lol spartan status: mildly intoxicated. translate in: they were drunk as fuck!

oblique order "take your hats off, gentlemen, if this man were still alive, we would not be standing here today." - Napoléon at the tomb of Frederick the Great. the tactic of "oblique order" earned a mention by Vegetius. what i like about the oblique order, is that it allows to attack the enemy's stronger side, and having defeated the opponent's main body, to envelop the enemy, now rolling around the enemy forces, watching them melt. i successfully used this tactic in chess. the problem with some of the other brilliant tactics, which rely on segmenting your forces, is that reserves might not come on time. which is what happened to Napoléon at the battle of Waterloo. other tactics are not as universally applicable. • the oblique order was used by the Thebans under the command of Epaminondas to defeat the Spartans (la bataille de Leuctres). • the oblique order was employed by the brilliant Khalid ibn al-Walid against the Byzantines at the Battle of Yarmouk. • one-sided envelopment tactic was used by Fulk the Black "par la grâce de Dieu comte des Angevins" and his sidekick Count Herbert of Maine, to defeat Fulk's rival, Odo II of Blois at the Battle of Pontlevoy. Fulk III was an avid reader of Vegetius. Vegetius does not preach cowardice unlike Sun Tzu. among European generals Napoleon's tactics were more like Sun Tzu. they worked for a while. in the said battle Fulk lost his horse and his standard-bearer. from the early feudal period (which was a continuation of roman client-patron system of societal organization) until the end of the middle ages, conveying orders wasn't easy, so the sovereign along with his standard-bearer led from the front! this led to the development of plate armour which completely encompassed the body. these suits became pretty much impervious to swords and bladed weapons, arrows and bullets - due to the curvature of the plates. the leaders (sovereigns and magnates) used percussion weapons such as war hammers and maces to try to crush one another. dismounted knights could endure for fifteen to twenty minutes in such heavy armor. Edward IV, who lived near the end of the Middle Ages fought in this way. the leader and his chief sidekicks served as points to attract troops, instead of sending out orders. but Fulk the Black didn't have such superior armour to protect him in 1016. he still used a sword. instead he had self-confidence. chivalry didn't end because of firearms. chivalry ended because the retinues which were required to arm knights became too costly. self-confidence was less expensive. preparedness equals confidence. Fulk had a copy of "the epitome of military science", therefore he could remain calm in turmoil. • the oblique order was frequently used by Frederick the Great (Battle of Hohenfriedberg, Battle of Leuthen). the lesson is that the oblique order never let down a wise commander, so it is the best. "intensity gives eminence, and rises to the heroic in matters sublime." - Baltasar Gracian

if your quality was better your channel would became big enough to give you money!

This was an accurate and informative video. My only complaint is that your voice is too monotone and you need to speak with more energy.

This is Madness!!!

ahhahaha... the king of sparta and his men were drunk before battle 0:23 LOL!!!!!! wrong move

Jonathan Web > God. Im gonna do everything I can to bring more viewers to your site

This is Sparta!!!!! Now, let's run

Why didn't the Spartans simply advance their left side to collapse in on the Thebans in a flanking maneuver?

this helped me loads thanks! however the Spartan phalanx was 3 men wide, not 4

The tactics ensured that Sparta would lose in any case, as they usually didn't fight the elite of their enemies immediately. They may not have been drunk but they were certainly overconfident. They did not expect an echelon formation, superior cavalry and the magnificent Sacred Band right in the front with Epaminondas. The Spartans also failed to get their allies to help- they usually only hopped in when winning was possible. Alexander the Great also used the echelon against Persia.

Was the battle decided by the weight of the Theban left or by the superiority of their cavalry? Seems the deciding factors were the : 1) angular advance of the Theban Formation 2) the tactical victory of their cavalry and 3) the fighting prowess of the Sacred Band.

The war in which Sparta and Athens allied against Thebes - what was it called?

where is 300 spartans

@WarfareKing187 doubt it

also thebes failed to invade sparta like they literally failed at taking a city with no walls...cough cough

the Spartans lost to homosexuals no joke 300 homosexuals where on the bans side called the sacred band

I thought the Spartans only lost 400?? as it was still 1/3 of there population, so are you saying they lost 1000?? cuz that's like all of them and must be wrong

well to be fair they got out manuered by combined arms...revolutionary at the time and spartans never really adapted to new tactics so being extremely predictable can be a huge disadvantange...not to mention to all the spartan haters out there..spartans managed to kill the theban genius and all his officers at battle of mantinea ending the very short lived theban hegemony..just saying

westerns making excuses all time

LİAR AND SPECULATİONS.NOT REAL...