The book is described as a hodgepodge of half-remembered stories, lacking coherence and depth. The author critiques the book's reliance on impressionistic connections rather than solid evidence.
Jason Colavito's review of 'America Before' is quite critical. He argues that the book is a collection of disjointed ideas and stories that don't come together to form a cohesive argument. Colavito suggests that Hancock's work relies too heavily on speculative connections and anecdotal evidence, rather than presenting a well-researched and substantiated narrative. He finds the book more imaginative than factual, which may disappoint readers looking for a rigorous exploration of lost civilizations.
Quick quotes
In the end, America Before is similar to the lost civilization Hancock imagines—a hodgepodge of half-remembered stories tying together impressionistic connections.
The book is a collection of disjointed ideas and stories that don't come together to form a cohesive argument.
Hancock's work relies too heavily on speculative connections and anecdotal evidence.