english
Ex Member
|
Maybe not centuries of blind loyalty - but firmly engrained tradition must surely be part of it. Japanese warfare, from what I know about ninjutsu and Japanese castles, was reasonably siege-based - there are numerous accounts of sieges, at least in the Sengoku Jidai period. Perhaps it is limited to this era, but I wouldn't be so sure. But of course, by the 17th century, guns had been introduced to Japan, making the sling less useful. I would say, however, that by the time of major sieges in Europe, the sling was rather out of fashion. The 13th, 14th and 15th centuries saw most siege action in Europe, and the crossbow and longbow were firmly established, weapons which are excellent for siege warfare. The idea about "personal maneuverability" is totally correct - European warfare was mostly about massed formations, be it of slingers, archers, spearmen, etc. And I would agree with the idea that Japanese warriors of all ranks would have worn more armour than their western counterparts. This is probably because effective armour in the Japanese style is cheaper than effective armour in the European style. A brigandine in 15th century Europe would have cost more than a full suit of lacquered wooden, leather or other armour in Japan in the same century; and a brigandine would be less effective. I think armour is the deciding factor in the Japanese non-adoption of the sling.
|