Reddit mentions: The best ancient civilizations history books

There are far too many to describe one as "the best", but here are some of my favourites.

The Making of the Atomic Bomb by Richard Rhodes is a well deserved winner of the Pulitzer Prize. A combination of history, science and biography and so very well written.

A few of my favourite biographies include the magisterial, and also Pulitzer Prize winning, Peter the Great by Robert Massie. He also wrote the wonderful Dreadnaught on the naval arms race between Britain and Germany just prior to WWI (a lot more interesting than it sounds!). Christopher Hibbert was one of the UK's much loved historians and biographers and amongst his many works his biography Queen Victoria - A Personal History is one of his best. Finally, perhaps my favourite biography of all is Everitt's Cicero - The Life and Times of Rome's Greatest Politician. This man was at the centre of the Fall of the Roman Republic; and indeed fell along with it.

Speaking of which, Rubicon - The Last Years of the Roman Republic is a recent and deserved best-seller on this fascinating period. Holland writes well and gives a great overview of the events, men (and women!) and unavoidable wars that accompanied the fall of the Republic, or the rise of the Empire (depending upon your perspective). :) Holland's Persian Fire on the Greco-Persian Wars (think Cyrus, Darius, Xerxes! Think of the Movie 300, if you must) is equally gripping.

Perhaps my favourite history book, or series, of all is Shelby Foote's magisterial trilogy on the American Civil War The Civil War - A Narrative. Quite simply one of the best books I've ever read.

If, like me, you're interested in teh history of Africa, start at the very beginning with The Wisdom of the Bones by Alan Walker and Pat Shipman (both famous paleoanthropologists). Whilst not the very latest in recent studies (nothing on Homo floresiensis for example), it is still perhaps the best introduction to human evolution available. Certainly the best I've come across. Then check out Africa - Biography of a Continent. Finish with the two masterpieces The Scramble for Africa on how European colonialism planted the seeds of the "dark continents" woes ever since, and The Washing of the Spears, a gripping history of the Anglo-Zulu wars of the 1870's. If you ever saw the movie Rorke's Drift or Zulu!, you will love this book.

Hopkirk's The Great Game - The Struggle for Empire in Central Asia teaches us that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

I should imagine that's enough to keep you going for the moment. I have plenty more suggestions if you want. :)

First, realize that your condition is normal for any "self-aware human being". We all go through these phases. The following is based on my attempts to cope with this condition. It is a ongoing process.

The key is to understand that you have to change the mental conditioning that has led you to this stage. The mental conditioning is the sum total of experiences in the various environments that you have been in since birth.

Change your immediate social environment and the change in internal perception will follow. Next, try and change your response to environmental stimulus from the pre-learnt ones. I recently read an article which beautifully explained the relationship between external stimulus and our response to it in a given environmental context (think Pavlov's dog). The gist is that, when we encounter a new stimulus in a given environmental context our initial response is based on our reading of the context, our past experiences and inferences from those. When next we again encounter the same stimulus in the same context we often choose to use the same response. Over time pathways are laid in the brain and the tuple {environmental context, stimulus, response} becomes a conditioning. Now guess what? By just putting you in the same environmental context your brain automatically jumps to the associated response even without the stimulus. Next realize that with the power of imagination we can recreate the environmental context without being physically in it. Thus i am responding in a known way to a stimulus without the context being actually present! The same also happens to be the case when the stimulus is absent but the context is recreated! Subconsciously we pick up on the context and the preset response is triggered (bodily changes) before we notice the absence of stimulus and control ourselves. Hence the great importance of controlling thought patterns.

Start by avoiding those social situations which you know are dragging you down. Learn to be comfortable in your own company i.e. cultivate healthy solitude. Exercise and maintain health so that the body helps you to control the mind. Slow down everything so that you have a chance to regulate your perception of an event and thus modulate the response. Use imagination to play out scenarios of successful response to situations before you encounter them. This is a well-proven technique. "Faking it" is a learning mechanism, not the end goal. Thus for example if you are always walking slouched and downcast, by consciously throwing out your chest, chin up, looking people in the eyes and walking straight you are breaking the previous conditioning and reinforcing a new positive one. By imagining (i.e. currently non-existent) and asserting confidence in a subject of choice, you are building up a new neural pathway so that as you progress the real confidence substitutes the scaffolding.

Here are some books which i found useful;

1. Science of Happiness: How our brains make us happy and what we can do to get happier - Nice overall view. Backed by science and not a pep talk.
   
   
2. The Body has a Mind of its Own - The synergy between mind and body.
   
   
3. Yoga and Western Psychology - Ignore the cover (some idiot's idea of appeal). The authoress was a practicing psychiatrist who saw parallels between classical Raja Yoga and western psychology (freud, jung, all that good stuff.). This book contains an overview of both and a comparison so the cultural context does not obscure the real substance. Invaluable. Nothing religious. Focuses on how to use the techniques for a better life.
   
   
4. Discouses and Selected Writings of Epictetus - Greek/Roman Stoicism. A very practical way to regulate perception and response.
   
   

A lot of people here are giving shitty answers and not helping because they disprove of your use of "dark ages."
On behalf on the internet I apologize. They are giving you crap for not knowing something you have expressed interest in learning about.
I am fascinated by the "Dark ages" and I have a history degree and I'm still using the term. I understand it to usually mean "the medieval times" or "the huge time-span that is not usually taught to the average student." Most history in public schools (at least that I've seen) tends to gloss over the time from the Romans to the early renaissance so I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt and assuming that's the era you want. It's my favorite era to study for that reason - most people know so little about this 1000 year span in history.
A good starter book for you would be A world lit only by Fire I loved this book. It's not overly scholarly and is a good read.
Another great one is Mysteries of the Middle Ages... Thomas Cahill is a great writer and if this version of the paperback is anything like my copy it is a visually stunning read. I discovered him through "How the Irish Saved Civilization" which was also great.
Mark Kurlansky's books (Salt and Cod specifically come to mind) are well written, specific histories that cover parts of this time period.
I wish my books weren't still packed (recently moved) because I want to dig through the stack and share them all. :) I suck at remembering names of stuff. I recommend browsing the amazon pages section of "Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought" for other good recommendations.
Happy Reading!! :)
edit - just remembered this one on the byzantine empire of all the books I've read on the Byzantines, that one is my favorite.

edit I'm getting a lashing for "A World Lit Only By Fire" due to the fact that it contains historical inaccuracies.
Please read this one instead In the year 1000.
I'm not trying to recommend dry scholarly tomes, I am trying to think of books that are fun, interesting, and entertaining to read while still being informative.

Historical linguistics was too deep for me too until I listened to a podcast on the subject, and after the first 20 episodes I was so fascinated I went back and listened to them again. Now this week I'm nearing the end of those for the second time, but as of today there are over 70 episodes total. Anyway, to your questions:

> If humans have been in Europe for hundreds of thousands of years, how could so many languages over the continent be connected to a single language spoken so recently?

Language is spread from cultures that dominate or influence other cultures for whatever reason: winning wars, economic power, being a key trading partner, religious influence, technological influence, etc. Or it could just be the speakers of the language moving from one place to a previously unoccupied place. In the case of PIE the reasons kept changing over the years, but in the beginning it spread because of Economic and military power. The PIE people had (a) domesticated horses, which other peoples did not, (b) a genetic mutation for lactose tolerance which allowed them to produce and consume much more calories per acre, (c) wool/weaving technology since their latitude caused their domesticated sheep to grow longer wool. They therefore also had (d) the luxury of being isolated from other cultures due to their ability to live on the Eurasian steppes where others could not, so they had a long time to expand their power and population without interference. All of this turned into military might and economic advantages that were unsurpassed in the region and allowed them to invade and dominate a successively wider area. In later years some of the other language-spreading factors also came into play.

> When we theorize about PIE, do we also theorize about neighboring dialects?

Yes. But in this case the PIE culture tended to wipe out their neighbors without much blending of the conquered languages, because that was their style and they could pull it off. Remember all those advantages they had. After the establishment of the language families (Hellenic, Italic, Germanic, Celtic, Indic, Balto-Slavic, etc) you see some blending with other languages because there was cultural mixing instead of just complete domination.

> A lot people think it was spoken by a people in the Caucuses, right?

More likely North of the Caucasus mountains. Here's a map.

> So do they think that this one language was basically a superstrate language, dominating everywhere from England to Iran (with help from people like the Romans)...?

Yes, that is exactly what they think. It was a superstrate language beginning in the Eurasion steppes that spread into a huge multi-continental region. What's interesting about English in particular is that it is composed of several different offspring of the original PIE: Germanic, Italic, Hellenic and Celtic. So English represents a re-merging of the original proto-language to a great extent.

> ...or was *PIE a part of a contemporary language family that already covered a great deal of land? If that's true, successful theorizing about PIE would land us at one really random lect of a language spoken ~three thousand years ago. Right?

There is a tremendous amount of evidence; linguistic, archeological and historic, that refutes this possibility.

By the way I just bought this book which I plan to read over the Christmas break. It was recommended in the podcast I mentioned earlier.

Edit: Spelling (photo → proto) and a little grammatical clarity

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

First of all, I want to say that it speaks very well of you that you are looking to use your time in prison to your advantage. Most people would see this as a catastrophe, but you see it as an opportunity. If you want to make this a full-time, in-depth study, this is the plan I recommend.

I would first start with a good introduction to the entire Stoic system. A great one is Stoicism by John Sellars.

Then I would start reading the source material. We are fortunate enough to have the lectures of one of the great teachers of Stoicism, Epictetus. I would go with Epictetus - Discourses, Fragments, Handbook translated by Robin Hard.

After reading Epictetus, you can move on to Marcus Aurelius, who was directly influenced by the Discourses. Robin Hard has also done a translation of the Meditations.

To fully appreciate the Meditations (and to better appreciate Epictetus), next read The Inner Citadel by Pierre Hadot. This is an incredible analysis of the Meditations which explains Epictetus' influence on Marcus Aurelius and his work.

Finally, you must of course read Seneca. Two good sources are this book of his essays and this book of his letters.

Between the footnotes in these translations and the detail given by Sellars and Hadot, you won't need Wikipedia to get clarification on any points. You'll have the expert knowledge in your hands.

I don't think it's necessary to read one of the modern how-to type books before you begin reading these, but if you think it would help to read something lighter first to become acquainted with the core concepts ahead of time, I recommend Stoicism and the Art of Happiness by Donald Robertson.

There are other sources, such as Musonius Rufus and Cicero, but these are the three most people start with and the three that I recommend first. You can look at the FAQ for more ideas if you'd like.

Find out how many books you are allowed to have at one time, as this may be an issue in prison.

As others have said, it's a very good idea to keep a journal of your thoughts, both on what you are reading and how you relate what you are reading to your life.

Few things focus on just that period, so far as I can tell. Fewer if you want it written for popular audiences; lives of Charlemagne are thick on the ground, but before him, there's not much. Bachrach's Early Carolingian Warfare is good for the military side of things, mostly focused on Martel's army. It's dense, and written primarily for academics, but if you're interested in how a Roman-style military worked in post-Roman Europe (and in particular the military that brought about a lot of the consolidation of what would become the Holy Roman Empire), I know of nothing better.

More layman-oriented, The Carolingians: A Family who Forged Europe by Riche is a broad history of the entire Carolingian dynasty, focused mostly later but has some relevant bits. And I hear good things about The Age of Charles Martel, but haven't read it myself.

Also, The Inheritance of Rome is excellent; it's broad in geographic scope, so not limited to the Frankish-ruled realms, but it starts with a Western Roman Empire in decline and continues until two centuries after Charlemagne was given his Imperial title. It's pretty much the best introduction to early medieval European history I know of.

I wish I knew a good biography of Charles Martel to recommend. (For that matter, if anyone else knows one, I'd love to read it!) The Franks had already expanded a bit before he became Mayor of the Palace, and continued to do so after his death, but it was during his tenure that the largest, fastest period of expansion and consolidation of Frankish power occurred; he's also of course known for the battle of Tours, which helped make the Pyrenees the northern border of an otherwise-expansionist al-Andalus. (I am not a fan of great man history for the most part, but Charles Martel was at the center of a lot of big events.)

>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?
   
   

• Meditations: Either get the one by Gregory Hays or Robin Hard. I have both. Hays uses more modern English and is easier to understand, but he can be pretty liberal with his translation. Hard is a little more straight laced in his translation it seems but still uses pretty modern English. Also the Hard translation contains Letter from Marcus to his Rhetoric teacher Fronto which are cool to read. Other versions of Meditations do not have this in them afaik.
  
• Epictetus, Enchiridion + Discourses: Epictetus's Discourses, Fragments, Handbook by Robin Hard. Best translation of Epictetus I have found ( I like more modern English). Lots of good footnotes in this one.
  
• Seneca's Letters: Either Letters from a Stoic to get a taste of what Seneca is like, or go all the way in and get Letters on Ethics which contains all 124 letters to Lucillius. Hardcover book is awesome, high quality, great foot notes throughout.
  
• Seneca's Moral Essays: There are a bunch of these, I haven't found a favorite translation yet. If you only read one, read On the Shortness of Life

Firstly, sorry I cannot give you a detailed answer here. I did ancient Chinese as one half of my undergraduate degree, but haven't read anything recently (i.e. years).

However, I can direct you to some sources that I read which really helped inform me about the late Eastern Han/Three Kingdoms era.

• The Early Chinese Empires: Qin and Han by Mark Edward Lewis is incredibly insightful in regards to society, government, and military of the Qin and Han Dynasties, while his other book China between Empires: The Northern and Southern Dynasties deals with with post-Han China.
  
• Imperial Warlord: A Biography of Cao Cao covers the life of Cao Cao (obviously!) as well as the political situation he found himself in, which includes his position under Dong Zhuo.
  
• The Government of the Qin and Han Empires by Michael Loewe gives a fantastic insight into how the governments of the early empires was run!
  
  In regards to some of your questions, I'll take a shot at answering from memory (sources as above basically!)
  
  > if Dong Zhuo and others are so bent on being that powerful, why would they stop at Prime Minister?
  
  Dong Zhuo was thought to have been preparing to name himself Emperor under a new dynasty. But even besides that, we did try to rise higher than Prime Minister. He named himself Imperial Father, as in Father to the Son of Heaven (the Emperor Xian). This is important, as in Chinese political society where filial piety was important, the Emperor was the father of the empire, with only heaven as his superior. By naming himself the Imperial Father, he was de facto naming himself above the Emperor.
  
  In regards to regional warlords accepting the legitimacy of the Han Emperor while fighting each other, you need to understand where the political authority was seen to have originated, which was the The Mandate of Heaven (mostly). It was more politically difficult to get the rest of the empire to accept that you had gained the Mandate and the Han had lost it than to simply kidnap the emperor and issue decrees in his name (as Dong Zhuo and Cao Cao did). By acting 'under' Han imperial authority, warlords in control of the Emperor had more legitimacy to their actions than without him. This was made easier by the fact that the majority of later emperors in the Eastern Han were child emperors, who were the sovereign in name only, with court officials or eunuchs with real authority governing the state in the Emperor's name.
  
  Apologies I could not be more detailed, I have not read any of my books on this in a long time. But I think once my thesis is done, this question has knocked enough nostalgia into me to revisit them!

Hey, I'd really strongly recommend the Yale OT MOOC. I'm a lifelong atheist and history nut doing it just for fun, and it is awesome. The Prof is a respected scholar, it's not some anti-theist spouting BS.


She basically analyzes the OT as a piece of historic literature a la Shakespeare. You learn about the cultures in that region, where/how a lot of the bible stories got incorporated in the Jewish tradition, etc.


Bonus, if your parents are Christians this would probably make them happy while supporting your exploration. I ordered the main book she recommends and just watch the videos/wiki and feel like I'm getting LOTS out of it.


But yeah, the period you're asking about is the neolithic. I also strongly recommend 1177 BC to get a sense of how archaeology works, how we reconstruct the record, etc. It's absolutely fascinating!

The Romans had a highly established logistical system. Every province was responsible for maintaining a series of depots and when imperial armies marched through, they could requisition food and equipment while maintaining a minimal supply train. Additionally, the Romans could build up supplies of all kind in advance of campaigns: food, animal feed, equipment, horses, beasts of burden, etc. According to various papyri (see the papryi from Panopolis), when Constantius II was preparing to campaign against Julian, 120k metric tons of wheat in Brigantia and 3 million in the Cottian Alps were to prepared in advance. During the republican era, Roman armies were fed by allied states or were delivered by the state. Having the Mediterranean Sea and lands plentiful in rivers in your backyard makes moving enormous amounts of supplies very easy. The lands where the Rhine legions were stationed couldn't possibly feed them at all and so the state had to bring in enormous amounts of food every month. Using the Saône, Moselle, and Rhine Rivers, you can move grain almost entirely by water. The Romans during the republican era also maintained a series of supply depots. If necessary, the Romans would send out foraging parties but this was only a short term solution. If you want to read more on Roman logistics, I recommend the book The Logistics of the Roman Army at War (264 B.C.-A.D. 235).

Logistics in Alexander the Great's time wouldn't have been that enormously different from the Romans. Again, it helped that he used captured Persian food stores to feed his army. His rapid campaign also resulted in the rapid political disintegration of the Persian government and Alexander won over former enemies pretty rapidly; this would have solved his supply problem pretty quickly. To read more on this subject, please see Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army.

Hannibal relied heavily on his Italian allies to feed his army. People seem to forget that when Hannibal invaded Italy, he courted many of Rome's disgruntled allies to his cause. Of course, it also helps that you're invading in rich farmlands.

Much is often made of Napoleon lightening the load of his soldiers so that they could move faster and in doing so, they had to live off the land. This is partly true and partly false. The French had their own series of supply hubs and depots that were stocked up in advance of major campaigns. At the height of his reign, Napoleon also had the advantage of have many allies and vassals who provided for his army. Living off the land was only a temporary solution and it was probably more like part looting part foraging forests for berries and game. If you want to read more on this subject, I recommend Napoleon's Italian Campaigns: 1805-1815.

In pre-industrial warfare, there were simple logistical laws that no army could break.

> I think Neanderthals were as intelligent as Homo sapiens.

That's a fairly minority position ...

> My speculation is that they never got 10000 years of climate stability like humans enjoyed during the Holocene.

Except they did. Neanderthals existed between 350kya and 42kya. Now look at the global temperatures for that period. So there was a warm period between 110,000 and 125,000 years ago that would be about as warm as it is now (omitting very recent climate change effects for the moment).

> OTOH, humans were lucky enough to live during a time were the global temperature remained +- 1 C for ten thousands years.

Ok, first of all, the term "humans" applies both to Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. Second of all, the prehistoric agricultural theories have settled on the idea that basic domestication of cereal crops occurred in at most a few centuries; i.e., the only thing preventing homo sapiens from developing agriculture was a relatively brief period of time when climate allowed for it.

(Just look at the Kebaran -> Natufian development relative to the Bølling-Allerød interstadial and the Younger Dryas. The Ice Age stopped briefly, they tried to adopt sedentism and were on their way leaving archeological evidence, then the ice age came back, and it pwned them. And when the ice age ended for real, modern societies basically formed. This is all described in Steven Mithen's After the Ice in the "Western Asia" chapter at the beginning).

Third of all, 15,000 years seems like plenty of time (the 110,000 to 125,000 time period I was referring to) to develop agriculture even if, for some reason, you are running somewhat slower than the Natufians.

> Technologies like agriculture and writing had time to grow and develop in a relatively stable climate.

Writing follows from advanced cultures growing out of agricultural societies. That is to say, agriculture by itself is the essential bottleneck of concern, writing is almost inevitable once an agricultural society gets large and sophisticated enough.

> After 9,500 years of a stable climate and accumulation of information, the renaissance happened, from there industrialization and the Information Age happened.

Well ... as Jared Diamond correctly points out (in "Guns, Germs, and Steel" and other publications of his), it is actually geography that creates the climate stability. Basically, the Middle-East, Indus Valley, and some parts of China are basically in climate zones where one can develop long-term agriculture sedentary societies.

You only need some kind of reasonable interstadial period between ice ages, which the Neanderthals definitely experienced (and yet failed to develop agricultural societies).

Since it looks like you're interested in some general overviews, I'm going to recommend books that give just that. If you're looking for books that go more in depth on Roman topics, I'm more than happy to supply some.

For a brief introduction to Italian history in general, I would recommend Valerio Lintner's
[A Travelers History of Italy]
(http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/review/1566565219/R1B2MURVDQWPAT/ref=mw_dp_cr?cursor=2&qid=1407607391&sort=rd&sr=8-1). This offers a great overview of Italian history for someone with little exposure to the topic. It will show you plenty of topics you might want to investigate further.

As general overviews of Roman history (survey-level books that provide a contexualized narrative of Roman history), I'm going to recommend two books. [The Romans: From Village to Empire: A History of Rome from Earliest Times to the End of the Western Empire] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0199730571/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1407608174&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40), by Mary Boatwright and others, and [Ancient Rome: A Military and Political History] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0521711495/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1407608616&sr=8-1), by Christopher Mackay.
Boatwright's book provides an excellent in-depth overview of the general trends of Roman history, from the origins of the city of Rome itself until Late Antiquity. Though focusing on the political development of the Roman state, there are decent introductions to social and cultural history of the Empire. As the title implies, Mackay's work presents a survey-level overview of the political and military history of Rome, with emphasis placed on the Republic and Principate.

The best introduction to the history and workings of the Roman military is [The Complete Roman Army] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0500288992/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1407609072&sr=8-1&pi=SY200_QL40) by Adrian Goldsworthy. Goldsworthy is one of the leading Roman military scholars, and provides an incredibly readable yet detailed overview of the Roman army. Seriously, if you read only one book on the Roman military (but please don't!) read this.

While much more academic than the other books I've recommended, Arthur Eckstein's [Mediterranean Anarchy, Interstate War, and the Rise of Rome] (http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0520259920/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?qid=1407610158&sr=8-1) is the preeminent text on the rise of Rome. Using ideas from the modern Realist school of international relations, Eckstein argues that Rome became preeminent in the Mediterranean not because they were "tougher" than other states, but rather because they more effectively understood and exploited the power dynamics of the Mediterranean world. This is probably not the easiest book for someone just being introduced to Roman history, but if you can get through it it'll be worth it.

Since you mention Venice, I have a book in mind that might be useful, but I'm blanking on the title. I'll get back to you if I can find it ( I'm on mobile right now). I hope you find these titles useful, and if you need any other recommendations please let me know!

I think you are on the right track. There is no need to be nervous but its always best to be as sincere and open as you can when investigating something of this nature.

When I was at a similar point in my life, I was looking at all sorts of Islamophobic materials and it was a complete waste of time. I would go back and forth between the Islamic sites and the phobic ones and invariably there would be a perfectly logical argument against the scientific basis for the factoid in question which could not rule out the 'miraculous' part. The mention of fingerprint in Quran comes to mind.

Ultimately what will decide it for you is your own experience with the source material, i.e. the Quran. 100% of all the material bashing down the Quran is based on less than 0.001% of the book. Forget scholars, forget the hadith, forget anything else and just try and go through the book for yourself. If at the end of it, you dont feel anything and have no use for Islam, I am pretty sure you will be A-Okay. Whats the point of believing in a Just God if He will call you to task in spite of your best efforts?

For me, while I still have doubts over the classical interpretation of some parts, I am convinced of its divine nature.

Read https://www.amazon.com/Losing-My-Religion-Call-Help/dp/1590080270/ for one guy's journey which started and continues with the Quran. He also answers all the common objections.

Also the following two will give good insight in to the nature of early islam and why you should take all the traditional islamic narrative with a grain of salt.

https://www.amazon.com/Misquoting-Muhammad-Challenge-Interpreting-Prophets/dp/1780747829
https://www.amazon.com/Destiny-Disrupted-History-Through-Islamic/dp/1586488139/

In any case, be brave and feel confident that whichever way it turns for you, your sincerity guarantees your well being.

You are clearly a “true believer” in your own system, because you are defending an abstract concept with passion and vigor. Not necessarily a bad thing, but own up to it, because that's what you're doing and that's what you advocate; a non-existent system; you know, like heaven or nirvana. With that said, let’s try to grapple with a couple chunks of your reasoning.

First off, it's not bullshit. You are advancing a theoretical model that has, by your own admission, never existed. So then, how is one supposed to critique this model in a way that you can't defend in some equally rhetorical way? One probably cannot, therefore it's on par with a religious ideology. However, I’m going to give it a try, because I like to think people have the ability to change positions when confronted with new arguments.

On the Roman bit, I’m not critiquing that you didn’t write a thesis, I’m saying you lack nuance because you clearly don't know what you're talking about, yet insist on debating me on the particulars of a system of which you lack a sufficient amount of knowledge; again much like a religious argument against something like evolution.

Patronage was the dominant societal glue that transcended the fall of the republic into the era of empire. That’s not just my position, that’s the position of almost every Roman scholar who has written on the topic. Further, the only scholars that I’ve read who disagree are also the ones who also believed in the genetic inferiority of the “barbarians.”

“Corruption” is like the devil/Satan of your way of thinking. It’s a throwaway term that can be used to vilify everything, but actually means nothing. On that note, monarchy is still the norm, and I'd bet you'd agree, but the problem is that you agree for the wrong reasons. A strong executive branch was central to the Roman Republic and it is central to our own system, because the framers were essentially obsessed with the Roman model. In fact, the attendees of the Constitutional Convention debated the merits of a triumvirate, when figuring out how the Executive branch would function. So, in saying it was outside the scope of the debate, I was attempting to allow you to politely bow out of a topic in which you are outclassed. It is well within the scope, but I just don’t suppose that the finer points can be debated meaningfully until you attain more knowledge on the topic. Rest assured “corruption” is not really the answer you think it is.

So, you see, your understanding of Roman history doesn't require a thesis, but guess what? Corruption is baked into the entire system. The Constitutional framers knew it, just as the Romans did. Corruption is part of the political process, and arguably is the political process itself.

Now, let’s move away from Rome, and talk about your proposition itself. Am I defending our democracy as it stands? Of course not; it has many problems. However, you’re seemingly more interested in rhetoric than logic, so let’s play the rhetorical game. Democracy is bullshit, because the people don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground. Guess who ordered that Socrates be put to death? Guess who wanted to maintain segregation in the south? Guess who has stood in the way of LGBT rights? It wasn’t a monarch, the corporate system, or any other abstract evil; it was the people.

Now more rhetoric: What system has higher quality? I’d say your model is totally lacking in quality, because it would assure majority rule. You think of the people in highly vaunted terms, but you should not. The people are every bit as tyrannical and misguided as the leaders that they elect, and that’s the true problem with our current system. Our government is designed, in part, to safe guard the minority against the very system you advocate. Could the civil rights bill have been passed with your system? No. Nor could any of the other laws founded on progressivism. The majority doesn’t know shit about shit. PERIOD. Your majority rule concept is shallow, but that’s no matter, because you know in your heart of hearts that you’re right. You know; just like the religious.

“actually, yes it does. my approval +50% of people.” Okay, so do I really need to point out the flaw here? You say we don’t have a democracy, then say you plus 50% is required for approval. I struggle to articulate the silliness of this statement, so I guess I’ll merely say that you know exactly what I was saying. You advocate a non-existent system, yet democracy has and does still exist. Therefore, your definition is completely irrelevant. Also, what if me plus 50% agreed you’re totally wrong? Would you still be wrong, or would you suddenly advocate Gandhi’s position that “the truth is still the truth in a minority of one?” Hmmm…

So, have I come across as a condescending dick? Yes. Is there a purpose behind it? Yes. I believe a lot of the same things you do, but when you run around talking about invisible chains and the subverted will of the people, you make progressives look just as dogmatic as ultra conservatives, because you are advancing a belief, not a logical argument. Below is a list of books I’d suggest you read, if you really, REALLY want to know about the topics upon which you currently so freely expound, and the ones which have informed my viewpoint. Your dogmatic tone and the fact that I have little faith that your viewpoint is changeable makes me trust that you’ll need to have the last word on the topic, so I’ll give it to you. However, I do implore you to actually allow the holes in your way of thinking to bother you… at least some day.
Here’s the list
http://www.amazon.com/Fall-Roman-Republic-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140449345

http://www.amazon.com/The-True-Believer-Movements-Perennial/dp/0060505915

http://www.amazon.com/Brilliant-Solution-Inventing-American-Constitution/dp/0156028727

http://www.amazon.com/The-Fall-Roman-Empire-Barbarians/dp/0195325419

Perry Link is always a good read, he wrote Mandarin Ducks and Butterflies: Popular Fiction in Early Twentieth-Century Chinese Cities. Even if it's rather old, it's still a basic academic book that dissects early 20th century popular fiction against all odds that are placed against it in China (i.e. of no literary value etc.). I guess you best get it at your library.

Many praise Shanghai as the city that transformed itself from a small fishing village to a metropolis. Marie-Claire Bergère shows otherwise, it is one of the best histories on Shanghai you can get.

I often had trouble understanding ancient Chinese society and how it worked. Mark Edward Lewis gives a very good introduction there, also written in a very nice style.

What I still want to read is Douglas (Doug) Guthrie's, Social Connections in China (2002), as it researches how guanxi works.

Soon there's a book coming out on "Leftover Women" by Leta Hong Fincher, which is also on my very long To-read-list.


"Factory Girl's" is worth a read indeed, I loved it (although the author's personal experience was sometimes interrupting the main narrative too much).

erikmyster, thx for the tips above, I didn't know the titles...

Interesting idea! Coming in from /r/AskHistorians here :)

Unfortunately, I have some ehhhh news for you. You've got the right armour for a legionary in the time period of the Principate (ca. 30 BCE -ca. 200 CE - the first lorica segmentata that we've found was made in ca. 6 CE). So we'll base you off of a Roman from the time of the Principate! Here's a picture of a centurion who was killed in Teutoburg. Note something about his armour - he's depicted either wearing a muscled cuirass (rather common for tombstones when the person portrayed is wearing armour) or lorica hamata - or chain (the detail may have worn away). It's commonly believed that this was the panoply for the Roman Centurion. Note the lorica hamata rather than the lorica segmentata, the medals across the chest (they were the equivalent of modern...well...medals), the greaves (Which may have been a later addition in the Principate, as a response to the Dacian falx. The gladius is sheathed on the right side of the soldier (whether it was a legionary or a centurion), while the scutum (shield) would be wielded in the left hand. Finally - the belt. This might not seem like a big thing today, but the belt was HUGE - it was essentially the Roman badge of honour for being in the military. If you saw someone wearing one of those trademark belts, they were part of the army. Finally - the helm. Make sure you (as another user noted) get a true helm, rather than the mass-produced "infantry helm." Imperial Gallic is the more generic type (As shown in the picture), and a centurion would have a transverse crest. If you'd prefer to go for the look of an optio, you could do the vertical crest - but that part isn't confirmed, and we have no proof to support it.

Next thing to remember! No beard.

If there's more you want to know about the centurions of Rome, just let me know! I'm a bit short on time, which is why I'm cutting this short, but I'll be happy to give you a complete outline as soon as I can! If you're interested in more without listening to me ramble, check out The Complete Roman Army by Adrian Goldsworthy - it's a complete, EXTREMELY well written book that details every aspect of the Roman army, focusing most on the Principate.

Hi, Thank you for taking your time to answer. I'm looking for the Zhou-Qing Periods. I know that is "pretty much the entire history", but I am more interested in chronicles or annals that would give a good well rounded understanding on each dynasty. I have been eyeing The Cambridge History of China for awhile , but the book seems to be quite old in publishing, and the reviews online on websites seem mixed? Is it a valuable resource and not outtdated? They are quite expensive on Amazon!!

Have you ever used History of Imperial China (Harvard Press release)

Are the official annals like Ming Shi not translated into English? I'm Chinese, but my ability to read is frustrating haha.

My personal project is creating a website on Chinese, Japanese, and Korean history for context when one travel. One of my planned pages on the website is a brief history summary for each dynasty.

For starters, there really isn't such a thing as a "middle-class citizen" in the Roman Empire. Roman social classes did not work that way, and wealth actually had less bearing on your existence than social status, inherited mainly from your ancestors.

The best resource for this sort of thing would be Jerome Carcopino's Daily Life in Ancient Rome. Carcopino was the premier classical social historian of his day, and most of what he says is still very much to date. To say more than that would honestly not get you anywhere. The lives of citizens varied pretty wildly depending on social status, wealth, and of course location (life within the city would be very different from life in certain provinces, which would differ even more from each other). A very few things can be said in general, however. The vast majority of the Roman Empire was enjoying the benefits of peace, a blessing that was not lost on them after nearly a hundred years of civil wars and nearly a hundred and fifty years of political strife within the noble orders. The reign of Augustus was also blessed with an extreme degree of wealth, which Rome and her empire had not seen the likes of before, and which was even more welcome considering the extreme deprivation that most people had suffered duing the destructive civil wars. Among the lower social orders the climate of Augustus' reign from the period after the War of Actium was incredibly welcome, providing great social freedom and opportunity, as well as unheard-of wealth. The upper social orders, mainly the survivors of the nobility, were a mixed bag. Most of the remaining prominent members of the senate and nobility had originally been lowlives under Caesar or Octavian, and had joined them because they had hoped that supporting them would help pay off their massive debts from extravagance. The rest were the few survivors of the old nobility that had been sure to kiss up to the dictators, as well as aspiring tyrants like Pompey and Crassus. Since the beginning of the 1st Century, B.C. the political climate at Rome had increasingly been one of power slipping more and more firmly into the hands of private individuals, and as a result there were throughout the century great purges, either through proscriptions or wars, of the members of the nobility. As a result, there was great dissatisfaction with Augustus' seizure of power among the nobles, but for them Rome was rather like a police state, since any disloyal actions would result in Praetorians knocking on their doors. These attitudes are echoed by Virgil and Livy, who had mixed feelings about Augustus, by Cicero (for example, in his Philippics--although all of this is technically before Augustus' reign, it still very much applies, as the loss of political freedom had already been cemented in place following Caesar's victory over the Pompeians), and even by Horace, who owed Augustus and Maecenas everything but who nevertheless could not quite bring himself to agree with the autocracy. For more on the destruction of the Roman political system, see Ronald Syme's groundbreaking work, The Roman Revolution, which was the first study (on the eve of Hitler's declaration of war, to whom Augustus is implicitly compared) to challenge the old Victorian view of Augustus as the "benign dictator."

There’s a lot of good original sources, but if you want an easy read that focuses on this period, I recommend The Storm Before The Storm, by Mike Duncan. It talks about the late Roman Republican period, from the Gracchi brothers through Sulla. This is the generations just before Pompey and Julius Caesar - the people who essentially created the conditions that allowed Caesar to do what he did. It even has a forward that talks about parallels to today (Duncan was finishing the book during and just after the 2016 election).

If Duncan’s name is familiar, it’s because he is the creator of the History of Rome podcast, which is an awesome (and quite long) summarization of Roman history and culture from the founding through Constantine. I loved it and heartily recommend it to anyone who likes history and podcasts.

This is a very good video introduction to Stoicism.

The main ancient Stoic books that have survived are Marcus Aurelius's Meditations, Epictetus's Discourses and Enchiridion, which is basically a summary of the Discourses, and Seneca's Letters to Lucilius and Essays. All these editions are relatively new translations and, in Seneca's case, abridged, but they will give you an idea of what Stoicism is about. I suggest you first read the Enchiridion (it is no longer than 40 pages) and then the Meditations (around 150-200 pages), and then dig deeper if you get interested.

There are other ancient sources, and quite a lot of modern work is being done currently, but those are the ones I suggest you begin with.

Then there are very active modern Stoic communities, like /r/Stoicism, the Facebook group, and NewStoa, with its College of Stoic Philosophers, that lets you take a very good four month long course by email.

The great thing about Stoicism as a way of life is that it has neither the blind dogmatism of organized religion nor the ardent skepticism of atheism. It puts the soul back in the universe, in a way, and, on the personal level, empowers you to take responsibility for your actions and to take it easy with what you cannot control.

The standard textbook history right now appears to be The Romans: From Village to Empire.

Klaus Bringmann's A History of the Roman Republic also still seems to be the standard introduction to that period (i.e. the time period of Imperator).

If you want to read about the end of the Roman Republic and Caesar/Augustus, it's hard to turn down Caesar: Life of a Colossus which is great for the general reader, alongside his Augustus: First Emperor of Rome.

He also writes pretty solid books on other major Roman figures, such as In the Name of Rome: The Men who won the Roman Empire.

If you want to get a pretty good introduction to Roman History, but more of what life was like for the average citizen, SPQR by Mary Beard is actually a good choice.

Older, but still solid, is Peter Garnsey's The Roman Empire: Economy, Society, and Culture which covers a lot of things Beard doesn't.

For the Roman army, Adrian Goldsworthy's The Complete Roman Army is a solid introduction.

However you'll want to break that down into several books if you want to go deeper:

Roman Military Equipment by MC Bishop and JCN Coulston

The Roman Imperial Army of the First and Second Centuries AD by Graham Webster

A Companion to the Roman Army by Paul Erdkamp

For the collapse of the Western Roman Empire I'd recommend both Peter Heather's The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians combined with the more scholarly Guy Halsall's Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West.

For the forgotten half of Roman History, often mistakenly called the "Byzantine Empire," it's hard to cover with just one book, but Warren Treadgold's A History of the Byzantine State and Society has become the standard reading. John Haldon's The Empire that would not Die covers the critical transition during the Islamic conquests thoroughly.

Of course I have to include books on the two IMO most overrated battles in Roman history on this list since that's what people love:

The Battle of the Teutoberg Wald: Rome's Greatest Defeat by Adrian Murdoch

The Battle of Cannae: Cannae: Hannibal's Greatest Victory is sort of the single book to read if you can only pick one. However, The Ghosts of Cannae is also good. But if you actually want to go really in depth, you need Gregory Daly's dry-as-the-Atacama book Cannae: The Experience of Battle in the Second Punic War. When I say dry as the Atacama, I mean it, but it's also extraordinarily detailed.

I'd complement this with Goldsworthy's The Punic Wars.

For other interesting topics:

The Emergence of the Bubonic Plague: Justinian's Flea and Plague and the End of Antiquity.

Hadrian's Wall: Hadrian's Wall by Adrian Goldsworthy

Roman Architecture: Roman Architecture by Frank Sear (definitely a bit more scholarly but you can probably handle it)

I may post more in addendum to this list with further comments but I think I'm reaching the character count.

This is a great idea. Please definitely post your list when you've got it compiled.

In addition to some of the other books that have been recommended, I suggest the slightly more unconventional 1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed for a rather interesting look at a period in ancient history that I think is generally poorly covered. ("There were some civilizations like Egypt and Sumer, and they rose and fell, and look, it's Aristotle!") It really helps contextualize a lot of the ancient Mideast - who coexisted and what their relationships were, not just who was the Big Dog one after another.

It will also help break up the monotony of all the other books reading the same, because it's not organized like a traditional history book: instead it's organized almost like a play, with a cast of characters, a "prologue" and "epilogue," and several "Acts" describing key sequences of events! Despite that, the author is a pretty well regarded archaeologist at GWU, and it was published by Princeton University Press.

It depends. If you're looking for personal reasons then you don't really need academic works: I'd stick to the main ancient figures - Zeno of Citium (the 3rd C philosopher, not to be confused with the 5th C presocratic Zeno of Elea), Seneca, Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius. No complete work of Zeno's has survived so we're stuck with fragments, but there's a lot of Seneca (his Epistles, or 'Moral letters to Lucilius' are available for free in archaic but readable translation here) - there's a Penguin Classics collection of them too but it's incomplete so I wouldn't recommend it - but you could always pick that up for the better translations and just read the that are missing in the archaic online translation I linked above. On Epictetus the Discourses and Handbook as well as his fragments are collected in a new World Classics Epictetus: Discourses, Fragments, Handbook (which is very cheap: ~$7) and in a modern translation. I strongly recommend that. Marcus Aurelius you already have covered.

But there are probably some select academic works that might be useful to you:

• Ierodiakonou, K. (1993), 'The Stoic division of philosophy', Phronesis 38:57–74.
  
  
• Long A. A. (1978), 'Dialectic and the Stoic sage', in his Stoic studies, Cambridge, UK: CUP, 85–106.
  
  
• Sellars, J. (2013), The art of living: The Stoics on the nature and function of philosophy^3, Bristol, UK: Classical.
  
  I've uploaded the PDFs of the two articles here.^[1][2] I can get away with this as educational under UK copyright laws - but you'll have to get the book yourself from your library because that isn't covered.
  
  If you get through all of that and still want more then feel free to PM me and I can point you in the right direction.

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.

• Michael Kulikowski, The Triumph of Empire. The Roman World from Hadrian to Constantine (2016) might be a good point to start as it begins right in the period you’re already familiar with and leads you through the 3rd century crisis to the beginning of Late Antiquity.
  
  
• Peter Brown, The World of Late Antiquity. AD 150-750 (1989) is pretty much the foundational text for the modern scholarship on the named period. Its short, richly illustrated and just all around fantastic.
  
  
• Peter Heather, The Fall of the Roman Empire. A new history of Rome and the Barbarians (2007) covers the developments that would lead to the end of the Western Roman Empire.
  
  
• Peter Sarris, Empires of Faith. The Fall of Rome to the Rise of Islam. 500-700 (2011) has a larger focus than just Roman history and also concerns itself with the post Roman kingdoms in the west as well as (like the title says) the rise of Islam.
  
  
• Judith Herrin, Byzantium. The surprising life of a Medieval Empire (2009) is probably one of the best ways to first familiarise yourself with the huge timespan that is Byzantine history.
  
  
• Averil Cameron, The Byzantines (2006) is another excellent introduction to the entirety of Byzantine history.
  
  There are quite a lot of books that go into further detail about the different periods of Byzantine history but for the start those two general introductions should probably suffice. Of course you can always ask for more. I hope this helps!

If you like Monty Python you should like Terry Jones' books. Post-Python he became a medieval historian and written Medieval Lives, Barbarians, and The Crusades. I just read Barbarians (about those who the Romans called barbarians) recently and loved it.

Rubicon by Tom Holland is an excellent account of the fall of the Roman Republic.

I'm currently reading Warriors of God by James Reston about the 3rd Crusade. Its very entertaining but lacks footnotes so I doubt its accuracy. Still for a casual understanding of the 3rd crusade I recommend it.

If you're interested in military history check out Osprey Publishing. These books are very specific but also only 90 pages or with great illustrations.

Finally, if you're looking for historical fiction check out Bernard Cornwell whose written tons of historical novels. He's best known for the Richard Sharpe series about the Napoleonic wars but has also written on Anglo-Saxon England, the American revolution, and elsewhere.

Oh, man, there's a lot of great literature about ancient Rome. It really depends on what part of that era you want to focus on, but my favorite non-fiction are:

1. Rubicon by Tom Holland. Really beautiful telling of the death of the republic. Great.
   
   
2. Augustus by John Williams.
   
   
3. Plutarch's Lives. Now before you poo-poo this one because it's from an ancient source, let me just say that it's an incredible bit of writing on several famous Romans. Very readable and highly entertaining.
   
   
4. The Twelve Caesars by Suetonius. Although it's biased due to political and family connections, still highly readable and gives good insight into the culture of the time from someone who was (not quite) there.
   
   I hope this helps!

Not fiction... but if you find the era interesting:

• Sapiens
  
• The Humans Who Went Extinct: Why Neanderthals died out and we survived
  
• Before the Dawn: Recovering the Lost History of Our Ancestors
  
  Jean M Auel provided a fun introduction to the period but, as readers of the series know, she took creative liberty. More than occasionally the books wandered into fantasy. To enjoy a fascinating view based a bit more on scientific evidence, the three listed are (or were to me) quire enlightening.

Well, in the old Byzantine Empire AKA the Eastern Roman Empire, the typical mode of inheritance was non-familial. Generally, the successor to an Emperor would be adopted early in life, serve time in the military or civic offices, and then was elevated to co-emperor, gradually taking on the Imperial roles as the old Emperor aged. The accession of Emperor Justinian I is a good example of the old mode of "Late Roman" succession.

During the reign of Emperor Heraclius, in the era of the Arab Conquests (when the Empire saw the loss of the vital provinces of Africa, Egypt, and Syria), the Empire begins its drastic "medievalization", a necessary change in order to preserve what was left of the once-great Eastern Roman Empire. Included in this transformation is the disappearance of "adoptive succession", the traditional mode of Imperial succession stretching back all of the way to the time of Augustus. During the transition period, we begin to see a tendency towards hereditary succession, which becomes fully fledged by the era of iconoclasm and which would persist in Imperial succession until 1461.

In the era of the Komnenoi, a successor was generally appointed from the current Imperial family and would be elevated to the title of "co-emperor" or "σεβαστοκράτωρ" for a time. The then-Emperor or "βασιλεύς", would rule for life, or until retirement (which surprisingly, did occur several times) at which time the co-emperor would take his place. But other than usually being from the Imperial family, there was never really an organized method of succession like in modern monarchies, and as observed during the period, there was a lot of political strife, even amongst family members.

For relevant literature, I would certainly recommend reading the Alexiad by contemporaneous historian Anna Komnena. She provides a lot of insight into the events that occurred in the Imperial court during the Komnenian period.

Some recently-published books, such as Byzantium: The Surprising Life of a Medieval Empire and Lost to the West, both provide well-written overviews of the history of the period. These will help you get a feeling for the Byzantine political scene in the High Middle Ages.

The average legionary never rose very far up the ranks. However, if you knew people back in Rome or farther up the hierarchy in the army, then you had a much better chance of getting promoted. An exception to my opening sentence is the emperor Maximinus Thrax. He was a normal legionary who became emperor when his legion assassinated the current emperor and elevated him to the position.

Veterans were still very good soldiers right up through their forties.

I'm going to recommend Adrian Goldsworthy's The Complete Roman Army because it's frankly quite good and an excellent starting point into the world of the Roman military. If you want some heavier primary sources, Vegetius, Josephus, and several other writers speak in great detail on the Roman army.

While Gibbon is a lot of fun to read, he is in no way authoritative, his work is over 200 years old after all. I think there may have been some new research since then. :)

There are always the Romans/Greeks themselves of course, Tacitus, Livy, Seutonius, Plutarch, Polybius etc. but they can be a bit overwhelming for a newcomer.

Here's some newer stuff.

M. Carry A History of Rome Came out in the mid 1960s. Meant for undergrads. Very readable.

Robin Lane Fox The Classical World This came out in 2006 and is meant for the educated general reader. Very well written and sourced. A breeze to read and as a bonus you get the Greeks too.

Michael Grant was an excellent classicist who wrote for the educated general public. A great writer, always a fun read and you can often find some of his works at used bookstores.

Ronald Symes The Roman Revolution This is for once you've got a few books under your belt because the names and terms are going to come at you fast. You have to know your Claudius from your Clodius. An account of how Augustus managed to do what Caesar couldn't.

It's a fascinating history. I've been reading it for 25 years, I envy you your first plunge.

Like davemidrock said, most of your ancestors are Indo European and a lot of experts and scholars have put together a few well researched reconstructions/hypothesis's of what that original culture would be like and their gods. Here's a few books to start with:

https://www.amazon.com/Search-Indo-Europeans-J-P-Mallory/dp/0500276161

https://www.amazon.com/Horse-Wheel-Language-Bronze-Age-Eurasian/dp/069114818X/ref=pd_lpo_sbs_14_t_0?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=4FZR86TV92PSQ8B7PSG9

https://www.amazon.com/Deep-Ancestors-Practicing-Religion-Proto-Indo-Europeans-ebook/dp/B00JF6RKXK/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=Deep+Ancestors%3A+Practicing+the+Religion+of+the+Proto-Indo-Europeans&qid=1568890408&s=books&sr=1-1*** I have not read this one but I have heard good things about it. It really get's into the whole deity and myth thing.

With Indo-European beliefs you generally get the twin creation myths, an earth goddess, sky god and of course sun/moon deities. It seems with the earth goddesses, it not really an earth goddess that embodies the whole world (although it can be) but more of a local or regional goddess of the land. The problem with that is that most of the land deity's names have been lost to time, unless otherwise recorded (like Arduinna for the Ardiennes area). I'm nowhere near where Arduinna was first honored but she is what I lean toward as far as a goddess. However, I'm actually working through outdoor meditation on perhaps learning what my local land goddesses name is. My first instinct was to find the local indigenous name for the land spirit/goddess, but again, that's been swallowed by the mists of time. So even I have my struggles lol. I think you can figure this out with mindfulness, meditation, patience and reflection. Good luck!

MOTD #3: Find someone you respect, and use them to stay honest.

(Previous) // (Next One)

Seneca’s Letters are a must read for Stoics. Amazon Link

Want to read more books on Stoicism? checkout these lists: r/Stoicism’s the Stoic Reading List | Ryan Holliday’s Lists 1 & 2| Goodreads

As always if you have a favorite part of Meditations or want to see any other stoic passage in a future posts, please feel free to message me or comment anytime. Anyways, have a nice day/night where every you happen to be… All the best, Chris.

Natural laws are not imposed on man like the prescriptive laws imposed by a government. I am capable of disobeying state-imposed laws, and the justice system is in place to take care of people who do, but I am unable to disobey the law of gravity. It is simply a fact of nature that gravity works as it does, not a prescriptive law imposed on man by an institution. The same goes for other natural laws.

Besides that, an institution is something instituted by people. In Sapiens, Noah Yuval Harari talks about how we create fictions that help shape how society works. One example is money. Money works because we all agree that it does, not because of any property inherent in the stuff we use for money. This would be an example of an institution. Likewise, the family is an institution among humans because of agreement among humans that it is one. Cats also mate and have children, but for them, there is no institution of the family, because they are unable to consider it as such and agree on making it one.

The power nature has over us is not due to how we think about nature, and we don't have the option of violating natural laws. Nature is a concrete reality we are subject to, not an institution.

>Is Attica the name of the main body of land in southern Greece?

Attica is the general area around Athens.

> Was the main body of the Pelopennes the northern landmass of Greece?

The Peloponnesus is the big southern peninsula (Though it looks almost like an island on maps) where Sparta was.

>I've found reference to the Corinth canal; what is the name of the water passage that connected the Adriatic and Aegean seas?

I don't recall reading anything about a Corinthian Canal in Thucydides (Though it's been a while). The canal there is a relatively recent thing.

Good luck with Thucydides. It can be a difficult text. If you are interested, the best version to read is The Landmark Thucydides by Robert Strassler. There is a lot of good commentary, useful maps, and timelines. It's really helpful for deciphering what can be a very dense work. It's also not very expensive!

What are the best books on Hannibal (particularly ones that may have been overlooked)?

Personally I like Lazenby's Hannibal's War (for the academically inclined) and Dodge's Hannibal (for a general audience).

EDIT:

For those interested in learning more about Hannibal, here are my top picks from books actually on my book shelf:

1. Hannibal's War by J. F. Lazenby (little dry, but well documented history)
   
2. The First Punic War: A Military History by J. F. Lazenby (can't really understand Hannibal without the prelude)
   
3. The Punic Wars by Adrian Goldsworthy (dude knows more about the Roman Army than anyone)
   
4. Hannibal by Theodore Ayrault Dodge (Dodge was a Union officer in the Civil War and wrote some great books on Hannibal, Caesar, Alexander, etc. ... probably the best companion to primary source material on a first read through -- and it's out of copyright so you can find free copies online)
   
5. Scipio Africanus: Greater Than Napoleon by B. H. Liddell Hart (was Scipio the real, and somewhat overlooked, genius of the Second Punic War?)
   
   And recommendations and from /u/gevemacd :
   
   
6. Hannibal A Hellenistic Life by Eve MacDonald (/u/gevemacd herself!)
   
7. Cannae: The Experience of Battle in the Second Punic War by Gregory Daly (I haven't read this, but the slow trapping and butchery 70,000 men on a hot day seems like a fascinating topic for history as it was actually experienced)

The Horse, the Wheel and Language is a really excellent book about the origins of the Indo-european peoples. Did you ever wonder why so many of our ancient gods were sky and/or thunder gods? Why Iranian, English and Norse are all one big language family?

I also love After the Ice. That's another approachable archaeology/prehistory book. The author does an amazing job of imagining what life was like as the great sheets of ice retreated and humans began to settle in villages. Just imagine the changes in how people saw their world as they gave up tens of thousands of years of wandering to settle in one place and learn how to coax a living out of the land.

Oh, yeah, I love reading. I use Abebooks.com quite a bit. Here's a wonderful crackpot book that's simply fascinating: Julian Jaynes's The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind. Extremely intriguing.

And a non-crackpot book I highly recommend is by David Anthony: The Horse, the Wheel, and Language: How Bronze-Age Riders from the Eurasian Steppes Shaped the Modern World. Eye-opening and fascinating.

Because humans have agreed upon rules that have evolved to be socially beneficial. This set of rules could take the form of cultural norms, language, or a constitution. What's important is that these systems (usually) exist because the confer some type of net benefit to the community that adopts them. In this case we can weigh the pros and cons of allowing non-citizens to vote in school board elections:

pro: They have more control over how their child is educated.

con: Inherent cultural norms could mean they advocate for a less effective education system.

And we can weigh the pros and cons of allowing non-citizens to vote in presidential elections:

pros: greater representation of the total world (idk I'm kinda reaching for this one)

cons: China can just decide our president.

Because we want a system that does the most good for citizens of the US we can easily say that allowing non-citizens to vote in presidential elections is bad. I'd argue that allowing non-citizens to vote in school board elections is much more up for debate.

If you're interested in the argument I was trying to present in the first paragraph I recommend Sapiens. The way Harari explains cultural norms is incredible! :)

Edit: grammar

It's time once again for the AskHistorians Book Giveaway! Our lucky winner this month is Vlad! The selection of books we have available this month are:

• Daniel Walker Howe's What Hath God Wrought: The Transformation of America, 1815-1848, recommended by /u/freedmanspatrol.
  
  
• Hayden White's The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation, recommended by /u/NMW.
  
  
• Jonathan Harris's The Lost World of Byzantium, recommended by /u/shlin28.
  
  
• Tamim Ansary's Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes, my recommendation
  
  Want a chance to get a free book? Help support the podcast via Patreon!

A very good, easy to read book about this whole story of the late republic is Tom Holland's Rubicon: The Last Years of the Roman Republic

Now, I've read quite a bit on the period, and this might not be THE most complete or precise book, but it's very entretaining, and does a good job on telling the whole story (that, as you can see, is quite complex!).

The already mentioned Dan Carlin's podcast, Hardcore History, has a great series on this, "Death Throes of the Republic" is what got me hooked on the subject, and I wholeheartedly recommend it (also, it's free!), the 6 episodes combined are almost 13hs long, and worth every minute.

As a general rule, historians love books -- and this one, if he hasn't read it already, is a great text for someone who loves Rome: https://www.amazon.com/SPQR-History-Ancient-Mary-Beard/dp/1631492225

Beyond that, it's hard to give advice without knowing him. Possible gifts could include books, movies, documentaries, games, jewelry and other reproductions, militaria, or real (or replica) Roman coins.

I'm personally always fond of reproduced artefacts, and you can get pretty much anything depending on his taste. For myself, the perfect gift would be some reproduction Roman pottery or glass -- but I'm always looking for something cool to eat or drink out of, and other people like other sorts of things so it's difficult to advise without really knowing him.

Man I love the ASOIAF series. It truly got me into history.

After I learned that the Wall was inspired by Hadrian's Wall, I read a book about that.

If you haven't read Rubicon by Tom Holland, it's a great if fast-paced introduction to Roman history, especially the end of the Republic leading into the Empire. Reading ancient history especially really made me appreciate fantasy for its foundation in history of a simpler time.

Yes!!!

Philosophy: Love of Wisdom.

I've found that the stoics, especially, are really great. The Greeks were constantly looking to answer the question of "How, then, should we live?" It's the same question that we look to answer as we turn away from a TSCC church, isn't it? You can read one of Seneca's "Letters from a Stoic" every day in place of scripture and get more out of it than you ever did from BoM.

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.

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.]

By far the most interesting and well written "popular history" of republican Rome that I've read is "Rubicon" By Tom Holland.

He paints a beautiful picture of the city itself and life within it, as well as of the various people who lived there.

Here's the Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/Rubicon-Last-Years-Roman-Republic/dp/1400078970

I highly recommend that you look over the first few pages at least, you'll be hooked right away.

I just got finished reading Rubicon, by Tom Holland, which was great. It goes into quite a bit of detail on the Roman constitution, and how political life worked before the breakdown of the Republic. A few minutes ago I just needed to double check which assemblies voted for which offices, so I popped over to wikipedia. The articles on the Century Assembly and the Tribal Assembly are fantastic. I'm half way through reading about the Century Assembly now, and there's a tonne of stuff in there I didn't know.

I'm always on the lookout for a book about just about the Roman Republic's constitution, or basically the legal mechanics behind its political system. I have yet to find one, so if anybody out there has any recommendations I'd love to hear them. Most books on the period supply a chapter or two on the subject, which I always gobble up with enthusiasm.

I am Catholic and learned most of what I know about Islam though university classes and independent research. I can give you a list of books I have read about Islam that will get you started.

Oxford English Koran
Obviously the primary text is important to have and the book is pretty small. Much smaller compared to the bible.



Hadith of Bukhari: Volumes I, II, III & IV


Half of Islamic law is derived from the Koran and the other half from the Hadith. The Hadith is the collection of events, and quotes by Mohammad and his followers. This book is huge and you shouldn't try to read the whole since it is just list quotes and who they are by. But it is a good reference source and something to page through.

Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources
Biography of Mohammad using historical sources. Good reference.



Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes



Brief 350 page run of Islamic history until now as told by a Muslim. I felt the book was a bit preachy and accusatory towards the end but I read it 6 years ago so my memory might be hazy. Still a good read if you want to try to understand how mainstream moderate Muslim scholars see things. It has a good bibliography too.




There are probably a bunch of other ones I am forgetting. Take a look through Amazon and see what else they have. I would only buy books from university presses or published by academics though. They can be dense and difficult but they are peer reviewed which is important since there is so much anti-Islam, pro-Islam publishing out there.

One of the best books I've read on the history of the late (Western) Roman Empire was Peter Heather's The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians. He provides a great deal of the latest research on the origins and movements of the different "barbarian" tribes and their relationships with the Roman Empire, including the Visigoths. The book is excellently written and accessible to someone (like myself when I first read it) who is new to the topic.

For more information on the Visigoths after the official end of the Western Roman Empire in 476 CE, Chris Wickham's The Inheritance of Rome: Illuminating the Dark Ages 400-1000 provides a very detailed chapter on the Iberian peninsula under the Visigothic kingdom.

If you do decide to check these books out, I'd recommend reading Heather first for both the obvious reason of chronology and because Wickham is a much more daunting read.

Let me recommend to you Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes. The author is a fantastic writer (as well as a narrator, the audio book is quite good), as well as being from a devout Afghan sufi family. He gives a thorough account of the intellectual and philosophical traditions of the Islamic world couched within the frame of historical events from the pre-islamic world up to modern day.

It's a good read and goes into what so unsettled the Islamic world into fundamentalism.

Why 37,000 years ago? That sounds like a rather specific age and suggests that you have a more specific question in mind. For example, are you interested in Homo sapiens/Neanderthal interactions? At that distant age, archaeologists find sites that give us snippets of behavior, rather than definitive knowledge of what everyday life was like, so your question would be hard to answer. I can say with some certainty though, that life would have been very different in different parts of the world during that time period. Modern humans were living throughout Africa, Asia, Europe, and Australia at that point, and each continent would require different adaptations.

My own research interests don't usually extend that far back in time, so I can't think of a good readable book detailing sites from 37,000 years ago. The best one I can recommend is After the Ice, which discusses how human life changes during the transition from the Pleistocene to the Holocene around the world.

Yes, I still spell "Neanderthal" with the "th." I'm stubborn like that. Just because the German spelling changes doesn't mean the English usage needs to follow suit, in my opinion.

I can relate to that to be honest, I like the incidental details of history like what normal people ate, how they lived, etc more than what king ruled when and who he conquered, although admittedly that might be because the latter just gets way more coverage.

The most interesting parts of that book in my opinion are where they quote a farmer telling his son how to farm, or the hilarious dialogue of pessimism.

Also for the heck of it I might as well link that dry book I mentioned. I didn't like it because it spends most of its time trying to conclusively decide why something happened and then comes to no conclusion, but it did win a lot of rewards and it has decent amounts of info on the bronze age collapse so maybe you'll like it more than I did.

Some of the good Rome books I've read over the years:

In the Name of Rome by Adrian Goldsworthy

Caesar: Life of a Colossus by Adrian Goldsworthy

The Complete Roman Army by Adrian Goldsworthy

Rubicon: the Last Years of the Roman Republic by Tom Holland

A Day in the Life of Ancient Rome by Alberto Angela

Now, as someone lucky enough to have lived 6 weeks in Rome, the best prep is to somehow get yourself to La Città Eterna and visit where it all went down. The Palatine Hill and the Appian Way are places with less tourists and allow you to contemplate the power and splendor of Rome.

I have always been fascinated with ancient Greece. I'm currently more than half way through Ancient Greece, Pomeroy et. al so a natural progression would be reading something on the roman empire.
I've been eyeing SPQR. It is a widely praised book, so it could be a good substitute of "The Storm Before the Storm", although it covers a wider period. "The Storm Before the Storm" also looks good, and I would be more than willing to read it. "Red famine" and "1491" also attracted my attention, I remember hearing about "1491" in Rogan's conversation with Colin.

>For those interested in Seneca anybody ever, I can highly recommend this superb collection. Reading him played a major part in sparking my interest in philosophy.

FTFY

For those interested in Seneca, I can highly recommend this superb collection. Reading him played a major part in sparking my interest in philosophy.

I just finished reading Lost to the West, and it was a very fascinating and in-depth look at the broad history of the ERE as well as all the number of colorful and interesting people who sat on the throne. Although it does do some time skips, and glosses over some of the less important or less interesting emperors, I still enjoyed it none the less.

Complete novice? Extra Credits.

Seconding the Podcasts from Carlin, "Punic Nightmares" and Duncan's History of Rome and Born Yesterday. Seriously, Duncan is amazing. Major history hard-on.

Also, the History Channel has a pretty fun website, and there aren't any pawnshop aliens American Trucker-Pickers.

And if you want to read something that was written a tad earlier, Appian's histories cover the Second Punic War in several sections: The Spanish Wars, The Hannibalic War in Europe, and The Punic War and Numidian Affairs about Scipio in Africa (he also writes about the First Punic War), Livy deals with the Second Punic War in chapters 21-25 and 26-30, Polybius uses the Punic Wars to extol (and for us, explain) Roman virtues and institutions, and Plutarch gives two Generals treatment in his Parallel Lives, Fabius and Flaminius.

Modern books, I liked Adrian Goldsworthy's [The Punic Wars] (http://www.amazon.com/The-Punic-Wars-Adrian-Goldsworthy/dp/0304352845), and had WAY too much fun reading this book about Scipio and this book about Hannibal in tandem.

Oh... after you're done with all/any of that you might want to go buy Rome Total War and play as the Scipii. Extra points if you download Europa Barbarorum. Rome 2 is out and presumably awesome (and EB2)

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/ "

This is fantastic. He has written one book about Rome as well.

https://www.amazon.com/Storm-Before-Beginning-Roman-Republic/dp/1610397215

The audio quality at the beginning of THoR is meh, but he really gets that down, as well as his presentation by about 8 episodes in.

His Revolutions podcast is superb as well, but not at all about Rome.

I forgot to add this in my other comment (which focused on academic books), but if you want a really easy but informative/accessible read, perhaps comparable to Lesley Hazleton's book, you might want to check out Tamim Ansary's Destiny Disrupted, which is a history of the world through Islamic eyes (not exclusively focused on Shi'ism) though. I'd recommend the audiobook specifically, as it's read by the author.

I'm sure how far back you want to start, but if you want to get into our ancient ancestors, I'd start with Before the Dawn. Follow that up with Cro-Magnon for a decent overview of the first modern human migrations into Europe. There is some overlap with After the Ice-Age, but the latter is a great resource describing the first transitions into agriculture.

The History of the Ancient World would be a good follow up; it's breadth is quite broad, starting with the ancient Sumerians and taking you up to the fall of the Roman Empire, but it's broken into small, readable chunks.

Hopefully this helps to get you started!

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".

Here is some stuff I recommended recently, which itself links back to stuff I recommended less recently.

> I am most interested in is medieval european economics so anything specific to that time period/area would be even better.

Oh, that's different and interesting.

A good general history of early medieval Europe is Wickham, The Inheritance of Rome, 400 to 1000. Amazon link. That might be a little early for you, but he has a great chapter on economics and society therein.

This book picks up where Wickham leaves off and apparently focuses solely on social/economic affairs, but I have not personally reviewed it so I can't vouch for its quality.

Oh my god me too man. I recommend reading through the https://www.ancient.eu/ site if you haven't already. There is also this book about the Late Bronze Age collapse I enjoyed some time ago, maybe you would like it. It's great that we share this passion!

You won't get any disagreement from me. I'm on my second full re-watch, and I begrudgingly stopped it to watch the last 2 eps of GoT S3 and the S4 premiere.

If you're a fan of Rome, check out Rubicon. I bought it based on the recommendation of some folk from the Rome subreddit, and I haven't been disappointed. As a strict show watcher, I get the feeling reading Rubicon regarding Rome is going to be a lot like reading the ASOIAF series after watching GoT. All those little gaps in knowledge, all those things briefly mentioned...all spelled out in glowing prose.

If you have any interest in learning about the Gracchi, Sulla, young Pompey, young Cicero, or the rise of Caeser before the show starts, you'll love Rubicon.

Hard to answer that question accurately. I've read a lot of books, but it's a long time ago now. I seem to recall that SPQR - A History of Ancient Rome. By Mary Beard was interesting. /r/askhistorians has a fairly comprehensive list of books on the topic of Ancient Rome. And I am sure if you ask around in those areas of reddit you might get better suggestions than I can provide.

Also here is a list of thread about the Gracchi on askhistorians

Could it be you disagree with the particular strain of Christianity in which you were raised? There's nothing that says we must forsake science or reason to be Christian. Some of our greatest thinkers were, in fact, believers.

​

Take it for what it's worth, but maybe you could start with some reading about Christianity; its history, its teachings, etc. There are a couple of things I'd suggest (full disclaimer: I was raised Baptist but converted to Eastern Orthodoxy):

​

Lost to the West, not a Christian history book per se, but more an overview of how Christianity, among other things, helped shape the West.

​

Mere Christianity, which maybe you've already read. It helped pull me away from the ledge of my youthful agnosticism.

​

Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy, a podcast, admittedly from the Orthodox point of view, providing an overview of all the varied flavors of Christianity.

​

I hope this is in some way helpful.

The podcast comprises large chunks of his book Lost to the West. While Popular History, it has gotten good reviews all around, including from academics. I recommend it.

By the way, there is another ongoing podcast, History of Byzantium, which goes over the same territory but in more detail. It is done in the same mold as the famous History of Rome podcast, and is quite good. I also recommend it.

Seneca: Letters from a Stoic.
Short letters from Seneca, a wise Roman statesman and the tutor and political advisor of the Emperor Nero.

Really well written, poetic letters with many words of wisdom in them!

• It is not the man who has too little, but the man who craves more, that is poor.
  
• A great fortune is a great slavery.
  
• Money, which ever since it began to be regarded with respect, has caused the ruin of the true honour of things; we become alternately merchants and merchandise, and we ask, not what a thing truly is, but what it costs

Unfortunately, a lot of the readings on the topic are not widely available to the public, since they are in Archaeology and History journal articles. I read a lot of this stuff in university.

However, if you want to get into the Late Bronze Age in general, there are a few really good resources available to the general public.

1177 B.C. The Year Civilization Collapsed is a great survey of the collapse of the Bronze Age civilizations in the Near East. It's great for understanding just how complex and interconnected the world of the 12th century B.C. and earlier was.

A History of the Ancient Near East by van de Mieroop, and

The Ancient Near East by James Pritcherd both present an overview of the Ancient Near East, though both go into what is considered 'Classical' Near East as well.

Also, anything by Trevor Bryce, is worth a read, especially his work on the Hittites.

Coincidentally, I finished reading this book last night. I'd highly recommend it as a brisk, light read that gives a great overview of the Eastern Empire.

Fascinating stuff.

I would say in the period immediately following the Second Punic War.

Rome had just defeat it's greatest enemy, and would have no serious threats to it's existence for hundreds of years. The spoils from Carthage greatly enhanced the wealth of it's people (especially the elite), yet it was not quite to the point where decadence and corruption had completely overtaken the people.

The army was strong, and still owed loyalty to the state, instead of individual generals in the post-Marian reforms era. Of course, some of Rome's greatest commanders (namely, Scipio Africanus) were still alive and kicking. Territories in Spain, Sicily, and North Africa were in the process of annexation (so, perhaps dock a few points for stability there).

It would be quick turnaround in a few years, once the Glory-Seekers (i.e., Marius, Sulla, the Triumvirates), came around. But at the end of the 3rd century BCE, things were going pretty well for Roma.

I'd really disagree with the "Pax Romana" period of Augustus' reign being the best. To me, even that period looked nice on the outside, but was rotten to the core. We have a tendency to romanticize the early empire, I think. Check out Ronald Syme's book, The Roman Revolution. One might make the argument that it's a bit dated at this point, but I think it gives some very interesting insight into the Caesars, and helps de-romanticize them.

By who? We're told by our media that it's basically the Shi'as vs. the Sunnis. Anyone who picks up a book on Islam and Islamic history will see that there is more to Islam and Muslims than a bullet point summary.

Yes, the vast majority of Muslims are Sunni. They're divided into 4 schools of Islamic thought, Hanafi, Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali. The Shi'ites aren't a sect by themselves. 13% of Muslims in the world are Shi'i, and they're divided into further sects such as the Twelvers, the Zaidis, the Ismailis, Alawites, etc. 80% of those 13% of Shi'ites are Twelvers. Then you have the Ibadi sect, which is roughly 1% of all Muslims, mostly concentrated in Oman and pockets in North Africa.

Those are the traditional sects, the newer "sects" consist of Salafis, Ikhwani fundamentalists, Progressives, Secularists, etc. Most of these newer sects are more of a response to the political situation in the Muslim world over the past 100 years or so. Almost all the newer sects were born towards the end of the colonial era to the present era.

If you want to have a comprehensive view of Islam that is easy to read and understand for a non-Muslim, I would suggest reading Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes by Tamim Ansary

If you don't want to read a book, then check out r/Islam's wiki page that covers this topic in a well written and easy to understand manner

http://www.reddit.com/r/islam/wiki/theology#wiki_what_are_the_sects_of_islam.3F

Yeah, I was just making a stupid joke.

As for the Islamic view of Genghis Khan, it depends on perspective. Genghis Khan was tolerant of Muslims and even sought after their intellectuals. But he also destroyed their populations. A lot of the estimates of the deaths caused by Genghis Khan's conquest are exaggerated, but that doesn't really affect the perception in much of the Muslim world. There are also a lot of dubious claims as to Genghis Khan's brutality.

It's true, from any perspective, that the Mongol conquest put an end to a long period of Muslim prosperity. Since the days of Mohammed, they had seen very few serious military losses. The common belief among Muslims prior to Genghis Khan was that their prosperity and military success was undeniable proof of the validity of their beliefs. They felt that Allah had blessed them with the ability to win battles and spread their religion. So Genghis Khan turned their world upside down.

All of my understanding of Genghis Khan and Muslim history come from Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World and Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes, both of which I highly recommend.

Not OP, just someone who likes reading about other cultures.

I really like Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes.

It's a nice change of pace from the Euro-centric, Christian-centric history of US schools. It's also a really good read.

That's really the crux of it - Ireland ended up speaking a Celtic language but the dispute is whether this was a result of wholesale population replacement (i.e. invasion, extermination of indigenous non-indoeuropean speaking peoples as in, say, Europeans in North America) or as a result of a relatively small number of high-status settlers becoming culturally or technologically dominant to the point that the non-indoeuropean population adopted their way of life and language more or less voluntarily (more like how English displaced Irish in Ireland or local languages in India by becoming the high-status language of business, education, politics etc.).

This new genetic evidence seems to give us an idea that steppe people (who would have spoken a PIE dialect, the very ancient ancestor of Gaelic) had reached Ireland by about 2,000 BCE which is the at the early end of what has been postulated.

THIS is great book about this era if you're interested.

This series is as "broad" an overview as I am familiar with - granted, I have a specialist interest in Chinese history, language, and culture, and have an undergraduate degree in history which makes me shy away from really broad histories as inaccurate, so YMMV. I did listen to a teaching company audio lecture series called "From Yao to Mao: 5000 years of Chinese History" which might be of interest to you; I found frustratingly general, but he was treating major facets of time/themes in 30 min lectures.

I haven't read the Three Kingdoms yet - been hoping to do that in the original. :) Sorry I can't be more helpful on that score.

First, actually find a therapist.

​

Second, since you probably won't actually find a therapist (even though you should), below are a few strategies that got me through my roughest patches in investment banking and private equity:

• Life will challenge you at every corner, a new career will also be stressful in its own right
  
• Maximizing every decision leads to undue stress, learn to satisfice (Barry Schwartz TED Talk on the Paradox of Choice)
  
• Learn to control your mindset to identify and note negative thought patterns (Headspace teaches Mindfulness -- try it for forty lessons and be amazed at your improved perspective)
  
• Treat yourself to purposeful rest every day. You probably don't have rest time every day. But when you have a bit of a weekend or a couple hours before bed, set aside a strict portion of that time for purposeful relaxation. Don't half-work -- watch TV, play video games, do something stupid and unproductive that makes you happy and relaxed.
  
• Stay fit, even if it's a couple core exercises, some foam rolling, and some stretching
  
• These books helped me: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, Zorba the Greek, Seneca: Letters from a Stoic, Truth in Comedy

Assuming you read in English and are interested in the history of some of the sites, I suggest reading this book before you go:

http://www.amazon.com/Ancient-Rome-Rise-Fall-Empire/dp/1846072840

It has a nice pace to it if you're into Roman history and will give you an idea of what happened at various places, or even might spark some new ideas on what you want to see in and around Rome. If I could do it again, I'd have read this or something like it before my first visit to Rome. If the history interests you, then you end up getting a lot more out of the sightseeing than just being out looking at stuff.

off the top of my head:

Meditations, with The Inner Citadel as a reader

Letters from a Stoic

A Guide to the Good Life by Irvine

Do The Work by Pressfield as well as The War of Art by Pressfield

Managing Oneself by Ducker

Man's Search for Meaning by Frankl

What Predicts Divorce by Gottman

Nicomachean Ethics

Models by Manson seems to be popular on reddit

So Good They Can't Ignore You by Newport, as well

I'm currently reading Triumphs of Experience by Vaillant and find it insightful.

Adrian Goldsworthy wrote a book on the Punic Wars. He is an excellent writer and a great military historian. His book is quite comprehensive, however there is no other book that I would recommend to someone just starting out.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Punic-Wars-Adrian-Goldsworthy/dp/0304352845

Hope this helps!

The Horse, The Wheel, and Language might be up your alley. It's focused quite a bit earlier than Genghis Khan, and is pretty heavy on some fairly dry archaeology, but there's a lot of really interesting insight on the development and reconstruction of the Proto-Indo-European language and how its speakers affected the cultural development of India, Iran, and Europe.

My personal favorite chapter takes you through the development of a methodology used to determine when the Steppe peoples first mastered horse-riding, which involves looking at the wear patterns on horse teeth from thousands of years BCE and comparing them to wear patterns on modern horse teeth after they've been trained using various materials for bits.

Hey r/kappa! Since I was not chosen for the winter komike, that means I'll have more time to focus on improving my fundamentals, as well as doing more fighting game related NSFW art. Hopefully I'll be able to post here more often from now on!

I have also been reading quite a lot recently. Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind by Yuval Noah Harari has been as inspirational as lord Daigo's book to me. Highly Recommended.

Confirmed that this is Lars Brownworth of the 12 Byzantine Rulers and Norman Centuries podcasts. Two very excellent podcasts.

12 Byzantine Rulers even pre-dates the History of Rome podcast from Mike Duncan.

Lars homepage and a link to his Amazon page, and his book: Lost to the West: The Forgotten Byzantine Empire That Rescued Western Civilization.

Thank you for agreeing to do this, sir.

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.

There's a pretty popular book about the Late Bronze Age Collapse called 1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed.

Seems like it might be a good read to get a grasp on what might be coming up for us.

Like Truman said, "The only thing new in this world is the history you don't know."

I think the book Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind might be an enlightening read for you. Particularly the first half has great information about the emergence of religion and how certain religions came to be dominant in the world we know today.

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.

If you're set on a book that's a fairly broad discussion of Rome, Mary Beard's SPQR is one of the better ones I've read, though it stops at 212 A.D. and doesn't go all the way through the fall of the Western Roman Empire, so you will want something else for that. Anytime this question comes up though, I have to add a caveat: the best introductory material on Rome I've ever found isn't a book but a podcast: The History of Rome podcast by Mike Duncan. There really is no better introduction to get the basic story of the whole history of Rome from it's mythical beginnings to the end of the Western Roman Empire and in my opinion this is the true answer to your question.

He wrote a book about the beginnings of the fall of the Republic. Haven't read it myself, but I've heard good things.

Now, I have listened to the podcast, and I enjoyed it.

I know I'm in someone else's space right now, but I'm gonna make a recommendation. If you follow the Revolutions podcast or the History of Rome podcast, the man who did both of those just finished writing a book on exactly this topic.

Mike Duncan is a great historian, his stuff is always well researched, and his opinion is always heavily flagged as opinion not historical fact. I heartily suggest that you get yourself a copy of his book, The Storm Before the Storm: the Beginning of the End of the Roman Republic.

It's literally exactly what you're looking for.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh7rdCYCQ_U

Poslusaj video ukoliko imas vremena.

Svi izvori upotrebljeni u ovom videu:

The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire by Edward Gibbon
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0307700763/?tag=freedradio-20



Ancient Rome: The Rise and Fall of An Empire by Simon Baker
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1846072840/?tag=freedradio-20


The History of the Ancient World: From the Earliest Accounts to the Fall of Rome by Susan Wise Bauer
http://www.amazon.com/dp/039305974X/?tag=freedradio-20


The Rise of Rome: The Making of the World's Greatest Empire by Anthony Everitt
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0812978153/?tag=freedradio-20


A History of Ancient Rome by Mary Beard
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0871404230/?tag=freedradio-20


Rubicon: The Last Years of the Roman Republic by Tom Holland
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1400078970/?tag=freedradio-20


The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0195325419/?tag=freedradio-20


The Twilight of American Culture by Morris Berman
http://www.amazon.com/dp/039332169X/?tag=freedradio-20


The Fate Of Empires by Sir John Glubb
http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf

I read a good popular history of Rome at that time called The Rubicon: The Last Years of the Republic. It was fascinating seeing the visuals on screen while reading the book. The same characters. Roughly the same events.

I'll suggest two:

Augustus: Introduction to the Life of an Emperor (Karl Galinsky). This is recent, realistic but not jaundiced.

The Roman Revolution. This is a classic work, tough to read, now old, but a very interesting way of getting at the character and life of Augustus (by examining the course of events rather than dissecting his background and personality).

I'm not personally fond of Everitt's work. He seems to make unfounded conjectures (like his speculation at the beginning of his book on Augustus) and unjustifiable statements (like calling Cicero Rome's greatest politician...that one belongs to Augustus.)

This is well towards the end of and past the period you're asking about, but I really enjoyed After the Ice: A Global Human History 20,000 - 5,000BC. It's got this interesting narrative conceit where the author conjures the spirit of a 19th century paleoanthropologist and sends him around the world to various human habitations, so the viewer sees them through his eyes and what would otherwise be a dry survey of archeological digs becomes more like a story being told by a knowledgable person. The goal is to describe how the world changed during the last great phase of human pre-history and created the conditions necessary to propel humans into civilization. One part that sticks in my head is from very early on and its how he moves from a group that live in seemingly idyllic conditions in the levant (IIRC) to another group suffering through a harsh Ice Age winter, huddled together and all with their backs to a fierce wind. The difference in mobility and group-size really stuck with me.

I'm currently finishing this: "Brian Boru and the Battle of Clontark, by Seán Duffy. It's excellent.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18181699-brian-boru-and-the-battle-of-clontarf

This one, "Diarmait King of Leinster", by Nicholas Furlong, is also fairly interesting and covers a slightly later period:
https://www.amazon.com/Diarmait-King-Leinster-Nicholas-Furlong/dp/1856355055

There is a chapter in "The Inheritance of Rome", by Chris Wickham, which also deals well, albeit briefly with this period in Ireland and is quite nice in how it compares Ireland to other polities.
https://www.amazon.com/Inheritance-Rome-Illuminating-400-1000-Penguin/dp/0143117424

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

Have you read Fall of Roman Empire by Peter Heather (not to be confused with more famous book by Gibbon)? If so, what's your opinion on it?

From that book, I got an impression that in principle Rome could have held it together if it had clear succession of strong rulers. Every once in a while a strong general like Stilicho or Aëtius would emerge, consolidate power, drive back the barbarians, and start reconquering land. Then they'd face a setback, be deposed, and a period of chaos would follow when Visigoths, or other Germans, or whoever else, would reclaim the territory and then some.

Studying 8-12 hours is NOT good. Start working out and I recommend these books:

https://www.amazon.com/Good-They-Cant-Ignore-You/dp/1455509124/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1482042700&sr=8-1&keywords=so+good+they+can%27t+ignore+you

https://www.amazon.com/Peak-Secrets-New-Science-Expertise/dp/0544456238/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1482042708&sr=8-1&keywords=peak


https://www.amazon.com/Power-Habit-What-Life-Business/dp/081298160X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1482042776&sr=8-1&keywords=the+power+of+habit

https://www.amazon.com/Letters-Penguin-Classics-Lucius-Annaeus/dp/0140442103/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1482042852&sr=8-1&keywords=seneca


So, the idea is learn HOW to learn. Leisure is important and healthy for everyone.

If your serious about improving yourself this is a step in the right direction.

EDIT: www.calm.com go there and be.

I've read some good ones. I'll try to list all that I can remember from when I was getting my history degree and ones I've read for fun. I read the Iliad, odyssey, Thucydides, Herodotus. I read a lot of those guys. Unfortunately I don't have very many of my books and I can't remember all the titles. But, I do work in a library and have seen some good ones. Here are some links to some:
https://www.amazon.com/Wonders-Ancient-World-Metro-Books/dp/1435129660/ref=sr_1_18?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1495553357&sr=1-18&keywords=Wonders+of+the+ancient+world
https://www.amazon.com/History-Ancient-World-Earliest-Accounts/dp/039305974X/ref=sr_1_27?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1495553171&sr=1-27&keywords=Ancient+Greece
https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Athens-Worlds-Greatest-Civilization/dp/0812994582/ref=zg_bs_4880_22?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=C0JCVQDM2MA8DDZ43TYV
https://www.amazon.com/SPQR-History-Ancient-Mary-Beard/dp/1631492225/ref=pd_sim_14_33?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=1631492225&pd_rd_r=0HRJM2DS4HWZMWWQXP8B&pd_rd_w=OTprV&pd_rd_wg=vT33O&psc=1&refRID=0HRJM2DS4HWZMWWQXP8B
https://www.amazon.com/National-Geographic-Greeks-Illustrated-History/dp/142621670X/ref=zg_bs_4880_43?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1&refRID=RXBQK8K2K31NX6BE98ME

Eric Cline's "1177 B.C.: The Year Civilization Collapsed" is a pretty solid introduction for the lay-reader. Bonus also that he has done an AMA with us before!

If you're looking for a broad survey book of the time period 400-1000, I would recommend Chris Wickham's The Inheritance of Rome (2009)

Great book. Goes a little beyond (a lot beyond) Italy to basically talk about every part of the Roman Empire, plus some stuff in Ireland and Scandinavia for comparative purposes, but really gives you a good broad sense of everything going on in the post-Roman world.

this is a great book on the history of islam, egagingly written as an introduction to the religion and its history for casual readers. he writes with pretty much no bias. highly recommended.

Destiny Disrupted by Tamim Ansary. Easy read, consistently interesting, and a good primer for anyone looking to learn about Islamic history.

Lost to the West: The Forgotten Empire That Saved Western Civilization. A great great book that really helped me learn a lot about the Byzantines. Like how we think of the Roman Empire ending in 476AD, but that was only the western half. The Eastern, more Greek half, lived on for 1000 more years! Imagine that! A Roman Empire in the Middle Ages!

Posted this about a week back: In the last six months it has to be "Ancient Rome: Rise and Fall of an Empire" by Simon Baker. If you are going to read just one book on Rome, read this one. The man can write and had me hooked for days on end. Plus it ignited my current interest in the early European history, especially about the Franks and Eastern Empire after partition. Great stuff.

For those interested:

• The Little Prince
  
• Eating Animals
  
• The Hero With A Thousand Faces
  
• The Illustrated World's Religions
  
• Jihad vs. McWorld
  
• Collapse
  
• Just And Unjust Wars
  
• Descent Into Chaos
  
• The Landmark Thucydides
  
• A People's History of the United States

Yep! "Letters From A Stoic" - https://www.amazon.com/Letters-Penguin-Classics-Lucius-Annaeus/dp/0140442103/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=letters+from+a+stoic&qid=1558561107&s=gateway&sr=8-3


Here is a fantastic audio recording of it - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9a5jDHyXXDw&list=PLzKrfPkpj5om1kEBj7c80cwjJ1JS78FL7

So you're looking for hundreds of pages of open-ended history? Sounds like a tall order for an NSQ question. :-)

You might enjoy this book.

I don't know much about the subject, but I can point you to a book that might be able to.

Rubicon: The Last Years of the Roman Republic by Tom Holland is a book that details the later years of Rome and its fall. I haven't read it myself, but I've heard good things about it from other redditors. If you're into this kind of stuff, I suggest giving it a spin.

For anyone looking for an easy and entertaining introduction to this period, I highly recommended Rubicon by Tom Holland

From the Harper Encyclopedia of Military History, 4th Ed, pp. 89-90:

The typical army of the Ch'in and Han periods was a combined arms force of infantry, cavalry, chariots, and crossbowmen. The principal element had been heavy armored infantry, but increasing reliance was placed on cavalry as time went by. Shih Huang Ti did not introduce the crossbow into Chinese armies, since we know that these weapons were in extensive use as early as the Battle of Ma Ling (353 BCE). He seems, however, to have relied upon crossbowmen more heavily than his predecessors and may have been responsible for establishing a substantial contingent of mounted crossbowmen in his army. He also coordinated the employment of the reflex longbow with the crossbow, but (unlike the Mongols) does not seem to have had mounted longbowmen.

The combined arms concept seems to have been adopted for units as small as a 1,000 man equivalent of a modern regiment. Thus, the Chinese appear to have been able to deploy units capable of decentralized, independent action, as well as to combine them into large, massed, but articulated armies, in which the major units were brigades of 2 or 3 regiments. Heavy armored infantry predominated. Light unarmored infantry--archers, crossbowmen, and spearmen--functioned as skirmishers and provided security by screening flanks and rear.

The bulk of the soldiers, infantry and cavalry alike, had bronze-tipped--or iron-tipped--spears as their primary weapons. The secondary weapon for most soldiers, archers or spearmen, mounted or dismounted, was a single-edged sword nearly three feet long, suspended in a scabbard from a waist belt. All, except apparently for lightly-armed skirmishers, wore armor made up of small metal (bronze) plates attached by a form of rivent to a quilted fabric base. Some protection seems to have been provided even those without armor by a heavy quilted robe. The Chinese apparently relied entirely upon their armor for passive protection and did not carry shields.

Op. cit., p. 134:

The Han Dynasty inherited the government and military institutions of the Ch'in Dynasty. The basis of Han military power was the militiaman. Han law required males between the ages of 23 and 56 to undergo on month of military training each year at provincial training centers. Each man was also required to serve a 1-year tour with the Imperial Guards army in the capital and a 3-year tour at a frontier post. The militia was also called up during local emergencies and for foreign campaigns, such as those of Wu Ti against the Hsiung-nu.

The Roman army structure, equipment, etc under the Principate has been exhaustively documented ad nauseum in many many sources, some of which I'll list below. If asked to compare the two systems, I'd say that the Roman armies were strategically and tactically more flexible, and were by design able to be deployed from one end of the empire to the other for decades on end, versus the inherent limitations of a militia-type system. The testudo and gladius would have likely made the Roman legionary superior to his Han counterpart in melee combat.

However, the crossbow would be the central, pivotal piece of technological difference between the two armies, with its great range and its ability to penetrate virtually all known sorts of personal armor, one would have to conclude that, all else being equal, a Roman army's only chance would involve either a) surprise, or b) tactics wherein the main bodies of the legions closed the distance with the Han to precipitate a melee as soon as possible. This assumes that a crossbow bolt could penetrate the testudo, which seems reasonable, but may not have been true as a rule.

SOURCES:

Goldsworthy, Adrian. The Complete Roman Army. Thames & Hudson, 2003.

Coulston, J.C. Roman Military Equipment: From the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome. Oxbow Books, 2011.

Honestly a lot of my knowledge just comes from reading online. The Norse aspect of what I wrote comes from this site. A few books I've read that are relevant are Heather O'Donoghue's From Asgard to Valhalla which is about the development of Norse myths and their influence through time. Religions of the Ancient World I haven't read but I read a similar book by the same author (which I can't find) for a class and it was a good overview of ancient religions. Here are some books on Indo-European culture that seem reputable but I haven't read them. 1 and 2

Great read on this for anyone interested: https://www.amazon.com/Early-Chinese-Empires-History-Imperial/dp/0674057341

On that note you might be interested in The Horse, the Wheel, and Language - it’s great.

"Destiny Disrupted: A History of the World Through Islamic Eyes"

>In Destiny Disrupted, Tamim Ansary tells the rich story of world history as the Islamic world saw it, from the time of Mohammed to the fall of the Ottoman Empire and beyond. He clarifies why our civilizations grew up oblivious to each other, what happened when they intersected, and how the Islamic world was affected by its slow recognition that Europe-a place it long perceived as primitive and disorganized-had somehow hijacked destiny.

It's truly a classic, a must-read and it's on Amazon for 10 bucks.

I'm looking forward to reading this book: http://www.amazon.com/Lost-West-Forgotten-Byzantine-Civilization/dp/0307407969/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1334803636&sr=8-1

Also check out this article: http://blog.acton.org/archives/11693-review-how-the-byzantines-saved-europe.html

Byzantium, in brief, was the pinnacle of European civilization prior to modern times due to its location and strength. While surviving for a millennium, the empire had intimate contact with other cultures and traditions, as well as a long history of recording and transmitting ancient texts. While the Franco-latins were busy de-Christianizing the west and the Catholic Church subverting Christian doctrine and culture to their theocratic hegemony, Byzantium flourished and sustained itself as Christian Rome. Consider the following: No other region or society has had three successive stages of history. Western Europe has ancient, medieval, and modern. The rest have ancient and modern. The latter being characterized by western hegemony since the so-called "Holy Roman Empires". Food for thought!

Rubicon, by Tom Holland is a great book if you want to learn more about Roman history.
It is mainly about Caesar and his contemporaries, but almost every famous Roman of the Republic era passes the revue.

In my opinion it focuses on the most interesting century of Roman history, and is my favourite book about the Romans

I’m reading SPQR right now since Roman history is cool and I don’t really know much about it aside from what you pick up in popular media like Gladiator

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.

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

Some from my shelf

Arsenals of Folly

The Cold War

On China

The Tragedy of Great Power Politics

NATO's Return to Europe

On War

Bonus: The Landmark Thucydides: A Comprehensive Guide to the Peloponnesian War

Finished this book last fall... The Horse, the Wheel, and Language...and is a fascinating account of PIE, yamnaya, etc. It borrows quite a bit from Mallory's "In Search of the Indo-Europeans" which is a good read too.