A few months ago, I got the impression that everyone in my reading circle had gone crazy over “Sapiens” by the Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari. Nearly everyone either read the book or expressed their intent to do so.
The reviews from those who had read it were overwhelmingly positive (for example, on Goodreads, the book currently has an average rating of 4.45 out of 5, based on almost 300,000 (!) ratings). And since I love history, I couldn’t pass it by.
Jumping ahead a bit, I’ll say that my rating turned out to be significantly lower than the average. Here’s why.
The subtitle of the book reads: “A Brief History of Humankind.” However, it’s not quite history in the traditional sense. When we think of “history,” we’re used to stories about different eras and peoples. Usually, wars are the most interesting part, as they always led to significant changes in the course of history itself.
This book, however, isn’t so much about history as it is about the key milestones in human development and the events that fundamentally changed the status quo.
For me, the most interesting part was the first chapter, where Harari talks about the now-extinct branches of “parallel” Homo sapiens, from whom we also inherited certain traits. That’s the part I wish had been explored in more detail. After that, it moves on to topics like the agricultural revolution, scientific advances, and capitalism. These topics are also interesting because the author shows how they caused some groups to rise and others to fade away.
However, Harari doesn’t delve into the development of sapiens in different regions, which led to the formation of diverse cultures that still influence our behavior and interactions today, even though we are biologically one species. And while we know that race theory was flawed and harmful, I would have liked to understand how it came to be that we have such distinct races—what factors shaped them, what differences exist (some have more body hair, others are more adapted to ultraviolet light, etc.), how these differences are changing now, and what they contribute to humanity as a whole.
The final chapter—about who we might become (genetic engineering, cyborgization, or the creation of non-biological life)—is also fascinating. It’s a look into the future, and it ties back to the first chapter about the Neanderthals.
While reading, it felt like the author was far more interested in his theory about the impact of “revolutions” than in the actual history of humanity as a whole. He places a lot of emphasis on it.
That’s why I don’t share the overwhelming enthusiasm that seems to flood the internet regarding this book. There are interesting ideas, but there’s also a lot of repetition, which is understandable in a lecture format (which, as I understand, was the original material), but in a standalone book, it feels strange and like “padding for length.” And ultimately, the book doesn’t provide a comprehensive view of human history. It’s a very superficial take with a focus on a narrow theme.
My rating: 4- out of 5
