Best ancient greek history books according to redditors

We found 794 Reddit comments discussing the best ancient greek history books. We ranked the 238 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.

Next page

Top Reddit comments about Ancient Greek History:

u/kde36 · 160 pointsr/worldnews

> while his peers

Let's not paint with too wide a brush now. I'm Greek, but was raised without religion and have been an atheist for years now. The vast majority of Greek Orthodox priests and monks are more than happy to just sit down and have a conversation with someone regardless of if they're gay, atheist, muslim, or whatever else.

Just like Catholicism. Or Buddhism. The religion is made up of many different people, and the holy men are the same way.

One of my father's friends is a Greek Orthodox priest. He trained as a priest right after high school, and the guy is reaching 70 now. Growing up, my father knew him because he was the priest in their village. They kept in touch and now the guy is posted in Toronto. Him and my father speak every now and then, mostly when the priest gets some cool piece of technology he wants to show off. He drives an STI, has an Android phone with a custom ROM he put on it himself, and he goes on weekend skiing trips (on which he ends up looking hilarious in his long black robes and long North Face skiing jacket). He's been on the side of homosexuals for many years, and always said it was a matter of time before they become accepted by the church. Obviously the Metropolitan in the OP isn't speaking for the entire church but he's speaking for many in it.

One more thing - we all have this idea that the Byzantine Empire (pretty much the origin of the current Greek Orthodox church) was this ass-backwards nation of monks and nuns but, in reality, it was a very progressive Empire with a lot of things you wouldn't expect outside of Ancient Greece/Rome and modern societies like open relationships and homosexuals.

EDIT: Shameless plug for an amazing podcast and great book (links don't show because of subreddit style but hover over the words "amazing podcast" and "great book" for the podcast site and Amazon book link respectively).

u/Thrasyboulus · 95 pointsr/AskHistorians

I'm pretty sure the details of their training have been lost to time, but there is a way to at least get the "feel" for their training.

It would be safe to assume that their program was probably not unique for the time. Meaning, the Spartan way of combat was not different from Athens or Korinth. Like the vast differences between Kung Fu and Karate and Tae Kwon Do. That's not to say there was no difference between them, but that difference was the men who comprised the armies.

You see, the Spartans trained all the time because they were rich enough to do so. The Helots did all the farming and Perioikoi did the artisan work. An Athenian or Boeotian farmer came off the farm and joined the Phalanx with little training. Indeed, hoplite warfare----until, to some degree, the Thebans and really the Macedonians come along----is deceptively simple. You lock shields, march straight ahead, then jab your spear in the other guys face until one side breaks. While there were all kinds of nuances and politics as to who lined up where and which city did what, it was really a bunch of guys running in one long line. (See Victor Davis Hansen's The Western Way of War for a spectacular explanation of the psychology behind the hoplite).

I'd argue that what made Sparta different from the other Greek armies was their upbringing and experience in battle. They were taught from a young age to fight to the death, and would have been kicked out of Laconia (which did occur frequently, even a King was exiled for what was perceived as cowardice or weakness) went to war just about every summer. They were always fighting someone. And so until their later period, when Greece was always at war with itself, the Spartans had more experience than their foes. Another aspect of Spartan culture often overlooked, is they had to keep their slaves in line. So much of their "off" time might be spent engaging in psychological warfare on the enslaved helots and/or killing the bravest of them to make an example of them.

You can't really recreate their childhood education (which had a lot more singing and dancing than you'd expect) because stalking around stealing from people is frowned upon in our society. You can't really create their famous diet. Spartans spent much of their free time trapping and hunting game, so you could that. Also chariot racing, which is harder to get in to these days. So what's left?

This is conjecture, but, I'd argue, sound conjecture. Their exercise regimen was probably comparable to Olympic athletes of the day. The Olympians of that time were mostly from very wealthy families, who had "leisure time" to train in sports. Spartan men (and even a woman) often won Olympic victories. So where does this leave you and your regimen?

Sprinting would be good, and this would transfer well into the charge of the Phalanx. So too would push ups, pull ups, and throwing large rocks. Spartans were extremely competitive and I could see many competitions about who was strongest. Running in armor was a great Olympic event back then, so maybe buy a weighted vest and run around the track? There was the javelin, the discus and jumping too. Also, the Spartans loved to sing and dance and being unable to do was seen as a deficiency. So strut your stuff bro and belt a tune while you do it! Also, find eight or so buddies to train with. Then you all should move out of your house, into a barracks and live together and train together every hour of every day. You can see your wife/girlfriend at night but you can't sleep over, and if you don't give her a baby fast enough she'll cheat on you. But I digress.

Learning a little about Pankration might be a good place to start. It's basically a mix of western boxing and Olympic wrestling (with fewer rules actually). I know of no Pankration gyms. A boxing gym would be easy to find but wrestling instruction outside of high school and collegiate levels is hard to find. I'd argue modern MMA is pretty similar to Pankration, especially the spirit of the sport. Jiu Jitsu bay be Japanese with a Brazilian flair, but those joint locks and the concept of tapping out echoes of ancient Greek wrestling matches. Minus the Thai round kick or San Da side kick, MMA is how I'd imagine the Spartans sparring one another.


Some books to check out: The Spartans
is great. A great mix of history and culture, highlighting their rise and fall.


Gates of Fire is fiction, but it's the best show of hoplite warfare and the Spartan spirit that I have read.

And just to keep you well rounded, Lords of the Sea tells of Athens, whose navy and the men who manned it were nothing short of spectacular. They are to the sea warfare what Sparta was to land.


Hope that helps.

u/shiftless_drunkard · 73 pointsr/books

Starting out in philosophy, I think, requires a historical approach. In order to fully understand some work (say, Marx's Das Kapital) means you need the background literature that led up to that work (say, Hegel's Phenomenology). The important thing to remember when reading through the history of western philosophy, is that all of these writers are in dialogue with one another, and that none of their views makes perfect sense in a vacuum. So, I suggest we start at the beginning.

Plato. Folks will tell you to read the pre-socratics, but if you aren't a professional or a student, it's not entirely necessary. Plato is the ground floor in terms of western philosophy and the upshot is that the dialogues are fairly easy and light reading (in the context of western philosophy, which can often get very dense). I'd suggest the Meno which covers a bunch of intro epistemology, the Republic, which covers a lot of P's political and moral thought. The trial and death of socrates is also really great. It's a collection of dialogues.

Then I'd suggest Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics which is a direct response to Plato.

Then I'd move on to the early modern guys. Some will tell you to dig into the Romans and the medieval stuff, but again, if you just want a beginners list, I'd skip em for now.

In terms of early modern stuff, the period runs roughly from Francis Bacon or Galileo, to Kant. All of these guys are debating with each other so its important to move through it chronologically, in order to understand the context of the writings.

I always suggest that my students pick up this book: http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Philosophy-Anthology-Primary-Sources/dp/0872209784/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1375192962&sr=1-1&keywords=early+modern+philosophy+reader
Get an old edition, and a dirty used cheap one if you are buying the book. No point in going nuts when there's no difference between editions.

It is an anthology (with good translations) of Descartes' Meditations, Spinoza's Ethics, Leibniz's Monadology, Locke's Essay, Berkeley's Three Dialogues, Hume's Enquiry, and Kant's Prolegomena. Plus more- checkout the table of contents.
This book will give you the whole history of early modern, without you having to buy a ton of different books. But these are the books a beginner would read, in this order.

Once my beginner had finished these texts, he'd have a good idea of what the history of philosophy looks like, and would be in a really good position to start tackling more contemporary stuff. It will also give you an idea of what issues in philosophy (metaphysics, epistemology, logic, ethics, political philosophy, etc.) you are interested in so you can dial in what else you want to read.

Remember!: All of these books are in the public domain and you can find free copies online. The only downside is that the translations can be a little rough.

I also suggest (as you can no doubt tell by now), that a beginner tackle primary sources. People will tell you to read some secondary book that "breaks it down for you," but the only way to build up the ability to read the history of philosophy is by actually digging in and getting messy. Philosophy can be really hard to read, but you get the hang of it. But this only happens if you struggle with the text's themselves. The payoff is worth it.

Edit: /u/realy provided an absolutely badass reading list from St. John's undergraduate great books program. Check it out!!

u/Ibrey · 35 pointsr/askphilosophy

I think you will learn the most by reading five textbooks, such as A History of Philosophy, volumes 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5; or something like Metaphysics: The Fundamentals, The Fundamentals of Ethics, Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion, and An Introduction to Political Philosophy.

If what you have in mind is more of a "Great Books" program to get your feet wet with some classic works that are not too difficult, you could do a lot worse than:

  • Plato's Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, and Phaedo, often published together under the title The Trial and Death of Socrates. Socrates is so important that we lump together all Greek philosophers before him as "the Presocratics," and this cycle of dialogues is a great window on who he was and what he is famous for.
  • The Basic Works of Aristotle. "The philosopher of common sense" is not a particularly easy read. Cicero compared his writing style to "a flowing river of gold," but all the works he prepared for publication are gone, and what we have is an unauthorised collection of lecture notes written in a terse, cramped style that admits of multiple interpretations. Even so, one can find in Aristotle a very attractive system of metaphysics and ethics which played a major role in the history of philosophy, and holds up well even today.
  • René Descartes, Discourse on the Method and Meditations on First Philosophy. Descartes is called the father of modern philosophy, not so much because modern philosophers have widely followed his particular positions (they haven't) but because he set the agenda, in a way, with his introduction of methodological scepticism.
  • David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. I think Elizabeth Anscombe had it right in judging Hume a "mere brilliant sophist", in that his arguments are ultimately flawed, but there is great insight to be derived from teasing out why they are wrong.
  • If I can cheat just a little more, I will lump together three short, important treatises on ethics: Immanuel Kant's Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, John Stuart Mill's Utilitarianism, and Anscombe's paper "Modern Moral Philosophy".
u/NomadJones · 25 pointsr/philosophy

Quick and dirty introduction in Aristotle for Everybody: Difficult Thought Made Easy by Mortimer Adler.

https://www.amazon.com/Aristotle-Everybody-Difficult-Thought-Made/dp/0684838230

u/bountyonme · 16 pointsr/AskHistorians

The Peloponnesian War by Donald Kagan is great, although with that war you can read about straight from Thucydides as well (I have this book). These books are about the war, not sieges.


The other stuff I picked up in various textbooks and classes, I couldn't give you an exact book, sorry.


I wish I had a good book to recommend to you about the history of siege warfare, but I don't.

u/Tangurena · 14 pointsr/AskReddit

I'm going to list 2, in reverse chronological order:

The battle of Marathon. good book on it.
The end of the Bronze Age.

Marathon

All that most folks think about it was a myth created in the late 19th century: that some dude ran 26.2 miles back to Athens, croaked "rejoice we conquer" and fell over dead.

Oh, what a perversion.

Philippides lived at a time when no one drove cars. So when Athens learned that the Persians were going to land at Marathon and then march to Athens, they sent Philippides to run 70 miles to Sparta to get their military assistance. The Spartans, being a superstitious lot, said that they weren't going to go to battle until after the next new moon. So Phillipides ran 70 miles back to Athens, only to find that the troops had already left for Marathon. So he ran to Marathon and joined the battle. The Persians decided to get most of their troops back onto their ships and sail around the peninsula to attack Athens directly, and the 5000 Persian troops left behind were to keep the Athenians occupied so they could not get back to Athens in time. Instead, the Athenians beat the Persians and then faced the issue of getting back to Athens in time. Since the quickest route (which was the 26.2 mile route) went up about 5000 feet in the first couple of miles, they only sent the youngsters (those in their teens and 20s) along that route, with everyone else taking the coastal route (which was flat and more like 35 miles). Almost every one of the Athenian warriors made it back to Athens before the Persian ships got close enough to land. When the Persians saw that the folks they fought had made it there before them, they turned and left.

If Athens had been beaten by the Persians, based on how the Persians relocated and treated the conquered, there would be no history of democracy for us to follow. Athens had been a democracy for about 10 years by the time of that battle, and was still the only democracy in the world.

------------------------

The end of the Bronze Age

The Bronze Age is widely considered to have ended around 1150BC. The author calls the destruction of at least 47 cities (the ones we know about, and probably 1/3 of those were discovered in the second half of the 20th Century) the "catastrophe." If you aren't a history buff, then the only one of those cities that you've heard of would be Troy (yep, that one - wooden horse, face that launched a thousand ships, those legends written several hundred years later by Homer about the city that was destroyed in 1200BC). It was followed by a political and economic vacuum that endured for several centuries which allowed the Greek, Phonecian, Persian and Roman empires to spring up. The only civilization that survived the onslaught was the Egyptian empire, and it was weakened so severely that uprising rebels from the south were able to take over. The Egyptian empire withdrew from what is now called Libya and Gaza to concentrate on the Nile area, and shrivelled into irrelevancy prior to being conquered by the Greeks almost 900 years after the catastrophe. The Hittite empire vanished and one of their military outposts, located at what we now call Persepolis, became the nucleus for the Persian empire.

The city burners, who some archeologists call the "sea peoples" [1] were so effective at destroying cities and their surrounding areas that they left no one able to read or write. One of the cities that was destroyed and never rebuilt was called Ugarit. Ugarit (located on the coast of what is now called Syria, and close to the Turkish border) is important for this story because they were destroyed so quickly, that there were clay tablets left in an oven for drying them when the city was destroyed. One of the tablets that sat in the oven for almost 3k years mentions raiders from the sea, and would the Egyptian Emperor please send troops to aid his faithful vassals in Ugarit please. There were also a number of swords abandoned there that were so new, they had never been sharpened after manufacture.

The Sea Peoples had destroyed every city (going clockwise) from what is now Greece, through Turkey, through the Levant and Mesopotamia all the way to Gaza. The Egyptians waged several battles with them in 1208BC and 1176. The last known battle with the Sea Peoples was that one in 1176BC. By then, they had engaged in at least 30 years of continuous warfare during an era when the life expectancy of a person was less than that. As far as we know, there weren't any Bronze Age cities north or west of Greece.

The author delves into several competing hypotheses and rebuts them rather well. Two of the main alternative explanations for the "catastrophe" involve earthquakes or drought. Tree ring measurements show that there was no widespread drought at the time. If cities were destroyed in earthquakes, then loot tends to get buried in the rubble, and the cities that perished in the "catastrophe" were picked clean except for hiding places inside walls or floors. Which implies that the city burners killed everyone rather than torturing folks for details on their treasures.

Three new weapons appeared shortly before this war: javelins (previously used in hunting, but not common in warfare), lances and a new type of sword (called by archaeologist the Naue Type 2) that was suitable for slashing. Previous swords were almost exclusively stabbing instruments [2]. Prior to the collapse/catastrophe, chariot warfare was widespread and common. Subsequent to the dark ages that lasted for several hundred years after the collapse/catastrophe, chariots were far less common. I suspect that the javelins and lances were part of new military tactics that rendered chariot based warfare obsolete. Armor for legs was rather rare prior to the period of the Sea Peoples, but very common afterwards. This leads me to conclude that chopping at legs was an effective tactic that previous infantry was poorly equipped to deal with.

We don't really know who the Sea Peoples were, nor why they waged a multi-generational war to destroy all civilization in the world. Everyplace they conquered became illiterate. The list of names of participants include many tribes/nations that we've never heard of. The names that we do know of include tribes from Afghanistan, Italy and the Baltic Sea (the Naue Type 2 sword is considered to have be developed in the Baltic Sea area). What united such disparate tribes? We'll probably never know. Why did they do it? Again, without some astonishing breakthroughs, we'll never know that either. What we do know is that a wide range of tribes were so angry that they united for at least 3 decades to eliminate civilization from the face of the Earth.

Notes:
1 - The name Sea Peoples comes from an interpretation of some heiroglyphics that survived. One of the stelae involved mentioned Israel, and that it had been destroyed by the Sea Peoples about 1200 BC. You could see the stelae if you watched the first episode of Heritage: Civilization and the Jews.
2 - Later swords in some regions continued to be stabbing based weapons, such as the Roman Gladius.

u/HereEveryDay · 9 pointsr/JordanPeterson

Stoicism and JBP's teachings go hand-in-hand from what I've seen and read.

Stoic's believe that life is fraught with suffering, which is why they detach themselves from almost everything apart from their thinking mind, including their physical body.

One of the only conflicts that I can see is that traditional stoics (Epictetus' teachings) do not advocate marriage and/or engaging with women. The die-hard stoics would rather be celibate, however they do teach with a lens that their students will have a family. E.G Marcus Aurelius is a famous Stoic who had a wife and plenty of kids.

This is one of my favourite passages from [Discourses and Selected Writings (Penguin Classics)] (https://www.amazon.com/Discourses-Selected-Writings-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140449469) which does a nice job of summing up Stoicism, and there's plenty of links to JBP's teachings:

> In the event that you are haled before someone wielding the reigns of power, remember that there is somebody else looking down from above, and you have to answer first to him. [2] So he examines you: ‘How did you categorize exile, imprisonment, chains, death and disgrace, when you were in school?’

>‘I said they were indifferent.’

>‘And what do you call them now? They haven’t changed, I presume?’

>‘No.’

>‘Well, have you changed?’

>‘No.’

>‘Then define for me now what the “indifferents” are.’

>‘Whatever things we cannot control.’

> ‘Tell me the upshot.’

> ‘They are nothing to me.’

>‘Remind me what you thought was good.’

>‘The will and the right use of impressions.’

>‘And the goal of life is what?’

>‘To follow God.’

>‘And do you stand by that now?’

>‘I say it even now.’

>‘Go, then, in confidence, holding fast to these convictions. You’ll see what it’s like to be a young person with an education, alongside people who have none. I promise that you will feel somewhat like this: “Why do we serve such a long and difficult apprenticeship – in preparation to face nonentities? Is this what ‘authority’ meant? Are the courtyards, the palace staff, the guards no more than this? Was this why I sat through so many lectures? It all amounts to nothing – and I was expecting to be overwhelmed.” ’

u/FyonFyon · 8 pointsr/asoiaf

I'm guessing it's this one (pretty much the only thing google comes up with):
Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army

u/sab3r · 8 pointsr/AskHistorians

The biggest differences between logistics during the medieval period and the antiquity period is in the degree of political centralization of the state and the strength of the state's economy. Under Roman governance, trade stretched from all reaches of Europe and became highly specialized. But with the collapse of the Western government and the political fragmentation of the West, long distance trade collapsed and the power of the successor states weakened. This is especially important since the state needs to maintain a substantial number of supply depots, roads, communication posts, ports, and other infrastructure if the state wishes to be able to wage war for an extended period of time and over a great distance.

If you think about it, battles during the classical Roman era could see armies that number easily into the tens of thousands. However, if you look at the size of many of the more important medieval battles, they usually number from single digit thousands and in the rare occasion, they will go into the double digit thousands. See the Siege of Orléans, the Battle of Cadsand, the Battle of Stamford Bridge, and the Battle of Clontarf just to name a few. One of the exceptions to this trend, however, can be found in the medieval Roman Empire, also known as the Byzantine Empire. Under their governance, they were still able to maintain well funded logistical infrastructure.

There are several monographs written by medieval experts but I don't know them off the top of my head. However, I do know of several monographs written on logistics in antiquity. The most well known book on ancient logistics is Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army, which kicked started the field of ancient logistics. For logistics in Roman history, see The Logistics of the Roman Army at War (264 B.C. - A.D.235).

u/[deleted] · 7 pointsr/history

Greek Fire, Poison Arrows & Scorpion Bombs: Biological and Chemical Warfare in the Ancient World by Adrienne Mayor is a great overview of chemical warfare in antiquity.

The introduction is available on her Stanford faculty page. Mayor shows that people were using chemical warfare as early as the Bronze Age.

u/runeaway · 7 pointsr/Stoicism

The "Tao of Seneca" just uses the public domain Richard Mott Gummere translation, which can be found for free on Wikisource, along with the rest of Seneca's writings.

A YouTuber who goes by the name The Rugged Pyrrhus has recorded all of the letters using the Gummere translation, and I think he does a better job than what I've heard of the "Tao of Seneca" audiobook.

In general, I think it's always good to have multiple translations in order to compare. The Wikisource version includes Gummere's footnotes, which can be helpful, so I would reference that one. Unlike the Penguin edition, Wikisource also has all of Seneca's letters. The only modern translation that I know of that has all of the letters is Letters on Ethics: To Lucilius (The Complete Works of Lucius Annaeus Seneca) translated by Margaret Graver, but I don't own it and can't comment on the quality (other than what the Amazon reviews say).

So you are probably fine with Penguin and Wikisource, but if you want a modern translation of all the letters, Margaret Graver's book might be the one to buy.

Edit: If you don't care about having a modern translation of all the letters and you enjoy Seneca, perhaps look into getting Dialogues and Essays (Oxford World's Classics), which you can supplement with the public domain Wikisource translations for comparison. Unlike the Oxford World Classics edition, the Margaret Graver book has all of Seneca's essays, but it is a bit more expensive.

u/sammers23 · 7 pointsr/bookshelf

If we're talking ancient and medieval warfare, then it's a vast subject. I'm not sure I'd recommend one book to encapsulate it all, but some good places to start would be:

Warfare in the Classical World by John Warry

Greece and Rome at War by Peter Connolly

Warfare in Medieval Europe c.400-c.1453 by Bernard S. Bachrach and David Bachrach

Medieval Military Technology by Kelly DeVries and Robert Douglas Smith

From those, you'll inevitably find more specific periods and peoples that you'll want more focused works.

I write a bit about it on my website as well, but it's by no means exhaustive. It's just what I have time/desire to cover.

u/jeobleo · 6 pointsr/dresdenfiles

Myths and religion aren't the same thing. This book does a good job unpacking them, but cultic practice diverged from the literary stories of the gods, and belief was a whole separate ball of wax.

u/alexiuscomnenus · 5 pointsr/ancientgreece

For Thucydides and Xenophon I cannot recommend the Landmark series of books highly enough. They are lathered in detailed maps and explanatory footnotes, and come with a wealth of appendixes on everything from Athenian finances to naval warfare to historiography (the study of the sources themselves and how reliable etc. they are). These and all of the books I mentioned are easily and cheaply available on Amazon.

Thucydides - http://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Thucydides-Comprehensive-Guide-Peloponnesian/dp/0684827905

Xenophon - http://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Xenophons-Hellenika-Xenophon/dp/0375422552

u/HyperLaxative · 5 pointsr/entj

Discourses by Epictetus

A truly amazing book by a slave-turned-philosopher on having a mindset to face any challenges one might face.

Fun fact: The teachings of this philosopher bore a significant influence on Marcus Aurelius and his writings in The Meditations; as well as further Christian scholars down the ages as they adapted Epictetus' teachings to their own by replacing Epictetus' view of "fate" or "destiny" with one of "God".

u/trolo-joe · 5 pointsr/Catholicism

Hmmm...so many recommendations. First, you need to have a basic grasp of philosophy (particularly Aristotelian philosophy, which leads to Thomistic thought).

  • Aristotle for Everybody is very handy for getting a very basic grasp of philosophy as it pertains to the four causes and natural law.

  • Handbook of Catholic Apologetics: Reasoned Answers to Questions of Faith uses a lot of natural philosophy and Thomistic thought to give "reasoned answers to questions of Faith."

  • Transformation in Christ: On the Christian Attitude is a very dense, philosophical tome on Catholic philosophical thought. Very insightful and...really a work of art.

  • Encyclical Letter Fides et Ratio is a beautiful work from John Paul II explaining how the Church uses faith and reason together to defend Her claims.

    There are...so many more recommendations I could give, but working your way through these will take some time.

    >My dislike more from the fact that Catholics seem to think that these views should be encoded in society's laws rather than that they hold them.

    All of civil law ought to find its root cause in natural moral law. The Church uses not simply faith alone to defend Her claims, but also natural law. As such, there are certain Truths present (and observable) in natural law that should be reflected in our everyday behavior and legislated by the civil authority.

    We believe in an objective right and an objective wrong: a defined good and a defined evil. The difficulty, I think, is getting people to see the same thing!
u/Shoeshine-Boy · 5 pointsr/TrueAtheism

Personal research, mostly. I'm a big history nerd with a slant toward religion and other macabre subject matter. I'm actually not as well read as I'd like to be on these subjects, and I basically blend different sources into a knowledge smoothie and pour it out onto a page and see what works for me and what doesn't.

I'll list a few books I've read that I enjoyed. There are certainly more here and there, but these are the "big ones" I was citing when writing all the comments in this thread. I typically know more about Christianity than the other major faiths because of the culture around me.

Christianity: The First Three Thousand Years - Diarmaid MacCulloch

A History of God: The 4,000-Year Quest of Judaism, Christianity and Islam - Karen Armstrong

The next two balance each other out quite well. Hardline anti-theism contrasted with "You know, maybe we can make this work".

The Case for God - Karen Armstrong

The God Delusion - Richard Dawkins



Lately, I have been reading the Stoics, which like Buddhism, I find to be one of the more personally palatable philosophies of mind I have come across, although I find rational contemplation a bit more accessible to my Westernized nature.

Stoic Philosophy of Seneca: Essays and Letters - Translated by Moses Hadas

Discourses and Selected Writings (of Epictetus) - Translated by Robert Dobbin

The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius - Translated by George Long

I'm still waiting on Fed Ex to deliver this one:

A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy - William B. Irvine

Also, if you're into history in general, a nice primer for what sorts of things to dive into when poking around history is this fun series on YouTube. I usually watch a video then spend a while reading more in depth about whatever subject is covered that week in order to fill the gaps. Plus, John and Hank are super awesome. The writing is superb and I think, most importantly, he presents an overall argument for why studying history is so important because of its relevance to current events.

Crash Course: World History - John Green

u/reginaldaugustus · 5 pointsr/AskHistorians

>If you have time give the original by Thucydides a read.

Pretty much this.

Thucydides can be a bit difficult to read, but if you want to understand the war, you really have to read it. The Landmark Thucydides is easily the best version of it. The author basically provides explanation and assistance on each page, as well as maps and stuff.

u/yeahmaybe2 · 4 pointsr/TheRedPill

Aristotle for Everybody: Difficult Thought Made Easy: Mortimer J. Adler.

https://www.amazon.com/Aristotle-Everybody-Difficult-Thought-Made/dp/0684838230

I've had this book for over 20 years and have read it at least 3 times, highly recommend.

u/guitar_vigilante · 4 pointsr/history

One theory is based on large migrations of new groups of people, along with new military tactics and the rise of the javelin as a counter to the typical chariot warfare of the time. This book advances a theory that the Peoples of the Sea, (a group of seafaring raiders who were most documented for their invasions of Egypt) were one group partly responsible for the fall of the Bronze Age civilizations.

u/methshin · 4 pointsr/AskHistorians

The spear, pike, halberd, when not used in a phalanx are typically best suited against cavalry/horse based combatants. The typical Roman foot soldier (legionnaire) would be using either gladius or spatha, in conjunction with a scutum, which was a devestating combination that not only enabled great versatility in melee combat, but also against ranged (especially when implementing formations like the Testudo).

Now, the Greeks, as you mentioned, used a shield more similar to the Parma (I don't know if it has a unique name, if it does, I can't recall it), which while wide, did not offer the mobility and formative nature of the Scutum. And while they did use weapons like the Xiphos, it was secondary to the Dory, a long, thrusting spear. Great if your opponent is further away, but quite the liability in close quarters.

The point I'm trying to make is that it may be less about the sword vs. spear debate in the Romans vs. Greeks that you put forward, and more, shield vs. shield.

Spears would long have a place in warfare, but you cannot have an army made up exclusively of them, same goes for sword and ranged.

Some sources for historical warfare and weaponry.

A good little website for quick references, I've found their stuff to be accurate and best of all, free
http://www.ancientmilitary.com/roman-weapons.htm

http://www.ancientmilitary.com/spartan-weapons.htm

Required reading:

Peter Connolly - Greece and Rome at War (1981)

https://openlibrary.org/books/OL693053M/Greece_and_Rome_at_war

Most of my knowledge on Roman and Greek warfare and weaponry has come from this book. I've attached an Amazon link for the book, and you may want to hop(lite) on it as I'm not sure if it is still in print.

Peter Connolly is a great author, and has produced numerous books, across a variety of topics, but his main focus was Greco-Roman history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Connolly

The Cambridge History of Greek and Roman Warfare
http://www.cambridge.org/ca/academic/subjects/classical-studies/ancient-history/cambridge-history-greek-and-roman-warfare-volume-1

Now, the above book is expensive. Like college textbook expensive, but it really is comprehensive and is directly related to the topic at hand. I can't think of a better resource out there. Obvious Cassius Dio has a wealth of knowledge in there, but it covers far more than combat, and is more useful as a source on the politics.

I tried to google a cheaper alternative and found http://www.amazon.com/Warfare-Classical-World-Encyclopedia-Civilizations/dp/0806127945/ref=cm_lmf_tit_1

I haven't read it myself, but it has received positive response, and it sounds like there is a heavily illustrated one out there as well.

EDIT: Forgot about the Amazon rule, apologies. Removed the link and changed it to an openlibrary link. To those interested though, Greece and Rome at War is available on Amazon.com and is worth picking up.

u/mr-sinister2048 · 4 pointsr/byzantium

There is a book [Sailing From Byzantium] (http://www.amazon.com/Sailing-Byzantium-Empire-Shaped-World/dp/055338273X) by Colin Wells that is about this very subject. It is a fantastic read. I would highly recommend it. It talks about the legacy of the Empire in the West, Middle East, and in the Slavic world.

u/sqaz2wsx · 4 pointsr/Stoicism

Actually no that version does not, as i found out to my diaspointment. I would reccomend this for Senecas complete letters. That edition only has a few selected letters while this edition has every single letter in it with a new translation as well.

u/elsharra · 3 pointsr/GreekMythology

If you're interested in the 'rarer' and more obscure Greek myths, try to find copies of The God of the Greeks and The Heroes of the Greeks both by Karl Kerenyi. He does an amazing job pulling many of the Greek myths into a very good narrative and really focuses on a lot of the lesser known stories or versions of stories, many which I've not seen referenced outside the source material.

u/illegalUturn · 3 pointsr/Stoicism

I flick between Robert Dobbin's and Robin Hard's, but spend more time with Dobbin's. It feels a bit more immediate and impactful for me:

https://www.amazon.com/Discourses-Selected-Writings-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140449469

If you can afford it, get them both - they're both fantastic.

u/GreenWizard2 · 3 pointsr/Stoicism

My friend,

Try not to be too hard on yourself. Most of us are only good while things go our way, and start to fall apart to different degrees when things don't go our way. You also cannot change what has happened in the past. The Stoics would say you need focus on what you can control now, in the present, to do what is truly best for you.

To put things in perspective, I have also had my own personal fight with cancer, albeit a different one. I was diagnosed with testicular cancer last November, at age 27. Thankfully during that time, I was able to draw upon a lot of what I learned from the Stoics to help me during my own surgery and follow up treatments, it was still a difficult time though.

I can tell you that during my ordeal, reading through my copy of Meditations and Seneca's Letters helped a great deal. If you are looking for a Modern intro to Stoicism before going into the classic texts (which are very readable and inspirational, but don't give you the full theory) I would suggest How to be a Stoic as a good introduction to the topic.

One of the cornerstones of Stoic theory is the Dichotomy of Control. This idea basically asks you, ultimately, what in your life do you control? Do you control how much money you have? Not really, the depends a lot on what other people are willing to pay you, what skills you have, what country you live in,etc...Do you control if you have a ton of friends, and if people like you a lot? Again, not really. You could be the nicest person in the world, but somebody could still not like you for some reason, since that judgement is up to them, not you. What about your body? Certainly your body is under your control? Well, as you and I have become somewhat more aware, no, your body really isn't under your control. You can get into an accident, get sick due to no fault of your own, etc...What about our thoughts? Not quite, lots of times, seemingly random thoughts come to us, general ideas and impressions. So what do we control then? Our reasoned choice. We have the ability to make reasoned choices. When a thought comes into my head, I can reason through it and decided whether to act on it or not. That is where our power lies. In focusing on making the best possible choices with what we have, on making wise choices.

I found that focusing on that was very liberating. I couldn't control that I had cancer, that was a fact. But I could control what I did with that fact. How I worked with it and reacted to it. And honestly, some times I handled it well, and other times I handled it poorly. We are all imperfect, but we can improve.

If you have questions about anything or just want to talk, feel free to PM me, I'll be around.

I'll leave you with a passage from Meditations that I read through and kept in mind during the day of my own cancer surgery:

> So henceforth, in the face of every difficulty that leads you to feel distress, remember to apply this principle: this is no misfortune, but to bear it with a noble spirit is good fortune. - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations 4.49

u/iliterallyh8yourface · 3 pointsr/history

The major battle was the Battle of the Granicus which was the first major battle against the Persians. In reality a large part of the army was likely Ionian (eastern coast of the Aegean) Greeks.

The Asia Minor campaign is completed before the Battle of Issus, which occurs in modern Syria. I would also say its the period between his movement to gain a foothold in Asia, in an area with a large Greek and by association friendly population, into his campaign to essentially deny the Persians access to the Mediterranean. Where he goes through Judea, sieges Tyre, into Eqypt and founds Alexandria before setting off into Persia proper (Media).

A Couple Sources:
Wikipedia ,
Greece and Rome at War - Peter Connolly, Warfare in the Classical World - John Warry

Both those books are usually available at the Library. If you are actually interested in the subject they are worth the money to buy. Easy to read and with fantastic illustrations to help bring the descriptions into reality.

u/handlegoeshere · 3 pointsr/asoiaf

It seems to me that the two strengths of the series are world-building and character depth. If this is your favorite series, you probably like it for one or both of those things.

If you like it for the world building, I recommend history books such as the History of the Peloponnesian War or A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th Century.

If you like complex characters, then the Mistborn series by Brandon Sanderson. Another strength of asoiaf is that it isn't too heavy handed regarding magic in the story, and this is a strength of the Mistborn series too.

u/Darragh555 · 3 pointsr/AskHistorians

Byzantium by Judith Herrin is extensive yet accessible. She is a professional archaeologist and an academic. The book is a rung on the ladder above pure popular history but is still readable if you have little background info on Byzantium. It is also a broad overview encompassing the entire span of the Empire.

I also recommend Lars Brownworth's 12 Byzantine Rulers podcast for a first contact with Byzantium. This is less academic and more popular history than Herrin's book, but is very well researched and also covers the entire span of Byzantine history from its Roman roots to its fall.

u/LegalAction · 3 pointsr/AskHistorians

There is in fact earlier evidence for ancient biological warfare: Greek Fire, Poison Arrows & Scorpion Bombs: Biological and Chemical Warfare in the Ancient World. It's a terrible book, mostly because Mayor doesn't (in my opinion) have a clue what she's doing with her evidence (she's a "folkloreist," not an historian), but there is some impressive evidence she uses, if uses badly.

u/balanceofpower · 3 pointsr/totalwar

Machinima aside, if you ever want a fantastic resource for ancient warfare, strategy and history check out Warfare in the Classical World by John Warry. It covers everything from the siege of Troy, Alexander the Great and the entirety of classical Rome up to its height. It's a pretty good read too with plenty of illustrations showing off ancient arms, armor, heavy equipment and tactics.

u/A_hiccup · 3 pointsr/reddevils

So, what all you lads read this week? I finished this rather crazy book: http://www.amazon.com/The-Trial-Socrates-I-F-Stone/dp/0385260326

u/polyphanes · 3 pointsr/occult

So, it's important to draw a difference between the planet Venus and the goddess Venus. They're not the same, even though they're definitely mythologically connected; properly speaking, the ancient Greeks and Romans considered Venus/Aphrodite (who also weren't the same but generally considered to be so similar as to be indistinguishable) an Olympian, while the planet Hesperos/Eosphoros was a celestial wandering titan. In other words, the planet generally didn't have cult like the goddess proper did unless you were a magus.

I started out worshipping Venus as an astrologer-magus, but my practice has since evolved to focus on the Greek goddess Aphrodite, and based on my experiences, they're not the same but they are associated with each other. According to the ancient Greek calendar used in Athens, Aphrodite had monthly festivals on the fourth day of the lunar month as well as other yearly festivals here and there. Several resources for working with her would include:

u/detarame · 3 pointsr/AskHistorians

Alexander is tremendously well known for his logistical expertise. Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army is one of the go-to texts about military logistics in the ancient world.

http://www.amazon.com/Alexander-Great-Logistics-Macedonian-Army/dp/0520042727

u/RandyMFromSP · 3 pointsr/AskHistorians

Check out The End of the Bronze Age by Robert Drews.

u/Abominati · 3 pointsr/worldbuilding

I'd recommend this:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Alexander-Great-Logistics-Macedonian-Army/dp/0520042727

Its a great introduction to the nature of logistics and is relevant for any pre-vehicle period as frankly, the equations don't change.

u/youcat · 3 pointsr/atheism

I've also heard of this book which might interest the OP. But yeah, if you're looking for a good book on Thomism, you can't go wrong with Feser.

u/Human_Evolution · 3 pointsr/Stoicism

If you want something short with a bunch of Seneca's quotes on death, I recommend [How to Die] (https://books.google.com/books/about/How_to_Die.html?id=Mww8DwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button). If you want his most recommended text, you'll want to read his Letters, I prefer having a modern translation, which can be found [here.] (https://www.amazon.com/Letters-Ethics-Lucilius-Complete-Annaeus-ebook/dp/B017P31O3G)

 

My favorite writing of Seneca's on death is [Letters 99.] (https://youtu.be/FJiNSkh05UM) (this is an older translation, I think the newer one is better.)

u/frizbee2 · 3 pointsr/skyrim

reddit.com/r/Stoicism

The philosophy she's advocating sounds a great deal like the teachings of Epictetus the Stoic. I highly recommend his work.

u/terafunker · 3 pointsr/MapPorn

If only it wasn't so pricey!

u/JohnnyBsGirl · 3 pointsr/books

Around 8 pages of The Landmark Thycydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War. It is a very dense read, but I am enjoying it.

u/blackstar9000 · 3 pointsr/books

Robert Graves' 2 volume The Greek Myths is comprehensive, but there's a catch: Graves has arranged and chosen his version of the myths in order to facilitate a kind of narrative continuity that's not particularly true to the way that the Greeks understood their myths. Karl Kerenyi and Carl Kerenyi's The Greek Gods and The Greek Heroes are closer to the source material, and will give you a better sense of the variety and disagreements involved. Ultimately, though, it's a matter of preference: Do you want narrative sweep, or fidelity to tradition?

Alternately, you could go back to the sources themselves. Ovid's Metamorphoses is basically a treasury of Greco-Roman myth. Again, there's a catch: Ovid's theme is that of things transforming into something else (hence the title), so there's a definite bias in favor of myths that suit that motif. That said, Ovid is also as close as you're going to get to the original form of a lot of Greco-Roman myths, so it's hard to go wrong there.

If you really want to do some heavy lifting on the Greco-Roman myths, get a copy of Pausanius' Guide to Greece, Vol. I and Vol. II. This is basically a travelogue of Greece, written for the Roman Emperor, and it lists in detail most of the locations associated with Greek myths and legends, and gives some detail on most of the lesser known ones. There's a lot to sift through here, and you'll probably want to have an Atlas of the Ancient World on hand to get a sense of where he's talking about at any given time, so I definitely don't recommend starting out here, but if you're looking for really in-depth source material, this is the place to go.

For the Norse myths, there's the Poetic Edda and the Prose Edda, as well as a slew of sagas that are worth looking into. On of the most famous is certainly The Nibelungenlied, on which Wagner based his [Ring Cycle]() (you know, "Ride of the Valkyries," and all that), which was the basis for much of Lord of the Rings. Personally, my favorite of the sagas I've read so far is the Volsungs.

For the Sumerians, the obvious starting point is Gilgamesh. Our sources are pretty fragmented, and there are editions that reflect that fragmentation, but for pure readability, I suggest the Herbert Mason retelling. Or, if you're really into it, get both and compare. The go-to author for Sumerian myth and religion in general is Samuel Noah Kramer; his book Sumerian Mythology is as good a general survey as you're likely to find, particularly if you're interested in the archeological method behind our knowledge of the Sumerians.

What else? For the Egyptians, E. A. Budge is your man. Dover Books in general has a good series of older, public domain works on mythology, including books on Japanese and Chinese mythology. I wish I had some sources to give you on meso-American or African myth, but those are areas of inquiry I'm just delving into myself. But then, you're probably overwhelmed as it is.

Good luck.

u/pepperbridges · 2 pointsr/portugal

"The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War Paperback" by Robert B Strassler - > Esta é a melhor edição de todas em inglês, com o texto do Tucídides. Há outros livros, tipo o do Kagan, que também são muito bons, e explica o que se passou a partir de várias fontes (Tucídides incluído).

Se queres mesmo ler Tucídides em Português, opta pela edição da Gulbenkian, é a melhor (já não me lembro do preço, mas era um bocado caro), já foste ver se na Gulbenkian está disponível?

u/morrisonxavier · 2 pointsr/askphilosophy

It's generally thought that Plato's early dialogues run closer to Socrates' actual words/teachings. I would start with the 4 dialogues making up the saga of the Death of Socrates. Here's a link: https://www.amazon.com/Trial-Death-Socrates-Plato/dp/0872205541

Xenophon was also a student of Socrates and like Plato wrote a dialog on the Trial of Socrates.

u/trajectory · 2 pointsr/history

I can recommend Judith Herrin's very readable Byzantium - The Surprising Life of a Medieval Empire.

u/Thelonious_Cube · 2 pointsr/QuotesPorn

IIRC I. F. Stone's thesis was that Socrates had actually fomented rebellion. There had been some sort of coup (or attempted coup) and there was speculation that he'd actually been an instigator.

I have no idea at this point whether that's actually plausible given the historical data, but it's interesting to contemplate.

Plato's account obviously lauds Socrates and makes his trial out to be pure persecution of free thought, but we should take that with a grain of salt, right?

u/Mastertrout22 · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

If you really want to understand Greek history like an ancient Greek historian does, I would recommend From Solon to Socrates by Ehrenberg. It is a book that I can say as an ancient Greek historian that helps you understand the Greek Archaic and Classical Periods. For Sparta in particular, The Spartans: The World of the Warrior-Heroes of Ancient Greece by Cartledge is a great general read that really got me into Spartan history.

u/nihil_novi_sub_sole · 2 pointsr/byzantium

Judith Herrin's Byzantium: the Surprising Life of a Medieval Empire is probably the most accessible one I've read. It's fun enough that I'd recommend it to someone who doesn't study history academically, but it's not just airport bookstore fare either.

u/VividLotus · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

For a scholarly but interesting book about ancient Greek religious practices, check out Burkert's Greek Religion. For Norse religion, I'd just jump in and start reading the Poetic Edda.

Fortunately, there's still a wealth of original sources available regarding Greek and Roman religion, as well as Norse to a slightly lesser extent. Sadly, much of what's known today about pre-Christian Celtic religions comes from secondhand accounts of invading armies, or from the archaeological record, so it's not nearly as complete.

u/MercurialAlchemist · 2 pointsr/history

The Peloponnesian War, by Donald Kagan. It does an excellent job at explaining the context and the factors which led to the conflict, and paints the protagonist vividly. It's also not short on maps.

While you are at it, don't miss his lessons, which are available free on the net.

u/LurkerNo527 · 2 pointsr/Libri

In realtà mi interessava proprio la filosofia :) Se hai qualche fonte per orientarmi sulle diverse traduzioni disponibili, ero interessato a sapere se ce ne sono di nuove. Per capirci, qualcosa di simile a questo, ma in italiano.

u/Ozone365 · 2 pointsr/Catholicism

If you are looking to get handle on the Aristotle metaphysical worldview first, which is incredibly helpful since Aquinas builds on it, I recommend the fairly short book Aristotle for Everybody: Difficult Thought Made Easy. The book is only 200 pages and is written by Mortimer Adler, a renowned polymath and professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago (who actually ended up becoming Catholic before he died).

In fact, while u/Suppa-time recommends Feser's Aquinas, which is an absolutely great recommendation, I found reading Aristotle for Everybody first was enormously helpful and that I was able to hit the ground running when I picked up Feser's book.

u/280394433708491 · 2 pointsr/todayilearned

On the wedding night, the Spartan bride would actually cut her hair short in preparation for sex. Presumably to simulate a boy essentially. The male would sneak into the bedroom and have sex with a shaved female.

Title is also misleading as the sexual relationship was more between a male (mentor) and a child (student/apprentice).

Edit - Source: The Spartans by Paul Cartledge

u/kaci3po · 2 pointsr/Wicca

Since you mention wanting to learn about other neo pagan belief systems, I'll speak up for Helenic polytheism, which is the modern worship of the Greek gods, usually with an emphasis on reconstructing what the ancients really practiced.

Kharis: Hellenic Polytheism Explored https://www.amazon.com/dp/143823192X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_b7E6BbE517CQB. This is the book I recommend giving to relatives who want to know who we are and what we practice in the modern age.

Greek Religion https://www.amazon.com/dp/0674362810/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_c8E6Bb542VQ1W. This is an academic text on religion in ancient Greece that is very useful both in learning what the ancients did and believed as well as a source book used by many modern practitioners as they adapt ancient beliefs and practices to modern life.

u/pilgrim85 · 2 pointsr/Stoicism

Personally, I liked the Hays translation of Meditations better than others, the translation is more up-to-date with modern English. I did not read meditations like I would read a novel. I used it as a daily reflections book, I would read a few passages at the beginning of the day and process it throughout my day. Some of it is very dry, yes, but there are some real gems in there. It's just a matter of finding them (I marked them with stars in the margins!)

Another recommendation is Letters on Ethics: To Lucillius

u/Guckfuchs · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

The Constitutio Antoniniana which granted Roman citizenship to all free inhabitants of the empire was issued in 212 AD and there is quite a lot of Roman history after that. Soon follows the so called “crisis of the 3rd century” between 235 and 284 AD throughout which the empire was shaken by internal as well as external problems. Next comes Late Antiquity, a period which has attracted a lot of scholarly attention in recent decades. It saw some huge changes like Christianity’s rise to dominance or the final partition of the empire into a western and eastern half that you mentioned. And while the western part already disappeared throughout the 5th century the Eastern Roman Empire would survive for a long time further. The rise of the first Islamic caliphate in the 7th century AD cost it much of its territory and caused further transformations. This surviving remnant of the Roman Empire, now centred around Constantinople, is usually called the Byzantine Empire. Its eventful history would continue through the entire Middle Ages until 1453 AD when it was finally conquered by the Ottomans. So all in all there is more than a millennium of further Roman history to cover.

u/sumdumusername · 2 pointsr/books

I'm a fan of Antony Beevor.

I know, I know, he's an author, not a book. "Stalingrad" and "Berlin" were excellent, imo. I think you can trust whatever he writes.

I really enjoyed I F Stone's "Trial of Socrates."

The lengths Stone went to to write this is almost as fascinating as the book. (if for no other reason than that he can put a paragraph together that doesn't make your eyes glaze over. Same with Beevor.)

Actually, I think Stone's book is my all-time favorite in the genre. If I had a spare copy, I would send it to you!



u/AlphaOC · 2 pointsr/totalwar

I took a class on Greek and Roman warfare in college and one of the books was Soldiers and Ghosts. It's not light reading at all, but it describes how they fought and why they fought that way (the Greek system of war was especially strange and the Romans were hilariously inflexible about certain things).

u/Integralds · 2 pointsr/neoliberal

I read this variant, which (translation aside) is usefully augmented by copious maps and side notes. I am not good enough to be able to judge various translations.

(Where do I recommend Thucydides? I don't doubt that I do, I just don't remember doing so.)

u/Re4XN · 2 pointsr/Metal

> Peloponnesian Wars

This for something lighter and this for something a bit drier. I think these two books are the standard recommendations when approaching the topic.

u/mrBenDog · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

>Also if anyone has the time perhaps point to someplace where I can read more without being overwhelmed?

Try Donald Kagan's single volume Peloponnesian War, in addition to Thucydides, already mentioned in another comment.

u/scarlet_sage · 2 pointsr/AskHistorians

This is an entirely appropriate subreddit! Let nobody discourage you from asking for sources here.

There are AskHistorians book lists. The Europe mentions Byzantine books in two sections, so you might be best served by doing a search for "Byz" (Well, three sections, except that one section mentions only Herrin, J. Byzantium: The Surprising Life of a Medieval Empire, which I assume is the Herrin book you were referring to.)

AskHistorians has a podcast. Episodes 20 and 21 are "Byzantines: Macedonian and Komnenian Dynasties".

u/evagre · 1 pointr/askphilosophy

u/HideousRabbit is right: this is not a philosophical question. That said, a classic in the field you describe is Walter Burkert's Greek Religion (German original 1977, English translation 1985). A more recent work is Daniel Ogden’s Companion to Greek Religion from 2007.

u/Mister_Dick · 1 pointr/ChapoTrapHouse

It's not Marx, but Plato's dialog Crito sets up the social contract theory. Also, reading Plato is fun and good for you.

https://www.amazon.com/Trial-Death-Socrates-Plato/dp/0872205541

It's ultimately utter horseshit and a pure rationalization for colonial exploitation and the rise of the bourgeoisie, but if you want to understand American society, Locke's Second Treatise of Government is foundational.

Rousseau's The Social Contract and Second Discourse are universally foundational and Rousseau's fairly easy to read and not a total chud.

Mr. Dick remembers Kant's Towards a Perpetual Peace as being pretty o.k., but reading Kant is always daunting.

u/ijustwannavoice · 1 pointr/WritingPrompts

Well the thing they are always complaining about is the kind of myth that post-Rome was a terrible Dark Age with no progress. Things were still being done in terms of philosophy and research during that time.

Also, Rome didn't exactly fall with Attila- there were a number of invasions into Western Rome and its difficult to draw a precise line on where "Rome" as an idea stopped and started to be "Byzantium."

If you're at all interested in History, I suggest Sailing From Byzantium to see about how things still flourished in the so-called Dark Ages, and really just browsing through Wikipedia a bit here should get you well acquainted with the truth.

u/Deadhydra · 1 pointr/fantasywriters

May I recommend the following book

Its absolutely essential reading for all questions of movement and supply.

I would say though that for a warband (assuming something Viking-esque) that 20-40 miles per day sounds reasonable (depending on terrain and availability of supplies obviously). 20 miles standard, up to 40 miles if they are really, really pushing it (and don't assume they can keep it up for long).

I am assuming they are on foot. On horse it's a different story. Different breeds of horse have different levels of stamina. But the average horse is generally more delicate than the average human. If your warband ride their horses for 40 miles in a day they are likely to have a lot of dead horses.

I've heard a figure quoted of about 12-15 miles per day with horses - if you want to keep them fit and healthy.

Yes, yes, I know various horse nomads could do more than that. As I said, different breeds of horses.

u/wedge102885 · 1 pointr/totalwar
u/Apiperofhades · 1 pointr/AskHistorians

Also one book I've been curious is this

http://www.amazon.com/Greek-Religion-Walter-Burkert/dp/0674362810/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1463239850&sr=8-1&keywords=greek+religion

it says it's good, but it was written in the seventies. Has there been any great development since then?

u/wexman · 1 pointr/reddit.com

http://www.amazon.ca/Aristotle-Everybody-Mortimer-J-Adler/dp/0684838230

is a good book containing the essence of Aristotle. It's not too difficult for young people to understand.

I absorbed my ethics from parents, school and the surrounding society, initially unquestioningly. But as I matured I re-examined them in the light of experience and cold logic (which is common among Atheists), and I retain those that make sense.

u/Alkibiades415 · 1 pointr/AskHistorians

Do you want to stick with Roman stuff? Because Thucydides (history of the Peloponnesian War) is amazing. It is dealing with Greece centuries before the Romans got going, but really fascinating. This is a great way to read it as well, with lots of maps and diagrams and such.

If you want to stick with Roman: Caesar Civil Wars is ok, but I think you find it less compelling than Gallic Wars. You might enjoy the early books of Livy, about the beginnings of Rome. The Roman historian Sallust also has two different monographs: one of the War with Catiline and one about the Jugurthine War in Africa. The latter one might be of interest to you. link

u/Corsaer · 1 pointr/AskReddit
  • Currently reading The Discourses of Epictetus. (Philosophy, Greek Stoicism)

  • Last book I read was The First Heretic by Aaron Dembski-Bowden. (war, gore and testosterone that takes place in the year 40,000)

  • Emergency book to be always kept in the car until I finish it is The Living Dead. (zombie anthology)
  • Toilet book Whitman: Poetry and Prose. (my favorite poet)

    I'm kind of all over the place it seems.
u/rockyrook · 1 pointr/Stoicism

I’m not 100% confident in my response as I’m trying to recall from memory ... I don’t have my books with me now.

The Enchiridion is just the handbook and really good summary of his Discourses. It is a book on its own. It is included in the Penguin classics addition of Discourses and selected writings: https://www.amazon.com/Discourses-Selected-Writings-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140449469/ref=mp_s_a_1_2?keywords=epictitus&qid=1551101547&s=gateway&sr=8-2

I will add too that if you are looking to buy this book, I would suggest you go with the Oxford World Classics edition. Penguin leaves out whole chapters in Discourses, while Oxford has all of them: https://www.amazon.com/Discourses-Fragments-Handbook-Oxford-Classics/dp/0199595186/ref=mp_s_a_1_4?keywords=epictitus&qid=1551101610&s=gateway&sr=8-4

u/paul_brown · 1 pointr/Catholicism

My favorite books by him include How to Read a Book and Aristotle for Everybody.

I would highly recommend this author for anyone looking to study Thomas Aquinas - or for anyone who simply would like an introduction to philosophy.

u/sobergamer1 · 1 pointr/history

Peloponnesian War - Sparta vs Athens in 5th century B.C., very fun read and has helped me understand the foreign policies of nations today.

https://www.amazon.com/Peloponnesian-War-Donald-Kagan/dp/0142004375

u/spike · 1 pointr/history
u/grunknisse · 1 pointr/askphilosophy

There's a decent book that covers Socrates and the impact he had on his contemporaries, The Trial of Socrates. If you're really interested in how he impacted his surroundings, I think reading it will give you some answers.

Answering how much of an impact he would have had without his students is hard to answer, maybe there would have been other people writing about him, but then perhaps they would be seen as students of his as well.

u/mikeber55 · 1 pointr/history

The End of the Bronze Age Princeton University Press https://www.amazon.com/dp/0691025916/ref=cm_sw_r_sms_awdo_t1_.XcJBbE2K75XH

The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World https://www.amazon.com/dp/069114818X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_C1cJBbZV1V1W6

u/CuriousastheCat · 1 pointr/history

I'm interested in this period too and have seen recommended for the immediate aftermath and wars 'Ghost on the Throne' and 'Dividing the Spoils'. If you're interested in the wider historical aftermath for the period and have the appetite for a 1000 page tome then you might want to look at 'From Alexander to Actium'.

​

Unfortunately for this time period (the 'Hellenistic Period') we don't have a good narrative history from early sources like we do for some other periods. Herodotus, Thucydidesand Xenephon tell us the story of Greece from roughly 500-362, then we have a frustrating gap for the rise of Philip II (Alexander's father and seen by many ancients as more impressive than Alexander), then various accounts such as Arrian's of Alexander's conquests 336-323. But then there's a big 60 year gap after Alexander until Polybius's histories start in 264 (by which time this is the story of how the Successor Kingdoms and Carthage alike are ultimately defeated by Rome).

[Links in para above are to excellent scholarly versions: Landmark editions in particular are fantastic with maps, good footnotes and annexes etc. But as these are all ancient and so out of copyright you can probably get old translations for free on kindle etc.]

u/cdbavg400 · 1 pointr/MapPorn

Are you and your friend not aware of the Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World? If you both are, I'd be interested to know why he doesn't find that sufficient.

u/Libri_SS · 1 pointr/italy_SS

Ma non pensare che non sia guerrilla marketing di qualcosa di simile a questo, ma in italiano.

u/petrov76 · 1 pointr/AskHistorians

What's your thoughts on "Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army" by Donald Engels?

https://www.amazon.com/Alexander-Great-Logistics-Macedonian-Army/dp/0520042727

u/milophilomilo · 1 pointr/Stoicism

I would highly recommend starting with Epictetus and Socrates.

Stay away from the popular marketing stoics of our age, as they teach that stoicism is not about exalted truth and virtue, but that it is about lying to gain power, fame, fortune, and money. That is the exact OPPOSITE of True Stoicism and a sign of our times.

Many good recommendations here: http://twitter.com/philocowboy

"Instead of the lying marketing stoics and foolish professors, read Epictetus who honored Socrates: https://www.amazon.com/Discourses-Selected-Writings-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140449469/ "

u/kyrie-eleison · 1 pointr/books

I posted this a few days ago; just ignore the Norse stuff. As far as non-fiction, you can't do much better than the work of Walter Burkert. Ancient Greek Religion is probably a better introduction; you'll have to read something about Eleusis, too.

If you'd like to get into myth in general, definitely look into archetypal theory and criticism. It can be challenging, but it's very much worth it and quite illuminating.

EDIT: It might also be a good idea to keep this on hand.

u/Erithal · 1 pointr/Minecraft

I also recommend the Landmark Thucydides, if you are willing to branch out into ancient Greek classics; it's a certainty that Caesar was familiar with him. This book was another of the texts for my college course, and has maps of the ancient landscape so you can follow along with his description of the Peloponnesian War on an accurate map of the landscape of the time. Without these maps, it would be a wall of text, but being able to trace the movements of the armies with your finger eases the litany of troop deployments amidst unfamiliar geography.

u/kwizzle · 1 pointr/AskHistorians

Whoa, the Barrington atlas is going for 400$ on amazon!

Kinda depressing, I was looking forward to seeing the maps of the the cities, none of my local libraries have it.

u/matrius · 1 pointr/totalwar
u/PureAleWizards · 1 pointr/askphilosophy

I like the trial and death of Socrates.

It may not be the best place to start in the whole world of philosophy, but it is the best I know of. The Euthyphro dialog is particularly fun and accessible as far as primary sources go.

People will tell you to stick to/stay away from primary sources at first. Don't listen to either party. Read what you are interested in. Reading what you are interested will kindle your love of philosophy and improve your philosophy reading skills.

That said, Kant is not a good place to start. You now know one place that is not a good place to start. Best of luck.

u/FlavivsAetivs · 1 pointr/Imperator

Roman Smithing: Iron for the Eagles

Roman Armor Production and Construction: Roman Imperial Armor by Sim and Kaminski

Military Clothing: Roman Military Dress

Romano-Byzantine Court Dress: By the Emperor's Hand

General Roman Dress: Roman Clothing and Fasion

Why/how Ancient Battles were fought: Soldiers and Ghosts by J.E. Lendon

On Roman soldiers themselves: Rome and the Sword by Simon James

The Year of the Four Emperors: The Long Year: AD 69

Late Roman Generals: Aetius: Attila's Nemesis, Belisarius: The Last Roman General + The Gothic War, and Stilicho: The Vandal Who Saved Rome.

Ian Hughes also has a complementary book to his Aetius on Attila the Hun coming out in late 2018/early 2019. I have one on the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields coming out in April 2019 as well, more or less alongside it, but I don't have links for either of them.

u/indianawalsh · 1 pointr/neoliberal

This is a version that includes copious explanatory notes and maps to help you along. Each paragraph is summarized in the margins, even.

Any translation of Thucydides is going to have readability issues; he's tough to get through even in the original language and the process of translation only exacerbates that issue.

u/fectin · 1 pointr/history

USN war college uses this as a textbook:
https://www.amazon.com/Landmark-Thucydides-Comprehensive-Guide-Peloponnesian/dp/0684827905

For a surprisingly good overview of history generally, I recommend https://www.amazon.com/Cartoon-History-Universe-Volumes-1-7/dp/0385265204

u/TheCaptainDamnIt · 0 pointsr/philosophy

If you have the time I highly recommend you check out this book.
https://www.amazon.com/Trial-Socrates-I-F-Stone/dp/0385260326

It's not long, it's a easy read and I found it fun. It doesn't take an 'anti' stance, he's just putting together the larger picture. He looks at what the primary sources have to say and then puts that into the wider picture of what was happening in Athens (and Greece) at the time. I'm no expert on Greek history or philosophy, though I do love reading about both and I found it assessable and insightful.

I started to reread it two years ago and left the damn thing at an airport bar. Hopefully someone found it and gave it a read. The only way a book should go.

u/pointmanzero · -1 pointsr/Shitstatistssay

>Your being friends with a relatively high-profile engineer really does not make your plans more coherent.

Oh my holy titty fucking christ. Continually harping on the "you have not explained this to my satisfaction" without specific questions is getting old. I am honestly not sure about what part of my plan is not coherent. Honestly. the inability to accurately describe what is inside my mind to others is my single greatest failing as a human being and I readily admit that.

  1. Incorporate and prepare for resource allocation.
  2. Begin online media campaign to raise awareness and accept resources.
    3.Build first facility to demonstrate feasibility of tech and iron out design complications yet to be realized. (this includes the Hughes-001 a scout drone of my design) Which will serve a variety of functions including safety and scientific purposes.
  3. Introduce long range drone designs and test feasibility at the now SLE-0001.
  4. Optimize agriculture production. (I plan to fly in Ron finley and Carleen Madigan and compensate them for their time) Train the first OFH agriculture specialists and prepare them for exponential growth.
  5. Begin deployment of decentralized manufacturing grid. Supporters will receive 3D printers in their home that they can use for free but we can also remotely command to print parts we need. This is crucially essential to building the sheer number of drone chassis that will be needed within a very short amount of time.
  6. Strategically build out SLE-0002 SLE-0003 SLE-0004 etc... There is a reason why I have been going around for the past 2 years securing hundreds of acres of land. I plan to fucking use it.
  7. Connect SLE's using the long range drones in a metropolitan area. (this may take several years to do the first time)
  8. Begin Operation POLR (exponential growth through the path of least resistance)
  9. Begin A.I. program.


    Do you want me to give you my business plan word for word so you steal it? No thanks.

    > Can you honestly look at what you've typed here about the deployment of the Macedonian army and not understand why someone would think you are delusional?

    Not if that person is smart enough to understand that historical reference and the significance of the acheivment. Unheard of at the time.

    > If your plans really made sense you would be able to convey the gist of them in a way that similarly made sense. Yet you haven't... or were you going to claim again that I'm too stupid to understand it?

    Help me to help you Let me just walk you through every single facet of my plan so that you can run to Oprah and declare it your idea. If you have specific questions just ask them and I will try to help you.

    >So here you are claiming and claiming again that you and whoever are working on something that will revolutionize everything! while simultaneously shitting all over anyone skeptical of your claims and anything that contradicts you. Please take another moment to think critically about why people have responded to you the way they have.

    I am not pitching perpetual motion. Just an overall societal vision of using soon to be common technologies to disrupt industries and establish a new parcel delivery system that generates excessive energy surplus as a by product using less than 10,000 supporters out of 7 billion potential supporters. Culminating in a connected one world automated drone grid. This is why I am waiting for you to have an aha! eureka! moment.

    The reason why you believe I am insulting your intelligence is because I have explained this plan countless times and (I would estimate) less than 5% of people get it. And these are really smart people I talk to.
    So I have developed a callousness to the nay sayers.
    I don't have time to explain to you the way I see the world. You are probably not capable of ever getting it. And that is ok.

    You would think a human being that have been alive for the rise of cell phones would be more receptive to the possibility of this.

    >Perhaps you should combine this thought:

    Oh are you a therapist now?

u/JupeJupeSound · -2 pointsr/NeutralPolitics

Well first let's define what we mean by collectivism. I suggest using Hofstede's defintion:

>Collectivistic cultures emphasize the needs and goals of the group as a whole over the liberty of each individual. In such cultures, relationships with other members of the group and the interconnectedness between people play a central role in each person's identity.

Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory is a framework for cross-cultural communication, developed by Geert Hofstede. It describes the effects of a society's culture on the values of its members, and how these values relate to behavior, using a structure derived from factor analysis.

Collectivism can be divided into horizontal collectivism and vertical collectivism. Horizontal collectivism stresses collective decision-making among relatively equal individuals, and is thus usually based on decentralization. Vertical collectivism is based on hierarchical structures of power and on moral and cultural conformity, and is therefore based on centralization. A cooperative enterprise would be an example of horizontal collectivism, whereas a military hierarchy would be an example of vertical collectivism.

Horizontal collectivism grows out of Individualism as population density increases and the nation secures virtually limitless resources. While Horizontal collectivism is adaptive, vertical is maladaptive. Countries founded on Individualist principles do not survive the transition from individualism through horizontal collectivism to vertical collectivism.

Not distinguishing between horizontal and vertical collectivism would give us more countries but we don't need more examples than USSR, Rome, Byzantium, Egypt, and Germany under Hitler. No country has ever survived this.

The only countries with collectivist slants we have are the remnants of past empires which fell to the turnover, such as china. The PRC's system is an aristocratic republic. During the early dynasties china was individualist, and the lack of civil rights in PRC is a direct result of collectivism. They have a highly masculine system and yet there is low indulgence and low uncertainty avoidance, meaning the current workforce is deluded with individualist values (society will be driven by competition, achievement and success) when they are powerless to actually manifest them with such high long term orientation.

http://geert-hofstede.com/china.html

https://www.library.ln.edu.hk/eresources/etext/hkibs/hkws_0040.pdf

Only time will tell whether collectivism takes down china a second time. I included it in the post because it's commonly used as an example of a country which survives turnover, which is fallacious because the current aristocracy is in power because of a collectivist turnover. I think it's important to include citations regarding china because I know that it's the other side of the argument and I want to be fair. This empowers you to form your own opinion as we find support for our positions and communicate. While I personally believe the PRC exists because of a collectivist turnover, some basic arguments about China's potency as a collectivist nation can be made to show it's the only nation in history that may have survived a turnover, depending on what language you want to use (which is disingenous at best).

If you want to read about the fall of individualist Rome to collectivism I suggest J.E. Lendon's 'Soldiers and Ghosts'. He details the rise of fraud and mania in accordance with Romes fetish for greek culture, which led to liberal politics which undermined the individualist values which ensured Romes dominance in the region. The romans became obsessed with the allure of greek virtues in combat and culture, which led to mutations in rome's culture, warfare, commerce, politics and education which led to it's downfall. He makes the argument that this neurosis, which is complicated to understand and internalize, was the fall of rome. It's a great read. http://www.amazon.com/Soldiers-Ghosts-History-Classical-Antiquity/dp/0300119798

But enough about me, what do you think?

u/adfanbanme · -10 pointsr/AskReddit

SPARRRRTAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!! ... and to know more