>>24732660It was outdated back then already.
>>24732673I recently got duped into watching a great courses lecture on Mesopotamia, in which the “modern historian” suggests that King Ashurbanipal of Assyria was only literate because his wife compelled him to be. I want a non-pozzed source of history, even if it’s not fully accurate. Herodotus will always be relevant even though much of what he has to say is fable.
>>24732688>Herodotus will always be relevant even though much of what he has to say is fable.Easily one of the greatest filters ever in place. You have never read the 'Histories' at all. This is always a dead give away.
>>24732699I have. I’ll give an example. Herodotus claimed that when he toured the Great Pyramid, he was told that an inscription described the rations given to the workers, the bread/beer/onions. This is obviously a lie, no Pharaoh had ever, or would ever, erect a stela declaring the food he had offered to laborers, certainly not outside of a temple, certainly not in front of his tomb, and certainly not in the Old Kingdom when there were no inscriptions in or around the Pyramids. This was false information fed to him by a tour guide who was either making things up, or had misinterpreted something. Herodotus’ lies aren’t a result of him being a bad researcher, but rather his sources being unreliable on occasion.
>>24732688>even though much of what he has to say is fable.>>24732762>he was told>This was false information fed to him by a tour guide who was either making things up>Herodotus’ lies aren’t a result of him being a bad researcher, but rather his sources being unreliable on occasion.Lol.> he was told that an inscription described the rations given to the workers, the bread/beer/onions. This is obviously a lie, no Pharaoh had ever, or would ever, erect a stela declaring the food he had offered to laborers, certainly not outside of a temple, certainly not in front of his tomb, and certainly not in the Old Kingdom when there were no inscriptions in or around the Pyramids.And you know this how?Easy 4k exposed.>Hmm, I will write this down, even though I don't believe, yet I will let the reader decide.>DUDE HE IS A FABLE WRITER DUDE HE IS JUST LIKE FABLE MATRIXING IT UP! LE HECKIN!Lol, like I said, one of the greatest filters ever.
>>24732660Unlike seemingly everyone else in this thread, I have actually read the first two of his series and own all the rest besides the Age of Reason. Yes, it is absolutely worth reading, he writes with excellent prose, and gives a detailed, lifelike picture of the cultures he writes about. While new advances in archeology and historical analysis have provided some evidence which contradict specific points here and there, on the whole it is still quite accurate historically speaking, especially considering its sheer scale. Also, while there have been advances in archeology and whatnot, much of the advances made in history specifically since the writing of these books have been historiographical or philosophical in nature, and thus don't necessarily disprove his work, just draw different conclusions from similar evidence. But yeah, definitely worth a read, the chapter on Crete in the Life of Greece and Egypt in Oriental Heritage were my favourite sections.
>>24732660>readidk but they're worth listening tohttps://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLax23j-7EInW5aUHMjTqQ3uzs5rE0WP64
>>24732979>And you know this how?Because there is absolutely zero corroborating evidence of a Pharaoh ever doing this, ever. Herodotus’ tour would’ve been taking place nearly three thousand years AFTER Khufu lived. No one else, in history, Egyptian or otherwise, has ever corroborated the story. It’s patently false. >”I will let the reader decide”Lmao what a fucking cope. You can say this literally about anything. Napoleon was Polish, actually. No, I’m not lying, I’ll let the READER decide, haha!
>>24732660I only read the Rousseau volume and thought it was great. I'm a big fan of his book The Lessons of History
It’s worth reading with the caveat that Duran often relies on primary sources without the skepticism of an historian. So there is a significant amount of nonsense in his work but it’s nonsense from primary sources, not his imagination
>>24732660I love it but I would skip the first volume unless you like cavemen and asians/middle easterners, even then, the volume was published in 1935 and I guess at that point there wasnt that much chinese/japanese history information available in english so its rather lacking
>>24733215His sections on their art and literature are good
>They also left notes behind for a 12th volume, The Age of Darwin, as well as an outline of a 13th volume, The Age of Einstein, which would have taken The Story of Civilization to 1945.>we will never get to read these
these actually made me emotional
