>>4493789>As written by Froissart, an exiled French knight fighting with the English, Sir Denis Morbeke of Artois approached the king, requesting the King's surrender. The King is said to have replied, "To whom shall I yield me? Where is my cousin the Prince of Wales? If I might see him, I would speak with him". Denis replied; "Sir, he is not here; but yield you to me and I shall bring you to him". The king handed him his right gauntlet, saying; "I yield me to you".>what has been the most common form of surrender during or to avoid combat
For most of history it's just dropping the weapon and holding up your hands. Holding up a rifle butt or flag is probably a safety mechanism that came about with the advent of guns and their near instantaneous killing power even at range.>What was their fate?>Would they be spared on the spot or just offed by their frustrated enemy?
Almost all the time you would be spared and taken captive. Not sparing someone turns them into a caged animal that will fight for their life, and could end yours. Not sparing people who have surrendered gives you a bad reputation and will make your foes not spare you. Captives also provided a source of income for most of history in the form of ransoms.
Two examples I can think of involving the execution of captives would both be done by English kings. Richard the Lionheart executed around 3,000 captives after waiting a month for Saladin to pay the ransoms and exchange prisoners, and Henry V who ordered the execution of the prisoners after Agincourt. In both cases the prisoners were a liability to their captors. Their sheer size could allow an overthrow and attack and would slow down the army on the march.>What was their fate?
Nobles would be treated fairly well. Lower class people less so. If food was scarce they'd go hungry. They'd be cold, dirty, and wet until they were released. Prisoners might also be sent off to do hard labor until the end of war or sold into slavery. It's better than death.