Trebuchet were used primarily to hammer the walls of the castle to break them down. Not really possible to aim at a person; the soldiers clambering over the broken walls will do that.
This is the only man known to have died in a medieval siege of a medium-sized boulder falling on him.
Trebuchets were used for a variety of purposes in siege warfare, from (uniquely) breaching walls with large boulders to (less uniquely) setting things on fire to (probably) suppressing massed formations of archers with smaller shot. But smaller shot would not leave a characteristic trebuchet injury, it would leave a generic blunt-force trauma injury.
So, is this because Trebuchet are not particularly lethal, or because they were not used much?
Trebuchet were used primarily to hammer the walls of the castle to break them down. Not really possible to aim at a person; the soldiers clambering over the broken walls will do that.
This is the only man known to have died in a medieval siege of a medium-sized boulder falling on him.
Trebuchets were used for a variety of purposes in siege warfare, from (uniquely) breaching walls with large boulders to (less uniquely) setting things on fire to (probably) suppressing massed formations of archers with smaller shot. But smaller shot would not leave a characteristic trebuchet injury, it would leave a generic blunt-force trauma injury.
People didn't really bother recording cause of death for every casualty on medieval battlefields
the key word is "known"
They typically weren't trying to hit people with them.
Trebuchets crushed their victims so hard that they were erased from history.