Talk:Antonio López de Santa Anna/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Antonio López de Santa Anna. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Terms of presidency

The article states that SA was president of Mexico eleven times; the infobox only has 5 terms of presidency. Which is correct? User:FeanorStar7

Reply: From all published accounts that I've found to date, Santa Anna was president of Mexcio eleven times. Now how long each time lasted might make it harder to pin point. User: tlincoln 01:29, 26 June 2005 (UTC)

Here are a few dates to ponder:

30 March 1833/ 16 May 1833/ 3 June 1833/ 27 Oct. 1833/ 24 April 1834/ 20 March 1839/ 10 Oct. 1841/ 4 March 1843/ 4 June 1844/ 6 Dec. 1846/ 21 March 1847/ 20 May 1847/ 20 April 1853

Perhaps these can be collated with other dates to get an exact match. The following web sites all list his being president eleven times.

www.historicaltextarchive.com / www.tamu.edu.ccbn/dewitt/santaanna.htm / www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/people / www.mexconnect.com / www.libutexas.edu/benson/Mex_Archives

Now let us not raise our blood pressure over this issue. A simple, intelligent, non-finger pointing debate session will be healthy. Isn't history wonderful? Thanks and enjoy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.251.89.66 (talk • contribs) 03:42, 29 September 2005

Changes to Biography

I deleted a few sentences that were incorrect. One of these stating that Santa Anna was Emperor. He was never an Emperor. Dictator, yes. I tried to fix his early military carreer so it appears a bit more chronological.

Santa Anna was such a powerful force in American history, and he such an enigma, that it's hard to note down all the details of his life. For sure he was in love with himself and power.

I stopped at the US mexican war. He played a huge part in defending Mexico, and it seems that one paragraph on this topic should not be enough. I will make additional changes, and invite others to do so. Skibofilms 18:19, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup tag

This article needs some serious attention to make it clear, comprehensive and acurate (note disputes above). This perhaps may require an expert (which I am not). It seems that there is some discussion going on, and hopefully the cleanup tag will attract some fresh eyes. beekman 13:16, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Presidential Periods

This are the presidential periods, in some cases, days, when Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna were known as President of Mexico....

May 16 1833 / Jun 1 1833, elected by the votes of electors appointed by the state legislatures (votes counted at the joint meeting of the Congress 30 Mar 1833) oath of office taken, joint session of the Congress, Mexico City. left office several times to suppress revolts against his government (2 Jun 1833 - 17 Jun 1833)

Jun 18 1833 / Jul 5 1833, left office several times to suppress revolts against his government (6 Jul 1833 - 27 Oct 1833)

Oct 28 1833 / Dic 4 1833, granted leave of absence for health recovery (5 Dec 1833 - 23 Apr 1834); headed a coup to remove Gómez Farías and resumed presidency (24 Apr 1834).

Apr 24 1834 / Jan 27 1835, tendered his resignation to the Congress (22 Jan 1835), which was declined by the Chamber of Deputies (27 Jan 1835); was granted leave of absence for health recovery and retired to his estate.

Mar 18 1839 / Jul 9 1839 named provisional president to fill in for President Bustamante (18 Mar 1839), leading an army to suppress a rebellion in Tampico; pleaded illness and left the presidency (10 Jul 1839).

Oct 9 1841 / Oct 25 1842. appointed provisional president (9 Oct 1841) by a body composed of two representatives from each state.

Mar 5 1843 / Oct 3 1843

Jun 4 1844 / Sep 11 1844. Substituted on a number of occasions by interim presidents (Nicolás Bravo and Valentín Canalizo); elected constitutional president for the term beginning on 1 Feb 1844, but refused to enter the office (Valentín Canalizo elected interim president); assumed the presidency on 4 Jun 1844; obtained leave of absence for health treatment and transferred presidency to José Joaquín de Herrera (12 Sep 1844), who was in charge until Canalizo replaced him as interim president (21 Sep 1844); congressmen and military leaders announced the Santa Anna government deposed (17 Dec 1844); was arrested (15 Jan 1845) and imprisoned; amnestied (May 1845); sailed for Havana, Cuba; recalled to lead the war effort against the United States and returned on 16 Aug 1846; appointed commander-in-chief; elected president (Dec 1846), but departed for the north, leaving Vice President Gómez Farías in charge; attacked the American army under General Zachary Taylor near Buena Vista (22-23 Feb 1847), but retired with great losses; hearing of the overthrow of Gómez Farías, hastened to Mexico City and occupied the presidency on 21 Mar 1847; left General Pedro María de Anaya in charge and took command of the forces in the state of Vera Cruz.; was attacked and totally defeated at Cerro Gordo on 17-18 Apr 1847; retreated to Mexico City to organize an army to defend the capital against the advancing American forces; Mexico City was occupied by the American army (14 Sep 1847); resigned the presidency; obtained permission to leave the country, sailing for Jamaica (1848); established himself in Turbaco, near Cartagena (1850); recalled, following the revolution of 1853; arrived in Vera Cruz (1 Apr 1853); took possession of the executive (20 Apr 1853); received from the Council of State the right to continue to exercise extraordinary powers for as long as he deemed necessary, title of Su Alteza Serenísima (His Most Serene Highness), and the power of nominating his successor (19 Nov 1853); rule soon became so despotic that revolutions began everywhere, the principal one being that of Ayutla, directed by General Juan Nepomuceno Álvarez Hurtado; after a severe struggle and many defeats abandoned the capital (9 Aug 1855).

Mar 21 1847 / Mar 31 1847

May 20 1847 / Sep 15 1847

Apr 20 1853 / Aug 9 1855

--Iasijram 21:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Early years

An anon user added an entire Early Years history to the article. Can it be substantiated? Kevin Breitenstein 04:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Opium Addiction: follow-up

In his book about the Texas Revolution, Duel of Eagles, Jeffery Long reported that both Santa Anna and Sam Houston used laudanum, a then-common, opium-based medicine. Both were addicted to the point that it caused real problems for their judgement and health.

It should be noted that laudanum was not a recreational drug and was viewed at the time as a legitimate medicine (see the Wikipedia article). Most addicts innocently acquired the habit by using laudanum for pain or some other problem; I suspect that was the case with both Houston and Santa Anna.

The phrase "opium addict" may conjure up an image for some readers that does not exactly fit Santa Anna. I suggest any addition to the article use the more specific term, "laudanum", and note that Santa Anna became "addicted to laudanum, a widely used opium-based medication." --A. B. 00:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Most presidencies?

Does anyone have an idea if any person has been a president of any country more times than he was? Nyttend 14:04, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I seem to remember he had more non-consecutive presidencies than any head of state who ever lived over the same nation.I can't remember the source though. TaylorSAllen 23:55, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

References

I can't seem to add any references to this page for the facts that have already been stated, any Ideas? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prifesor (talk • contribs) 08:59, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

I have him as President of Mexico ten times, but that's the mos the box will allow. Could someone please find a way to get his eleventh term in there? Therequiembellishere (talk) 11:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit/ Reverts

The page at about 6:30 and until about 6:50 read 'HE WAS A BABY BACK BITCH' or something to that effect. I seem to remember seeing this before at school. The reverts are always quick (the person who performs the blanking, maybe does it) but still it could get worse. Has anyone else noted these breif issues? TaylorSAllen 23:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Yup, if you dig through the history tab you'll note many such occurrences. Rarely does the vandalism come from the same source, and rarely does it happen more than once a day or so. Not really often enough to semi-protect (block non-registered or new users). So we just keep our eyes on it and revert bad changes when they come up. Kuru ^talk 00:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

66.248.174.137 (talk) 20:14, 10 February 2008 (UTC)== Capture & Dishonor == It isn't mentioned in the article, but I had always heard that after his defeat by the Texan/Tejano forces he abandoned his men and was captured in women's clothing (dress, bra, headscarf, etc.) while fleeing amongst a group of refugees. Is this true? If it is, we should probably add it to the article. Along with his other actions, this would make him the most dishonorable military commander, like, ever. It doesn't get much worse than abandoning your men and hiding among civilians in drag. Childe Roland of Gilead 05:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't remember the women's clothing, but he was captured by Samuel Highsmith wearing a Mexican Army privates' uniform (this is in James Haley's book Texas (the non-fiction one, not Michner's) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.74.232.50 (talk • contribs) 22:17, 4 April 2007

In another of his quick exits, I have heard that he hid in a piano case when he left Mexico for St. Thomas (in a trip that included the bulk of his country's treasury). Anything else about his time here on St. Thomas?

Possible moves, disambiguation

Santa Anna is currently a redirect to Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, and info about "Anna also known as Saint Anne" is at Anna. I want to make Saint Anne info at Saint Anne and make Santa Anna a disambiguation page to the various meanings, but I'm waiting for a consensus on the Anna/Saint Anne move. See Talk:Anna. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.165.239.87 (talk • contribs) 20:58-20:59, 1 November 2002

I think the name is Ana, not Anna (at least in spanish the name is Ana) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.85.122.145 (talk) 16:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Descendant descrepancy

The article states that Santa Anna's second wife bore no children. But then it says:

"In 1897, Santa Anna's grandson by his second marriage, Santa Anna III (1881–1965), entered the Jesuit order."

Does anyone know what really happened? Perhaps this was a son of one of the illegitimate children? Sniffer12 (talk) 04:59, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Seven or eleven time president

I have read time and again that he was president on eleven occassions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.161.133.79 (talk) 00:46, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

See the following:

http://www.pbs.org/weta/thewest/people/s_z/santaanna.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.161.133.79 (talk) 00:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Santa Anna's current image

How do Mexicans view Santa Anna today? As a patriot? A brutal leader? A corrupt dictator? A good guy? A bad guy? --A. B. 00:24, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

A nobody, almost. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.150.219.119 (talk • contribs) 06:39, 30 November 2006

Well, Santa Anna is seen today as one of the darkest (if not the most) figures of mexican history. He is remembered for his tyrannic regime and his 11 presidential periods, his mediocrity as a militar, his erratic behavior when supporting a cause (You must know that during the first decades of independent Mexico there was a continous struggle between two main factions: the liberals, that supported the creation of a federal republic, and the conservatives, the ones that believed a monarchy led by a european prince would be the best option for the country). The most remarkable fact of his presidency, and perhaps the most remembered one is that our country lost about half of his territory, which has annexed by the United States. So, as simple as that, we mexicans consider Santa Anna a miserable traitor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.56.210.149 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 25 January 2007

He is viewed as a traitor who was used by the United States in their "Manifest Destiny" colonialist plans. Santa Anna was used in a similar manner to how the US used certain Native Americans against other Native Americans or specific Native American individuals were used by the Whites. This is because just like the US government went about paying specific individuals (often times Indians they had gotten addicted to alcohol) or Indians who didn't even own the land the US was "buying" the US did the following with Santa Anna; referring to the so-called "Gadsden purchase": Santa Anna claimed that he had no choice: "The United States would had taken the area by force if he had not agree to the sale." A rebellion slowly gathered strength. On March 1, 1854, a new revolt began with the announcement of the Plan of Ayutla by Liberal leaders. It called for an end to Santa Anna's regime and the convening of a national congress to write a new liberal constitution. ^[1]--Historylover4 (talk) 03:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

References

^ http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/mex-war/santa-anna2.htm

Confused

In April 1853, he was invited back by rebellious conservatives, with whom he succeeded in retaking the government. This reign was no better than his earlier ones. He funneled government funds to his own pockets, sold more territory to the United States (see Gadsden Purchase), and declared himself dictator for life with the title "Most Serene Highness". The Ayutla Rebellion of 1854 removed Santa Anna from power.

Despite his generous payoffs to the military for loyalty, by 1855 even conservative allies had had enough of Santa Anna. That year a group of liberals led by Benito Juárez and Ignacio Comonfort overthrew Santa Anna, and he fled back to Cuba.

If the Ayutla Rebellion of 1854 removed him from power, how was he overthrown again in 1855 without coming back in to power? And why does the infobox have his term from 1853 to 1855? Nil Einne (talk) 11:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

execution

why did they not execute him like he did with all the people in the Alamo and Golidad?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.14.211.156 (talk) 02:59, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

"López de Santa Anna"

So, should our subject be known as "López" or "Santa Anna". He is referred to as "López" once in the text, and an editor has just changed it so that he is sorted by "López" in categories. However "Santa Anna" seems to be the more usual name used. It'd be good to be consistent unless there's a reason. Any thoughts? -Willmcw 20:41, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

I would simply leave all references to him as Santa Anna. You're correct, he is almost universally recognized as Santa Anna. Tlincoln 17:46, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

This is true in Mexico as well. He never seems to be referred to as "López" and rarely as "Lopez de Santa Anna", almost always as "Santa Anna", which, by the way is pronounced as though it were spelled "Santana". Both the use of his second last name and the pronounciation are exceptions to the usual rules in Spanish. --Rbraunwa 17:56, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Anyone know why it's spelled with two 'n's, contrary to the usual rule in Spanish? Paul Magnussen (talk) 16:28, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

-He is to be refered as 'Santa Anna', and the double 'n's are strange in Spanish but most surely come from one of the many languages that exist in the Spanish Peninsula.

More could be said

I think more could be said in this article, but I'm probably not the best person to attempt it. Anyone? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.165.239.87 (talk • contribs) 20:38, 1 November 2002 santa anna:was saint anna to the other mexicans — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.214.72.202 (talk) 21:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Family

There are many wrong things being said about Santa Anna's family. As a historian, and expert in power and family relationships of the Viceroyalty of the New Spain, I think I can truly support the idea that Santa Anna belonged to the high class of Veracruz and not to the "criollo middle class" as it is being said. The fact that his father held a bureaucratic appointment does not mean that he was defined by that appointment, nor his family's economy, who's haciendas were very well-known at the time and who's last names represented everything that was criollo aristocratic identity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lope Díaz de Haro (talk • contribs) 21:36, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Slavery

I understood from one historian that part of the problem the Texans had with Santa Anna is that he did not allow slavery, widely practiced at the time in the southern regions of the present USA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.196.254.231 (talk • contribs) 04:14, 31 March 2005

Santa Anna was indeed opposed to slavery, although more than willing to compromise when politically expedient. Most Texians probably supported it, although relatively few owned slaves, and the Texas economy was not dependent upon slave labor to the extent the southern US economy was. There are only a handful of contemporary sources citing slavery as a key reason, among others, that the Texians rebelled, however. It has become popular in recent years to liken the Texas Revolution to the American Civil War, but that's probably not very accurate. By 1835, at least 75% of the population of Texas was Anglo, possibly higher. There was virtually no new Mexican settlement, and a steady stream of Anglo Americans and Europeans. When Santa Anna abrogated the Mexican Constitution and proclaimed himself dictator, most Texans were aghast at the prospect of being the subjects of a "foreign," dictatorial ruler, far away, with whom they had virtually nothing in common culturally, politically, or economically. It wasn't very hard from that position to move to outright rebellion. Given another decade, the issue of slavery would have become much more significant. At the same time, in a decade the Anglo population would have perhaps been in excess of 90%. The tide of history was simply against Mexico retaining control of Texas. Texas became a Mexican province by historical accident, inheriting it from Spain, which in turn owed it to the Papal compromise: not to settlement. To the north, the US and its burgeoning population, fueled by constant European immigration, superior economic and agricultural practices, and a cultural dynamism that just wasn't present in the old Spanish possessions, was on the move. There was no way Mexico was ever going to retain sparsely inhabited (by Mexicans), far-flung northern territories in the face of such competition.219.101.196.2 (talk) 09:12, 8 October 2012 (UTC)Vainamoinen

Psychopath

Everything I've read about Santa Anna seems to mark him as a psychopath, but I've been unable to find readings that discuss his psychological make-up. Are there any references that anyone has read that could be cited for this aspect of his personality? 50.202.81.2 (talk) 01:11, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Lead paragraph

The lead paragraph is a little euphemistic, and kind of slides over his many problematic actions (such as that if anyone had direct personal responsibility for both "losing" Texas and "losing" upper California, it was Santa Anna)... AnonMoos (talk) 21:44, 22 April 2010 (UTC) crazy craz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.25.187.106 (talk) 17:09, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Ambiguous Death

Did Santa Anna die peacefully or commit suicide? Who was the General Cos named in the first section?66.135.89.24 (talk) 04:54, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

indians had NOT driven Spanish form New Mexico

in 1846 Santa fe and Albuerqueue were large towns,

see wiki history of new mexico [[1]] 71.219.202.19 (talk) 18:21, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Antonio López de Santa Anna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:21, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Important details

How can you write about Santa Anna without mentioning the Alamo and talking about his defeat at the hands of general Sam Houston? Also, he called himself the "Napolean of the West" and obviously modelled his uniforms and that of his soldiers on the Napoleanic tradition. Seems like it's lacking some important details. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.161.91.63 (talk • contribs) 23:31-23:41, 16 November 2004

Improvements are welcome, as always. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 00:07, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Also what's written about the Alamo matter lacks citations and seems to be not neutral and justifying De Santa Anna behavior.Elettrozero (talk) 17:39, 10 December 2016 (UTC)elettrozero

The section is properly sourced. What information do you feel is inacurate or missiing? Mediatech492 (talk) 19:28, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Why not mention....?

I see several topics here regarding the number of presidencies, but why not mention, at least in a footnote, that several of the additional times were due to him returning after abandoning his post in the first place? I consider it the same "term" if he left the job in the hands of someone else and then returned to it later in the same period. The oft-cited Fowler claims six actual distinct presidencies, but the article doesn't mention the discrepancy. To present eleven as undisputed fact seems to me to be incomplete and not objective. RM2KX (talk) 03:22, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

You know your stuff - edit the article, reference your additions. That's how WP works. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 23:59, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I just did it. I like to get some things on the discussion record first, especially on great articles like this one. RM2KX (talk) 02:00, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Antonio López de Santa Anna. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.lib.utexas.edu/benson/Mex_Archives/Santa_Anna.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080723155832/http://texashistory.unt.edu/permalink/meta-pth-5828 to http://texashistory.unt.edu/permalink/meta-pth-5828
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.archontology.org/nations/mex/mex2/santa_anna1.php
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060822022222/http://tides.sfasu.edu/ to http://tides.sfasu.edu/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:28, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Main picture

There has been dispute about the main photo If someone could be willing to verify this, thanks

Lomjryo (talk) 14:55, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Needs a lot of improvement

This is an interesting and important entry, but unfortunately it is written very poorly. Facts are presented in short sentences as a condensed chronology of events, and sources are often mentioned inconsistently (for instance, mentioning a book by its title instead of referencing a bibliographical entry). There are also some paragraphs which seem to provide contradictory perspectives on events. It would help if the most objective perspective were presented first, and then the other positions/perspectives were presented (separately, and with proper attribution). Some examples are given below.

Seemingly uncalled for anecdotes: "With resentment growing, Santa Anna stepped down from power and fled in December 1844. The buried leg he left behind in the capital was dug up by a mob and dragged through the streets until nothing was left of it." - What does the information about the buried leg add to this paragraph? It seems to have been added for a reason, but it should be made clear. Is it argued that it symbolizes something?

Ambiguous/contradictory positions: "In August 1846, Santa Anna left for Veracruz. The Mexican people did not dwell on Santa Anna's past of military shortcomings and betrayals, because they still recognized him as a savior or hero who could make everything better. It had only been a year since he was forced out of the republic, but Santa Anna was still popular among the Mexican people. In "Santa Anna of Mexico", Fowler recognizes these events as a major turning point in Santa Anna's career and history, and explained his "transformation" or "resurrection" at the time. Though he had a history of corruption, many of the local people would often acknowledge that Santa Anna was the most reliable person to help Mexico get through the many obstacles and threats that the country would often face. His return was different from past events because Santa Anna had no intention of getting involved in politics again, intending to solely focus on aiding the military in its war against the United States.[47]" - The last sentence must be contextualized. I can only guess that it connects to the rest of the paragraph in relating to public opinion.

On the whole it would make the article less confusing if these opinions of Santa Anna were separated from the facts. It would also make sense to collect side notes on Santa Anna's opinion of himself into a designated section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.183.99.54 (talk) 13:43, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Opium addiction?

It was rumored that Santa Anna was an opium addict, according to "When Eagles Clash," any corroboration for this? -Babs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.136.24.56 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 17 September 2005

-Nonsense, that was only part of Houston's propaganda against him. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lope Díaz de Haro (talk • contribs) 21:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

I doubt anyone needed to use propaganda against such a pile of excrement, but keep defending him, my brave Mexican peon. be sure to put your machete to good use slaving away for the cartel!98.10.20.94 (talk) 15:04, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

[1] ttp://www.latinamericanstudies.org/mex-war/santa-anna2.htm

[1]