Cannon

[Hosakawa Tito]

I've just read about half way through "Taiko"
and found a reference to the use of cannon in one of the battles.I was wondering when the use of cannon became more widespread?Was it in the late Senguko period or after?In europe in the 16th and 17th centuries the developement of the cannon led to the eventual downfall of the castle as the impregnable defense.Was this also true in Japan or did it happen much later?
Tito

[Anssi Hakkinen]

Well, basically, never. Cannon were used in some specific (and usually rather insignificant) incidents during the late Sengoku period, but pretty much all European-imported guns eventually vanished from active service as the Tokugawa "age of peace" settled in (and the shôgunate banned their use). The next wars worthy of any note occurred in the mid-1800s during the Meiji Restoration, during which the national army used comparatively modern tactics (including cannon, I think) against the "conservativist" samurai. But I think that counts as "much later".

In any case, castles continued to be a very viable defence right up till the very end of the "Age of War", as the Siege of Ôsaka (1614-1615) clearly showed. There were simply not enough cannon, or experience at siegecraft, to ever consider simply battering down the walls of a castle. Even though the castles were very different, the tactics used against them didn't really differ significantly from those used against the wooden palisade "castles" of the Nambôkuchô period (14th century).

------------------
"2. Yu: bravery tinged with heroism."

[This message has been edited by Anssi Hakkinen (edited 04-23-2001).]

[FwSeal]

The one big advantage of cannon when it came to sengoku siegecraft was the effect it could have on morale. The best known case was the Osaka Winter Campaign (1614), where Ieyasu, who had amassed quite a large number of guns, blasted the castle relentlessly. This is supposed to have prompted Toyotomi Hideyori into talking peace (with some additional prompting from his mother, who was herself much agitated by the bombardment). Osaka had had cannon of its own, but these were outranged and out-positioned by the Tokugawa batteries.
But, as Anssi says, for the most part, cannon had a status somewhere between novelty and limited utility for most of the sengoku period, with occasional exceptions, especially in the western provinces. In addition, the records are sometimes vague on what constituted a 'cannon' and at times the word seems to have been applied to large 'wall rifles' (there's a better term, but it isn't coming to me at the moment...). One of the factors behind the relative scarcity of cannon was the difficulty the Japanese experienced in making their own. While they took to building arquebuses like pros, the casting of cannon barrels was another matter.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Did they not also trade for cannon made by the Chinese?I just find it very intriguing that a newer and better way of killing and terrorizing your enemy wasn't more fully embraced by whoever the ruling shogun was at that time.I guess being an isolated island nation who frowned on out side contact would explain it.A cultural isolationism steeped in tradition that saw no need for the weapons of the "barbarians".Thanks for your input guys.
Tito