"America's Hidden History" by Kenneth C. Davis (2008)

First of all, the title of this book is misleading.  There is nothing "hidden" about this history, and all of the events discussed in this book have been public knowledge since their occurrence.  Yes, many of the details added by the author to the general narrative of American colonial, and pre-colonial history are not widely known, but in no way could the historical events introduced in this book be described as "hidden."

The title of this book is misleading in another sense.  The subtitle of this book is "Untold Tales of the First Pilgrims, Fighting Women, and Forgotten Founders Who Shaped a Nation."  This title wouldn't readily lead one to believe that the history discussed in this book stops at 1789.  A better title would have indicated the distinctly early-American perspective of this book, and would not have claimed - as this book seems to do - that it is a general survey of American history from the Spanish (and French) colonization of Florida to the present.  Yes, there is a little line of text on the back cover that does make this distinction, but it is an easy thing to overlook.

This book is divided into five sections.  Each of these sections focuses on a specific historical event, with digressions for "backstory" and other events occurring out of the general thrust of the author's narrative.  The historical events, in order, are: the Spanish conquest of Central and South America, the abduction of a New England settler by Indians, one of George Washington's early military blunders, events leading up to the Revolutionary War and the death of Joseph Warren, Benedict Arnold's military exploits, and Shays' Rebellion.  In each of these chapters the author goes to great pains to draw parallels between personal conflicts and larger events, though a dedication to historical accuracy and a lack of documentation somewhat hobble his efforts.

It's a decent book, but anyone who's ever taken a class in early American history will be familiar with the events and their popular interpretations.  I haven't read any books on this subject in some time, but I'm sure there are much better works of history covering the same time period(s). 

All told, it is a less-than-imaginitive work of non-fiction, which might be taken as a contradiction in terms.  "History", however, is an act of continual interpretation, so imagination plays a role in its definition.  What we say and decide about events is often more important than the events themselves.  I only wish the author had said more, and decided with more intelligence.