longer . get a life millennial this is still America and we have a right to free speech even if it hurts your transgender, Antifa, sjw , socialist feelings
Get on his ass dale.l can't stand these Anti-Americans.Ship their ass to a country of their choice.And get rid of the liberal professors also.They are nothing but a bunch of lily livered liars.
He's spent his entire life researching the story because he loves Texas history you moron.
@@dab0331 BS The Mexican government asked for settlers because the Mexicans really didn't want to settle Texas because of the indians. Then Mexico back out of the deal.
This is why history should never be told by a 'historian.' Hardin here could put to sleep a cross-eyed mule on meth.
Hell yeah brother! And to add to that: music should never be played by musicians! Patients should never be operated on by surgeons! And electrical schematics shouldn't be made by electricians either! They should just let loud mouth dummies on the internet produce every work or artifact that serves humanity...
Meth?!?
Okay, nobody knows what the hell happened at The Alamo.
Remember The Alamo!!
Mexican military victory
Who believed the grace gospel?? All others were doomed. The grace gospel 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 and read Romans 5:9 & 10:9-10. Use the KJV bible. Romans 5:1 Peace with God.
This is fascinating material....but, after revealing the mythical nature of the Alamo story, the speaker seemed to "cop-out" at the very end...which kind've blew me away.
13 days to raise and train soldier's? that's undoable at anytime ...except 2175 when it could happen.
Why not call Joe Travis a slave? It's not like he was there for the pay...
His Alamo account is a red herring. Colonel Sanders real message was that the battle had little to do with a land grab for slavery. Thus exposing himself as a revisionist, yet is careful to instruct listeners to not believe "non historians". He is what he is, an entertainer with an uncontested thesis for an agreeable audience - note where his applause lines take place. Most people know the Alamo to be legend already, and quite frankly don't care.
Only a MORON would make such a hollow, brainless statement as you just did. Those that ignore history are bound to repeat it. Fool.
Most other comments are in agreement with this simple assessment. The few who don't should stick to teenage chat rooms where they may sound wise. Especially those who use clichés like its their original perspective (ie; those who ignore history..?). Can it.
Isn't is strange, that you have posted the exact same or nearly identical comments over and over again ? It seems to me that you are trying to convince YOURSELF. Not anybody else. And then you don't reply back to those like myself that have called into question and challenged your claims. Clearly it's because you don't have a defensible argument. So why don't you admit as much and stop the bullshit ?
@@lyartbane2115 Altogether - 🤠from the top: "Daniel Boone was a man.. Yes a big Man, with an eye like an eagle and as tall as a mountain was he" . Convinces me.
@@thunderbirdmessenger2813 Daniel Boone had nothing to do with the Alamo or Texas revolution. Are you even more ignorant than Johnny ? That would be impressive !
The last man that posed a question to Dr. Hardin was dressed in a Mexican Uniform, sword and all. He said that one of his ancestors was at the Alamo. It is apparent that he's still pissed off that the Americans (that were invited by the Mexican Government) took Texas away from Mexico.
I submit that Santa Anna was power hungry, he led the over throw of the elected President of Mexico, and decided to CRUSH the Americans in Texas. Previous to his change of position (he had been a federalist. The Colonists had supported Santa Anna. He was a brutal Dictator whose sole purpose of marching into Texas was to kill everyone that stood in is way. He was a 19th Century mass murderer.
What a joke of a comment. I guess you didn't understand the video. It was about MYTHS!! Santa Anna was vilified to make the story more convincing. He was coming to Texas to get back from savages who had turned that back on their obligation as immigrants. He was making Tejanos upset and other Mexicans sure, but the Americans were just in it to bring slavery. Not true?? Look at what Texas became after that, a legitimate, brutal slave state. The only ones fighting for true glory and freedom were the Tejanos. They had been in Texas land for centuries. Even in 2023, the Tejanos and their ancestors are in Texas longer than Americans. Stop believing the lies!!
For an expert on the Alamo you would think he could pronounce Santa Ana correctly. Its not Santanna !
This so called historian sounds like he's making fun of the Alamo.
When did this guy become a expert. He talks like he was there. Nobody actually knows the fact is brave men gave their lives. This guy acts like he knows what happened
Rick Golden
Dr Hardin has read every document he has gotten his hands on about the Alamo for the last 30 years. STFU. He forgot more about what happened then you're ever know.
This is why history should never be told by a 'historian.' Hardin here could put to sleep a cross-eyed mule on meth.