In fact, as my letter states, it was not intended to be sent to the entire Mayflower list. However, I have no particular objection to sharing those reservations - just not sure everyone on the list cares about it. Apologies to anyone who finds it off-topic, as it has nothing to do with Mayflower genealogy. Jeremy Bangs

Dr. Bangs, I'm sure all would agree that your comments are not only on-topic (i.e. Mayflower related), but they are more than welcome, and appreciated. Any serious scholar of our Mayflower ancestors will also be concerned over the "minor details" you speak of, particularly when historical inaccuracies are "sanctioned" simply by being presented on the screen. Unfortunately, if such inaccuracies are found in this newest presentment, it won't be the first time. Susan E. Roser www.rootsweb.com/~canms/canada.html -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 4:26 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [MFLR] my comments on the new movie In fact, as my letter states, it was not intended to be sent to the entire Mayflower list. However, I have no particular objection to sharing those reservations - just not sure everyone on the list cares about it. Apologies to anyone who finds it off-topic, as it has nothing to do with Mayflower genealogy. Jeremy Bangs -------------------------------

I am also one of the reviewers of the film. I think Dr. Bangs' comments are excellent and definitely on-topic. Yes, there are several inaccuracies in the presentation. However, I think the number and importance of myths that it dispels far exceeds those that it continues. The initial reviewer talked of economic reasons being promoted as the main reason to leave Leiden. This wasn't my impression at all. They talked of their children becoming Dutch, speaking Dutch, and this was worrisome. Also they mentioned the fact that the English had been able to force the Dutch government into stopping their printing of religious pamphlets that they had been sending back to England. They did decrease the importance of the Mayflower Compact, but I anticipated that, as it has been a bone of contention for the last decade or more. My main disappointment was the "First Thanksgiving" when they showed a huge roast turkey being served at an indoor sit-down dinner. At least they didn't show them using forks! I still highly recommend that people watch it. If it increases interest in our ancestors and in Thanksgiving (and keeps it from being overrun by Christmas,) I'm all for it. Robert Luce Chilton's Children Family Association Sunday, November 12, 2006, 3:12:12 PM, you wrote: > Dr. Bangs, > I'm sure all would agree that your comments are not only on-topic (i.e. > Mayflower related), but they are more than welcome, and appreciated. Any > serious scholar of our Mayflower ancestors will also be concerned over the > "minor details" you speak of, particularly when historical inaccuracies are > "sanctioned" simply by being presented on the screen. Unfortunately, if such > inaccuracies are found in this newest presentment, it won't be the first > time. > Susan E. Roser -- Robert Luce <[email protected]> On ne voit bien qu'avec le coeur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux. -Antoine de Saint Exupéry