İpek Yolu: Alternatif Dünya Tarihi

The book covers a vast span of history, so I'm curious how the author chose which stories to highlight and which to omit. Was it driven by thematic focus or available sources?

It challenged the traditional Eurocentric view of history and emphasized Asia's central role. I wonder if others felt more connected to the broader story of the world.

It seems like a timely reminder of interconnectedness, but I’m curious whether recent events influenced the timing or focus of this book.