Hey, I'm looking to read books that focus on this period only because I want maximum details. I've already looked at the recommendations of AskHistorians but I didn't quite find what I was looking for. I've narrowed my search down to: 𝘈𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘦: 𝘍𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘌𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘈𝘴𝘴𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘑𝘶𝘭𝘪𝘶𝘴 𝘊𝘢𝘦𝘴𝘢𝘳 by Matthew Dillon and Lynda Garland,
𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘙𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘦 by Anthony Everitt,
𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘤 𝘞𝘢𝘳𝘴 by Adrian Goldsworthy,
𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘴: 𝘍𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘝𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘌𝘮𝘱𝘪𝘳𝘦 by Boatwright,
𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘦𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘦: 𝘐𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘺 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘻𝘦 𝘈𝘨𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘤 𝘞𝘢𝘳𝘴, 𝘊𝘢 1,000-264 𝘉𝘊 by Tim J. Cornell
𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘍𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘩𝘪 𝘵𝘰 𝘕𝘦𝘳𝘰: 𝘈 𝘏𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘰𝘧 𝘙𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 133 𝘉𝘊 𝘵𝘰 𝘈𝘋 68 by H.H. Scullard. I've thought of reading the Tim J. Cornell then going to Goldsworthy and then reading Scullard, or just reading Matthew Dillon and Lynda Garland. Are those books good enough or do you have any better books to recommend?
I'd like maximum details, so I don't know if reading just one book about this period would be a good idea, so which book should I read first and which books should i follow it with?
Also, if you don't know of any better books and you think reading Tim J. Cornell or Everitt or and then Goldsworthy is a good idea, which book should i follow it with for the late Republic days? Just looking to get a thorough understanding of this period. Keep in mind that I do want to read the Goldsworthy book about the Punic wars because people say he covers this period well. Sorry for the long message and thanks for your patience :)
Edit 1: I'm looking for modern books in general that don't feature dated and untrue information, I'm not sure if I should trust Livy or the other ancient historians much
I'm reading Mary Beard's SPQR. Pretty informative. The prose is easy to understand.
For the Fall of Rome, I usually recommend Barbarian Migrations and the Roman West by Guy Halsall. Halsall's work does more to argue his theory (and deconstruct accepted notions) so, perhaps, it's not the best introduction to a subject, but it covers a wide range of history in a clear, informative, and entertaining way and I think tends to give a stronger account of both what the late Roman Empire was like and what the causes of its collapse were.
Cornell's book is very in depth and quoted by other academic and introductory level books on rome. Boatwright himself suggets it in the further reading of the early chapters of "The Romans".
It is quite an optimistic approach to roman origins, trying to mantain as much as possible from what the sources tell us. Let's be clear, it is not an apologetic book. It simply refuses, with very solid arguments, some of the very extreme minimalist views of early rome. And rightfully so imho. It dialogues with a lot of academic literature on the subject expecially with the works of the dear Momigliano, which are the backbone of Cornell's book.
But honestly I'd suggest you to read other introductory level books first because you need at the very least a basic knowledge of the subject matter which is sometimes given for granted in Cornell's.
Read "The Romans" first which is the standard introductory textbook, then you can move and explore the subject in depth with Cornell.
In case you speak italian or are willing to learn it (if you plan to become very well versed in roman history you must) the next step are these volumes by Momigliano himself (which deal with greek history as well)
Check out Theodor Mommsen's book History of Rome; very good prose writing, a page turner, won him nobel prize. The book demythologizes Rome unlike Gibbons, very well researched. Do not die before reading it