Why Ancient Japanese Soldiers NEVER Used Shields

Why Ancient Japanese Soldiers Didn't Use Shield

You’re in the middle of a blood-soaked ancient Japanese soldier battlefield a few hundred years ago, watching your fellow warriors get cut down all around you by ruthless samurai, a version of ancient Japanese soldiers. While you’re wondering if there’s any hope of escape, a particularly infamous ancient Japanese soldier spots you and decides you’ll be an easy kill. He runs towards you, unsheathing his katana and preparing to strike a lethal blow.

The last thought that goes through your head while you still have a head might be something like: “Why am I not carrying a shield right now!?” The battlefields of historic Japan played host to many arms and armor that have become famous across the entire globe. Who doesn’t immediately think of the katana sword and iron mask of the o-yoroi armor when asked to picture a powerful samurai warrior? The naginata polearm is also a well-known ancient Japanese soldier's weapon, seen as an equivalent to the European glaive - neither of which has anything to do with Krull. In this article, we will discuss why ancient Japanese soldiers never used shields; stay with us.

Sorry, fantasy fans. Japan was also known for the heavy use of bows and arrows, which often decided the winner of a battle long before and even after guns began to serve a similar function in the Sengoku Period. But of all the many implements of war that the ancient Japanese soldiers used in their most famous battles, there doesn’t appear to be any clear equivalent to the shields that were used in Europe and other parts of the world.

At least not one that is nearly as famous as any on the previous list of iconic weapons. But this is a common oversight, born out of a misunderstanding of Japan's full military development scope. While the popular image of samurai (ancient Japanese soldier) warfare paints a vivid picture, that cultural touchstone is only a fraction of the truth. It’s a misconception largely based on the legendary reputation of the samurai as peerless swordsmen who fought with lightning speed with both of their hands firmly on their blades.

But other warriors fought on ancient Japanese soldiers' battlefields throughout the ages, and among those were a select few in need of portable defenses.

The History of Shields

So today, we’re going to explore the history of shields in ancient Japanese soldiers' warfare. We’re going to find out definitively when the armies of Japan used shields, what kind of shields or similar armor are unique to Japan, and why, ultimately, the shield fell out of prominence during the samurai (the ancient Japanese soldier) era and beyond.

So put away your bows, spears, and swords because it’s time for the unsung shield heroes of Japan to rise up! The best place to start is by defining the utility of the shield and how it’s intended to be used. A standard hand-held shield is meant to provide an active defense against the edged or piercing weapons of the enemy. It’s typically made of a sturdy and durable material so that it can withstand multiple solid hits. Many cultures - Japan included - intuitively understood the benefits of such a defensive item in battle.

This is why conventional hand-held shields or tedate saw widespread use in Japan from the third to the eighth century. While the time of the tedate was comparatively short-lived in Japan’s history, for a time, these wood or hide blocks of defense were paired with early ancient Japanese soldiers' swords and axes. Like the other cultures that developed shields, the tedate was born out of a general principle of “if you don’t want to get hit, put something else in the way.”

Similarly, European knights would use their heavy shields alongside swords to block and counterattack as needed in single or battlefield combat. Knights also would sometimes bring hand-held shields on horseback when jousting and use them as a means to parry the one-handed lances of their opponents. From these examples, we can see how the shield prolongs combat by negating the potentially fatal blows of the enemy. Using a shield this way is as simple as it gets, but when incorporated into more sophisticated maneuvers, shields can allow an entire army to advance while avoiding the worst of combat.

This table summarizes the reasons why ancient Japanese soldiers did not use shields;

The Roman testudo

The Roman testudo formation was used to create an impenetrable barrier of shields, protecting the lighter troops and supply animals from arrows and slings, as well as any melee weapon that a shield could turn aside. While testudo might sound passingly similar to a Japanese word, it’s Latin for tortoise - which is fitting for the formation’s dome-like structure, which resembles the shell of a tortoise. It also was far from an unbeatable defense in practice.

The testudo relied on every soldier who made up the formation moving at the pace of a tortoise to keep the multitude of shields in position. Additionally, it was extremely noticeable to any competent enemy on a battlefield - which, coupled with the lack of mobility, meant that an opposing force with significant numbers could easily surround the testudo and keep the Romans locked in place.

By the 12 century in Japan, the samurai era had begun, and with it came the prioritization of fast-moving formations and overall swiftness in battle. Unlike the Roman legionnaires, the infantry of ancient Japanese soldiers was made up of ashigaru spear fighters who benefited from having both hands occupied by their long-reach naginatas.

The spear technique required to use these weapons would have been at odds with a heavy hand-held shield, much less staying in place with several other soldiers to hunker down. The prevalence of mounted archery among the elite samurai troops also played a role in discouraging the use of heavy shields, since the bow and arrow could not be used as effectively by an archer who was holding a shield, and the swiftness of a well-trained warhorse was often a far better defense than any kind of protective armor.

If the dominant strategy in any given period becomes a rapid assault from a distance on highly mobile steeds, the antithesis - slow-moving troops with intentionally limited attack options - quickly becomes unviable. But to say it was just a mere trade-off between speed in defense would be reducing the nuances of practical warfare down to a set of roleplaying game stats. While it is true that most ashigaru kept both hands on their naginata, that wasn’t to say that their armor was their only defense.

The conical jingasa hat worn by countless ashigaru and samurai alike was more than just for show.

Jingasa Hat

It might be considered an example of a Japanese shield hidden in plain sight. Since jingasa were the hats of foot soldiers, most were made of leather or multiple layers of paper. But in larger and more well-funded armies, jingasa were made from iron and sported the distinctive conical shape that would drive weapons away from the point at the top. This meant that the jingasa was effectively designed to divert blows meant for the center of the head.

Though the extent to which the jingasa was able to save the life of its wearer would vary - like all shields and armor - its primary purpose of providing extra protection was matched in practicality by the very fact that it was worn upon an ashigaru’s head. In theory, the ashigaru would have access to the full protection of a shield without having to sacrifice control over either hand that would be occupied by the spear. Of course, there are downsides to placing the soldier's only means of defense right against his skull, and the primary one is how unwieldy it would be to maneuver to the jingasa in a manner that would accurately deflect multiple incoming blows.

Additionally, two-handed bludgeoning weapons like the infamous armor-crushing kanabo - a style of great club often depicted in the hands of mythological japanese oni demons - would deliver major concussive damage to the head of the ashigaru under the jingasa even if the conical hat survived. Even the kabuto helmet, a far more effective form of defensive headgear, could buckle under the weighty blow of a kanabo club, and because the jingasa was not secured to the same extent, it was never a good idea to lean into an opponent's strike if dodging was an option. However, the removal aspect did grant the jingasa one advantage that the kabuto helmet did not have.

If an ashigaru was disarmed of his primary polearm weapon, the jingasa could be close at hand to serve as a secondary weapon. When held in hand by the straps that would otherwise tether it to the hand, the jingasa can deflect incoming blows and even use its pointed shape as a striking surface to hit the enemy in the face or body. In this position, the jingasa becomes similar to the medieval European buckler - a compact shield that was used alongside light blades for sword fighting.

There is at least one Japanese swordsmanship school that has techniques for using a jingasa this way: the yagyu shingan ryu - a philosophy of total warfare that encompassed everything from the unarmed grappling moves of jiu-jitsu to the proper form for drawing a katana in iaijustu.

It made sense that a comprehensive fighting art would develop some methods for employing a common piece of battle gear like a jingasa into fighting - but in all likelihood, it was no warrior’s first plan when stepping onto the battlefield. Especially when mounted archery was still dominating the proverbial metagame of warfare well into the 14th century, there was a need for a more consistent way of blocking arrows and one that wouldn’t compromise the soldiers' ability to move throughout the battlefield and launch counterprojectiles with ease. Enter the tate - a fortified combat tool with a name that translates from Japanese to “shield.”

Tate

Despite its name, tate had little in common with hand-held shields besides sharing the purpose of deflecting attacks. Tate were stationary riveted iron shields that were built to be as tall as a person and would stand in place to provide cover from arrows for the soldiers behind them. They were comparable to the oblong pavise shields introduced to Europe in the mid-14th century. One might assume that since tate would reduce the effective mobility of soldiers, due to their intended standing cover design, but the fact that tate stood freely actually let soldiers use both hands to fire their bows from behind the cover.

Compared to the previously discussed testudo formation, tate didn’t necessarily reduce the offensive capabilities of the infantry while their protective function was in effect. The tate simply added to the archer’s safety without hindering them, and in the same measure, the bow more than made up for having to stay in one place.

If the ancient Japanese soldiers wanted to, the tate could even provide mobile cover similar to the testudo formation under the right circumstances. Because the iron rivets were strong enough to stop arrows and posed no risk to the body of the soldiers, retreating ashigaru would even mount tate shields on their backs while retreating to ensure that they’d escape as the arrows of their pursuers rained down.

When not in use, tate could be folded into a smaller form for easy transportation and could also be hung from the sides of strongholds to provide additional shielding for the fortified buildings. Of course, the utility of the tate was still something that was reserved for foot soldiers, not the elite samurai class. With few exceptions, tate shields and horseback did not mix as strategic concepts. There were some instances of Japanese cavalry using naginatas while riding, and these units occasionally brought shields with them like the European jousting knights, but this was rare until the 14th century, and in most cases - archery was the preferred method of mounted fighting.

Appropriately enough, the implementation of the pavise across late medieval to Renaissance Europe demonstrates a parallel trend towards lessened shield use among the higher class knights. While the purpose of this paper is to answer the question of why the ancient Japanese soldiers didn’t use shields in their armies, it’s worth pondering why Europe saw an apparent decline in hand-held shields during the same rough period. To reiterate, shields such as the pavise and tate never truly vanished from the battlefield on either landmass, but the most notable and celebrated members of the warrior castes of both Europe and Japan became significantly less likely to use them.

The o-yoroi

As one might expect, advances in the design of armor played a major role in the pivot away from shields. European full plate armor and the complete o-yoroi armor weren’t necessarily outperforming shields in durability, but they both certainly made shields less of a requirement. Being against the body automatically made armor more limited in what it could protect just like Japan had an effective anti-armor weapon in the kanabo: Europe had war hammers and specialized polearms such as the bec de corbin or “crow’s beak.”

A shield would be a better option against such weapons, which is why the infantry still used them to avoid punishing hits. But when worn by a mounted combatant, a set of complete armor built using the technology of the 14th century provided scarcely a few weak points that a foot soldier could capitalize on. In Europe specifically, the crossbow had become one of the only threats that armor may not protect against, and even then, the strength of contemporary armor was such that a bolt might not penetrate.

If you like to know more about the ancient Japanese soldiers and why they did not use shields, check out this video;

Of course, Japan didn’t have crossbows at that time, which meant that even though the o-yoroi wasn’t exactly as sturdy as the European full-plate, it could still handle arrows from a distance. Apart from raw material and the completeness of coverage, the aesthetic anatomy of the armor changed to reflect the changing times. Italian armors of the 15th century began to build more heavily onto the left-hand side of the suit, and this practice was carried over into British, Spanish, and French designs as well.

The reason for this was expressly to compromise in some way for the lack of a shield in the off-hand, which was generally the left. Since the dominant hand would be wielding a weapon or otherwise more capable of protecting itself, shoring up the defenses in the opposite arm was a tacit acknowledgment that a shield was no longer expected to be there.

In short, the myth of the ancient Japanese soldier (samurai) eschewing shields in a way that was vastly different from European knights at the same time is just that - a myth. By the point in history that most people focused on the lack of Japanese shields, the same thing was taking place among the upper echelons of the nobility on European battlefields.

Since most samurai were nobles themselves, the historical comparison is almost one-to-one. Hand-held shields were already becoming a thing of the past, and since the samurai era of Japan is among the most documented by Western historians and doubly so the most focused on by pop culture - the aesthetic of that period became projected onto Japan as a whole and all but erased its history of shield use. Of course, this leads us back to those stalwart counterparts - the tate and the pavise - which both continued to see combat beyond the introduction of early firearms in their respective lands.

No hand-held shield could ever hope to be as defensive against guns as the stationary tower variants, due to both density and size differences. The design of guns as ranged weapons that required reloading and maintenance also meant that they could be seamlessly integrated as replacements for bows and crossbows for infantry without removing the standing shield from the equation. Rather than spelling the end of such shields, the advent of firearms gave them a new lease on usefulness. Most surprisingly, these kinds of shields were most effective in the hands of the very infantry gunmen who were reshaping the battlefield around their weapons.

Ashigaru truly came into their own through the use of firearms, and their on-foot tactics continued to develop side-by-side but wholly separate from more refined samurai fighting arts of mounted combat and swordsmanship. During the Sengoku era, the amount of Portuguese arquebus guns flooding into Japan was astronomically more than what was available in many parts of Europe thanks to tactically minded lords like Oda Nobunaga, who saw the potential in these foreign arms. The 16th century saw Japan become almost a testing ground for the arquebus.

While many samurai would come to wield their power, it was the ashigaru who proved the practicality of using these guns in droves. And just as the ashigaru evolved through adopting the arquebus, new strategies augmented the viability of the tate as total cover. Since on its own, a tate is unlikely to remain intact after direct fire from an arquebus, the ashigaru learned to suspend rolled bundles of straw in front of the shields, not to stop the bullets, but to force them to meet resistance and slow down.

A row of these bamboo straw bundles or taketaba would be positioned ahead of a row of tate, crafting a cheap and effective battlement that could be propped up wherever a battle was going to take place.

Just as Europe had moved towards siege warfare, the ability to set up fortifications anywhere was very attractive to the rank-and-file members of the samurai armies. For all the aforementioned reasons - the demands of mounted combat, weapon choice, and overall tendencies towards more effective armor - the battlefield experience of most samurai remained distant from the struggles of the ashigaru. That isn’t to say, however, that their lack of hand-held was, even at the height of samurai warfare, unaccounted for in a detrimental way.

Are you surprised by the reasons why the ancient Japanese soldiers never used shields? stay tuned.

In much the same way that historians can tell when shields started to become less common among knights by the shape of their armor, we can deduce that wearers of the o-yoroi armor have a form of built-in protection that supersedes the shield and more or less replaces it. Why carry an unwieldy shield or strap one to your head when the shoulders of your armor could serve as two large shields in their own right? The massive lamellar pauldrons or o-sode on the o-yoroi were both sturdy and flexible, protecting the wearer from arrows and melee weapons while also still allowing the samurai enough freedom of movement to fire a bow.

During a mounted charge, the pauldrons would protect the non-dominant side of the attacker, allowing them to lean their shoulder towards their adversary to avoid incoming damage. This worked in conjunction with the kabuto or jingasa and was fastened to the armor rather than built-in, slightly reducing the weight and displacing whatever trauma the o-sode receives away from the wearer. The o-sode was one of many aspects of the o-yoroi that were both elegant and catered towards specific purposes.

Some parts of the suit were designed to make archery more effective, like the yugake gloves, which were made of smooth animal hide. Others were defensive modifications like the o-sode that the average ancient Japanese soldier's foot couldn’t dream of having. The kote or armored sleeves were another such addition, which could protect a samurai from most slashing attacks in unmounted combat. Much like the 16th-century knights, a samurai lord (ancient Japanese soldier) in a yoroi suit was pretty much in a different class than foot soldiers and wouldn’t have as much need for a shield when fighting them.

The powerful fire of an arquebus was the biggest threat a samurai could face frequently, and the introduction of tamashi guzoku, or bullet-tested armor, meant that armor would remain a part of samurai battles up until the Tokugawa Shogunate. This is all to say that in both Europe and Japan, the shield became a poor man’s suit of armor, and as warfare itself continued to increase in deadliness and speed, the benefits of negating damage were outweighed by the benefits of killing the opponent before being killed.

The Summary

So why didn’t the ancient Japanese soldiers use shields? Well, they did, to a slightly lesser extent than Europe, and then relied on them even less around the same time Europe began to move past them. It comes down to an acknowledgment that changing paradigms in combat means that not all tools are effective forever. There is another question that comes to mind when taking this all into account: where did this common belief that the ancient Japanese soldiers didn’t use shields come from? While it might be tempting to blame this gap in knowledge on the cultural austerity of Western academia, this would be highly reductionist.

Especially because it seems that most scholars agree with the idea that the ancient Japanese soldiers did use shields outside of the samurai caste, it would seem instead that this myth is born out of the human tendency to personify the past as individuals. Imagine that battles are won by the singularly honorable samurai (the ancient Japanese soldier), the brave knight, or the cunning general.

When these amalgamated figures become the focus of the layman’s fascination with bygone eras, the countless less fortunate foot soldiers who truly won the battles are overlooked. And if we know one thing about the peasants who pressed into service for feudal lords and were forced to race into the certain doom of territory struggles… it’s that any one of them could find a use for a shield.

In this article about the question of why the ancient Japanese soldiers never used shields, we addressed the history and usage of below warfare among the ancient Japanese soldiers;

• Hand-held shields
• The Roman testudo
• Jingasa Hat
• Japanese Tate
• The kabuto helmet

If you like to know more about the ancient Japanese soldiers, you can check Here. If you were an ancient Japanese soldier, which one would you prefer? Using shields or not? Tell us in the comments.