Got the idea first from watching this from Lord of the Rings. I was thinking, is there any sort of tactical advantage whatsoever to exposing your archers in front of your front wall of shields? At that, I feel like i've seen in a variety of media. Shouldn't they start the battle in the position that they would like to defensively shoot from? I don't exactly think of them as a mobile flanking squad.
Additionally, I thought it may be a good idea to get an example grounded in reality. However, after a bit of time searching epic battle scenes in movies more realistic than LotR (Troy, Kingdom of Heaven, Robin Hood, Gladiator, The Eagle, The Last Samurai, 300, Braveheart, Arn?, Alexander) well, I can't find a single film that has archers who step in front of their shield wall before shooting.
So /r/askhistorians, was this ever a tactic employed in battle, is it just a Hollywood flashy maneuver to look cool, or something that I seem to be making up because I can't find a good example?
Archers shooting from the front or the flanks of an infantry formation generally was the norm for medieval warfare. They sometimes were used to shoot arrows over the heads of their comrades. But the general consensus was that indirect fire with a bow wasn't nearly as effective as shooting horizontally.
The first reason for this is the fact that an archer still has to see in order to be able to aim, which becomes impossible if there are too many ranks in front of him. Second, the only way to arc an arrow over something when the enemy is up close is to reduce the power, which completely defeats the point of using a 100 lb warbow in the first place. There are examples from the 16th century of soldiers basically laughing off "half-drawn arrows" wildly shot into the air by nervous archers. During the Napoleonic wars Baron de Marbot noticed this when fighting against Baskir horse archers levied by the Russians. The Baskirs didn't fight by forming ranks, and as a result Marbot writes that most had to shoot into the air in order to avoid hitting their comrades, meaning that not only were their arrows inaccurate, but when they did hit, they typically only caused "minor wounds" despite the French being completely unarmored.
Ideally medieval archers would be protected by sharpened stakes, a a ditch, or a steep slope. Allowing them to take point blank potshots as the enemy struggled to cross the obstacle. If that wasn't possible they would either withdraw behind the rest of the infantry or just draw their sidearms and join in the melee. English longbowmen were considered quite good with a sword and buckler as well as a bow. And sometimes the archers did indeed serve as a mobile flanking squad, which is exactly what happened at the battles of Dupplin Moor and Hadron Hill. Once the Scottish Schiltrons had engaged the main English infantry, the archers went around the sides and started shooting arrows into the Scots' flanks and rear, eventually causing a panic.
I can't speak too much on the historical aspect but I want to point out that your initial estimate that the Orc archers were in front of the pikeline is incorrect. Gothmog clearly Orders "Pikes in front, Archers behind" Then we see the "pikes" (definitely not pikes, more like polarms, spears, halberds) move into position. We see the archers do their thing and it appears that they are in front, However, the Rohirrium clash with the non-pike pikes first. So the archers were protected.
—
Now for the real question. I can't think of a battle where the archers played a vital part and they were exposed. The Battles of Crecy, Poitiers, and Agincourt of the Hundred years War had archers on the front lines (technically the flanks/wings) but they were behind defensive works
