Manifest destiny meets inclusion: Texas nationalism at the Alamo

Abstract

In San Antonio, Texas, the Alamo is an annual destination for 2.5 million visitors. From the early 1900s, the Daughters of the Republic of Texas (DRT) controlled the Alamo, with their nationalist, Anglo-centric version of the past. They allegedly ignored its previous history, erasing the Tejanos (Texas Latinos) who supported the 1836 Texas Revolution. Texas lawmakers recently voted to restrict DRT's control of the site. For tour guides, what is the Alamo's meaning? What happens as that meaning becomes more inclusive? This study documents Alamo guides' interaction with tourists, through the use of participant observation and interviews. At the Alamo, narratives now embrace Tejano heroism alongside Anglo heroism, and there is substantial inclusion of the Spanish language. Tour guides integrate political context and evidence-based history, alongside – and often in conflict with – the myth-making of the DRT. These are distinct and important adjustments, yet slavery and Alamo tourism's antagonistic past are not fully confronted. Guides wonder whether their story is simply harder to promote in the face of cultural pressures. When contested sites become more inclusive, there are unforeseen obstacles and consequences.

Keywords:

• ethnic identity
• historical accuracy
• nationalism
• mythology
• inclusion

Notes

The DRT have drawn further criticism and auditing from Texas politicians, after expelling members over an internal disagreement about whether to spend money fixing the roof, building a theater, or expanding the private library (McKinley, 2010). Another public struggle looms over alcohol sales and street vendors in Alamo Plaza (O'Connor, 2012). Official DRT custodianship of the Alamo was legally revoked as of 2011 (Office of the Attorney General, 2012).

Among the guides interviewed, seven are Anglo, three are Tejano; six are paid historical interpreters, four are volunteer docents; half are female, half are male. These interviewees ranged in age from 25 to 67. In the findings sections, I refer to guides aged 25–38 as ‘younger’ and guides 50–67 as ‘older’. All tour guides expressed support for the traditionally Anglo Texas creation myth (Brear, 1995), insofar as they valorized the Alamo battle as essential to an English-dominant Texas.

Winders, a media spokesperson for the Alamo, agreed to the use of his real name. All other participants are kept anonymous. This research was approved and monitored by the Institutional Review Board of University of Texas at San Antonio.

Emphasizing this bravery as universal, a sign outside the Long Barracks calls it an act of heroism ‘whose consequences have helped shape the world’. One Tejano guide showed his respect for this heroism by participating in Alamo re-enactments, as a Mexican soldier.

This claim about ‘bought time’ is untrue, even according to the Alamo's own website: Sam Houston was neither building nor training an army during the siege (Daughters of the Republic of Texas, 2012). Yet this heroic legend has remained popular.

Similarly, two guides were themselves relieved about the removal of confusing artifacts, such as Santa Anna's bed, which had been incongruously displayed in the Long Barracks.

In terms of race, North Mexico in 1836 was not like the USA; indigenous people saw themselves as Tejanos (De Leon, 1983), segregated facilities were rare, ‘One Drop’ laws never existed, and all human beings were entitled to citizenship, regardless of race.

This happened a month after the Alamo battle, southeast of San Antonio. Anglos and Tejanos of the Republic of Texas Army were defeated and killed by Mexican General José Urrea (Roberts & Olson, 2001).

Flores (2002) documented the bitter rivalry between DRT leaders De Zavala and Driscoll. National newspapers have long documented Alamo tour site conflicts, as far back as their original real estate dispute (New battle of the Alamo: Texas women want to take historic site out of politics, 1912).