I have not read the book so I cannot compare; however, I hope a lot was left out because there sure is a lot missing. The theory is not really quite formed or proven. All I can glean from this series is that the difference between the haves and have-nots is the luck of location and the luck of location is not always lucky for the haves when they step out of their bounds.
Many of the facts are just downright wrong it is like the tail wagging the dog. One good example is that as you can see in the series "The Ascent of Man" (Available in Britten) or the book by Jacob Bronowski it was the natural change in wheat that brought on agriculture not agriculture that brought on the change in wheat; he also misses the boat by ignoring the economic reasons for culture, commerce and war.
A good book to read on the subject of plant migration and commerce is "Green Cargoes" by Anne Dorrance. There are too many examples of missed or purposely ignored more logical reasons for differences in cultures, it is never mentioned, for example, "why" the Chinese, having developed gunpowder used it in a more benign manner.
Now it was not all a waste. First, there may be some credence in his theory. However, it was very interesting to watch the confutation between the conquistadors and the Natives of Peru.
