I came across Johann Winckelmann (known as the founder of scientific art history).
Some literature on his contributions to the development of art history revealed an interesting observation.
John Onian referenced the following
'after repeated contemplation', "first make 'them perfectly familiar to his memory' and only then 'read all the ancient authors'."
So for me I've never approached art history from a name, date, location inventory. (I'm assuming this mentally expensive requirement for academic purposes imposes on the desire to express and absorb freely). Instead, I've focused on a few historical pieces I instinctively enjoyed looking at for some organic reason. (Many deviating my style or medium). I would spend so much time looking and thinking and thinking about the piece picking up everything I can before I explored the metadata such as time period, movement, historical impact etc.. (although I do this eventually to compare my assumption and lead me to other places). This wasn't so much a technique as much as an absence of technique.
I'm also not the biggest variety kind of guy. I have a few in-depth diversified hobbies and activities, but some people prefer to explore hundreds of pieces in a similar style at once, some just want the highlights of each era (influenced by the metadata), some are only focused on current stuff, some maybe follow a specific artist.
What's your relationship with art history? Is it similar to your other cultural tastes?