Talk:Yasuke

"Valignano describes"

Is Valignano the source for this? I though Valignano didn’t write about Yasuke? It is also interesting that the pronoun 'he' is not referring to neither of the two men mentioned in this sentence. Tinynanorobots (talk) 12:14, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Lockley in Britannica says the primary source is Ōta Gyūichi, and also Tsujiuchi [1] mentions Gyūichi's Shinchō Kōki. Perhaps we could replace the sources currently cited (both in Japanese: BuzzFeedJapan and Fujita) with Lockley and Tsujiuchi? Per WP:NONENG, "English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones". I'm now going to fix the "he" issue you noticed. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 13:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Lockley also mentions Jesuit sources, but that usually means Luís Fróis and Father Lourenço, not Valignano. The Japanese HuffPost says pretty much what the wikiarticle says, but it is formatted differently than other quotes and possible refers to multiple persons and not just Yasuke.

Britannica does mention the scrubbing so it would support the section if the attribution to Valignano was removed. I don’t know if the other sources mention it. I will look at what other Japanese sources can be swapped out. Tinynanorobots (talk) 14:24, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Britannica does mention the scrubbing. Actually it does: "Nobunaga could not trust the color of his skin and had his retainers scrub him". [2] Gitz (talk) (contribs) 14:31, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Isn't that what Tinyanorobots said? Did you miss that both of you said 'does' rather than 'does not' Nil Einne (talk) 22:09, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Yep! I should get more sleep... Gitz (talk) (contribs) 22:15, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

"Valignano describes" was included with this massive edit by Aroohcore. Since it contains at least one mistake ("Valignano describes") Aroohcore and editors interested in Yasuke should check it carefully to see if there are any more. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 12:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Valignano, despite apparently being a great epistoler, doesn't really mention Yasuke. He mentions being given cafres; sending two to a church in Lisbon, and keeping one, presumably Yasuke, to himself. The published, contemporaneous Jesuit letters mention Nobunaga having Yasuke strip to his waist, but do not mention washing or scrubbing. Neither does Tsujiuchi: When Nobunaga saw him, he ordered the kokudo (black fellow) to take off his clothes suspecting that his black skin color was painted.. There is, however, a later (post-1744 at least) secondary source which does, apparently, include this aspect: キリスト教に関する導入書、すなわち日本宣教の始まりとその上長たちについての書　1549年8月15日から1744年8月31日まで. I've not yet found a copy, so cannot confirm the contents.

In the meantime, Tsujiuchi fails to verify the specificity of the content. Rotary Engine ^talk 13:09, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

The massive edit by @Aroohcore I mentioned also added that Yasuke's confirmed period of stay in Japan was very short - about three years, from 17 August 1579 to 21 June 1582 and cited excite.co.jp as the source. If I'm not mistaken, the author is anonymous ("Japaaan") and it's a WP:SPS we shouldn't rely on; besides, it doesn't support the "17 August" date. Lockley says that "Yasuke first enters the historical record in 1581". So I'm going to remove the dubious information and replace it with The earliest known record of Yasuke dates back to 1581 (or something similar) sourced with Lockley. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 12:52, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

I have just noticed that the article also contains In 1579, Yasuke arrived in Japan in the service of the Italian Jesuit missionary Alessandro Valignano. This is contradicted by Lockley's "The earliest known record of Yasuke dates back to 1581". Two sources are cited: Leupp, which doesn't support the content, and "Crasset 1925, p. 384 (number of frames 207)", which I can't verify. Could someone please check? Gitz (talk) (contribs) 13:00, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

It's possible that both "Yasuke arrived in 1579" and "the earliest known record dates back to 1581" are correct.

Jean Crasset has Alessandro Valignano arriving in Japan in 1579 to relieve Cabral as the Jesuit Visitor in Japan; on Frame 202 of the Japanese document. The characters for the year are 千五百七十九年. The same is on page 420 of Crasset's original French here, which may be easier than the Japanese. It is commonly assumed that Yasuke was with him; and sources to that effect should not be difficult to find.

The event mentioned on Frame 207 is Yasuke's meeting with Nobunaga, which occurred in 1581. The corresponding section in the French original is on page 430. That section describes "a Moor valet brought from India".

The first known mention of an (unnamed, presumed) Yasuke in the Jesuit letters is in Luis Frois letter written 14 April 1581. The writing of this letter predates the Japanese records - Ota Gyuichi's Shincho Koki and Ietada's Diary - so unless there is something earlier, Lockley's date for the "earliest known record" appears correct. Rotary Engine ^talk 15:04, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that both information could be true, but (if I'm not mistaken) we lack a source for the first one: we know that he was in Valignano's service, but we don't know if he came to Japan with Valignano in 1579 or if he joined him later. We would need a source for that, wouldn't we? Gitz (talk) (contribs) 16:06, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Concur that we should not, ourselves, take Valignano's arrival in 1579 (Crasset F202/p420) and his having "a Moor valet which he brought from India" (Crasset F207/p430) and synthesise that to "Yasuke arrived in Japan in 1579". If that is to be included, we should find a source which directly supports it. Rotary Engine ^talk 20:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Thomas Lockley's First Papers

It’s been a long time. I had no intention of coming, but I saw something interesting so I brought it. I'll be back soon.

The Story of Yasuke: Nobunaga's African Retainer. 桜文論叢. 2016. 91. 89-127

It was said that Thomas Lockley's paper had been removed from Nihon University's website and could not be viewed, but some Japanese people noticed that the file remained on the server, only the link to the file had disappeared. . It seems that it could be viewed by simply rewriting the URL.
Thomas Lockley claims that this is a thesis, but half of it is an introduction to Japanese history, and the other half is Lockley's speculation and wishful thinking, with almost no academic discussion. There was a story about Naoto in a few sections above, and what he pointed out was true.

https://www.publication.law.nihon-u.ac.jp/pdf/treatise/treatise_91/all.pdf

We read primary documents and we all know that there is only one mention of Yasuke in Ietada's diary, right? Along with Nobunaga was Yasuke, and it is said that he was a large, black man.
However, Thomas Lockley claims that there are two references to Yasuke. The references state that Matsudaira Ietada was jealous of Yasuke's good treatment. Although he states that the references were taken from the Ietada Diary, he does not give any specifics, such as which page he quoted from or which day in the diary he used. This cannot be confirmed.
It states that it cites multiple other documents, but when Naoto investigated, it was reported that some of the cited documents did not include the content. If you don't want to see Naoto's text, please look it up yourself.
Naoto's writing is very aggressive, but please bear with me. I said it before, right? There are some Japanese people who are very angry about this incident. He is a typical example.

https://japanese-with-naoto.com/2024/10/02/did-black-people-own-japnese-slaves/
https://japanese-with-naoto.com/2024/10/09/did-yasuke-wield-nobunagas-sword/

It is probably easier for you than me to check the source material and how accurate the content is.
If multiple contents that are not stated in the original source are found, it would mean that Thomas Lockley's peer-reviewed paper is unreliable and Nihon University's peer review was not working properly.
What bothers me the most is that in this paper, Lockley Thomas completely ignores how to write a paper, such as not writing a page when quoting from a source, or writing a story from his own imagination. How can he teach a class at Nihon University?

By the way, someone mentioned the other day that a book by a Korean scholar examining Thomas Lockley's claims will be published soon. It will be released soon.

https://naude.eu/page-3/
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DJ2KJJ9Y Tanukisann (talk) 16:33, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

I can't comment on the quality of the 'Japanese by Naoto' articles or Thomas Lockley's earlier works, as I haven't looked into them, but I highly doubt that Alaric Naudé's self-published book would be an acceptable source here, as per WP:RS. Guinsardrhineford0079 (talk) 17:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

As everyone says, Alaric NAUDÉ books are self-published. No news sites have responded to this so far. Therefore, it cannot be used as is. I noticed that too when I was told. I thought it would be published by some publisher.

However, you can research the literature and enrich your articles based on the content pointed out in this book. For example, let's look at this information.

The African Samurai claims that the Shincho-kōki was printed ten years after Nobunaga's death, but that is false information.It can be seen that Hoan-Shincho-kōki corresponds to this, and Thomas Lockley cannot distinguish between them. This makes Thomas Lockley's claim even less credible. This book is based on Shincho-kōki, but it is a book for the masses, with many fictional stories added that are not in the original.

Here is a document from 1634. The name of the material is Sōkenkōbukan. Japanese:総見公武鑑

During the Edo period in Japan, encyclopedias of names of people who were subordinates of famous people such as Nobunaga and Hideyoshi were often created.

The documents contain the names of Nobunaga's direct subordinates. Not only famous vassals but also pages are listed, but Yasuke's name is not included. This confirms that Yasuke was not a samurai, or that he was a low-ranking person who did not need to be written as a document.

You may not be very interested in it, but there is the name of Ranmaru Mori, and there is also the name of Shinsuke Mōri, who defeated Yoshimoto Imagawa.

https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1015270/1/45 To the left of this. Continues to right side of page 50.

Incidentally, the same goes for Odabukan, which starts on the left side of page 44 and continues on the right side of page 45. Japanese:織田武鑑

Yasuke's name does not appear in this document either.

These are two different documents, so there is some overlap in content.

Finally, these are included in a book published in 1939. It is housed in the Diet Library of Japan and can be viewed online. Tanukisann (talk) 12:21, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Naoto makes some errors. He says the missionaries were already banned in Yasuke´s time. I think the first anti-Christian edict was in 1587, after Yasuke´s service had ended. The sources Lockley cites might be useful. Here is a link to a book discussing Yasuke, slavery and samurai https://www.google.de/books/edition/The_Book_of_Bushido/mjUtEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=yasuke+bushido&pg=PT71&printsec=frontcover In general, I am not sure how proving that Lockley is a bad scholar effects the article. He isn’t a trained historian and his first paper isn’t very well written. Most of his theories aren’t in this article. Most of the one in this article are at least linked to the source. The servants bit is still a mystery. So really, Naoto doesn’t help us. Tinynanorobots (talk) 17:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you, and I don't think we should use all of the information written by Naoto or Alaric Naudé. Every piece of information has some correct and some incorrect parts. Of course, you cannot write information that cannot be used as is, but if you check the source of the information, the literature that was the source of the information may be useful. As you say, the first ban on missionaries in Japan was issued in 1987. At that time, forced conversion to Christianity and slave trade were not permitted, but individuals were allowed to convert of their own free will. Spain, which had shown its intention to invade Japan through religion, was oppressed, but the Jesuits were exempt. Tanukisann (talk) 15:43, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

• 1587

Re the Spain, it's ironic that Spain wants to invade Japan through religion despite Portugal being far more active in Japan than Spain ever was. And was discovered her first before Spain84.54.70.44 (talk) 05:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

I got the numbers wrong. Not 9 but 5. I feel pathetic myself.

Many people criticize Lockley, but this is mainly due to two reasons. The first is that while he claims to be a researcher of history, he spreads a false history to the world that is based on his own delusions and what he wants to say. The second is that Lockley's claims are the basis for the arguments of people in the West today who make various claims, such as that Yasuke was a samurai. If Thomas Lockley had not claimed that Yasuke was a samurai, and if he had not written that hiring black slaves was popular in Japan, he would probably be living a quiet life by now. However, he would not have achieved his current status as a history expert if he had not written these things.

British David Atkinson makes the following claim.

He agreed with Thomas Lockley's claim that blacks were employed in Kyushu, and argued against those who denied that this was the case, that slaves were brought along the Silk Road. He ignores the fact that the Silk Road was no longer in use at the time.

He says that the samurai system had not yet been fully developed in Japan, so there were no samurai during the Sengoku period, and that Oda Nobunaga was a bushi, not a samurai. He says that Yasuke could not have been a samurai, so such a story is a ridiculous one told by people who are ignorant of history, and so on. He ignores the fact that the position of samurai has existed since the Heian period several hundred years ago.

It is because of people like this that the influence of the false history that has spread is so great that we cannot dispel it unless we work harder, which is why the voices of criticism continue.

Some people overseas claim that there have been black descendants in Japan since ancient times, and that all samurai are of black descent. This is also a ridiculous story. But there is even a paper on it. This has nothing to do with Thomas Lockley, but it has come up as a topic from time to time, as it must be denied. Source1 Source2 Tanukisann (talk) 17:38, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

I just received a message from a kind person, so I'm writing this just in case.

Thomas Lockley himself admits that he wrote the book by prioritizing his own imagination, rather than the sources. 1

Changing the harshness of David Atkinson's comments would mean changing what he meant to say. 2

Or should I have added that David Atkins, addressing those who denied that it was fashionable to hire slaves in Kyushu, demanded that evidence be produced and was criticized by many as proof of the devil? 3 4

Should I have added that they claimed the slaves were transported along the Silk Road? 5

The theory that the ancestors of the samurai were black is confirmed to have been proposed by Alexander Francis Chamberlain of Canada in 1910 and W. E. B. DuBois of the United States in 1915. It is unclear how such a theory came about. 6

Perhaps people don't realize it. Many westerners talk about diversity and DEI, but that it is often at the expense of Asia, where the white and black communities are prioritized to do so. I personally don't want to speak or get involved in ethnic matters, but the problems that started with Yasuke and Assassin's Creed have reached that point.

I guess you want to tell me not to come again, so I'm leaving. Tanukisann (talk) 14:30, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Has tanukisann retired? What a pity. He was a valuable Japanese who used to come here.

The English version of wikipedia is now being edited by Westerners who don't know anything about the East, who feel like they know the East and create Westernized materials, and then edit articles based on what they have read and feel like they know the East.

The best example of this would be Thomas Lockley.

Some Japanese once came to me and said that Yasuke is not a samurai because he does not have a family name, but did you guys take their opinion seriously?

In the West, the family name is only an identifier, but in the East, it is very significant.

Hideyoshi wanted a high official rank, but of the surnames he had, Kinoshita was of low rank, so he could not receive a high official rank. Hashiba was self-made and has no meaning. Taira is a self-proclaimed name.

Since a family name of high status was required to receive the highest official rank, Hideyoshi adopted a person with a high status family name and received the Fujiwara family name, and was finally able to receive the highest official rank.

The surname is very important, which is why the Japanese are making the point, but did anyone, including the current Britannica article, Atkins and López-Vera, even mention it that much?

To be clear, the current Britannica article has a bad reputation among the Japanese for being false and wrong. 140.227.46.9 (talk) 02:08, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Maybe you should look up Yayōsu. The foreign born samurai without a surname. Tippytoemuppet (talk) 08:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I think this is veering into WP:NOTAFORUM territory. Which is to say that it is off-topic. Unless this is somehow related to a proposed change in the article, then it is off-topic. The definition of a samurai and the importance of samurai names would be relevant to the Samurai page, if you have a RS on that, please share it there. In English, the word samurai is used very generically. A lot of historians use it to refer to all Japanese warriors. Especially in books for a non-academic audience. I am sorry, I don’t have time to look up all your links. Tinynanorobots (talk) 16:43, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Sometimes I wonder.

You guys say that as far as the Naoto text is concerned, it was written by a layman and is useless. It is true that they are not peer-reviewed and cannot be used as a source of information. But not only that, you are denigrating him entirely on the grounds that he is critical of Thomas Lockley.

Alaric Naudé's own publications cannot be used directly per se, but it should be possible to check the secondary sources described in them. However, no one is willing to look at that either, on the grounds that it too is critical of Thomas Lockley.

On the other hand, they are amateurs when it comes to history, they fabricate sources, and they give credence to Thomas Lockley's imaginatively created claims with a mindset that ignores the basics of Japan and China at the time and replaces them with modern Western thinking. You guys do not even make personal attacks against him. That would be a double standard.

Now, since there is no use in just complaining, I will describe the matter that Fujita wrote about his visit to Echizen on May 14, 1581.

The Japanese version of wikipedia has more information.

[37] a b c 藤田 2005, pp. 7–8.

It is said that Yasuke was the first Negro to visit Kyoto. There is no record of another black person being brought to Kyoto after Yasuke was given to Nobunaga. Therefore, Fujita speculates that the black man who accompanied him to Echizen must have been Yasuke and describes him. Therefore, the Japanese version is described as Fujita's assertion, not as official information based on documents. 140.227.46.9 (talk) 02:49, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

I think most people just aren’t going to buy Naude's book, and double-checking the sources would probably require knowledge of Eastern languages and access to documents. I wouldn’t say that Naude's book is unusable. I will wait for a professional review before forming an opinion on that. The main thing that separates him from Lockley, is that Lockley isn’t self-published. Tinynanorobots (talk) 16:57, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

I've read Alaric Naudé's books. He uses linguistics and sociolinguistics to investigate the character of Yasuke.

Although there are parts of him that are criticizing Thomas Lockley, he is only criticizing the fact that when researching Yasuke, he does not have an appropriate distance from the subject of his research, and that he makes up various theories. Alaric Naudé acknowledges the parts where Thomas Lockley did proper research. He does not deny everything.

According to Alaric Naudé, he collected materials in Japanese, which was used in Japan where Yasuke was active, Portuguese, which was used by missionaries, Chinese, which is the central language of East Asia, and Korean, which is located between China and Japan, but the best materials were in Japanese and Portuguese.

The materials in English are Westernized and are almost useless. It's only used to explain the times and world situation. In other words, as long as we collect materials in English, we will not be able to obtain proper information about Yasuke. The insistence on using English materials is probably one of the reasons why many Japanese people who read the article are not satisfied with it.

This book is a self-published work, but it uses a lot of material. There is no way that the current way of editing articles, which relies on English materials without trying to understand Japanese history and common sense, will be able to convince Japanese people who are familiar with history. 153.236.158.180 (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Sources used to explain the history of the slave trade in Europe and how it was not prevalent in Kyushu, Japan.

• Kollman, P. (2024). Catholic Missions and African Responses I: 1450–1800. In The Palgrave Handbook of Christianity in Africa from Apostolic Times to the Present (pp. 193-205). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
• Da Gama, V. (2009). Em nome de Deus: the journal of the first voyage of Vasco da Gama to India, 1497-1499. In Em nome de Deus: The Journal of the First Voyage of Vasco da Gama to India, 1497-1499. Brill.
• Russell, P. E. (2019). Prince Henry the Navigator. In The European Opportunity (pp. 100-129).
• Routledge. Schwaller, J. F. (2016). Manila-Acapulco Galleon Trade. The Spanish Empire: A Historical Encyclopedia [2 volumes], 95.
• Cartwright, M. (2021). Macau Portuguesa. traduzido em português por Joana Mota. World History Encyclopedia em português, 21.Subrahmanyam, S. (1993). The Portuguese Empire in Asia, 1500-1700: A Political and Economic History. Longman.
• Chan, K. S. (2008). Foreign trade, commercial policies and the political economy of the Song and Ming dynasties of China. Australian Economic History Review, 48(1), 68-90.Sakamaki, S. (1964). Ryukyu and Southeast Asia. The Journal of *Asian Studies, 23(3), 383–389. doi:10.2307/2050757
• Goodman, G. K. (1955). The Dutch Impact on Japan (1640-1853). University of Michigan.
• Fróis, L. (1585). História de Japam.
• Ramesh, S., & Ramesh, S. (2020). The Tokugawa Period (1600–1868): Isolation and Change. China's Economic Rise: Lessons from Japan’s Political Economy, 101-133.
• Naoko, I. (2013). Wei Zhiyan and the Subversion of the Sakoku. Offshore Asia: Maritime Interactions in East Asia before Steamships, 236-58.

153.236.158.180 (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Regarding Yasuke's visit to Japan. While he says this is only speculation, he admits that Lockley's Mozambique theory is more likely.

• Fróis, L. (1585). História de Japam

153.236.158.180 (talk) 16:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

In the West, names are given based on family ties, but in the East, names indicate status or position.

Furthermore, the source uses the explanation that the name Yasuke is a form similar to that of a low-ranking servant or a childhood name, and not the form of a samurai.

It was also pointed out that his name was not included in the list of Oda's vassals.

• 조진석. (2024). 백제의 한자 수용과 문서 행정 시기. 호서고고학, 38-62.
• 권인한. (2010). The Evolution of Ancient East Asian Writing Systems as Observed through Early Korean and Japanese Wooden Tablets. Korea Journal, 50(2), 124-157.
• 山田健三. (2013). 書記用語 「万葉仮名」 をめぐって. 人文科学論集. 文化コミュニケーション学科編, 47, 15-30.
• Miller, R. A. (1967). The Japanese Language.
• Seeley, C. (1991).A History of Writing in Japan.
• Friday, K. F. (2004). Samurai, warfare and the state in early medieval Japan. Routledge.
• 谷口, 名. (2000). 信長の親衛隊: 戦国覇者の多彩な人材 (中公新書 1453). 中央公論新社.
• 浅井玄卜. (1634). 総見公武鑑.
• 金子哲. (2003). 中世後期民衆のサムライ観: 戦国期の多様な侍と王権の姿: 戦国期の多様な侍と王権の姿. 동북아시아문화학회 국제학술대회 발표자료집, 39-44.
• Loveday, L. (2019). Onomastic Configurations within Japanese Shintoism. Onomastics between Sacred and Profane, 91.
• 신종대. (2018). 무사의 이름체계 연구: 메이지 전후, 무사의 실명 (實名) 과 통칭 (通稱) 을 중심으로: 메이지 전후, 무사의 실명 (實名) 과 통칭 (通稱) 을 중심으로. 동북아 문화연구, 54, 111-127.

153.236.158.180 (talk) 16:24, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Descriptions of various types of soldiers such as swords, spears, and bows.

Japanese is a difficult language, and there is no way Yasuke will be able to use it in a short time. A commander in command of soldiers requires advanced communication skills, which is impossible to achieve at an entry-level level.

He was not given a sword or a surname. Being given a wakizashi does not prove he was a samurai. If he had been given the position of a samurai rather than a servant, Gyuichi Ota and the Jesuits would have left records, but no such information exists.

In other words, he was probably just a servant who carried a weapon, and was not given the status of a samurai. Sources used in these descriptions.

• Conlan, Thomas (2003). Weapons and Fighting Techniques of the Samurai Warrior, 1200–1877 AD. Amber Books.
• Ota, G., Elisonas, J. S., & Lamers, J. P. (2011). Book I Ōta Izumi No Kami Composed This. And It Records The Life Of Lord Oda Danjō No Jō Nobunaga From Eiroku 11 [1568], The Year Of Earth Senior And The Dragon. In The Chronicle of Lord *Nobunaga (pp. 116-127). Brill
• Yazıcıoğlu, E. T. (1996). A Historical Analysis of Consumer Culture in Japan: Momoyama-Genroku (1573-1703) (Master's thesis, Bilkent Universitesi (Turkey)).
• Wakita Kyūbei (1585–1660), served under the famous warlord Maeda Toshinaga (前田 利長) who lived during the Azuchi-Momoyama period (1573–1600) and the early Edo period (1603–1868)
• Nelson, D. (2021). From Erstwhile Captive to Cultural Erudite: The Career of Korean-Born Samurai, Wakita Kyūbei. In The Power of the Dispersed (pp. 285-310). Brill.
• Tsang, C. R. (2020). War and Faith: Ikkō Ikki in Late Muromachi Japan (Vol. 288). BRILL.
• Inoguchi, T. (1997). The Japanese political system: Its basic continuity in historical perspective. Asian Journal of Political Science, 5(2), 65-77.
• 高橋 寛次 (2024) 弥助問題「本人は芸人のような立場」「日本人の不満は当然」 歴史学者・呉座氏に聞く（上） https://www.sankei.com/article/20240805-2RDCMCMKMNFYFOGXMRGPCIT2NI/

153.236.158.180 (talk) 16:26, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

It is pointed out that the content of the book written by Thomas Lockley is completely different from what is recorded.

Tracking the history of incorrect entries made on Wikipedia and reprinted on various sites such as Britannica. Sources used in these.

• Luis Frois, S. J. The First European Description of Japan, 1585. Routledge.
• Luis Frois, "Jesuit Annual Report" (耶蘇会の日本年報), May 19, 1581.(Original)
• Ichiko, T. (市古 貞次). (1966). Soga Monogatari (曽我物語). Iwanami Shoten.
• Kagawa, S. (香川 宣阿). (1717). Intoku Taiheiki (『陰徳太平記』)
• Matsudaira, I. (松平 家忠). (1966). Ietada Nikki (『家忠日記』). Tokyo: Daiichi Shobō. Covers his journals for 17-year interval between 1575 and August 1594
• Lockley, T., & Girard, G. (2019). African samurai: The true story of Yasuke, a legendary black warrior in feudal Japan. Hanover Square Press. p. 106-107, p. 113, p. 140

153.236.158.180 (talk) 16:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

The Wikipedia article cites a lot of Japanese sources. Also, the book by Lockley and Girard is not considered a reliable source according to consensus. I don't know what change you are advocating for. There is also very little about the slave trade in this article. It isn't even mentioned that Yasuke might have been a slave. Lockley's arguments are also very pro Japanese. They aren't in the article, though, so it would be off-topic to discuss them here. This page is about improving the article. Thank you for the reading suggestions. Tinynanorobots (talk) 08:56, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Some reading

I’ll just leave these right here

• [3]

• [4]
  • (English) [THE REAL YASUKE: HISTORY BEYOND THE SAMURAI MYTH](kindle, Paperback)
  • (Japanese) [弥助: 侍伝説の歴史学的検証](kindle, Paperback)

 Works by a scholar and professor of social (applied) linguistics at Suwon University in Republic of Korea.
 His work is a worthy addition to your reference list.
 As for the source, it would likely correspond to the following.
 * The piece of work itself (the article, book)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phoepsilonix (talk • contribs) 08:06, 28 October 2024 (UTC) 

Mileasel (talk) 17:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

And you want to use this as source for the article or what exactly? Trade (talk) 17:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Where in the 13 sentences written about Yasuke is he referred to as a samurai? Mileasel (talk) 17:55, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Please take a look at WP:RS before encouraging editors to read 'The Bogus Story of Yasuke & "wokeness" revisionist history'. Guinsardrhineford0079 (talk) 00:25, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorta weird how two accounts that are three years old with no edits come out of nowhere to edit about this self published book by a lonely redditor. Weird. 12.75.41.48 (talk) 03:10, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree. It's strange that he suddenly turned into this after being silent for several years.

However, his books will be published not only in Japanese but also in English and Korean by the official publisher.

In his last self-published book, he had no production budget, so the text was not proofread properly, but this time, he says that he will use the money he made from self-publishing to hire a professional and make it more solid.

https://x.com/Goryodynasty/status/1850871797136425314 110.131.150.214 (talk) 14:15, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

It seems that the English version of his book has been published by an official publisher.

It's a company that specializes in academic books, and all of their books are peer-reviewed by professors and experts.

From today on, the book you derided as self-published and no one wanted to look at is a much more reliable source of information than Thomas Lockley's non-peer-reviewed book.

https://x.com/Goryodynasty/status/1851994356305244506

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1763781100

https://unitedscholarsacademicpress.com/ 140.227.46.9 (talk) 04:12, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

A few points:

1. https://unitedscholarsacademicpress.com/books

The publisher still lists it as 'under review'

2. The author is not a historian and unlike Lockley (who is attributed to on the page when his claims are made) his field of research is significantly further away from historical research (Linguistics) and again unlike Lockley seems to not even be focused on Japanese linguistics. If the book does get reviewed I would still say that at best the findings should be directly attributed to him. Relm (talk) 16:39, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

He came with portuguese people

He didn't come with Italians he came with Portuguese and one of the guys was Italian 2001:818:E924:D000:2DA2:4B14:59AF:E0BC (talk) 07:03, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Interesting. Do you have a reliable source to confirm that? Commander Keane (talk) 08:37, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

I removed "Italian" from the lead. I believe they came on a Portuguese ship, but am not sure. It is more important that Yasuke came with the Jesuits, than the nationality of the ship. I believe most of the Jesuits were Portuguese, but not all. Usually, when the Portuguese are referred to in this context, it means merchants. Thank you. Tinynanorobots (talk) 16:44, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Badly Translated Quote

The quote following quote seems to be machine translated from Japanese to English. The original is in Portuguese, the Japanese translation made be old.

"A black man whom the visitor [Valignano] sent to Nobunaga went to the house of Nobunaga's son after his death and was fighting for quite a long time, when a vassal of Akechi approached him and said, "Do not be afraid, give me that sword", so he gave him the sword. The vassal asked Akechi what should be done with the black man, and he said, "A black slave is an animal (bestial) and knows nothing, nor is he Japanese, so do not kill him, and place him in the custody at the cathedral of Padre in India"

The most obvious error is the use of India, presumably to translate southern barbarian. However, "black slave" might also be wrong, if it is a translation of "cafre". Does anyone know of a better translation that is available? Tinynanorobots (talk) 09:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

There was a lot of discussion around the word 'cafre' a few months ago around july/august, I'd suggest checking for it in the archives. Relm (talk) 16:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

If a quote is not reported by a reliable secondary source, we should simply remove it from the article. It is likely to be neither accurate nor significant (WP:V and WP:NPOV). Removing it also makes the article more readable. Gitz (talk) (contribs) 22:57, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

It is from the Huffington Post in Japan. Interestingly, the Huffington Post uses "black slave" every time to translate "cafre" however, the Wikipedia article uses black man in all but one instance. I found the letter in the original Portuguese, and it uses India, so that is actually correct (although cathedral might not be). I think that just removing it is probably better. There is already a summary of the events in the article, so it is redundant. Tinynanorobots (talk) 17:55, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

I think the Honno-ji section contains some misleading sentences. but I only point out one here

"...and not bound by the samurai code of honour." this the-samurai-code-of-honour does not show in the two of the cited sources, it is just someone's imagination.

so I thought showing hos actually stated in the original source(JapaneseToEnglish translated version) was better.

a bit late on commenting below but anyway.

As mentioned, the missionary's letter said "igreja dos padres da India" which would literally translate to "the church of missionarys of India" which thought to mean the Nanban-ji temple, the temple of foreigners at the time basically. sorry for rough explanation. so yes, the word India is not a mistake but was expressed and understood differently in old times perhaps.

and the original text only used word "Cafre" for "Black people" and was translated to Japanese as "黒奴" by Japanese historians for this section of the letter, which pretty much means "black slave" and the cited sources does not seperately use words "black slaves" and "black people" ,it only uses "黒人奴隷" which is "black slave".

so what is discussed here was just how Wiki users modified the source. KeiTakahashi999 (talk) 02:11, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Cartas de Evora

https://sleepcratic-republic.hatenablog.com/entry/2024/07/30/225016#%E4%BA%AC%E9%83%BD%E7%99%BA%E3%82%AB%E3%83%AA%E3%83%A8%E3%83%B3%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8ACarrions-report-about-the-honnoji-incident 110.131.150.214 (talk) 14:20, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Just to be sure, can you read Portuguese?

If you can, please read the page on the left of this document.

If you see a document that someone has translated and you don't like what you see, you're probably wondering if it's a lie. Just read the original.

https://digitalis-dsp.uc.pt/bg5/UCBG-VT-18-9-17_18/UCBG-VT-18-9-17_18_item1/P744.html 110.131.150.214 (talk) 15:01, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I am aware of this web site of the original manuscript and I have tried reading it.

But to inline with how the wikipedia article should be treated,

this true original manuscript, I think is not really the source to dig into, for it is the primary source plus is very difficult just even to read to anyone as you can see.

We do already have translated version of those texts in Japanese by professionals and I do not really doubt its accuracy for the main grasp of the content.

I do not intend to be offensive in any racial way of course. KeiTakahashi999 (talk) 15:32, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

The two relevant archives which discus Cafre and Kurobo are here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yasuke/Archive_5#Another_source_not_yet_mentioned

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Yasuke/Archive_2#Yasuke_mentioned_by_Portuguese

Additionally, not mentioned in either is this entry in Nippo Jisho: (link)

>Curobô • Cafre. Ou homem negro.

>Curobô • Kafre. Or black man.

This entry on it's own implies that「黒奴」is an accurate translation of "Cafre" however see the other sources in the archives for other relevant sources.

J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 13:59, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

thanks for sharing info.

the words "黒坊","黒奴", and "黒人" are different in its nuance.

the relatively older Japanese translation (by Murakami namingly) had used "黒奴" which had meaning of slave.

the site suggested above : https://sleepcratic-republic.hatenablog.com/entry/2024/07/30/225016#%E4%BA%AC%E9%83%BD%E7%99%BA%E3%82%AB%E3%83%AA%E3%83%A8%E3%83%B3%E5%A0%B1%E5%91%8ACarrions-report-about-the-honnoji-incident

introduces the translation by Matsuda which uses more neutral word of "黒人" which mean black person.

the word "黒坊" is not used in these translations discussed, but i have seen it used in different manuscript.

So how to translate the word "Cafre" of original Portuguese text was up to the translator at the time, and they had their knowledge and reasons. 2001:F74:8C00:2200:C2C9:0:0:1002 (talk) 14:43, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

You are correct, thanks for pointing that out. I had found this entry a few months ago after the last discussion about "cafre" and "kokudo" was already archived and I think I mixed up its relevance since it's been a while since I looked at this. I mainly meant to just point to the previous archives that were mentioned. If I remember correctly, this article said that "cafre" in Portuguese mainly referred to Africans in general, and does not necessarily imply "salve." I guess the entry in Nippo Jisho would seem to support that claim, which was perhaps my original intention when I first saw this entry, although I don't really remember anymore. I may try to look at this again later but I likely will not as I just wanted to link to those two archives. Thanks again for pointing that out. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 16:36, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

The term Cafre is in India and Southafrica an insult to black people, because it is implied with it a clear connection to slavery, similar to the N-word. I will add, that it is now euphemistically addressed as the K-word in South African English. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaffir_(racial_term) While there were theoretical and speculative remarks of freed Africans in India, who were still called by this term, who were once slaves in India, it should be highlighted, that in the time of these Portuguese writings by the Jesuits about Yasuke, the Jesuit branch in India was a strong supporter of the Asian slave trade, the Portuguese dominated the slave trade in Asia in these times and they brought the Africans to Asia as slaves and used them in their daily lives in India and their travels.

"Once the slaves arrived in Acapulco, they were categorized as either blacks (negros), also called cafres, or chinos.³"

(³ The word cafre stemmed from the Portuguese cáfer, which in turn derived from the Arabic kāfir for pagan. It was used to refer to black slaves from all parts of Africa.)

https://brill.com/display/book/edcoll/9789004346611/BP000055.xml

It is quite an oblivious racial view of the source, written by Jesuit Portuguese about Yasuke, that they name him in not a single instant by a name themself. Even the term Yasuke is only mentioned once as a name given by the Japanese to him and afterward they still call him just by this slave-term. They never use a term for a black person (N-word) for him.

I will add, that this remark about this capture of him is not from a Japanese work, but from the Portuguese Jesuit reports. There were not a lot of sources for this incident, the japanese sources quote the court women, who were not killed, while all retainers from Oda were killed.....apparently not Yasuke, because he is a cafre. --ErikWar19 (talk) 21:18, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

I think it is hard to tell how much to read into the fact that the Jesuits didn't use his name in the letters. They probably wouldn't have used the name for a white servant, either, especially since the recipient of the letter might not have known Yasuke's name. One should probably read all the letters and look for patterns. It does seem that most experts believe that Yasuke was a slave at some point in his life. Although, the relationship between Jesuits and slavery is complicated. The Jesuits were made legal distinctions between different types of servitude that are sometimes lumped together as slavery in modern literature, and the different Asian cultures had different forms of bondage that influenced the legal aspects of the Asian slave trade as conducted by the Portuguese.

The letter calling Yasuke bestial is in fact from the Jesuits, so we don't know how accurate it is to what Akechi actually said. Historians tend to ignore the "he knew nothing" line and interpret it as Akechi being racist. They defend Akechi by suggesting other reasons to spare Yasuke or call Akechi out for being racist. I am not actually sure if Yasuke being spared relates to any legal code or custom at the time. I know that Japanese both executed enemies, but also took people as slaves during war. Also, some bushi would change sides. I have, however, no idea how the distinction was made. Tinynanorobots (talk) 14:56, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Actual even Lockley argues in a lot of articles with his direct statements, that Yasuke had to be at some point of his live a slave, he just speculates, that he was freed in India....and didn't supplied any prove of this praxis in India by Portuguese.

His prove is simply to point at his actions in Japan, while claiming, that he has to be freed, to become a samurai for the Japanese. But the Japanese nobles had a different view on European slavery and on Africans in general. So it is more likely, that the Portuguese sources could have seen him as a slave, while the Japanese nobles simply used him as a regular servant, partly unaware about the Portuguese slave-status and norms connected to this matter.

Jesuits talked about the legal ground of slavery in Europa and became later actual opponents against slavery over the decades and centuries, but the actual Jesuits in the colonies had different opinions compared to the Indian and later Macau branch of the Jesuits about this matter, it is still more or less oblivious, that the Jesuits in Asia were strong supporters of the argument to allow slavery, they were involved in the profit of it and a lot of them made cruelties in Southamerica and Asia against slaved Natives and Africans. This is simply the state of the Portuguese colonial slave system at these times.

There were some few examples of Jesuits defending the Natives from Slavery in Southamerica...but even these Jesuits supported often the slavery of Africans as a reason to spare the Natives in America. It is simply dangerous to wish away the biggest European slave seller in this time period in Asia or to make up a "freeing slave" position without actual prove, that Portuguese nobles actual freed African slaves in any significant number in India. We shouldn't presume, that he was freed.

Goa was a main hub of Asian slave trade and Goa was the centrum of the Indian branch of the Jesuits. It was common to have multiple "cafres" as nobility in India and even the poor nobles rented slaves for these services in public. The other servants were Indians, you wouldn't use an expensive white servants in India with these cheaper and easily available options. It was daily live in Portuguese India to use Natives and Africans for these lower services and the delegation to Japan started in India.

Additonal in their arrival in Japan, they talk a lot about the commotion by this specific "carrier, who was a cafre", a carrier of luggage. They presented him to Oda to explain the commotion by their arrival and they gave him into service for Oda as a gift, because he likes curiosities and he served for him in the same capacity, like a servant in India to a Portuguese noble. Carrying weapons etc. But this is partly speculative, original research, because we use the original source and not a reliable second hand source.

It would just fit with the actions of Akechi in this incident, that we have here two sides, the Portuguese side seeing him as a slave, while the Japanese side saw in him a commoner servant.

We have from the Jesuits sources, that he was not killed in this incident, like the actual armed retainer or warriors on the scene, but survived and we know, that barely anyone survived this incident...we have even a statement, clearly seeing him as belonging to the Jesuits. This quote is actual even more interesting, because Akechi send him to the "Indian" branch of the Jesuits, but at this time the Jesuits in Japan were already in a specific Chinese branch and the Jesuits in Japan knew this. I read about the theory, that Akechi probably simply didn't knew about this recent change. Than the source must have adopted the quote accurately with the error.

Some people suggested, that the bestial part by Akechi is an attempt of Akechi to spare Yasuke, because he was not an influential or important figure to him and he saw in him a foreigner, so he send him away to his foreigners, but it remains a glaring issue, that an armed warrior in servitude in any higher rank under Oda would have been killed by Akechi, because he was a loyal follower of the lord. He just killed hundreds of Oda's actual retainers on this day in this incident. Not Yasuke. So there has to be a difference between the way, we portray Yasuke and the way the Portuguese or/and Akechi saw Yasuke. I don't say, that we should change the article for this big problem, but we should probably keep these things in the back of our head, while we look at news articles or books about Yasuke. It will warp our understanding of these sources, if we don't know these perspective differences between Portuguese and Japanese views on Yasuke. We could end up hiding Asian slavery in history. --ErikWar19 (talk) 01:54, 5 November 2024 (UTC)