4 ms·

Battles are not important. Today's leaders fight wars. It was also true in medieval and classical times. Battles were the exception. Sieges were far more commo

• sandworm101 8y ago
  That was very different. Armies then lived off the land, bought/stole what they needed very locally. Supply lines existed but the number of goods needed wasn't the same as today. Logistics is only part of maneuver warfare. Intelligence is more important. Sieges were not that common. A siege needs a stronghold. There were periods where strongholds were common in some areas, but they are over-represented in the history. We have records of sieges because sieges, by definition, occurred at important locations.
  • stcredzero 8y ago
    That was very different. Armies then lived off the land, bought/stole what they needed very locally. Yes. It was the medieval version of logistics -- basically everything comes from the immediate vicinity and there's frack-all by comparison for infrastructure. You could have supply lines, but it was proportionally more expensive. It's quite surprising, the amount of materials for building a castle which came from the immediate vicinity. Sieges were not that common. Like battles were even less common. I was given to understand that sieges were more frequent than battles.