How did people fight in medieval battles?
The most bitter hand-to-hand fighting was done by ‘men-at-arms’. These were nobles and gentry, often wearing suits of elaborate plate armour, and their retainers, who wore quilted ‘jacks’ and helmets. English armies rode to battle but nearly always fought on foot.
Is it a war crime to shoot a soldier with a tank?
It would not be a war crime. Under the rules of war it is permissible to shoot enemy soldiers under almost all circumstances.
How were wounded soldiers treated in ww2?
Wounded soldiers were removed from the battlefield by litter bearer, the predecessor to the medic or corpsman. Regimental Surgeons were responsible for dressing wounds and patients were evacuated in ambulances driven by Medical Corps noncommissioned officers to a division level field hospital for surgical treatment.
Why were the battles fought in the ancient period?
Answer: War is waged by political entities, nations or, earlier, city states in order to resolve political or territorial disputes and are carried out on the battlefield by armies comprised of soldiers of the contending nations or by mercenaries paid by a government to wage battle.
How did ancient armies find each other?
Scouts on light fast horses (some armies that fought in hilly locations used light foot troops) with light weapons would sweep ahead and to the sides of armies looking for the enemy. Once they spotted the enemy they raced back to the main army with the news.
How were the wounded treated in the Civil War?
The wounded and sick suffered from the haphazard hospitalization systems that existed at the start of the Civil War. As battles ended, the wounded were rushed down railroad lines to nearby cities and towns, where doctors and nurses coped with the onslaught of dying men in makeshift hospitals.
How were combat medics treated in WW2?
They were trained to stop bleeding, apply dressings, sprinkle sulfa powder on wounds as an antiseptic, and to administer morphine as a sedative. More elaborate medical treatment would wait.
Why was the sword a secondary weapon in medieval warfare?
Swords are the medieval equivalent of a sidearm like a pistol. However, battles are not won by close, individual combat. They’re won by groups. This is why the sword was a secondary weapon. The primary melee weapon was the polearm.
How did the Romans use swords to fight?
After the “shock and awe” administered by the throwing spears, Roman soldiers would close in with short, thrusting swords to finish the job. These tactics were similar to those used by men armed with (one shot) muskets, and bayonets, centuries later.
What are the disadvantages of a spear over a sword?
Another issue with a spear is that it can take a long time to kill somebody because the wound is relatively minor. You could stick somebody with a spear and he might just keep going like the energizer bunny. With a sword you can cause massive wounds that put the enemy into shock and disables them almost immediately.
What are the advantages of a sword over a pole arm?
A few advantages of the sword that I could think of is being able to use a shield and being more mobile, but do these advantages really outweigh the advantages of the pole arm? I believe sword users are also much more vulnerable to cavalry than pole arms. Pole arms vary greatly in length and purpose.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdPYGjsX8_E