/lit/ - Literature

Don't bother with those books, they're too skewed. Just read Wikipedia articles if you're looking for conversation

>>13367061
Autistic way to say how old you are. Why not just put the number?

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/books
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/timi4/the_askhistorians_master_book_list/
>inb4 >reddit

>>13367061

When it comes to big events, or the entire history of a country, just read wikipedia articles. "General" history books always bite off more than they can chew, or are always pushing some ideology. Only read a history book if it's about a specific person or a smaller more specific event or topic.

1/2

>>13367107
2/2

>>13367074
25, sorry

>>13367110

>>13367087
Thanks, it seems I am retarded and couldn't find those pages, they seem to have a lot of content

>>13367107
>>13367110
Thanks

>>13367124

>>13367131

>>13367134

>>13367138

>>13367061
>GREEKS
>ROMANS
>FRENCH

there you go, the history of the world

Stop recommending OP ancient history books on specific societies you fucks, that's not going to help. OP obviously wants an overview. The average person knows jack shit about Mesopotamian religion.

OP, just read Wikipedia articles or look specific events up when it comes up. Also accept the fact that there will be gaps. I'm quite interested in history, but between 500-1000 AD is just a blank for me, and even up to 1500 is kinda iffy. That's a recent millennium I know very little about. It's ok to read about periods you like, as long as you have a general idea of what happened in what periods.

>>13367152
No joke, the arbiters of civilization are all listed there. Good things come in threes. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. As such, it goes the Greeks, then the Romans, then the FRANKS. FRANKISH steel melts saracen shields. Charles did 10/11. Never again! THE FRENCH hold the key to success, and are the successors of ROME, inheritors of GREECE, the land of GOD by the apostle Paul. GOD BLESS LOUIS IX. Philip IV good pope boniface bad.

>>13367142
Then you have your Start with the Greeks charts, which include the Oxford History of Ancient Greece, you're ready for both later history itself, but also going further into the myths, religion, philosophy and poetry of the Greeks.
>>13367159
>The average person knows jack shit about Mesopotamian religion.
Exactly.
>between 500-1000 AD is just a blank for me
here's a free Yale course on the topic:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL77A337915A76F660

I know you'd rather a book, but watching the youtube series crash course world history can be an entertaining and fast way to get a grasp on a bunch of different major historical periods, then you can choose which part of that history you'd like to explore more in depth with a thick history book.


Also there's this video that covers everything in 20 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuCn8ux2gbs

>>13367182
Didn't think of other mediums, will check.

>>13367173
speaking of the Greeks, a course on ancient Greece:

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL023BCE5134243987

>>13367173
It's not the right place to start if he has no general grasp of history. It's more important to get a short overview of the last 2000 years + Egypt and Mesopotamia. Not 25 in depth books about each society.

I love ancient history, especially the classical Greek period, but I still don't think it's the right way to introduce someone to history as a whole. A more bland list of events would probably be best.

>>13367061
1. Pick a specific area/time period/subject that interests you. Don't set out with the unreasonable goal of learning about everything that has ever happened.
2. Find a well-received general work on your subject. This can be a pop-history book or a textbook, whether it's perfect or not doesn't matter. It's a starting point, not a conclusion.
3. Once you're done reading, look through the book's bibliography and read whatever looks interesting there. Read scholarly reviews of the book to find out if there's anyone out there who disagrees with the author, then read what those people have written.
4. Keep doing this until you've either read everything that's been written on your subject, or found a new subject to research.

That's all there is to it, OP. You just have to read a lot. Trying to find a single-volume work that will answer all your questions is usually a waste of time, even the most specific subjects in history have more than one book written about them.

>>13367061
Start with the Romans.

>>13367201
I haven't watched the history of the world I guess in a while, it's still great.

>>13367243
Oh, and at some point you should make sure you're reading primary sources as well as secondary ones.

there's a field for this called 'world history' or 'big history'. google it and you'll find textbooks that will be suitable for your needs of getting a quick overview of it all.