Hello /lit/
I have started with the Greeks and resumed with the Romans.
My question is after I have continued with the Christians, do I then Ruminate with the Renascence men? or do I back up to the Byzantines?
And at which time do I adventure with the Arabs and examine the east Asians?
>>8174128
get kuhrazy with the khristians
you get along with the arabics
avicenna, alfarabi, averroes etc
all these memes
you should have read the greeks and skipped to enlightenment
Renaissance doesn't make sense if you don't master the middle ages.
But don't bother with Byzantines, they wrote nothing notable.
>>8174195
>skipped to enlightenment
Apply alliteration, anon.
>>8174286
entered the
why am i even doing this jfc
>>8174195
that is mostly dangerous propaganda
>>8174317
>your statement contradicts my values
>it must be politically motivated
have fun reading all those hacks
I doubt you finished the Greeks and Romans let alone the Greeks. So, you read all of Homer, Plato, Aristotle, the tragedies, Hellenistic philosophers, Neoplatonists, Hesiod, Aristophanes, Herodotus, Xenophon, Thucydides, and the mythologies?
>>8174286
Why would it be alliteration when "start with the Greeks" isn't in the first place?
>>8174353
That's the meme, man
>>8174353
you only really have to read plato, the tragedians, maybe aristophanes, and maaaaaaaaaybe some histories if you really have nothing to do.
Quite frankly it's more valuable to have a romp with the Romantics and mope with the Modernists.
>not piss-drunkenly pondering postmodernists
>>8174327
