Thursday marks the 189th anniversary of the Battle of the Alamo, where the Mexican army’s rout of Texas revolutionaries would later inspire the fateful defeat of Mexican forces under the battle cry “Remember the Alamo.”

The Spanish mission-turned-battleground is one of Texas’s most iconic locations, symbolizing state pride and independence and one of its most popular tourist attractions. Established in 1718 as Mission San Antonio de Valero and relocated to its current location six years later, the site that came to be known as the Alamo was one of five Spanish missions built along the San Antonio River in what is now South Texas.

“The Alamo battle is part of the fabric of who we are as Texans,” said Kolby Lanham, the Alamo’s senior researcher and historian.

But it’s also a source of debate over how history is recalled and by whom, as some strive to offer perspectives that counter the mythology surrounding the event.

The buildup to the battle

Mexico gained independence from Spain in 1821. Texas was a contested territory, and by 1836 the Alamo had become a military outpost as Texans fought to win independence.

That February, 189 Texan soldiers commanded by James Bowie and William Travis had locked themselves inside the mission walls as Gen. Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna’s Mexican army approached, intent on a siege. Among those inside taking up arms against the Mexican forces were folk legend Davy Crockett, a Tennessee congressman, and Texans of Mexican descent, or Tejanos.

On Feb. 24, as Mexican troops amassed to several thousand strong and the two sides traded sporadic gunfire, Travis wrote a now-famous missive “to the people of Texas and all Americans in the world” pleading for reinforcements.

“I shall never surrender or retreat,” he wrote. “…. If this call is neglected, I am determined to sustain myself as long as possible & die like a soldier who never forgets what is due to his own honor & that of his country.”

Travis signed off, “Victory or Death.”

Why was the Battle of the Alamo significant?

By the morning of March 6, Santa Anna’s troops, numbering nearly 5,000, attacked at dawn. They quickly breached the mission’s north walls, overwhelming the occupants and killing nearly all of them.

“It becomes a rallying call for the Texas Revolution,” Lanham said. “Many people who maybe weren’t involved or who had sat on the fence joined the cause.”

Six weeks later on April 21, led by Sam Houston’s army and shouting “Remember the Alamo,” the Texans defeated Mexican forces at the Battle of San Jacinto, capturing Santa Anna and forcing the withdrawal of his troops.

The victory earned Texas independence. The territory would remain independent until 1845, when its Legislature approved United States annexation.

“With that final battle, Texas becomes a nation,” said Lanham, whose ancestors fought in the conflict. “When it joined the union, Texas already had this big, bold identity that came along with it, and people haven’t lost sight of that.”

Three years later, after the Mexican-American War, the U.S. would obtain most of what is now the American Southwest with the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.

Why has the site ignited controversy?

The Battle of the Alamo has been depicted in film and pop culture for over a century, most notably in the 1960 John Wayne vehicle “The Alamo.” But such retellings have been criticized for oversimplifying the conflict with racial overtones and the myth of martyred white heroes, with damaging reverberations.

“The Mexican army won the battle of the Alamo, so you would think that would make it a point of pride for people of Mexican descent, but that’s not the case,” said Sarah Zenaida Gould, executive director of San Antonio’s Mexican American Civil Rights Institute. “Instead, over time the Alamo becomes this symbol of Texas greatness. … Many Mexican Americans have stories of growing up in Texas and feeling shame about the Alamo and their ancestors defending their own country.”

Scholars such as University of Texas anthropology professor Richard Flores have recently examined how characterizations of the site have both reflected the state’s struggle with its Anglo and Mexican identity and distorted the reality of what occurred. Such reexaminations have drawn scorn in recent years amid ongoing culture wars.

Meet the ‘Angel of the Alamo’: Adina De Zavala’s grand stand in 1908 saved a landmark of Texas history

“History changes and adapts over time,” Lanham said. “Some people don’t really want the story to change. They love the way the story was told, and as things are added to the story they get uncomfortable.”

In 2021, authors Bryan Burrough, Jason Stanford, and Chris Tomlinson released “Forget the Alamo: The Rise and Fall of an American Myth,” exploring how racism and the desire to practice slavery played roles in Texas history. That July, an event promoting the book was set for Austin’s Bullock Texas State History Museum until Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, a member of the State Preservation Board, pressured museum directors to call off the event just hours before it was to take place.

“This fact-free rewriting of TX history has no place @BullockMuseum,” Patrick posted on social media. The move was criticized as censorship.

Gould said research bears out the book’s premise.

“A lot of Anglos who were at the battle were pushing to expand slavery,” Gould said. “That wasn’t the sole reason why it happened, but it was a complaint they had against the Mexican government, which had outlawed slavery in 1821.”

Historic site nearly lost to development

Following the Texans’ victory, Lanham said, the mission was vacated, its cannon disabled, and the outer walls torn down. As noted on the Alamo website, the site fell into disrepair until the U.S. Army took it over in the 1840s as a supply hub, only to be abandoned again with the building of a more permanent military garrison at Fort Sam Houston.

According to Gould, San Antonio experienced a power shift in the aftermath of the battle, with the site roughly marking an east-west divide between white residents and those of Mexican descent, who had become marginalized as the city grew.

“Until 1836, every mayor of San Antonio had a Spanish surname,” she said. “Not until 1980 would there be another.”

San Antonio expanded across the river as German immigrants moved into the area, and many mission buildings were lost. The chapel and long barrack are all that remain of the original compound, Lanham said, thanks to early 20^th-century preservationists who fought to save them from development.

How is The Alamo remembered today?

At 6 a.m. Thursday, the Alamo was set to host an annual ceremony commemorating those who lost their lives in the historic battle. Jonathan Huhn, the site’s senior communications director, said this year’s 189^th anniversary is special given that it marks the number of soldiers who fought to defend the site in 1836.

Today, the Alamo is one of Texas’ most popular tourist sites, visited by 1.6 million people annually. In March 2023, the 24,000-square-foot Ralston Family Collections Center opened at the site, part of a $550 million project to restore and revitalize the historic location that site leaders predict will raise annual visitor figures to 2.5 million.

The collections center houses Alamo artifacts, including items donated by rock legend Phil Collins, who became enthralled by Alamo lore as a child. The items will eventually move to a new visitor center and museum, expected to open in 2027, with the collection center available for traveling exhibits.

The future museum will feature eight galleries chronicling the 300 years of history encompassing the Alamo and the surrounding area, from the Indigenous inhabitants who settled along the San Antonio River thousands of years before European arrival, to the role adjacent businesses played in civil rights struggles.

It’s a step toward acknowledging the complex history around one of Texas’ most iconic structures.

Gould said the shame once felt by Texans of Mexican descent “has evolved into an understanding that the myth of the Alamo as a cradle of liberty was created for particular ideological purposes, and we shouldn’t just accept it at face value. These days people are more attuned to the idea that history has multiple perspectives and that it’s not a single narrative.”