How would you reccomend I learn history with spaced repetition? I'm studying a detailed subject independently (I.e. not for an exam with a set curriculum) and I'm finding it hard to atomise the cards down bevond dates and names. I suppose I should start there first and then build more complex cards, but I'm not sure what the best approach for those is. Thanks for the detailed article!
I'm currently doing this and personally I believe the dates and names approach is best (depending on your goals). The theory is that if you have a solid grasp of the coarse details like births/deaths/major battles then when you are reading about the more subtle ideas (like what factors caused the fall of the Roman empire) you will be able to couch those ideas in the concrete framework you've already built. Then those ideas will be able to stick better.
I've only been doing it for a year and change so we'll see how it goes, but I think it's a good approach.
Obviously ignore the stuff that's less relevant for an autodidact, though seriously consider the effect any particular thing could have on your learning. For example, perhaps you'd get a high ROI paying a history graduate student to assign and grade a research paper or exam.
I've thought about this a lot and I don't have an answer. History is very prose-like and unstructured and that makes it hard.
My tentative thought (and I haven't validated this entirely) is to try to structure it. Make a spreadsheet with tables for people, events, etc. Look at Wikipedia infoboxes for inspiration into the types of things that should go as columns in the tables.
You can also try hierarchical periodization. Like if you were making flashcards about the life of Peter the Great you'd divide his life into:
1. Early life
2. Grand Embassy
2.1. Austria
2.2. The Netherlands
2.3. England
3. Great Northern War
3.1 Start
3.2 Founding of St. Petersburg
