And for the Peloponnesian War, you can't go wrong with Thucydides.
He actually fought in it! On both sides! Thucydides is considered the first "modern" historian, his prose (translated from ancient Greek) reads like a twentieth century writer. He is a biased observer, but he also freely admits it. The Peloponnesian War is vital to understanding Greek history. It weakened both Athens and Sparta so that they could not resist the threats coming from the North (Macedonia) and West (Rome).

For Roman history, late Republic and early Empire, read Robert Graves' books in the list I posted above. I also highly recommend the HBO series "Rome". These are both works of fiction and not history, but they give a good idea of what it must have been like to live in those times, something academic histories cannot do.

A work of fiction that went deep into what it was like to actually live in NAZI Germany in WWII is Len Deighton's "Winter". Also, I highly recommend Shirer's "Berlin Diary" and Harry W. Flannery's "Assignment to Berlin", both available online at:

Assignment to Berlin : Flannery, Harry W., 1900- : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive (archive.org)

both written by US correspondents working in Berlin just prior to our entry in the war.

I also highly recommend Simon Schama's "History of Britain" available as a book and TV series.

The new Ken Burns documentary on the American Revolution is just as good as his "Civil War". There's a lot more to that story than what we learned in school, and some of it is pretty ugly. For example, even though the Brits tried to accommodate many of the colonists' demands, there were powerful forces pushing to complete independence. There were American companies who were lobbying to acquire Indian lands W of the Allegheny mountains, so it could be sold to future European immigrants to the colonies, and the Brits were for leaving that land to the Indian nations because of their help against the French during the French and Indian War. Most of our founding fathers were involved financially in those companies. They WANTED independence because they planned to make a fortune if the UK was gone. Also, the Boston Tea Party wasn't about British taxes on tea, the Brits had eliminated the tax and cheap British tea was hurtful to John Hancock's smuggling business. And of course, both sides lied to the Indians and the blacks in order to buy their support.