Siege weapons used during Sengoku?

[Emrick09]

Does anyone know which siege weapons were used back then to attack castles?

Canons obviously, but anything else (magnonels?)

Thanks!

[lordameth]

I'm not sure that even cannon were used all that much. Other people here are much more Sengoku / military experts than I am, but my impression is that Sengoku-era sieges consisted primarily of surrounding a fortification and starving them out by cutting off their supply routes - and that they did not involve bombarding the walls.

Cannon were used, I believe, however, in a limited capacity in naval battles, and also by the defenders of the Ishiyama Honganji (and possibly other cases).
_________________
My blog on Japanese art & history: http://chaari.wordpress.com

紫水晶殿 - The Amethyst Lord

[Tatsunoshi]

The only castle siege in which cannon were a real factor was the Winter Battle of Osaka in 1614 (and later used to destroy the castle after the Summer Battle of 1615). Other than that, cannon really weren't much of a factor. Catapults and other siege engines really weren't used either, although there are some rare accounts where one might pop up.

Usually sieging a castle involved (as Meth indicated) starving the defenders out, flooding them out, setting the castle on fire, negotiation, occasionally using miners and protective carts to dig tunnels under the castle walls, and only rarely direct assault by attempting to scale the walls or fill moats with debris in order to create a makeshift 'ladder'.

[owari no utsuke]

I wrote a blog post on starvation sieges awhile back. Hopefully, it will help you.

http://otsuke.blogspot.com/2011/09/starvation-sieges.html

Also the long battle scene in Akira Kurosawa's Ran is a nice Sengoku siege as well.
_________________
You'll Never Walk Alone!

http://www.otsuke.blogspot.com

[Emrick09]

What do you make of this?

When siege weapons were used in Japan, they were most often trebuchets or catapults in the Chinese style, and they were used as anti-personnel weapons.

Turnbull, Stephen (2003). Japanese Castles 1540-1640. Oxford: Osprey Publishing.

[Emrick09]

Catapult bombardment

As noted earlier, bombardment from gunpowder weapons was never a major consideration in defensive planning for a Japanese castle until the very end of the period under discussion. Its primitive cousin, bombardment by crossbows and catapults, has a much longer history, but accounts of their use in Japan are sparse. Both forms of missile weapons seem to have been used during sieges, primarily as anti-personnel weapons and secondarily as incendiary deliverers, with wall-breaking only a minor consideration. Crossbows passed out of use late in the 12th century. The catapults used were Chinese-style traction trebuchets, and in fact the best account of their use, which dates horn 1468, describes them throwing soft-cased exploding bombs not against a yamashiro's castle walls but against the samurai defending the rudimentary palisades set up during the Onin War. Traction trebuchets appear in a clearly defensive role for a castle when the Mori family attacked Takiyama castle and were met by smooth river stones loosed from catapults. As late as 1614 traction trebuchets armed with soft-cased bombs were to be found on the walls of Osaka castle. 39

Japanese Castles 1540-1640, PUBLISHING OSPREY Fortress

[YellowRegiment]

Brother,

Check this website http://www.hlj.com/product/FTB47992
this might help at least a colorful illustration of Siege Weapons.

[Lugbar]

The siege warfare has been improved a lot by Hashiba Hideyoshi and his ever lasting imagination.

* The flooding technique was used at Takamatsu first in 1582, and was used several times after.
* The starvation technique was also improved by Hideyoshi by making sure that the isolation of the castle is total, nobody could be interested to run for supplying it and also making sure the besieging army can stay in field for long periods. This was rare before Miki castle. Many examples show fortresses resiting for years.
* So the two preferred way to take a castle were treason and assault:
- treason was the less costly and we see many exemples of this is Sengoku, Fushimi castle in 1600, Inuyama in 1583, etc. Negotiated surrender is also a form of treason as the daimyo that surrendered usually changed sides.
- assault. Main problem with assault is that it is costly as the enemy fires at you without you being able to retaliate. So first an assault is launched by overwhelming numbers, then there is a great honor (and reward) to be first on the enemy walls, at last you will try to approach closest to the enemy as possible and destroy enemy fortification.

With what weapons ?
- first bamboo or wooden fences to protect you while approaching the castles
- towers used as platforms to fire inside enemy castle
- fascines, earth/wood to fill in the moats
- ladders
- fire: let's not forget that a lot of the construction are in wood and the big castles like Osaka are only build from the end of Sengoku
- firearams and guns are only appearing at the very last part of Sengoku.
- Mining techniques were also used in rare cases

[Tornadoes28]

Castles during sengoku were not the large stone castles of later years, they were generally smaller wood fortifications so large siege cannon were not necessarily needed.
_________________
http://toshogu.blogspot.com

http://twitter.com/Toshogu

Google+

[Lugbar]

Have a look at this video, not really of my liking, but shows some of the features of this type of warfare.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dZCTFkoAf_w

[kitsuno]

WTF is that? "Sengoku Family 1549"?
_________________
Shop Amazon.com, support the Samurai Archives: http://amzn.to/wnDX2j

Subcribe to Blog FeedS-A Podcast homepage

[ltdomer98]

[kitsuno]

[ltdomer98]

[Tornadoes28]

Oh I think I saw one of those back in time movies on a flight to Japan. Very entertaining.
_________________
http://toshogu.blogspot.com

http://twitter.com/Toshogu

Google+

[wiranobu]

[Tatsunoshi]

"Ballad: Namonaki Koi No Uta" is indeed based on the Crayon Shin-chan movie from 2002, "Arashi Wo Yobu Appare! Sengoku Daikassen". They just renamed the characters (the Shin-chan character is named Shinichi or something), although the time-travel backstory is still there.

Other than a very small action (with no fighting) during the Otate no Ran where Uesugi Kagekatsu secured the castle against Uesugi Kagetora, no battle of Kasuga(yama).

[ltdomer98]

[kitsuno]

It must be "based" extremely loosely on Crayon Shinchan - I didn't see him drop his pants and stick out his butt or pick his nose or anything.
_________________
Shop Amazon.com, support the Samurai Archives: http://amzn.to/wnDX2j

Subcribe to Blog FeedS-A Podcast homepage

[Bethetsu]

What was the man wearing the big red horo? I have never seen one except for the tsukaiban in the heraldry threads.

[ltdomer98]

[Lugbar]

[JLBadgley]

[evalerio]

The documentary series 'Ancient Discoveries' put the Horo to the test as an arrow catcher.

A horo without framework was attached to a stationary sashimono pole. A fan was used to make the horo billow and bob in the wind. An archer standing maybe ten feet away shot at the horo.

Immediately the archer noted that the horo caused a distraction, making the horo-wearer a more difficult target with the bobbing horo spoiling the aim. A mon painted on the center of the horo would increase the distraction.

75% of the arrow shot at the bobbing horo did NOT reach the wearer. Arrows shot from ten feet away were:
1.) Knocked out of the air. Arrows were slapped out of the way by the bobbing motion of the horo.
2.) Bounced back. The horo acting like a trampoline or air bag. Arrows bounced upon hitting the horo which slightly deflated on impact, then expanded to throw off the arrow.
3.) Like caught in a net. Arrows that did penetrate the horo fabric did not often reach the wearer as the weight of the arrow would make the horo collapse in on the arrow.

Only a small number of the arrows reached the wearer, hitting the horo at the right angle to penetrate all the way through to the wearer's back. Taking into account that the wearer would have been armoured, it was estimated that the horo is an effective arrow-catcher!

To really prove the effectiveness of the horo, a 'volunteer' mounted on a horse wore the horo galloping away from a pursuing mounted archer. The pursuing mounted archer shot at the horo-wearer from different angles from almost point-blank range. The arrowheads were 'blunted' to prevent injury to the horse.

The results were almost identical to the stationary horo. The horo-wearer felt only a small number of the arrows hit his back, the horo succesfully deflecting more of the arrows.

Horo that were stiffened with framework would be less effective as 'arrow-catchers' and functioned more as dramatic heraldry. Some horo did not even have fabric, with just the framework of bizarre materials like feathers and deer antlers. These would not have any protective qualities and served only to make the wearer stand out on the battlefield.

[wiranobu]