US History From a Brasilian's Perspective

One reviewer of Mayflower asserted that Nathaniel Philbrick “avoid[ed] the overarching moral issues [of his subject] and [took] no sides.” Do you find this to be true? Are there moral lessons Philbrick wants us to learn? If so, what are they?

One of my favorite aspect about this entire book is that Philbrick didn't take sides. I despise it when an author expresses a belief as an undeniable truth. When an author takes side, it make me almost lose complete faith in them. Sure it could be true, but I'm also sure that something in the argument is false, no matter how small. However, I would have to disagree with the other part of the quote because by no means did Philbrick avoid the moral issues of the subject. He may not have taken sides as to who was morally correct but he did thoroughly explain how morality and religion played into almost every part of the formation of America.

I think that if there was a moral lesson Philbrick wanted his readers to take from Mayflower, it would be to be tolerant of people who are different then yourself, and that's stretching it. Philbrick is a historian and Mayflower is a history book. It may be an interesting story with some lessons to be learnt from, but it is not meant to provide an overarching moral lesson.