Christopher Columbus set sail in 1492, “certain though he was of finding the Great Khan – and of the role he would play in the liberation of Jerusalem.” Not to spread enlightenment, as Yuval Noah Harari would have us believe in Sapiens, but on a religious mission to defeat Muslims and claim wealth for Christian Europe.

This single quote from Peter Frankopan’s The Silk Road captures exactly what frustrated me so deeply about Sapiens. Where Harari spins a neat story about European exploration driven by academic curiosity and enlightenment values, Frankopan provides the messy, complicated, properly researched truth: Columbus was a religious zealot seeking the Great Khan to fight a holy war.

After reading Sapiens and pointing out its glaring problems in my earlier post, I picked up The Silk Road. The difference was immediately apparent. Where Harari makes sweeping claims without evidence, Frankopan provides archaeological records. Where Harari ignores entire continents, Frankopan centers his narrative on the very regions Harari dismissed.

The contrast is stark. Harari claims European imperialism was unique because it sought knowledge, not just power. Frankopan shows us the reality: “The age of empire and the rise of the west were built on the capacity to inflict violence on a major scale.” He doesn’t hide behind noble narratives – he documents how “The Enlightenment and the Age of Reason…were the fruits of political, military and economic success in faraway continents.”

Frankopan proves that accessibility doesn’t require sacrificing truth. Yes, The Silk Road demands more intellectual engagement than Sapiens , it’s not bedtime reading. But it respects its readers enough to present actual history rather than a fictional storyline designed to go viral.

The most disappointing part isn’t that Harari wrote an oversimplified book. It’s that the book has worldwide acclaim and people think they’ve learned human history when they’ve actually absorbed a western-centric fantasy. Meanwhile, books like The Silk Road which provide well research citations, reach far smaller audiences.

Harari’s book simply doesn’t deserve the global acclaim it has received. If you want to understand human history, read multiple books by actual historians who cite their sources and acknowledge complexity. Start with Frankopan, but don’t stop there.

The solution isn’t to avoid popular history – it’s to read more critically.