WI: Santa Anna killed shortly after San Jacinto?

Nofix

Antonio López de Santa Anna, Caudillo of Mexico at many times over many years, personally lead troops into battle against the Texas Revolutionaries and personally ordered the slaughter of remaining forces after the Alamo was overtaken. For this he was widely feared and loathed by the Texan's who heard about the massacre, until the Battle of San Jacinto. There his forces were decimated in the infamous 19 minute battle, Sam Houston's army reversing their retreat and attacking the drunk and sleeping Mexican Army. Santa Anna was caught shortly thereafter, humiliated and stripped of power in the eyes of Texans, Americans, and even his homeland Mexicans. He was only kept alive due to Houston's long term planning, figuring that having Santa Anna alive would make them look merciful, compared to Santa Anna's brutal butchery, and useful as a negotiation tool. But many of Houston's men still despised Santa Anna, and many wanted to hang him for the Goliad massacre despite Houston's direct orders.

Let's say Houston's men disregard their Commander-in-Chief and kill Santa Anna themselves, hanging or just shooting him when given the chance, what are the long and short term effects? Obviously Texas is still going to be claimed by Mexico, but will they wait more or less if Santa Anna is dead. What would happen in Mexico with their on-again off-again dictator dead for good? How would the Mexican-American War go without the leadership of Santa Anna?
 
Last edited:

jycee

Mexico probably wouldn't wait to try to re-invade Texas again.

At this point Santa Anna hasn't fully lost favor with the Mexican population and government; his 7 Leyes were not popular but technically he still hadn't lost Texas.

The Mexican Presidency would fall on Valentin Gomez Farias, who was certainly not popular at all for being too liberal. To up his popularity and cement power, Farias might want to prove a point an order a new invasion of Texas. Unlike Santa Anna, Farias is not a military man so he would allow more capable men to lead this new invasion. Texas has likely lost some immediate support from the US. Once again the US won't step in for Texas unless Mexican troops cross the Sabine. All in all this is not good news for Texas.

But, Farias is probably not going to last in Mexico. He is more than likely to rescind the 7 Leyes and confiscate Church property to fund the war if needed. So unless he wins swift and fast, he'll be replaced by another Santa Anna ( Arista, Herrera, Barragan, Bustamante, etc).

Still Texas has lost its moral advantage. If it gains fair independence from Mexico, its borders are likely to be smaller this time around. Whether or not the US annexes it afterwards has to do with US foreign policy afterwards. Does Polk, Van Buren, or Clay get elected?
 

Dave Howery

Killing SA right after San Jacinto would have been a bad move. The Mexicans still had overwhelming forces in place, along with several Mexican generals who probably could have stomped Houston's force. The only thing that really stopped them in OTL was SA's capture and being forced to sign a peace treaty... and being still alive. Some of them wanted to go on and fight anyway, but were dissuaded from doing so. Filisola and Urrea had 4000 troops inside Texas, and Urrea was probably the best military leader on the ground on either side. With SA dead, it's likely that the two would continue the campaign. Interestingly, SA's being forced to sign the peace treaty under duress as a POW was technically illegal by all international standards, but no one bothered to contest it....
 

Paul MacQ

Donor
Dave Howery said:
Killing SA right after San Jacinto would have been a bad move. The Mexicans still had overwhelming forces in place, along with several Mexican generals who probably could have stomped Houston's force. The only thing that really stopped them in OTL was SA's capture and being forced to sign a peace treaty... and being still alive. Some of them wanted to go on and fight anyway, but were dissuaded from doing so. Filisola and Urrea had 4000 troops inside Texas, and Urrea was probably the best military leader on the ground on either side. With SA dead, it's likely that the two would continue the campaign. Interestingly, SA's being forced to sign the peace treaty under duress as a POW was technically illegal by all international standards, but no one bothered to contest it....
Click to expand...

You say Bad? Lets say José de Urrea finds Hoston and defeats the Texans how many years would it be before there is US immigrants coming over the boarder again?. Also Urrea soes not seem the sort that wanted power for himself. What happens back in Mexico City ?
 

Dave Howery

Paul MacQ said:
You say Bad? Lets say José de Urrea finds Hoston and defeats the Texans how many years would it be before there is US immigrants coming over the boarder again?. Also Urrea soes not seem the sort that wanted power for himself. What happens back in Mexico City ?
Click to expand...

he didn't want power, but he didn't want to stop the war when he had such an advantage either... he wanted to stomp the rebellion. It was mainly Filisola who stopped the campaign and led the Mexican troops out of Texas... and he did that because SA was a POW and had signed the treaty. With SA dead and (presumably) no peace treaty, all bets are off....
 

173rd LRRP

Texas lost every battle to Mexico except the critical one. If Santa Ana had not been there, his much more capable generals would probably have won; however Santa Ana was afraid to let them attack and get the credit.

Texas later mounted a filibuster attack on New Mexico in 1841 and were defeated and captured by rag-tag leather armored militia lancers (Dramatized in "Dead Man's Walk" - they were decimated by drawing beans as shown in the movie).

In 1843, there was a raid on the town of Mora, New Mexico by Texas freebooters under Colonel Charles A. Warfield[ claiming that the people in Mora had purchased stolen beef from the Comanches. The Texans killed five men and took eighteen women and children captive as well as 75 horses. The people of the Mora Valley convened a posse, overtook the Texans, and sent them back to Texas on foot. These eastern frontier New Mexico villages were farming/ranching communities which supplimented their income as Comancheros (fight them when necessary as lanceros/trade when they could) and Ciboleros (buffalo hunters). They were sufficient to run off the Texians. Our friend Kathe's nephew, SFC Leroy Petry MOH is descended from these folks.

Alas, theseis is not taught in Texas schools.
 

Nofix

Anyone else? Santa Anna might have been the worst General in history, but he managed to influence history far more than he should have.
 

zert

I will wonder if the Texians are wiped out as some say, if the reaction in the US might stir up more wish for revenge. Could Jackson get swayed to call on Congress or could volunteer companies band together and go after the Mexicans?
 

Gurroruo

173rd LRRP said:
Texas lost every battle to Mexico except the critical one. If Santa Ana had not been there, his much more capable generals would probably have won; however Santa Ana was afraid to let them attack and get the credit.

Texas later mounted a filibuster attack on New Mexico in 1841 and were defeated and captured by rag-tag leather armored militia lancers (Dramatized in "Dead Man's Walk" - they were decimated by drawing beans as shown in the movie).

In 1843, there was a raid on the town of Mora, New Mexico by Texas freebooters under Colonel Charles A. Warfield[ claiming that the people in Mora had purchased stolen beef from the Comanches. The Texans killed five men and took eighteen women and children captive as well as 75 horses. The people of the Mora Valley convened a posse, overtook the Texans, and sent them back to Texas on foot. These eastern frontier New Mexico villages were farming/ranching communities which supplimented their income as Comancheros (fight them when necessary as lanceros/trade when they could) and Ciboleros (buffalo hunters). They were sufficient to run off the Texians. Our friend Kathe's nephew, SFC Leroy Petry MOH is descended from these folks.

Alas, theseis is not taught in Texas schools.
Click to expand...


Actually the Texans won a lot of battles. Goliad, Bexar, Gonzales, La Bahia, etc. But if SA died, Urreas would rape the Texans. And then when America attacked Mexico in the Mexican American War, France and Britain would have stoppped America because it didn't have a cassis belli
 

Texian

To add to the previous post, The Texans force at Mier was outnumbered approximately 300/3000 (That's ten to one). After 24 hours of house-to-house fighting the Mexican Army had nearly 1000 casualties dead or wounded (Mostly dead) versus the Texans who had lost less than 20 men. Had the Texans not run out of ammunition, they probably would have managed to either hold the city or escape. After the battle the Texans surrendered not knowing the full extent of the casualties they had inflicted and were later subject to the black been lottery. Most of the Battles the Texans fought before and after the Revolution were like this. The Texans were always horribly outnumbered often ending in massacre, capture or retreat but not before inflicting debilitating casualties on the enemy; on average inflicting 10 times the casualties on times there armies twice their size.

Now Back on Topic. Neither Jackson or Van Buren are going to go to war for Texas. If they do a Civil War or the Break-up of a political party will immediately follow, Which is why they barely recognized Texas let alone give them a commerce treaty or attempt to Annex Texas. (Which Texas offered twice and was twice refused.) Texas caused a few fracases in its day.
 
Last edited:

Dave Howery

Gurroruo said:
Actually the Texans won a lot of battles. Goliad, Bexar, Gonzales, La Bahia, etc. But if SA died, Urreas would rape the Texans. And then when America attacked Mexico in the Mexican American War, France and Britain would have stoppped America because it didn't have a cassis belli
Click to expand...

'rape' is a really inappropriate word here. Urrea was a decent sort who accepted surrenders and treated POWs decently. He was rather appalled at Santa Anna's order to massacre Fannin and his men after Goliad, and saved as many as he could...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top