Was Yasuke a samurai?

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.

**Haighus**

To avoid further derailing in a different thread. Relevant posts:

Leopold Helveine wrote:
insaniak wrote:
Just Tony wrote:

Yasuke was never a samurai, though. He was a retainer, but was thought of by Nobunaga as something of a "pet".

He was a retainer with the rank of samurai, according to historians.

But that's also not the topic of the thread...

ackshually that was a confirmed edit, he never held a samurai title.

Anyway, whilst it is rarely possible to be definitive about a soldier fighting in a major war almost 500 years ago, from what I can see the evidence points heavily to yes.

From a reddit post (with sources, although I don't think the links have copied across):

u/ParallelPain avatar
ParallelPain
•
5mo ago
•
Edited 4mo ago
•
Since the last time I posted about this, I went to track down the entry of Yasuke in the Maeda Clan version of the Shinchōkōki. Kaneko Hiraku (professor at the Historiographical Institute of the University of Tokyo, the most prestigious historical research institution in Japan) includes in his book below, paired with the translation in Thomas Lockley's book (which is correct):

然に彼黒坊被成御扶持、名をハ号弥助と、さや巻之のし付幷私宅等迄被仰付、依時御道具なともたさせられ候、
This black man called Yasuke was given a stipend, a private residence, etc., and was given a short sword with a decorative sheath. He is sometimes seen in the role of weapon bearer.

Ever since previously people have been arguing with me that "stipend" could be given to anyone, not just samurai, without considering the word’s meaning in Japanese. I have already mentioned how the word was used in Japanese history. Let’s look then specifically at how Ōta Gyūichi, the author of the chronicles, used it. Here are all the other entries that mention the word "stipend" (specifically 扶持), each with link to the exact page of the Shinchōkōki. I will also quote the translation by J. P. Lamers, so this time the translation is academically published.

Shiba Yoshikane in 1553 – son of the previous and soon to be the next de jure lord of Owari, before Nobunaga ran him out of town.

若武衛様は川狩より直にゆかたひらのあたてにて信長を御憑み候て那古野へ御出すなはち貳百人扶持被仰付天王坊に置申され候
Lord Buei the Younger fled directly from his fishing spot on the river to Nagoya, dressed only in a bathrobe, to call on Nobunaga’s help. Accordingly, Nobunaga assigned him a stipend sufficient to maintain a retinue of two hundred men and installed him in the Tennōbō temple.

2. Saitō Dōsan. Recent research suggest this story is inaccurate, but I’m just demonstrating how Ōta Gyūichi uses the word.

斎藤山城道三は元來山城國西岡の松波と云者也一年下國候て美濃國長井藤左衛門を憑み扶持を請余力をも付られ候
The original family name of Saitō Yamashiro Dōsan was Matsunami. He was a native of the Western Hills of Yamashiro Province. One year, he left the Kyoto area for the provinces and called on the help of Nagai Tōzaemon of Mino, who granted him a stipend and assigned auxiliaries to him.

3. Nobunaga remonstrating Ashikaga Yoshiaki in 1573 for not giving out stipend properly.

一諸侯の衆方々御届申忠節無踈略輩には似相の御恩賞不被宛行今々の指者にもあらさるには被加御扶持候さ樣に候ては忠不忠も不入に罷成候諸人のおもはく不可然事
Item [3] You have failed to make appropriate awards to a number of lords who have attended you faithfully and have never been remiss in their loyal service to you. Instead, you have awarded stipends to newcomers with nothing much to their credit. That being so, the distinction between loyal and disloyal becomes irrelevant. In people’s opinion, this is improper.
...
一無恙致奉公何の科も御座候はね共不被加御扶助京都の堪忍不屆者共信長にたより歎申候定て私言上候はゝ何そ御憐も可在之かと存候ての事候間且は不便に存知且は公儀御爲と存候て御扶持の義申上候ヘ共一人も無御許容候餘文緊なる御諚共候間其身に對しても無面目存候勸(觀歟)世與左衛門古田可兵衛上野紀伊守類の事
Item [7] Men who have given you steadfast and blameless service but have not been awarded a stipend by you find themselves in dire need in Kyoto. They turned to Nobunaga with a heavy heart. If I were to say a few words in their behalf, they assumed, then surely you would take pity on them. On the one hand, I felt sorry for them; on the other, I thought it would be in the interest of the public authority (kōgi no ontame; sc., to your benefit). So I put the matter of their stipends before you, but you did not assent in even one case. Your hard-heartedness, excessive as it is, puts me out of countenance before these men. I refer to the likes of Kanze Yozaemon [Kunihiro], Furuta Kahyōe, and Ueno Kii no Kami [Hidetame].

4. A samurai captured in 1573 who would rather die than submit to Nobunaga.

御尋に依て前後の始末申上之處神妙の働無是非の間致忠節候はゝ一命可被成御助と御諚候爰にて印牧申樣に朝倉に對し日比遺恨雖深重の事候今此刻歷々討死候處に述懷を申立生殘御忠節不叶時者當座を申たると思召御扶持も無之候へは實儀も外聞も見苦敷候はんの間腹を可仕と申乞生害前代未聞の働名譽名不及是非
When Kanemaki, on being questioned by Nobunaga, gave a rough account of his career, Nobunaga commented that it would be a shame to lose a man with such marvelous accomplishments to his credit and stated that his life would be spared, were he to pledge his loyal service to Nobunaga. To this Kanemaki replied that he had harbored a deep grudge against the Asakura for a long time. Now that so many warriors of standing had been killed, however, he could not permit himself to stay alive by giving vent to his resentment. The moment he was remiss in his loyal service, Nobunaga would surely think that whatever he might have said at this juncture was just an expedient to save his skin and would cancel his stipend. Then Kanemaki would be unable to live with himself and with what people would say about him. He would therefore cut his own belly now. Having made this plea, he took his own life. His heroism was unprecedented, and his glory was beyond dispute.

5. Nobunaga to his own "companions" (think of Alexander’s foot and horse companions) in 1575 because he was feeling generous that day and had just given a bunch of cloth to a beggar and then felt like also rewarding his men who were supposedly moved to tears by the former act of generosity.

御伴之上下皆落淚也御伴衆何れも々々被加御扶持難有仕合無申計樣体也如此御慈悲深き故に諸天の有御冥利而御家門長久にに御座候と感申也
All of Nobunaga’s companions, those of high as of low rank, also shed tears. Each and every one of his companions had his stipend increased, and it goes without saying that they felt fortunate and thankful. It is because Nobunaga was so compassionate, everyone felt, that the heavens shed their blessings upon him and that the fortunes of his house would long endure.

6. Kuki Yoshitaka and Takigawa Kazumasu in 1578 for building big ships.

九鬼右馬允被召寄黃金二十枚並御服十菱喰折二行拜領其上千人つヽ御扶持被仰
Nobunaga summoned Kuki Uma no Jō and presented him with twenty pieces of gold as well as ten garments and two boxes containing wild duck. In addition, Nobunaga rewarded Kuki Uma no Jō and Takikawa Sakon with stipends adequate to maintaining a thousand men each.

7. A young samurai in 1579 for being a good wrestler, since Nobunaga loves wrestling.

甲賀の伴正林と申者年齡十八九に候歟能相撲七番打仕候次日又御相撲有此時も取すぐり則御扶持人に被召出鐵炮屋與四郞折節御折檻にて籠へ被入置彼與四郞私宅資財雜具共に御知行百石熨斗付の太刀脇指大小二ツ御小袖御馬皆具其に拜領名譽の次第也
A man from Kōka whose name was Tomo Shōrin, some eighteen or nineteen years old, showed good skills and scored seven wins. The next day, too, Nobunaga put on sumo matches, and Tomo again outclassed the others. As a result, Nobunaga selected Tomo to become his stipendiary. At about that time Nobunaga had to take disciplinary measures against a gunsmith by the name of Yoshirō, whom he locked up in a cage. Now Tomo Shōrin received the private residence, household goods, and other possessions of this Yoshirō. Nobunaga also gave him an estate of one hundred koku, a sword and a dagger with gold-encrusted sheaths, a lined silk garment, and a horse with a complete set of gear—glorious recognition for Tomo.

8. As part of his order preparing for his soon-to-be conquests in 1582, Nobunaga ordered his vassals to hire good local samurai.

一國諸侍に懇扱さすか無由斷樣可氣遣事
一第一慾を構に付て諸人爲不足之條內儀相續にをひては皆々に令支配人數を可拘事
一本國より奉公望之者有之者相改まへ拘候ものゝかたへ相屆於其上可扶持之事
Item [5] Treat the provincial samurai with courtesy. For all that, never be remiss in your vigilance.
Item [6] When the top man is greedy, his retainers do not get enough. Upon succeeding to domains, apportion them to all your retainers and take new men into your service.
Item [7] Should there be any men from your home province who wish to enter your service, investigate their provenance, contact their previous employers, and only then grant them a stipend.

So the word was not a one-off usage by Ōta Gyūichi and every single usage of the word stipend was, without exception, either giving it to samurai (some incredibly high ranked) or used in the context of hiring samurai or samurai’s salary. This includes a young sumo wrestler who may or may not have been a samurai, but was definitely hired by Nobunaga as his personal samurai. There is therefore no reason to think Gyūichi was using the term in Yasuke's context any differently. In fact we might even draw a slight parallel to Tomo Shōrin. Yasuke was said to have had the strength of ten men, meaning he must have demonstrated that strength and it’s certainly possible he demonstrated it through wrestling and beating everyone. Nobunaga loved wrestling, loved exotic stuff, and as shown above loved to demonstrate his generosity. So, it would certainly make sense on meeting Yasuke for Nobunaga to give Yasuke, who was exotic and might have been good at wrestling, a samurai’s stipend, a decorated sword, and a residence.

EDIT: I'm adding an explanation because people are misinterpreting this post.

The meaning of the word stipend alone is not supposed to prove Yasuke was a samurai. What proves Yasuke was a samurai is not that he received a samurai stipend, but that he received a samurai stipend & carried Nobunaga's weapons which was usually the job of a koshō and koshō were samurai & was awarded a residence by Nobunaga and the only non-samurai to be awarded one in the Shinchōkōki was the special one given to the Jesuits & he was given 10 kanmon by Nobunaga's nephew Tsuda Nobuzumi which was a lot more than the annual income of some samurai & he was mobilized and followed Nobunaga on the Takeda campaign of 1582 and remained by Nobunaga's side even after Nobunaga dismissed all his "ordinary soldiers" & he fought with a katana at Nijō.

If you've read this and all my other posts and links on Yasuke and still don't believe Yasuke was a samurai, then you either a) prefer to believe your own bias over historical research or b) should post an academic level publication arguing Yasuke wasn't a samurai so I could read it.

It seems, to me, like it would be weirder for Yasuke to not be a samurai given the things he did.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

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.

**Leopold Helveine**

I do come from another direction into this discussion, that of the origin and actual meaning of samurai which originates of two words, one being the Sami language, this word sami is actually the same as samu' and simply means -land-. The rai' comes from the southern asiatics which is the word RAJ meaning lord' and is an equivalent of words such as HAN and KHAN'; leader.

All in all the word (and therefor -position-/role of a) Samurai (correctly written Samuraj when nitpicking past the modern bias) is to be a land-lord as in someone that has been awarded land by a daimyo as the head of a region.

Yasuke was a -sword bearer- which is pretty lowly, being given a residence does not equate being given a province or village to govern.
Do note that after Nobunaga's death the function of Samuraj was changed in that they were no longer allowed to own land nor -weapons- (under Tokugawa)

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

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**

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.

**Laughing Man**

Leopold Helveine wrote:
I do come from another direction into this discussion, that of the origin and actual meaning of samurai which originates of two words, one being the Sami language, this word sami is actually the same as samu' and simply means -land-. The rai' comes from the southern asiatics which is the word RAJ meaning lord' and is an equivalent of words such as HAN and KHAN'; leader.

All in all the word (and therefor -position-/role of a) Samurai (correctly written Samuraj when nitpicking past the modern bias) is to be a land-lord as in someone that has been awarded land by a daimyo as the head of a region.

Yasuke was a -sword bearer- which is pretty lowly, being given a residence does not equate being given a province or village to govern.
Do note that after Nobunaga's death the function of Samuraj was changed in that they were no longer allowed to own land nor -weapons- (under Tokugawa

It's worth noting that this is absolutely not the etymological root of Samurai. The Sami language is Uralic, and very much is not the root for Japanese or Chinese, where the word Samurai originates. Nor is it related to the various Indo-Aryan languages where "Raj" would mean "Lord." Japanese is its own language family, borrowing heavily from the Sino-Tibetan and Koreanic families due to heavy interaction with China and Korea. The root of Samurai simply means "one who serves" and has nothing to do with land ownership.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

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.

**Tyran**

He was either a Samurai or functionally close enough to a Samurai to the point the difference would be academic.

Edit: specially as we are talking about the Sengoku period, in which having weapons was enough to be considered a Samurai because you weren't going to debate the heavily armed guy about it.

**insaniak**

Tyran wrote:
He was either a Samurai or functionally close enough to a Samurai to the point the difference would be academic.

Edit: specially as we are talking about the Sengoku period, in which having weapons was enough to be considered a Samurai because you weren't going to debate the heavily armed guy about it.

This is more or less the impression I get from the various historians' interpretations that I've come across... the general consensus seems to be that the specific definitions people are using to claim he wasn't a samurai simply didn't apply at the time, and by any reasonable metric he was entitled to the title.

**LordofHats**

*puts on historical hat*

Okay.

So the answer is yes.

Like straight up. the answer is yes. You know the answer is yes basically by the basis that he was being paid on retainer. Were you paid on retainer? That's basically the marker of a samurai pre-Edo period.

A deeper question is did anyone take Yasuke seriously in his role, which is maybe a more complex question. He was recorded as defending the home of Nobunaga's son when he was convinced to surrender, but its clear form the very brief account mentioning him that this wasn't out of respect so much as disinterest. Yasuke was an outsider and the forces arrayed against Nobunaga had nothing particularly against him. They just wanted him gone so they sent him back to the Jesuits at which point he shortly after vanishes from the historical record.

A big part of the confusion is that people have an idea of what a samurai is that is mostly a mirage conjured by the Edo period. before Hideyoshi pulled up the ladder behind him after he made it to the top and Tokugawa continued the policy of formally codifying the Samurai into something resembling a peerage, being a samurai was a fairly straightforward thing.

A person who was retained for the purposes of being a thug with a sword. (less comically, someone who was retained for the purpose of fighting in some way).

That's basically it when you strip all the romanticism away. Samurai were thugs with swords. Some samurai were from noble families and highly placed. Some were from warrior families that commanded extra respect. A lot of samurai were just guys who had a record of being good at violence, or of someone thinking they'd be good at it, and were retained on that basis. EDIT: If even that, technically. Hideyoshi was a peasant who ascended to samurai status mostly by the basis that Nobunaga considered him effective and loyal and he would retain that status after Nobunaga's death.

Nobunaga's primary interest in Yasuke, aside from eccentricism, seemed to be that Yasuke was huge and jacked. Yasuke's technical job was basically as a bodyman. He occupied a samurai's rank and position, though I would argue that he was not taken very seriously as other samurai did not treat him as one of their own but rather as an outsider. To his credit, I'd contend Yasuke understood his duties and took them seriously though. At least to some extent. I can think of no other reason why he was where he was when he was convinced to surrender.

As an aside, debates about linguistic origins of samurai is basically pointless. The Samurai first appeared 1000 years before the Sengoku period and what the word meant and what being a Samurai was like were very very different compared to the Kofun period. About the only thing they had in common was that 'thugs' remained somewhat accurate, except they were thugs with bows.

TLDR:

Yes, in the technical sense.

Yes, in the sense of 'what a Samurai was for the period.'

No, in the sense that I don't think he was regarded as a Samurai by other Samurai. Someone regarded as a Samurai likely wouldn't have been afforded the opportunity to back down and 'go home' Yasuke was given.

**Leopold Helveine**

Laughing Man wrote:
Leopold Helveine wrote:
I do come from another direction into this discussion, that of the origin and actual meaning of samurai which originates of two words, one being the Sami language, this word sami is actually the same as samu' and simply means -land-. The rai' comes from the southern asiatics which is the word RAJ meaning lord' and is an equivalent of words such as HAN and KHAN'; leader.

All in all the word (and therefor -position-/role of a) Samurai (correctly written Samuraj when nitpicking past the modern bias) is to be a land-lord as in someone that has been awarded land by a daimyo as the head of a region.

Yasuke was a -sword bearer- which is pretty lowly, being given a residence does not equate being given a province or village to govern.
Do note that after Nobunaga's death the function of Samuraj was changed in that they were no longer allowed to own land nor -weapons- (under Tokugawa

It's worth noting that this is absolutely not the etymological root of Samurai. The Sami language is Uralic, and very much is not the root for Japanese or Chinese, where the word Samurai originates. Nor is it related to the various Indo-Aryan languages where "Raj" would mean "Lord." Japanese is its own language family, borrowing heavily from the Sino-Tibetan and Koreanic families due to heavy interaction with China and Korea. The root of Samurai simply means "one who serves" and has nothing to do with land ownership.

My friend there were dong yi (barbarian) peoples in china illustrated as saka (hallstatt celt outbranch nomadic peoples of many a tribe, especially around the tarim basin).

https://ibb.co/qjnYhJ8
(Hu vs Han(khan), Hu refers to Dong hu as in the Dongyi)

There is a distinct Qin(chinese) root to the minamoto family that they themselves stressed, the Uralic language is absolutely connected to both chinese and japanese and so is Gojoseon related to them. The Japanese Taira too as much as the specific 'Sakai' find their origin in aforementioned saka (roaming/nomadic) peoples that are very much so sami-connected.

edit: not to be confused with Saika, that comes from Saiga' meaning ruffian.
(Abled ruffians (saiga-zaki) (ikko ikki bhuddist mercenaries who fought for Oda but were later betrayed and annihalated by the aforementioned.))

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakai_clan
to:
https://japanesemythology.wordpress.com/2014/07/11/notes-the-saka-sakai-of-japan-are-related-to-the-sakha-aka-yakuts-saka-scythians-of-siberia-afterall/

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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uralic_languages
Sami and Ainu culture for instance are very similar

**Herzlos**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
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.

Absolutely, though both sides should be able to provide citations and sources.

If I was going to claim the sky was green, it'd be on me to prove it and not everyone else to disprove it.

**Gitzbitah**

This is pretty common. Certainly, old nobility and traditional samurai wouldn't recognize a new, weird upstart- but rulers and lords would absolutely hand out titles to acquire the services of otherwise unpleasant but violently skilled individuals. The Varangian guard, hired warriors of mostly Northern European extraction, were prized specifically because they (initially) had no loyalty to any of the factions in Byzantium. Rollo and his Vikings were Frances worst foe, until the king gave Rollo his daughter and settled them in Normandy, gaining a shield of friendly Vikings for Paris, against the raiders from the North. The Romans were infamous for recruiting defeated warriors into their armies as auxiliaries..

It's very possible to be granted a title, and serve in the role, without being granted the social status aspect of it, or respected by your adopted culture.

**LordofHats**

It's also mostly that Nobunaga was an eccentric kind of guy. He was fascinated by foreign things. New things. Odd things. His eccentricities grew as his power did, as did the volatility of his temperament. Both may have contributed to his fall.

It's pretty evident from the sources he valued Yasuke both as a novel thing, and because he was just huge and built.

The moment Nobunaga died, I think his days were up as far as that life was concerned. It was solely due to Nobunaga's personality he was where he was.

**A.T.**

Haighus wrote:
Was Yasuke a samurai?

In the same sense that Kevin Spacey is a knight, perhaps.

**Haighus**

A.T. wrote:
Haighus wrote:
Was Yasuke a samurai?
In the same sense that Kevin Spacey is a knight, perhaps.

Would you like to elaborate on that? I'm struggling to see how a modern actor is relevant to a historical soldier.

**Leopold Helveine**

LordofHats wrote:
It's also mostly that Nobunaga was an eccentric kind of guy. He was fascinated by foreign things. New things. Odd things. His eccentricities grew as his power did, as did the volatility of his temperament. Both may have contributed to his fall.

It's pretty evident from the sources he valued Yasuke both as a novel thing, and because he was just huge and built.

The moment Nobunaga died, I think his days were up as far as that life was concerned. It was solely due to Nobunaga's personality he was where he was.

Exactly how Hideyoshi became a daimyo. If Nobunaga had not made him he would've stayed a peasant.
I think this post is a lot more important to this subject than a gloss over as it is indeed very much Nobunaga who elevated Yasuke aswell (but not as a samuraj, regardless) and not the culture.

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

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.

**Crispy78**

Haighus wrote:
A.T. wrote:
Haighus wrote:
Was Yasuke a samurai?
In the same sense that Kevin Spacey is a knight, perhaps.

Would you like to elaborate on that? I'm struggling to see how a modern actor is relevant to a historical soldier.

I assume it's meaning how Kevin Spacey is officially in current parlance a knight (honorary knight commander of the order of the british empire) but is not what we would traditionally think of as a knight - local ruler with nice horse, sword and armour and so on...

**Haighus**

Crispy78 wrote:
Haighus wrote:
A.T. wrote:
Haighus wrote:
Was Yasuke a samurai?
In the same sense that Kevin Spacey is a knight, perhaps.

Would you like to elaborate on that? I'm struggling to see how a modern actor is relevant to a historical soldier.

I assume it's meaning how Kevin Spacey is officially in current parlance a knight (honorary knight commander of the order of the british empire) but is not what we would traditionally think of as a knight - local ruler with nice horse, sword and armour and so on...

Sure, but if Kevin Spacey lived in the 16th century he'd probably be more relevant given that no modern knight fits that archetype.

Also knights weren't associated with ruling land, that was lords. Most lords were considered to be knights though, or had become a knight before they became a lord.

**Leopold Helveine**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
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.

You cannot feign academic concencus simultaneously accruing me of incredulity.. I am a legitimate researcher of all things archeology and cultural syncretism having dived deep into the asiatics, especially lately considering I am doing a restudy of the Gojoseon culture aswell (and relevant migrations concerning). It is no semantic to adress the pre-tokugawa stance on what a samuraj entails in terms of posessions and status over others. Nobunaga died a while before the Tokugawa era started so we can rest assured that at his time a samuraj was not a merc or thug or simply a warrior who recieved mere housing (and considering as I said Tokugawa outlawed ownership of land to the samuraj this is another vindicating factor to it.).

Samuraj were -not- common soldiers, such were called Ashigaru and Ashigaru were not Samuraj, they were employed BY the Samuraj.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashigaru

Considering a swordbearer is not a commanding role, we can all be certain that Yasuke did not employ Ashigaru. Now there is a minor nuance here because the Maeda family actually did consider Ashigaru Samuraj albeit an underclass of such (see the Kaga domain) but Yasuke had nothing to do with them, nor lived in that domain (he stayed in Echizen). Regardless, he was not even among the Ashigaru himself, he was literally nothing but an attraction kept close to Nobunaga, the same way sultans surrounded themselves with paradisal birds. This may sound very crude but it is what Nobunaga was like.

Oh and here's the proof that Samuraj entails a LAND OWNER from that very wiki of Ashigaru;

"Ashigaru (足軽, "light of foot") were infantry employed by the samurai class of feudal Japan"
"by the 10th century Japan instead relied on individual landowners to provide men for conflicts and wars. These horse-owning landowners were the beginnings of the samurai class and the men who worked the land for the landowners became the common foot soldiers during times of war. These foot soldiers could have long ties and loyalty to the landowners which went back many generations.[3]"

**Crispy78**

Haighus wrote:
Crispy78 wrote:
Haighus wrote:
A.T. wrote:
Haighus wrote:
Was Yasuke a samurai?
In the same sense that Kevin Spacey is a knight, perhaps.

Would you like to elaborate on that? I'm struggling to see how a modern actor is relevant to a historical soldier.

I assume it's meaning how Kevin Spacey is officially in current parlance a knight (honorary knight commander of the order of the british empire) but is not what we would traditionally think of as a knight - local ruler with nice horse, sword and armour and so on...

Sure, but if Kevin Spacey lived in the 16th century he'd probably be more relevant given that no modern knight fits that archetype.

Also knights weren't associated with ruling land, that was lords. Most lords were considered to be knights though, or had become a knight before they became a lord.

See previous comment about me dropping history as soon as I could

**StudentOfEtherium**

Leopold Helveine wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
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.

You cannot feign academic concencus simultaneously accruing me of incredulity.. I am a legitimate researcher of all things archeology and cultural syncretism having dived deep into the asiatics, especially lately considering I am doing a restudy of the Gojoseon culture aswell (and relevant migrations concerning). It is no semantic to adress the pre-tokugawa stance on what a samuraj entails in terms of posessions and status over others. Nobunaga died a while before the Tokugawa era started so we can rest assured that at his time a samuraj was not a merc or thug or simply a warrior who recieved mere housing (and considering as I said Tokugawa outlawed ownership of land to the samuraj this is another vindicating factor to it.).

Samuraj were -not- common soldiers, such were called Ashigaru and Ashigaru were not Samuraj, they were employed BY the Samuraj.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashigaru

Considering a swordbearer is not a commanding role, we can all be certain that Yasuke did not employ Ashigaru. Now there is a minor nuance here because the Maeda family actually did consider Ashigaru Samuraj albeit an underclass of such (see the Kaga domain) but Yasuke had nothing to do with them, nor lived in that domain (he stayed in Echizen). Regardless, he was not even among the Ashigaru himself, he was literally nothing but an attraction kept close to Nobunaga, the same way sultans surrounded themselves with paradisal birds. This may sound very crude but it is what Nobunaga was like.

Oh and here's the proof that Samuraj entails a LAND OWNER from that very wiki of Ashigaru;

"Ashigaru (足軽, "light of foot") were infantry employed by the samurai class of feudal Japan"
"by the 10th century Japan instead relied on individual landowners to provide men for conflicts and wars. These horse-owning landowners were the beginnings of the samurai class and the men who worked the land for the landowners became the common foot soldiers during times of war. These foot soldiers could have long ties and loyalty to the landowners which went back many generations.[3]"

since you're now being insistent on using "samuraj" instead of "samurai", i decided to google it, see maybe if there's some websites talking about this, or perhaps some academic papers. literally anything. all that came up was some typos and people's names (mostly Russian, it seems)

insisting that "samurai" comes from two different languages, one an entire subcontinent away, in a language which is otherwise isolated, is crackpot academics at best. cutting up pieces from different puzzles to make them fit together

**Leopold Helveine**

StudentOfEtherium wrote:
Leopold Helveine wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
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.

You cannot feign academic concencus simultaneously accruing me of incredulity.. I am a legitimate researcher of all things archeology and cultural syncretism having dived deep into the asiatics, especially lately considering I am doing a restudy of the Gojoseon culture aswell (and relevant migrations concerning). It is no semantic to adress the pre-tokugawa stance on what a samuraj entails in terms of posessions and status over others. Nobunaga died a while before the Tokugawa era started so we can rest assured that at his time a samuraj was not a merc or thug or simply a warrior who recieved mere housing (and considering as I said Tokugawa outlawed ownership of land to the samuraj this is another vindicating factor to it.).

Samuraj were -not- common soldiers, such were called Ashigaru and Ashigaru were not Samuraj, they were employed BY the Samuraj.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashigaru

Considering a swordbearer is not a commanding role, we can all be certain that Yasuke did not employ Ashigaru. Now there is a minor nuance here because the Maeda family actually did consider Ashigaru Samuraj albeit an underclass of such (see the Kaga domain) but Yasuke had nothing to do with them, nor lived in that domain (he stayed in Echizen). Regardless, he was not even among the Ashigaru himself, he was literally nothing but an attraction kept close to Nobunaga, the same way sultans surrounded themselves with paradisal birds. This may sound very crude but it is what Nobunaga was like.

Oh and here's the proof that Samuraj entails a LAND OWNER from that very wiki of Ashigaru;

"Ashigaru (足軽, "light of foot") were infantry employed by the samurai class of feudal Japan"
"by the 10th century Japan instead relied on individual landowners to provide men for conflicts and wars. These horse-owning landowners were the beginnings of the samurai class and the men who worked the land for the landowners became the common foot soldiers during times of war. These foot soldiers could have long ties and loyalty to the landowners which went back many generations.[3]"

since you're now being insistent on using "samuraj" instead of "samurai", i decided to google it, see maybe if there's some websites talking about this, or perhaps some academic papers. literally anything. all that came up was some typos and people's names (mostly Russian, it seems)

insisting that "samurai" comes from two different languages, one an entire subcontinent away, in a language which is otherwise isolated, is crackpot academics at best. cutting up pieces from different puzzles to make them fit together

I do insist using Samuraj but everyone is free to use Samurai, I am a scholar of Etymology and prefer to use root meanings of whichever adress, admittedly rebeliously. Such is the endeavor of revisionism/science within the paradigm of archeology.

Anyhow, it is obviously not found on google but I have provided every piece of proof that was' even on wikipedia' pointing at the very meaning to be such, and such is called syncretism'; no culture was static and isolated, nomadic peoples were ever moving from west to east, along the path of the sun's optimal season of pasture. I say this to point at the many pronged nature of the meaning, the Uralic language as much as the pre-tokugawa specification (see the Ashigaru quote)

actually to add to that, considering you're calling me a crackpot now, you do realise.. again.. as I've mentioned this earlier' that the origin of Japans emperial line is chinese right?

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

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.

**StudentOfEtherium**

Leopold Helveine wrote:
StudentOfEtherium wrote:
Leopold Helveine wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
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.

You cannot feign academic concencus simultaneously accruing me of incredulity.. I am a legitimate researcher of all things archeology and cultural syncretism having dived deep into the asiatics, especially lately considering I am doing a restudy of the Gojoseon culture aswell (and relevant migrations concerning). It is no semantic to adress the pre-tokugawa stance on what a samuraj entails in terms of posessions and status over others. Nobunaga died a while before the Tokugawa era started so we can rest assured that at his time a samuraj was not a merc or thug or simply a warrior who recieved mere housing (and considering as I said Tokugawa outlawed ownership of land to the samuraj this is another vindicating factor to it.).

Samuraj were -not- common soldiers, such were called Ashigaru and Ashigaru were not Samuraj, they were employed BY the Samuraj.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashigaru

Considering a swordbearer is not a commanding role, we can all be certain that Yasuke did not employ Ashigaru. Now there is a minor nuance here because the Maeda family actually did consider Ashigaru Samuraj albeit an underclass of such (see the Kaga domain) but Yasuke had nothing to do with them, nor lived in that domain (he stayed in Echizen). Regardless, he was not even among the Ashigaru himself, he was literally nothing but an attraction kept close to Nobunaga, the same way sultans surrounded themselves with paradisal birds. This may sound very crude but it is what Nobunaga was like.

Oh and here's the proof that Samuraj entails a LAND OWNER from that very wiki of Ashigaru;

"Ashigaru (足軽, "light of foot") were infantry employed by the samurai class of feudal Japan"
"by the 10th century Japan instead relied on individual landowners to provide men for conflicts and wars. These horse-owning landowners were the beginnings of the samurai class and the men who worked the land for the landowners became the common foot soldiers during times of war. These foot soldiers could have long ties and loyalty to the landowners which went back many generations.[3]"

since you're now being insistent on using "samuraj" instead of "samurai", i decided to google it, see maybe if there's some websites talking about this, or perhaps some academic papers. literally anything. all that came up was some typos and people's names (mostly Russian, it seems)

insisting that "samurai" comes from two different languages, one an entire subcontinent away, in a language which is otherwise isolated, is crackpot academics at best. cutting up pieces from different puzzles to make them fit together

I do insist using Samuraj but everyone is free to use Samurai, I am a scholar of Etymology and prefer to use root meanings of whichever adress, admittedly rebeliously. Such is the endeavor of revisionism/science within the paradigm of archeology.

Anyhow, it is obviously not found on google but I have provided every piece of proof that was' even on wikipedia' pointing at the very meaning to be such, and such is called syncretism'; no culture was static and isolated, nomadic peoples were ever moving from west to east, along the path of the sun's optimal season of pasture. I say this to point at the many pronged nature of the meaning, the Uralic language as much as the pre-tokugawa specification (see the Ashigaru quote)

you've provided no proof of an uralic-japanese link whatsoever other than supposedly connecting definitions. are you trying to claim this as a branch conspiracy of the ural-altaic language family? the one that everyone agrees doesn't actually exist? that would at least be something that has been discussed by academics (and widely debunked. lol). but you have not put in the work to explain the evidence, nor provide it

furthermore, "prefer to use root meanings of whichever adress[sic], admittedly rebeliously[sic]" just means that you insist on using words incorrectly. how are you speaking english if you insist on such a principle? shouldn't that sentence instead be

"Ic am a scholaris of etumología and praefero to usus wréh₂ds meanings of hwazǣfre adirigo, admittoly rebellisly"

do you see how stupid that looks?

**Leopold Helveine**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
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”.

I provided vindicating material, and something isn't automatically incorrect when it finds no concensus because practically the entirity of -all sciences- finds no concensus. Which is the beauty of studying, you do not look for a paper to agree with, you do due dilligence at best comparing notes and using references as portals.

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.

Depends on the meaning of professional, yes in the terms of occupation. Also depends on the wording 'qualified' as such is rather hard to specify.., qualified to what exactly? There is no such thing as a qualification to a science, no thesis is ever qualified afterall, not even after peer review.. it always remains the sum of ..well.. a joint effort', one's perseverence to effort', one's virtue to genuity (I cannot say truthfulness considering truth simply means loyalty, but fair enough.. one sticking to honesty' perhaps is a better way to put it, including to hold one's own theories to scrutiny), one's capacity to discern.. which itself cannot be measured.. and lastly the stamina to a sharpness of mind. All such combined are an immense undertaking in itself, it is not as simple as googling a subject with a brand stamp on it and declaring it the best answer, issue solved.

Syncretics are a very important aspect to every culture, as one just wrongly assumed that Japan was isolated; no Island was ever isolated. Especially during the bronze age sea peoples went all over the earth non stop trading and raiding eachother, making land, often called barbarian (barbar means unintelligable because their language wasn't understood), through such regions such as kemet (egypt which means gypsies, hungary was also called egyptaland for instance, as gypsy just means nomad), sumer and the indus were inhabited by "barbarian" peoples (so unintelligable from the locale).
Japan had such peoples too, who lived at the coasts and on the islands. This is what I was trying to show mentioning the Dong yi for one, among which were many sea peoples (dong yi is an umbrella term mind you, of all barbarian peoples, including landbound), and yes I understand this all seems like side issues to the topic, but it isn't. Because the very core of understanding japanese history is by understanding exactly that japan was not isolated and its language was not isolated either, did you read the link I provided on the uralic-sakai link?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

StudentOfEtherium wrote:

you've provided no proof of an uralic-japanese link whatsoever other than supposedly connecting definitions. are you trying to claim this as a branch conspiracy of the ural-altaic language family? the one that everyone agrees doesn't actually exist? that would at least be something that has been discussed by academics (and widely debunked. lol). but you have not put in the work to explain the evidence, nor provide it

furthermore, "prefer to use root meanings of whichever adress[sic], admittedly rebeliously[sic]" just means that you insist on using words incorrectly. how are you speaking english if you insist on such a principle? shouldn't that sentence instead be

"Ic am a scholaris of etumología and praefero to usus wréh₂ds meanings of hwazǣfre adirigo, admittoly rebellisly"

do you see how stupid that looks?

I do see how stupid that looked.

Here was my posting showing the conection between Uralic languages and Japanese;
https://japanesemythology.wordpress.com/2014/07/11/notes-the-saka-sakai-of-japan-are-related-to-the-sakha-aka-yakuts-saka-scythians-of-siberia-afterall/

**Tyran**

A.T. wrote:
Haighus wrote:
Was Yasuke a samurai?
In the same sense that Kevin Spacey is a knight, perhaps.

Has Kevin Spacey ever fought in battle? As riding a horse in heavy armor and killing people?

Because while Yasuke might not have the social status that came with the title, he did fulfill the martial role expected from it.

**Leopold Helveine**

Tyran wrote:
A.T. wrote:
Haighus wrote:
Was Yasuke a samurai?
In the same sense that Kevin Spacey is a knight, perhaps.

Has Kevin Spacey ever fought in battle? As riding a horse in heavy armor and killing people?

Because while Yasuke might not have the social status that came with the title, he did fulfill the martial role expected from it.

He only fought during the honnoji betrayal (by Akechi Mitsuhide) which is logical considering his side was being attacked, he fulfilled no martial roles in any other Oda battle ever, even though it is stated he "fought at" the Oda-Takeda war, he didn't actually partake in any military action, he was just there at Nobunaga's side (which is not part of the battle, as commanders didn't join battles themselves, instead staying at a command post shielded from all sides) and is accounted to have inspected the terrain after the Oda victory.

He was captured and deemed unworthy of being executed so returned to the Jesuits. Equating to him not having any status as executing him would dishoner a Samuraj.

**StudentOfEtherium**

Tyran wrote:
A.T. wrote:
Haighus wrote:
Was Yasuke a samurai?
In the same sense that Kevin Spacey is a knight, perhaps.

Has Kevin Spacey ever fought in battle? As riding a horse in heavy armor and killing people?

Because while Yasuke might not have the social status that came with the title, he did fulfill the martial role expected from it.

that's the important thing. crackpot etymology aside, Yasuke was a warrior who filled a role that was filled by samurai. the way that fiction portrays him can be exaggerated, but that's true of everything from that time in Japanese history. the question at the top of the thread has a swift and objective answer: yes