弥助関連史料とその英訳 / YASUKE in historical materials

※編集中なのでちょっとおかしいところがあります。
! Probably you’ll find typos and wrong formats in the article right now, because it’s under rivision!

はじめに
Introduction by the author

　この男が生まれつき何と言う名であったか私たちには知る由もない。彼は肌が黒く、背が高く、力が強かった。この黒人はイエズス会宣教師アレッサンドロ・ヴァリニャーノに連れられて1579年（天正7年）に来日した*1。当時の日本は戦国大名たちが群雄割拠する戦乱の時代、戦国時代*2の真っ只中であった。武将たちは武勇に秀でた侍たちを家臣に取り立てて力を蓄え、雄を争い覇を競い合っていた。そしてこの黒人は当時の日本で最強の戦国大名、織田信長と出会い、その名を歴史に残した。彼の名を弥助という。

There is no way for us to know what the man's birth name was. He was dark-skinned, tall, and strong. This black man was brought to Japan, probably in 1579 (7th of Tensho)*3, by a Jesuit missionary Alessandro Valignano. Japan at that time was a warring arena of powerful rival warlords. The warlords became stronger by adding samurai of valor to their own vassals, and competed for power and honor. This period of chaotic civil war is known as the Sengoku era (the Warring States Period).*4 The black man met Oda Nobunaga, the most powerful warlord in entire Japan, and left his name in history. His name was Yasuke.

　本記事では筆者が見つけることができた弥助に関する全ての文献を取り上げる。引用されているものは基本的に史料から弥助に関する部分のみを抜粋したものである。原文、現代日本語訳、英訳の三種を掲示する。英訳の多くは学術的背景の無い筆者が浅薄な知識と貧弱な英語力でもって翻訳したものであることに注意してほしい。また外国語史料は欧州の言語で書かれているが、筆者による英訳はすべて日本語訳からの重訳である。

This article covers all the documents about Yasuke as far as I have been able to find. I will take citations from original documents, and basically only the parts directly related to Yasuke. For Japanese historical materials, I will show the original Japanese texts, their modern Japanese translations, and their English translations in a row. For European materials, I will show the original texts and their Japanese and English translations. Please note that some of English translations are made by me, who have no academic background, but who try as hard as I can with what little knowledge and English ability I have. Also please note that, as to European historical materials, all of my English translations are secondhand translation via Japanese translations, which are works of Japanese historians.

　弥助に関する史料と直接は関係ないものの、その背景を考える上で重要と思われる事柄についてはこれを脚注に記した。また本記事中では歴史学者の考察を何箇所か引用しているが、その他に私自身の推測もいくらか含まれている。後者は翻訳と同様にアカデミックな背景を持たないことを断っておきたい。

My footnotes describe important backgrounds on things that are not directly related to Yasuke or the historical materials per se. Also, throughout this article I will quote a number of historians' observations, but I will add some of my own speculations, too. Please be warned that the latter, like some of English translations, are coming from me, a non-academic.

　謝辞
　Acknowledgment

　欧文史料の原文は東京大学史料編纂所准教授の岡美穂子氏から入手した他、使用する日本語訳についてなど多くのご教示を得た。この場を借りて感謝申し上げる。また英文の見直しにあたって翻訳者の長谷川珈氏から多大なご助力を得ることができた。合わせて感謝申し上げたい。

I would like to thank Mihoko Oka, an associate professor of the Historiographical Institute at the University of Tokyo, for providing some of the original texts and many suggestions, such as which one of Japanese translations should I adopt here. I would also like to thank Ko Hasegawa, a translator, for helping me out reviewing my English.

　言うまでもなく記事の内容に誤りがあれば、それらは全て筆者の責任である。

Needless to say, I am the one responsible for any and all errors in this article.

筆者の連絡先
How to contact me

　この打越眠主主義人民共和国というブログは基本的に日常的な記録のためのブログで、今回の記事は例外的なものです。誤りの指摘やご感想があれば、ぜひ筆者までお知らせください。連絡手段は以下の通りです。基本的にはブログのコメント欄での連絡お願いします。

ブログのコメント欄：記事末尾の「コメントを書く」からどうぞ。
ツイッター：@WL641884Sでやってます。
reddit：MarxArielinusというユーザー名でやってます。

拙文を引用する際の筆名は「打越の易者」でお願いします。

I usually write this blog "Sleepcratic People's Republic of Uchikoshi" for my private records, which makes this article an exception. Please share me your thoughts, and let me know if you find any errors. My contact details are below. Basically, please contact me in the comment section.

Blog Comments: Click "コメントを書く Write a comment" at the bottom of this article.
Twitter: My account is @WL641884S.
reddit: My account is MarxArielinus.

When you cite and credit my article, please use Marx Arielinus as my pseudonym.

太田牛一『信長記』
The Chronicle of Oda Nobunaga

　『信長記』は弥助の主君である織田信長の一代記であり、信長に関する最重要史料の一つだ*5。著者は信長家臣であった太田牛一である。『信長記』を牛一が著したのは信長死後に年月を経てからのことであるが、記述はおおむね正確であり牛一が織田家吏僚だったこともあって*6、歴史家たちは『信長記』の信憑性を高く評価している。

Shincho-ki (literally, Nobunaga Chronicles; Shincho is another way of pronouncing the Kanji characters for Nobunaga) is a biography of Oda Nobunaga*7, the lord of Yasuke. It was written by Ota Gyuichi, one of Nobunaga’s vassals, after Nobunaga's demise using the memoranda Gyuichi made during his lord’s lifetime. Historians do not exactly consider it a primary source since it was completed several decades after Nobunaga's death, but they highly evaluate its credibility for the general accuracy of its descriptions and for the position of Gyuichi, one of the Oda clan's bureaucrats (吏僚 riryo).*8

　織田信長は日本で最も有名な戦国武将である。若い時期の彼は奇矯な振る舞いが目立ち「うつけ」と呼ばれたが、やがてその軍事的カリスマによって台頭する。永禄3年（1560年）の桶狭間の戦いではわずか三千の兵を率いて今川軍二万五千を破り武名をあげた。信長27歳のときの出来事である。

Before we get into the text of Shincho-ki, a quick background summary from me. Nobunaga is undoubtedly the most famous Japanese warlord in the Sengoku period. In his youth, Nobunaga was called "a fool" because of his eccentric behavior, but he eventually rose to prominence with his military charisma. In the Battle of Okehazama in 1560 (3rd of Eiroku), he led only 3,000 soldiers and defeated 25,000 soldiers of the Imagawa clan army. Nobunaga was 27 years old at that time.

　有力大名となった信長は永禄11年（1568年）に形骸化していた足利幕府を復活させたが、将軍*9足利義昭との関係が悪化したことをきっかけに周囲のあらゆる勢力と敵対してしまう。だが信長は生涯戦争に明け暮れて主要な敵をほとんど討ち滅ぼし、天正9年（1581年）には畿内一帯を支配する日本最強の戦国大名となっていた。

In 1568 (11th of Eiroku), Nobunaga, who became a powerful warlord, restored the Shogunate, whose authority had been a mere shell after the Onin war in the 15th century. However, his relationship with Shogun*10 Yoshiaki Ashikaga deteriorated, and as the result, Nobunaga became the enemy of almost all surrounding powers, which eventually led him to his breaking off with the Shogunate. Despite that, Nobunaga spent his entire life in war, destroyed most of his major enemies, and by 1581 (9th of Tensho), he become the strongest warlord who ruled the Kinai region (today's Kyoto City and surrounding areas).

　信長は新しいもの好きで知られていて、当時日本で広まりつつあったキリスト教に対しても、その布教を許可していた。日本でキリスト教を広めていたイエズス会*11は好機を見出し、信長と関係を強化するため巡察師ヴァリニャーノ*12を長とする使節団が信長に謁見することとなった。この日、弥助は後の自分の主君と出会うことになる。

The Society of Jesus aka Jesuits is a religious order of the Catholic Church that was formed in the early 16th century. In the period of the Protestant Reformation, they aimed at the revival of the Catholic Church, promoted higher education and carried out missionary work for non-Christians. The Society of Jesus had continued missionary work in Japan since Francis Xavier, a Jesuit missionary, first came to Japan in 1549 (18th of Tenbun).)), who engaged in missionary work in this country, saw an opportunity. A mission headed by Valignano, the Jesuit Visitador*13, departed northern Kyushu region to pay a visit to Nobunaga to strengthen their relationship, and came to Kyoto. On this day, Yasuke met his future lord.

池田家本『信長記』
Ikeda-hon, a autograph copy

　『信長記』の写本は確認されている限りで72本存在し、それぞれに内容上の違いがあることで知られている。自筆本はほぼ完全な形で現存するものが二冊存在し、それぞれかつての所蔵者の名に因んで池田家本、建勲神社本と呼ばれている。二つの自筆本間にも異同があるため、研究者はこの両者を参照することが多い。ここではインターネットで全文を閲覧できる池田家本の記述を見てみよう。天正9年を取り扱う巻十四には弥助が信長に謁見した際の記録がある。

There are 72 hand copies, so far as confirmed, of "Shincho-ki." Each one of them varies to some degree. Other than these copies, there are two existing autograph copies, both of which are in almost perfect condition. (Here, I mean by “autograph copy” the copies of “Shincho-ki” Gyuichi himself transcribed from his own manuscript, and by “hand copy” the ones someone other than Gyuichi transcribed from any of the autograph copies or hand copies. We usually call both kinds of copies just “copy” (“hon” in Japanese) for short, which will confuse you a bit but I will try to clearly distinguish them as far as I can.) One of the two is called the Ikeda copy (Ikeda = House Ikeda), and the other the Kenjin-jinja copy (jinja = shrine), respectively after the name of their owners. Historians often rely on these two autograph copies for ther study, but even the two are known to have subtle differences between them. In this section, let's look at the text of the Ikeda autograph copy, the full text of which we can read (or at least, view) on the Internet. Volume 14 has a record of the scene Yasuke had an audience with Nobunaga in 9th of Tensho.

二月廿三日、きりしたん国より黒坊主参候。年之齢よわい廿六七と相見え、惣之身之黒き事、牛之如く、彼男健すくやかに器量也、しかも強力十ツヾ之人に勝スクレたる由候、伴天連召列参、御礼申上候。誠以御威光古今不承及、三国之名物か様に珍奇之者共、餘多拝見仕候也。

池田家本『信長記　巻第十四』（岡山大学附属図書館所蔵）
Shincho-ki vol.14 (Ikeda-hon) (in the collection of the library of Okayama University）

二月二十三日、キリシタンの国から黒坊主が参上した。年のころは二十六、二十七歳でもあろうか、全身の黒いことは牛のようである。見るからにたくましく、みごとな体格である。その上、力の強さは十人力以上である*14。伴天連（ヴァリニャーノら）がこの男を召し連れて参上し、信長公に、布教のご許可にたいしてお礼を申し上げた。まことに、信長公ほどのご威光は今も昔もうかがったこともなく、日本はもとよりインド・中国にもめずらしい異人どもを、親しく拝見できるのも、めったにないできごとである。

（榊山潤『現代語訳　信長公記（全）』P378）*15
（Jun Sakakiyama, Gendaigo yaku Shincho Koki (zen), p. 378*16）

On the 23rd of the Second month, a blackmoor came from the Kirishitan Country. He appeared to be twenty-six or twenty-seven years old. Black over his whole body, just like an ox, this man looked robust and had a good demeanor. What is more, his formidable strength surpassed that of ten men.*17 The Bateren brought him along by way of paying his respects to Nobunaga. Indeed, it was owing to Nobunaga's power and his glory that yet unheard-of treasures from the Three Countries and curiosities of this kind came to be seen here time and again, a blessing indeed.

(The Chronicle of Lord Nobunaga, Brill Academic Pub, 2011, 385P)*18

　弥助の大まかな年齢、外見、肌が黒かったこと、力が強かったことなどが記録されている。太田牛一は彼の外見に大変驚いたようだ。なお、この史料を読む際に注意すべき点が二つある。

As we can see, Shincho-ki briefly but plainly records Yasuke's approximate age, how dark his skin was, and how powerful he was. Ota Gyuichi seems to be very surprised at his appearance. We have to consider two points when we read this kind of historical materials.

　まず日付の2月23日は旧暦であり、欧文史料が使用しているユリウス歴とは日付が一致しない。天正9年3月11日はユリウス暦1581年4月14日にあたる。和文史料は年については元号を使用し、日付については九世紀に中国で発明された太陽太陰暦である宣明歴を使用している。本記事では両者を併記するものとする。

First, the date “the 23rd of the Second Month” means that of the old calendar system, which do not match with that of the Julian calendar system in European historical documents. “The old calendar system” means this: premodern Japanese people used the imperial era name (元号 gengo), which we often use even today, for the years; and the Senmyo calendar, which is a solar lunar calendar invented in China in the ninth century, for the dates. In this article, I will describe years and dates in both calender systems.

　また弥助の年齢について26、27歳との記述があるが、当時の日本では年齢を記述する歳に数え年という方法を使用していた。これは生まれた時点の年齢を一歳とし、以後元日のたびに一歳を加算する方式である。現代の年齢表現でいえば当時の弥助は24、25歳ぐらいということになる。ただし異人種の年齢を外見から推測することはいつの時代でも難しいので、これも正確ではないだろう。

Second, though Gyuichi describes the age of Yasuke as 26 or 27, premodern Japanese people used the East Asian age reckoning, in which your age at the time of birth is one year old, and one year is added every New Year's Day. It means that in terms of our modern age system, Yasuke at that time seemed about 24 or 25 years old. That being said, in any historiclal period people would not be so good at guessing the age of foreign races from their appearances. Gyuichi's guess, too, might not be so accurate.

尊経閣本『信長記』
Sonkeikaku copy

　次に池田本とは別の『信長記』写本を見てみよう。取り上げるのは尊経閣文庫本と呼ばれる写本で、同本には他の『信長記』に見られない独自の記述があることで知られている。尊経閣文庫とは江戸期最大の藩であった加賀藩前田家の文書庫であり、尊経閣本は同文庫が所蔵する『信長記』写本のうちの一つだ。太田牛一の四代あとの子孫、太田弥左衛門一寛が自家に伝来する『信長記』を書き写して享保4年（1719年）に主君前田綱紀へ献上したものと考えられている*19。一寛が書写した原本は『和泉守編輯之信長記』という名前が伝わっており、太田牛一の自筆本だった可能性があるが、宝暦9年（1759年）の太田家居宅火災によって焼失したため確かめるすべはない。

Next, let's take a look at another version of "Shincho-ki." This time, one of its hand copies. It is called the Sonkeikaku copy, and known for its extra passages that we cannot find in any of the other copies. Its name came from Sonkeikaku-bunko (bunko = library or archive), which was a library belonged to the Maeda clan who ruled the Kaga Domain, the largest Domain [藩 han; Domain = a large unit of fief, roughly overlap with but a bit smaller than today’s prefecture] throughout the Edo period, meaning that it was a copy of “Shincho-ki” preserved in the collection of the library. Supposedly Ota Yazaemon Kazuhiro, the fourth generation descendant of Ota Gyuichi and a vassal of the Kaga Domain, transcribed the version of "Shincho-ki" handed down in his family and presented it to his lord in 1719 (4th of Kyoho).*20 We only know the name of the original copy, from which Hirokazu transcribed the Sonkeikaku copy, as "Izumi no kami henshu no Shincho-ki" (Izumi no kami = the official post of Gyuichi, henshu no = edited by), and possibly it was one of autograph copies or even the original manuscript itself, but we cannot confirm it anymore because it was lost in a fire that burned the Ota family's residence in 1759.

　尊経閣本は現在の尊経閣文庫管理者である前田育徳会が許可した研究者だけが閲覧できる。本記事では金子拓『織田信長という歴史』内の同本抜粋を引用した。尊経閣本では、弥助と信長の出会いを記述した部分で下線部の内容が追加されている。

Not everyone can read the Sonkeikaku copy. Only reserchers who granted permission from Maeda Ikutokukai, the current manager of the Sonkeikaku-bunko collection, can access it. In this article, I’ll quotethe Sonkeikaku copy via Professor Hiraku Kaneko's book "Oda Nobunaga toiu rekishi." Below is one of such extra passages in the Sonkeikaku copy that appears in the scene of Yasuke’s first meeting with Nobunaga.

二月廿三日、きりしたん国より黒坊まいり候、齢廿六七と相見へ、惣之身之黒キ事牛之ことく、彼男器量すくやかにて、しかも強力十人に勝れたる由候、伴天連召列参、御礼申上候、誠以御威光古今不及承、三国之名物又かように珍奇之者共拝見仕候、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、

（金子拓『織田信長という歴史』P311）
（cited from: Hiraku Kaneko, Oda Nobunaga toiu rekishi, p. 311）

二月二十三日、キリシタンの国から黒坊主が参上した。年のころは二十六、二十七歳でもあろうか、全身の黒いことは牛のようである。見るからにみごとな体格でたくましい。しかも力の強さは十人力以上である。バテレンが召し連れて参上し、布教のご許可にたいしてお礼を申し上げた。まことに、信長様ほどのご威光は今も昔もうかがったこともなく、日本はもとよりインド・中国の名物やめずらしい異人どもを、親しく拝見できるのも、めったにないできごとである。
そうして、この黒坊主は信長様からお扶持を与えられ、名前を弥助と号され、装飾刀並びに私邸なども与えられた。彼はときどき信長様のお道具などを持たせられた。

（複数の歴史学者の書き下しを参考にしつつ筆者が訳した）

On the 23rd of the Second Month, a black man came from a Christian country. The age of this man seemed to be perhaps around 26 or 27, and his whole body was black like an ox. Even at a glance his body was impressively of good build. What is more, he was so strong that he could beat ten people. Jesuit Padres brought him along, to thank Lord Nobunaga for his permission for their missionary work. Indeed, we know nothing comparable to Lord Nobunaga's power and glory, such that allows us to see so closely yet unheard-of treasures and curios people from the world, a blessing indeed.

And then, Nobunaga bestowed a stipend on this black man, gave the name Yasuke (弥助), a sword (鞘巻 sayamaki) with a gold-encrusted sheath, and even a private residence. He was sometimes seen in the role of Lord Nobunaga's weapon bearer.

(My English translation)

　これらは弥助の身分を考える上で極めて重要な情報だ。まず扶持とは主君が家臣に与える俸禄の一種であり、ここでは信長と弥助の間に主従関係が成立したことを意味している。ただし扶持は大名のお抱え能役者など、幅広い種類の家臣に支給されていたので、この記述だけでは彼の詳しい身分はまだ確定しない。

These pieces of information, in this extra passsage in the Sonkeikaku copy, is so important for us. So, let’s check them one by one. Stipend is a kind of salary given by a lord to his retainer (I’ll use “retainer” as a very broad term, not as a specific rank or post, for lack of a better word), and here it means that a homage was established between Nobunaga and Yasuke. However, stipend was given not only to warriors, but also to, for example, Noh actors who were employed as personal retainers of feudal lords, so stipend alone do not tell Yasuke’s status.

　次に弥助という名前だ。信長が”号した”とある。イエズス会の従者は必ずキリスト教徒なので弥助には洗礼名があったはずだが、信長は日本語の名前を与えたようだ。ただし名字は記録されていないので、弥助は名字を持っていなかったと思われる。名字を公的に名乗ることは日本の身分制度上大きな意味を持っており*21、これは弥助の身分にも一定の限度があったことを示している。庶民が名字を持っていなかったわけではないが、それらを公的な場で名乗ったり文書において署名したりできることは一種の特権だった。ただし「侍」の最下層には名字を持たない者もいたから、名字なければそれ則ち侍にあらず、というわけではない。

Next is the name Yasuke. It says that Nobunaga named him. The valets of the Jesuits were always Christians, so Yasuke must have had a Christian name, but Nobunaga seems nontheless to have given him a Japanese name. However, his surname is not mentioned, so apparently Yasuke did not have a surname. Bearing officially a surname had a great meaning in the Japanese social status system*22, and that limits the status of Yasuke to some degree. It is not that common people never had surnames, but it was a kind of privilege to be able to use them publicly and sign documents with it. It is also true, however, that there were people without a surname among the lowest-ranking "samurai" class, so it does not in itself mean Yasuke was not a samurai.

　次に装飾刀*23だ。これは信長が弥助に帯刀を認めたということなので、武家社会の構成員に弥助が仲間入りしたことを意味している。帯刀すること自体が特別なわけではない。当時の日本では百姓や非戦闘員である武家奉公人も刀で武装していた。ここで重要なのは、主君から刀を授かることが儀礼上大きな意味を持つということだ。

Next is the “decorated sword.”*24 This means that Nobunaga allowed Yasuke to wear a sword, so it means that Yasuke has joined the members of the warrior household (武家 buke). However, wearing a sword itself is not so special. At that time, even peasants and warrior household servants (武家奉公人 buke-houkounin) who were not combatants  armed themselves swords. But a crucial fact is Yasuke received a sword from his lord, since it had a important symbolic meaning.

　最後に私邸だ。通常武士身分に満たない、武士に仕える奉公人身分の者は私邸に住むことが出来ない。奉公人身分なら借家、今風にいえば賃貸集合住宅に住んだり、主君の屋敷に住み込みで働くのが普通だ。当時の日本は厳然たる身分制社会であり、名乗り、住居、着る衣服などが身分によって定められていた。そのことを考えれば、この記述は信長が弥助を一定の地位を持つ家臣として処遇したことを如実に示している。*25

Finally, the “private residence.” Usually, servants who did not count  as the warrior class could not live in a private residence. The servant class usually lived in an apartment house (長屋 nagaya: long house) , or were live-in workers in their lord’s residence. Japanese society at that time had a strict class system, and one’s name, residence, and clothes were determined by one’s class. When we considering these factors, Yasuke’s description here clearly shows that Nobunaga treated him as a retainer with a certain rank.*26

　贈り物だけではなく、弥助はときどき信長の道具持ちをしたという。道具持ちとは主君の武器、多くの場合は槍を持ち運ぶ役職をいう。中間と呼ばれる下級の奉公人がこの役割を担う場合が多い。ただし中間だけが道具持ちをするわけではなく、近習と呼ばれるような主君に近侍する高位の家臣、例えば小姓*27などが状況に応じて主君の荷物を持つこともあった。弥助は”ときどき”道具持ちをしたとあるから、ここから分かるのは弥助が信長に近侍していたということだ。

Other than these bestowed gifts, this passage also tells us Yasuke sometimes served Nobunaga as a “weapon bearer.” A weapon bearer was a post that carries the lord's weapon, usually a spear. In many cases, a lower-ranking servant called chugen (中間 mid-servant) played this role. However, mid-servants were not the only ones who served as a weapon bearer. High-ranking vassals called kinju (近習 adjutant) such as pages (小姓 kosho)*28, who served their lord in close distance, carried their lord's weapon and other luggages depending on the situation. This passage sais Yasuke “sometimes” served as a weapon bearer, so we at least it is clear Yasuke served Nobunaga in close distance.

　二人の歴史学者、武田氏研究会副会長の平山優氏と国際日本文化研究センター助教の呉座勇一氏が、この記述に従えば弥助は明らかに「侍」として処遇されていると指摘している。ただしここでいう「侍」の定義は戦闘員資格を持つ高位の武家奉公人を含み、いわゆる「武士」のこととは限らない。付録を参照せよ。

Two historians, Yu Hirayama, the vice president of the Takeda Clan Study Society, and Yuichi Goza, an assistant professor at the International Research Center for Japanese Studies, concur in pointing out that Yasuke was clearly treated as a “samurai” according to this description. I would like to ask the reader’s attention here, though. I am pretty certain that their definitions of “samurai” would include not only so-called bushi (武士 japanese medieval warrior) but also a part of servants, that is, high-ranking servants in a warrior household who qualified as a combatant. This point would lead you to complicated but interesting arguments regarding what was “samurai” in the first place. If you are interested, see Appendix: Definition of "Samurai."

尊経閣本の信頼性に関する議論
Discussion on reliability of Sonkeikaku copy

　しかしながらこの独自記事が尊経閣本にしか見られないことには留意する必要がある。尊経閣本の独自記事は信用できる情報源なのだろうか？　まず重要な点は、太田家に伝わる『信長記』を牛一の子孫が書写したという伝来経緯である。太田牛一は日頃から覚書を残し、それらを集成する形で『信長記』の稿本を編纂した。そして他者の求めに応じて、都度その稿本を清書することで、配布用の自筆本を認めたと考えられている。史料学を専門とする歴史学者で東京大学史料編纂所教授である金子拓氏は一寛が書写した原本『和泉守編輯之信長記』こそ、生前の牛一がかつて用いた稿本だったのではないかと考えている。

However, we should be a little careful here, though: we find this extra passage only in the Sonkeikaku copy. Are the extra passages in the Sonkeikaku copy, including this one, a reliable source of information? First of all, an important point is the processes of how this copy came to existance. An descendant of Gyuichi made this copy, and its original was a copy of Shincho-ki that had been handed down in the Ota family.  Ota Gyuichi supposedly made memoranda on daily basis, compiled the original manuscript of "Shincho-ki" from them, and published autograph copies by his own hands transcribing from the manuscript. Hiraku Kaneko, a historian specializing in historical materials and a professor at the Historiographical Institute of Tokyo University, surmises that "Izumi-no-kami Henshu no Shinchoki," from which Kazuhiro transcribed, might be none other than the original manuscript that Gyuichi himself used for publication. (Here “publication” means, I believe, something like today’s on-demand publication, meaning that Gyuichi made a new autograph copy whenever he needed one for someone.)

　金子氏は『信長記』伝本の網羅的な研究に取り組み、尊経閣本を牛一の初期の稿本の内容を反映した貴重な写本と判断した。金子氏は同本の史料的価値を高く評価している。そう判断できる根拠はいくつかあるが、主たるものとしては上に説明した伝来の経緯、徳川家康に敬称を付していないという初期の写本に共通する特徴*29、そして独自記事の性格の三つが挙げられる。

Professor Kaneko have conducted a comprehensive study of the copies of Shincho-ki, determined that it is a hand copy that preserves the contents of some earlier version of Gyuichi's manuscript, and highly evaluated its value as a historical material. He highlighted, a number of but mainly, three grounds: first, its legitimate history that its original had been handed down in generations in the Ota family as I have already explained; second, the fact it shares the common feature of the earlier copies that they refer to Tokugawa Ieyasu without a title of honor*30; and thirdly, the nature of its extra passages.

　信長記が太田牛一の覚書や稿本から書き起こされたことはすでに述べた。金子氏は断片的に現存する、最初期の牛一自筆の草稿の内容を分析し、こうした覚書や稿本には極めて些細な出来事も記録されていたことを明らかにした。牛一が稿本を清書する際、あるいは他人が牛一の自筆本を書写して写本を作成する過程でそれらの枝葉末節は削除されていったと考えられる。だが尊経閣本には元亀3年2月13日に信長が鹿狩に出かけた*31というような、明らかに重要性の低い情報が含まれているのである。

I have already mentioned that that Shincho-ki was a product of Ota Gyuichi’s compilation from his own memoranda. Professor Kaneko believes that these memoranda, or perhaps earlier versions of manuscript too, have recorded extremely trivial events. However, he believes, in the process of Gyuichi made a clean copies (autograph copies) from the completed manuscript, or in the process of someone other than Gyuichi made hand copies, such minor details might have been removed. In fact, we can find in the Sonkeikaku copy apparently insignificant details, such as on 13th of 2nd month in 3rd of Genki (1572), Nobunaga enjoyed a deer hunting excursion.*32

　このことから尊経閣本は牛一が生前に用いた稿本の内容を削除せず忠実に保存した極めて貴重な写本であると考えられる。この金子氏の説に従えば、弥助に関する独自記事も牛一の使用していた稿本から受け継がれたものであって、自筆本同様の信憑性があると考えうるのだ。

From this analysis of Professor Kaneko, we can say that the Sonkeikaku copy may be an extremely valuable copy that faithfully preserves the contents of Gyuichi's manuscript without deletion. If we adopt this theory, it means that the extra passage on Yasuke, too, tells us information faithfully preserved from the original manuscript Gyuichi himself completed.

独自記事増補説
Were extra passages added later?

　しかしこの金子氏の評価に対する異論もある。呉座氏は尊経閣本の独自記述は稿本から削除されずに残った古態というよりも、後世に加筆されたものなのではないかと疑っている。以下は尊経閣本の引用で下線部は同本の独自記事、［］内は池田本にはあるが尊経閣本には見られない異同、ただし仮名遣いの異同は省略されている。

However, there is an objection to Professor Kaneko’s theory. Professor Goza conjectures that the extra passages in the Sonkeikaku copy may be additions of later years, rather than survivors of elimination of the original trivialities. Professor Goza highlighted two passages from the Sokeikaku copy, which I will show you now. The underlined parts indicate the extra passages in the Sonkeikaku copy. (The [square brackets] in the Japanese text indicate the words present in the Ikeda copy but not in the Sonkeikaku copy.)

七日目に大将之頸を切、残党一命被助候様にと［歎申］色々雖御侘言申候、同心無之付而、不及是非腹を仕候、則［上月］城主之頸安土へと致進上、

（金子拓『織田信長という歴史』P311）
（cited from: Hiraku Kaneko, Oda Nobunaga toiu rekishi, p. 311）

城攻め七日目に城中の者が、大将の首を切り取り持参して、残党らを助命してくれるよう［嘆願したが］色々と詫び言を申し上げたが、秀吉は同意しなかったので、是非もなく（残党らに）腹を切らせた。そして［上月（こうつき）］城主の首は安土へと進上された。

（榊山訳を参照しつつ筆者が訳した）

On the seventh day of the siege, men came from the castle, bringing the severed head of their commander, and desperately pleaded with Hideyoshi to spare the lives of the surviving defenders, and made apologies. But Hideyoshi would not allow it, and forced them (the remnants of the enemy) to kill themselves. Immediately forwarding the Kōzuki castellan's head to Azuchi for Nobunaga to view, (Azuchi is the Oda clan's home castle town, in this context it means Hideyoshi proved his success by sending enemy leader’s head to Nobunaga).

(My English translation)

　巻十における、秀吉（当時は羽柴秀吉）*33が天正5年（1577年）に播磨国の上月城を陥落させた際の記事である。上月城の者は不届きにも主君を裏切り、城主の首と引き換えに残党たちの助命を願ったという。城主が自らの命と引き換えに城兵の助命を乞うのは当時よくあることだったが、秀吉は彼らの背信を許さなかったらしい。というのも、この箇所の後には秀吉が「残党をことごとく引き出して」「磔にかけた」と記述があるのだ。尊経閣本では秀吉が降伏を許可しなかったという具体的な記述が追加されていることがわかる。

This part is in the 10th volume of Shincho-ki, and describes how Hideyoshi (then known as Hashiba Hideyoshi)*34 took Kozuki Castle in Harima Province in 1577. It tells us that the vessels of the castle lord cowardly offered, of all things, the head of their own castle lord pleading to spare the lives of the remnants of the castle. But, from what we gather from the description after this part, Hideyoshi “forcibly dragged out the enemy remnants to the last one of them” and “crucified them,” which indicates apparently he was not amused by the cowardly offering and did not allow their surrender anyway. This extra passage in the Sonkeikaku copy let us know the specific fact that Hideyoshi did not allow them to surrender. Let’s take a look at another extra passage.

五月廿八日、丹羽国亀山へ帰城、去程に今度信長中国表御動座に付而、五月廿九日、［信長］御上洛、

（金子拓『織田信長という歴史』P311）
（Hiraku Kaneko, Oda Nobunaga toiu rekishi, p. 311）

五月二十八日、（明智光秀は）丹波の亀山へ帰城した。ところでこの度信長様は中国攻めでお移りになるので、五月二十九日に［信長様は］京都へご上洛になった。

（榊山訳を参照しつつ筆者が訳した）

On the 28th of Fifth Month Akechi Mitsuhide returned to his castle at Kameyama in Tanba Province. On the other hand, Lord Nobunaga’s plan was to march to attack Chugoku, therefore, on the 29th of the Fifth Month, he left for Kyoto.

(My English translation)

　巻十五のこの記事は本能寺の変の直前、信長が中国攻め*35に自ら出陣するため安土から京都へ上洛したことを記すものである。自筆本でも他の箇所で信長が中国攻めに備えて上洛したことは記述されているが、上洛の目的を明記した下線部は書かれているのは尊経閣本だけだ。

This article in volume 15 describes the fact that, just before the Honnoji Incident, Nobunaga came to Kyoto from Azuchi (his home castle) in order to prepare the army  and to lead it himself to Chugoku region (the western tip of the main island in Japan).*36 Of course the autograph copies, too, describe the same fact that Nobunaga came to Kyoto, but the underlined part appears only in the Sonkeikaku copy.

　これらの記述を見ると、自筆本と内容上の食い違いがあるわけではないものの、独自記事には枝葉末節と言いがたいものもあるということがわかる。呉座氏はこれらの記述が無い場合文章の前後の意味を取りづらくなると指摘し、枝葉末節なので削除されたというよりも、意味を通りやすくするため後世に加筆された可能性を示唆している。

When we look at these two extra passages, we notice that while they do not contradict the content of the autograph copies, they are not exactly so trivial. Professor Goza points out that we would struggle a bit to grasp the context without these extra passages, which help us to make sense of the lines before and after them. This argument of Professor Goza suggests the possibility that these passages unique to the Sonkeikaku copy might be addition of later years, whose intension was to provide the reader with the context, rather than surviving trivialities of elimination process.

　こうした考えを踏まえれば、弥助に関する尊経閣本の独自記事が牛一の稿本から受け継がれた信頼すべき古態であったが、枝葉末節と見られて他本からは削除されてしまったという説は揺らぐことになる。加えて尊経閣本の信頼性を高く評価する金子氏もこの弥助に関する独自記事については「創作という見方も不可能ではない」として留保を付しているのだが、それについては『家忠日記』の章で後述する。

If we adopt Professor Goza’s line of thought, Profesor Kaneko’s theory, that the extra passages of the Sokeikaku copy including Yasuke’s treatments are faithful to Gyuichi’s manuscript, would be shaken. I would also like to mention that Professor Kaneko, while he highly evaluate the general reliability of the Sokeikaku copy, expressed a reservation as to this particular passage pertaining Yasuke, but I defer this point until the section I will discuss Ietada Nikki.

天正9年のイエズス会書簡
Jesuit Documents in 1581

　ここからはキリスト教宣教師たちの残した記録を見ていく。彼らの記録は日本文化の誤解や通訳の誤りなどに由来する間違いが散見され、しかも最終的に書簡を取りまとめてヨーロッパへ送る立場にいたイエズス会士ルイス・フロイスには話を膨らませる悪い癖があった*37から、彼らの記述を一概には信頼できない。それでもイエズス会は日本国内の政治的利害対立から一歩離れた立場で、外部の目線から記録を残しており、これらの史料は戦国時代の日本を研究する上で極めて重要なものと考えられている。

Next, we will look at records of Christian missionaries, in particular two letters of the Society of Jesus. Sometimes Jesuit documents contain misunderstandings of Japanese culture and mistranslations of Japanese language. On top of that, Luis Frois, a Jesuit missionary in Japan who was in a position to write up and send report letters to Europe, had the bad habit of exaggerating stories.*38 We, therefore, cannot fully rely on their descriptions. That being said, nevertheless, the Jesuits kept records from an outside, neutral standpoint, at least in the meaning that their agenda was different from the conflicts of interest within Japan. Historians have regarded these historical materials extremely valuable for the study on the Sengoku period.

　本記事で使用するイエズス会書簡の原文には『エヴォラ版書簡集』を利用した。これは宣教師たちがイエズス会本部に宛てて送った報告書簡を取りまとめて、1598年にリスボンで出版されたものだ。本記事内の翻訳も全てこのエヴォラ版を底本としている。エヴォラ版は原書簡と同じポルトガル語を使用していることから、翻訳による誤りが少ないことが期待できる良質な史料だ。ただしエヴォラ版は原書簡に意図的な編集を加えたものであり、原文と異なる部分もかなりある。本当に正確を期するためには原書簡から直接翻刻する必要があるが、現時点の筆者にはその手段が無いことを断っておく。

I will use in this article the texts of Jesuit letters from "Cartas de Evora," a collection of letters from missionaries published in Lisbon in 1598. All of their Japanese translations (works of Japanese historians) I will quote in this article, too, are made from this "Cartas de Evora." However, we have to be aware that "Cartas de Evora" had edited original letters with deliberate intentions, and in fact, some parts are said to be quite different from the original letters. I really should have, in order to be truly accurate, checked out the original letters directly, but at the moment I do not have the means.

天正9年3月11日フロイス書簡
Frois's Letter of April 14, 1581

　以下に引用するのはルイス・フロイスが1581年4月14日（天正9年3月11日）に日本在留の宣教師に宛てた書簡だ。前述したようにイエズス会は巡察使ヴァリニャーノを長とする使節団を信長に派遣しており、フロイスは通訳として使節団に同行していた。書簡では弥助と思わしき人物が初めて信長と面会するまでの出来事が描写されている。

The first Jesuit letter I will show you is a letter written by Fróis on April 14, 1581, which tells us the unexpected course of events which ultimately led the black man, who seems to be Yasuke, to his first meeting with Nobunaga.

No mesmo Domingo de Ramos, nos partimos pera Vocayama & ao sair pola cidade de Sacay fora, avia infinidade de gente que estava esperando pollas ruas pera verem a extraordinaria estatura do Padre Visitador, & a cor de Cafre que hia comnosco, era tanta a gente, & tantos os fidalgos que com ser o Sacay tam livre com quanto a multidão da nossa gente não podia passar sem derrubarem algumas tendas polas ruas estreitas. Todavia não ouve falarem palavra desconcertada, fora do Sacay avia mais de trinta e cinco bestas dalbarda, & alguns trinta ou quarenta homens de carga pera o fato, & outros tantos cavalos pera os nossos, fizerão muita instancia que o cafre tambem cavalgasse, & cada passo nos saião por aquelles caminhos, acompanharão nos muitos fidalgos provedendo-nos de todas as cavalgaduras necessarias, & por aquelles caminhos saião muitos fidalgos a cavalo que vinhão a nosso encontro.

（cited from: Cartas de Evora『エヴォラ版日本書簡集』）

堺の市を出る時、無数の人々が巡察師の並外れた背丈と我らに同行していた黒人*39の（膚の）色を見ようと街路で待ち受けていた。堺は極めて自由（の市）であったが、多数の民衆と武士が集まったので、我らの一行が狭い道を通る際に数軒の店を壊したにもかかわらず苦情を言う者はなかった。堺を出ると三十五頭を超える駄馬、三、四十名の荷持人足、ほぼ同数の乗馬が居り、黒人もまた乗馬するようしきりに勧められた。道行くごとに人々が我らを出迎え、多数の貴人が同行して必要な乗馬を整えた。また、我らに相見えんとする多数の貴人が馬上から出迎えた。

（松田毅一監訳『十六・七世紀イエズス会日本報告集第Ⅲ期第5巻』P288）
（Japanese translation from: Kiichi Matsuda, 16 - 17 seiki Iezusu kai nihon houkokusyo dai 3 ki dai 5 kan, p. 288）

On leaving the city of Sakai, countless people were waiting for us in the streets to see the extraordinary height of Padre Visitador and the (skin) color of the Cafre*40 who were accompanying us. Although Sakai was a very free (city), when our party passed through a narrow road, a large number of people and warriors gathered and caused destruction of several shops, but no one complained. When we left Sakai, there were more than thirty five packhorses, thirty to forty luggage carriers, and about the same number of riding horses, and they were very insistent that the Cafre should also ride on one. On every road people greeted us, and many gentries accompanied us to arrange the necessary riding horses. Many gentries who wanted to see us also came out to greet us from horseback.

(My English translation)

　堺を通過する際、宣教師一行と弥助の珍しさゆで、見物しようとする人々が大勢集まったことが記録されている。また弥助が乗馬を勧められたという記述があることを考えると彼に乗馬の心得があった可能性があることが伺える。なおここで登場する貴人とは前後を読む限り武家の上級家臣のことで、公家などのことではないようだ。*41

We can see from this letter that as they passed through Sakai, a free city near Kyoto, the rarity of the missionary group and Yasuke earned attention, and that many people gathered to see them. The description that Yasuke was recommended to ride a horse might imply he knew how to ride a horse. I guess from the context that the “noblemen” mentioned here were high-hanking vassals of warrior households, rather than court nobles (公家 kuge).(公家 kuge).*42

Logo à segunda feira, primeira oitava foi a gente tanta a nossa porta, por estar aqui
Nobunanga no Miaco, todos a ver o Cafre que ouve alguns principios de arroidos, & alguns feridos de pedradas, & outros que estavão pera se matar, & quebravão as portas, & com aver muita gente de guarda às portas, com difficuldade se lhe podia resistir, & todos dizião que se mostrasse pera ganhar dinheiro, que polo menos ganharia hum homen com elle com grande facilidade oito ou dez mil cruzados em breve tempo, & he grande , & excessivo o desejo que tem de o ver, Nobunanga o mandou chamar, & levou lho o Padre Organtino, fez estranha festa com elle fazendo-o despir da cinta pera riba, não se podendo persuadir que era aquillo cousa natural se não artificiosa: tambem o mandarão chamar os filhos de Nobunanga, & com cada hum delles ouve extraordinarias graças, & hum sobrinho de Nobunanga que agora he capitão de Ozaca lhe deu dez mil caixas, folgou em estremo de o ver, & temos bem de trabalho com suas vistas.

（Cartas de Evora『エヴォラ版日本書簡集』）

復活祭日に続く週の月曜日、信長がこの都にいたため、多数の人々が我等の門前へやって来た。皆、黒人を見ようとしてのことで、騒動が始まり、投石により数名が負傷し、他にも殺し合いに発展しそうな人々がいた。そして彼等は門を破壊せんとしたが、門には警固する者が大勢いたため、それに抵抗するのは困難であった。皆が言うには、もし金儲けをするために（黒人を）見せ物にしたならば、その人は彼を用いて短期間に最低でも八千乃至一万クルザードをいとも容易に稼ぐであろう、とのことであった。〔彼は〕巨体で、彼を見ることに対する信長が抱く願望は凄まじいものであった。信長は彼を召喚し、オルガンティーノ師が彼の許に連れて行った。信長は彼に会って奇妙なまでに大騒ぎし、（黒人の）腰から上の衣服を脱がせた。というのも、その者が自然のものであって、人工のものでないことに納得しなかったからである。信長の息子たちもまた彼を呼び寄せ、それぞれが大げさに褒め称えた。今は大坂の指揮官である信長の甥も彼を見て非常に喜び、彼に銭一万を与えた。我等にとってそれらの御目見えは大いに面倒なことであった。

（岡美穂子訳）

On the Monday of the week following Easter, when Nobunaga was in the capital, a great number of people came to our gates. They were all trying to see the Cafre, and a disturbance began. Some were wounded by stone-throwing, and a few were about kill each other. They tried to destroy the gate, and despite so many guards protecting the gates, it was difficult to resist the people. Everyone said that if you made a spectacle of a Cafre in order to make money, you would very easily earn at least 8,000 to 10,000 cruzados with one in a short period of time. The Cafre’s body was huge, and the desire of Nobunaga to see him was tremendous. Nobunaga summoned him, and Padre Organtino took him to Nobunaga. Nobunaga met him and made a strangely great fuss, and made the Cafre undress from the waist up, for Nobunaga was not convinced that he was natural and not artificial. The sons of Nobunaga also summoned him, and each of them greatly praised him. The nephew of Nobunaga, who is now the commander of Osaka, was very happy on seeing him, and gave him ten thousand sen. These audiences were a great trouble to us.

(My English translation)

　イエズス会一行は堺を平和的に通行したが、京都では大混乱を巻き起こしてしまったようだ。群衆は黒人を一目見ようとするあまり、恐るべきことに完全に暴徒化してしまった。フロイスが話を盛っている可能性もあるが、弥助が人々の注目を集めたことは確かなのだろう。フロイスはこうした状況を金儲けに利用できるだろうと考えており*43、当時のイエズス会の黒人への見方を伺うことができる。信長もこの黒人をひと目見てみたいと考え、両者の謁見の場が設けられることになった。

The Jesuits passed peacefully through Sakai, but in Kyoto they seemed to have created quite a commotion. The crowds were so eager to catch a glimpse of the Cafre that they became, to their horror, complete mobs. Frois may dramatized the story, but Yasuke certainly attracted the attention of the people. From the fact that Frois thought he could take advantage of the situation to make a big money, we might catch the glimpse of the attitude of the Society of Jesus toward black people at that time.*44 Nobunaga also wanted to have a glimpse of this black man, and a place for an audience between them was established.

　重要な点は日付である。「復活祭日に続く週の月曜日」はユリウス歴で1581年3月27日を差し、旧暦では天正9年2月23日となる。従って弥助と信長が初めて会った時の日付は、『信長記』とイエズス会史料で一致しており、二つの史料が同じ出来事を記録していることになる。

An important point is the date. 'the Monday of the week following Easter' means March 27, 1581 in the Julian calendar and 2nd month 23, Tensho 9 in the Japanese old calendar. That means, the date of Yasuke's first meeting with Nobunaga is consistent between Shincho-ki and this Jesuit letter. When multiple historical materials have consistent information, we can judge them as having relatively high reliability.

　またここで信長が自身の求めによって弥助と対面していることも大きな意味合いがある。当時の信長は朝廷の位階制度において正二位の位におり、これは彼が天下人、つまり日本における事実上の最高権力者の地位にあったことを意味している*45。前近代日本の身分制社会において、こうした正式な場で貴人に謁見することは一定の地位を有する者だけに許される特権だった。

We can also see the significant point that it was the will of Nobunaga himself to meet Yasuke face-to-face.*46 In premodern Japanese society with the class system, the occasion of such a formal audience with nobility was in itself a privilege granted only to those with a certain position.

　例えば朝廷においては一定以上の位階を有するか、特定の役職に就いていない限り内裏への昇殿が許されず、昇殿できる殿上人の家系と昇殿が許されない地下人の家系の間には超えられない壁があった。同様の文化は公家社会だけではなく武家社会にもあり、徳川幕府では上級家臣である旗本と下級家臣である御家人の区別は旗本が将軍に謁見できること、つまり御目見得身分であることにあった。

For example, in the Imperial Court, people were not even allowed to enter the Imperial Palace unless they had a certain rank or held a certain post. In the Tokugawa shogunate, too, the basis for distinguishing bannerguards (旗本 hatamoto), who were high-ranking vassals, from household vassal (御家人 goke-nin), who were low-ranking vassals, was that the former had "audience with one’s lord (御目見得 omemie)" status, which meant they were allowed to have an audience with the Shogun.

天正9年9月11日メシヤ書簡
Mexia's letter of Octover 8, 1581

　次に引用するのはイエズス会宣教師ロレンソ・メシヤの書簡である。この書簡は1581年10月8日（天正9年9月11日）に送られたものだが、先に引用したのと同じように弥助と思われる人物と信長の出会いを書き記している。

Now, let me show you another Jesuit letter, one by Lourenço Mexia, a Jesuit missionary, sent on October 8, 1581. This letter too, like the one I have cited above, describes the first encounter between Nobunaga and a man we believe to be Yasuke.

Levou o Padre hum Cafre, o qual porque nunca foi visto no Miaco, fez pasmar a todos, era a gente que o vinha ver que não tinha conto, & o mesmo Nobunanga pasmou de o vernem se podia persuadir que naturalmente era negro, mas que era artificio de tinta, & assi não se fartava[sic] de o ver muitas vezes, & falar com elle, porque sabia mediocremente a lingoa de Iapão, & tinha muitas forças, algumas manhas boas, de que elle muito gostava, agora o favorece tanto que o mandou por toda a cidade com hum homem seu muito privado pera que todos soubessem que elle o amava: dizem que o fará Tono.

（Cartas de Evora『エヴォラ版日本書簡集』）

司祭は黒人を一人同伴していたが、都においては初めて目にするものであったがため、誰もが驚嘆し、彼を見に来た人は無数であった。信長自身、彼を見て驚き、生まれつき（膚が）黒いのであって墨による細工でないことを納得しなかった。たびたび、彼を観、中程度に（mediocremente）日本語を解したので彼と話して飽くことがなく、また黒人は非常に力がありまた良い資質（manhas boas）があって、信長はそれらを気に入っていた。彼はあまりに（信長の）お気に入りとなったので、その旨を諸人に知らせるため、腹心の家臣一人を付けて市中を巡らせた。人々が言うには、（信長は）彼を殿にするであろうとのことである。

※上記の日本語訳は松田毅一監訳『十六・七世紀イエズス会日本報告集第Ⅲ期第6巻』（同朋者出版）を基に岡氏の指摘に従って修正を施したものである。修正点は以下の通り。典拠はラファエル・ブリトー『Vocabulario portuguez, e latino』（1712-1728）より。なお英訳はこれらの修正を反映している。

幾らか日本語を解したので→中程度に（mediocremente）日本語を解したので
いくらかの芸ができたので信長は大いに喜んだ。→良い資質（manhas boas）があり、信長はそれらを気に入っていた。
今では彼を厚く庇護しており→彼はあまりに（信長の）お気に入りとなったので

Padre was accompanied by a Cafre, but since the capital had never seen one, everyone was amazed and countless people came to see him. Nobunaga himself was surprised to see him and was not convinced the black color (of his skin) was natural, not painted with ink. Nobunaga saw him often and spoke with him insatiably because the Cafre understood Japanese moderately, and the Cafre was very strong and had good qualities, which Nobunaga liked. Now that he became Nobunaga's favorite so much, Nobunaga sent him with a trusted retainer around the city to let people know. People said that Nobunaga would make him a Tono.

*The Japanese translation presented above is basically that of Dohosha Publishing, whose translations I cited in several places in this article. But as to this particular citation, I added my revisions which followed Professor Oka’s suggestions. My English translation above is a secondhand translation via this Japanese translation with my revisions.

　この書簡によれば弥助は中程度に日本語を話すことができ、信長は彼との会話を楽しんだという。また信長は彼の力の強さや、詳しくは書かれていないがなんらかの資質を気に入ったと書かれている。そして信長は弥助を大変厚遇するに至り、京都の人々が将来彼は殿になるのではないかと噂したことが記録されている。

This letter says that the man we believe to be Yasuke was able to speak mildly fluent Japanese, and that Nobunaga enjoyed talking with him. It also says that Nobunaga liked his power and some qualities that are not described in detail. It even says that Nobunaga treated him so well to the point that people in Kyoto rumored that he would become a “Tono”.

　殿とは武将に付せられる敬称である。武将とは上級武士のうち、知行を取る領主であり、自らの家臣を抱える軍事指揮官のことをいう*47。そうした噂が立つほど弥助は厚遇されていたのかもしれない。ただしこれは人々の噂を宣教師が又聞きして記録したものに過ぎないし、そうした噂があったということは裏を返せば弥助は武将ではなかったということでもある。

“Tono” is an honorific title in Japanese language which was generally used for warrior lords (武将 busho).Warrior lords in Japan meant the highest echelon among the warrior (bushi) class, a combined figure of a feudal lord who governed his own fiefdom and a military commander of his own vassals. Such a rumor of Yasuke certainly seems to indicate Nobunaga treated him so highly, but it should also be noted that this is a record of mere hearsay which the missionaries had heard of. We can also say that this rumor, if true, proves Yasuke’s status was not so high as a warrior lord.*48

松平家忠『家忠日記』
Matsudaira Ietada's Diary

　『家忠日記』は徳川家の家臣である松平家忠が綴った個人の日記である。彼の日記は当時の武家の風習や歴史的出来事を同時代に記録した一次史料であり、歴史家たちはその価値を極めて高く評価している。弥助に関する記録のなかで最も信頼できる史料といってよい。『家忠日記』は原本が現存し駒沢大学図書館がインターネットで公開しているものの、二次利用が禁止されている。そこで本記事では二次利用が許可されている茨城大学図書館所蔵写本を見ることにする。内容に違いがないことは原本のデータによって確認済みだ。

"Ietada Nikki" (nikki = diary) is the diary of Matsudaira Ietada, a vassal of the Tokugawa clan. Historians have highly valued it as a primary historical material of the same period. Regarding Yasuke, too, we could say Ietada Nikki is the most reliable historical material. The original manuscript of Ietada Nikki do exists today, and we can see it online on the site of the library of Komazawa University, but unfortunately they do not allow secondary use. In this article, therefore, I will show you one of its hand copies that allows us secondary use, a copy in the collection of the library of Ibaragi University. I have confirmed the two have no diferrence in the text.

　『家忠日記』の記録によれば天正10年4月19日（1582年5月11日）に松平家忠は、武田征伐*49を終えて東海道を通って帰還する途上の信長に付き添っている弥助を目撃している。

According to the entry of Ietada Nikki on May 11, 1582, Ietada saw Yasuke accompanying Nobunaga on his way back home on Tokai-do Road (a major route along the east coast of the main island of Japan) after the subjugation campaign of the Takeda clan.*50 The following is how Ietada described Yasuke.

十九日 丁未 雨降

上様御ふち候大うす進上申候くろ男御つれ候、身ハすみノコトク、タケハ六尺二分、名ハ弥介ト云。

『家忠日記』茨城大学図書館所蔵写本

十九日　ひのとひつじ　雨

信長様は扶持を与えている宣教師から進上された黒人をお連れしていた。黒人の体は墨のようで、身長は六尺二分*51、名前は弥介という。

（筆者訳）

On the 19th, fire goat (chinese sexagenary cycle), rainy.

Ue-sama (Nobunaga) was accompanied by a black man who was a present from Cristians to him and to whom he give a stipend. The man's body was the color of black ink, and his height six shaku two bu.*52 His name was Yasuke (弥介).

(My English translation)

 　弥助が信長に同行していたこと、弥助の身長と特徴的な皮膚の色、彼が信長から扶持を与えられていたこと、そして弥介という名前が記録されている。内容自体は他の史料に比べて詳しいとは言えないものの、『家忠日記』という信頼できる史料に弥助が現れる事実は重要だろう。なお武田征伐において彼が実戦に参加したかどうかについては、史料がなく定かではない。

(Ue-sama was an honorific for the head of warrior household.) As we can see, Ietada Nikki clearly records Yasuke's specific height and characteristic skin color, the fact that he was given a stipend, and the name Yasuke. Although the description itself is rather short in comparison with most of the other historical materials, the fact that Yasuke appears in this reliable historical material is important. It is not certain, though, whether Yasuke participated in the actual battles in this campaign. We have no historical material about that.

尊経閣本家忠日記依拠説
Sonkeikaku discussion again

　尊経閣本には独自記事が存在し、その信頼性について議論があるということを先に述べた。独自記事は古態であり信頼できるのか、それとも後世に創作されたものであって信頼できないのだろうか。金子氏は全体として前者の立場を取りつつ、弥助の身分に関する記述については後者の可能性を排除していない。というのも彼の名前が『家忠日記』にも記録されているからである。

As I mentioned earlier, the Sonkeikaku copy has its unique extra passages, and their reliability could be controversial. Are they reliable? Or are they questionable inventions added in later years? Professor Kaneko, who generally takes the former position, does not rule out the latter possibility as to the particular description on Yasuke's status. The reason is that the name of Yasuke had been already recorded in none other than Ietada Nikki.

　欧文史料には弥助という名前は一切登場しない。彼の名前が記された史料はこの『家忠日記』と尊経閣本『信長記』の二つしか存在しないのである。『家忠日記』は同時代史料であり、尊経閣本の独自記事の加筆者がもし存在するとすれば、彼が『家忠日記』のこの記述を参照できたかもしれない。よって尊経閣本の弥助に関する記述が『家忠日記』に依拠した創作であると考えることは不可能ではないことになる。

We cannot find the name Yasuke at all in the European historical materials. We have only two historical materials in which the name appears, namely, Ietada Nikki and the Sonkeikaku copy of Shincho-ki. Ietada Nikki was a contemporary document, and Shincho-ki was completed after Nobunaga’s death. Which means, perhaps Ota Gyuichi, or his descendant Kazuhiro, might had somehow read Ietada Nikki and recognized about Yasuke. In that case, the hypothetical writer might have used a touch of creative license to flesh out the status of Yasuke, and finally incorporated it into the Sonkeikaku copy or the original of it. Was that possible? In terms of the chronological order of events, we cannot exclude this possibility. Let us call this hypothesis, hereinafter, the “Ietada Nikki-based-Sonkeikaku copy theory.”

　しかしこの依拠説に対して平山氏が反論している。平山氏は「太田牛一が存命中の慶長11年までに、『家忠日記』が広く公表されていた事実は確認できない」と指摘している。大前提として『家忠日記』は個人の日記なので広く刊行されるような性質の書物ではない。この家忠日記は松平家に保管され、その史料としての価値に最初に気がついたのは家忠の孫、松平忠房であった。彼は元和5年（1619年）生まれなので、そのときには太田牛一はもう故人である*53。牛一が家忠日記を参照することは不可能だ。

Professor Hirayama flatly refuted this theory. He pointed out that, if we assume in the same way with Professor Kaneko that the extra passages of the Sonkeikaku copy are surviving original trivialities and not addition of later years, he (Professor Hirayama) ”cannot confirm that Ietada Nikki had been widely accessible during the lifetime of Ota Gyuichi, who died in the 11th year of the Keicho (1606).” First of all, the nature of Ietada Nikki. It was, literally, a diary. It was personal and private, not something random people could get to see. It was left in the Matsudaira family, and its value as a historical document was first noticed by Ietada's grandson, Matsudaira Tadafusa. Tadafuta was born in 1619 (5th of Genna), supposedly after Gyuichi had passed away.*54 Professor Hirayama concluded that, all things considered, Ota Gyuichi could not have possibly read Ietada Nikki in his lifetime.

太田家は家忠日記を読めたのか？
Could the Ota family read Ietada's diary?

　では牛一子孫の一寛の場合はどうだろうか。彼が享保4年（1719年）尊経閣本を書写したとき『家忠日記』を参照することは可能だったか？　歴史学者の岩沢愿彦氏による研究によれば忠房による発見以来『家忠日記』原本は島原藩主松平家の秘蔵であった。文化元年（1804年）に将軍徳川家斉が上覧して以降は、将軍の意向に従ってより一層の秘蔵となり人目に触れる機会はなくなった。なお上覧の際には複本が作成され幕府の文書庫に納められているが、これは尊経閣本の書写より後の出来事なので同本とは無関係である。

Then, what about Kazuhiro, a descendant of Gyuichi? Was it possible for him to see Ietada Nikki before he made the Sonkeikaku copy in 7th of Kyoho (1719)? According to a study by historian Yoshihiko Iwasawa, the original manuscript of Ietada Nikki had become, ever since Tadafusa’s discovery, a near-secret heirloom of the Matsudaira family, the ruler of the Shimabara Domain. On top of that, in 1804, the shogun at that time Tokugawa Ienari himself took a look at Ietada Nikki, and ordered that it be kept under strict care, which made the diary even more treasured and virtually out of public accessibility. It is true that a duplicate copy was made at the occasion of the presentation for shogun and it was kept in the library of the shogunate, but this happened after the production of the Sonkeikaku copy in 1719, making it unrelated to our problem here either way.

　では原本以外についてはどうだろうか。松平忠冬が『家忠日記』を元に万治3年（1660年）頃に『家忠日記増補追加』を選述したほか、徳川義直も正保3年（1646年）ごろ成立した『神君御年譜』の編纂に『家忠日記』を利用したという。だが実はその両方から弥助が登場する天正10年4月19日の記事は飛ばされているのである*55。依拠説成立のためには一寛が『家忠日記』原本を直接参照したと仮定するしかないが、加賀藩前田家に仕えていた彼が享保4年（1719年）に松平家門外不出の秘蔵文献を参照するのは、不可能だったといってよい。

Okay, then, what about any other duplicate copies of Ietada Nikki? We know that Matsudaira Tadafuyu, a groundson of Ietada, compiled a supplemented version of Ietada Nikki around 1660 (3rd of Manji), and Tokugawa Yoshinao, a relative of shogun family, supposedly made use of this version of Ietada Nikki in his editing work of "Shinkun Gonenpu," a chronology of Tokugawa Ieyasu, which was completed around 1646 (3rd of Shoho). But, in both works the entry of the 19th of 4th month, Tensho 10, wherein Yasuke appears, was omitted.*56 In summary, if we aim to establish the “Ietada Nikki-based-Sonkeikaku copy-theory,” we have to assume that Kazuhiro directly read the original manuscript of "Ietada Nikki." But, I would say it was impossible for Kazuhiro, who was serving the Maeda clan, to access the near-secret treasure of the Matsudaira family before 1719 (4th of Kyoho).

　では牛一や一寛が家忠日記を参照せず、完全なでたらめを書いた可能性についてはどうだろうか。この場合、弥助の名前（の読み*57）と扶持を貰ったという二つの情報が偶然符合しうるとは考えられない。そもそもの問題として、仮に尊経閣本の独自記事が創作だったと仮定しても、加筆者には弥助のことをわざわざ誇張する動機は無いのである。例えば池田本『信長記』は牛一が池田家に献呈したもので、所有者池田家の事績が少し加筆されている*58。だが弥助と尊経閣本に同様の関係を見出すことは不可能だ。

We can think of one last possibility. Could it be that Gyuichi or Kazuhiro wrote mere fabrication from the thin air, and that had nothing to do with Ietada Nikki? In this case, the coincidences between the Sonkeikaku copy and Ietada Nikki, such as the name Yasuke*59and the description that he received stipend, would become really mysterious. In the first place, I must say, even if we hypothesized that the extra passages in the Sonkeikaku copy were mere whimsical creation of someone, we can imagine no motivation whatsoever to inflate the status of Yasuke, who was obviously not a very impotant figure throughout this period. For example, When Gyuichi made the Ikeda autograph copy of "Shincho-ki," he slightly added lines to emphasize the the achievements of the Ikeda family, because it was a present for the Ikeda family, who became the owner of this copy.*60 But I believe it is impossible to find a similar relationship between Yasuke and the Sonkeikaku copy.

　以上の議論から尊経閣本の弥助に関する記述は家忠日記に依拠した創作であるという考えは退けられたことになる。当該記事は太田家に伝来していた『信長記』稿本から受け継がれた古態であるとする説には十分な説得力がある。ただし、前述の通り呉座氏は同本について慎重な態度を取っており、尊経閣本の信頼性に関する議論は現時点では未だ結論が出ていない。弥助に関する同本の独自記事のうち名前と扶持を受け取ったこと以外の情報については、書写段階で加筆された可能性が依然残っている。

Based on the above reasons, I argue against the “Ietada Nikki-based-Sonkeikaku copy-theory,” which claims Yasuke’s description in the Sonkeikaku copy was a fabrication made based on Ietada Nikki. I also believe that it is a persuasive theory that the description in question has its origin in Gyuichi’s original manuscript or autograph copy of "Shincho-ki" handed down in the Ota family. However, as I mentioned earlier, Professor Goza took a cautious stance on the Sonkeikaku copy, and historians seems to be still not in agreement about the general reliability of the Sonkeikaku copy presently. I have to admit it is marginally possibe that the information in the extra passage on Yasuke, except the part of his name and stipend, was addition made in the process of transcription.

本能寺の変
the Honnoji incident

　中国地方で毛利家と激戦を繰り広げる秀吉を増援するため、自ら出陣することを決意した信長は天正10年5月29日、出師に備えるために僅かなお供――『信長記』には「御小姓衆二、三十人」だったとある――だけを引き連れて上洛した。一方その頃、中国攻めのため動員したおよそ一万三千の軍勢を伴って本拠亀山城を出発した明智光秀は、突如部将たちに信長を裏切ると告げて、軍の進路を京都へ向けた。以下は『信長記』のクライマックス、本能寺の変の部分の抜粋である。6月2日（西暦6月21日）早朝、信長は宿泊していた本能寺が明智軍に包囲されていることに気がついた。

Nobunaga decided to go to the front lines himself in order to reinforce Hideyoshi, who was engaged in a fierce battle with the Mori clan who ruled almost entire Chugoku region (western tip of the mainland of Japan). To arrange the army for departure, Nobunaga came to Kyoto with only a few escort, on 29th of 5th month, Tensho 10 (1582).  "Shincho-ki" tells us that there were "two to thirty pages". Meanwhile, Akechi Mitsuhide, a corps commander who left his headquarters with about 13000 troops he mobilized to attack Chugoku region, suddenly told his officers that he would betray Nobunaga and directed his corps to Kyoto. The following is an excerpt from the climax of "Shincho-ki," the Honnoji Incident. In the early morning of 2nd of 6th month (June 21 in the Julien calender), Nobunaga realized that Honnoji-temple, where he was staying, was surrounded by Akechi's men.

ときの聲を上御殿へ鐵炮を打入候是は謀叛歟如何成者︀之企そと　御諚之處に森乱申樣に　明智か者︀と見え申候と言上候へは不及是非と　上意候透をあらせす御殿へ乘入面御堂之御番衆も御殿へ一手になられ候〻御廐より　矢代勝介　伴太郞左衞門　伴正林　村田吉五　切而出討死　此外御中間衆（中略）初として廿四人御厩に而討死 
　御殿之內に而討死之衆（中略）御小姓衆懸り合――討死候〻也（中略）信長初には御弓を取合二三つ遊し候へは何れも時刻到來候而御弓之絃切其後御鎗にて被成御戰御肘に被鎗疵引退是迄御そはに女共付そひて居申候を女はくるしからす急罷出よと被仰追出させられ旣　御殿に火を懸燒來候御姿を御見せ有間敷と被思食候歟殿中奧深く入給ひ內よりも御南戶之口を引立無情御腹めされ

我自刊我書『信長公記』ウィキソース

敵勢はときの声をあげ、御殿に向かって鉄砲を撃ち入れてきた。信長公が「さては謀反か、いかなる者のしわざか」とお尋ねになったところ、森乱（蘭丸〈長定〉）が、「明智の手の者と思われます」と申し上げると、「やむをえない」と覚悟なされる。敵勢は間を置かずに、つぎつぎと御殿に進入してくるので、表御堂のご番衆も退いて、御殿の人々と一手になった。おうまやからは矢代勝介・伴太郎左衛門・伴正林・村田吉五らが切って出て討ち死にした。このほかお中元衆（戦死者10名の名が列挙されるが中略）をはじめとして、二十四人がおうまやにおいて討ち死にした。

　また御殿の中で討ち死にした人々は（戦死者26名の名が列挙されるが中略）これらのお小姓衆が敵勢に立ち向かい、渡りあって討ち死にしたのである。（中略）

　信長公ははじめ弓を取って、二つ三つととりかえひきかえ、矢を放たれたが、いずれも時が経つうちに、弓の絃が切れてしまったので、その後は槍を取って戦われた。しかし御ひじに槍傷を受けて、引き退かれる。それまでおそばに女中衆が付き添い申していたが、「女たちは構わぬ、急いで脱出せよ」と仰せられて、女たちを御殿から追い出されたのであった。
　すでに御殿に火がかかり、燃えひろがって来た。最後のお姿を見せまいと思われたのであろうか、殿中奥深くお入りになって、中からお納戸の戸口にカギをかけ、あわれにもご自害なさったのである。

（榊山潤『現代語訳　信長公記（全）』P459）

The enemy raised the battle cry and blasted Nobunaga’s residential quarters with their guns. “This is treason!” Nobunaga stated. “Whose plot is it?” “They look like Akechi’s men,” Mori Ran replied. Nobunaga’s response was, “What’s done is done.”

Attacking relentlessly, Akechi’s men quickly forced their way into Nobunaga’s residence. Nobunaga’s guards at the front hall fell back to join forces with the defenders of his personal quarters. From the stables Yashiro Shōsuke, Ban Tarōzaemon, Tomo Shōrin, and Murata Kitsugo rushed forward, slashing away with their swords, to their death. Apart from these men, twenty-four of Nobunaga’s grooms*61 [...] were killed at the stables.

The following men were killed inside Nobunaga’s residence: [...]

Nobunaga’s pages went at the enemy again and again, until all were killed in battle. [...]

Nobunaga first grabbed his bow, but when he had let fly two or three times, the string broke, its time apparently having come as well. He continued the fight with a spear but suffered a spear wound to his elbow and retreated. Up to that point his women had remained by him but now he ordered them, “Get out, hurry! They won’t harm women.” Once the women had been chased away, he had his personal quarters set on fire, and soon the entire building was aflame. Not wanting anyone to see his final moments, it would seem, Nobunaga retired deep into his residence, shut the door of a utility room from the inside, and coolly cut his own belly.

(The Chronicle of Lord Nobunaga, Brill Academic Pub, 2011, 469P)

　かくして「かつては声はおろかその名（を聞く）だけで諸人を畏怖させていた人が毛髪一本残すことなく灰塵に帰した」（イエズス会書簡）のであった。一方このとき京都には信長の嫡男信忠と織田家の馬廻衆もいた。信忠は本能寺から少し北にある妙覚寺に、馬廻たちは市内の民家に散らばって宿泊していた。彼らは明智の謀反を知ると本能寺の変へ駆けつけようとしたが、時既に遅しであった。

In this way, “A man who used to frighten people only by his name, let alone by his voice, was reduced to ashes without leaving a hair” (a Jesuit letter). At that time, Nobunaga's heir Nobutada and the horse guards of the Oda clan were actually in Kyoto. But Nobutada was staying at Myokakuji Temple, a little to the north of Honno-ji, and the horse guards were staying scattered around town. When they learned of Akechi's rebellion, they tried to rush to the Honnoji Incident, but it was already too late.

 　妙覚寺のすぐ横には二条新御所があった。ここはかつて信長が京都滞在中の宿所として築いた城館で、今は信長から献上され誠仁親王の宮殿となっている。信忠は防御の堅固なここへ移動し、彼の元へ馬廻たちが京都中から駆けつけてきた。その数は千から千五百。しかし一万を超える明智軍を前に多勢に無勢は明らかだ。今は宮殿である二条新御所には武器の蓄えもない。京都を脱し安土へ退くか、御所で明智を迎え撃つか。信忠は決断を迫られた。

Right next to Myokakuji temple was the Nijo New Imperial Palace. It was a castle that Nobunaga had built as a lodging for his stay in Kyoto. Now it had been presented to his highness Sanehito by Nobunaga and had become the prince’s palace. Nobutada moved to this place, where the defense was strong, and horse guards rushed to join him from all over Kyoto. But clearly they were outnumbered. The Nijo New Imperial Palace, which was a palace now, had no arsenal. Nobutada was forced to decide whether to leave Kyoto and retreat to Azuchi, or to engage Akechi army at the palace.

三位中將信忠　御諚にはか樣之謀叛によものかし候はし雜兵之手にかゝり候ては後難︀無念也爰に而腹を可切と被仰

我自刊我書『信長公記』ウィキソース

三位中将*62信忠卿は、「このような謀反を起こすほどであるから、敵はまさかやすやすとは逃がしはしないであろう。雑兵の手にかかって死んでは、のちのちまでとやかく言われるであろうし、それも無念である。ここで腹を切ろう」とおっしゃられた。

（榊山潤『現代語訳　信長公記（全）』P462）

To this Sanmi no Chūjō*63 Nobutada responded: "Those involved in a revolt such as this are not apt to let me get away. The thought of the infamy I would incur if I fell into the hands of common foot soldiers is more than I can bear. I will rather cut my belly right here!"

(The Chronicle of Lord Nobunaga, Brill Academic Pub, 2011, 471P)

　明智方の合意のもと親王ら朝廷関係者が避難すると、戦闘は再開された。馬廻は奮戦し、イエズス会書簡によれば「世子（信忠）はきわめて勇敢に戦い、鉄砲と矢によって幾つもの傷を受け」るほどだった。だが明智方が御所の隣にある公卿近衛前久の邸宅の屋上に弓兵銃兵を送り込むと、大勢は決した。高所から弓矢と銃弾雨のごとく降り注ぎ兵たちは次々倒れ、ついに明智軍が御所内になだれ込んで、建物に放火した。信忠は自分が切腹したら亡骸を隠すよう命じ、介錯を家臣の鎌田新介に命じて、自刃した。

On the agreement with the Akechi side, the Imperial Court officials, including his highness, evacuated, and the battle resumed. The horse guards fought bravely, and according to the Jesuit letter, “the heir (Nobutada) fought bravely and suffered many wounds by guns and arrows.” However, when the Akechi side sent up bowmen and gun infantry to the roof of the residence of a court noble Konoe Sakihisa, which was next to the Nijo New Imperial Palace, the battle was decided. Arrows and bullets rained down from the heights, and the soldiers fell one after another. Finally, the Akechi army surged into the Palace and set fire to the building. Nobutada ordered his vassal Kamata Shinsuke to assist him in ritual suicide, and committed it with his sword.

　明智軍は京都中を捜索して残党を狩り出し「明智の面前には今や首が山と積まれ、死体は街路に放置された」（イエズス会書簡）こうして天下にその精強を誇った織田家御馬廻衆はわずか数時間のうちに主君もろとも壊滅したのであった。

The Akechi army searched all over Kyoto to hunt down the remnants, and “The heads are piled up in front of Akechi, and the bodies are left in the streets” (Jesuit letter). In this way, the Oda horse guards, who were once proud of their power throughout the country, were annihilated along with their lord in just a few hours.

　以上はイエズス会書簡を参考にして『信長記』から（かなり脚色を入れつつ）再現した本能寺の変の経過である。このとき弥助はどこで何をしていたのだろうか。『信長記』本能寺の変での織田家戦死者たち90人強を列挙して顕彰しているが、そのなかに弥助の名はない。しかしイエズス会書簡によれば彼もまた、この本能寺の変を戦った一人だったのだ。

So, the above was from first to last of the Honnoji Incident, which I reconstructed (with considerable dramatization) from "Shinchoki" and a Jesuit letter. Where was Yasuke, and what was he doing during this whole time? "Shincho-ki" lists and praises more than 90 people who died in the Honnoji Incident, but the name Yasuke is not among them. However, according to a Jesuit letter, he was also one of those who fought in this  incident.

京都発カリヨン報告
Carrion's report about the honnoji incident

　以下に引用するのはルイス・フロイスが1582年11月5日（天正10年10月20日）にイエズス会総長へ宛てた書簡だ。この書簡は弥助の戦闘が記録された唯一の史料であり、弥助の最後の記録でもある。

According to a Jesuit record, Yasuke was one of those who fought in the Honnoji Incident. it is the only record we know of Yasuke engaged in an actual battle, as well as the last record of him in history. Now let’s see the letter, which Luís Fróis wrote to the President of the Society of Jesuit on November 5, 1582.

Temiamos mais porque hum Cafre que o Padre Visitador deixou a Nobunânga polo desejar, depois de Nobunánga ser morto se foi a casa do principe, & ali esteve pelejando hum grande pedaço: hum criado de Aquechí se chegou a elle, & lhe pedio a cataná, que não tivesse medo elle lha entregou, & o outro foi perguntar a Aquechì, que faria do Cafre, respondeo: esse Cafre he bestial, que não sabe nada, nem he Iapão, não no matem, la o depositem na igreja dos Padres da India, polo qual nos começamos aquietar alguma cousa,

（Cartas de Evora『エヴォラ版日本書簡集』）

信長の求めによって巡察師が彼の許に残していった黒人が信長の死後、世子の邸へ行き同所で長い間戦っていたので我らは少なからず心配していたが、明智の一家臣が彼に近づき、恐れずに刀を（棄てるよう）求めたところ、彼はこれを差し出した。別の家臣が明智の許に行き、黒人をいかにすべきか問うたところ、その黒人は動物であって何も知らず、また日本人でもないから彼を殺さず、インドの司祭たちの教会に置くように命じた。これによって我らは幾分落ち着き始めたが（後略）

（松田毅一監訳『十六・七世紀イエズス会日本報告集第Ⅲ期第6巻』P129）

After the death of Nobunaga, the Cafre, whom Visitador had left to Nobunaga at his request, went to the residence of Nobunaga's heir and had been fighting there for a long time, which made us a more than little worried, but when a vassal of Akechi approached him and demanded him to hand over his sword without fear, the Cafre offered it to him. Another vassal went to Akechi and asked him what to do with the Cafre, and Akechi said 'the Cafre is an animal and don't know anything, and he is also not a Japanese, so don't kill him and send him to the church of Padre of Indies.' This made us calm down a little.

(My English translation)

　記述からわかることは信長の死後に弥助が信忠の元へ向かい、明智軍を相手に長時間戦ったが、降伏したということである。彼は助命され京都の教会に送られた。この教会は本能寺から通りを二つ隔てた東に位置していた。

What we can see from this description is that he fought against probably many enemies for a long time and then surrendered.

　尊経閣本には弥助が信長に近侍していたことを示唆する記述があることは先に述べたが、この報告もそれと符合している。『信長記』によれば信長はごく少数の小姓たちだけを伴って上洛しているので*64、弥助が彼らと行動を共にしていたと仮定しなければ、弥助が本能寺の変で戦闘したことを説明するのは難しいのだ。もっとも、その場合本能寺での襲撃をどうやって生き延びたのかという難問も浮上する。

I mentioned earlier that the Sonkeikaku copy contains a description that suggest Yasuke served Nobunaga closely, and this report is consistent with that. Since Nobunaga came to Kyoto with only a small group of pages (御小姓衆)*65, if we do not assume Yasuke accompanied him, it would become difficult to explain why Yasuke fought in the Honnoji Incident at all.

　信長に近侍していたはずの弥助がなぜ信長のいた本能寺から「世子の邸」に移動できたのか、また弥助が戦っていた場所がどこなのかは定かでない。書簡の直前の部分でこの「世子の邸」は信忠が寄宿していた妙覚寺を指す言葉として使われているため、文字通りに解釈すれば弥助は妙覚寺で戦っていたことになる。しかし信忠たちは妙覚寺から二条御所へ移動してそこで戦闘しており、弥助が一人だけで妙覚寺に残って戦ったとは考えにくい。

It is unknown how and why Yasuke, who we suppose was at the side of Nobunaga, could move to ”the residence of the heir.” It is also unknown exactly where Yasuke fought. In a part immediately before this part, the phrase ‘the residence of the heir’ appears referring to Myokakuji temple where Nobutada was boarding, which means if we interpret the phrasing literally, Yasuke fought at Myokakuji. However, actually Nobutada moved from Myokakuji to Nijo Imperial Palace and fought there. It is difficult for us to imagine Yasuke stayed and fought at Myokakuji all by himself.

　書簡の記述から呉座氏は次のような状況を想定している。弥助は信長の側にいたが、信長が自害すると本能寺を脱出して、信忠のもとに向かった。信忠を討つべく明智軍が攻め寄せると、弥助は信忠方として奮戦するが、信忠が自害したため、明智方に降伏した。なお「邸へ行き同所で」の原文は岡氏によれば「邸へ行きその辺りで」と翻訳することも可能であるとのことである。当時の妙覚寺と二条御所は通りを一本隔てた隣同士にあった。

Professor Goza speculates the situation, from this letter, like this: Yasuke was at the side of Nobunaga, but after the death of his lord somehow escaped from Honno-ji Temple, and went to join Nobutada. When the Akechi army closed in on him, Yasuke fought hard with Nobutada’s men, but when Nobunaga’s son died too, Yasuke surrendered. According to Professor Oka, the original sentence of 'fought there' could be translated as 'went to the residence of the heir and fought around there.' Myokakuji and Nijo Imperial Palace were located just one street away from each other at that time.

　助命されて教会に送られた弥助の消息は途絶えてしまう。彼のその後については何もわかっていない。史料では西日本にいくらか黒人が現れる例もある*66が、彼らと弥助を結びつけるものは何も見つかっていない。

After his life was spared and sent to the Jesuit church, Yasuke was never heard from again. We know nothing about his life after that. Several black people do appear in historical materials of western Japan in the near period, but nothing is found to connect them with Yasuke.*67

カリヨン報告の持つ文脈
The context of Carrion's report

　この報告を起草したのは本能寺の変発生時に京都の教会にいた宣教師フランシスコ・カリヨンである。書簡自体はフロイスのものだが、文中で私という一人称が使われていることから、フロイスはカリヨンの報告をそのまま書き写していると考えられる。教会は本能寺のすぐ近くにあり、光秀の発言に登場する教会とはここのことだろう。間近で目撃していただけあって本能寺の変に関するイエズス会の記録は詳細であり真に迫るものがある。この書簡の信頼性は比較的高いとみてよいだろう。

The one who drafted this report letter was Francisco Carrion, a Jesuit missionary who was in the church in Kyoto at the time of the incident. The letter itself was authored by Frois, but the use of the first person 'I' in the letter suggests that Frois copied Carrion's report as it was. The church was very close to Honno-ji temple, and "the church of Padre of Indies" mentioned in Mitsuhide's statement must have meant here. Having seen it closely himself, Carrion’s record of the Honnoji Incident is detailed and close to reality. I presume the credibility of this letter relatively high.

　信長は生前イエズス会の活動に寛容だったが、彼が死亡したことによってイエズス会が活動していた畿内は混乱に陥った。またイエズス会の見方*68では信長は日本の伝統的な宗教勢力と対立的だったのに対して、明智光秀は仏教との関わりが強いと見なされており、イエズス会は今後の日本での活動に不安を抱いていた。

Nobunaga generously allowed the activities of the Society of Jesus during his lifetime, but his demise caused confusion in Kinai region (the capital and its surrounding areas), where the Jesuits were active. On top of that, in constrast to Nobunaga who was loath of traditional religious forces in Japan, from the Jesuit point of view*69, Akechi Mitsuhide was apparently strongly involved in Buddhism, which made the Jesuits worried about their future activities in Japan.

　宣教師らは明智軍が教会を掠奪することさえ危惧したが、実際には光秀は京都の治安維持に努め、教会も無事であった。弥助が生還したことを伝えるこの記述もそうした文脈の一部として理解できる。弥助が助命されたことから、イエズス会は光秀が自分たちに害意を持っていないと判断し、安心したのだろう。光秀が弥助を助命した理由は謎である。彼は本能寺の変のすぐ後に豊臣秀吉の軍勢に敗れ死亡してしまったため、彼が反乱を起こした理由は戦国時代最大の謎となっている。*70

The missionaries feared that Akechi army might seize or even plunder their church, but in fact Mitsuhide tried to maintain order in Kyoto, and the church remained unscathed. We can interprete the account of Yasuke's survival in this letter as a part of this context. On seeing the fact that Yasuke was spared, the Jesuits must have judged that Mitsuhide had no malice against them and felt relieved. However, the real reason why Mitsuhide spared Yasuke remains a mystery for us. As it turned out, Mitsuhide was defeated by the army of Toyotomi Hideyoshi shortly after the Honnoji Incident, and the whole reason why he rose in revolt itself remains the greatest mystery in the history of the Sengoku period.*71

　中国地方で毛利家と戦闘中だった秀吉は、変の報せを受けると主君の死を隠して毛利方と講話し強行軍で京都に急行、わずか十日ほどで明智軍と接敵した。天正10年6月13日（1582年7月2日） 山崎の戦いである。未だ態勢の整わぬまま光秀は一万六千の兵力で秀吉軍二万六千を迎え撃ったが、戦闘は一日のうちに秀吉軍の勝利に終わった。光秀は落ち武者狩りに遭ったと言われている。主君の仇を討ち取った秀吉は勢いに乗り、激しい権力闘争に勝利して織田家の権力を継承することに成功した。*72

Toyotomi Hideyoshi was fighting against the Mori clan in the Chugoku region. When he was informed of the incident, he returned to Kyōto in forced march, and within mere ten days he engaged Mitsuhide's army. This was the Battle of Yamazaki which was held on July 2, 1582 (6th month 2, Tensho 10). Akechi Mitsuhide, who had 16,000 troops but was unable to prepare himself for Hideyoshi's swift action, fought Hideyoshi's army of 26,000. The battle ended in a victory for Hideyoshi's army within one day. The conventional story says Mitsuhide was attacked and killed by random armed locals during his retreat. Hideyoshi, who avenged his lord's death, gained momentum and emerged the victor of the following fierce power struggle, and eventually succeeded the whole power of the Oda clan.*73

後世の欧文史料
European documents in later period

　これまで見てきたイエズス会書簡はいずれも同時代史料だった。本章では後世に作成された欧文史料を見ていくことにしよう。初めに取り扱うのは17世紀フランスで刊行された日本におけるキリスト教布教史の記録の抜粋である。このなかには弥助を日本に連れてきたヴァリニャーノに関する記録があり、弥助と見られる黒人男性の出身地や来日以前の軌跡について記録されている。

The three Jesuit letters we have seen so far were contemporary historical materials. Now, let us take a look at European historical materials of later years. The first one I’ll show you is a passage from a 17th-century French book of the history of Christian missionary work in Japan. This book includes a record about Valignano, who brought Yasuke to Japan, as well as some clues for the homeplace of a black man we believe to be Yasuke and his life before he came to Japan.

フランソワ・ソリエー『日本教会史』
Book by François Solier 1627

　1627年にイエズス会士フランソワ・ソリエーが著した『日本教会史』には以下の記述がある。原文はインターネットで閲覧できる。

"The History of the Church in Japan," written by Francis Solier, a Jesuit, in 1627, have the following description. We can see the original text on the Internet.

Or auoit le Pere Alexandre mené auec ſoy des Indes vn valet More, auſli noir que ſont les Ethiopiens de la Guinee, mais natif du Mozambic, & de ceux qu'on nomme proprement Cafres, habitans vers le Cap de Bonne eſperace. 

(François Solier. Histoire ecclésiastique des isles et royaumes du Japon, 1627)

アレクサンドル司教はインドからムーア人を連れてきた。その男はギニアのエチオピア人のように黒い肌で、モザンビーク出身だった。その国は喜望峰の近くにある国で、カフレと呼ばれる人々が暮らしている。

（筆者訳）

Padre Alexander brought a Moor from India. The man was dark-skinned, like the Ethiopians in Guinea, and he was from Mozambique, a country near the Cape of Good Hope inhabited by a people called Cafre.

(My English translation)

　ヴァリニャーノが弥助と思われる男性をインドから連れてきたこと、そしてこの黒人男性がモザンビーク出身であると書かれている。しかし一見すると、この記述におけるアフリカの地理認識はでたらめに見える。エチオピアは東アフリカにあるのに対しギニアは正反対の西アフリカだし、モザンビークは喜望峰から離れている。

It says that Valignano brought a man from India who seems for us to be Yasuke, and that this black man was of Mozambican origin. At first glance, however, Solier’s geographical perception of African continent seems awfully random: we know in reality Ethiopia is in East Africa, Guinea is in the opposite West Africa, and Mozambique is far from the Cape of Good Hope.

　実際にはそうでたらめというわけでもない。岡氏によればギニアは北アフリカを除くアフリカ全般を指す言葉として用いられていた時期もあった。また現在のモザンビークの近くに当時存在したモノモタパ王国は喜望峰の近くまでを勢力圏に含んでいた。そしてヴァリニャーノが欧州から日本へ向かう途中に、ポルトガル植民地だったインドのゴアに立ち寄ったことはイエズス会史料によって裏付けられている。

But actually, this is not so entirely random. According to professor Oka, the word “Guinea” was, for a time, used to refer to all of Africa except North Africa, and the kingdom of Monomotapa, which existed near present-day Mozambique, extended its sphere of influence as far as the Cape of Good Hope. Also, the fact that Valignano stopped at Goa in India, which was a Portuguese colony, on his way from Europe to Japan is supported by Jesuit historical materials.

　本記事は当初この記述をアフリカの地理認識がおかしいので信用できないと解説したが誤りであった。ソリエーの用いた情報源は不明だが、明白なでたらめというわけでもなさそうだ。なお同書には本能寺の変で弥助が戦ったことの記録は含まれていない。

At first (before revisions) I had evaluated Solier’s description as unreliable because of his warped perception of Africa, but I was incorrect. Solier’s statements are perhaps not so random, though his source of information is unclear. By the way, this book does not include any record of Yasuke's fight in the Honnoji Incident.

ジャン・クラセ『日本教会史』
Book by Jean Crasset 1689

　1689年には日本教会史の増補版が刊行された。同書ではヴァリニャーノらを含む宣教師一行の日本への渡航経緯が詳細に記されている。同書の記述もまた、彼がリスボンからモザンビーク経由でゴアに立ち寄ったことを記録している。次に引用するのは増補版における弥助と見られる人物と信長との会合の場面である。原文は岡氏から提供していただいた。

In 1689, an enlarged edition of this book was published by Jean Crasset, a French Jesuit theologian. It contains the details of the trip to Japan of the missionary group including Valignano. It matches with the original edition in that he stopped in Goa, India, on the way from Lisbon via Mozambique. The following is a scene of the first meeting between a person who seems to be Yasuke and Nobunaga in this enlarged edition. Professor Oka provided me with the original text.

Aprés les Festes de Pasques, le Pere Valignan se transportara à Meaco pour y falüer Nobunanga & pour le remercier des faveurs continuelles qu’il répandoit sur les Chrétiens & sur les Peres qui preschoient dans son Royaume. Il avoit amené des Indes un valet More. Aussi-toft qu’il parut dans la Ville tout le monde courut pour le voir. Le Pere Organtin le presenta à Nobunanga, qui en sut surpris & ne pouvoit croire que cette couleur sût naturelle: Mais il se persuadoit qu’on l’avoit peint de la forte, ce qui obligea le More de se dépoüiller jusqu à la ceinture. Aprés l’avoir bien examine il en demeura convaincu. Il receut le Pere tres favorablement & luy assigna un jour pour entretenir le Pere Visiteur.

(Jean Crasset. Histoire de L’ Eglise du Japon, 1689)

復活祭の後、ヴァリニャーノ師は京都に行って信長に挨拶し、彼の領国で宣教する信徒と聖職者たちに与えてくれた絶え間ない引き立てに感謝した。彼（ヴァリニャーノ）はインドからムーア人（黒人）の召使いを連れていったが、彼が町に現れるとすぐに人々が彼を見ようと押し寄せた。オルガンティノ師が彼を信長に紹介したところ、信長は驚いて彼の（肌の）色が自然なものだとは信じられなかった。だが彼はその男がこのように（黒い墨で）塗られていると信じたので、ムーア人は腰から上の服を脱がなければならなかった。彼（黒人）をよく調べた後、彼（信長）は（黒人の肌の色が人工でないと）確信した。彼はとても好意的に宣教師らを受け入れ、次に巡察師と会見する日程を定めた。

（筆者訳）

After the Easter celebrations, Padre Valignano went to Kyoto to pay respect to Nobunaga and to thank him for the constant favors he bestowed upon the Christians and its priests who preached in his kingdom. He (Valignano) had brought a Moor (black people) valet from India, but as soon as the man appeared in the city, everyone rushed to see him. Padre Organtino introduced him to Nobunaga, who was surprised and could not believe that his (skin) color was natural. In fact, he was so convinced that the man had been painted (with black ink) in this way, the Moor was compelled to undress from the waist up. After examining him closely, he (Nobunaga) was convinced (that the skin color was not artificial). He received the group of Padre very favorably and set a day for the next meeting with Visitador Padre.

(My English translation)

　基本的には天正9年イエズス会書簡の内容とほぼ一致しているが、弥助と思しき黒人男性がインドから連れてこられたという記述はソリエー版と一致している。

Basically it matches the contents of the Jesuit letters of 9th Tensho I have cited earlier, but as to the point that Yasuke was brought from India it inherits the description from Solier’s edition.

　イエズス会が各地から本部へ送った報告書簡は整理され公開されていたため、イエズス会士が閲覧することは容易だった。クラセの記述が同時代イエズス会史料と概ね一致しているのは、彼がそうした史料に依拠してこの本を著したことを示唆している。にも関わらず、ソリエーの著作と同様にクラセの『日本教会史』もまた、本能寺の変での弥助の戦いについては記していない。

It was easy for the Jesuits to read the reports their members sent from various places to their headquarters because these reports were stored in a organized and accessible way. The general consistensy of Crasset's description with contemporary Jesuit historical materials suggests that he relied on such materials to write this book. Nevertheless, like Solie's book, Crase's "History of the Japanese Church" does not describe Yasuke's battle in the Honnoji Incident.

信長は弥助の肌を洗わせたのか？
Did Nobunaga make Yasuke’s skin washed?

　弥助について知っている人なら誰でも、信長が彼の肌の色を信じず皮膚を洗わせたという逸話を聞いたことがあるだろう。本記事が取り扱うイエズス会史料にはこの逸話が記述されていないため、筆者は後世の創作の可能性を疑っていた。だがこの逸話を裏付ける史料を岡氏に提供していただいたので、紹介しようと思う。

Anyone who knows about Yasuke has heard of the anecdote that Nobunaga wouldn’t believe his skin color and made it wash before his own eyes. Since this “wash” part of anecdote is not described in any of the Jesuit historical materials I’ve cited so far, at first I had doubted that it might be an invention of later years. But Professor Oka provided me with the text of a book, a historical material that supports this anecdote, which I will show you now.

Vay o Padre Visitador pera o Meaco e leva consigo o Padre Luis Froes e outros companheiros e chega ao Sacay, he recebido com muita festa. Chega o Padre Visitador a Meaco, e vay visitar a Nobunanga, elle fez honras extraordinarias, admirão-se muito os japonezes de tres cousas ninca vistas em Japao; a primeira da estatura do Padre Visitador que ainda entre os Europeus era de marca mayor, e de hum Cafre pequeno que o acompanhava e bom trabalho deo aos Padres pela muita gente que comcorria a ve-llo como era couza que não tinha visto, huns se admiravão do cabello trizado, outros dos narizes, e outras arengas, não se podia Nobunaga persuadir que as corres erão naturaes, mandou o despir da cinta para cima, e lavar com muita curiosidade, e quanto mais, e quanto mais o lavavão mais negrejava. A terceira novidade erão huns orgãos que forão de Goa que sendo este instrumento montado por Jubal Sexto neto de Adam, ainda não tinhão os Japões dado neste invento.

（『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』アジュダ図書館所蔵史料
Biblioteca da Ajuda, Lisboa. Jesuítas na Ásia 49-IV-55. Livro Primeiro da Christandade, digo do principio da Missão do Japão e Superiores della, começando em quinze de agosto de mil quinhentos e quarenta e nove, annos 1549 athe o trinta e hum de agosto de mil settecentos e quarenta e quatro 1744 annos.）

巡察師パードレ（ヴァリニャーノ）は、ルイス・フロイス神父や他の仲間を連れて都へ向かい、堺に到着すると、盛大に歓迎された。巡察師パードレは都に到着し、信長を訪問した。信長は彼に特別な敬意を示し、日本人たちは日本では見られたことのない3つの事柄に非常に驚いた。第一に、巡察師パードレの身長がヨーロッパ人の中でも非常に大きいこと、さらに彼に同行していた取るに足らないカフル人に対してであった。一度も見られたことのないものであったので、彼を見ようと多くの人が押し寄せたため、司祭たちはかなり苦労をした。ある者はその縮れた髪に、また他の者はその鼻や他の様々な特徴に驚嘆した。信長は、その肌の色が自然のものであるとは納得せず、ベルトから上を裸にして、念入りに洗わせた。しかし、洗えば洗うほど肌はますます黒くなった。第三の初物は、ゴアから齎された数台のオルガンであった。これらの楽器はアダムの6代目の孫ユバルによって組み立てられた（発明された）もので、日本人はまだこれらの楽器のことを知らされていなかった。

（岡氏の訳を元に筆者が文体を調整した）

Visitador Padre (Valignano) took Father Luis Frois and other companions to the capital (Kyoto), and when they reached Sakai, they were enthusiastically welcomed. On arriving the capital, Visitador Padre paid a visit to Nobunaga, who showed him special respect, and the Japanese were very surprised by three things that had never been seen in Japan. Firstly, by the height of Visitador Padre, which was very tall even among the Europeans, and secondly, by the insignificant Cafre who accompanied him. Cafre was something that had never been seen, and so many people rushed to see him that the priests had quite a hard time. Some marveled at his curly hair, others at his nose and various other features. Nobunaga, not convinced that his skin color was natural, stripped him naked above his belt and commanded to wash him scrupulously. But the more they washed, the darker and darker his skin became. The third new thing was the several organs from Goa, which had been invented by Adam's sixth grandson Yuval, and of which the Japanese had not yet know.

(My English translation)

　信長が弥助の肌を洗わせた事実に加えて、髪質など弥助の外見的特徴も記述されている。これは非常に貴重な史料であるといってよいだろう。

This text not only tells us the fact that Nobunaga made Yasuke's skin washed, but also describes Yasuke's other external features. I’d say it is a very valuable historical source.

　本史料はヴァリニャーノの事績について書かれたものだが、著者は現時点では不明である。岡氏は書簡中にフロイスが登場することから、フロイスの書簡を誰かが参照し記したものなのではないかと推測している。*74

This book describes mainly about Valignano's achievements, but we currently do not know who was the author of this historical document. Since Frois appears in this letter, Professor Oka suspects that it was someone who had read Frois’s letters.*75

　ちなみに複数の文献が本史料の著者をアントニオ・フランシスコ・カルディンに比定しているがこれは間違いである。本史料が収録されている文書集には五つの写本が含まれており、カルディンは二つ目の文書の著者だが本文書とは関係がない。カルディンは1645年頃にイエズス会日本管区の管区長に就任したが、当時の日本はキリスト教布教に極めて敵対的で、密入国は確実な死を意味した*76。彼は日本に入国する代わりにマカオで日本に関する情報を集め、多くの歴史書を著したが、その中に弥助と関係するものは今のところ発見されていないようである。

助と関係するものは今のところ発見されていないようである。
I’ve noticed that several documents incorrectly identified the author of this material as Antonio Francisco Cardin. This book, a collection of documents including this historical material, is composed of five documents, and Cardin is the author of only the second document, but not of the others. Cardin assumed the position of Prefect of the Japanese Territory of the Society of Jesus around 1645, but at that time Japan were extremely hostile to the propagation of Christianity, and smuggling onself into the country meant certain death.*77 Instead of entering the Japanese territory, he gathered information about Japan in Macau and wrote many history books, but none of which seems to related to Yasuke so far as I know.

弥助の事績は省略されていた
Yasuke's ommition in later ages

　ところでこの弥助が肌を洗わせられたという文書だが、同文書は1938年に出版されたルイス・フロイス『日本史』第二部（Segunda parte da Historia de Japam : que trata das couzas, que socedarão nesta V. Provincia da Hera de 1578 por diante, começãdo pela Conversão del Rey de Bungo (1578-1582)）にも収録されている。書き方からしてこの文書の著者はフロイスではなさそうだが、ここで『日本史』についても軽く触れておきたい。フロイス『日本史』は彼が1594年までに執筆した編年体の歴史書で、日本史における重要史料の一つだ。またフロイスはこれまで見てきたように自身の書簡の中で弥助に触れているし、そもそも彼はヴァリニャーノを長とする使節団に同行していたのだから、フロイスが弥助と面識があったことはほぼ間違いない。

By the way, this same document, which says Yasuke was forced to wash his skin, is also included in the second part of Luis Frois's “History of Japan” (Segunda parte da Historia de Japam : que trata das couzas, que socedarão nesta V. Provincia da Hera de 1578 por diante, começãdo pela Conversão del Rey de Bungo 1578-1582),  a book published in 1938. Frois does not seem to be the author of this document, but I would like to briefly explain about this book. Frois’s "History of Japan" is a chronological history completed before 1594 and is one of the most important historical materials in Japanese history. As we have seen already in this article, Frois mentioned Yasuke in his letters, and since he was a member of the missionary headed by Valignano in the first place, there is little doubt that Frois was personally aquainted with Yasuke.

　それにも関わらずフロイス『日本史』には弥助は一切登場しない。また「日本教会史」は部分的に弥助に触れているものの、本能寺の変における弥助の戦闘はやはり記録していない。ソリエーはともかく、クラセは明らかにイエズス会書簡集に依拠しているにも関わらず、やはり弥助の事績を省略している。このように欧文史料においても、書簡集から二次文献が作成される際に弥助の事績は省略されるのが常であったのだ。

In spite of that, Yasuke does not appear at all in Frois's "History of Japan." And although both versions of "The History of the Church in Japan," Solier’s and Crasset’s, mentions Yasuke, they do not record Yasuke's battle in the Honnoji Incident. In the case of Sollier it is understandable, since his focus was obviously not on the “Moor,”  but Crasset also omits Yasuke's action, even though he clearly relies on Jesuit letters. Thus, not only in Japanese documents, but also in European historical sources, Yasuke's action was always omitted when secondary literature was created.

関係史料その他
Other materials and considerations

　ここでは直接弥助は登場しないものの弥助と関係がある史料を紹介する。またここまで論じてこなかったものの、史料を解釈するために補足的な解説を行う。

So far, I have dealt, as a rule, only with historical materials in which Yasuke directly appears, but in this section I’d like to make exception and introduce some historical materials which are related to Yasuke but he does not directly appear. I’ll also provide supplementary explanations you might need when interpriting historical documents but I haven’t discussed so far.

1574年ヴァリニャーノ書簡
Valignano's letter of 1574

　弥助が直接は登場しないものの、彼の境遇を考える上で参考になる史料があるので、ここで紹介したい。岡氏は本史料を元に弥助の出身地はモザンビークだったと推測している。以下に引用するのは1574年8月7日付モザンビーク発のイタリア語で記されたヴァリニャーノの自筆書簡の一部である。

Professor Oka provided me with a historical material, in which Yasuke does not directly appear but e can use to infer his backgrounds. Based on this material, Professor Oka surmises that Yasuke came from Mozambique. The following is a part of Valignano's own Italian handwriting letter from Mozambique dated August 7, 1574.

Gli schiavi poi che erano stati dall’ istesso governatore donati per servitio de Padre
ancora all’istesso ho restituiti et gl’altri, che gl’erano stati dati per elemosina, o, gli
menaro me co che sono tre, o, un paro d’essi gl’inviato à donare alla casa di San
Rocco in Lisboa, p.che se gl’há molto bene meritati con la molta spesa, che con la
nostra dimora ha fatta

（ローマイエズス会文書館所蔵史料 Archivum Romanum Societatis Iesu, Jap Sin 7 III, fl. 225v.）

その〔モザンビークの〕司令官から寄付された奴隷たちは、パードレ達に奉仕するために与えられたものであった。そのうち幾らかはすでに他人に譲渡し、その他の者たちは喜捨として〔他者に〕与えられた。私は三人だけを自分の元に残し、うち二人をリスボンのサンロケ修道院に喜捨として送った。というのもその修道院では多大な出費が必要で、彼らはそれに使われるに相応しいからである。

（岡美穂子訳）

The slaves, donated by the commander of the (Mozambican) fortress, had been given to serve Padres. Some of them had already been transferred to others, and the rest was given [to others] as alms (alms = charity, donation). I left only three to myself, and had sent two of them as alms to San Roque abbey in Lisbon, where great expense was needed, and they were fit to be used for it.

(My English translation)

　この手元に残った一人の元奴隷が後の弥助である証拠は一切存在しないものの、岡氏はこの二人が同一人物なのではないかと推測している。当時のアフリカの黒人奴隷の供給源は主に黒人国家同士の戦争から生じた戦争捕虜だったことから、彼らも元は捕虜だった可能性は高い。

Although we have no evidence that this remaining former slave was Yasuke, Professor Oka guesses that they were one and the same person. Since the sources of black slaves in Africa at that time were mainly prisoners of war resulting from wars between black states, it is highly likely that the ones the commander donated were also former prisoners of war.

イエズス会は奴隷制度に反対していた？
Did the Jesuits oppose slavery?

　イエズス会は公的には奴隷制に反対していたことがよく知られているが、この書簡ではヴァリニャーノが奴隷を使役しているようにも見える。たしかにこの書簡では「譲渡」や「喜捨」といった言葉が使用されているのだが、法的にはこの時点での彼らの身分は元奴隷である可能性が高い。

Although it is a well known fact that the Jesuits ostensibly opposed slavery, apparently in this letter Valignano allocates and employs slaves as he pleases. However, I’d like to note that, though this letter certainly uses words such as “transfer” and “alms,” it is highly likely that their legal status was “former” slave.

　欧州の奴隷法において、債務奴隷が奴隷である根拠は所有者に対して負っている負債である。この負債は債権として、奴隷を所有し使役する権利と一体化している。従って奴隷がその身分を維持して次の所有者へ渡る際は、必ず債権の移動を伴う。だが要塞司令官は無償で奴隷たちをヴァリニャーノにプレゼントしている。このため岡氏は奴隷たちの債権が要塞司令官によって担保され消滅したのではないかと考えている。この場合、奴隷たちはヴァリニャーノに負債を負っていないため、もはや奴隷ではないことになる。

In European slave law, the foundation of a debt slave was that they owed a debt to the owner. This debt was an obligation which was integrated with the right of the owner to own and use the slave. Therefore, if and when the slave maintained their status as a slave while passed over to the next owner, it involved the transfer of the obligation, too. However, the fortress commander gave the slaves to Valignano without compensation. Thus, Professor Oka believes that the obligation of the slaves were secured and extinguished by the commander. In this case, the slaves were no longer slaves because they did not owe a debt to Valignano.

　ただしこの奴隷たちが債務奴隷ではなく、従って奴隷身分を維持させるかどうかヴァリニャーノが自由に選択できた可能性もあるようだ。その場合、彼は奴隷たちを自由にすると宣言し教会で証文を作成することで奴隷たちの身分を変更できた。イエズス会が公的には奴隷制度に反対していたことを考えると、いずれにせよ彼らが非奴隷身分で使役された可能性は高いだろう。岡氏は彼らの身分をmoçoと呼ばれる、明確な奴隷契約のない、給金付きの下僕だったと考えている。イエズス会の従者がキリスト教徒でないことはありえないため、彼らは洗礼名を持つ改宗者に違いない。来日時の弥助もキリスト教徒だったはずである。

It seems possible, however, that these slaves were not debt slaves, and in that case Valignano would have been free to choose to keep them as a slave ot not. He could have changed their status by declaring that they were free and writing a document in a church. Either way, given that the Jesuits’ official stance was against slavery, it is likely that they were employed in a non-slave status. Professor Oka speculates their status to be “moço,” which meant paid servants without a explicit slave contract. And, since it was impossible Jesuit servants were not Christians, they must have been converts with Christian names. That makes, technically, Yasuke at the time of his arrival in Japan a Christian, too.

　イエズス会は公的には奴隷制度に反対していた。それにも関わらず実際には黒人たちを商品同然に扱っていた。本史料はそのことを如実に記録しており、注目に値する。

It is worth noting that despite the Jesuits ostensibly opposed to slavery, in reality they transferred black people as if they were commodities. That fact is well documented in this historical source.

弥助マネー考察 How much money were those?

　ところで、上記のヴァリニャーノ書簡を読んでフロイス書簡の「黒人を見世物にすれば大金を稼げる」という一文を思い出さなかっただろうか。これもまた当時のイエズス会が黒人をどのように見ていたかを示す傍証なのだが、それはそれとしてあの8,000から10,000クルザードというのはいくらくらいなのか、気にならないだろうか。また弥助は信長の甥から銭一万を受け取っている。これもどのくらいの価値なのか。結論から言ってしまうと、イエズス会士が噂した8,000から10,000クルサードは米15トンから20トンに相当する大金で、実際に弥助が貰った銭一万は米3トンに相当する。

By the way, when you read the above Valignano's letter, didn't you remember the line in the Frois’s letter, "if you made a spectacle of a Cafre in order to make money, you would very easily earn at least 8,000 to 10,000 cruzados"? This is also a supporting evidence of how the Jesuits at that time viewed black people. But, by the way, don't you wonder how much was 8,000 to 10,000 cruzado worth? Also, according to the same Frois’s letter, Yasuke received ten thousand sen from Nobunaga's nephew. How much was this worth? To cut to the chase, the 8,000 to 10,000 cruzado the Jesuits dreamed of was a large sum of money worth 15 to 20 tons of rice, and 10,000 sen Yasuke actually got was worth 3 tons of rice.

　何故急に米が出てきたのかと困惑した読者のために説明すると、近世日本では武士の経済力は石高制という仕組みで表された。石高とはある土地の一年間の標準的な米の収穫量を意味する。一石は約180リットルの容積を意味し米の場合は約150キロの重さとなって、これは成人が一年間に消費する米の量とおおまかに等しいとされていた。例えばある武士が百石の所領を持っているなら、その土地の経済的価値はだいたい一年間で15トンの米の収穫に相当する。これに税率をかけたものが武士の年収になるわけだ。

The reader may be puzzled, why did I suddenly mention rice? It is because, in Japan at that time, namely from the end of the Middle Ages to the Early Modern period, the economic power of a warrior was measured with a system known as the “kokudaka” system. Kokudaka (koku = a volume unit of rice, daka = amount) meant the standard annual rice yield of a certain land. One koku meant a volume of about 180 liters, and if weighed in rice about 150 kilograms, which was roughly the amount of rice consumed by an adult per year. For example, if a warrior owned an fief of 100 koku, the economic value of the land would be equivalent to a harvest of 15 tons of rice per year, which, multiplied by the tax rate, would become the warrior's annual income.

　ところで当時の織田家は領地を急拡大したため、領国では石高制と別に貫高制という仕組みも併用していた。土地の収穫量を基準とする点では石高制と同じだが、石高制が米を税として物納するのに対して貫高制は貨幣を使って納税する点が異なる。銭千枚を意味する貫文という単位が使用される。貫文と石の為替比率は時期と地域によってかなり変動が激しいが、貨幣史家である川戸貴史氏によればこの時期の織田領内ではだいたい一貫文が二石に相当した。弥助はこの書簡で銭一万を受け取っている。これは10貫文すなわち20石なので、米3トン分というわけだ。

By the way, since the Oda clan was rapidly expanding its territories at that time, they also used a system called the “kandaka” (kan = a unit of money, daka = amount) system in addition to the kokudaka system. Both systems were the same in that they made culculation based on the amount of land harvests, but the difference was that in the kokudaka system people paid tax with rice itself, whereas in the kandaka system people paid with money worth the culculated rice. The monetary unit was “kanmon,” which meant a thousand coins. The exchange rate between a kanmon and a koku varied considerably depending on the time period and region, but according to monetary historian Takashi Kawato, a kanmon was roughly equivalent to two koku in the Oda clan fiefs during this period. Yasuke received 10,000 coins in this letter, which was 10 kanmon, and that equaled 20 koku, 3 tons of rice.

　クルサードはポルトガルの金銀貨の単位である。1クルサードは銀35gに当たる。イエズス会日本支部の報告書簡は日本における金銭のやり取りをすべてクルサードに換算して表記している。クルサードと日本の貨幣の為替レートについては、取り上げた書簡の引用部のすぐ後に30,000クルザードは200貫文に、50,000クルザードは300貫文に相当するという記述がある。この為替比率に従って8,000から10,000クルザードを換算するとだいたい米15トンから20トンになる。これはちょっとした武士の年収に相当する大金だ。

Cruzado was the Portuguese unit of gold and silver coinage, and one cruzado equaled 35 grams of silver. Jesuits report letters from Japanese branch converted all monetary exchanges in Japan into cruzado. In fact, the letter I cited earlier explains, immediately after this part, the exchange rates as 30,000 cruzado equals 200 kanmon, and 50,000 cruzado equals 300 kanmon. According to these exchange rates, 8,000 to 10,000 cruzado would be roughly equivalent to 15 to 20 tons of rice. A fortune, worth the annual income of a decent warrior.

　石高制と貫高制はどちらも知行制、すなわち所領支配権によって俸禄を与える仕組みである。武士は自らの所領を領主として経営し収入を得る、そしてその対価として所領の規模に応じた重さの軍役を主君に課せられた*78。こうした知行制と並んで、武家の俸禄には扶持という仕組みもあった。信長が弥助に与えていたのはこちらで、これは土地支配を伴わず主君から直接支給される俸禄を意味した。

Both systems, the kokudaka system and the kandaka system, were the foundation of the feoffment (知行 chigyo) system, the practice in which warrior lords paid a salary to his vassels through bestowing them the right to govern a fief. The vassels, in other words warrior households, earned their income through managing this fief as a lord themselves, and in return, the warrior lords imposed on them military services according to the size of their fiefs.*79 The warrior lords used, in addition to the feoffment system, the system of stipend (扶持 fuchi), too. Yasuke’s was such a case, meaning that Nobunaga paid Yasuke a stipend directly and it did not involve control of land.

　武士と土地は切っても切り離せないもの、とよく言われているが、実際には戦国時代以降大名が下級家臣を扶持で雇用することは一般的になっていた。例えば御家人と呼ばれていた徳川幕府直参の下級武士たちは知行取りではなく蔵米取りだ。蔵米取りとは藩などの米蔵から米を支給することで、おおむねここでいう扶持と同じものと考えてよい。これに対して御家人よりも位の高い上級武士である旗本は基本的に知行取りだ。また武家奉公人は給金を貰うことが多かったので、大まかに言えば上級武士には知行・中下級家臣には扶持・奉公人には給金の順に身分と給与形態が連動していたことになる。

It is often said that the samurai and their fiefs are inseparable, but in reality, it was a common practice for feudal lords (daimyo) to employ lower-ranking vassals with stipends in the Sengoku period and after. For example, so-called “household vassals” (御家人 gokenin), who were lower-ranking warriors but direct vassals of the Tokugawa shogunate, did not receive a fief, but received kuramai (蔵米 rice from storehouse). Kuramai was a salary distributed from the rice storehouse of Domains or the shogunate, and we can roughly understand it as the same with a stipend. On the other hand, bannerguards (旗本 hatamoto), who were higher-ranking warriors than household vassals, basically had enfeoffment. In addition, warrior household servants often received a salary in money.  So roughly speaking, the status and salary forms were linked: a fief for higher-ranking warriors, a stipend for lower-ranking vassals, and salary money for servants.

　ただし旗本と御家人の境界線は給与形態ではなく、旗本が御目見得身分であること、つまり彼らが主君である将軍に謁見する資格を持っていることだった。なので最下層の旗本が蔵米取で、御目見できない御家人の最上位のほうが経済的には豊かということもありえなくはない。また扶持を貰う奉公人が居なかったわけでもない。連動しているとはいっても身分と給与形態はやはり別問題であり、弥助が扶持を貰っていたことだけから彼の身分を推し量ることは難しいようだ。なお弥助が貰っていた扶持の具体的な額は、史料に記録がないため不明である。

However, the boundary between bannerguards and household vassals was not the form of salary, but “the status of omemie” (御目見得 audience with one’s lord), in other words, being  entitled to meet their lord, the Shogun. Therefore, it was not impossible that a lowest rank of bannerguard who receive stipend was financially poorer than a high-ranking household vassal who did not have  the audience status. Also, it was not that there were no servants who received stipends. I have said they were linked, but the status and the form of salary were still different matters.So, it seems difficult for us to guess Yasuke's exact status only from the fact that he received a stipend. The specific amount of Yasuke’s stipend, too, is unknown because it is not recorded in any historical materials.

『信長記』天正6年相撲大会
Sumo Tournament in "Shinchi-ki"

　ここまでいくつかの史料において弥助の織田家における身分について度々触れてきた。ここでは『信長記』のなかから、弥助は登場しないものの彼の立場を考える上で参考になる箇所をピックアップしてみたい。原文は我自刊我本である。同本は牛一自筆本の建勲神社本を祖とする写本系統に連なり、読み下しをつけたものが出版され幅広く流通した。現代日本語訳も同本を底本としているものが多い。

I have already discussed a number of times Yasuke's position in the Oda clan using several materials. Here, I would like to highlight some parts of "Shincho-ki" useful for considering his position, although Yasuke does not appear in them. The text I’ll show you now is from a reprint copy of the “Gajikanga copy.” This copy belongs to the line derived from the “Kenkun-Jinja autograph copy,” one of the autograph copies of Gyuichi, and one of the widely circulated versions of Shincho-ki. Many of modern Japanese translations of Shincho-ki, too, have used it as their original.

　信長が大変な相撲好きであったことはよく知られており『信長記』にもたびたび相撲大会の記録が現れる。とりわけその規模が大きかったことで知られているのが天正6年8月15日の大会だ。以下にその部分を抜粋しよう。

It is well known fact that Nobunaga loved sumo so much, and “Shincho-ki” frequently records sumo tournaments. Especially famous one for its large scale is the tournament held on “6th of Tensho, 8th month, 15th.” The following is an excerpt from the tournament.

八月十五日　江州國中京都︀の相撲取を初として千五百人安土へ被召寄　御山にて辰刻より酉刻迄とらせて御覽候（中略）

度々能相撲仕候に付て被召出人數之事

東馬二郞　たいとう　づかう　妙仁　ひし屋　助五郞　水原孫太郞　大塜新八　あら鹿　山田與兵衞　圓淨寺源七　村田吉五　麻生三五　靑地孫治　以上十四人 

右御相撲取被召出何れものし付之太刀脇差衆御服かみ下御領中百石宛私宅等まて被仰付都︀鄙之面目忝次第也 

我自刊我書『信長公記』ウィキソース

　八月十五日、信長公は、近江・京都をはじめとして、千五百人の相撲取りを安土へお召しになって、お城で午前八時ごろから午後六時ごろまで相撲を取らせてご覧になった。（中略）

　たびたびよい相撲をとったとして召し出された人びと、東馬二郎・大藤・づこう・妙仁・ひし屋・助五郎・水原孫太郎・大塚新八・荒鹿・山田与兵衛・円浄寺源七・村田吉五・麻生三五・青地孫次の十四人であった。

　右の相撲取りを召し出されて、いずれものし付きの太刀・脇差・御服のかみしもを賜り、ご領中にそれぞれ百石ずつとそれに私宅まで下され、名誉この上なくかたじけない次第であった。

（榊山潤『現代語訳　信長公記（全）』P281）

Eighth Month, 15th day: Nobunaga summoned fifteen hundred sumo wrestlers, beginning with men from all over Ōmi Province and Kyoto, to Mount Azuchi, where he watched them compete from the Hour of the Dragon [around 8 a.m.] until the Hour of the Bird [around 6 p.m.]. [...]

The following were summoned before Nobunaga on account of their repeatedly demonstrated excellence:

Tōma Jirō, Taitō, Zukō Myōnin, Hishiya, Sukegorō, Mizuhara Magotarō, Ōtsuka Shinpachi, Arashika, Yamada Yohyōe, Enjōji Genshichi, Murata Kitsugo, Sasō Sango, and Aoji Magoji. Fourteen men in all.

Having called these wrestlers before him, Nobunaga ordered each of them to be given a sword and a dagger with gold-encrusted sheaths, a full set of clothing, an income of one hundred koku from Nobunaga's demesne, and even a private residence. This redounded to their fame in town and country, and they were full of gratitude.

(The Chronicle of Lord Nobunaga, Brill Academic Pub, 2011, 291P)

　信長は畿内中から相撲取りを集め、なんと1,500人もの力士が文字通りぶつかり合う一大相撲大会を開催した。そして優秀な成績を収めた14人の力士を家臣として取り立て、彼らに太刀と脇差、衣服、百石の所領、そして私宅を与えたという。そう、彼らは侍として処遇されているのだ。なにより「召し出されて」と書いてある。また彼らには名字を持たない者が多くいるので、家臣に取り立てられる上で名字が必須でないこともわかるだろう。

This description tells us that Nobunaga gathered sumo wrestlers from oll over the Kinai region (Kyoto and its surroundings) and held a grand sumo tournament in which as many as 1,500 wrestlers literally clashed with each other. He took 14 wrestlers who achieved excellent performance as his retainers and gave them a pair of swords, a suite of clothes, a fief, and a private residence. Yes, they were treated as samurai. Above all, it says they were "summoned” to an audience. Also, many of them do not have a surname, so you can see that a surname is not essential for being promoted to a retainer.

　弥助が扶持、装飾刀、私邸を与えられたとする尊経閣本の独自記事と、上記の相撲取りたちの処遇がよく似ていることは一目瞭然だ。なんなら彼らは刀が大小二本であり、扶持ではなく所領を受け取るなど弥助よりも高待遇に見える。ただし弥助は信長から名前を貰っており、ときどき信長の道具持ちをしたという記述がある点は違っている。

The similarity is obvious. Yasuke received a stipend, a decorated sword, and a residence according to the extra passage in Sonkeikaku copy. The sumo wrestlers in the above description received quite similar things. More exactly, the latter seem to be treated better than Yasuke because they were given a pair of swords, one large and the other small, and a fief instead of stipend. However, Yasuke was different with the wrestlers in two points, that he was given a name by Nobunaga and was described as sometimes seen in the role of Nobunaga's weapon bearer.

　では彼ら力士も武士と同じように、家来を引き連れて戦場で戦ったのだろうか。そういうわけでもない。呉座氏が新聞取材において、弥助の侍身分について問われた際以下のように述べている。

Did these wrestlers fight in the battlefield, with an entourage of their own servants like genuine warriors (bushi)? That is not the case. Professor Goza said, when asked about Yasuke's samurai status in a newspaper interview, as follows.

「また、侍だったとしても『形の上では』ということもあります。例えば江戸時代、相撲好きの大名にはお抱えの力士がいた。形式的には家臣、侍として召し抱えて帯刀を許可していましたが、たとえ戦（いくさ）が起きたとしても、お抱え力士が戦場で戦うようなことはもちろん、想定されていませんでした」

（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）産経新聞電子版令和6年8月5日付記事）

"Moreover, even if Yasuke was recognized as a samurai, it could have been largely symbolic. For example, during the Edo period, some daimyo [feudal lords] who were sumo enthusiasts employed wrestlers as "personal retainers." These wrestlers were nominally considered retainers and were permitted to carry swords like samurai. However, they were not expected to actually fight in battles."

("INTERVIEW | Yasuke and Assassin's Creed Shadows: A Japanese Historian's Perspective" JAPAN forward. August 22, 2024.)

　「お抱え」とは一定の年限を定めて武家に召し抱えられる特殊な家臣を指す語である。有名な例は上記にもあるような力士と、士分格で大名に仕える御典医だ。この他にも能役者が大名から扶持を与えられていた例、職人を徒士身分で家臣にしていた例などがある。彼らは形式上は侍として処遇されるが、戦争の際に生まれついての武士たちと一緒に戦ったりはしないのだ。また通常その身分は一代限りが原則で、家臣としての地位を世襲できる普通の武士とはその点も異なる。

Personal retainers (お抱え okakae) is a term used to refer to a special kind of retainers employed by a feudal lord under a contract of a certain period of time. Famous examples are sumo wrestlers, as I mentioned above, and doctors who personally served feudal lords. They were treated as having “the status of warrior” (士分 shibun). Other than that, there were examples of Noh actors who were given a stipend by feudal lords, and skillful craftsmen who served with the status of “foot warriors” (徒士 kachi). They were treated as samurai in a symbolic sense, but they did not fight shoulder-to-shoulder with real, natural-born warriors in war. The status of personal retainer was usually limited to one generation, which was different from that of ordinary warriors who could inherit the status of vassal in their families.

　するとここで名前の挙がった14人の力士たちもやはり形式上の侍で、家臣として仕えた実態はなかったのだろうか。どうもそうとは限らないらしい。引用部には出てこないが、信長が取り立てた相撲大会出身者のうち、目立った出世を遂げた者に青地与右衛門と伴正林がいる。青地は信長が最初に開催した相撲大会で家臣に取り立てられ、以降は相撲大会を所管する相撲奉行という役職に就いて、この天正6年の大会でも奉行を務めている。また伴正林はこの翌年の大会で七人抜きをやってのけた剛の者だが、彼と村田吉五郎の二人はその後厩番に出世した。二人は本能寺の変で信長と共に戦い『信長記』の戦死者名簿に載っている*80。またたいとうとひし屋の二人は天正9年2月28日（1581年4月1日）に信長が京都で行った観兵式、京都御馬揃えにおいて、信長の長刀持ちを勤めたと『信長記』にある。

We might wonder if the 14 wrestlers mentioned here were also samurai merely as formality, without actually serving as retainers. But, it seems that was not always the case. Although it is not described in the part I have quoted, among the ones whom Nobunaga recruited as retainers from sumo tournaments, two wrestlers, Aochi Yoemon and Tomo Shorin, got remarkable promotions afterwards. Aochi was promoted to a vassal in the first sumo tournament held by Nobunaga, and since then he held the post called “sumo commissioner,” which oversees sumo tournaments, and he served as the directors in the tournament in Tensho 6, too. Tomo Shorin, who pulled off the feat of defeating 7 wrestlers in a row in the tournament following year, and Murata Kichigoro were promoted to stablemen (厩番 umayaban) after that. These two fought together with Nobunaga in the Honnoji Incident and are on the list of the war dead in Shincho-ki.*81 According to Shincho-ki, Taito and Hishiya served as Nobunaga's polearm bearers at the big military parade Nobunaga held in Kyoto.

　一方で相撲大会以外にはまったく名の現れない者もおり、彼らは形式上のお抱え家臣だったようだ。そう思ってみれば「あら鹿」などは名前というよりリングネームみたいに見えるから、彼は一種のセミプロだったのかもしれない。要するに、引用した部分だけを見ても個々の相撲取りが内実のあるれっきとした家臣なのか、形式上だけの侍なのか、いまいちよくわからないのである。なお歴史家の谷口克広氏は目立って出世した青地、村田、伴の三人がもとからの武士身分であったことを指摘し、そうでない相撲取り出身者の出世には一定の限界があったことを指摘している。

On the other hand, some sumo wrestlers appear only in sumo tournaments, and they seem to have been retainers just as formality. Come to think of it, for me the name "Arashika (the wild deer)" sounds more like a ring name than a real name, so he might have been a kind of semi-pro wrestler. In short, how hard we look at the quoted part, we cannot decide clearly whether each of the sumo wrestlers was a real retainer or a nominal retainer. Historian Katsuhiro Taniguchi points out that the remarkably promoted three wrestlers, namely, Aochi, Murata, and Ban, were born in warrior families, and that there was a certain limit of promotion for former sumo wrestlers who were not born in warrior families.

　弥助も本当の武士というより形式上の侍だったのかもしれない。そもそもの話、形式上の身分と家臣としての実態がどうだったのかという問題は、また別の話なのだ。ただし弥助が信長に近侍していたことを伺わせる史料がいくつかあることを考えると、家臣としての実態がまったくなかったとも思えない。弥助の織田家での立場を考えるためには『信長記』だけではなく複数の史料を総合して考える必要があるだろう。

I suspect, in summary, that Yasuke might have been more of a nominal warrior (bushi) than a real warrior. In the first place, the questions of his formal status and of his actual roles as a retainer are separate stories. However, when we consider the fact that multiple historical materials suggest that Yasuke served at the side of Nobunaga, it is unlikely that he did not actually work as a retainer at all. In order to think about Yasuke's position in the Oda clan, we have to consider not only "Shincho-ki" but also other historical materials comprehensively.

史料からわかること
What can we say about him?

　本章ではこれまでの総括として、取り上げてきた史料から伺える情報を整理していきたい。まず初めに注意を促したいのは、弥助に関係する史料は大変少ないため彼について考察することには大きな制限が伴うということである。彼の実態は依然として謎に包まれている。ただし複数の史料が彼の存在に触れている（信長記とイエズス会史料における弥助と信長の対面の日付は一致）ことから、少なくとも弥助という黒人男性が戦国時代の日本に実在したことは疑いようがない。

To round up our examination so far, in this section I’d like to summarize the information we can glean from all of the historical documents. First of all, we have to note that there are very few historical documents directly related to Yasuke, which means any discussion about him is accordingly under severe limitations. His true character and life remain shrouded in mystery. However, multiple historical documents do mention his existence (the dates of Yasuke’s meeting with Nobunaga match between Shincho-Ki and Jesuit documents), so there is no doubt that at least a black man named Yasuke existed in Sengoku-period Japan.

　彼はイエズス会士ヴァリニャーノがインドのゴアから連れてきたモザンビーク人であり（日本教会史）名前を弥助という（尊経閣本）この名前は信長から貰った（尊経閣本）イエズス会史料は彼をカフレと呼称しており、このことから彼はアフリカ系黒人である可能性が高い。『信長記』に記された年齢がおおむね正しいなら、1550年代生まれである。

He was a Mozambican brought from Goa, India by the Jesuit Valignano (History of the Church of Japan), and his name was Yasuke (the Sonkeikaku copy and Ietada diary). Jesuit documents call him a Cafre, which makes it likely that he was racially a black African. If his age recorded in "Shincho-ki" is approximately correct, he was born in the 1550s.

　弥助の人となりについて特に強調されているのは、やはりその肌の黒さである。日本人はそれまで黒人を見たことがなく（複数史料）信長を初め多くの人々が彼を一目見ようと押し寄せた（天正9年イエズス会書簡）身長はおそらく平均的な日本人より高く（家忠日記）髪は縮れていた（アジュダ図書館文書）

What these documents particularly emphasize about Yasuke's character is, predictably, his dark skin. The Japanese had never seen a black man before (Sincho-Ki and other documents), and many people flocked to see him (Frois’s letter). He was probably taller than average Japanese (Ietada Nikki), and his hair was curly (Ajuda library document)

　また牛一は弥助の印象的な外見と合わせて力の強さを記録している（信長記とメシヤ書簡で符合）彼は中程度に日本語を話すことが出来、信長は弥助のなにかを気に入って（メシヤ書簡）家臣に取り立てた（家忠日記と尊経閣本で符合）そのように信長が彼を厚遇したことは京都の人々の間で噂になった（メシヤ書簡）弥助は信長の話し相手になり（メシヤ書簡）信長に近侍していた可能性がある（尊経閣本とカリオン報告）

Gyuichi recorded Yasuke's strength, as well as his impressive appearance (Sincho-Ki and Mexia's letter). He was able to speak Japanese moderately well, and Nobunaga found some favorable qualities in him (Mexia's letter) and made him a retainer (Ietada Nikki and the Sonkeikau copy). Nobunaga treated him so well that  people in kyoto rumored about it  (Mexia's letter).

　ただしこれらは全て他者の目線からの記録である。弥助本人が著した文書等は一切発見されていないため、彼の実際の人間性について我々は知ることが出来ない。

However, these are all records from the perspective of others. Since no documents written by Yasuke himself have been discovered, we have no way of knowing his actual personality.

弥助は伝説の戦士だった　か？
Yasuke was a legendary warrior?

　弥助は武士である信長の家臣であった。本能寺の変で織田家が危機に陥った際、弥助は刀を持って戦闘に加わっている（カリヨン報告）少なくとも本能寺の変における彼は決して臆病者ではなかった。しかしながら一方で、彼がもし侍だったのであれば、助命されて主君の死後も生き残ったことは恥ずべき事態だと指摘する意見もある。*82

Yasuke was a retainer of Nobunaga, who was a warrior himself. In the crisis of the Oda clan  when the Honnoji temple was attacked, Yasuke joined the battle with his sword (Carrion’s report). At least in the Honnoji Incident, he was not a coward. On the other hand, however, some people argue that if he was a samurai, it was a shameful fact that he was spared and survived the death of his lord.*83

　カリヨン報告を除くと弥助の戦闘に関する記録は一切存在しない。武田征伐に同行したことは確か（家忠日記）なのだが、戦闘の記録はない。例えば第二次天正伊賀の乱に彼が従軍したかどうかはまったくわからない。弥助は信長に近侍していた可能性があるので、信長の側を離れることは稀だったのだろう。信長はしばしば陣頭指揮を執って戦ったが、弥助が仕えた晩年の頃には最前線に姿を見せなくなっていた。そして弥助が信長に仕えた期間は一年程度でしかない。以上のことから弥助が本能寺の変以外で戦闘に参加していない可能性は高い。

With the exception of the Carrion’s report, we have no record of Yasuke's combat. It is true that he accompanied the campaign that destroyed the Takeda clan (Ietada Diary), but we do not find his name in any of the documents related to its battles per se. Also,  though Nobunaga often took command himself in the battlefield, we know that by the time Yasuke served him in his later years, he no longer appeared on the front lines. Yasuke served Nobunaga for only a little over one year. When we surmise from the above facts, it is quite possible that Yasuke did not participate in any battle other than the Honnoji Incident.

　またしばしば形式上の侍として家臣に取り立てられる人々が居たことを考えれば、そもそも弥助は実際に信長に仕えていたのかという疑問も生ずる。ただし彼は武田征伐で信長に帯同している（家忠日記）ので、家臣としての実態がなかったとまでは言えないだろう。それに弥助が単なるお抱え身分だったなら、本能寺の変で彼が「信長の死後、世子の邸へ行き同所で長い間戦っていた」ことをどう解釈すればよいのだろうか。

In addition, considering the fact that there were people who were retained as a samurai just in the symbolical meaning, we even could question if he ever actually served Nobunaga. However, since he actually accompanied Nobunaga in the campaign against the Takeda clan (Ietada diary), we cannot deny he did have a status as a retainer. On top of that, if Yasuke was a samurai in name only, how should we interpret the description that he “went to the heir's residence after Nobunaga's death and fought there for a long time” in the Honnoji Incident?

弥助の身分は侍だったのか
Was Yasuke a samurai?

　尊経閣本の記述が真実であれば彼は明らかに「侍」として処遇されている。主君から刀と私邸を受け取ったことは彼が相応の身分にあったことを如実に示している。しかし同本には信頼性の疑義があり、その評価は未だ確定していない。そこで一旦尊経閣本の記述を棚上げし、まずは他の史料を見てみよう。

If we take the description in the Sonkeikaku copy as true, Yasuke was clearly treated as a “samurai.” The fact that he received a sword and a private residence from his lord indicates more than enough that his status was above that of a ordinaly household servant. However, I have to say that doubts still remains about the reliability of this copy, and its true value is yet to be determined. Now, let us shelve the Sonkeikaku copy for a whole and look at other historical documents first.

　力の強さが記録されたこと、そして本能寺の変で戦ったことを考えると弥助が一種の戦闘員資格者であった可能性はある。このことから彼は少なくとも下級の武家奉公人ではなかったと考えられる。というのも下級奉公人には戦闘員資格が無く、特殊な状況以外で積極的に戦闘に加わることはないからである。また信長は弥助と会いたがり、対面したという（フロイス書簡）この事実から弥助が御目見得身分であった可能性はかなり高い。前近代日本において貴人と正式に会見できることは身分制度上極めて重大な意味を持っていた。

When we consider the recorded strength of his strength and the fact that he fought in the Honnoji Incident, it is plausible that Yasuke was a kind of a combatant. Which implies that he was at least not one of ordinary household servants, who did not qualified as combatants and would not actively participate in battle except under emergency. In addition, Nobunaga was eager to meet Yasuke, and they met face to face (Frois’s letter). This fact makes it highly likely that Yasuke was of “audience with one’s lord” (御目見得 omemie) status. In pre-modern Japan, the right to formally meet with nobility was extremely important in the class system.

　では弥助は織田家の重要人物だったのかというと、そうとは言えない。弥助は扶持を受け取っており（家忠日記と尊経閣本で符合）、知行を受けた形跡は無い。つまり土地所有者ではない*84。彼は武将ではなく（メシヤ書簡）名字を持っていない。なにより膨大な数が残っている織田家の関連文書に弥助の記録がまったく見られないという明白な事実がある。

However, I would not say that Yasuke was a very important figure in the Oda clan. What Yasuke received was a stipend (Ietada Nikki and the Sonkeikaku copy), and there is no evidence he received any land. In other words, he was not a landowner.*85 Also, he didn’t have a surname, which was not strictly necessary if he was a lower-ranking warrior (bushi), but certainly suggests he was not a higher-ranking warrior. Neither he was a warrior lord (武将 busho) (Mexia’s letter).  Above all, we have the plain fact that we cannot find his name in the Oda clan-related documents, which have survived until today in vast amount.

　以上のことから、彼はおそらく下級の武家奉公人ではなかったが、上級武士未満ではあったと結論することができる。もし尊経閣本が真であるならば、これらの推論は決定的な根拠を獲得することになる。その場合彼が「サムライ」なのかどうかは、使用する「侍」の定義にも拠るのではないか。しかしこの点はもはや弥助関連史料の域を超えるので、付録で取り扱うこととしたい。もっとも彼が侍だったとしても、実際に家臣として何をしていたのかは別問題だ。

From the above factors, we can infer that he was probably not a mere household servant, but less than a high-ranking warrior. If we approve the veracity of the Sonkeikaku copy, that would decisively endorses this inference. In that case, whether or not he was a “samurai” would simply depend on what definition of samurai you choose. However, this point exceeds the scope of this article, the examination of direct documentations on Yasuke. So I’ll pass over this subject to Appendix. But, apart from he was a samurai or not, I’d like to discuss what his actual roles was as a retainer of the Oda clan, as the last point of this section.

弥助の仕事は何だったのか？
What was Yasuke's role?

　彼が形式上一定の地位にいたことは確かだが、日常的に織田家中で果たしていた役割についてはよく分からない。ただ彼は武田征伐からの帰路と本能寺の変直前の信長上洛に随行しており、尊経閣本には「ときどき道具持ちをしていた」ともあるので、信長に近侍していたようには思える。よって信長の近習たちと共に日々を過ごしていたのではないだろうか。問題なのは近習の役割が弥助の立場とはいまいち合致しないことなのだ。

It is true that he had a certain position, at least formally, but it is not clear what roles he played in the Oda clan on a daily basis. However, he accompanied Nobunaga on his way home from the Battle of Takeda, and also on his trip to Kyoto just before the Honnoji Incident. The Sonkeikaku copy, too, says “he was sometimes seen in the role of Lord Nobunaga's weapon bearer.” So we have to say he certainly seems to have served Nobunaga closely. Then, it is also plausible that he have spent his days mingled with Nobunaga's adjutants (近習 kinju). The problem is that the roles of adjutants do not quite match the position of Yasuke.

　近習とは当時の用語で主君に側仕えし、身の回りの世話や秘書的業務に携わる者をいう。代表的な近習は小姓であり、彼らは主君の世話が本来の役割だ。戦時にはボディガードも務め、事実本能寺で小姓たちは討死した。この他にも馬廻や吏僚が信長の側で勤務していれば、それも近習に含まれる。加えて同朋衆といって、僧籍にある下級家臣も信長の近習に含まれるが、弥助は明らかに仏僧ではないからこれは取り上げなくてよいだろう。

Adjutant (近習 kinju) was a general term used at that time to refer to people who served at his lord’s side and was engaged in personal care and secretarial work. Among adjutant, the most typical position was page (kosho), and their essential duty was to take care of and do choirs for their lord. Pages also served as bodyguard during the war, and in fact, they died in the battle at Honno-ji Temple. Horse guards and bureaucrats too, if they worked at Nobunaga's side, were called adjutants. Other than that, priests who had a position as a lower-ranking retainer, called Doboshu (同朋衆), was also a part of Nobunaga's adjutants, but since Yasuke was clearly not a Buddhist priest, it is irrelevant here.

　谷口氏によればこれら信長配下の近習の仕事は以下の七つに分けられるという。まず最も基本的な仕事は来客を信長に取り次ぐ「奏者」だ。次に信長の朱印状に前後の文脈や詳細を補足する書状を書き添える「副状の発給」これは送り先によって担当が決まっている場合が多い。敵味方への「使者」も重要で、敵地へ使節として派遣されれば命の保証は無かった。次に信長のいない戦場で武将たちの戦いぶりを見張る「検使」この立場は基本的に戦闘には加わらない。使者と並んで外交的業務と言えるのが来客や使者を持てなす「接待役」だ。その他に種々の行政的業務である「奉行」と、最後は信長の身の回りの細々した「世話係」以上の七つだ。谷口氏は挙げていないが戦場での「身辺警護」を加えて八つとしてもよいのではないかと思う。

According to historian Taniguchi, the duties of adjutants under Nobunaga's command can be divided into the following seven categories. First, the most basic job was the intermediation to relay visitors to Nobunaga. Second, “issuance of a supplementary letter,” which meant to supplement Nobunaga’s orders and notifications with the surrounding context and details. In many cases, the assignment of this duty was determined by each of the destination of the orders. Third, the role of envoy to the enemy and his allies was also important, and there was no guarantee of life if dispatched to the enemy territory. Fourth, the field inspector, who watches over the fighting of warrior lords in the battlefield when Nobunaga was not present. This position basically did not involve taking a part in the battle. Fifth, receiving and entertaining visitors and messengers, a similar role with the messenger in that it was a diplomatic duty. Sixth, there were various administrative duties. And seventh, Nobunaga's personal caretaker. Taniguchi did not mention it, but I think it would be good to add the duty of bodyguard in the battlefield to make an eighth.

　こうしてみると、武家の家臣といっても戦うことばかりが仕事ではないことがよくわかるだろう。これらの役割のうち行政的・外交的業務を中程度の日本語力しかない弥助がこなすのは難しそうだ。すると世話係と身辺警護が残り、この二つは小姓の仕事ということになる。ただし小姓は普通若い武士の仕事で弥助は少し年嵩だし、小姓とて行政外交業務をやれるようでなければいけない。小姓も弥助にいまいち合致しないのだ。

When we look at it this way, you will see that even if you are a vassal of a warrior clan, your job is not all about fighting. Of these roles, Yasuke wouldn’t be suitable to handle administrative or diplomatic duties, considering his medium ability of Japanese tongue. That leaves the roles of personal caretaker and bodyguard, and these two were the work of pages. However, pages were usually the role of young sons of warriors, and Yasuke was a little older than that. And even if one was a page, that entailed to be able to handle administrative and diplomatic duties. A page did not quite match Yasuke.

　弥助が侍だったという見方に抵抗を持つ意見は根強いが、現実問題として彼が実際に信長の元で担っていた役割には謎が多い。にも関わらず、史料からは彼が一定の地位を持つ家臣として処遇されていることが伺える。結局のところ外国人である彼は一種の特別待遇家臣なのであって、日本の武家社会の仕組みに単純に当てはめようとしても、うまく行かないということなのかもしれない。例えばマルムーク出身でナポレオンに護衛として仕えたルスタム・レザをフランス大陸軍の階級でいったら士官か下士官なのか論じても、うまく行かないのと同じなのではないか。

Some people firmly resist to the view that Yasuke was a samurai, but as a matter of reality, many mysteries remains about the roles he actually played under Nobunaga. Nevertheless, historical materials show that he was treated as a retainer with a certain rank. After all, I presume that he was, as a person of foreign origin, a kind of special appointment, and our attempt to simply try to shove him into somewhere in the structure of the Japanese warrior households might not work. If I may make a rough analogy, it would be rather pointless to argue whether Roustam Raza, who was from Mamluk and served as a bodyguard and valet for Napoleon I, was a commissioned officer or a non-commissioned officer in the French Grande Armée.

歴史学者たちの意見
Opinions of historians

　管見の限り、確かな経歴と実績を持ち弥助について意見を発信した歴史学者を筆者は四名知っている。それは岡美穂子氏、平山優氏、呉座優一氏、金子拓氏の四名であり、本記事では彼らの考察をたびたび参照してきた。歴史学者たちは弥助のことをどう評価しているのだろうか。

To the best of my knowledge, I know of four academic historians with solid backgrounds and accomplishments who have shared their opinions on Yasuke. Mihoko Oka, Yu Hirayama, Yuichi Goza, and Hiraku Kaneko. I have quoted many of their arguments in this article. What do they think of Yasuke?

金子拓氏の意見
Opinion of Hiraku Kaneko

　金子拓氏は弥助に関連する史料を参照し、彼の立場について「本当に侍という立場だったかどうかは、ここ（各史料）に書かれていることからははっきりは言えない」と述べ、史料の少なさから来る著しい制約のために明言できないという立場を示した。

Professor Hiraku Kaneko said about Yasuke's position, referring mainly to Shincho-ki and Ietada Nikki, that “I can't say for sure whether he was really in the position of samurai from what is written here (in those historical materials).” That makes Professor Kaneko’s position a non-committal one. that is, due to the conspicuously scarce amount of historical materials, a definite statement is impossible..

　ただし金子氏は尊経閣本の信頼性を全体的に高く評価しており、弥助がときどき信長の道具持ちを務めることがあったという記述から弥助の織田家での職務を小姓に比定している他、私邸を受け取ったという記述から「それなりの侍といっていい立場という”推測”もできる」と述べている。侍の定義については金子氏は戦国時代における侍と武士を基本的には同じものと考えている。

That being said, it is also true that Professor Kaneko highly evaluate the general reliability of the Sonkeikaku copy, and from the description that Yasuke sometimes served as a weapon-bearer for Nobunaga, he surmise Yasuke's duty in the Oda clan as a page (小姓 kosho), and from the description that he received a private residence, he said, “you could 'guess' that he was in the position of a decent samurai.” As for the definition of samurai, Professor Kaneko basically regards samurai and warrior (武士 bushi) in the Sengoku period as the same thing.

平山優氏の意見
Opinion of Yu Hirayama

　平山優氏は史料に基づけば弥助は信長に仕える「侍」身分であると断定した。その最重要の根拠は尊経閣本の独自記事と弥助が信長に御目見した事実である。また平山氏は尊経閣本の記述が家忠日記に依拠した創作であるという考えは否定している。

Professor Yu Hirayama has asserted that historical records indicate Yasuke was a “samurai” in the service of Nobunaga. The most important evidence is the extra passage of the Sonkeikaku copy and the fact that Yasuke had an audience with Nobunaga. Professor Hirayama also rejects the idea that the description in the Sonkeikaku copy was a fabrication made based on Ietada Nikki.

　平山氏は弥助の身分を論ずるにあたって「侍」を「武家に武芸をもって仕える従者の総称」という定義で使用しており、逆に弥助が「武士」であったとは述べていない。平山氏は本項で触れる四名のなかでは弥助の身分を比較的低く見積もっているようだ。

However, I am aware that professor Hirayama uses “samurai” as the general term that refers to retainers who serve warrior households with combatant status, and he did not call Yasuke a warrior (武士 bushi). Professor Hirayama seems to have estimated Yasuke's status as relatively low among the four historians I mention in this section.

呉座勇一氏の意見
Opinion of Yuichi Goza

　呉座氏は尊経閣本の記述が真であれば弥助は明らかに武士（侍）として処遇されていると指摘している。この点で呉座氏と平山氏の考えはほぼ一致している。

Professor Goza points out that if the description in the Sonkeikaku copy is true, Yasuke was clearly treated as a warrior (武士 bushi) or samurai. In this respect, Professor Goza and Professor Hirayama are basically in agreement.

　呉座氏はしかしながら、弥助が武士（侍）として取り立てられたと明確に記す史料は尊経閣本のみであることに注意を促している。呉座氏は尊経閣本の独自記事には重要な内容が含まれていると指摘し、弥助に関する独自記事が重要でないため他の『信長記』写本から削除されたという説に慎重な姿勢を示している。

Professor Goza, however, cations that the only historical document that clearly indicate that Yasuke was retained as a warrior (武士 bushi) or samurai is the Sonkeikaku copy. He points out that the Sonkeiaku copy's extra passages contain important information, and cautious about the theory that the passage on Yasuke were deleted from other copies of “Shincho-Ki” because of its insignificance.

　呉座氏は弥助の身分を論じるにあたって、外国人である彼を日本の身分制度に当てはめようとすること自体に懐疑的である。ただし呉座氏は弥助が信長のボディガード的役割を担っており、弥助が信長の死後信忠の元に駆けつけて戦ったという考えには一定の信憑性があるとも評価している。またこの他に呉座氏が注目するのが信長が弥助と「話して飽くことがな」かった（メシヤ書簡）ことである。

On discussing the status of Yasuke, Professor Goza is skeptical about the very idea of trying to impose the Japanese status system on Yasuke. However, Professor Goza also gives a certain credit to the belief that Yasuke played the role of Nobunaga's bodyguard, rushed to Nobutada's side after Nobunaga's death, and fought with him. Other than that, Professor Goza highlights the description that Nobunaga “spoke with him insatiably” (Mexia’s letter), too.

　以上から呉座氏は弥助の家臣としての役割を「ボディガードと御伽衆を合わせたようなもの」と結論付けた。御伽衆とは主に知識人や文化人から構成され主君を会話で楽しませる集団を意味し、彼らは武家社会の秩序とは一歩外れた存在だった。*86このように呉座氏は弥助の地位は一種の特別待遇であり、彼の武士（侍）身分は外形的なものだったと考えており、彼の地位が一種の特別待遇だったという見方については平山氏と次に述べる岡氏も同様の意見を発信している。

Based on the above points, Professor Goza concludes that Yasuke's role as a retainer was “like a combination of bodyguard and otogisyu.” This “otogishu” refers to a group of intellectuals and cultural figures who entertained their lord with conversation, and they were one step aside from the class system of warrior household society.*87 In this way, Professor Goza believes that the position of Yasuke was a kind of special appointment, and that his samurai status was something of formality. This view of Professor Goza, that Yasuke's position was a kind of special treatment, is in common with Professor Hirayama, and Professor Oka, whom I will discuss next, too, have expressed a similar opinion.

岡美穂子氏の意見
Opinion of Mihoko Oka

　岡氏は弥助の身分について詳述してはいないものの、史料において彼がしばしばポジティブな評価を受けていることから「選りすぐりの人」だったと考えている。本章でまだ触れていない点としては「器量健やか」（信長記）や弥助が乗馬するよう促された（フロイス書簡）などが挙げられるだろう。逆に彼が明確に貶められている記述は光秀の「獣」発言（カリヨン報告）だけなのだ。*88

Although Professor Oka does not elaborate on Yasuke's status in details, she believes that he was a “selected man” because of his often positive reputations in the historical records. Some of the points that I have not mentioned yet in this section include his “looked robust and had a good demeanor” (Shincho-ki) and the fact that Yasuke was urged to ride horse (Frois’s letter). Conversely, the only description in which he is clearly undermined is Mitsuhide's “beast” remark (Carrion’s report).*89

　そもそもイエズス会宣教師の従者は基本的に選りすぐりの人材である。彼らは少人数で完全な異国を行動し、かつ当時のヨーロッパ人には優れた従者を引き連れることで自身を権威付ける文化もあった。弥助がヴァリニャーノの元従者であったことを考えると、弥助が信長の目に止まるような優れた資質を持っていたと想像することは不自然ではない。

To begin with, the valets of the Jesuit missionaries were carefully selected ones. Jesuit missions traveled and took actions in completely foreign countries, and Europeans at that time had a culture of showing off prestige by bringing along impressive entourage. Considering that Yasuke was a former valet of Valignano, it is not unnatural to imagine that Yasuke had some superior qualities that would have caught Nobunaga's attention.

付録「侍」の定義について
Appendix: Definition of "Samurai"

　大手ゲーム会社であるUBIソフトから発売される新作ゲームソフト『アサシンクリードシャドウズ』の主役として弥助が抜擢されたことを受けて、2024年のインターネットでは弥助に関する議論が紛糾している。その焦点は彼が「サムライ」身分だったのか、そうでないのかという点であるようだ。だが、そもそも「侍」とは何なのだろうか。弥助が「サムライ」に含まれるか含まれないかは、どんな「侍」の定義を採用するかによって判断が分かれるだろう。

Ever since the announcement of featuring Yasuke as (one of) the main characters of “Assassin's Creed: Shadows,” a new video game by a major game company Ubisoft, controversy about Yasuke never ceases on the Internet in 2024. The main focus of it seems to be whether or not he was a “samurai.” But what exactly was a samurai in the first place? Whether Yasuke had or had not a “samurai” status would depend on what definition of “samurai” you adopts.

　侍という言葉は貴人に仕えることを意味する「さぶらう」という動詞が転訛したものである。中世初期の彼らは貴族身分に満たない、貴族に仕える家来だった。後に「侍」は武家に仕える者の総称となり、やがて近世には侍と武士はほぼ同義語となった。江戸時代の学者である小山田与清が19世紀前期から中頃にかけて記した随筆集『松屋筆記』にはこう記されている。

The word “samurai” is a corruption of the verb saburau, which meant “to serve” nibilities. In the early Medieval period, samurai were retainers who served nobility but were below the rank of nobility themselves. Later, this word became a generic term for retainers who served a warrior household, and in the Early Modern period, the terms “samurai” and “bushi (武士 warrior)” became almost synonymous. (The period Yasuke served Nobunaga was the end of the Middle period, or beggining of the Early Modern period, depending on how you look it.) We know of an explanation by Oyamada Tomokiyo, a scholar in the Edo period. It is in his “Matsuya-writing,” a series of essays written from the early to mid-19th century.

「武家を侍（サフラヒ）といふ事、侍はもと近侍の臣をいふ事なるに後世は武家を皆さむらひといへり」

（『松屋筆記』第95巻・頁169）

「武家を侍というのは、侍はもとは主君に近侍する家臣をいったのが後の時代には武家をみな侍というようになった」

（筆者訳）

The reason we came to call a warrior "samurai" is that, the word "samurai" originally referred to a retainer who attended nobility, but in later years, all warriors came to be called "samurai".

(My English translation)

　武士とは中近世日本を実質的に支配していた世襲の職能戦士たちを意味する言葉で、彼らを総称して武家という。武芸に秀でている、血縁と封建制度を基軸にした共同体を組織していたなど、西洋の騎士や帯剣貴族と似た存在として知られている。*90

The term “bushi (武士)” meant hereditary professional warriors, who effectively ruled Medieval to Early Modern Japan, and people called them collectively as “buke (武家),” a warrior household. They were known to be similar to knights or banded aristocrats in the West, in that they excelled in military arts and they organized communities based on blood and feudal system.*91

　戦国時代は伝統的な身分制度が流動化した時期だったため侍と武士の境界線は明確ではなく、伝統的に日本史学界には戦国時代における両者をほぼ同じものと考える傾向があった。これを①侍≒武士説と呼ぼう。

The Sengoku period was an era where the traditional class system became fluid, and the boundary between samurai and bushi was accodingly not clear. That‘s way Japanese historians tended, traditionally, to consider the two during the Sengoku period were one and the same. Let us call this the theory of (1) "Samurai ≒ warrior."

　一方で、侍とは本来身分秩序の上層と結びついた言葉であったことから「武士階級のうち特に上位層のみを侍と呼ぶ」という定義も盛んに流布している。この場合侍は名字を名乗り二本の刀を腰に指す特権などよって下級の武士と峻別されることになる。このとき侍は武士の一部なので、これを②侍⊆武士説と呼ぼう。

On the other hand, another definition, currently rather popular one, hold this view: since the word samurai was originally associated with the upper classes of social order, only the upper echelon of warriors (bushi) were samurai. If we adopt this view, we would distinguish samurai from lower-ranking bushi by the privileges such as bearing a surname, waring two swords at his side, and so on. In this definition, samurai are only a part of bushi. So let's call it the theory of “(2) samurai ⊆ bushi.”

　この二つの説はどちらも幅広く普及している。例えば自動翻訳で「武士」と入力すると"samurai"と出力される。では弥助が信長に仕えた時代にはどちらが正しい定義だったのだろうか？　現在の日本史学界はどちらの定義を採用しているのだろうか。答えはどちらももはや定説ではない、である。歴史学者の高木昭作氏が1980年代に行った研究によれば法的には「侍」は「若党」のことなのだ。

Both of these two theories are widespread. For example, if you type in “武士 bushi” into machine translation, it will outputs “samurai.” Now, which one is correct? Which definition do our contemporary academic Japanese historians adopt? The answer is neither. As academic theories both stand no more. Shosaku Takagi, a historian, conducted a study in the 1980s and concluded that “samurai” meant, legally, “wakato.”

幕府法令の中の侍
Samurai in shogunate's acts

　高木氏の研究によれば、法令用語としての「侍」は戦闘員資格を有する上位の武家奉公人を指す「若党」の同義語である。武家奉公人とは個々の武士に仕える従者であり、彼ら自身は武士ではない。彼らの仕事は武士のための下働きであり、戦時には主君の荷物を運ぶことが主な役割だった。*92

According to Takagi's research, as a legal word “samurai” was synonymus with the word “wakato” (若党; waka = young, to = party; hereinafter I will translate it as “esquire,” for it is the best analogy in the West). Wakato refered to high-ranking “buke-houkou-nin” (武家奉公人 warrior’s household servant; buke = warrior household, houkou = serve, nin = person) who qualified as combatants. Generally, household servants served a particular bushi, their lord, but were without a bushi (warrior) status themselves. Their daily job was to do chores for their lord, and in wartime, their main role was just to carry luggeges and weapons for their lord, the warrior.*93

　だが若党は武家奉公人の一種といっても別格の存在であった。高木氏によれば若党は主君の荷物や武器を持ち運ぶ必要がなく*94、また若党として雇用されている間に罪を犯せば武士としての刑罰を受けるなど、他の武家奉公人とは一線を画した存在であった。以下に引用するのは高木氏の論考において取り上げられている徳川幕府の法令である。

Wakato were a subtype within the category of household servants, to be sure, but had a special status. According to professor Takagi, wakato were not required to carry their lord's luggages or weapons.*95 They were also clearly distinguished from other household servants in other aspects. For example, if and when they committed a crime while employed as wakato, they were punished as a warrior (武士 bushi). I will show you, from Takagi’s study, some examples of laws and regulations of Tokugawa Shogunate.

◯慶長十五年（一六一〇）四月二日「定」（『大日本史料』一二―七、一三九頁）
　（原文）
一、侍之輩者不及沙汰、中間・小者に至迄、一季者を一切置へからさる事、
　附、奉公望之者、一季と相定出すものハ可為曲事事、
（中略）（現代語訳）
一、侍の者たちは言うにおよばず、中間・小者にいたるまで、一季者を一切置くべきではない。
　付則：奉公したいと望む者は、一季のみの契約とするのは違反であり処罰する。

◯元和二（一六一六）年一〇月日「定」（『大日本史料』一二―二五、七〇二頁）　
　（原文）
一、武士の面々、若党之儀不及申、中間・小者に至迄一季居一切拘置へからさる事、
（中略）（現代語訳）
一、武士たちは、若党のことは言うにおよばず、中間・小者にいたるまで、一季者を一切抱え置くべきではない。

（平井上総『兵農分離はあったのか』P98）

The act of “15th of Keicho, 4th month, 2nd”
That, you are not allowed to employ any seasonal servant, including, not to mention samurai, but mid-servants and menials as well.
　Supplementary provision: If you seek to serve anyone, it is illegal, and will be punished, to do so with signing a contract for a single season only.
(source: ”Dai nihon siryo” 12-7, 139P)

The act of “2nd of Genna, 10th month”
That, warriors should not keep any seasonal employees, including, not to mention wakato, but also mid-servants or menials.
(source: ”Dai nihon siryo” 12-25, 702P)

(My English translation)

　この二つの条文は文面がよく似ており、侍と若党が同義語であることがよくわかる。これらの条文はいずれも一季居禁令として知られるものの一部で、同様の文面の法令が大量に残っている。*96

The wording of these two laws are quite similar, and when we compare them, it is clear that samurai and wakato (若党 esquire) were synonymous terms. Both clauses are part of laws that are known as the “one-season residence prohibition,” and the shognate issued similarly worded laws a countless number of times.*97

　また一季居禁令以外で侍と若党が同義語であることがわかる史料として、次に掲げるものでは同一の法令内で侍が若党と言い替えられている。
In addition to the seasonal servant prohibition, the following historical document also shows that the terms samurai and wakato were synonymous: it uses samurai interchangeably with wakato in the same one law.

　定
一　弐百石　侍壱人
一　三百石ゟ四百石迄　同二人（中略）

一　一千石ゟ千七百石迄　同四人（中略）

右之通、出仕幷江戸中往還之時、若党召連へし、是より少なき事は不苦、おほくつるゝ儀可為無用（後略）

　寛永五年二月九日

「江戸幕府朱黒印御内書留」京都大学所蔵史料

　お定め
一つ、二百石の武士なら侍一人
一つ、三百石より四百石までなら侍二人（中略）

一つ、一千石より千七百石までなら侍四人（中略）

右の通り、出仕並びに江戸を行き来するとき、若党を召し連れてもよい。これより少なくしてもいいが、多くするのは無用である。

（筆者訳）

The ordinance of “5th of Kan-ei, 2nd month, 9th”
That, you can be accompanied by one samurai (侍) if you are a warrior (武士 bushi) of 200 koku or below.
That, you can be accompanied by two samurai if you are a warrior of 300 to 400 koku [...]
That, you can be accompanied by four samurai if you are a warrior of 1,000 to 1,700 koku. [...]
As stated above, when traveling to and from Edo, you may take some wakato (若党) with you. You may take fewer than this, but may not exceed it.

(My English translation)

　武士が出歩く際に奉公人を召し連れていたことは広く知られている。この法令は武士が役人になったときなど特殊な場面を除いた、平常時においてそうした供回りを一定以下の人数で済ませることを要請するものである。ここでは侍と若党の両者が同じものを指していることは明白だ。

We all know that warriors (武士 bushi) took servants with them when they went out. This decree required them to constrain their entourage under a certain number of people in ordinary times, except on special situations such as when the warrior has a post of government official. We can clearly see that samurai and wakato refers to the same thing here in this law.

『雑兵物語』の若党
Esquire in the Tale of Common Sodiers

　では侍が若党と同義語だとして、若党とはどのような人々だったのだろうか。高木氏によれば若党が他の奉公人と異なる待遇を受けた根拠は、若党が戦闘員であることに関連しているという。江戸時代前期に成立した軍記物『雑兵物語』は当時の雑兵たちに関する第一級の史料である。この中から二箇所抜粋しよう。

Now, If we think samurai was a synonym with wakato (若党 esquire), then what kind of people were wakato? According to Takagi, the basis that wakato distinguished themselves from other ordinary household servants (武家奉公人 buke-houkou-nin) involved the fact that they were combatants. Regarding this point, we have "Zohyo Monogatari" (雑兵物語 The Story of Common Soldiers), a war chronicle written in the earler Edo period, as a first class historical source on the fighting styles of lowly common soldiers of the time. Now, I will show you two excerpts from it.

草履取　嘉助（中略）

互におつゝめた所て、旦那が云なさつたは、この鉄砲を腰に引はさめ、一番鑓を合せべいと云なさつた所て、左候はゝわつちめも此鉄砲で脇鑓を追詰申べい、玉薬を一放分下されいとのべたれば、おのれが脇鑓推参なやつだとて血目玉を出してしかりなさつたに依て、是非なく見物してねまつた

（深井一郎『雑兵物語研究と総索引』P152）

草履取り　加助（中略）

　こうして敵味方が押し詰まったところで、旦那がいいなさるには、この鉄炮を腰に差せ、一番槍を合わせべえという。そこで、そんならわっちめが鉄炮で槍脇をつとめますべえ、弾薬を一発分くだされといったところ、お前が槍脇などとなまいきなやつだと、大目玉をむいてお叱りになった。

　そこで仕方なく、ぼんやりと見物していると（後略）

（平井上総『兵農分離はあったのか』P44）

Sandal-bearer Kasuke (嘉助)

When the hand-to-hand combat began, my master said, "Keep this gun to your waist, I am now charging into the battle and I will be the spearhead!" Then I said, "Then, I will do flank spear (assist your attack) with this gun. Give me a bullet and gunpowder." He scolded me furiously, saying, "You’re no flank spearer , you cheeky one!" I had no choice but to sit around and watch…

(My English translation)

　草履取りである嘉助は気を利かせて主人のため一緒に戦おうとするのだが、それは越権行為と見なされ、哀れにも彼は主人に激怒されてしまう。彼の仕事は白兵戦では不要となった鉄砲を預かっておくことなのだ。一方若党の場合は次のように記されている。

Kasuke, a sandal-bearer, thoughtfully offered his direct assistance to his master’s battle, but for his master, that was nothing but overstepping of the line of authority, and the poor sandal-bearer got a severe reprimand for that. His job was just to carry around the gun which his master had no use during in close combats. In contrast, in the same book esquires (wakato) are described as follows.

（若党である）加助どのは、よい働きをした。歴々の武士にも勝る脇槍をし、首を取られた。

（平井上総『兵農分離はあったのか』P46）

Kasuke-dono (a wakato character in this book: 加助; the name’s pronounciation is same but it’s a different Kasuke from the Sandal-bearer Kasuke) did a good job. He took off enemy's head with his flank spear, even outshining all other illustrious warriors.

(I made this English translation from historian’s modern Japanese translation. The differences between the original text and this translation will be explained later.)

　加助は援護に留まらず敵の首を討ち取り賞賛されている。若党という言葉はそもそも武士の若い子弟を指す言葉だったが、奉公人である若党が戦場で戦功を挙げて士分に取り立てられ、正式な武士に昇進する可能性もあった。嘉助が主人の戦いを見物している間、加助は早々と昇進してしまったかもしれない。*98

This Kasuke was praised not only for assisting the attack but also for the very reason he successfully killed an enemy. The term “wakato” originally referred to young sons of warriors, but it was possible for a wakato, a servant, to achieve war merits on the battlefield and got promoted to a genuine warrior (bushi) rank. While the former Kasuke remained a servant just watching his master fought, the latter Kasuke might have been promoted in no time after that.*99

　侍と武士が別個の存在であるという高木氏の説はそれまでの通説と真っ向から対立するものであって、大きな衝撃を持って受け止められた。しかし法的には両者を別物とする高木氏の説は現在の日本史学界でも同意を得ている。。これを③侍=若党説と呼ぶことにしよう。

It was a great shock to historians - Takagi's theory that samurai and warriors were separate entities radically challenged the previously established theories. But Takagi's theory, at least the point that the two were separate in the legal sense, has become an accepted theory in Japanese historian communities. Let us call it the theory of (3) samurai = wakato.

天正19年8月令
Order of 8th month, Tensho 19

　③侍=若党説は弥助が信長に仕えた時期の織田家を考察する上でも有効なのだろうか？　これらの法令を幕府が制定した時代と弥助が信長に仕えた時代は離れている。だが高木氏は少なくとも、この法的「侍」定義は豊臣政権期にも通用したと考えている。秀吉が制定した次の法令を見れば、条文が幕府法令と似通っていることは一目瞭然だ。

Is the (3) “samurai = wakato” theory valid for examining the Oda clan during the period Yasuke served Oda Nobunaga? The two periods, when these laws were enacted by the shogunate and when Yasuke served Nobunaga, has a gap. Professor Takagi believes, though, that this legal definition of samurai was valid as early as during the Toyotomi administration. The wording of following statute enacted by Toyotomi Hideyoshi clearly shows similarity to that of the shogunate statutes.

奉公人、侍・中間・小者・あらしこに至るまで、去七月奥州へ御出勢より以後、新儀ニ町人百姓ニ成候者有之者、其町中地下人として相改、一切をくへからす、若かくし置ニ付而ハ、其一町一在所、可被加御成敗事、

（『毛利家文書』935、『浅野家文書』258、『小早川文書』504）

一、奉公人、侍・中間・小者・荒し子にいたるまでは、去る七月に奥州に御出陣以後、新たに町人・百姓になる者がいたならば、町中・地下人（＝町人・村人）が調べ、一切居住させるべきではない。もし隠しおいたならば、その町・村を成敗する。

（平井上総『兵農分離はあったのか』P93）

That, If and when any former servants, including samurai, mid-servant, menials, and arashiko, were found to have became new townspeople or peasants after the Oshu campaign in July of this year, they should be investigated by local townspeople and villagers, and should not be allowed to live in the town or village. If they hide it, the town/village will be punished.

(My English translation)

　高木氏は先述した幕府法令との文面の共通性から、「奉公人、侍・中間・小者・あらしこ*100」は武家奉公人をまとめたもので、この法令の主旨は彼らが武士の元から逃亡するのを防ぐことだったと喝破した*101。なお法令が制定された天正19年は秀吉が朝鮮へ派兵する前年のことであり、高木氏はこの法令には日本軍の戦力を維持する意図があったと考えている。*102

Based on the phrasing of this statute, and on the similarity with the aforementioned shogunate statutes, Professor Takagi proclaimed that the said “servants, samurai, mid-servant, menial, arashiko”*103” in this statue were all subtypes of warrior household servants, and that the main purpose of this statute was to prevent them from fleeing from warrior households.*104 In this connection, Takagi also believed that another purpose of this statute was to keep human resources for a future war, since the timing of this statute was just one year before Hideyoshi invaded the Korean Peninsula.*105

　以上のように豊臣政権と徳川幕府の奉公人関連法令の条文を検討すれば、「侍」とは武家奉公人の一種である若党のことを意味し、武士とは異なった存在であることがわかる。また豊臣政権と徳川幕府の法令に一定の連続性があることもわかるだろう。そして豊臣秀吉が元織田家臣であり、彼の政権が信長のそれと連続したものである以上、弥助の織田家における身分を考察する上で高木説を無視することはできないのだ。

In summary, if we examine the clauses of the laws concerning servants during the periods of the Toyotomi government and the Tokugawa shogunate, we can see that the term “samurai” referrd to “wakato” (若党 esquire), a subtype of household servant, and that they were not same with warriors (武士 bushi). We also recognize that the Toyotomi gorvetment and the Tokugawa shognate were continuous as to these statues. And, since Toyotomi Hideyoshi was a former retainer of the Oda clan, and his administration succeded that of Nobunaga, we cannot ignore Takagi's theory when considering the status of Yasuke in the Oda clan.

　では③侍=若党説の出現によって①侍≒武士説と②侍⊆武士説は完全に陳腐化してしまったのだろうか。そうとも言い切れない。これらの説にも無視しがたい根拠があるのだ。

So, have the emergence of the “samurai = wakato” theory made the theories of "samurai ≒ bushi" and "samurai ⊆ bushi" completely obsolete? I don’t think quite so. These old theories also have their bases that are hard to ignore.

『雑兵物語』の侍
Again, samurai in the Tale of Common Sodiers

　まずは①侍≒武士説を再検討しよう。大前提として③侍=若党説の根拠は法令であり、法令用語としての「侍」の定義と一般的な「侍」の用法は一致していなかった可能性がある。再び『雑兵物語』を見てみよう。

First, let's re-examine the theory of (1) samurai ≒ bushi. As a basic premise, the basis for this theory is the laws. It is quite possible that the definition of samurai as a legal term and the general usage by people did not match. Let's take another look at the Story of Common Soldiers.

鎗擔小頭　長柄源内左衛門（中略）

先鑓の内ても、はやく勝負のはじまるは、御侍衆の鎗からだそ。扨また、鑓を突もんだと斗り思ひなさるな。各心を一つにして、穂先の揃ひ申すやうに拍子を合せて、上やりに成やるにたゝきめされい。必すつくべいと思ひなさるな。それは壹人貳人の出合の時はよし、鑓數のおほくそろつた時は、拍子を揃へてうつより外はないぞ。（中略）惣じて御持鎗かつきは、江戸廻りでは御道具のものとて高給金とりてやつこはすれど、物まへでは預かりものだ所で、我役にはたゝない。數鑓は、おのかまゝに鎗をふりくり廻すさかひて、歴々の御侍衆と替事はないもんだ程に、能々腰骨をつよくして、おくれないやうに覚悟をしろ。又御持鑓かつぎは、かならず――我用に立たらば、うろたへ者の腰ぬけ同前だ程に、後生一大事にひつかついて、働かないか手柄だぞ。此二色のわけを、よく――ぼてつ腹へつゝこんておけ。

（深井一郎『雑兵物語研究と総索引』P109）

槍担ぎ小頭　長柄源内左衛門（中略）

　槍の合戦でも、まず勝負が始まるのは、お侍衆の槍からだぞ。
　それからまた、槍は突くもんだとばかり思っちゃあならねえ。一同、心を一つにして穂先がそろうように拍子を合わせ、上から敵と叩き伏せなされ。決して突くべえと思いなさるな。一人、二人での出会いがしらの戦いなら突くのもいいが、槍数のそろった合戦とあれば、拍子をそろえて叩くのがなによりだ。（中略）

　およそ、お侍の槍を持つ役は、江戸あたりではお道具を持たせるからといって高給を払って、槍持ち奴の姿をさせるが、いざ合戦となれば、槍はご主人からの預り物だによって、てめえの役には立てられねえ。そこへいくと槍足軽のほうは、てめえの思うままに槍を振り回すんだから、お歴々のお侍衆と変わりはねえ。よくよく腰骨を強くして、遅れを取らねえように覚悟しろ。
　また、お侍の槍を担ぐ役では、それをてめえの用に立てたりしたら、うろたえ者の腰抜け同然だで、後生大事にひっ担いで、戦わねえのが手柄だぞ。この二つの道理を、よくよく腹へぶちこんでおけ。

（吉田豊訳『原本現代語訳　雑兵物語他』P40）

Gennaizaemon the pikeman, the platoon sergeant of a pike infantry

[...]You know, battles with spears open with the charge of samurai!
Also, never think like spears are only for thrusting. Sync your movements with everybody around you, keep your spearhead aligned with theirs, and strike down the enemy from above. Don’t even think about thrusting! If ever you’re one-on-one, or one-on-two, on a sudden encounter, thrusting may be fine. But in a battle of many spears, it's best to swing down in time with the others! [...]

In places like Edo city, the guys who carry the “tools” for his samurai is dressed as if they were spear-wielders like us, and paid a high salary for. But in the real battlefield, these guys’re just carrying the spear for their master, not for their own use. On the other hand, pike infantry (槍足軽 yari-ashigaru) like us can wield our pikes as we please, so we're no different from illustorious samurai. You'd better brace yourself and make sure you don't fall behind!.
Also, when you are just a spear-bearer for your samurai, using the spear for yourself means you're no better than a coward who panics. Just carry it carefully and never fight! Make sure you understand these two principles!

(My English translation)

　長柄源内左衛門*106は長柄足軽たちの小頭*107として、部下たちに気合を入れているようだ。足軽とは文字通りフットワークが軽いことを意味し、最初期の彼らは武家に金で雇われ放火や掠奪に従事する準軍事的傭兵だったと言われている。戦国時代に長柄槍や鉄砲といった集団戦術に適した武器が広まると、彼らは武士と並んで戦う歩兵になった。一応戦闘員なので草履持ちのような下級の奉公人よりは偉いが、武士より下の存在であることに変わりはない。おそらく自分の荷物は自分で運んでいたのだろう。

Apparently, Gennaizaemon*108 is pepping up and teaching ropes for his men as the ploon sergeant (小頭)*109 of pike infantry. Infantry (足軽 ashigaru) literally means “light foot” in Japanese, and historians believe they were originally no better than mercenaries hired by warrior households for arson and looting. But during the Sengoku period, weapons suitable for group tactics such as pikes (long spear) and guns became widespread, and they became a kind of foot soldiers fighting side-to-side with warriors (bushi). As combatants, their rank was higher than that of lower-ranking servants such as sandal bearers, but they were still lower than warriors. They probably carried their own luggage themselves.

　この長柄源内左衛門が部下たちに語っているところによれば、長柄槍隊よりも先に「お歴々のお侍衆」が戦闘に加入するのだという。彼らが足軽とは別個の集団であることは明らかだが、高木説に従って考えれば彼らは若党なのだろうか？　ここで、先程引用した若党である加助の部分の「原文」を見てみよう。

According to Gennaizaemon the pikeman, usually the “illustrious samurai” will engage in the battle before pike infantries. Clearly samurai are a separate group from the infantrymen (足軽 ashigaru). If we follow Takagi's theory, these samurai are the same with esquires. Are they really? Let's take a look at the “original text” of the part about Kasuke the esquire that I quoted earlier.

若黨　左助

加助どの――、扨々能はたらきをした。れき――の侍衆にもまさつた鑓脇を引詰、首とられた。そちか旦那も被官も手柄した、（中略）おれが旦那はニ番鑓た所て、加助が旦那の一番鑓をぶつこみなさるをも、加助が鑓脇をおつつむるをも、能みとヾけた。

（深井一郎『雑兵物語研究と総索引』P149）

若党　左助

さてさて加助、立派な働きをした。槍脇（武士の槍の勝負を脇から助ける）をつとめて歴々のお侍衆にもまさる働きで首をとった。おまえの旦那も、家来のおまえも手柄をした。（中略）おれの旦那はニ番槍だったから、加助の旦那が一番槍を突っこみなさるのも、加助が槍脇をつとめるのも、よくよく見届けたが、（後略）

（吉田豊訳『原本現代語訳　雑兵物語他』P77）

Esquire Sasuke (左助)
Well, well, Esquire Kasuke(加助), you did a splendid job bro. You served as a flank spearer and, with the exloits that surpassed even the most illustrious of the samurai, you took an enemy's head. You, a retainer, and your master both did a good job. [...] As my master was in the second echelon, I saw very clearly that your master was the first one to thrust his spear in, and that you assited him as his flank spearer.

(My English translation. In the original text, it is written as "侍 (samurai)", but in the modern Japanese translation quoted earlier, it was translated as "bushi (武士 warrior)".)

　若党である加助の活躍が「歴々のお侍衆」にも勝るものと賞賛されているので「侍衆」は若党ではない。そして「侍衆」は同じ戦闘員である足軽や若党から仰ぎ見られる存在として描かれている。よって『雑兵物語』において「侍」が武士を指す言葉として使用されていることは明らかである。『雑兵物語』には「侍」という語が頻出するが、筆者が確認できた限りでは、その全てが文脈的に武士を指しているように読める。

The esquire Kasuke was praised for his exploits that even surpassed “samurai” around him, so the “samurai” were not esquires here. Also, the samurai here are depicted as being looked up to by the infantrymen and esquires, even though the latter two are combatants themselves. Therefore, clearly the word “samurai” refers to warriors (bushi), at least in the Story of Common Soldiers. The word “samurai” frequently appears in this story, and as far as I have confirmed and judging from the context, all the instances refers to warriors (bushi).

　『雑兵物語』は17世紀半ばに成立し、その文章は当時の東国の庶民が使っていた話し言葉で書かれている。そのため本史料における侍の用法が高木氏の論考において立証された法令用語における「侍」定義と一致しないとしても不思議ではない。一般的な用法では侍と武士が同義語として使われる例もあったのだ。

The Story of Common Soldiers was written in the mid-17th century, and the manner of talking is extremely colloquial,  the way common people of the eastern Japan at the time spoke. For this reason, it is not surprising that the usage “samurai” in this historical document does not match the definition of the word “samurai” as a legal term, as established in Takagi's treatises. It plainly indicates that in general usage there were cases the word “samurai” was a synonym with “bushi”.

『日葡辞書』の侍
"Samurai" in the Jesuit dictionary

　次に②侍⊆武士説を取り扱う。この説の有力な典拠は『日葡辞書』イエズス会が作成したポルトガル語による日本語辞書である*110。彼らが日本での宣教活動に役立てるために数年がかりで編纂したもので、弥助が活動していた時期にほど近い1600年代初頭に成立している。この辞書では武士と侍は次のように書かれている。

Next, we will look at the theory of (2) "samurai ⊆ warrior." The main source for this theory is the "Vocabulário da Língua do Japão," a Japanese-Portuguese dictionary created by the Jesuits.*111 It was compiled over several years to help with their missionary work in Japan, and was completed in the early 1600s.

Buxi (武士 bushi) Soldado (Soldier 軍人)

Saburai (侍 Samurai) Fidalgo (Nobleman 貴人)　

（日葡辞書より抜粋し括弧内は筆者が補った。Quoted from "Vocabulário da Língua do Japão". I have supplemented English-Japanese in parentheses.)

　Soldado は現代英語のソルジャーに相当する語である。また Fidalgo は貴人だが、岡氏に質問したところこれは土地や財産などを持った上級武士を指している。欧州でいえば、下限としては爵位のない上流階級ぐらいまでを含む語であるとのことである。

“Soldado” is the equivalent of the modern English word “soldier,” and “Fidalgo” is “nobleman.” But when I asked professor Oka about it, she said that while the latter do refer to nobility, they were also high-ranking warriors who owned their own land and property. In Europe, she said, it was a word whose lower bound was upper classes without titles.

　この日葡辞書の記述を素直に受け取れば、侍が武士より下位の奉公人身分であると考えることは極めて困難だと言わざるを得ない。イエズス会が日本語を誤解した可能性は否めないものの、日葡辞書は一定の信頼性を持つ史料であり単なる錯誤として退けることも難しい。*112

If we take these entries of this Portuguese-Japanese dictionary at face value, it would become extremely difficult to think that samurai were below bushi and a kind of servants. Certainly, it might be possible that the Jesuits just misunderstood Japanese language. But it’s also true that this dictionary is a historical document with a certain degree of reliability, and we cannot just dismiss it as a simple mistake.*113

北条家定書（天正15年7月晦日）
Go-hojo conscription order of 1587

　これについて筆者は当初 fidalgo が saburai というのは地侍のことではないかと考えていた。地侍とは当時の村落共同体における上位層を指す言葉である。彼らは名字を名乗り、刀を二本指し*114、一般農民であるところの凡下と自分たちを区別していた。次に掲げるのは後北条氏が天正15年（1587年）七月晦日付で領内に発した「北条家定書き」のうち、相模西郡の栢山（かやま）村に出された一通である。

As I said just now, This Portuguese-Japanese dictionary tells us that “saburai (samurai)” was “fidalgo (nobleman),” but I first suspected that perhaps this “saburai” might have meant country samurai (地侍 jizamurai; ji = local). Country samurai meant the upper class of the village community at the time. They had surnames, wore two swords*115, and distinguished themselves from the commoners (凡下 bonge), which meant ordinary peasants. The following instruction is an instance of the “Hojo clan Regulations” issued by the Go-Hojo clan in their territory in 1587 (15th Tensho), on the last day of the 7th month, for Kayama village in the west Sagami county (a west part of Kanagawa prefecture now).

一、於当郷不撰侍・凡下、自然御国御用之砌、可被召仕者撰出、其名可記事、但弐人、

一、此道具、弓・鑓・鉄炮三様之内、何成共存分次第、但鑓ハ竹柄にても、木柄にても、二間より短きハ無用に候、然者号権門之被官、不致陣役者、或商人、或細工人類、十五、七十を切而可記之事、

一、腰さし類之ひら――武者めくやうニ可致支度事、

一、能者を撰残し、夫同前之者申付候者、当郷之小代官、何事も聞出次第可切頸事、

一、此走廻心懸、相嗜者ハ、侍にても、凡下にても、随望可有恩賞事、

『北条家定書（天正15年7月晦日）』小田原市郷土文化館所蔵史料

（現代語訳）

①この郷村では、侍と凡下を区別せず、もしもの御国の御用の時のために、動員すべき人員二名の名を書いて提出すること。

②武器は弓・鑓・鉄砲の三つのうち、好きなものを使うように。ただし槍は竹柄でも木柄でも、二間（＝約三・六メートル）より短いものは不要である。権門（＝権力を持つ者。貴族や寺社、武士など）の被官（＝家来・家臣・奉公人）や、陣夫役をしていない者、あるいは商人・細工人（＝職人）などを、一五歳から七〇歳までの間で記すこと。

③腰に指す旗指物は、武士であるかのように支度すること。

④良い者（＝屈強の者）を選んで（村に）残し、（弱々しい）人足のようなものを提出するようであれば、判明次第この村の小代官の首を斬る。

⑤この働きをしっかりと勤めれば、侍でも凡下でも、望みに従って恩賞を与える。

（平井上総『兵農分離はあったのか』P63）

One. The village must submit names of two men who in the event of a state emergency should be conscribed, and regardless of the two being samurai (侍) or commoners (凡下 bonge).
Two. The two men may use any of the following weapons: bow, spear, or gun. However, spears shorter than two ken (approx. 3.6 meters) unacceptable, regardless of bamboo or wooden handles. The two men should be the age between 15 and 70, and should be selected from the ones such as retainers or servants of Kenmon (kanmon = houses of power; such as nobles, temples, shrines, and warriors), ones who are not currently serving as a soldier, and merchants and artisans.
Three. The two men should be equipped with a banner on their waist as if they were warriors (bushi).
Four. If you submit weak men such as coolies and deliberately keeps the good men (ones with strong build) in the village for your own good, we will cut the head of the minor official in charge of this village as soon as we find it.
FIve. If the two men work hard and well, we will reward them with things of their wishes, regardless of they are a samurai or a commoner.

(My English translation)

　武家が百姓たちに発した徴兵令*116であるこの文書を見れば、武家側が百姓のなかの上層を「侍」と呼んでいることは明らかである。また武者らしく支度させろという一文から、この「侍」が武士でないことは明白である。

It is a conscription order that mainly targetted peasants issued by the Go-Hojo clan, one of the powerful warrior households at that time. When we look at this text,*117 clearly “samurai” refer to the upper class of peasants. And it is also clear that the instruction to euip them “as if they were warriors (bushi)” indicates these “samurai” are not same with warriors (bushi).

　そもそも何故村落内の上流層が「侍」を名乗っているのか。それは侍の語源と関わりがある。この言葉が貴人に仕えることに由来することは先に説明したが、平安時代から鎌倉時代にかけて「侍」は朝廷の官位制度において六位以下の位階を有する人々の呼称として使用されていた。貴族は五位以上なのでそのすぐ下ということになるが、位階があるということは官人なので一般大衆よりは偉いわけだ。

But why in the world did the upper class in rural villages call themselves “samurai”? It has something to do with the etymology of the word samurai. I have already explained that the word originally meant “to serve (nobility).” But before the Sengoku period, to be exact from the Heian period to the Kamakura period, people used the word “samurai”  for people with a position of sixth rank or lower in the court rank system of the Imperial Court. Nobles had  fifth rank or above, so “samurai” were just below them, but having a court rank meant they were government officials, which made them above the general public.

　この用法が発展して鎌倉時代以降「侍」は社会的上流を指す用語となり、一般民衆である凡下の対義語となったのだ。こうした社会的上流を「侍」と呼ぶ用法を耳にした宣教師たちが「侍」に貴人という訳を当てた。そうは考えられないだろうか？

As a influence of this usage, after the Kamakura period “samurai” became a term to refer to the upper classes of society. To put it in the other way around, “samurai” became an antonym of commoners (bonge).  So maybe, I suspect, could it be that the Jesuit missionaries heard the local gentry being called or call themselves “samurai,” and made a entry into their dictionary that “samurai” were “nobles”?

　だがこの私の考えには反証がある。本記事でも取り扱った1581年4月14日付のフロイス書簡ではヴァリニャーノら一行を馬上の貴人が出迎える場面が描写されているが、この貴人は原文ではfidalgosとなっており、前後の文脈からすると彼らは上級武士であるようなのだ。宣教師たちはfidalgoを地侍だけに対して用いているわけではない。

But there is a clear evidence contrary to this suspicion of mine.  A letter written by Frois on April 14, 1581, which I have already cited, describes the scene where noblemen greeted Valignano and his group from horseback. These noblemen are referred to as “fidalgos” in the original text, and in this context they are clearly high-ranking warriors. It at least proves that the missionaries did not use “fidalgo” only for country samurai.

結論
Conclusion

　これまでの議論を踏まえた上で、武家社会における各身分を大雑把に上から下に並べると、次のようになる。

Based on all the above discussion, I’ll tantatively and roughly sort out the order of ranks in the societal system of warrior households, from the top to the bottom, as follows.

大名(daimyo) feudal lords
武将(busho) warrior lords
上士(jo-shi) mounted warriors
徒士(kachi) foot warriors
若党(wakato)（侍）esquires (samurai)
足軽(ashigaru) infantrymen
中間(chugen) mid-servants
小者(komono) menial servants

　このうち大名から下級武士までがいわゆる「武士」であり、若党・中間・小者は武士に仕える「奉公人」だ。若党は戦闘員かつ在職中に限り武士として扱われる場合もあるので、地位的には足軽より上位とした。足軽は戦闘員なので中間・小物といった下級の武家奉公人よりは上だろう。

Among them, I’d categorize from feudal lords to lower-ranking warriors as so-called "warriors (bushi)," and esquires, mid-servants, and menials as "warrior household servants (buke-houkou-nin)," whose job was to serve bushi. I have placed the status of esquire (wakato) above infantryman, because esquires were combatants and sometimes treated as warriors (bushi), though only during they worked as wakato. Since infantrymen (ashigaru) were combatants, they were probably higher than mid-servant and menials.

　①侍≒武士説を採用するとき、侍とは上三者を含み、下級武士と若党は入るかどうか微妙といったところだろう。②侍⊆武士説を採用するとき、侍は上級武士以上の三者ということになる。③侍=若党説の場合、少なくとも法的には侍とは若党だけを意味していることになる。③は現在日本史学界で同意を得ているものの、筆者には①と②がまったく無根拠というわけではようにも思える。

 If we adopt the theory of (1) "Samurai ≒ warrior,” the upper three ranks are clearly samurai, but lower-ranking warriors and esquires are a bit difficult to decide whether or not they are samurai. If we adopt the theory of (2) “samurai ⊆ bushi,” higher-ranking warriors and the above are samurai. In the case of the theory of (3) “samurai = wakato (esquire),” samurai means only esquire, at least in legal perspective. Currently, Japanese historians approves (3) as a standard theory. But for me, (1) and (2) seem not so completely groundless.

　呉座氏によれば現在の日本史学界では「侍」の定義を基本的に広義に設定する風潮があるという。例えば「侍」の定義を狭義に解釈した場合、「地侍」を説明することは苦しくなる。そして平山氏は高木説を踏まえつつ、侍は武芸をもって武家に仕える従者の総称であり、その上位層が武士であるという定義、つまり④侍⊇武士説を使用している。侍という言葉の用法の多様さを考えれば、これまで掲げた四つの定義のうちこの④侍⊇武士説がもっとも妥当なように筆者は感じるのだが、如何だろうか。このとき「侍」には若党より上の全てが含まれるので、一言に「侍」といっても内部の上下格差はかなり大きいことになる。

According to professor Goza, today’s Japanese historical academia prefer to define the term “samurai” in a broader sense. It’s because, for example, if we define samurai narrowly, explaining “jizamurai (local samurai),” who were in essence merely armed villagers, as a kind of samurai would become a bit difficult. Based on Takagi's theory, Professor Hirayama adopts a definition that “samurai” was a general term for the warrior households’ retainers whose speciality was military arts, and that “warrior (bushi)” was high-ranking samurai. Which makes professor Hirayama’s therory a new one, that is, the theory of (4) samurai ⊇ bushi. For me, considering the wide range of historical usages of the word “samurai,” this last definition, samurai ⊇ warriors, feels most reasonable among the four definitions I have discussed so far. If we adopt this difinition, “samurai” includes all the people including and above wakato in the ranking order, making the range of “samurai” pretty broad. Even within the label of “samurai,” there were considerably huge disparities of classes – if we adopt this theory, that is.

　ここで再度弥助の身分を考察して付録を締めくくりたいと思う。史料考察において、弥助は上級武士でも下級の武家奉公人でもないと結論した。また戦国時代の足軽は軍役に応じて募兵される傭兵だったので、信長から扶持を受け取っていた弥助は足軽にも相当しない。よって上級武士より上と足軽より下は選択肢から外れる。残ったのは下級武士と若党だ。この両者が「侍」に含まれるかどうかは、結局のところ今まで見てきた定義のどれを採用するかによって変わってくる。

I’d like to conclude this appendix by discussing the status of Yasuke again. In the examination of historical materials, I have concluded that Yasuke was neither a high-ranking warrior nor a low-ranking servant. Also, since infantrymen (ashigaru) in the Sengoku period were mercenaries recruited for military service, Yasuke, who received a stipend from Nobunaga, was not one of them. Which makes Yasuke not above high-ranking warriors, nor below infantryman. I have only two options left for his status. He was a low-ranking warrior (such as foot warrior and household vassal), or he was an esquire (wakato). Whether or not one or both of the two ranks were “samurai” depends on which definition you adopt from the ones we have discussed so far.

　筆者としては④侍⊇武士説を採用した上で、弥助が徒士相当だったか若党侍だったかはわからないが、どちらにせよ広義の侍には含まれると考えるが、如何だろうか。むろん他の定義が無根拠というわけではないから、読者が他の「侍」定義を採用した上で異なる結論に達しても、私としては一向に構わない。またこれは形式的身分だけの問題であり、記事中でも既に論じた通り、彼が信長のもとで実際にどんな役割を果たしていたのかは依然謎だ。そのことについては、今後の課題としたい。

I’d like to adopt (4) samurai ⊇ bushi theory, and though I don’t know  whether Yasuke was same rank with foot warriors (徒士 kachi) or same rank with esquires (wakato), , in either case that puts Yasuke in the category of “samurai.” Of course, other theories have their own grounds, so I have no objection if you adopt other definitions and come to different conclusions. And this is only a matter of his status in formal meaning, and as I have already discussed in this article, it is still unclear what roles he actually played under Nobunaga. I’d like to set that a topic for future articles.

典拠
Sources and Reference

出典
Sources

池田家本『信長記』（岡山大学附属図書館所蔵）

榊山潤『現代語訳　信長公記（全）』ちくま学芸文庫（2017）

The Chronicle of Lord Nobunaga, Brill Academic Pub, 2011

尊経閣本『信長記』（前田育徳会尊経閣文庫所蔵）

『エヴォラ版日本書簡集』（1598）
Cartas que os padres e irmãos da Companhia de Jesus escreverão dos reynos de Japão & China aos da mesma Companhia da India & Europa, desdo anno de 1549 atè o de 1580, etc. (Segunda parte das cartas de Japão, do anno 1581-1589.). Evora, 1598

松田毅一監訳『十六・七世紀イエズス会日本報告集第Ⅲ期第5巻』同朋舎出版（1992）

『家忠日記』茨城大学図書館所蔵写本

松田毅一監訳『十六・七世紀イエズス会日本報告集第Ⅲ期第6巻』同朋舎出版（1991）

François Solier. Histoire ecclésiastique des isles et royaumes du Japon, 1627

Jean Crasset. Histoire de L’ Eglise du Japon, 1689

『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』アジュダ図書館所蔵史料
Biblioteca da Ajuda, Lisboa. Jesuítas na Ásia 49-IV-55. Livro Primeiro da Christandade, digo do principio da Missão do Japão e Superiores della, começando em quinze de agosto de mil quinhentos e quarenta e nove, annos 1549 athe o trinta e hum de agosto de mil settecentos e quarenta e quatro 1744 annos.

ローマイエズス会文書館所蔵史料 Archivum Romanum Societatis Iesu, Jap Sin 7 III, fl. 225v.

我自刊我本『信長公記』ウィキソース

「江戸幕府朱黒印御内書留」京都大学所蔵史料

深井一郎『雑兵物語研究と総索引』武蔵野書院（1973）

吉田豊訳『原本現代訳　雑兵物語他』教育社（1987）

『日葡辞書』Vocabulário da Língua do Japão

小田原市郷土文化館所蔵史料『北条家定書（天正15年7月晦日）』

To non-Japanese readers

You can read (or at least, view) the Ikeda autograph copy of "Shincho-ki" and "Ietada Nikki" on the Internet, but they are written in cursive style characters in medieval Japanese that can only be read by those with special training. The Sonkeikaku copy is under a special care and accessible only for researchers who have submitted an application. I did not read the original texts directly but relied on professional transcriptions.

In short, it would be extremely difficult for foreigners to access the original Japanese materials directly. However, it seems there is an English translation of "Shincho-ki," which is "The Chronicle of Lord Nobunaga" published by Brill Academic Pub in 2011. Although I don't know which version of "Shincho-ki" this translation used as its original texts, I recommend that you check it out if you are interested.

"Zohyo Monogatari" (The Story of Common Soldiers) is the most important historical material on the actual life of low-ranking soldiers and servants in the Sengoku Period, as well as on the spoken language of the eastern Japan at that time. We cannot avoid this historical material when researching the armies of the Sengoku warriors.

主要参考図書
References

金子拓『織田信長という歴史』勉誠出版（2009）

谷口克広『信長の親衛隊』中公新書（1998）

和田裕弘『織田信長の家臣団』中公新書（2017）

岩沢 愿彦『家忠日記の原本について』東京大学史料編纂所報（1967）

ルシオ・デ・ソウザ／岡美穂子『大航海時代の日本人奴隷　増補新版』中公選書（2021）

川戸貴史『戦国大名の経済学』講談社現代新書（2020）

竹本幹夫「江戸時代諸藩における能役者の身分」『国文学研究第108集』（1992.10）

鈴川博「菱田春草先祖の才能と堀飯田藩仕官の背景」『飯田市美術博物館研究紀要22:59-96』（2012. 3）

高木昭作「いわゆる「身分法令」と「一季居」禁令」『日本近世国家史の研究』岩波書店（1990）

平木上総『兵農分離はあったのか』平凡社（2017）

西股総生『戦国の軍隊』学研プラス（2012）

西股総生『東国武将たちの戦国史』河出書房新社（2015）

『日本国語大辞典　第二版』小学館の以下の記事を参照した。
”御抱””御目見””さむらい””鞘巻””地侍””道具持””扶持”

『日本大百科全書』小学館（1994）の以下の記事を参照した。
”イエズス会””織田信長””御伽衆””徒士””姓名””豊臣秀吉””苗字帯刀”

To non-Japanese readers

Unfortunately, all materials I have listed above in this "References" section are in Japanese. I don't know of any good books on Yasuke written in any languages other than Japanese.

Almost all information in English concerning Yasuke, including articles of famous media outlets, is under the influence of Thomas Lockley, whose writings and speeches are sometimes not so easy to distinguish between historical facts, plausible inferences thereof, and his own speculations extended thereof.

I highly recommend Professor Hiraku Kaneko (金子拓)'s book, a tour de force of the comparative study of Shincho-ki, for readers who want to know more about discussion about the reliability of the Sonkeikaku copy, although reading it may not be easy for non-Japanese.

For the discussion on the definition of samurai, see the article by Shosaku Takagi and Kazusa Hiragi’s book.

ネットで読んだ
The Internet things I've read

呉座勇一「信長に仕えた黒人「弥助」とは何者か（1）」日本関係欧文史料の世界
呉座勇一「信長に仕えた黒人「弥助」とは何者か（2）」日本関係欧文史料の世界
呉座勇一「信長に仕えた黒人「弥助」とは何者か（3）」日本関係欧文史料の世界

Yu Hirayama平山優氏のSNSアカウント@HIRAYAMAYUUKAINの弥助に関する発言

Mihoko Oka岡美穂子氏のSNSアカウント@mei_gang30266の弥助に関する発言

和文史料の読み下しと現代語訳については北見花芽「弥助全資料　～『信長公記』『家忠日記』『イエズス会日本年報』『日本教会史』～」（うきよのおはなし～江戸文学が崩し字と共に楽しく読めるブログ～）が大変参考になった。

desaixjp「尊経閣本と家忠日記」「弥助を洗った史料など」（祖国は危機にあり(La patrie en danger) 関連blog）は『家忠日記』とアジュダ文書の来歴について極めて重要な情報を提供している。

K'sBookshelf「資料 本能寺の変」

本能寺の変において信長が引き連れた少数の手勢に弥助が同行していた可能性についてはa3dayo「トーマス・ロックリーの著作について」（三分の一）が指摘しており、本記事もこの考えを参照した。

呉座優一氏が運営に関わるユーチューブチャンネル春木で呉座います。に投稿された弥助に関係する複数の動画を参考にした。

ゲームさんぽ /よそ見「【基礎知識】そもそも「史料」ってどういうものですか？／さんぽ史料学📚前編」「弥助に関する史料をちゃんと読んでみよう／さんぽ史料学📚後編」では金子拓氏が弥助に関連する史料について解説しており、参考にした。

negi.moe「弥助に関する全歴史的資料 All historical documents related to Yasuke」は私が本記事を執筆するきっかけを与えてくれた。ただしこの動画の翻訳と史料解釈については同意しがたい部分が少なくない。

To non-Japanese readers

The online sources I have listed above are relatively accessible to non-Japanese. With the use of machine translation, you will be able to grasp the contents to some extent. I recommend the essays by Professor Yuichi Goza (呉座勇一) in particular, whose opinions I have cited three times in a row at the beginning of this article, because his writings are well-organized sources of information.

In the blog post of Haname Kitami (北見花芽), Japanese historical materials on Yasuke are translated into modern Japanese. If you can't read the original texts, but at least want to check out the modern Japanese translations, this post is there for you.

The last video listed at the bottom has a lot of translation problems. However, this video inspired me to write this article, and I have listed it here as a token of my respect.

編集履歴
Editing history

　令和6年9月下旬に記事の大幅な増補を書き換えを行った。主要な論旨を変更した点も少なくない。追記部分は以下の通り：尊経閣本関連の議論、戦国時代の経済制度の概観、歴史学者らの意見のまとめ、信長が弥助の肌を洗わせたとする新発見史料、さらに直接弥助とは関係ないものの「侍」の定義に関してまとめた付録を増補した。この他にも既存の部分を大幅に変更しているが、変更があまりに多岐に渡るためここに逐一記すことはしない。なお和文は9月28日現在ほぼ完成しているが、新規に追加した英文はほとんど機械翻訳をそのまま出力した状態であり、非常に多くの問題を残している。これについては今後修正していくものとしたい。同日追記：侍≠武士説が現在の定説だと解説していた箇所、地侍が土豪の類義語だとしていた箇所を訂正した。

In late September 2024, the article was significantly expanded and rewritten. There were quite a few changes in the main points of the argument. The added parts are as follows: discussions related to the Sonkeikaku copy, an overview of economic systems in the Sengoku period, a summary of opinions of historians, newly discovered historical materials that Nobunaga ordered to wash Yasuke's skin, and an appendix on the definition of' samurai' that is not directly related to Yasuke. In addition, the existing parts were significantly changed, but the changes were so extensive that they are not described here in detail. The Japanese text was almost completed as of September 28, but the newly added English text is almost exactly the output of the machine translation, and there are a lot of problems. This will be corrected in the future. P.S. on the same day: He corrected the part where he explained that the theory that samurai was not bushi is the current established theory, and the part where jizamurai (country samurai) said it was a synonym of dogo (gentry).

9月29日、『信長記』の和訳と英訳を見直した。また尊経閣本家忠日記参照説に関する議論をより整理した。この他にも細かい修正点が無数にあり、ここに全てを書き切ることができない。

On September 29, I revised the Japanese and English translations of "Shinchoki." I also organized the discussion on the theory of referring to the Ietada diary of Sonkeikaku. There are countless other minor corrections that I can't write all of here.

10月1日、章立てを変更した。また尊経閣本の信頼性に関する筆者自身の試論を追加した。他にも細かい変更点は多数あるが論旨に関わりがないので記さない。

On October 1, the chapter structure was changed. In addition, the author's own essay on the reliability of the Sonkeikakubon was added. There are many other minor changes, but they are not related to the thesis and are not described.

脚注
Footnotes

 

*1:弥助が来日した経緯や時系列を詳述する史料は発見されていない。ただし彼はヴァリニャーノに帯同していたため、イエズス会の記録から彼らが来日したのは1579年であると判明している。

*2:戦国時代以前の日本では朝廷と幕府という二つの中央政府が存在した。朝廷は古代から存在する名目上の最高権威だったが、彼らは13世紀頃から政治的権力を武家に奪われていき、武家政権である幕府が武士たちを封建制度によって統治するようになっていた。極めて複雑な経緯から応仁元年（1467年）に始まった室町幕府の内乱、応仁の乱によって朝廷と室町幕府の本拠たる京都は荒廃し、日本の中央権力は機能不全に陥った。戦国時代の始まりである。

*3:No historical materials have been found that describes in detail how and when Yasuke came to Japan. However, since he accompanied them to Valignano, it is known from the records of the Society of Jesus that they came to Japan in 1579.

*4:Before the Sengoku period, Japan had dual central governments, the Imperial Court and the Shogunate. The Imperial Court had been the supreme authority since ancient times, but from around the 13th century, its political power was usurped by the rising warrior class, and the Shogunate, a bushi (武士 warrior) government, came to rule warriors, and by extension the rest of people, through the feudal system. As the consequence of extremely complicated processes, the internal conflicts of the Shogunate that began in 1467, the Onin War, devastated Kyoto, where both the Imperial Court and the Shogunate had been located. That meant utter dysfunction of the central governments, marking the beginning of the Sengoku period.

*5:この書物は『信長公記』というタイトルでも知られている。これは『信長記』を元に小瀬甫庵という人物が著したいわゆる『甫庵信長記』と区別するためである。『甫庵信長記』は江戸時代に牛一『信長記』以上に流通し、織田信長の世間的なイメージに大きな影響を与えたが、その著作は儒教思想の強い影響下にあり、事実の歪曲が見られるため史料としての価値は低い。金子氏は太田牛一の著した信長一代記を『信長記』と呼称することを提案している。本記事もそれに従うことにする。

*6:太田牛一は若いころ弓の名手として知られ、信長配下の六人衆の一人に選ばれたこともある。だが後にむしろ文書業務を主にこなすようになり、織田家宿老である丹羽長秀のもとで吏僚として働いた。吏僚とは武家において文書業務や行政的な仕事をこなす者をいう言葉である。牛一はそれほど高位の家臣だったわけではないが信長を深く尊敬し、彼の栄光を後世に伝えるため死の間際まで『信長記』の改稿を重ねた。信長のために書いたといってもその著作姿勢は極めて真摯なものであり、彼は「故意に削除したものはなく、創作もしていない。これが偽りであれば神罰を受けるであろう」と記している。現代の歴史家は牛一の著作を高く評価している。

*7:This book is usually known by the title "ShinchoKo-ki" (ko = an honorific) to distinguish it from "Hoan Shincho-Ki", which was another chronicles written by Hoan Oze based on Shincho-Ki. Hoan Shincho-Ki was circulated more widely than "Shincho-ki" during the Edo Period and greatly influenced on the iconic image of Oda Nobunaga, but historians consider its value as a historical material low because of its strongly Confucian influenced ideas and distorted facts. Professor Kaneko advocates  the position that we should call Gyuichi’s biography of Oda Nobunaga "Shincho Ki", and I follow his position in this article.

*8:Ota Gyuichi was known as a master of archery when he was young, and was once selected as one of the Rokuninshu (Six Martial Masters) under Nobunaga. Later, however, he came to work mainly in the field of documents, and became a bureaucrat (吏僚 riryo) under Niwa Nagahide, one of the elder vassals of the Oda clan. The term "bureaucrat (吏僚 riryo)" refers to people who were in charge of documents and administrative work in a warrior household. Although Gyuichi was not a very high-ranking vassal, he had a deep respect for Nobunaga, and he continued to revise Shincho-ki until his death in order to pass on the glory of his lord to future generations. Even though he wrote it for Nobunaga, his attitude was extremely sincere, and he wrote in his book that "I did not intentionally delete anything, nor did I create anything. If this is false, I will receive divine punishment." Modern historians highly value his works.

*9:将軍とは朝廷の武官の官職の一つで、正式名を征夷大将軍という。これは古代に朝廷が北方異民族を討伐するため派遣した軍の総司令官に与えた称号であった。武家の棟梁である源頼朝が建久3年（1192年）にこの将軍に就任して以来、将軍は日本における事実上の最高権力者の称号となった。ところで著名な将軍の一人に坂上田村麻呂が挙げられるが、延暦16年（797年）将軍に就任した彼は後の武家とは無関係である。海外にはこの坂上田村麻呂が黒人だったと主張する珍説が存在する。カナダの人類学者アレクサンダー・フランシス・チェンバレンが優生学の影響を強く受けた学術雑誌「人種開発ジャーナル」に投稿した論文『人類文明への黒人の貢献』（同誌第1巻、1911年4月）において、田村麻呂はネグロ（黒人）だったと無根拠に記述したのが起源らしいのだが、この説は日本ではまったく相手にされていない。坂上氏は渡来系氏族である東漢氏から分かれた枝氏族の一つだが、田村麻呂の人種については確かな史料がなく知りようがない。

*10:The title of “shogun” was a government post of the Imperial Court, and its formal name was “Seii Taishogun” (the barbarian-subjugating general). This title was given to the commander-in-chief of the army dispatched by the Imperial Court to subdue the northern barbarians in ancient times. After Minamoto no Yoritomo, the head of a warrior household, was appointed as shogun in 1192, the title of shogun became the title of the de facto supreme authority in Japan. By the way, one of the famous shogun is Tamuramaro Sakagami, who became shogun in 797, but he was unrelated to the warrior class, which emerged in later ages. There is a strange theory, in the west, that Tamuramaro was a black man. The origin of this theory seems a paper entitled “The Contribution of the Negro to Human Civilization” (The Journal of Race Development, Vol. 1, No. 4. Apr, 1911) written by Alexander Francis Chamberlain. Apparently, this paper described Tamuramaro as a Negro (black person) without any evidence. This journal itself seems a bit problematic, since apparently it was strongly influenced by eugenicist ideas. No one in Japan seriously considers this theory. Sakanoue clan is surely one of the branch clans that split off from the Yamatonoayauji clan, which have a foreign origin, but we have no certain historical records about Tamuramaro's race, so it is impossible to know.

*11:イエズス会は16世紀前期に結成されたカトリック教会の修道会である。宗教改革の時代にあってカトリック復興を目指した彼らは高等教育の振興と非キリスト教徒への宣教を行った。イエズス会士フランシコ・ザビエルが1549年（天文18年）に初めて来日して以来、イエズス会は日本での布教活動を続けていた。

*12:巡察師とはこの時代にイエズス会が布教状況を査察するため各地に派遣した宣教師の称号である。アレッサンドロ・ヴァリニャーノは現在のイタリア南部にあったナポリ王国の貴族出身で、当時のイエズス会における重要人物だった。

*13:Visitador is a title given to missionaries dispatched by the Society of Jesus to various places in order to inspect the state of missionary work in this period. Alessandro Valignano, a nobleman from the kingdom of Naples, was an important figure in the Society of Jesus at that time.

*14:本当に十人に勝てたわけではなく、あくまでそういう表現である。十人力という慣用表現は現在でも使われている。乃至政彦氏は池田本の「強力
十（つづ）之人に勝たる」という部分を「力強さは、普通の人に勝る様子であった」と訳している。ただし我自刊我本を底本とする諸現代語訳はいずれも「十人力に勝る」と翻訳しており、乃至氏の意見は広く受け容れられるに至っていない。

*15:同現代語訳の底本は建勲神社本系統に連なる我自刊我本。引用部については内容上の大きな異同はない。

*16:Jun Sakakiyama made this modern-Japanese translation not from the Ikeda copy, but from “Gajikanga copy.” But there is no substantial defference between them as to this part.

*17:It does not mean he was literally able to beat ten people, but is rather a common phrase. The idiomatic expression of "the power of ten" is sometimes used even today.

*18:The translation cited above is not based on the Ikeda autograph copy, but this description is the same with the Ikeda copy.

*19:昭和14年（1939年）に前田侯爵家が編んだ「尊経閣文庫国書分類目録」には七点の『信長記』伝本が掲載されている。このうち一寛が書写したという伝来経緯に合致しないものを取り除いた『信長記』十五冊本が尊経閣本である。ただし一寛が書写した写本が目録作成までに紛失していて、実は一寛の写本と尊経閣本が別物であるという可能性も皆無というわけではない。なお目録に掲載されている七点の内の一つ『安土記』十冊本は現在所在不明であるという。

*20:According to the "Sonkeikaku-bunko Kokusho Bunrui Mokuroku (The book catalog of Sonkeikaku-bunko)" compiled by the Marquis Maeda family in 1939 (14th of Showa), this library had seven archival copies of "Shincho-ki." Among them, “the Sonkeikaku copy” means the fifteen volumes set of "Shincho-ki," excluding those that do not match the history that Kazuhiro transcribed it. However, it is not impossible to think that Kazuhiro’ copy had been lost before the catalog was made,  and therefore the true transcriber of the Sonkeikaku copy was not Kazuhiro. For example, the ten volume set of "Azuchi-ki," which is one of the seven listed in the catalog, is currently missing.

*21:前近代における日本の氏名は極めて複雑なシステムであり、英語のラストネームに相当するものとして氏あるいは本姓、姓（カバネ）、家名、名字などが複合的に使用された。また英語のファーストネームに相当するものとして実名である諱と仮名の二つがあった。武士は通常名字と仮名を使用し、氏姓と諱はほとんど使用しなかった。例としてある時期の織田信長の名前を見てみよう。彼が使用した正式な名前は平朝臣織田上総介三郎信長である。平は本姓、朝臣はそれに付随するカバネ、ただしこれは僭称である可能性が高い。織田は名字である。上総介は朝廷の官職で上総国の副長官を意味し、三郎は彼が三男であることに由来する名前で、これはどちらも仮名でありどちらか一方を文脈に合わせて使い分ける。信長は諱であり、現代人は彼をこの名前で呼ぶが当時は滅多に使われなかった。

*22:In premodern Japan, the name system was extremely complicated. Lineage name (氏 uji or 本姓 honsei), hereditary title which belonged to lineage name (姓 kabane), family name (家名 kamei) and surname (名字 myo-ji) were used in various combinations, in ways equivalent to the last name in English. And there were two types of name that corresponded to the first name in English: real given name (諱 imina) and pseudonym (仮名 kemyo). Warriors (武士 bushi) usually used surname and pseudonym. Lineage name, hereditary title and real given name were rarely used. Take for example the name of Nobunaga. The official full name he used at a point was “Taira no Ason Oda Kazusa no Suke Saburo Nobunaga” (平朝臣織田上総介三郎信長). Taira (平) is his lineage name, Ason (朝臣) is hereditary title belonged to that (however, it is highly possible that this was a falsely claimed name). Oda (織田) is the surname of his clan. Kazusa no Suke (上総介) is a government post in the Imperial Court, meaning vice governor of Kazusa Province, and Saburo (三郎) is the name derived from the fact that he was his farther's third son, both of the two are pseudonym, only either one was used at a time depending on the context. Nobunaga (信長) is his real given name, which people today call him by, but was rarely used in his lifetime.

*23:平山氏によればのし付とは薄く伸ばした金銀を使用した高価な装飾である。またこの刀は従来は腰刀であると見なされてきたが、平山氏はこの刀が太刀である可能性もあると考えている。主君から刀を賜ることは、刀のサイズに関係なく大きな名誉だった。

*24:This “gold-encrusted sheath” (のし付 noshitsuki) meant, according to Professor Hirayama, an erabolate decoration that used thinly stretched gold and silver. And, he pointed out, though people conventionally considered this kind of swords to be a dagger (腰刀 koshi-gatana),  it actually might meant a long sword (太刀 tachi). In any case, receiving a sword from one's lord was an honor regardless of the size of the sword.

*25:信長記ではより上位の武士の住居として屋敷という言葉が使用される例も多い。

*26:In Shincho-ki, the word "yashiki (屋敷 mansion)" is used to refer to the house of a high-ranking warrior.

*27:小姓は武士の若い子弟が就く役職で、主君に近侍し身辺の雑用や秘書としての業務にあたり、戦時には主君の親衛隊として戦う。江戸時代の諸藩においては中小姓が士分の最下層である場合が多く、小姓とは基本的に武士の役職だと言ってよい。歴史家の谷口克広氏によれば織田家の御小姓衆は家臣の次男以下から信長が自ら選抜した精鋭集団であり、信長は彼らと馬廻を自ら率いてしばしば陣頭指揮を執った。こうした親衛隊には幹部候補生集団の性格もあり、前田利家のように小姓から大名に昇った例がある。弥助が信長の小姓であったと明示する史料は発見されていないが、金子氏は弥助の身分を小姓に比定している。一方で呉座氏は小姓としては弥助は歳を取りすぎていると指摘し、弥助が小姓だったという説には懐疑的である。

*28:Page (小姓 kosho) was a post held by young sons of warriors (武士 bushi). They served their lord as personal attendants and secretaries, and fought as their lord's bodyguard during wartime. For example, we can say that in many Domains (藩 han; a large unit of fiefdom) of the Edo Period, pages basically had a warrior status, but the lowest rank of that. More exactly, middle-page (中小姓 chu-gosho) was the lowest rank of warrior, and young-page (小小姓 ko-gosho) was yet to have a warrior status because they were before coming-of-age. According to historian Katsuhiro Taniguchi, the pages of the Oda clan were an elite group Nobunaga himself selected from the second sons and younger of his vassals, and Nobunaga often led them and horsegurads (馬廻 umamawari) to the front lines himself. Such guard troops also had the implication of officer candidates, and an example of that was Maeda Toshiie, who rose from a kosho to a feudal lord (大名 daimyo). We have no historical material that clearly show Yasuke as one of Nobunaga’s pages, but professor Kaneko infer Yasuke's status as a page. On the other hand, Professor Goza points out that Yasuke was a bit too old for being a kosho (they were basically teens), and is skeptical about the page theory.

*29:信長存命の頃、徳川家は織田家から見て格下の同盟相手だった。しかし徳川家康は戦国時代を勝ち残り、260年続いた徳川幕府の初代将軍になった。『信長記』写本の研究では、初期に成立した写本ほど家康を呼び捨てにする傾向があり、徳川氏の権力が確立した後の時代に成立した写本では、家康へ敬称をつける傾向が強まることが分かっている。池田本では家康は46回中呼び捨てはわずかに2回のみである。対して尊経閣本は44回中26回呼び捨てとなっている。このことは尊経閣本が古態を残す写本であるという金子氏の説と整合的だ。ただし尊経閣本はそもそも家康以外の人物にも全体的に敬称をあまり使わない傾向がある。また『信長記』諸伝本の間で規則性があると見なされているのは基本的に家康の敬称だけで、信長へ敬称を付す頻度は不規則であることが知られている。

*30:When Nobunaga was alive, the Tokugawa clan was an ally but a lesser clan than the Oda clan. However, Ieyasu survived and won out the Sengoku period, becoming the first shogun of the Tokugawa shogunate, which lasted for 260 years. For this reason, research on the copies of "Shincho-ki" proves that the copies made in the earlier years tend to name Ieyasu without  a title of honor, and the copies made in the later years tend to give some title of honor to Ieyasu. In the Ikeda copy, Ieyasu was named without a title only twice out of 46 times. On the other hand, the Sonkeikaku copy gave a title to him 26 times out of 44 times. This is consistent with Kaneko's theory that the Sonkeikaku copy preserves the older way. However, we have to note the Sonkeikaku copy generally tends not to use titles of honor, Ieyasu or not, in the first place. In addition, historians point out that  this kind of regularity is relevant only to the name of Ieyasu, and that the frequency of giving a title of honor to Nobunaga have no such pattern.

*31:該当箇所は巻五の巻頭。金子拓『織田信長という歴史』の308ページを見よ。

*32:You find this deer hunting passage at the beginning of volume 5. See Hiraku Kaneko, “Oda Nobunaga toiu rekishi,” p. 308

*33:豊臣秀吉は卑賤の身から成り上がり位人臣を極めたことで有名である。天文23年（1554年）秀吉18歳のとき信長に小者として仕えたのを振り出しに、やがて足軽に昇進した。永禄4年（1561年）の結婚の前後から木下の名字を名乗るようになり、永禄9年（1566年）には美濃攻めにおける功績から部将に昇進した。天正1年（1573年）には12万石の大名となり、名字を羽柴に改めた。この頃の彼は織田家最有力武将の一人として数万の兵力を率いていた。身分制の影響が強かった中世日本において、これほどの立身出世は他に類を見ない。

*34:It is a well known story that Toyotomi Hideyoshi rose from a humble beginning to the highest among the imperial subjects. In 1554, when Hideyoshi was 18 years old, he served Nobunaga as a menial servant (小者 komono) and was later promoted to a infantryman (足軽 ashigaru). Around the time of his marriage in 1561, he began to use the surname of Kinoshita, and in 1566, he was promoted to a commanding officer, due to the trust he earned with his great achievement in the Mino campaign. In 1573, he became a feudal lord with 120,000 koku and changed his surname to Hashiba. At this time, he led tens of thousands of troops as one of the six major corps commanders of the Oda army. In medieval Japan, where the class system strongly influenced, such a successful career was unheard of.

*35:信長によって京都から追放された将軍足利義昭は諸大名に対する政治工作を行い、その結果複数の戦国大名が織田家と敵対した。中でも中国地方に勢力を築いた毛利家は義昭の亡命政権と深く繋がり、この方面の織田軍を率いる秀吉と激しく争っていた。天正10年に入り重要拠点である高松城を巡る争いで毛利軍主力が出動すると、秀吉は信長に応援を請い、信長は自らの出陣を決断した。

*36:Shogun Ashikaga Yoshiaki, who had been banished from Kyoto by Nobunaga, carried out political maneuvers to various feudal lords, and succeeded to turn several warlords hostile against the Oda clan. Among them was the Mori clan, who had established their power in the Chugoku region. They were deeply involved in Yoshiaki's exile shogunate, and fiercely fought against Hideyoshi, who led one of the six major corps of the Oda clan in this area. In 1582 (10th of Tensho), when the main force of the Mori army moved to the battle over Takamatsu Castle, an important base, Hideyoshi asked Nobunaga for support, and Nobunaga decided to go into battle himself.

*37:1588年10月30日付でヴァリニャーノがイエズス会総長宛てに送った書簡のなかで彼はフロイスについて「彼は物事を完全にかつ詳細に書くことを好み、自分が言っていることすべてが真実かどうかを確認することを怠っている」と記した。筆者はこの記述を確認できていない。

*38:Valignano wrote in his letter, on October 30, 1588, to the President of the Society of Jesus, aobut Frois that "He prefers to write things in full and in detail, and fails to ascertain whether all of what he says is true." I have not saw this letter myself, though.

*39:原文ではCafre。カフレとは当時のポルトガル人たちが黒人を呼ぶのに使った言葉である。この語は村上直次郎訳では黒奴と翻訳されているが、カフレという語自体には奴隷の意味合いはないため誤訳といってよい。

*40:The word Cafre was used by the Portuguese at the time to refer to black people. This word is translated as "black slave" in some of conventional Japanese translations, but we can daresay it is a mistranslation because the word Cafre itself does not bear the meaning of slave.

*41:堺は京都のすぐ近くにある。京都には公家が多く住んでいた。朝廷は七世紀頃まで天皇が代替わりするたびに遷都を繰り返していたが、山城国に造営した新首都平安京へ延暦13年（794年）に遷都するとそのまま定着し、この都市が京都と呼ばれるようになった。度重なる戦乱によって荒廃してはいたものの、当時の京都は依然として全国屈指の大都市だった。

*42:Sakai was very close to Kyoto. Until around the seventh century, the Imperial Court moved the capital every time there was a new emperor, but when the capital was moved to Heian-kyo (平安京), a new capital built in Yamashiro Province in 794 (Enryaku 13), they took root and the city came to be called Kyoto. Although devastated by repeated wars, Kyoto at that time was still one of the largest cities in Japan.

*43:フロイスは現地での活動で資金を自己調達する方法を模索していたのかもしれない。戦国時代を通じてイエズス会日本支部は厳しい財政難にあった。そのため、フロイスが本部宛に送った報告は本部からの支援のために誇張される傾向があった。したがってイエズス会史料に記述された彼らの現地有力者との繋がりや布教活動の成功などは過大評価されていると考える必要がある。

*44:Frois might have been looking for ways to self-finance their activities in the field. Throughout the Sengoku period, the Japanese branch of the Society of Jesus was in severe financial difficulties.The reports Frois sent to the headquarters of the Jesuits, therefore, tended to exaggerate things in order to seek more supports from the headquarters. This factor necessitates us to think their connections with local dignitaries and successful missionary works described in Jesuits historical materials were often overstated.

*45:信長は武家であって公家ではないものの、朝廷の庇護者として振る舞うことで、朝廷から高位の官位を授けられていた。正二位は戦前の官位制度では総理大臣や陸海軍元帥が叙せられ、現在では在任期間の長かった総理大臣が没後に追贈される例が多い。また信長は位階とは別に名目上の官職として右大臣兼右近衛大将にも就いていたが、天正6年（1578年）に何故かどちらも辞任した。辞任の理由も、彼が将来どのような官職に就いて政権を運営するつもりだったのかも、まったくの謎となっている。

*46:Although Nobunaga was a warlord and not a court noble, he acted as a protector of the Imperial Court and was given an official rank in the Imperial Court. At that time, his official rank was Senior Second Rank (正ニ位 sho ni-i), which was the same as that of successive shoguns and indicated Nobunaga's status as the ruler of the country. The official rank system continued into modern times, and in the pre-WW2 Japanese, the Prime Minister, the Army field marshal, and the navy marshal admiral were given the rank of Senior Second Rank. Even today, many of Prime Mnisters has been posthumously conferred this rank.  Other than this rank, Nobunaga held the Imperial Court posts of “Minister of the Right” (右大臣 udaijin) and “major captain of the right division of the Inner palace guards”  (右近衛大将 ukone-no-daisho), but he resigned both posts in 1578 for some reason. It remains complete mysteries why he regisnated and what post he intended to hold in the future to grasp the administration.

*47:信長や秀吉など著名な武士の多くはこうした武将なので、武士ないし侍とは武将のことだと誤解されることもあるが、実際にはこうした高位の武士は一握りである。武将が広大な所領を擁し数千の兵力を率いる一方で、多くの武士は数人の奉公人だけを引き連れ個人戦闘員として戦わなければならなかった。

*48:Almost all of today’s famous and admired warriors (武士 bushi), like Nobunaga and Hideyoshi, were warrior lords (busho). For this reason, some modern people misunderstand that bushi, or samurai, means the same status as warrior lord. But in reality, there were only a handful warriors who had so high a status as warrior lord. In contrast to a warrior lord who held a large territory and led thousands of troops, many of ordinary warriors had to fight as an individual combatant, with only a few servants in tow.

*49:この年に織田家と徳川家の連合軍は長年の宿敵であった武田家を滅亡させた。織田軍主力は信長の嫡男信忠の軍勢であった。織田信忠は天正3年（1575年）に織田家督を譲られ、当時は織田家最有力武将の一人だった。信長は名目上の総大将として出征したものの戦線の後方に留まった。

*50:In this year, the allied forces of the Oda clan and the Tokugawa clan destroyed the Takeda clan, which had long been their archenemy. The main force of the Oda army was the corps of Nobunaga's eldest son, Nobutada. Nobutada was formally handed over the reigns of the Oda clan by his father in 1775, and was one of the commanders of the six major corps of the Oda army at this time. Nobunaga went to this campaign technically as the the highest commander, but he remained behind the front lines.

*51:六尺二分は182.42406cmで約6フィートとなる。参考までに戦国時代の日本人男性の平均身長は155cm程度とされている。これは同時期の欧州のそれとあまり変わらない。ただし欧州の貴族たち同様に、武士は一般人よりも栄養状態が良かったから彼らの平均身長はもう少し高かったはずだ。例えば織田信長の身長は約170cm、前田利家の身長は約180cmだったと言われている。ところでこの弥助の身長の記述はデータとしてあまりに詳細なため不自然である。これについては二つの説がある。一つは六尺二分はある種の定型表現ではないかというもので、非常に有名な僧兵である武蔵坊弁慶の身長がしばしば六尺二分と言及されることから、家忠が弥助を見て弁慶を連想したのではないかという説である。もう一つは当時家忠の領地において検地のために使われていた長さを測る棒、検地竿の長さが六尺二分だったので、家忠はだいたいその長さと同じくらいだと当たりをつけたという説である。ただし検地竿の長さは時期や地域によってかなり異同があるため、それほど確かではない。

*52:Six shaku and two bu equals 182.42406 centimeters, which is about six feet. For your information, the height of Japanese men in the Sengoku period averaged about 155 centimeters. The Europeans at the same time averaged about the same, too. However, warriors were generally taller than ordinary people because they were better nourished. The height of Oda Nobunaga, for example, was supposedly about 170 centimeters. But to return to the height of Yasuke, this data provided by Ietada feels unnaturally precise. It would have certainly been difficult for Ietada, in such a situation, to measure Yasuke's exact height. There are two plausible theories about this number. One is that six shaku two bu might have been a kind of conventional phrase which came from the height of Musashibo-Benkei, a very famous monk warrior, which was often described as six shaku two bu. This theory implies that Ietada might have associated Yasuke with Benkei when he saw him, making the phrase a kind of epithet rather than objective data. Admittedly, though, it is difficult to judge the validity of such a guess from the context. The other theory is that the length of the “kenchi-zao,” literally the measuring stick for land survey, in Ietada's territory at that time, might have been six shaku two bu, and that Ietada estimated Yasuke’s height as about the same with it. However, the length of the kenchi-zao varied considerably depending on the era or the region, which do not help this theory.

*53:太田牛一の没年は不詳であるが、金子氏によれば慶長18年（1613）に比定されているという。彼は晩年まで非常に活発な文筆活動を続けたが、その時期以降記録が途絶えるからである。彼の子孫は二つの家に分かれ、それぞれ加賀藩前田家と摂津麻田藩青木家に仕えた。

*54:The year of Ota Gyuichi's death is unclear, but according to professor Kaneko it was probably 1613 (18th of Keicho). The reason is that he continued to be a very productive writer even in his old age, but after that year we have no record of it. His descendants split into two families, and served the Maeda clan who ruled Kaga Domain and the Aoki clan who ruled Settsu-Asada Domain, respectively.

*55:『家忠日記増補追加』については旧内務省所蔵写本と早稲田大学所蔵写本の二つで確認、いずれも4月18日の次は21日。内務省本はNo3の44/102、早稲田本は13/104が該当箇所。『神君御年譜』については茨城大学図書館所蔵史料で確認、4月18日の次は5月に入る。該当箇所は38/108。

*56:As for the Supplemented Ietada Nikki (“Ietada Nikki Zoho Tsuika”), I have confirmed it with two versions of hand copies, one owned by the former Home Ministry and one owned by the library of Waseda University. In both of the copies, the next entry of the 18th of 4th month jumps to 21 of 5th month. The relevant parts are No. 3, 44/102 in the former copy and 13/104 in the latter. As for "Shinkun Gonenpu," I have confirmed it with the hand copy owned by Ibaraki University Library, and the next entry of 18th of 4th month jumps to 5th month. The relevant part is 38/108.

*57:尊経閣本と家忠日記ではヤスケの漢字表記が異なる。尊経閣本では弥助で、これは今日の人々が彼を表記する際の表記だが、家忠日記では弥”介”になっている。もっとも前近代の日本ではこうした表記揺れはまったく珍しいものではなかった。そこで筆者が平山氏に確認したところ、尊経閣本の加筆者が直接家忠日記を参照したと仮定したとき、表記揺れが起こることはありえないと回答された。

*58:池田本『信長記』は太田牛一自筆本でありその信頼性は高く評価されている。だが同本は池田家の要請に晩年の牛一が応えて著したものであり、実は池田輝政の事績が他本に比べて少し誇張されている。池田輝政のための加筆部分のうち目立つものとしては、天正8年閏3月2日摂津鼻熊城下の合戦で池田輝政が戦功を挙げた旨を記す「忝も御成御感状、後代之面目也」（かたじけなくも賞状を貰い、後の代まで続く名誉だ）という記述が巻十三のなかにある。ところでこの加筆は実は尊経閣本にも共通して存在する。新しい時期の自筆本と尊経閣本に共通点がある事実は、後者が牛一の初期の草稿の内容を反映する古態写本であるという説にとって無視できない矛盾だ。その一方で池田本と尊経閣本の異同は細かい言い回しや送り仮名などの点で非常に大きいこともまた事実であり、両本の関係についてはまだよくわかっていない。

*59:The Sonkeikaku copy and Ietada Nikki have a difference as to what Kanji characters they use for the name Yasuke. In the former, Yasuke is 弥"助", which is also the way we usually write his name today, but in the latter, it is 弥"介." In premodern Japan, such fluctuations in Kanji writing themselves were pretty common. However, when I asked Professor Hirayama about it, he replied that if the hypothetical person who added the passage to the Sonkeikaku copy actually could have directly read Ietada Nikki, such a fluctuation could not have happened.

*60:The Ikeda autograph copy of “Shincho-Ki” was written by Ota Gyuichi in his own hand, and historians highly regard its reliability. However, Gyuichi wrote this copy in his old age in response to a request from the Ikeda family, and in fact, the achievements of Ikeda Terumasa, a feudal lord, were slightly exaggerated compared to the other copies. But, I find it impossble to discover similar relationship between the Sonkeikaku copy and Yasuke. I will show you just one of the major additions made for the Ikeda family here. It is a passage in volume 13 that reads “I (Terumasa) am deeply grateful for the letter of commendation, which is an honor that will last for generations of my family to come,” which describes how Ikeda Terumasa distinguished himself in the Battle of Hanakuma Castle in Settsu province on the 2nd of leap 3rd month in 8th Tensho (1580). I’d like to say one more thing in passing. The Sokeikaku copy also shares this passage. The fact that the relatively new Ikeda copy and the Sonkeikaku copy have similarity is a nonnegligible contradicttion to Professor Kaneko’s theory that the latter was transcribed from Gyuichi's manuscript with the original trivialities. On the other hand, though, it is also true that the differences between the Ikeda copy and the Sokeikaku copy are very large in terms of minor wording. I have to say, at this moment, the relationship between the two copies is still not clear for us.

*61:In the original text, it is referred to as chugen (中間), and in this article, mid-servant is used for chugen.

*62:このときの信忠は従三位、左近衛中将。

*63:He was at Junior Third Rank (従三位) in imperial rank system, and Lieutenant General of the Left Division of Inner Palace Guards (左近衛中将).

*64:信長が上洛に伴って安土から引き連れてきたのは「御小姓衆二、三十人」だったと『信長記』に記されているが、人数が記載されていない武家奉公人たちも含めれば総数はもう少し多かったはずだ。谷口氏によれば信長と共に戦った護衛は小姓を中心とし総数は50人から60人ほどだったという。この数字には本来非戦闘員である中間たちも含まれる。このように緊急時に奉公人が戦闘に加わるケースは稀にあった。

*65:According to Shincho-ki, Nobunaga brought only 20 to 30 pages (御小姓衆 Okosho-syu; o = honorific, kosho = page, syu = group) from Azuchi, his home castle, to Kyoto. The total number might have been a little larger if we count in unmentioned household servants, but it would still be a small group. According to historian Katsuhiro Taniguchi, the total number of the escort who fought with Nobunaga at Honno-ji was only about 50 to 60 men, the core of which was his pages. This number includes household servants, who were essentially non-combatants. It was rare but not unheard-of for them to join the battle in an emergency, though, and this was such a case.

*66:平戸のイギリス商館長であったリチャード・コックスの日記には当時の長崎に多くの黒人がいたことが記録されている。例えば彼の日記にはアントニオという名前のカフル人が登場する。アントニオは元は平戸領主松浦隆信に所有されていて、日本語とポルトガル語に堪能であったが、解放されイギリス商館にいた。1617年11月の日記によると、マニラからやってきたスペイン人が大金を払ってでもアントニオを買い入れたいと申し出てきたという。記録の多くは貿易港である長崎の周辺におけるものだが、『続無名抄』には慶長12年（1607年）頃に因幡鹿野藩に「黒坊」がいたという記録がある。藩主亀井氏が朝鮮出兵から連れ帰ったらしい。当時編纂されたポルトガル語による日本語辞書『日葡辞書』によるとクロボウ（Curobō）はカフル人のことなので、これは黒人のことだと思われるが、詳細は不明である。

*67:Richard Cox, the chief of British merchant house in Hirado, recorded in his diary that there were many black people in Nagasaki at the time. For example, in his diary, a man named Antonio appears. Antonio was originally owned by Matsuura Takanobu, the lord of Hirado fiefdom, and was fluent in Japanese and Portuguese, but he stayed at the British trading house after he was freed. According to his diary in November 1617, a Spaniard from Manila offered to buy Antonio for a large sum of money. Although most of such records are from around Nagasaki, a trading port, the “Zoku Mumyōshō” (a book in the Okanishi Ichu’s series of essay) contains a record of a “Kurobō” in the Inaba Shikano Domain around 1607. It seems that a feudal lord Kamei brought him back from the Korean invasion. According to "Vocabulário da Língua do Japão" (the Japanese-Portuguese dictionary compiled by the Jesuits at the time), the Japanese word “Curobō” meant “Cafre”, so I think this was a black person, but the details are unknown.

*68:これはイエズス会の一方的な見方であって事実とはすこし異なる。イエズス会報告のなかにおける信長は信仰を持たない無神論者であるかのように描写されているが、実際には伝統的な日本宗教との関係もあった。谷口氏の著作には織田家の近習が神社の修繕を怠る家臣を叱責する記録が登場する。ただし信長が激しく敵対した勢力のなかに仏教勢力も含まれていることは事実である。

*69:This was a onesided view of the Jestuits and not true. In the Jesuit reports, Nobunaga was described as an atheist without any faith, but in reality he was associated to traditional Japanese religions. Historian Taniguchi highlightes in his book a scene in a historical record that an adjutant (近習 kin-ju) of the Oda clan scolded a vassal who neglected to repair a shrine. That being said, it is very true that Buddhists were among the forces that Nobunaga fiercely fought against.

*70:明智光秀は信長に下剋上を試みたことで非常に著名な人物である。もっとも戦国時代には武士の裏切りは日常茶飯事だったし、信長は家臣や親族によく裏切られたので、光秀が特別卑劣な人間だったというわけではない。もともと彼は室町幕府の下級幕臣で、信長が上洛し幕府を後見するようになると形式上幕臣でありつつも事実上織田家の指揮系統に組み込まれるようになった。信長が将軍足利義昭と決裂すると光秀は織田方につき、以降は織田家中で昇進を重ねた。彼が信長を裏切った理由については様々な説があり、信長に叱責された恨み説、幕府への隠れた忠誠心説、最初から天下を取る野心があった説、果ては陰謀論的なものとして朝廷黒幕説、イエズス会黒幕説なども提唱されたが、いずれも根拠に乏しい。呉座氏は光秀の突発的な犯行だっただろうと考えている。信長と信忠は同じとき同じ場所に軍勢を伴わず集まるという決定的なミスを犯した。そして光秀はすぐ近くの丹波国にいて、信長たちの居場所を偶然知ることができた。

*71:Akechi Mitsuhide is very famous for his half-succeeded attempt to overthrow Nobunaga. However, in the Sengoku period, betrayal by vassals was a daily occurrence. Nobunaga, too, was often betrayed by his vassals, and that makes Mitsuhide a not-so-particularly despicable person. Mitsuhide was originally a low-ranking vassal of the Muromachi shogunate, and when Nobunaga went to Kyoto and took the position of the guardian of the shogunate, he was practically incorporated into the chain of command of the Oda clan even though he was still a vassal of the shogunate formally. But when Nobunaga broke off with Shogun Ashikaga Yoshiaki, Mitsuhide actually took the side of the Oda clan, and since then he was promoted in the Oda clan. There are various theories as to why he betrayed Nobunaga, such as the theory of a grudge for being scolded by Nobunaga, the theory of hidden loyalty to the shogunate, the theory that he had an ambition to rule whole country from the beginning, and even conspiracy theories that feature a mastermind like the Imperial Court or the Society of Jesus. But all of them have little basis. Professor Goza believes that Mitsuhide did it on the spur of the moment. Nobunaga and Nobutada made the crucial mistake of gathering in the same place at the same time without an army, and Mitsuhide got to find it out by chance, since he happend to be in Tanba, a nearby region.

*72:天下人となった秀吉は朝廷に接近し天正14年（1586年）に太政大臣に就任、同年正親町天皇から豊臣姓を賜った。権力の絶頂に達した秀吉を止められる者はおらず、彼は天正18年（1590年）に天下統一を果たした。統一後の秀吉は誇大妄想に取り憑かれ海外侵略を目指すようになり、天正20年（1592年）朝鮮へ出兵した。二度に渡る派兵は得るところ少なく、慶長3年（1598年）に秀吉が没すると戦意の低い日本軍は朝鮮半島から撤退した。秀吉が一代で築き上げた豊臣家の権力は盤石とは言えず、徳川家康が次の天下人となって徳川幕府を開くことになる。

*73:After the succession of power, Hideyoshi approached the Imperial Court and was appointed the Grand Chancellor of the Realm (太政大臣 daijo-daijin) in 1586 (14th of Tensho). In the same year, Emperor Ogimachi gave him the lineage name of Toyotomi. At this point Hideyoshi, who was at the pinnacle of power, was utterly unstoppable, and it was not long before he unified entire Japan. After the unification in 1590 (18th of Tensho), Hideyoshi became obsessed with delusions of grandeur and aimed to invade foreign countries. He invaded Korea in 1592. Even with the second attempt in 1597, there was little to gain. When Hideyoshi died in 1598 (3rd of Keicho), the Japanese army, which had little will to fight, withdrew from the Korean Peninsula. The power of the Toyotomi clan, which Hideyoshi had built in one generation, was not perfectly solid, and Tokugawa Ieyasu became the next supreme power and established the Tokugawa shogunate.

*74:この弥助を洗わせたという内容の記述が1710年にリスボンで出版された『Oriente conquistado a Jesu Christo pelos Padres da Companhia de Jesus』という著作にもほとんど同じ文面で登場する。この二つの書物の奇妙な符合は、二人の著者が同じ内容の報告書簡を別の場所別のタイミングで参照した可能性を示唆しているのかもしれない。当時イエズス会は同じ内容の報告書簡を最低でも三つ作成し一通はマカオで保管、他はヨーロッパへ送信していた。

*75:This description of washing Yasuke appears almost in the same expression in “Oriente conquistado a Jesu Christo pelos Padres da Companhia de Jesus,” a book published in Lisbon in 1710. This curious consistency of two books may suggest that the two authors may have referred to a report letter of the same content in different places and times. The Jesuits at that time wrote at least three report letters of the same content, one of which was kept in Macau, and the others were sent to Europe.

*76:秀吉は信長の死後もしばらくの間キリスト教を容認する姿勢を維持していたが、天正15年（1587年）に宣教師の追放と南蛮貿易の禁止を宣言した。ただしこの伴天連追放令は不完全なもので実際には宣教師たちの活動と貿易はその後も続き、三浦按針ことウィリアム・アダムズが乗ったオランダ商船リーフデ号が慶長5年（1600年）に日本に漂着した際にもイエズス会の日本支部はまだ活動を続けていた。この後イエズス会以外のキリスト教勢力による布教が活発化すると、当時成立したばかりの幕府はキリスト教に対する姿勢を徐々に硬化させていった。最終的に慶長18年（1613年）に幕府は全国規模の禁教令を発し、教会は破壊され宣教師たちは追放された。それから二十年以上経って、島原・天草地域のキリシタン信徒たちは寛永14年（1637年）に大規模な反乱を起こした。幕府は十二万の大軍を動員し、オランダ武装商船による艦砲射撃などあらゆる手段を用いて非戦闘員を含む信徒たちを根絶やしにした。ごく僅かな信徒だけが地下組織化し生き残った。幕府が再び布教活動を許可したのは安政6年（1859年）のことである。

*77:After Nobunaga's death, his successor Hideyoshi also kept the stance of tolerating Christianity for a while, but he declared banishment of missionaries and prohibition of trade with the West in 1587. However, this so-called "Bateren edict" (Bateren = a phonetic transcription of Padre) was incomplete, and in fact, evangelistic activities of the Jesuits and trade with the West continued. The Japanese branch of the Society of Jesus was still active even when the Dutch merchant ship Liefde with William Adams on board washed ashore in 1600. But, soon after that, when Christian orders other than the Jesuits, such as Dominicans, the Augustinians, and the Franciscans, began to propagate Christianity in Japan, things have changed. The newly established Tokugawa Shogunate (徳川幕府 tokugawa-bakufu), the last warrior government in history, gradually hardened its stance against Christianity. Finally, in 1613, the Shogunate declared severe banning of Christianity on a nationwide scale, and began destroying churches and expelling missionaries. In 1637, the Christians in Shimabara and Amakusa areas staged a large-scale rebellion. The Shogunate mobilized a large force of 120,000 troops and exterminated the Christians, including non-combatants, by any means such as naval bombardment from a Dutch armed merchant ship. A mere small number of Christians who organized underground groups survived thereafter. It was in 1859 that the Shogunate permitted again Christian propagation.

*78:徳川幕府は石高に応じた戦時動員兵力を詳細に規定しているが、当時の織田家にはそうした客観的な基準は一切存在しなかった。なので信長から、この家臣の石高の割に軍功がぱっとしないな、などと思われると悲惨な目にあった。事実佐久間信盛は織田家筆頭家老かつ最有力武将の一人だったが1580年に信長から追放されている。彼は信長の期待に答えられなかったらしい。彼の軍団を引き継いだのは明智光秀であった。

*79:The Tokugawa shogunate stipulated in detail the number of soldiers to be mobilized in wartime according to the amount of kokudaka and assigned to eash warriors. In the lifetime of Nobunaga, though,  such an objective standards were yet to be established in the Oda clan. That meant it had disastrous consequences when Nobunaga thought a vassal's military performance was poor for the size of his fief. In fact, even though Sakuma Nobumori was one of the Oda clan's elder vassals and one of the six major corps commanders of the Oda army, he was expelled by Nobunaga in 1580, seemingly because he did not live up to Nobunaga's expectations. It was Akechi Mitsuhide who took over his corps.

*80:本能寺の変で信長と共に戦死した者の中には矢代勝介という家臣も登場するが、彼は馬術家であることがわかっている。矢代、伴正林、村田の三人は『信長記』では厩で戦ったと記録されている。ところで『甫庵信長記』には明智方の者が矢代に対して「汝は他に異なり、退かじ」（お前は他の者とは違うから逃げろ）と言ったが、矢代はそれをあざ笑って戦い、討死するという場面がある。『甫庵信長記』は信頼性に問題のある史料なので字面通りには受け取れないが、事実なら戦闘員でない矢代は見逃してもらえたのに自ら戦いを選んだことになる。

*81:Among those who died in the Honnoji Incident with Nobunaga was a retainer named Yashiro Shosuke, who was an equestrian. Shincho-ki tells us that Yashiro, Tomo Shorin, and Murata Kichigo fought in the stable. By the way, "Hoan Shinchoki," a popular version of Shincho-ki, depicts a scene in which an Akechi's soldier said to Yashiro,“You are different from the others, run away,” but Yashiro scoffed at that and fought to his death in the battle. "Hoan Shinchoki" is a historical material with credibility problems, so we cannot take it literally, but if it was true, it means that Yashiro, who was not a combatant, chose to fight even though he had the right to be overlooked.

*82:弥助以外にも変の生存者は数多くいた。御所にいた皇族の誠仁親王はじめ朝廷の関係者、信長に帯同していた女性たち、寺の僧侶たちなどである。変に遭遇した織田家家臣は大部分が死亡した。数少ない例外として挙げられるのは稲葉貞通、水野忠重、織田長益（有楽斎という別名で有名）の三名である。特に長益は信長の弟だったにも関わらず逃亡し生き残ったため大きな非難に晒された。歴史家の和田裕弘氏は彼らをして「武将としての名を汚してしまった」と評している。

*83:In fact, there were many survivors of the Honnoji Incident other than Yasuke. For example, His Highness Prince Masahito, officials and court ladies of his court, women who accompanied Nobunaga, and the monks of the temple. But it is also true that most of the Oda clan vassals who took part in the incident died. The few exceptions who ran away was Sadamichi Inaba, Mizuno Tadashige, and Oda Nagamasu (also known as Urakusai). In particular the last one, Nagamasu, who escaped and survived despite being Nobunaga's younger brother, came under heavy criticism. Historian Yasuhiro Wada describes these three as having 'tarnished their reputation as a warrior lord.'

*84:武士身分であっても知行を受けない場合はある。近世諸藩において徒士、または徳川幕府直参のうち御家人と呼ばれる身分がそれに相当する。彼らはより上位の武士である上士や旗本と就ける役職や礼儀作法の面で差別的な扱いを受けていた。上士は基本的に騎乗身分・御目見得・知行取りなのに対し、徒士は非騎乗身分・非御目見得・蔵米取（扶持取り）であることが多い。ただ徒士は上士より下とはいってもやはり士分であり、苗字帯刀と世襲される家臣としての地位を持つ武士であることに変わりはない。徳川幕府では両者を区別する境界線は旗本が御目見得身分であることだった。そのため非常に貧しい蔵米取の直参が御目見して旗本に加わる場合がないわけではなかった。

*85:Warriors (武士 bushi) did not necessarily have his own fief. In the Early Modern period, in the case of various Domains, they were called foot warriors (徒士 kachi), and in the case of direct employment of the Tokugawa shognate, they were called household vassals (御家人 gokenin). They were treated lower than higher-ranking warriors such as mounted warriors (上士 joshi) or bannerguards (旗本 hatamoto) in terms of the posts they could hold and the etiquette they were expected to follow. These higher-ranking warriors basically had the privilages such as to ride horse, to be able to have audience with his lord, and to have his own enfeoffment. In contrast, foot warriors (kachi) were often not allowed to ride horses nor had the audience with his lord, and they received a kuramai (蔵米 rice of storehouse, stipend), not a fief. However, even though foot warriors (kachi) were lower than mounted warriors (joshi), they were warriors (武士 bushi) nontheless. Which meant they had “the status of warrior” (士分 shibun), which was the  hereditary rights to serve as a retainer to his lord, bear a surname, and wear two swords. In the Tokugawa shogunate, the dividing line between the two was that bannerguards had the status of audience. For this reason, it was not unheard of for a very poor stipend receiver to join the bannergurads for getting stats of audience.

*86:豊臣秀吉は多くの御伽衆を抱えていたことで知られている。小瀬甫庵の記した『甫庵太閤記』には800人いたとあり、甫庵の著述は疑わしいものだが多かったのは事実なのだろう。秀吉の御伽衆は没落した元大名など由緒ある血筋の者が多いことが特徴で、最後の室町将軍足利義昭や、本能寺の変から逃亡して生き残った信長の弟、織田長益も秀吉の御伽衆になった。

*87:Toyotomi Hideyoshi is known to have had many otogisyu. Oze hoan's “Hoan Taiko Ki” (Chronicles of Toyotomi Hideyoshi by Hoan) describes that Hideyoshi had 800 otogisyu, and although the accuracy of this number is questionable, he did seem to had many. One of the characteristics of Hideyoshi's otogisyu was that many of them were from prestigious families, such as former feudal lords who had fallen from grace. For example, among them were Ashikaga Yoshiaki, who was the last shogun of the Muromachi period, and Oda Nagamasa, who was Nobunaga's younger brother and who fled and survived the Honnoji Incident.

*88:当該発言が宣教師によって記録されたことを考えると、獣という表現は宣教師たちの弥助への評価から出てきたものかもしれない。岡氏はイエズス会に一度入信したが脱会した日本人が、脱会以来イエズス会側の記録において罵詈雑言で形容されるようになったという事実を踏まえて、急激に身分が上昇した弥助と彼の元主人であるイエズス会の間で関係が悪化した可能性を示唆している。

*89:On this “beast” remark, we might suspect that, considering the said remark was recorded by a missionary, the word “beast” might have come from the missionaries' ideas on Yasuke. Professor Oka suggests that the relationship between Yasuke and his former master, the Jesuits, might have deteriorated after he became a retainer of Nobunaga. Professor Oka points out the fact that some Japanese people who once joined the Jesuits but left the order have since been described in abusive terms in Jesuit records.

*90:実際にはかなり多くの違いがある。例えば戦国時代の武士は騎乗していても戦闘時には下馬するのが普通であった。また日本と西欧の封建制における最大の違いは、日本においては既存の政治的権威である朝廷が存続したことである。

*91:In reality, bushi and knights have quite a few differences. For example, in the Sengoku period in Japan, it was common practice to dismount during battle even if they were mounted warriors. Also, the biggest difference between Japanese and Western feudalism is that in Japan, the ancient political authority, the Imperial Court, continued to exist.

*92:代表的な武家奉公人として挙げられるのは中間と小者である。小者は雑用に従事する下級の奉公人で、個々の武士の私的使用人であるため軍役の対象にならない。中間は小者と足軽の間の地位であることにその名が由来し、非戦闘員で主君の世話を務める点で小者と変わりはないが地位は小者より高い。

*93:The two most common types of household servants were the mid-servant (中間 chugen) and menials (小者 komono). The menials were low-ranking servants for miscellaneous works, and they were not subject to military service because they were merely personal servants of individual warriors. Mid-servant, whose name derives from their position between the menials and infantrymen (足軽 ashigaru), were the same with menials in that they were non-combatants who take care of their lord, but were a rank higher than menials.

*94:このことを示す史料として元和9年（1623年）徳川秀忠上洛の際の行軍法度にはこうある。「一馬上の際に召列かちものゝ事、馬取二人・沓持壱人・草履取壱人・持鑓壱本、此外若党を可召連事、」（『東武実録』）「一つ、騎乗して行進する際に引き連れる徒歩の従者については、馬丁二人、くつ持ち一人、草履持ち一人、槍持ち一人（一本）、この他に若党を召し連れてもよい」若党は奉公人と並んで記載されているが、持つ道具が指定されていない。

*95:The following is an example of this point, a notification about the marching when Tokugawa Hidetada went to Kyoto in 1623 (9th of Genna): “As for the entourage on foot who are to accompany a mounted troop on the march, you may bring along two horsemen, one shoe-bearer, one sandal-bearer, and one spear-bearer (one spear). Other than that, you may bring along a wakato.” As we can see, although it lists a wakato (若党 esquire)  alongside household servants, what equipment he carry is not specified.

*96:一季居とは一年季で雇用される奉公人、あるいは一年季で奉公人を雇用することで、近世の武家は町人や百姓をこのように期間雇用することで奉公人を確保していた。なお法令の文面は一見すると一季居を禁止しているように読めるが、この法令における一季者とは厳密には雇用期間の切れた元奉公人「一季之窂人」のことを指している。彼らは契約期限が切れると元の居場所に戻ることが想定されていたが、元一季者がそのまま都市部に滞留し、人口過密や治安悪化を引き起こすなどして、当時社会問題化していたのである。一季居禁令は幕府が農業人口確保の観点から、彼らを農村へ還流させることを意図したものだったが、ほとんど同じ文面の法律が大量に制定されたことを鑑みると効果が上がったのか疑わしい。

*97:Ichiki-ori (ichi = one, ki = season, ori = stay; seasonal servant) meant servants employed with a single-year contract, or the practice of employing a servant for only a year, and warrior households in the Early Modern period secured servants by employing townspeople and peasants in this manner. Although at first glance the text of these laws may seem as prohibiting the hiring of temporal servants, technically the term “ichiki-nin” in these laws referred to “ikkino ronin,” any former servants whose employment period had expired. Supposedly they would return to their original places when their contracts expired, but in reality they remained in urban areas, causing social problems such as urban overcrowding and deterioration of public safety. The intention of the shogunate in prohibiting seasonal servants was to return them to the rural areas in order to secure agricultural population, but the effect was doubtful at best, given so many number of laws enacted with almost identical wording.

*98:逆に侍が雑兵に落ちぶれることもあった。雑兵物語には夫丸の馬蔵という人物が登場し籠城の際の兵糧の取り扱いについて説明してくれるのだが、彼は自分のことを元は侍だったが落ちぶれて百姓になったと説明している。

*99:On the other hand, samurai sometimes fell to the rank of common soldier. In The Story of Common Soldiers, a coolie person called Umazo explains how to handle army provisions during being besieged, and tells his story that he was originally a samurai but fell to a peasant.

*100:荒仕事を受け持つ最下級の奉公人の一種である。

*101:天正19年に秀吉が定めたこの法令は日本各地の大名家に文書が残っており、日本全国を対象にしていたことがわかっている。かつてこの法令は侍（武士）と町人や百姓といった各身分の間の移動を禁じたものと解釈され、歴史家によって身分統制令と呼ばれてきた。高木氏の研究はそれまでの通説を覆すものであり、前近代日本の身分制度研究は転機を迎えることになった。

*102:武士の軍隊における非戦闘員比率は一般に想像されているよりも遥かに高い。高木氏はこのことを18世紀初頭の前橋酒井家の陣立書を用いて説明している。陣立書によれば12万5千石を誇る酒井家の軍勢は総勢約5,880人と馬930匹から成り、その内訳は騎馬の士350人、徒士200人、足軽1,050人、中間・小者計300人、又者（騎馬の士などの従者）1,800人、人足1,200人、馬の口取（馬子）570人、その他（職人・医者・坊主・台所方など）、そして乗馬360匹と駄馬570匹である。戦闘員である武士と足軽の合計はたったの1,600人に過ぎない。ただしこの陣立書には若党（侍）が記載されていない。彼らは個々の武士の家臣であり藩主からみれば陪臣なので又者のなかに含まれているのだ。高木氏は又者1,800人のうち、武士の人数と大まかに同数の若党がいると推測しているが、その場合でも戦闘員が2000人を超える程度で総勢の三分の一ほどにしかならない。

*103:Arashiko was a kind of lowest-ranking servants who are in charge of rough work.

*104:This statute enacted by Hideyoshi in Tensho 19 covered entire Japan. We know of that because documents remained in the families of feudal lords in various regions of Japan. In the past, historians interpreted this statute as prohibition of trespassing the lines of social caste, such as samurai (warrior), townspeople and peasants, and referred to it as the “social status control edict.” Professor Takagi's study overturned this conventional theory and marked a turning point in the study of the class system in premodern Japan.

*105:The ratio of non-combatants in Japanese armies in this period is much higher than we might imagine.  Professor Takagi illustrated this point using a military mobilization plan of the Maebashi Domain from the early 18th century. According to this plan, the army of Sakai clan, who boasted its Domain’s rice production of 125,000 koku, consisted of a total of approximately 5,880 soldiers and 930 horses. Its breakdown was as follows: 350 mounted warriors, 200 foot warriors, 1,050 infantrymen, 300 household servants, 1,800 vavasours (servants of mounted warriors, etc.), 1,200 coolies, 570 horsemen, and others (craftsmen, doctors, priests, kitchen staff, etc.), plus 360 riding horses and 570 packhorses. As we can see, the total number of warriors and infantrymen, who were the combatants, was only 1,600. However, this list does not include esquires (若党 wakato). They were retainers of individual warriors, and as they were, from the viewpoint of feudal lords,  vavasours (retainers of a retainer), they were included in the “vavasours” part of this list. Professor Takagi estimates that, among the 1,800 vavasours, the number of esquires would have been roughly the same with warriors, but even in that case, the number of combatants would only be a little over 2,000, or about one third of the total.

*106:彼の名前に長柄と入っているところをみると、おそらく架空の人物なのだろう。雑兵物語には例えば他にも矢持ちの矢左衛門と矢右衛門が会話する場面がある。

*107:酒井家の1840年頃の陣立表では、一種類の武器を装備する足軽隊には指揮官と思しき武士一名とその従者、そして小頭一名が置かれている。この事から小頭は現代の軍曹のような叩き上げの現場リーダーだったのではないかと思われるのだが、これは専門的知識のない筆者の想像に過ぎないことを断っておく。

*108:Judging from his name with a nickname “the pikeman” (長柄 pike), he is probably a fictional character. Other than him, for example, in the Story of Common Soldiers, there is a conversational scene between “Arrow-zaemon the arrow bearer” and “Arrow-uemon.”

*109:According to another mobilization plan of the Sakai clan around 1840, each ashigaru unit, with only one type of weapon, included one warrior (who seems to be the commander), the warrior’s servants, and one kogashira. I suspect from this setup that the position of kogashira was a kind of sergeant in modern armies, but it is only my speculation without much evidence.

*110:イエズス会は日本で宣教を行うにあたって、当時日本と交易があったポルトガル商人のネットワークに相乗りすることを選んだ。そのため宣教師にはポルトガル語を話せる者が選ばれ、日本語との翻訳もポルトガル語を通して行われた。

*111:When the Jesuits came to Japan to spread Christianity, they chose to piggyback on the network of Portuguese traders who had trading connections with Japan at the time. For this reason, the headquarters of the Jesuits chose missionaries who could speak Portuguese, and translations into other European languages were made via Portuguese translation.

*112:日葡史料は歴史学者だけではなく日本語学者たちにとっても重要な史料である。同辞書は当時の日本語の発音をアルファベットで記録しているため、中世後期の日本語と現代日本語の発音の違いを検証する極めて貴重な史料になっており、しばしば言及される。

*113:The Vocabvlario da Lingoa de Iapam is an important historical document not only for historians but also for Japanese linguists. This dictionary records the pronunciation of Japanese at the time using the alphabet, and that makes it an extremely valuable historical document for examining the differences in pronunciations between the late Middle Age Japanese and modern Japanese.

*114:中世の自力救済社会にあって農村共同体が自衛のために武装することは常識だった。明智光秀を殺害したのもこのような武装した地元住人であった可能性が高い。豊臣秀吉は天正16年（1588年）に刀狩令を発し、武士以外の階層の武装権を大幅に制限した。

*115:In the Middle Ages, whose legal principe was essentiallly that of self-help, it was just a common sense that even rural peasant communities armed themselves for self-defense. It is highly likely that it was these armed local people who killed Akechi Mitsuhide, by the way. Toyotomi Hideyoshi issued the famous order of “sword banning” in 1588, which almost unconditionally deprived the right to arm oneself for all classes except the warrior class.

*116:かつて日本史学界は戦国時代の足軽の母体が徴兵された百姓だったと考え、この史料がその根拠だと考えてきた。だが徴兵令と思しき史料は少なく、そのどれもが徴兵を非常事態のための緊急的措置だと弁明している。百姓が戦闘員として招集されることは非常に稀だった。武士の軍隊は職能戦士である武士とその奉公人、武士が募兵した傭兵である足軽から組織されていて、通常徴発された百姓は小荷駄隊で陣夫を務めていたに過ぎない。この文書が発給された当時、天下統一に王手をかけた豊臣秀吉の圧倒的な大軍を目前にして、後北条氏は質を問わず兵力をかき集めようとしていた。軍事史に明るく城郭研究で知られる歴史家の西股総生氏は、これらの百姓を徴兵した民兵部隊を後方拠点の守備に用いることで、後北条氏は軍の主力部隊を有効活用できるようになったと説明している。後北条氏はこのようにあらゆる手段を尽くして戦ったが、当主北条氏直は天正18年7月5日（1590年8月4日）小田原城において降伏し、秀吉が天下を統一した。

*117:Academic historians believed, in the past, that common soldiers in the Sengoku period were merely conscripted peasants, and that this historical document is an evidence of that. However, there are only a few historical documents that seem to be conscription orders, and all of them make excuses that they are just an emergency measure, like this one. In reality, recruiting peasants as combatants was very rare. The armies at this period were made up from the following: warriors (bushi), who were professionals of war; their servants; and infantrymen, who were mercenaries the warriors recruited. The conscripted peasants merely served as a part of luggage train. This fact is  consistent with the timing of this conscription order, when the Go-Hojo clan was desperately preparing for the coming war with Toyotomi Hideyoshi, who was within the reach of unification of entire Japan. Nishimata Sosei, a historian well-versed in military history and known for his research into castle architecture, explains that by using these peasant militia to defend the clan's rear bases, the Go-Hojo clan were able to make effective use of their main military force. The Go-Hojo clan fought against Hideyoshi with every means possible, but Hojo Ujinao, the head of the Go-Hojo clan, surrendered at Odawara Castle on July 5th, 1590 (4th of 8th month, Tensho 18). Shortly after that, Hideyoshi unified Japan.