Do you read primary sources?
If not, why are you browsing both Reddit and 4chan?
Also read Ammianus Marcellinus, he's underrated as hell by people obsessed with muh early empire and muh eagle. Historians consider him one of the best writers apart from Tacitus.
Fuck, I don't even read enough secondary sources. I get most of my 'knowledge' from this board. I feel like if I hang around here long enough I'll eventually develop a coherent understanding of certain subjects.
I would start, theyre actually pretty interesting if youre willing to work through them.
If you don't think you can make it through a primary, go for something where you can learn history but it wont be dry as fuck. Robert Oconell and Roger Crowley are both great examples for this.
I think my biggest barrier to reading primary sources by myself is the same feeling a child gets from swimming without armbands for the first time. I absolutely NEED to have a commentary or exegesis on hand otherwise I just can't approach it mentally. I'm working to overcome this though.
As long as you don't read shit from the 19th century where they replace words like "fucking" with "making love to" in order to portray a historical culture as lofty and cultured, you're fine.
There's a bajillion of Bible translations with severely altered meanings, and that's just the Bible where the guys who assembled the canon were some of the biggest autists on the planet.
Not as much as I'd like. I've mostly started reading history shit in the past two years though. So I'm doing a lot of broad comparative surveys. Also I'm not much into narrative, war, and Rome. Which rules out a lot of the better known stuff, apparently.
because I can rarely contextualize primary sources from outside my field of study.
I also don't like having to use google after every page to discover the meaning of some abstruse word.
> I also don't like having to use google after every page to discover the meaning of some abstruse word.
Aren't primary sources usually heavily annotated? Half of that I know from reading Livy I got from annotations.
>month / day / year
Could anything be more retarded or non-sequential?
A lot of college history text books will have an accompanying primary source book that usually have some contextual commentary and good questions to lead you toward better interpretive abilities. They're a good place to start.
>not reading Loeb (which is patrician level)
>he hasn't read read pic related