Additionally, how might the empire have reacted if that was cut off?

Hi,

I've tried searching around for an answer to this on the sub-reddit but I can't seem to find it. Apologies if there is one out there!

I don't know why this popped into my head the other day but it did and I've just been curious about it ever since.

During the medieval period both in Europe and Asia. Generals made great use of archers during battles.

But when the battle 'proper' began and the two forces became engaged - what happened to the archers?

It seems odd that so many trained men would just be left to sit out the battle. Presumably they couldn't fire into the mass of men fighting (because they'd hit their own side). But it just seems so odd to have so many healthy men that could fight just standing around waiting to see if they'd be needed again.

So after the battle proper began. Did archers put down their bow and arrows and head into the fray? Did some enter and some wait back just in case they were needed to mow down some retreating force?

Cheers.

Just curious if armies have ever done this to save many lives from being killed.

Edit: Thanks for all the comments so far everyone!

From what I have read the Hebrides had their own judges called the Brieves with judicial authority and that lasted until about the late 16th century. Are there any other instances like this is Scottish history?

I recently saw a documentary about the Battle of 73 Easting (I believe it's part of a series called "Greatest Tank Battles"). I had a few questions

1.) In the recreation, they state that the American forces rapidly closed the gap, drove straight in and intermingled with the Iraqi armor. I found that a bit confusing because it is my understanding that the US Army focused on long range gunnery, and that the Abrams would be better protected at long distances. Why did they choose to charge in rather than use of their advantages?

2.) They indicated that the Iraqi army tanks were entrenched in defensive positions. I understand that the Iraqi army was not as well trained, but there was an account where a Bradley managed to fire its missiles, reload and fire again before any Iraqi tanks returned fire. How were the Iraqis caught so unprepared that they lost all the advantages of being in prepared defensive positions?

Reading history books, they often talk about how the Allied Expeditionary Forces were under joint American and British command, but most media (stories and movies and such) generally just show one nation's soldiers at a time, and it seems like the teamwork between nations is mostly something that is happening pretty high up the chain of command (IE, Eisenhower and Montgomery deciding to send a british unit here, and an american division there). In "Band of Brothers" there is a scene where E company rescues some British soldiers trapped behind enemy lines, and another scene where they are escorting a few British tanks, so I am wondering how much stuff like that actually happened. How often were Allied forces coordinating at the 'lieutenant' level versus the 'general' level? How often would enlisted soldiers interact with those from other nations in combat?

For example;

Blonde hair, blue eyes = Tier 1 Black hair, green eyes = Tier 2 so on and so forth . . .

Seems like ancient europe probably slept a lot because not much work could be done at night, but as the industrial revolution happened people had more free time, so at what point was the amount of sleep maximized for the average person?

I have read that marijuana was widespread throughout the Old World by the Dark Ages. Why isn't cannabis use a more common trope about the middle ages, the way that mead, ale and beer are?

Just curious?

Sorry if this seems like a stupid question but whenever I'm watching a TV show, (Turn is what I'm watching at the moment) with a historical war camp, the tents of officers will contain something bulky such as chests of drawers or a writing desk, basically just cumbersome pieces of furniture.

It may simply be set dressing and I'm reading too much into it but I'm always left thinking about the logistics that would be involved in transporting furniture around in campaigns for those officers a few hundred years ago if that's how it actually would have happened.

I know it obviously effects our ability to know there post split history

I'm not a very good reader, so readable academic books would be preferred! Thanks in advance, recently got amazing replies on two posts I made previously about rape in Viking society, and also sexuality and women in Viking society, now I'm looking to read even more. I've got a couple of books recommended by the Viking Answers Lady, any more recommendations? Thanks in advance?

From my understanding, he took someone else's laws and applied them and discovered something new. Now some people are telling me that he discovered them all on his own through the inspiration of the bible.

The quote in question is:

"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think hard before starting a war."

This doesn't make sense since I remember another quote that said that the great questions of time will be solved by iron and blood. Didn't he also advocate for wars during his time?

Any stories of Augustus loving feet or anything?

Were there any who were notorious micromanagers? Any who were well-known for letting other people do all the work?

Considering they sailed a lot, how common was scurvy? Also, how did the nordics navigate the open seas?