Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

No particular horse in this race, so I googled “evidence against Yasuke being a samurai”, as I felt that was the more open question to ask.

There are of course various results, too many to share here. But I picked this one, as I liked its conversational tone. And frankly, the Smithsonian feels like a reliable source.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/who-was-yasuke-japans-first-black-samurai-180981416/

So, first and foremost? Yasuke, the man, existed. He himself is not a myth.

I feel that’s a solid base to start exploring from, yes? Establish we’re not talking about a semi-mythical folk hero or a misinterpretation of historical reports.

It also establishes Yasuke was already a warrior, whether or not he freely accompanied Valignano, because as a Jesuit Missionary, Valignano was forbidden from carrying weaponry.

This makes it plausible he could have been a viable candidate to become a Samurai, as he already knew some form of martial art.

It then cites a 17th Century, contemporaneous account written by one of Nobunaga’s associates that Yasuke was noted for having great physical strength.

Then it establishes that in that century, a Samurai was defined as a warrior in service to a Lord or another Warrior. I take that to mean a professional warrior, and not say, a member of an ad-hoc militia raised to bolster numbers. Furthermore, he was part of a smaller circle of warriors that accompanied Nobunagas

The Gamer whilst itself not a historical source, does cite Japanese Historian Yu Hirayama as confirming Yasuke’s status as a Samurai. However, I’m struggling to find confirmation that Yu Hirayama isn’t some quack - I’ve been around the conspirasphere long enough to know to check these things. But equally, I can’t find anything to say he definitely is a quack.

But the consensus does seem to be Yasuke was in fact a Samurai. And so any claims to the contrary will need quite considerable citation to back them up. As in, more than “this person on Twitter said he’s not” citations. And unless the poster happens to be a suitably qualified historian of that period of Japanese history, their insistence should be treated very cautiously.

For me though? It seems he is though of as a Samurai - but there is room for doubt due to a general lack of historical documents explicitly confirming or denying.

But..it’s the historical definition and usage we need to look to, no?

Otherwise, those people who make Nike trainers can’t actually be shoe makers, because their surname isn’t Shoesmith.

And Dexter Fletcher can’t be a low rent actor/tv presenter and a poor replacement for Dominik ‘is carbon based so maybe this one works” Diamond, because his surname tells us his trade should be fletching arrows.

Henry Cooper wasn’t a boxer, because Coopers make barrels.

Words, meanings and definitions change, expand and contract all the time dude. That’s the fluid and mutable nature of a living language,

Herzlos wrote:
The wikipedia page I'm sure everyone has already read seems to have 4 credible citations about him being given the title of Samurai:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yasuke


It also mentions that the position of sword bearer was actually a prestigious one, and had the unusual honor of occasionally sharing meals with Nobunaga.

I haven't dredged through the citations because they seem to be reputable sources.

As a professional impartial and independent dispute resolver*?

The ball and onus of evidence is in the naysayer’s court.

And don’t you forget your citations, and link to sources.

*No, really. Like for real for real.

Except all other sources show Yasuke was a Samurai, by the cultural definition of that specific period.

So far all you’ve presented to counter is semantics (and possibly incorrect semantics at that), and I’m sorry to say, personal incredulity.

So by “you can’t find it on Google”, you mean “nobody else seems to agree with me, but I’m definitely correct, and it is in fact absolutely every other source you might be able to find that’s wrong. All of them”.

And so we have better context, when you say you’re a scholar of etymology, is that in a professional, qualified capacity, or just something of interest to you? And to be open, nowt wrong with having a interest in it, because it’s something of a passing interest for me.

Hmm. Word Salad, and what feels like an attempt to avoid answering the question.

Do you, or do you not, have a relevant qualification in ancient Japanese language? It’s a yes or no question.

Whilst no qualification doesn’t mean no knowledge, it must necessarily inform us over which source (you, or seemingly everyone else in academia) is the more reliable. And when it comes to flying in the face of the academic consensus, “trust me bro, syncretic” just isn’t gonna cut the mustard.

Was Chivalry not more about “we don’t kill fellow nobility, we ransom them back”?

At least until Crecy and Agincourt. And even then, the whole finishing off Knights stuck in the mud wasn’t done by the English Nobility, but the men at arms and archers and that?

Is the game out yet?

If not, do we know much about the plot?

If not, is it not possible they’ve plumped for Yasuke precisely because like the majority of potential players, he was an outsider to the culture of Japan at the time?

Modern Japanese culture, sure.

But historical Japanese culture?

We’ve already covered in the early posts in this thread that it’s far from monolithic, with different definitions for titles and stations, and expectations thereof, across different historical periods.

Also? How many of those who believe they’re familiar with Japanese Culture derive said knowledge solely from Anime? No, not Weebs. One can be a Japanophile through enjoying Anime and still not be a Weeb.