• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Texas Rising

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
8. I was disappointed that our tribe (the TSALAGI NVDAGI) & our permanent allies (the APACHES) were NOT shown to be "preying upon" the Mexican Army, as our warriors made life MISERABLE for the Mexican Army, from the moment that they crossed the Rio Bravo/Grande to the time that they arrived at San Jacinto.= The poisoned arrows, poisoned darts, occasional gunfire and "the silent knife that comes out of the darkness" caused the Mexicans to "withdraw" their scouting parties & "stay close to home", when the Army was not "on the march" AND our warriors frequently "reported upon" the activities/movements of the Mexican forces to GEN Houston's scouts.

Perhaps the lunatic survivor was an attempt by the writers to explain the deaths that the Mexican Army may have reported as you wrote, and I bolded above?
 
Best part of this series is the opening montage of
artifacts!

I laughed when I seen Kriz Kristofferson playing Andrew Jackson! ........ Really? :rotf:
 
I have watched both parts so far and I think it is far better TV than anything else that would have been available. What's not to like about a bunch of folks running around shooting off flintlocks and cannons?
 
Well by now, those who wanted to watch it did and those that didn't want to didn't! Swing a dead cat and your bound to hit a critic expert here, so all I'll say, is that it didn't follow history and was made for entertaining the masses and not history buffs!
 
There are still 3 more parts to it. It is supposed to be a 5 part special, with the next one coming next Monday. It looks like we also have 2 threads on it.
 
Not really in the know any more but my understanding is that New Mexico has some perks for production companies. Tax breaks used to be one way states lured production cos.

It is kind of funny that they are using sites in N.M. for Texas when we used to use Texas to portray other states.
 
Native Arizonan said:
I have watched both parts so far and I think it is far better TV than anything else that would have been available. What's not to like about a bunch of folks running around shooting off flintlocks and cannons?

You make a good point. :thumbsup:
 
That fragmentary quote is from the private campaign journal of 1LT Alonzo Luis Fuerza de Mendieta of the Mexican Engineer Corps, who "bitterly complained" about the "savage behavior of the Indian warriors toward our soldiers" & that "the savages never would stand & fight like Christian men".
("Hit & run", brief but violent raids, attacks from ambush positions & "attacks by stealth" was for uncounted centuries the AmerIndian style of warfare.)

ONE of the "techniques" to sow terror among the soldiers in camp was to slip into the enemy lines & slit the throat of every 5th or 6th man & then leave until the next night. - After few nights of that tactic, I suspect that FEW Mexican soldiers slept well, no matter how tired that they were.

Note: From the 17th Century when fighting against the Europeans to Afghanistan, "our way of warfare" has remained essentially unchanged, as many a Royalist/Tory, Bluecoat, Spaniard, German, Japanese, Korean, Chinese, Vietnamese, Iraqi or Afghan tribesman has had reason to fear our NA warriors. = Reports from Afghanistan reveal that "our lads haven't lost a step", when it comes of our style of unconventional war.

yours, satx
 
cavsgt said:
Not really in the know any more but my understanding is that New Mexico has some perks for production companies. Tax breaks used to be one way states lured production cos.

It is kind of funny that they are using sites in N.M. for Texas when we used to use Texas to portray other states.
Every thing east of the Rio Grand was Texas back then. So much of New Mexico and some of colorado were part of Texas. I seem to recall a little argument with Mexico about 10 years after the Revolution about ownership of the south part of Texas.
 
Actually, after the TX Revolution, there were THREE separate Republics in what NOW is The State of Texas:
1. The Republic of Texas,
2. The Republic of The Rio Grande, which was between the Rio Grande & Neches Rivers
and
3. The Caddoan Republic in what is now Cherokee, Rusk, Harrison, Upshur, Marion, Camp, Panola, Gregg, Smith and parts of other NE Texas counties, that lie near the Sabine River & south of SW Arkansas & SE Oklahoma.

All 3 fledgling republics had a flag, a president & congress, courts, a "more or less organized" military force, a capitol city & other "indicators" of sovereign nations.
The Caddoan Republic also had a National Anthem (Dawn at Caddo), a National Motto (Strength & Honor) AND (for about 15 years) a "Caddoan Navy", composed of 4 armed gunboats that patrolled the Sabine River, "against bandit gangs, renegades, smugglers & other men of evil intent".

Note: By January 1845 all 3 independent republics had "joined together", to enter the USA as ONE new State.

yours, satx
 
To ALL,

I would be remiss, as a Tsalagi Nvdagi, if I didn't mention our tribe's "Teenaged Horror". = Her name was HAS MANY HORSES & in 1836, she was probably about 15-16YO.
(A Mexican officer "ran 'her intended' through with a saber" & thereafter she "preyed upon everyone in Mexican uniform".)
Her "weapon of choice" was a blowgun/poisoned darts (smeared with snake venom & feces), which in a time before "modern medical care" was tantamount to a painful/lingering death.
(By The Battle of San Jacinto, the mention of her name, "caused unreasoning terror" among the Mexican forces.)

yours, satx
 
It's really hard for me to take Bill Paxton seriously, but after reading these posts I'll make an effort to watch this. GW
 
I had high hopes for this series because it was on the History channel. Boy, am I disappointed!!! The acting sucks to say the least. The scenery is absolutely nothing like the areas in which the story takes place. I have lived in and traveled through all of the places being represented in the story and I can tell you that they didn't even make an attempt to correctly represent it. It is, at best, a grade B production. It may, perhaps, fairly closely represent the confusion and poor choices that were made by the Texas forces at the time but it is presented in an extremely poor manner. I am offended by the way many of our Texas heroes are represented as some kind of doofuses.

A "Mystery Man" who suervived the Alamo? Didn't happen. Everyone at Goliad being killed? Didn't happen. There were several survivors who were able to run for cover and escaped. Waaay too much Hollywood and waaay too little factual history. I have found it to be a very poorly done and disappointing production.
 
Well,I am a lot like "deaf" I only have 30% hearing in 1 ear left,so understanding the spoken word does get by me most times :shocked2: But do I understand correctly that the negro bed wench is ya'lls YELLOW ROSE? Lord have mercy :doh:
 
Fwiw, MS. EMILY MORGAN was what in the 19th Century was called a "QUADROON", i.e., of 3/4 "White" & 1/4 African ancestry. - According to every period comment, that I've seen of her, "The Yellow Rose" was described as a STUNNING & SEDUCTIVE BEAUTY, who was oftentimes in those days compared to the Biblical DELILAH.
(Robert Potter, The TX Secretary of the Navy, stated that Ms. Morgan was "second in beauty to all women in Texas, excepting only my beloved Harriett.")

Note: After our Revolution was won, the Congress of the RoT awarded her "640 acres of rich bottomland of her choosing, for her bravery & invaluable contributions to Texas freedom".

yours, satx
 
So, you all liked Gone To Texas with rough and mumble character-actor Sam Elliott? There were no Indian allies in that historically-based film either...
 
Well, i finally got the chance to watch the first two episodes.

I had such high hopes for this as it looked like they had a budget and some recognizable actors who are a proven known quantity.

How in the........world, did they mess it up so badly? It's known story, with established known history that includes a wide range of cultures and characters and is exciting in its own right. Why do they feel the need to make things up and take so much....."license"? Who wrote this thing? I've seen better dialogue in porn. I like Bill Paxton but I have a hard time buying him as a war hardened, fearsome leader of men. Also, they do realize that all of Texas isn't tinted yellow, right? It's like they forgot to pay for color correction and just ran the whole thing through an instagram filter.

I'm unable to get invested in it, sadly.
 
PLEASE don't presume that the REAL Sam Houston was a "battle-hardened, fearsome leader of men", as he was NOT. = He basically was an AMATUER soldier. The sole "close combat" that he was in prior to our Revolution was HORSESHOE BEND when he was 19YO & various periods of fighting Native Americans. - Truthfully he wasn't a tactician/trained soldier but he had GUTS, EXCELLENT woodcraft skills as a hunter/outdoorsman & GOOD LUCK.

Had the Winter of 1835-36 NOT have been as bad/wet/cold as it was, had Santa Anna NOT been as s big of a self-important loudmouth/blowhard/poor tactician as he actually was & so badly underestimated the GUTS of Texicans, we would NOT have won our war against the Dictator.

The TRUTH is that POOR PLANNING, POOR TACTICS, over-extended lines of supply, POOR or NO effective field sanitation/medical care, POOR quality supplies, insufficient food/clean water and other weaknesses of the Mexican army caused their final DEFEAT, rather than our small/weak/largely untrained & AMATUER Texas Army.

yours, satx
 
I thought he saw more action than that fighting NAs. I assumed he had to have some of that character about him to be able to end up in that position and then hold the army together long enough to get the job done. You've obviously studied him more than I have.

I agree with you that, given the situation, the Mexican army probably lost the war more than the Texans won it.
 
Back
Top