José Enrique de la Peña (1807–1840)

This account of the Texas Revolution is told from the perspective of José Enrique de la Peña, a brevet Lt. Colonel in the Zapadores (Sappers) attached to the Toluca Battalion of the Mexican Army of Operations in Texas. De la Peña has produced one of the more readable first hand Mexican accounts of the war. It is vastly easier to comprehend than the convoluted writing of his superior officers, Generals FIlisola, Urrea, and Santa Anna.

The first part, comprising most of the book, details the movements of the Mexican Army leading up to April 21, including accounts of the battles at Coleto and the Alamo. De la Peña describes the hardships endured by the Mexican Army, especially the lack of adequate food and clothing. He also casts aspersions on the Army’s leadership, attacking leaders from Santa Anna, to Ramirez y Sesma, to Secretario de Guerra y Marina Tornel. De la Peña is very fair to the Texan soldiers, noting their courage and tenacity, while still decrying their efforts to separate Texas from Mexico. He also attacks the execution of American and Texan prisoners as inhumane and unworthy acts.

De la Peña was not present at San Jacinto, but was with Filisola at Thompson’s Crossing on April 21. He describes the reaction of the Mexican leadership as panicked and irredeemable, and claims that the Mexican Army rank and file is chomping at the bit to go attack the Texans under Houston. While de la Peña and his compatriots might have been ready to go, I highly doubt that the typical mestizo draftees who comprised most of the remaining Mexican troops in Texas wanted anything but to go home. De la Peña goes on to describe the terrible conditions during the retreat back to Mexico.

It is relevant to note here that de la Peña was a Federalist and eventually joined a short-lived rebellion against the Centralist government, along with Urrea. Most of de la Peña’s attacks are targeted at Centralist generals and should be read with that in mind. I don’t think that de la Peña was immune to exaggeration in promoting his side of the Federalist-Centralist debate. Also, de la Peña was caught up in the finger-pointing after the loss of Texas and actively sided with Urrea in attacking Filisola and other Centralists in the editorial battle between the two sides.

Of course, de la Peña’s account is famous (or infamous) due to his account of the battle of the Alamo, including the surrender and execution of Davy Crockett. Entire books have been written supporting and attacking the authenticity of this book because of this one passage.

I think that there is little evidence that the diary as a whole was a forgery. The text is rich with details about the Mexican and Texan Armies, the towns the Army passed through and descriptions of the American colonies in Texas. If this was a forgery created in the 1950s as some have claimed, new information discovered over the last 50 years would have exposed errors in the text. As far as I know, no glaring errors have been found except for a description about Travis fighting in the Alamo after the Mexicans breached the walls.

I consider this book essential reading for anyone interested in the revolutionary history of Texas. For someone dipping a toe into Mexican accounts of the Revolution, this is a great starting place as it is very readable and entertaining. The end of de la Peña’s book will also give you a taste of the attacks the Mexican generals made on each other after returning to Mexico.… (más)