Mayflower
by Nathaniel Philbrick
Penguin (Non-Classics); Reprint edition (April 24, 2007)
As someone who considers “America’s Hometown” his hometown, my knowledge of the Pilgrims is nauseating at times. I grew up a stone’s throw from Plimoth Plantation (literally kids used to throw stones at it) and about 100 yards from the Eel River (which turned out to be an integral body of water to the Pilgrims).
In fact, I fell in Eel River at least 3 times in my life— fishing. It took me years to understand that fishing isn’t supposed to be an extreme sport (although I hear it is up for consideration for X-Games 2008).
All that said, for someone who has driven by places like The Governor John Carver motel, the Pilgrim Sands hotel, his whole life— and has even given audio tours of Plymouth Rock, the Plantation and the Mayflower II— Philbrick’s “Mayflower” was incredibly illuminating and enjoyable— and comes highly recommended.
I approached the book expecting to be regaled with stories of the treacherous journey across the sea in a tiny boat— but “Mayflower” concentrates heavily on what happened once the Pilgrims came ashore. The book traces the beginnings of the “cult” of Pilgrims and truly gains momentum as it parallels the leaders of the Pokanoket Indians and the Pilgrims in 1620— and the second generations of both.
The message of the book is timely— it stresses that a dynamic of war and conflict was not inherent in the relationship between these 2 cultures, and at first— through compromise, respect, and need— they maintained a delicate balance to avoid war.
However, when the second generation of Pilgrims became more and more greedy, and more and more intolerant of the Natives, war became inevitable.
“Mayflower” brings the reader from pre-1620, up through King Philip’s War (post-1670) and the incredible horrors of this conflict.
For someone who today lives a stone’s throw from the Boston Common (OK, maybe if you had a cannon for an arm) the idea of Indian heads mounted on posts, or people tied to trees there about 350 years ago, is horrifying.
I have read a bit on Native American history "Bury my Heart at Wounded Knee" for example) and found “Mayflower” to be a better and more interesting view on the details of the conflict and the incredible evil that often motivated the English settlers. While “Buried” displays the western expansion and details many battles, “Mayflower” gives the reader a greater arc of story and has more room for the personal details of the characters. Its voice and content are interesting, and it is actually a very easy read.
Finally, “Mayflower” attempts to parallel the dynamic between the English and Natives with that of the American’s and those in the Middle East today. It draws connections between the fact that religious differences, economic need, and cultural disparities are not the cause of war and bloodshed— as the original English and Native dynamic in the Northeast allowed for all these things in a delicate harmony. Rather, Philbrick shows, misunderstanding and greed are the root of war. And can certainly be avoided.
____________________________________
Reviewed by Kurt Cole Eidsvig
While Eidsvig's own ancestors may have been marauding, insane Vikings, Kurt bypasses a horned helmet in order to devote himself to painting, writing poetry, and adoring Frank O'Hara. For more on Eidsvig and O'Hara both, check out his blog.
2 comments:
I think I've always been fascinated with early American (i.e. European American) history for the very reason that I grew up so far away from where it all happened. As a kid growing up in suburban Houston, I knew New England only through school history books; Until I drove to Plymouth with you two summers ago, my image of the area was still dialed to the 1600s.
Sounds like a great book. Have you read Richard Slotnik's Regeneration Through Violence? It's a historical and interpretive approach to the "American Experiment," and Slotnik focuses heavily on colonist/indian conflicts--particularly on the intersection of their very disparate understandings of land use, currency, human nature, property, etc. In one example--and this is straying from your review somewhat--he explains that colonists and indians likely understood the transaction whereby colonists "bought" Manhattan Island in totally different ways: Colonists believing they now held exclusive rights to the land, indians seeing the transaction as a sort of symbolic gesture of goodwill.
Now, I don't know if Slotnik is right about it all (he's deeply invested in the idea of the mythologizing of the frontier), but it's good, substantial (400+ pages) reading.
I started this book last fall, and intend to finish it before Thanksgiving.
It got a bit tedious at times mid-way.
As someone with a life long fascination for history, in particular European and American history I can advise a caveat here.
Historians are genus Homo Sapiens themselves, and just as prone to presumption and prejudicial viewpoint as the rest of us.
Some of the colonists were base and selfish, others showed great nobility and compassion.
The same can be said for the native tribes they encountered, all over the continent.
There was great nobility, and also a great deal of mean and self serving behavior in their camps.
You are very discerning in your comment on cultural backgrounds creating great confusion as to the other parties intent at times.
We tend to view history from the prism of our 'enlightened' viewpoints of today.
Life has always been hard througout history for most of mankind.
In the 17th century almost half of the women could expect to die as a result of childbirth, and a man in his fifties was considered to be 'old'.
Something as simple as a minor scratch or abrasion could be fatal, and childhood disease killed millions.
Disease killed more tribal Americans than warfare, either amongst themselves or with the colonists from across the seas.
As tough as we think we have it now, no sane person would want to go back to that era.
It is amazing that the framework for change and a chance at individual freedom that the founders gave us has survived for almost 400 years now.
Post a Comment