Earlier this year, a ceremony was held in downtown San Antonio featuring a small cannon “thought” to have been fired at the 1836 Battle of the Álamo.
It is the latest artifact that regardless of its origins, those in charge insist on placing it in Mission San Antonio de Valero, a structure they mistakenly call the “Álamo.” In truth, it was Presidio San Antonio de Béxar that was nicknamed the “Álamo,” and it was done for a very practical reason.
José Antonio LópezBy way of history, Álamo de Parras, Coahuila was home to the Compañía Volante (Flying Squadron) soldiers and their families stationed at Presidio San Antonio de Béxar in the early 1800s. That is, the troops were stationed at the presidio (military post), not the mission (church). Local inhabitants (Bexareños) referred to the presidio compound as “El lugar donde vive la gente de Álamo de Parras” (The place where the people from Álamo de Parras, Coahuila live). Soon, Bexareños shortened the long phrase to “El Álamo”, meaning the Presidio. As such, the term “Álamo” has organic roots to Coahuila, not Texas.
Since 1848, conventional historians in the U.S. have attempted to force-fit the 1836 Texas battle into U.S. history by describing it as equal to, for example, the Battle of Concord in the U.S. The comparison is incompatible. Battles of the U.S. War of Independence happened in New England, while the 1836 Battle of the Álamo happened in New Spain. Specifically, in soil of the sovereign nation of Mexico. Keep this key point in perspective, because remember that Mexico did not lose Texas (including South Texas and the Southwest) to the U.S. until 1848.
The question is, how come certain civic groups, media, and tourist agencies ignore historical facts? Contrary to their prevailing perception, that is, missions and presidios are not equivalent in purpose or deed.
It is a matter of record that contact between these two Spanish institutions in America was mostly always contentious. Thus, the viceroy forever acted as the referee in constant disputes between catholic bishops and presidio commanders. The reason is that Spanish missions and presidios in America had distinguishing characteristics that set them totally opposed to each other. Clearly, in dealing with Native Americans, the padres relied on benevolence, while contact with presidio captains usually resulted in violence. See below for a comparison between the two entities.
Missions were entirely religious in nature. Headed by Roman Catholic clergy, missions were set up with only one special assignment. That is, to Christianize Native Americans. Setting them further apart from military presidios, missions were (are) houses of worship. Their “mission” was complete when the local indigenous population they were assigned to serve became Christians. Once that was determined, the structure was secularized (made into a regular church or closed as a religious institution).
The list of Texas missions (built in the late 1600s to mid-1700s) is long. In his book, “Spanish Texas, 1519-1821,” author Don Chipman writes that San Francisco de los Tejas in East Texas was the first mission; with Roman Catholic Mass celebrated on June 1, 1690.
Also included are Santísimo Nombre de Maria, San José de los Nazonís, Nuestra Señora de Guadalupe, Nuestra Señora de los Dolores, San Miguel de los Adaes, San Antonio de Valero (formerly San Francisco Solano), Concepción, Espada, San José, San Juan, San Francisco Xavier, San Ildefonso, Nuestra Señora de la Candelaria, and Espíritu Santo. San Bernardo and San Juan Bautista, located in present-day Coahuila also served Native Americans from Texas.
Thus, as regards this latest display of a cannon within the mission, the heavenly choir of padres who served in Mission San Antonio de Valero must be horrified to see military weapons in their religious sanctuary.
Presidios, on the other hand, were entirely military and headed by Spanish Army officers. The first walled defensive presidio in New Spain was built in 1570. As the Spanish ventured north from Mexico City, the first garrison was built near Zacatecas to defend against hostile tribes. In a few years, dozens of presidios dotted the territory. As for Texas, the first one is Presidio San Juan Bautista del Rio Grande, completed in 1703 in present-day Guerrero, Coahuila, across from Eagle Pass, Texas. Because of its strategic location, it was called the “Gateway to Texas.” No European could enter Texas territory unless they first reported to San Juan Bautista to receive official authorization.
Interaction between the military and indigenous tribes was usually confrontational. Thus, few local Indios lived within the confines of the presidio. Initially and as a precaution only presidial soldiers and their families lived inside the compound. As the presidios outgrew their confining walls, they gave root to the region’s first towns in early Texas. By that time, most indigenous people had adopted Christianity. Intermarrying into Spanish European society, trying to avoid hostile tribes, and/or seeking trade opportunities/employment, local Indios were finally absorbed as part of the community, giving birth to today’s Mexican-descent Texans.
Other presidios in Texas established in the early 1700s include San Antonio de Béxar, Nuestra Señora de los Dolores, Nuestra Señora de Loreto (La Bahia), Nuestra Señora del Pilar, Presidio San Sabá (San Luis de las Amarillas), San Gabriel, and San Xavier. Many others remained in the planning stage.
Thus as integral parts, Missions and Presidios embrace much of the story of early Texas. Lest we forget, they are the source of the first Spanish European and Mexican footprints in Texas, whose realm extended from west to east Texas. Connected by the Camino Real system of roads, they initiated most of the modern-day communities dotting the landscape. Many of these sites (as well as rivers and regions) have Spanish names, Anglicized Spanish names, or were renamed in English.
In summary, the following facts are worth reinforcing. (l) Make visitors aware that Presidio San Antonio de Béxar is the place that Bexareños tagged as the “Álamo, not Mission San Antonio de Valero. Concede that the presidio was the victim of pure capitalism. It no longer exists, because city leaders tore the presidio down for commercial development. (2) The 1836 Texas battles (Álamo, Goliad, and San Jacinto) are a chronological chapter in the history of Mexico, not the U.S. (3) Nowhere else in history has one ethnic group robbed another group of its heritage to embellish its own. Yet, that’s what has been done to Mission San Antonio de Valero and La Bahia Presidio.
Lastly, the general public must be told the truth. The building called “The Álamo” is in fact a religious sanctuary. Yes, the structure is a “shrine,” but not one referring to the 1836 battle. Rather, just like other houses of prayer, its image, form, and function is clearly peaceful, not of conflict. It’s a Roman Catholic church, not a fort. Pre-1848 Texas historic structures must no longer be marketed only because armed Anglo expatriates from the U.S. died there. It’s time to honor them for their strength, beauty, and creativity of their Spanish Mexican builders. ¡Viva San Antonio de Valero! ¡Viva Texas!
