Rate this guy's top 10 history books of all time

1. Rubicon by Tom Holland
2. The Wars of the Roses: The Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise of the Tudors by Dan Jones
3. Carthage Must be Destroyed: The Rise and Fall of an Ancient Civilization by Richard Miles
4. Agrippina by Emma Southon
5. The Rape of Nanking by Iris Chang
6. The Brothers York by Thomas Penn
7. From Cyprus to Alexander by Pierre Bryan
8. Ghost of the Throne: The Death of Alexander the Great and the Bloody Fight for his Empire by James Room
9. The Poison King by Adrienne Mayor
10. Philip & Alexander: Kings and Conquerors by Adrian Goldsworthy

Terry Davis: They Glow, You Shine Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

Terry Davis: They Glow, You Shine Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    pop-his moment

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Is his list good or what?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        No. I hate people like him. They are not intelligent. They're not good looking. What they do is saturate their minds and knowledge drop to try to look smart and go to the gym and try to look more attractive. They do this out of resentment for people who look better that are more intelligent than they are, always trying to correct them over a simple point, split hairs over a irrelevant detail or misspoken word, and need to act authoritative "dude just" tier unsolicited life advice. And when they talk, it is a one way conversation, on and on, 60 sentences spoken for everyone one sentence of everyone else in the room. If you get under their skin they will just brag about tristes and fricking as proof they've done life right (meanwhile it's hambeasts). This guy is a soijak incarnate and I would never read a damned thing he suggests. I am not meming. I hate everyone who looks like this and the people who have tried to frick me over and make me look bad in life look like him. The suggested readings are all milquetoast meanderings Paul Bunningying the figures and war narratives, enumerating little factoids to the precisest detail, meanwhile saying nothing insightful, and others being marvel tier fictions that lambast the 'bad guy' as being bad for no reason at all like his China vs Japan book.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          don't hold back, anon

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's a terrible list. Survey factoid shit that focuses on overemphasizing tidbits to make things more interesting to ADD morons. Also:
        >The Rape of Nanking by Iris Chang
        Is easily the worst written mainstream history book I've ever read. It reads like an unproofed first year undergrad essay.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Is easily the worst written mainstream history book I've ever read.
          Do you have an alternative recommendation for a book about the topic?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            There really isn't one that deals specifically with the Nanking massacre. It's a quick read but just don't expect a well written history that goes into detail beyond "THIS bad thing happened...then THIS bad thing happened." I know there's a biography of John Rabe that might be worth checking out. Seriously though, I don't like commenting on prose specifically but when you read it you'll keep thinking it sounds like an essay written by a precocious high school student (or an undergrad at a mid school).

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            https://i.imgur.com/mW0OH6q.jpeg

            I did a little research and pic-related seems like it has more depth. If you just want massacre porn bro history you can go with Chang. The Rabe book I was thinking of is called "The Good Man of Nanking"; it's not a bio like I though but an edited version of his journals.

            Thank you, both, for the insight.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            I did a little research and pic-related seems like it has more depth. If you just want massacre porn bro history you can go with Chang. The Rabe book I was thinking of is called "The Good Man of Nanking"; it's not a bio like I though but an edited version of his journals.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Unironically, you'd be better off reading the wiki page first and then reading one of these books if you find the wiki page interesting.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's unfiltered shite tea.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          How, exactly, is his list shite?

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Its Ghost on the Throne
    Good for an introduction and overview of most topics, but afterwards you need more specialised articles and books.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >but afterwards you need more specialised articles and books.
      What's a good follow-up book?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        On which topic exactly ? On the hellenistic period of the diadochi theres good article collections, tbh theres a myriad things. Ptolemaic egypt has books on tax collection and on its military, three books on the last alone that I know.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I thought you were referring to a "Ghost on the Throne" as a good introduction and, afterward, needing more specialized articles and books about it. My apologies.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Its a good example for the hellenistic period. The other books are mostly in the same vein.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            NTA but there's Alexander to Actium by Peter Green that spans the whole Hellenistic Period dealing with both political and cultural history. It's long and thorough but reads well. You can download it on Annas Archive. In general you can just search that site for the topic/person you care about. There are books about Ptolemy, Seluceus, Demetrius, Pyrrhus, etc.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Thank you.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, Ghost on the Throne is the only decent work in that list but something like Dividing the Spoils covers similar ground while being better written and shorter.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Tbh the primary sources are free and quite readable, so thats definetly something you should read after.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          No doubt.

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Dan Jones from what I’ve heard is light reading compared to someone like Henri Pirenne or Desmond Seward

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Only read his book on Templars but it is a pretty breezy read. Still think it’s well researched and everything.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Thank you, I didn't get any attractive results from Google searching for a book on the War of the Roses. The subject seems to be a magnet for female authors wanting to put a romantic fiction bent to it.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >of all time
    >it's all from the present

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    All fricking angloids

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Seethe

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Average IQfy poster

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Why wouldn't you just read Plutarch/other ancient authors + Mommsen + some modern academic history if you get really into it for the ancient world? All this pop his crap is adding literally nothing, not even good writing since the ancient authors and Mommsen have that.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Just read some discussions about certain translations, not all are of the same quality.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I just read Rubicon and am going to start Dynasty soon. It was good for what I needed, which was an accessible and entertaining intro to the Republic. It also imparts the author's love of the subject onto the reader, I am interested in reading more in-depth books on Rome.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >It was good for what I needed, which was an accessible and entertaining intro to the Republic.
      The guy in the video also recommended SPQR: A History of Ancient Rome by Mary Beard.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Doesn't include the Iliad
    Belongs in the trash

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Carthage Must Be Destroyed is not a good book. There isn't enough data available to really do a thorough history of Carthage, so the author padded the book with discussion of his personal hobby horse – the syncretic Hercules/Melqart cult. This would have been tolerable except he also does a lot of tenuously supported theorizing about said cult, which is the sort of writing that belongs in a blog, not a published history book.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    that guys list is garbo
    jus modern propaganda

    voyager of xanadu
    the travels of ibn battuta
    the book of five rings
    the argonautica
    the prince
    athelstan
    popes of avignon
    the prose edda
    the epic of gilgamesh
    meditations
    le morte d'arthur
    the aeneid of virgil
    sir gawain and the green knight, pearl, sir orfeo
    the Iliad
    the odyssey
    theogony, works and days and shield of heracles
    medea
    tristan and Isolde
    Saga of the volsungs
    heart of darkness

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      cont..
      the book with a glare is british slaver ownership there's a palace on the cover, communications majors HATE that book, they also don't like when you bring up the 40 volumes of the talmud they didn't want to pay taxes

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I don't take book recommendations from anyone who reads comic books.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      this is fiction

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Everything is fiction, especially history.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Nah

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Deal with it.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      In all cases there are better books that cover the subject n the same way. Besides the one on Nanking because I don't know or care about modern history. None of them as far as I can tell are terrible, but why would you read the double biography of Philip and Alexander when there is a better one by Ian Worthington? Or just take Alexander by Peter Green, or any of his works for the Hellenistic period really. There is no point going out of your way to read pop history when perfectly readable (if you care for that) and better works of history on the same topics out there.

      >athelstan
      The Yale King's series Athelstan is good, at least in terms of scholarship but not a very interesting read which is mainly due to the lack of sources really dealing with the man. Edward the Elder, the Confessor, Cnut and Aethelred all have better biographies in the series but I think that's more due to the fact there are more sources for them.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >when there is a better one by Ian Worthington? Or just take Alexander by Peter Green, or any of his works for the Hellenistic period really.
        How are they better, exactly?

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Some of those are good for someone who never read history and needs an introduction. But ''of all time''? Not even close.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What are your recommendations?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        EP Thompson
        Past & Present (a journal)
        Annales
        CLR James
        Engels (for first year students as easy to read)

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          You name-dropped authors. What books specifically?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            EP Thompson. Article: Time, Work Discipline and Industrial Capitalism.
            Past & Present (a journal). Attempts to deal with medieval economics.
            Annales. Mediterranean in the age of Phil.
            CLR James. Black Jacobins
            Engels (for first year students as easy to read). Your choice of Peasants war in Germany, Family Private Property or Condition of the working class in England. Note how Engels titles indicates he deals with broader social phenomena in their instantiation.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Thank you.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            The P&P articles are from the earliest sequence of the journal.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            You sound like a Marxist

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          CLR James is a hack.

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Pop slop boomer dadcore

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There's a vague tension here between white guilt and being trapped in Eurocentric viewpoints, I can't pin this guy. But I like the list.

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Function follows form, all that is good is beautiful

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    how do you find good history books then? inb4 muh primary sources but I can't go to a british museum to read assyrian clay tablets. Even then primary sources won't give the backgroun knowledge of the region and time to accurately understand the events taking place.
    I looked at /askhistorians reading list, wikipedia's sources (books cited 5+ times and academic looking with with more than 7600 pages). What if you don't know general world history? There's not academic works written on the span of 5 thousand years, only pop slop.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Well first pick a point and place that interests you, get an overview on wikipedia and then read a secondary book, like the ones in OP. Then read primary sources if theyre accessible and search for books and articles which go in depth into the whole, or parts of the topic youre interested in.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      I read book lists and pick the ones that seem interesting

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Primary sources, duh. Obviously there will be some harder primary sources that a non scholar can't reasonably read, or parse through like the English Royal records. But if you care about Antiquity you aren't going to be out of luck for good sources. Plutarch, Thucydides and Polybius are all excellent sources that really, you don't need that much background to read.
      Unironically, Amazon's algorithim isn't that bad at finding stuff for you. You can also check University press websites especially Yale which has excellent books. You can even just search up books on (x) and google will give you a bunch of suggestions

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    No.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    He should order his books by colour. It would be more honest.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >not a single primary work
    Apt list for someone who looks like a basedjak.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      You want a primary source? National Archives Australia. Go have fun. Archives beat the shit out of contemporary texts published as texts. Archives weren't meant for public consumption.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        By primary sources I mean memoirs, ancient historians, etc. Not tax records, moron.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          And they're radically different and deficient compared to archival primary sources for generating historiography. Primary sources produced as texts for consumption at the time are produced with a "public face" that results in the authorial structure presenting for display. Archival records produced for internal consumption, like tax records, are *wild fricking shit*, like getting access to purely private daily diaries.

  20. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    I've read Rubicon and Rape of Nanking. They are not "pop his." They aren't exactly textbooks either, but if you think there's no middleground between the two, you're moronic. Rubicon is closer to being academic than Rape of Nanking I suppose. Also it's weird calling or associating Rape of Nanking "pop his" because I think of "pop his" as being enjoyable, fun, and light, whereas Rape of Nanking is one of the most depressing things I've ever read.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Historians think of textbooks as worse than journalist meyanderings btw. Historians write monographs, chapters, articles or compile source books.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        no everyone is paid by the state to read whole days.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Or you could learn to read in a party or union.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            lol
            I have read monographies or articles ,it's just moronic to think that everyone is going to read 500pages book lenght of the developpement of the county of burgundy X-XI century or and then expect they would do that for any period/subject/territory/history they're interested in.
            So yeah textbook are cool ,they give you an overview and not everyone has the time to put thousand of hours into reading monographies or reading sources,confronting them,articles etc
            as i said ,when you're paid 8 hours a day to actually do that yeah it's possible to do it.
            my point is : your pedantism is shit please just frick off.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >my point is : your
            >is : your
            > :
            I'm so sorry that you're French, please accept my apologies. I didn't realise I was teasing the moronic.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      How hard is it to grasp the concept that something becomes pop-history because it provides material for pop-culture. We all know about the rape of Nanking, but we can also see how uncaring chinese people are for every single person other than themselves, they literally killed each other by the millions for centuries and even recently, they have almost zero compassion. The question then is, how bad was this rape really, if we were to analyze it at face value it doesnt even make a dent in when compared against Mao's mass murders and great leap forward victims. So yes, this rape of nanking book is a fricking pop-his book and not history, as it just serves a political agenda. Its like holocaust literature. Even if it was genuinely good historical work, it would not serve a purpose because history should not be a crowd pleaser made with the intent to sell a shitton of books to a group of people who hate another people for nationalistic reasons or because they want to play victim, but a critical investigation of events as they are purportes to have happened.
      The same goes for all the books in this redditor baldie homosexuals list, they all just reheat an established, at times millenia old, historical pop-cultural perspective, they add nothing to the discourse whatsoever.

  21. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If by 'all time' then wouldn't Herodotus' Histories be on there? There's no understating his significance in recording history. Or is this just a contemporary list and not really 'of all time'?
    It's an insult to his legacy.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >If by 'all time' then wouldn't Herodotus' Histories be on there?
      History was invented by a movement typified by Ranke in the 19th century.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Are you moronic? The OP subject refers to the buff dude's list of his *favorite* history books he ever read.

  22. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    R8 my top 10
    1. Symposium
    2. Gorgias
    3. Phaedrus
    4. Alcibiades
    5. Menon
    6. Phaedo
    7. Protagoras
    8. Trial of Socrates
    9. Crito
    10. Minor Hippias

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      1/10. No one cares for your Greek fetish.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Black person

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I do.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        are you brown

  23. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    i don't read history "books"
    i read twitter threads from schizos who link everyone to the CIA

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *