Hand weapons

I know that this will have be covered before but what the hell. In a pre industrial battle of spear axe sword mace and bow, what position and with what weapons and tactic, fighting style would you prefer?

Myself as an archer id want my longbow and axe/knife combo and some light leather armour

A couple of things:

1.  What do you folks mean by "light leather armor"?  Leather has been used as armor (and as a component of armor) for a long time, but its effectiveness varies widely, depending upon how it is processed and utilized.  Hardened leather (cuir-boulli) is rather effective.  Ordinary thick leather (say, an English Civil War buff coat) will turn a sword cut, but won't stop a thrust.

All things considered, I'd rather have something like a brigandine (metal plates rivetted inside a canvas jacket) or a "jack-of-plate" (similar to the brigandine, but with the plates stitched in place with thick cord, and with padding in the fabric as well).

2.  The most common sidearms for English longbowmen were the sword-and-buckler (which was a traditional fencing method of the yeomen anyway), and the maul (a large sledgehammer-like implement--not a military weapon, but extremely damaging to anything it hits nonetheless).

3.  Paul is correct in his analysis of the spear, but I would add other bladed polearms to the list--the Swiss/German halberd (helleparten), the English bill (especially the dreaded "Welsh hook"), the Italian bill (roncone), & the partisan (including many variants). 

4.  It is debatable as to whether or not the "pattern welded Viking sword" (many of which were actually Frankish ones made in the Rhineland anyway, FWIW) is the "finest" sword "ever made"--keep in mind that pattern-welded blades were largely replaced by homogenous steel ones which were made by those same Rhineland smiths.  Western sword authority Ewart Oakeshott goes into this stuff in some detail, in his classic Archeology of Weapons.

5.  The single-handed sword is typically regarded as a secondary weapon, unless it is used in conjunction with a shield--e.g., Iberian caetrati with falcata & caetra; Roman legionary with gladius & scutum; Spanish rodelero with espada & rodela; or Highland Scot with claymore (basket-hilt) & targe.

John, 

I believe that Captain Gars has already posted what I wanted to say.

In any case, as already indicated by him, the sword-and-buckler was in fact a very common combo amongst common soldiers.  As I originally stated, it was a traditional fencing form of the yeomen, who, while they owned land, were not noblemen.

As for sword types, both straight double-edged types and single-edged backsword types (including variants of the falchion) were used.

But, I must confess that I don't understand your rationale for claiming that the use of sword-and-buckler in battle is limited because "it needs to (sic) much space".

Peace,

L_D

I would have to go for a composite short bow combined with an iron mace and lamellar armour for protection.I would also need (what every Turk needs).....a Horse

After spending dozens of hours training pike fighting I'd go for a long spear (about 2,5-3 m long). With pike it's easy to take out short weapons, although polearms might be a problem. Chainmail would propably be the armour of my choice combined with light helmet.

 true

Maybe i just dont like the buckelr and sword idea, and am trying to discredit it, anyway