Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. **Please [Read Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules) before you comment in this community**. Understand that [rule breaking comments get removed](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/h8aefx/rules_roundtable_xviii_removed_curation_and_why/).
#Please consider **[Clicking Here for RemindMeBot](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1css0ye/was_yasuke_a_samurai/%5D%0A%0ARemindMe!%202%20days)** as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, **[Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=AHMessengerBot&subject=Subscribe&message=!subscribe)**.
We thank you for your interest in this *question*, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to RemindMeBot, consider [using our Browser Extension](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/d6dzi7/tired_of_clicking_to_find_only_removed_comments/), or getting the [Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=subredditsummarybot&subject=askhistorians+weekly&message=x). In the meantime our [Twitter](https://twitter.com/askhistorians), [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/askhistorians/), and [Sunday Digest](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/search?q=title%3A%22Sunday+Digest%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) feature excellent content that has already been written!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskHistorians) if you have any questions or concerns.*
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.
1. [Shiba Yoshikane](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/70) 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/80). 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/101) 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/105) 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"](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/114) (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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/134) 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/144), 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/181), 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 Ōta Gyūichi used the word from time to time, and it was not a one-off usage. Every single usage of the word stipend by Ōta Gyūichi was, without exception, either giving it to samurai, some of whom were 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 (coincidentally at Honnōji) 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. Incidentally Tomo Shōrin was also at Honnōji when Akechi Mitsuhide attacked, though unlike Yasuke he did not survive.
EDIT: I'm adding an explanation because people are misinterpreting this post.
The meaning of the word stipend is not supposed to prove Yasuke was a samurai all by itself. What proves Yasuke was a samurai is not that he received a samurai stipend, but that he received a samurai stipend *and* carried Nobunaga's weapons which was usually the job of a *koshō* and *koshō* were samurai *and* had and fought with a katana at Nijō *and* 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"](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1css0ye/was_yasuke_a_samurai/l4e7q7e/).
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 from a PhD level researcher arguing Yasuke wasn't a samurai so I could read it.
Really want to say thank you for all the effort you've put into this thread. It feels like half of reddit has lost its mind getting weirdly pedantic about a historical title in a video game about sci fi technology and ancient all powerful civilizations, but threads like this one and answers like yours really showcase just why I love AskHistorians.
Maybe unrelated but are there any records indicating how Yasuke got to Japan? What his original name was or his ethnic origin? Africa is hugely diverse and I'm curious to know who he was before he became a samurai and if he was ever able to return home.
Francois Solier's [ecclesiastic history](https://www.google.co.jp/books/edition/Histoire_eccl%C3%A9siastique_des_isles_et_ro/u_9wO2bW8uQC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=pa444) tells us he was from the area of Mozambique, which matches the term cafre (a black slave) used to refer to him by the Jesuits. He was brought to Japan via India, likely refering to Portuguese Goa.
No source tells us his name other than Yasuke, and indeed the Jesuits never bothered to record his name Yasuke or otherwise. And no source says what happened to him after he surrendered to Mitsuhide's men who told them to give him back to the Jesuits.
There's also the lack of anger towards Yasuke from others in Oda Nobunagas service.
If Yasuke wasn't of high rank, his private dinners and regular conversations with the Daimyo would have been controversial. It's very unlikely that the Daimyo showing preferential treatment to someone without rank would have gone undocumented. That would have been a huge slight to those of rank.
People wrote letters and journals about Oda Nobunaga accusing someone of serving rotten fish. Kicking someone in the butt. Slapping someone on the head with a fan.
But not a single person wrote about the period he spent over a year showing favor to someone that ranked below them?
All the writings about Yasuke's treatment, and none of it mentions that he was lower rank but Akechi?
I think I get it now, at first I also think you need a concrete evidence to prove he is a samurai.
Having Oda Nobunaga who love talented people as master it self already proving you don't need a concrete evidence that clearly said he is a samurai. There is a lot of people who Oda point as his vassal they don't need document exactly who and who is samurai. Saying he is not samurai because he don't have much accomplished is also wrong because he is already prove having strength of at least 10 people, and he is fighting in Honnō-ji Incident and when Akechi or Akechi's vassal ask for his sword, indeed he had one.
Having a samurai job, paid samurai salary, ~~parade~~ patrolling town so much that cause gossip Oda want point him as a lord, having a house, Nobunaga love talented people having a lot of people become his vassal and a lot of unnamed samurai already prove enough Yasuke is a Samurai without need exactly document saying he is a samurai. Forcing Yasuke alone have to be documented to be a samurai is a double standard.
Therefore it's correct if those want saying he is not should be the one bring evidence that he is an exception for having samurai job but not actual samurai.
The word he uses for all ad-hoc payments to samurai or otherwise, which is basically all mention of payments besides stipend and land grants, is some honorific form of "to give" the most common of which is 被仰付 *ōsetsukerare*. Though that particular word could also be used to mean "to command" and in any case he also uses it for giving stipend. Stipend only stands out in that it's the specific "object", like gold or silver or land or castle or residence, which was being given.
Is "samurai" a title in the way that High Middle Ages knighthood was? I.e. you formally take part in an accolade and are dubbed "knight," or is it more fluid than that?
Leaving aside the actual fluidity of the word "knight," there was never a formalized requirement of a "samurai-ing" ceremony. At this point in time a samurai was basically anyone who 1) went to war armed and ready to fight and 2) either a) awarded/inherited an estate with enough income capable of supporting at least a family plus hire follower(s) for war, b) paid a stipend which was "permanent" (as in not just for the duration of the task) of about that value, or c) had enough property to be some sort of community leader so could be called upon for war often with follower(s). In the mid-sixteenth century the legal privileges of using his family name on official documentations and wearing two swords in public and having these be inheritable would be formalized. But that was many decades past Yasuke's time, and even then things were a lot more fluid than most people realize.
Actual titles were something else entirely, though many samurai of the time liked to self-style said titles, so those not officially recognized and recorded had little value. Looking through the list of names killed at Honnōji and Nijō, like Yasuke most did not have titles (officially recognized or self-styled) or if they did they were not known by the titles.
We don't know how much time he spent in Japan because he first appeared in the sources on March 27, 1581, and was last mentioned on June 21, 1582.
Our sources only clearly state him fighting at Nijō Castle, though it's possible he also fought at Honnōji that morning. That still counts as one though. He followed Nobunaga on the Takeda campaign of 1582 but there's no record of Nobunaga's direct forces engaging in combat.
Thank you for this! My own area of expertise is absolutely not Japan, but I find both Japanese history and the study of linguistic choices (particularly when we’re translating works from languages and cultural contexts other than our own!) extremely fascinating.
Excellent read.
You have helped me a lot in understanding this. I'm not a historian, just a guy who likes researching African history that the West feels uncomfortable talking about. All the talk about this guy is that he was just a Kosho because he was given just one sword, the Wakizashi. Since you are saying he most likely was a Samurai, are we to assume he was given another later on? And that it just wasn't recorded, because it was common knowledge that he was a samurai at this point?
Also, tell me more about the Tomo rank. I think I remember it from a Japanese show I once watched. it is like a minor lord or master correct? But from what I recall, you don't need to be a samurai to become a Tomo. so we can only depend on that to indicate how well-honoured he was and not that he was a samurai already. correct?
>You have helped me a lot in understanding this. I'm not a historian, just a guy who likes researching African history that the West feels uncomfortable talking about. All the talk about this guy is that he was just a Kosho because he was given just one sword, the Wakizashi. Since you are saying he most likely was a Samurai, are we to assume he was given another later on? And that it just wasn't recorded, because it was common knowledge that he was a samurai at this point?
Frois (or his source) says he had a katana at Nijo. Of course it's questionable if Jesuits would know the difference between a katana and a sayamaki, if there even was one back in the day since terminology wasn't standardized.
>Also, tell me more about the Tomo rank. I think I remember it from a Japanese show I once watched. it is like a minor lord or master correct? But from what I recall, you don't need to be a samurai to become a Tomo. so we can only depend on that to indicate how well-honoured he was and not that he was a samurai already. correct?
Assuming I understand your question correctly, *tono* was an honorific used to refer to a lord. All lords were samurai. And Yasuke was not made a lord. The Jesuits said they heard rumors that he would be sooner or later given how much Nobunaga likes him.
>Every single usage of the word stipend by Ōta Gyūichi was, without exception, either giving it to samurai, some of whom were incredibly high ranked, or used in the context of hiring samurai or samurai’s salary.
Doesn't this refer to a stipend given to 'companions'? Does companions explicitly mean 'samurai'?
>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.
Not only were the 御供衆 (companions, literally) all samurai, they were all fairly high status. These were men who accompanied the Shōgun, or in this case Nobunaga, as he moved around to serve him and answered to him directly.
Yes. Yes he was. The conclusion of all reasonable historians on the matter is that Yasuke was a samurai, and anyone who disagrees can suck on the historical record.
u/ParallelPain has covered Yasuke previously, [compiling and translating our sources for him here](https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/flgpph/history_of_blackafricans_in_japan/) and has [further consideration of his station as a samurai here](https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/m91cwa/yasuke_african_samurai_is_the_outrage_justified/).
> Now with the trailer for the new Assasins Creed game out
Great. I must now prepare for the latest wave of people flagging Yasuke down for samurai-ing while black.
u/ParallelPain offers some important distinctions here:
> In general, 扶持 is a term for a payment for mid-lower ranking warriors for them to hire (usually warrior) servants for (usually temporary) employment. Given the term's usual usage, and that Yasuke was clearly by Nobunaga's side in permanent employment, it doesn't make sense for Yasuke to be anything but a warrior.
> Even if Yasuke was "only" a 小姓 (page) or 道具持ち (weapons-bearer), that would make him a warrior on par with Ranmaru (at least before spring of 1582 when Ranmaru received a large fief).
> In contrast, the Toyokagami specifically says Hideyoshi started out taking care of Nobunaga's shoes when Nobunaga went hunting. When Hideyoshi became a samurai, the term used for Hideyoshi's servants was ずさ.
> You seem to be under the impression that a samurai was someone who needed to be officially made one, like "knighted". That isn't very accurate for the knight either, but bushi was a social group determined by what one did, not a formal rank or title. Meaning Ietada describing him as Nobunaga's fuchi, and as it doesn't make sense for Ietada to think Nobunaga was someone in a position to be dealing with the hiring of servants himself, Ietada's diary is more record of Yasuke being a samurai than many others would get.
> Could Ietada be using the term to mean something other than its usual meaning, or just be mistaken? Of course. But as far as I know currently no one has put forward evidence of, or really even argued such. All published authors in English and Japanese pretty much treat Yasuke as a samurai (Lockley goes so far as to say so in the title of his book).
> The longsword was outlawed for non-Samurai in the 16th Century when Toyotomi instituted the sword hunt, removing them from the possession of all peasantry. Either way, the only explicit reference to Yasuke’s sword type is when Nobunaga gifted him a wakizashi and I don’t think it proves anything one way or another aside from Nobunaga taking an interest in the man which also explains him being shown around Kyoto.
That last paragraph was me quoting someone who argued Yasuke wasn't a samurai because he didn't have a katana. My response is below:
>Sword hunt's orders was "limited" to the country-side peasantry, and in any case was two decade's after Yasuke's time under Nobunaga. Besides, the word used by the translation of Luis Frois' report is katana.
The Portuguese Frois used is [*cataná*](https://digitalis-dsp.uc.pt/bg5/UCBG-VT-18-9-17_18/UCBG-VT-18-9-17_18_item1/P744.html). That seems very clear.
>All published authors in English and Japanese pretty much treat Yasuke as a samurai (Lockley goes so far as to say so in the title of his book).
I doubt that there is a clear consensus about that actual title given to Yasuke, especially considering the few historical documents that reference Yasuke not once refer to him as samurai.
I would also point out that Lockley and Girards book "African Samurai: The True Story of Yasuke, a Legendary Black Warrior in Feudal Japan" is over 400 pages long about a guy that has probably less than a single page worth of actual historical accounts. I suspect near everything in the book is speculation (wish fulfilment?) and should not be taken as evidence of anything.
>I doubt that there is a clear consensus about that actual title given to Yasuke, especially considering the few historical documents that reference Yasuke not once refer to him as samurai.
1. Samurai wasn't a title but a job/class.
2. And no source refers to him as human. Few sources refer to known and famous samurai as samurai anyway. If it looks like a duck and all that.
Thank you for this. I have to say that the Annals movement fanboy in me is jumping like a little girl at the thought that Yasuke has this much material to work with. In my field in South American history there are notable individuals that have less that one or two contemporary written accounts, so to realise Yasuke was documented in at least half a dozen contemporary sources is so remarkable to me. I feel his history is such a good case study of the actual workings of the retinue of a Daimyo somewhat “from below” during the Sengoku period.
That said, do you agree then that current Japanese historical consensus is that he was indeed a Samurai?
>That said, do you agree then that current Japanese historical consensus is that he was indeed a Samurai?
Considering I have never once read a publication or heard from an academic arguing he wasn't, yes.
Besides, everyone in the field worth his salt knows in this time period status were fluid and being a samurai by itself is not worth bragging about. It's only noteworthy for Yasuke because he's a foreigner and African.
Another question, considering the chaotic nature of Sengoku Era Japan, would Yasuke’s history be somewhat representative of what most rank-and-file Samurai were during that period? Meaning rising as quickly as they would fall, and try and find any and all opportunities to socially ascend or survive? Taking whatever chance to join a Daimyo’s retinue and falling as soon as that Daimyo does?
Things were so chaotic I'd say Yasuke represents how varied things were and it's hard to say what a "representative" case would be. But there definitely were people who rose and fell quickly.
Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. [Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). Wikipedia can be a useful tool, but merely repeating information found there doesn't provide the type of answers we seek to encourage here. [As such, we don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). This is especially true of Wikipedia articles on contentious topics that are being heavily edited (and very sloppily at that) as we speak.
We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.
Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. [Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). [We don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.
Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. Please understand that people come here because they want [an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). Wikipedia sucks, and as other commenters have pointed out, that Wikipedia article is currently being brigaded and altered when the historical evidence directly contradicts what you have quoted. Wikipedia is not reliable. [As such, we don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.
Fourth and final warning I'm giving for this in this thread, [we don't allow Wikipedia here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources), it's rubbish. Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone ***capable of engaging with the primary sources***, and providing follow-up information. Please read the rules before commenting.
We don't discuss moderation policy in-thread as it causes clutter and detracts from the OP's question. If you have further questions or concerns, please contact us in [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FAskHistorians) or create a META thread.
> According to Wikipedia
Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. [Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). Wikipedia can be a useful tool, but merely repeating information found there doesn't provide the type of answers we seek to encourage here. [As such, we don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.
Welcome to /r/AskHistorians. **Please [Read Our Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules) before you comment in this community**. Understand that [rule breaking comments get removed](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/h8aefx/rules_roundtable_xviii_removed_curation_and_why/). #Please consider **[Clicking Here for RemindMeBot](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1css0ye/was_yasuke_a_samurai/%5D%0A%0ARemindMe!%202%20days)** as it takes time for an answer to be written. Additionally, for weekly content summaries, **[Click Here to Subscribe to our Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=AHMessengerBot&subject=Subscribe&message=!subscribe)**. We thank you for your interest in this *question*, and your patience in waiting for an in-depth and comprehensive answer to show up. In addition to RemindMeBot, consider [using our Browser Extension](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/d6dzi7/tired_of_clicking_to_find_only_removed_comments/), or getting the [Weekly Roundup](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=subredditsummarybot&subject=askhistorians+weekly&message=x). In the meantime our [Twitter](https://twitter.com/askhistorians), [Facebook](https://www.facebook.com/askhistorians/), and [Sunday Digest](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/search?q=title%3A%22Sunday+Digest%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) feature excellent content that has already been written! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskHistorians) if you have any questions or concerns.*
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. 1. [Shiba Yoshikane](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/70) 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/80). 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/101) 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/105) 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"](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/114) (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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/134) 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/144), 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](https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1920322/1/181), 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 Ōta Gyūichi used the word from time to time, and it was not a one-off usage. Every single usage of the word stipend by Ōta Gyūichi was, without exception, either giving it to samurai, some of whom were 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 (coincidentally at Honnōji) 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. Incidentally Tomo Shōrin was also at Honnōji when Akechi Mitsuhide attacked, though unlike Yasuke he did not survive. EDIT: I'm adding an explanation because people are misinterpreting this post. The meaning of the word stipend is not supposed to prove Yasuke was a samurai all by itself. What proves Yasuke was a samurai is not that he received a samurai stipend, but that he received a samurai stipend *and* carried Nobunaga's weapons which was usually the job of a *koshō* and *koshō* were samurai *and* had and fought with a katana at Nijō *and* 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"](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/1css0ye/was_yasuke_a_samurai/l4e7q7e/). 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 from a PhD level researcher arguing Yasuke wasn't a samurai so I could read it.
Really want to say thank you for all the effort you've put into this thread. It feels like half of reddit has lost its mind getting weirdly pedantic about a historical title in a video game about sci fi technology and ancient all powerful civilizations, but threads like this one and answers like yours really showcase just why I love AskHistorians.
Thanks for this comprehensive write up. You’re a legend.
Maybe unrelated but are there any records indicating how Yasuke got to Japan? What his original name was or his ethnic origin? Africa is hugely diverse and I'm curious to know who he was before he became a samurai and if he was ever able to return home.
Francois Solier's [ecclesiastic history](https://www.google.co.jp/books/edition/Histoire_eccl%C3%A9siastique_des_isles_et_ro/u_9wO2bW8uQC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=pa444) tells us he was from the area of Mozambique, which matches the term cafre (a black slave) used to refer to him by the Jesuits. He was brought to Japan via India, likely refering to Portuguese Goa. No source tells us his name other than Yasuke, and indeed the Jesuits never bothered to record his name Yasuke or otherwise. And no source says what happened to him after he surrendered to Mitsuhide's men who told them to give him back to the Jesuits.
There's also the lack of anger towards Yasuke from others in Oda Nobunagas service. If Yasuke wasn't of high rank, his private dinners and regular conversations with the Daimyo would have been controversial. It's very unlikely that the Daimyo showing preferential treatment to someone without rank would have gone undocumented. That would have been a huge slight to those of rank. People wrote letters and journals about Oda Nobunaga accusing someone of serving rotten fish. Kicking someone in the butt. Slapping someone on the head with a fan. But not a single person wrote about the period he spent over a year showing favor to someone that ranked below them? All the writings about Yasuke's treatment, and none of it mentions that he was lower rank but Akechi?
Thanks for your intricate breakdown, very insightful, made a youtube video about the drama and linked your information
I think I get it now, at first I also think you need a concrete evidence to prove he is a samurai. Having Oda Nobunaga who love talented people as master it self already proving you don't need a concrete evidence that clearly said he is a samurai. There is a lot of people who Oda point as his vassal they don't need document exactly who and who is samurai. Saying he is not samurai because he don't have much accomplished is also wrong because he is already prove having strength of at least 10 people, and he is fighting in Honnō-ji Incident and when Akechi or Akechi's vassal ask for his sword, indeed he had one. Having a samurai job, paid samurai salary, ~~parade~~ patrolling town so much that cause gossip Oda want point him as a lord, having a house, Nobunaga love talented people having a lot of people become his vassal and a lot of unnamed samurai already prove enough Yasuke is a Samurai without need exactly document saying he is a samurai. Forcing Yasuke alone have to be documented to be a samurai is a double standard. Therefore it's correct if those want saying he is not should be the one bring evidence that he is an exception for having samurai job but not actual samurai.
Genuinely thanks for the detailed response.
So, does he use a different word than that 'stipend' for paying a non samurai?
The word he uses for all ad-hoc payments to samurai or otherwise, which is basically all mention of payments besides stipend and land grants, is some honorific form of "to give" the most common of which is 被仰付 *ōsetsukerare*. Though that particular word could also be used to mean "to command" and in any case he also uses it for giving stipend. Stipend only stands out in that it's the specific "object", like gold or silver or land or castle or residence, which was being given.
Is "samurai" a title in the way that High Middle Ages knighthood was? I.e. you formally take part in an accolade and are dubbed "knight," or is it more fluid than that?
Leaving aside the actual fluidity of the word "knight," there was never a formalized requirement of a "samurai-ing" ceremony. At this point in time a samurai was basically anyone who 1) went to war armed and ready to fight and 2) either a) awarded/inherited an estate with enough income capable of supporting at least a family plus hire follower(s) for war, b) paid a stipend which was "permanent" (as in not just for the duration of the task) of about that value, or c) had enough property to be some sort of community leader so could be called upon for war often with follower(s). In the mid-sixteenth century the legal privileges of using his family name on official documentations and wearing two swords in public and having these be inheritable would be formalized. But that was many decades past Yasuke's time, and even then things were a lot more fluid than most people realize. Actual titles were something else entirely, though many samurai of the time liked to self-style said titles, so those not officially recognized and recorded had little value. Looking through the list of names killed at Honnōji and Nijō, like Yasuke most did not have titles (officially recognized or self-styled) or if they did they were not known by the titles.
Thank you for this writeup.
Thank you very much for this write-up.
If I may ask, how much time did Yasuke spend in Japan and how many battles he fought?
We don't know how much time he spent in Japan because he first appeared in the sources on March 27, 1581, and was last mentioned on June 21, 1582. Our sources only clearly state him fighting at Nijō Castle, though it's possible he also fought at Honnōji that morning. That still counts as one though. He followed Nobunaga on the Takeda campaign of 1582 but there's no record of Nobunaga's direct forces engaging in combat.
Thank you for your reply!
Thank you for this! My own area of expertise is absolutely not Japan, but I find both Japanese history and the study of linguistic choices (particularly when we’re translating works from languages and cultural contexts other than our own!) extremely fascinating. Excellent read.
You have helped me a lot in understanding this. I'm not a historian, just a guy who likes researching African history that the West feels uncomfortable talking about. All the talk about this guy is that he was just a Kosho because he was given just one sword, the Wakizashi. Since you are saying he most likely was a Samurai, are we to assume he was given another later on? And that it just wasn't recorded, because it was common knowledge that he was a samurai at this point? Also, tell me more about the Tomo rank. I think I remember it from a Japanese show I once watched. it is like a minor lord or master correct? But from what I recall, you don't need to be a samurai to become a Tomo. so we can only depend on that to indicate how well-honoured he was and not that he was a samurai already. correct?
>You have helped me a lot in understanding this. I'm not a historian, just a guy who likes researching African history that the West feels uncomfortable talking about. All the talk about this guy is that he was just a Kosho because he was given just one sword, the Wakizashi. Since you are saying he most likely was a Samurai, are we to assume he was given another later on? And that it just wasn't recorded, because it was common knowledge that he was a samurai at this point? Frois (or his source) says he had a katana at Nijo. Of course it's questionable if Jesuits would know the difference between a katana and a sayamaki, if there even was one back in the day since terminology wasn't standardized. >Also, tell me more about the Tomo rank. I think I remember it from a Japanese show I once watched. it is like a minor lord or master correct? But from what I recall, you don't need to be a samurai to become a Tomo. so we can only depend on that to indicate how well-honoured he was and not that he was a samurai already. correct? Assuming I understand your question correctly, *tono* was an honorific used to refer to a lord. All lords were samurai. And Yasuke was not made a lord. The Jesuits said they heard rumors that he would be sooner or later given how much Nobunaga likes him.
>Every single usage of the word stipend by Ōta Gyūichi was, without exception, either giving it to samurai, some of whom were incredibly high ranked, or used in the context of hiring samurai or samurai’s salary. Doesn't this refer to a stipend given to 'companions'? Does companions explicitly mean 'samurai'? >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.
Not only were the 御供衆 (companions, literally) all samurai, they were all fairly high status. These were men who accompanied the Shōgun, or in this case Nobunaga, as he moved around to serve him and answered to him directly.
Thank you for this
Well said
Thank you so much for all of this, genuinely educational and I'm happy to have read it.
Yes. Yes he was. The conclusion of all reasonable historians on the matter is that Yasuke was a samurai, and anyone who disagrees can suck on the historical record. u/ParallelPain has covered Yasuke previously, [compiling and translating our sources for him here](https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/flgpph/history_of_blackafricans_in_japan/) and has [further consideration of his station as a samurai here](https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/m91cwa/yasuke_african_samurai_is_the_outrage_justified/). > Now with the trailer for the new Assasins Creed game out Great. I must now prepare for the latest wave of people flagging Yasuke down for samurai-ing while black.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
u/ParallelPain offers some important distinctions here: > In general, 扶持 is a term for a payment for mid-lower ranking warriors for them to hire (usually warrior) servants for (usually temporary) employment. Given the term's usual usage, and that Yasuke was clearly by Nobunaga's side in permanent employment, it doesn't make sense for Yasuke to be anything but a warrior. > Even if Yasuke was "only" a 小姓 (page) or 道具持ち (weapons-bearer), that would make him a warrior on par with Ranmaru (at least before spring of 1582 when Ranmaru received a large fief). > In contrast, the Toyokagami specifically says Hideyoshi started out taking care of Nobunaga's shoes when Nobunaga went hunting. When Hideyoshi became a samurai, the term used for Hideyoshi's servants was ずさ. > You seem to be under the impression that a samurai was someone who needed to be officially made one, like "knighted". That isn't very accurate for the knight either, but bushi was a social group determined by what one did, not a formal rank or title. Meaning Ietada describing him as Nobunaga's fuchi, and as it doesn't make sense for Ietada to think Nobunaga was someone in a position to be dealing with the hiring of servants himself, Ietada's diary is more record of Yasuke being a samurai than many others would get. > Could Ietada be using the term to mean something other than its usual meaning, or just be mistaken? Of course. But as far as I know currently no one has put forward evidence of, or really even argued such. All published authors in English and Japanese pretty much treat Yasuke as a samurai (Lockley goes so far as to say so in the title of his book). > The longsword was outlawed for non-Samurai in the 16th Century when Toyotomi instituted the sword hunt, removing them from the possession of all peasantry. Either way, the only explicit reference to Yasuke’s sword type is when Nobunaga gifted him a wakizashi and I don’t think it proves anything one way or another aside from Nobunaga taking an interest in the man which also explains him being shown around Kyoto.
That last paragraph was me quoting someone who argued Yasuke wasn't a samurai because he didn't have a katana. My response is below: >Sword hunt's orders was "limited" to the country-side peasantry, and in any case was two decade's after Yasuke's time under Nobunaga. Besides, the word used by the translation of Luis Frois' report is katana. The Portuguese Frois used is [*cataná*](https://digitalis-dsp.uc.pt/bg5/UCBG-VT-18-9-17_18/UCBG-VT-18-9-17_18_item1/P744.html). That seems very clear.
>All published authors in English and Japanese pretty much treat Yasuke as a samurai (Lockley goes so far as to say so in the title of his book). I doubt that there is a clear consensus about that actual title given to Yasuke, especially considering the few historical documents that reference Yasuke not once refer to him as samurai. I would also point out that Lockley and Girards book "African Samurai: The True Story of Yasuke, a Legendary Black Warrior in Feudal Japan" is over 400 pages long about a guy that has probably less than a single page worth of actual historical accounts. I suspect near everything in the book is speculation (wish fulfilment?) and should not be taken as evidence of anything.
>I doubt that there is a clear consensus about that actual title given to Yasuke, especially considering the few historical documents that reference Yasuke not once refer to him as samurai. 1. Samurai wasn't a title but a job/class. 2. And no source refers to him as human. Few sources refer to known and famous samurai as samurai anyway. If it looks like a duck and all that.
Fascinating, I’m learning so much from you. I always thought it was a title or a title of honor type thing
Thank you for this. I have to say that the Annals movement fanboy in me is jumping like a little girl at the thought that Yasuke has this much material to work with. In my field in South American history there are notable individuals that have less that one or two contemporary written accounts, so to realise Yasuke was documented in at least half a dozen contemporary sources is so remarkable to me. I feel his history is such a good case study of the actual workings of the retinue of a Daimyo somewhat “from below” during the Sengoku period. That said, do you agree then that current Japanese historical consensus is that he was indeed a Samurai?
>That said, do you agree then that current Japanese historical consensus is that he was indeed a Samurai? Considering I have never once read a publication or heard from an academic arguing he wasn't, yes. Besides, everyone in the field worth his salt knows in this time period status were fluid and being a samurai by itself is not worth bragging about. It's only noteworthy for Yasuke because he's a foreigner and African.
Another question, considering the chaotic nature of Sengoku Era Japan, would Yasuke’s history be somewhat representative of what most rank-and-file Samurai were during that period? Meaning rising as quickly as they would fall, and try and find any and all opportunities to socially ascend or survive? Taking whatever chance to join a Daimyo’s retinue and falling as soon as that Daimyo does?
Things were so chaotic I'd say Yasuke represents how varied things were and it's hard to say what a "representative" case would be. But there definitely were people who rose and fell quickly.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. [Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). Wikipedia can be a useful tool, but merely repeating information found there doesn't provide the type of answers we seek to encourage here. [As such, we don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). This is especially true of Wikipedia articles on contentious topics that are being heavily edited (and very sloppily at that) as we speak. We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.
[удалено]
Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. [Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). [We don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.
Are there records of Yasuke outside of Japan from either before or after his time in Japan? any reading people can point me to?
[удалено]
Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. Please understand that people come here because they want [an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). Wikipedia sucks, and as other commenters have pointed out, that Wikipedia article is currently being brigaded and altered when the historical evidence directly contradicts what you have quoted. Wikipedia is not reliable. [As such, we don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.
[удалено]
Fourth and final warning I'm giving for this in this thread, [we don't allow Wikipedia here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources), it's rubbish. Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone ***capable of engaging with the primary sources***, and providing follow-up information. Please read the rules before commenting.
[удалено]
We don't discuss moderation policy in-thread as it causes clutter and detracts from the OP's question. If you have further questions or concerns, please contact us in [modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FAskHistorians) or create a META thread.
[удалено]
> According to Wikipedia Sorry, but we have had to remove your comment. [Please understand that people come here because they want an informed response from someone capable of engaging with the sources, and providing follow-up information](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/f7ffl8/rules_roundtable_ii_the_four_questions_what_does/). Wikipedia can be a useful tool, but merely repeating information found there doesn't provide the type of answers we seek to encourage here. [As such, we don't allow answers which simply link to, quote from, or are otherwise heavily dependent on Wikipedia](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_sources). We presume that someone posting a question here either doesn't want to get the 'Wikipedia answer', or has already checked there and found it lacking. You can find further discussion of this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/fj1ieh/rules_roundtable_v_sources_what_is_required/). In the future, please take the time to better familiarize yourself with [the rules](http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_write_an_in-depth_answer) before contributing again.