I have a dilemna - and its ongoing. Which do I read first: history or myth?
I know that I need to read the myths associated with the British Isles, but I have also been informed, by people I respect, that I need to read them in context. But, how is this achieved if you havent' read the history first? And, just how much history do you need to know before you start reading the myths?
Its all very confusing to me. I try to read a book a week and I try to alternate between myth/folklore, history and general pagan subjects. The problem I'm finding is that when you read one history book, (e.g. Hutton's "The Druids"), it often contains references to other works with comments like "If you wish to explore further, then read ...". Well, fine. Except I will be reading a book under the myth/folklore section next week and, after that, I have this history book which is relevant to the next myth/folklore book I'm reading and so on.
I checked my library catalogue the other day to find 125 books on my "to be read" list and 75 on my wishlist. If you add that up, that's about 16 years reading, provided I ignore all bibliographies and recommendations contained within those books. This is quite daunting and I am having to consider whether I should just read the myths/folklore/tales and disregard the history; applying a modern sensibility to the texts.
I wonder how others have managed or are managing to do this?