My history teacher once told me this: "The kings were warriors. They often died on the battlefield. There were two kings, so the Ephors wouldn't abuse their power after one of them died. That is why one of them was leading a military campaign, and the other one stayed in the palace.
Both kings used to go on campaign until near the end of 6th century BC one of kings disagreed with the other and retreats with half the army causing an embarrassing situation. Since then only one could go on campaign. I think their names were Cleomones and Demaratus but don't trust me on that.
@@flynn659 yeah but at that time kings had to be warriors since directing your army to be lead by a general meant exposing your position as a king and being defenseless. Although kings usually didn’t participate in the battlefield and observed from a safe spot. With no real long-range weaponry and a horde of soldiers to guard them, instance of kings dying on the battlefield were spares.
You did not mention the one aspect that I had previously learned. With two General-Kings, one could lead an offensive assault (ex. Battle of Thermopylae) while the other defends the city. In addition, because they were two dynasties, the Kings were not always constantly the same age. One might be far senior to the other, so in theory, the "senior king" could guide the "junior king" during its upbringing.
Not related to the video but If I had a dollar for everytime Sparta got mad at Athens for allying with Argos, I'd have 2 dollars, which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice.
@@dlugi4198 I think the reason Athens and Argos didn't become Allies a lot was because Athens taxed the Greek city states a lot to "protect them from the Persians" while in reality they were using it to build temples, and Argos saw it as kind of a dick move. I know Athens kept this a secret but who knows how many spies Argos had in Athens.
This comment is two years old but I'll still leave it here: this is also where the word "archon" comes from. Generic Greek name for a ruler although now it's probably more famous for being the name of a Starcraft unit.
You forgot to mention that the five “rulers” of Sparta had to answer to the next five rulers for all their actions at the end of their one year term. Not really a system that you can abuse too much for your own benefit and power because if next year people get in who don’t like you they can find you guilty for trying to mess with them the previous year.
@@rifasclub take that attitude to court and tell me how it works out for you SPOILER ALERT! Badly, the onus is on the accuser to provide evidence of their assertion
U know why i love your channel? Because of the topics. All these "little" topics that most History Lovers dont know. Why and how Russia sold Alaska. Why it owns Kaliningrad, Why Spain never concuered Portugal. Why Canada didnt join the American revolution etc. Very interesting unknown topics that i was always qurious for. Thanks and happy new year from Greece
My favorites are the ones that almost sound like an accusation: "Why does Luxembourg exist?" (two people in the thumbnail throwing accusatory stares at Luxembourg)
@@hugomlpaixao I guess you could say that. Technically a good amount of ppl were skipped over to claim that inheritance, but you're right, there only seems to have been one battle and that was it for King Phillip to take control of Portugal
I assume you're referring to the fact that women ended up with the lion's share of any inheritance? Yeah they basically became their own political power base as a result of that.
@@ChrisDyn1 I think they're both great channels. I'm just suggesting that if y'all wan't more on the subject go there, it's really good too. Don't be a chode Chris.
I'd like to learn more about why Sparta declined the way it did. From what I understand they never fell from war, calamity, or strife, but more from an atrophy over the centuries until the Romans noted them as being an antiquated backwater.
The Spartan system required citizens to pay for their military equipment, supplies and a host of other things out of their own pockets from their serf-run (Helots) land holdings in order to participate in society and run their army. They did not however take the steps necessary to keep the wealthiest most connected aristocrats from gobbling up so much of the land that not enough people were left who could afford to serve in the Spartan army. The Athenians avoided this by making sure they kept a flatter distribution of wealth while the Romans under Marius had the government pay and arm their soldiers out of the public treasury.
Kinda late but the spartans declined because their government was totally unable to reform. The 5 ephors had lots of power but they could never use it. 1 the next 5 ephors could always undo the previouses changes if they didnt like them and 2 the gerousia had the final say on laws ultimately. Ephors would propose a law then people would vote and then the gerousia which was in another building would announce the winner based on who made more noise. The gerousia could also take legal action against both the king and the ephors. The gerousia (word translates the best as senate) were a council of 30 elders plus the 2 kings. Most of these guys were major landowners, old, and extremely conservative. So yeah sparta could lead armies and could function as a state but it was unable to do any reforms at all. When the romans came to sparta they found a small village with extremely alien to them laws filled with extremely bitter old people and thats because the laws were 400 years or so out of date. Imagine an alt history austria where they never evolve past feudalism. Its 2023 and wien looks like shit and has literal peasants and nobles walking around
The Peloponesian War put them in charge of Greece but they were absolutely thrashed by the Thebans afterwards. The Thebans went on to liberate Messenia (the land directly west of Laconia). The loss of that many Spartiates, territory and helots put them into a permanent decline. By the time of Rome they were a tourist trap. They basically fell from a combination of war and low citizen birth rates but there were a lot of factors. Had the Spartans defeated the Thebans at Leuctra I still doubt they'd have held hegemony over Greece for long.
I like the idea that the Ephors were all pretty chill with each other as they abused their positions for personal gain. Like one’s walking down to the street to tell some guy who had called the system corrupt that he and his family are banished, and waves at another walking the other way, carrying a bag of coins taken from the treasury for “reasons”
Wait, isn't this is because of their fear of Helots revolting? There are two kings because when one of them is on campaign other one stays at Sparta to keep them in order.
Oh huh this makes a lot of sense. Granted there can be several reasons or advantages to having two kings, the real question if you look at other monarchies throughout history is how neither of the kings wound up murdering the other- the Romans tried things like this several times and it always ended badly. "The Ephors held the real power" is the key explanation
I heard the explanation for the two kings was that Heracles had two sons and these two sons founded the city of Sparta. The line of these two brothers would be the dual kings, as a way to keep in touch with the gods.
I always considered that having a duel monarchy was a good insurance policy. If one king led the military, the other could govern from home, and if the king leading the military were to die in action, his colleague could assume sole command until the military crisis passed. This is effectively what happened in 480-479, in the aftermath of Leonidas' death, since his co-monarch Leotychidas immediately led the campaign against the Persians at Mycale, whilst the regent for the dead monarch, Pausanius, led the Spartan forces at Plataea. The dual monarchy was an effective instrument for a state designed for war.
It's fascinating to me how, despite all the bluster about Spartan warrior pride or the paranoia of the helots one day rising up and putting an end to Sparta, what actually led to their end was simply time, and eventually conquest by a much more powerful Rome. Sparta, by that point, due to their rigorous lifestyle, had actually withered to become a rather small and insignificant Greek village, with their glory dying in a slow whimper rather than a quick bang.
I appreciate a video like this... It's not something I ever thought about but UA-cam shows it to me and I'm like "Yeah? how?" And then I see the video is 3 minutes long and I click on it knowing I'm not going to get a lot of build up or filler, just an an answer to the question. Thanks History Matters for grabbing my interest and satisfying my curiosity in less than 5 minutes.
Romulus *(founder and 1st King/Rex/ of Rome)* & Titus Tatius *(the king of the Sabines from Cures and Romulus' joint-ruler of Rome)* : *"ARE WE A JOKE TO YOU??"*
Sparta: Yes (A few Centuries Later) Roman Republic: I’m back baby! Sparta: Help Us! (Population Decline, refusal to change, weird practices) Roman Republic: What happened! Sparta: I don’t know!
Actually it is kind of simple. You would ALWAYS have a "Spartan king", even when at war. 1 to lead the military effort while the other keeps the country United in regards to society and laws.
The Spartan diarchy was resurrected by Jerry Pournelle in his "Mote in God's Eye"/Falkenberg's Legion universe. I think the book "The Prince" covers it in more detail than any of the others.
The ancient Greeks were the result of the Indo-European colonizers and the native population intermingling. Mycenaeans and Cretans, often referred as "proto-greeks", are perhaps among the most ancient civilizations in the region and their government was originally based on the "Vanax" rule, basically a king who held both militaristic and religious powers (a common figure in antiquity across the Mediterranean, even romans originally had a similar type of ruler). Is plausible that consequently to the original settlement being expanded the Vanax later saw his region of influence (political and religious) split and his power watered down by an electoral institution. Spartans, Athenians and other Greek city states later inherited this political system, some cities like Sparta maintained to the end of their relevant history others, like Athens, got rid of it almost immediately.
Something not mentioned here: while it is true that the King had practically unlimited authority while on militray campaign, said King would be overseen by two Ephors. Two Ephors on their own could do nothing to veto a King's orders but as soon as that army returned to Sparta, the two attending Ephors could issue a full report to the full college who would then decide if the King partook in any unethical activity. Even the 'limtless' power of the King was checked by the very existence of the Ephors.
In the current system there are similaritys from my point of view: Chancellor and President, prime minister and king/queen, religious leader and a political leader, etc.
Franz Josef I of Austria to Franz Josef I of Hungary: *We'll both be kings*
don’t forget Franz Jozef I the King of Dalmatia, and Franz Jozef I the King of Jerusalem
**King Franz Josef has decided to confer Hungary on King Franz Josef**
Bipolar
@@the_odd_cat553 And king Franz Josef I of Slavonia-Croatia
@@gracchus7782 He's more mad for keeping Bosna and Herzegovina and sending his heir there to say hello to the angered Serbs.
My history teacher once told me this: "The kings were warriors. They often died on the battlefield. There were two kings, so the Ephors wouldn't abuse their power after one of them died. That is why one of them was leading a military campaign, and the other one stayed in the palace.
Little nitpick, but weren't there only two recorded instances of Spartans Kings dying in Battle?
@@flynn659
Surprising!
Both kings used to go on campaign until near the end of 6th century BC one of kings disagreed with the other and retreats with half the army causing an embarrassing situation. Since then only one could go on campaign. I think their names were Cleomones and Demaratus but don't trust me on that.
@@flynn659 yeah but at that time kings had to be warriors since directing your army to be lead by a general meant exposing your position as a king and being defenseless. Although kings usually didn’t participate in the battlefield and observed from a safe spot. With no real long-range weaponry and a horde of soldiers to guard them, instance of kings dying on the battlefield were spares.
Yes this is what we are taught at school as well .
You did not mention the one aspect that I had previously learned. With two General-Kings, one could lead an offensive assault (ex. Battle of Thermopylae) while the other defends the city. In addition, because they were two dynasties, the Kings were not always constantly the same age. One might be far senior to the other, so in theory, the "senior king" could guide the "junior king" during its upbringing.
Like The tetrachy but with just one side of The empire
ok yes. that makes a LOT more sense
Oh that explains the Spartan kings age gap in ac odyssey
Duh
Everybody else: RAID SHADOW LEGEND
History Matters: J A M E S B I Z A N E T T E
Let's not forget of David the archaeologist.
Bissonette but I’ve seen it spelled so many different ways on here lol
James Bissonette oh shit it’s James!
@David Josephus Daniel Nuntius it is me but it seems my name has taken on a quite silly and surreal existence.
Kelly moneymaker
0:45 "Ancient Crete"
What was it like btw? History videos almost never talk about it except to say that they had archers.
Cretan Archers - Rome Total War.
@@morfeusaquino4695 good or bad archers?
@@Darthwgamer Very good archers :)
@@MrWeGe hmm cool well at least we know they were good at that.
@@Darthwgamer They were used until the siege of Constantinople. The best of the best.
Because Spartans were so cool they needed one more king just to govern themselves.
and with one kind of Parlament
Actually, the spartiates were very authoritarian and would defend the motherland and do as it says at all costs. Their slaves were more rebellious.
But what IF they had three kings?
Ali Nukaru what is the 3rd king role anyway? 1 for military and 1 for government is enough in my book
Because of the Dioscouroi legend. But actually because one King was in lead of the military while the other was in charge of city administration.
Not related to the video but
If I had a dollar for everytime Sparta got mad at Athens for allying with Argos, I'd have 2 dollars, which isn't a lot but it's weird that it happened twice.
@@matthiascorvinus8843 yep
*Doofenshmirtz wants to know your location*
I see men of culture here
I am more curious why it didnt happen more times. 2 biggest historial rivals of Sparta, who had no problems with each other.
@@dlugi4198 I think the reason Athens and Argos didn't become Allies a lot was because Athens taxed the Greek city states a lot to "protect them from the Persians" while in reality they were using it to build temples, and Argos saw it as kind of a dick move. I know Athens kept this a secret but who knows how many spies Argos had in Athens.
Finally understood, that monarchy derives of mono thanks to this. Makes so much sense, but one never guessed.
So now you can understand what autarchy, diarchy and anarchy means.
This comment is two years old but I'll still leave it here: this is also where the word "archon" comes from. Generic Greek name for a ruler although now it's probably more famous for being the name of a Starcraft unit.
@@emsouemsou that pylon must be placed on a vespien geiser
yes. so spartan kings werent mono but stereo
@@zbowmasteri 😂😂
For some reason all i ever hear is "Air Force"
elKuhnTucker it’s in the auto captions too lol.
the spartan were fierce fighter pilots didnt you not know that?
adiintel1 lol yes
Imagine playing something like Ace Combat and 300 planes just show up and clean house
Sparta had an air force???
I bet they had a space force too!
You forgot to mention that the five “rulers” of Sparta had to answer to the next five rulers for all their actions at the end of their one year term. Not really a system that you can abuse too much for your own benefit and power because if next year people get in who don’t like you they can find you guilty for trying to mess with them the previous year.
Imagine if that happened to the politicians in modern governments.
thank god they didnt have the internet
Source?
@@looinrims Is out there. Be a grown up kid, and stop asking people to do your homework.
@@rifasclub take that attitude to court and tell me how it works out for you
SPOILER ALERT! Badly, the onus is on the accuser to provide evidence of their assertion
1:59 "you see, the air force were the only ones with real power" lol
Ephors
LOL
I'm glad I'm not the only one who heard it that way. 😉😉😉
@@SFnader Timothy Rice saw that part in auto generated English caption.
@Fabian Brown look the subtitles
I love the animations here for the Spartans lol. They look so laid back
U know why i love your channel? Because of the topics. All these "little" topics that most History Lovers dont know. Why and how Russia sold Alaska. Why it owns Kaliningrad, Why Spain never concuered Portugal. Why Canada didnt join the American revolution etc. Very interesting unknown topics that i was always qurious for. Thanks and happy new year from Greece
Spain never conquered Portugal because Portugal didn't want to
The End
Spain did conquer Portugal. And then Portugal fought for its independence about 60 years later and won it about 20 years after that
My favorites are the ones that almost sound like an accusation: "Why does Luxembourg exist?" (two people in the thumbnail throwing accusatory stares at Luxembourg)
@@jueljohnson41 Spain didn't conquer Portugal. The Spanish king inherited the Portuguese throne, and Portugal was kept a separate kingdom from Spain
@@hugomlpaixao I guess you could say that. Technically a good amount of ppl were skipped over to claim that inheritance, but you're right, there only seems to have been one battle and that was it for King Phillip to take control of Portugal
This is so strange, I just played Odyssey today and did the part where you meet the two Kings of Sparta!
Great video as always.
The young guy is the bad one!
1:38 First sheep sighting in this series!
I loved the its scared look!!
looks realistic lol
@@keziahdelaney8174 Even in the ancient world, priest love buggering small cute things.
@@TheLastSterling1304 wow.
I love that little moneybag sight gag at 1:24, it's great how there always some little gems sprinkled in like that
You should talk about Spartan inheritance laws. They are some of the most fascenating in the world. As well as their economy and government
I assume you're referring to the fact that women ended up with the lion's share of any inheritance? Yeah they basically became their own political power base as a result of that.
It's wild to think that ancient Sparta had such a powerful air force.
?
@@sebasobregoncahuich9891 He pronounces "ephors" like "air force"
I mean, they had F4s. That's third generation fighter-bomber jets.
History Civilis's video covers Spartan's constitution in deep detail as well look it up! Great video by the way man!
'Hey everybody! Go to another channel, great video by the way guy!'
@@ChrisDyn1 What do you expect people till watch this short video over and over all day? History Civilis Is more detailed.
@@ChrisDyn1 I think they're both great channels. I'm just suggesting that if y'all wan't more on the subject go there, it's really good too. Don't be a chode Chris.
believe it
they’re* (the first one)
@@koisov4401 oh shit it's the grammar police, everybody ruuuunn!
I'll fix it rn.
"He fell"
And then got a spear at his head huh...
Well it is sparta so it would be more common there to fall onto poorly placed weapons.
Epstein didn't fall
Reminds me this guy I know called Sab...
Just liked Leslie Tiller fell on her shears
@@oohglenn who is Epstein?
1:16 Doesn't feel like drawing the other 2 so he spends 5 seconds making a text box saying they're busy, relatable.
2:35 Roman Senator: Sorry for setting your home on fire
Spartan King: ...
I'd like to learn more about why Sparta declined the way it did. From what I understand they never fell from war, calamity, or strife, but more from an atrophy over the centuries until the Romans noted them as being an antiquated backwater.
The Spartan system required citizens to pay for their military equipment, supplies and a host of other things out of their own pockets from their serf-run (Helots) land holdings in order to participate in society and run their army. They did not however take the steps necessary to keep the wealthiest most connected aristocrats from gobbling up so much of the land that not enough people were left who could afford to serve in the Spartan army. The Athenians avoided this by making sure they kept a flatter distribution of wealth while the Romans under Marius had the government pay and arm their soldiers out of the public treasury.
Kinda late but the spartans declined because their government was totally unable to reform. The 5 ephors had lots of power but they could never use it. 1 the next 5 ephors could always undo the previouses changes if they didnt like them and 2 the gerousia had the final say on laws ultimately. Ephors would propose a law then people would vote and then the gerousia which was in another building would announce the winner based on who made more noise. The gerousia could also take legal action against both the king and the ephors. The gerousia (word translates the best as senate) were a council of 30 elders plus the 2 kings. Most of these guys were major landowners, old, and extremely conservative. So yeah sparta could lead armies and could function as a state but it was unable to do any reforms at all. When the romans came to sparta they found a small village with extremely alien to them laws filled with extremely bitter old people and thats because the laws were 400 years or so out of date. Imagine an alt history austria where they never evolve past feudalism. Its 2023 and wien looks like shit and has literal peasants and nobles walking around
The Peloponesian War put them in charge of Greece but they were absolutely thrashed by the Thebans afterwards. The Thebans went on to liberate Messenia (the land directly west of Laconia). The loss of that many Spartiates, territory and helots put them into a permanent decline. By the time of Rome they were a tourist trap. They basically fell from a combination of war and low citizen birth rates but there were a lot of factors. Had the Spartans defeated the Thebans at Leuctra I still doubt they'd have held hegemony over Greece for long.
@@matthewmorris5893 Thanks! I forgot I made this post, but it's a good explanation.
I like the idea that the Ephors were all pretty chill with each other as they abused their positions for personal gain.
Like one’s walking down to the street to tell some guy who had called the system corrupt that he and his family are banished, and waves at another walking the other way, carrying a bag of coins taken from the treasury for “reasons”
Spartans took bromance so seriously that even the throne was occupied by two guys together.
-Actually studying history from books-
Watching minecraft documentaries about it ✔️
"Spartans never die, they are just missing in action".
For some reason, I read the title as “Did Sparta have two legs?”
Kinda reminds me that the Dutch had the Raadspensionaris and the Stadhouder.
One represented the government, the other was in command of the army.
Wait, isn't this is because of their fear of Helots revolting? There are two kings because when one of them is on campaign other one stays at Sparta to keep them in order.
It was to keep everything in order
Oh huh this makes a lot of sense.
Granted there can be several reasons or advantages to having two kings, the real question if you look at other monarchies throughout history is how neither of the kings wound up murdering the other- the Romans tried things like this several times and it always ended badly. "The Ephors held the real power" is the key explanation
If you have a king like me, you don't need a second one
🇨🇩🇨🇩🇨🇩
and any black subjects will need hand anymore
@@hashar9593 the old flag is better...
@@AppleGhostCat oh hey my friend
Chip chop
I just went today to sparta pls stop spying me
Luv ur vids
We're good, guys. James Byzannete is back.
James Byzantine
He's back from fighting the Ottomans at Constantinople.
I heard the explanation for the two kings was that Heracles had two sons and these two sons founded the city of Sparta. The line of these two brothers would be the dual kings, as a way to keep in touch with the gods.
2:20 "He Fell" LoL
I think it's "The Hunt for Red October" reference.
I learned this in Social Studies and my teacher said
“They had two because if one dies, the other is there backup”
When are you going to make the Orthodox view on the Protestant reformation??????
Hmm
Your call got answered
Good one! I'm going to use this one in class.
Sparta:I have two kings!
Andorra:Me too! One of them is Emmanuel Macron.
The Rule of Two , one to have the power , the other to crave it ,and to eventually take it.
>Sparta had an elected chamber
11 year old me: Impossible.
I love your channel keep up the great stuff!!!
so the mo in monarchy stands for mono, wow i never realized that
Love seeing ancient Greece on the channel!
Any time Sparta is mentioned, I hear the word "Misthios" and warm memories fill my head of my time spent jn Ancient Greece...
I read "why did Sparta have 2 legs?"
I love that background picture during the credits section.
the 1 dislike might have come from somebody who had a test about Sparta before this video
Or from Kleon
Why? This is Sparta, because they can
We need more videos on ancient history... it's fire!
I am Greek and I didn't even know this, your video was educational.
Moral of the story: even if you're King, you might fall under the powers that be.
Short, sweet, to the point. No fluff, no bull. Just history. You sir get a like and a sub.
Good stuff!
I like it how the subtitles think you say Air Force when you say Ephors.
Great videos btw!
Sparta: it just works.
worked
I always considered that having a duel monarchy was a good insurance policy. If one king led the military, the other could govern from home, and if the king leading the military were to die in action, his colleague could assume sole command until the military crisis passed. This is effectively what happened in 480-479, in the aftermath of Leonidas' death, since his co-monarch Leotychidas immediately led the campaign against the Persians at Mycale, whilst the regent for the dead monarch, Pausanius, led the Spartan forces at Plataea. The dual monarchy was an effective instrument for a state designed for war.
What I like the most in these series os the attention to detail. I loved the little sigma as if it were $
1:18 *The other two were busy 😆
Great video.
Also the fact that Leonidas was not a young guy but was in fact over 60 years old. But that wouldn't be watchable on TV now, wouldn't it?
It's fascinating to me how, despite all the bluster about Spartan warrior pride or the paranoia of the helots one day rising up and putting an end to Sparta, what actually led to their end was simply time, and eventually conquest by a much more powerful Rome. Sparta, by that point, due to their rigorous lifestyle, had actually withered to become a rather small and insignificant Greek village, with their glory dying in a slow whimper rather than a quick bang.
Most civilizations, unions and kingdoms die out that way. Or if they still exist, they are never what they used to be.
Fun fact: Gerousia and Ephor are the Greek ethnonym words for Senate and Tax Collectors.
I appreciate a video like this... It's not something I ever thought about but UA-cam shows it to me and I'm like "Yeah? how?" And then I see the video is 3 minutes long and I click on it knowing I'm not going to get a lot of build up or filler, just an an answer to the question. Thanks History Matters for grabbing my interest and satisfying my curiosity in less than 5 minutes.
Austria-Hungary: Hi! I'm a diarchy!
Sparta: oh I don't think so
Where is the Orthodox Church in the Protestant reformation video
One king. One king only, please. ~ Capt Marko Ramius.
Romulus *(founder and 1st King/Rex/ of Rome)* & Titus Tatius *(the king of the Sabines from Cures and Romulus' joint-ruler of Rome)* :
*"ARE WE A JOKE TO YOU??"*
Sparta: Yes
(A few Centuries Later)
Roman Republic: I’m back baby!
Sparta: Help Us! (Population Decline, refusal to change, weird practices)
Roman Republic: What happened!
Sparta: I don’t know!
Seeing Sparta predates Rome by a lot, yes, you're a joke.
@@gracchus7782 but dual consulship of the republican era also worked quite well for quite a long time.
I would love a 10 minute history on this one.
Actually it is kind of simple. You would ALWAYS have a "Spartan king", even when at war. 1 to lead the military effort while the other keeps the country United in regards to society and laws.
Because, two heads are better then one?
“What happened to Leonidas?” Xerxes:DIE
Damn, Sparta was really early with its air force
Very great and informative video as always! But I am curious...what happened to Partyboyko.. I haven't heard his name in a while? 🤔🤔
THIS IS INTERESTING!
Because Sparta is that badass.
"He fell" lawlz straight up murdered the guy
I LOVE THIS CHANNEL
If the King is going to die in battle on a regular basis, it's good to have a redundant one.
I´m binge watching your videos, every time I have a time i can just watch one of these. Great content, saludos desde Bilbao
The Spartan diarchy was resurrected by Jerry Pournelle in his "Mote in God's Eye"/Falkenberg's Legion universe. I think the book "The Prince" covers it in more detail than any of the others.
"One King Only"
I read that in a thick Scottish accent and laughed out loud.
I keep hearing you say "Air Force" lol.
The ancient Greeks were the result of the Indo-European colonizers and the native population intermingling.
Mycenaeans and Cretans, often referred as "proto-greeks", are perhaps among the most ancient civilizations in the region and their government was originally based on the "Vanax" rule, basically a king who held both militaristic and religious powers (a common figure in antiquity across the Mediterranean, even romans originally had a similar type of ruler).
Is plausible that consequently to the original settlement being expanded the Vanax later saw his region of influence (political and religious) split and his power watered down by an electoral institution.
Spartans, Athenians and other Greek city states later inherited this political system, some cities like Sparta maintained to the end of their relevant history others, like Athens, got rid of it almost immediately.
It does avoid the stability loss when one of them died tho...
Title: Why did Sparta Have Two Kings?
Me: Sparta *had* two kings?
More videos like this!
You should make a video on Gibraltar
"So, what period of history do you specialise in?"
History Matters, going from a video about Ancient Babylon to one on the space race: "Yes."
Despite its problems and odd practices, after reading a large part of its history, Sparta was still the most kick ass of any Greek state
Very interesting
Something not mentioned here: while it is true that the King had practically unlimited authority while on militray campaign, said King would be overseen by two Ephors. Two Ephors on their own could do nothing to veto a King's orders but as soon as that army returned to Sparta, the two attending Ephors could issue a full report to the full college who would then decide if the King partook in any unethical activity. Even the 'limtless' power of the King was checked by the very existence of the Ephors.
This video would have help me a bit more with the exam
:)
Can we have a video on the Greek War of Independence as it is its 200 year anniversary? Pretty please?
What happened to David Archaeologist?
Mummy?
In the current system there are similaritys from my point of view: Chancellor and President, prime minister and king/queen, religious leader and a political leader, etc.
Why did it take me this long to notice that Monarch comes from monos, meaning one
oh yea notification gang
Dang here I go learning again