About the "Yasuke" Slave Theory
最終更新：
mitsuko_tada 2024年09月13日(金) 17:13:03履歴
I am summarizing and explaining the misunderstanding that many people seem to have about "Yasuke", a "Black man who served Nobunaga", not only overseas but also in Japan. This is not a detailed explanation, but a rough one. However, the information is highly contaminated, so I sometimes make corrections when I find out that the information is contaminated.
You are free to link to this site as you wish, but please note that the content of the site will change as we add to and revise what we have learned from our research.
The "Yasuke" slave theory
Letter from missionarys
Nationalism
Before and after the Perry Expedition
Acquisition of Jesuit Records
トンデモ考察
You are free to link to this site as you wish, but please note that the content of the site will change as we add to and revise what we have learned from our research.
The "Yasuke" slave theory 
One of the big questions about Yasuke right now is "Was Yasuke a slave?
The general conclusion is that "Yasuke" was not a slave.
There are five reasons for this theory of Yasuke was not slave
(1) Letters from missionaries of the time
(2) European nationalism in the 17th century
(3) Overseas information after Perry's arrival
(4) Mistranslation after the acquisition of Jesuit materials in Japan
(5) Recent arrant discussions
The following is the list.
Also, please remember that "There hasn't been slavery in Japan for a long time". There was a "Houkou (apprenticeship) system" and Nobunaga did some things related to it. For more information on the slave trade in Japan and the rest of the world at that time, please check here.
The general conclusion is that "Yasuke" was not a slave.
There are five reasons for this theory of Yasuke was not slave
(1) Letters from missionaries of the time
(2) European nationalism in the 17th century
(3) Overseas information after Perry's arrival
(4) Mistranslation after the acquisition of Jesuit materials in Japan
(5) Recent arrant discussions
The following is the list.
Also, please remember that "There hasn't been slavery in Japan for a long time". There was a "Houkou (apprenticeship) system" and Nobunaga did some things related to it. For more information on the slave trade in Japan and the rest of the world at that time, please check here.
Letter from missionarys
This is a matter of misunderstanding in several statements.
First of all, there is no mention of "Yasuke was a slave" in the records written by the missionaries at that time.
To say that Yasuke "was not a slave", please also check Place of origin and name of "Yasuke".
Therefore, since there is a baptismal record in Goa, it is not possible to say that Yasuke was a slave.
Sub Contents
First of all, there is no mention of "Yasuke was a slave" in the records written by the missionaries at that time.
To say that Yasuke "was not a slave", please also check Place of origin and name of "Yasuke".
He was an Ethiopian from Goa, India, of East African origin and a devout Christian.This is what the Freudian letters tell us. In the 16th century, Goa was Portuguese territory and Portuguese law was in force. Portuguese law was in force in Goa in the 16th century, and Portuguese law said that if you became a Christian, you could become a free person, even if you were a slave.
Therefore, since there is a baptismal record in Goa, it is not possible to say that Yasuke was a slave.
Sub Contents
In a letter dated 1581-1582 in "Mention of Yasuke", there is a reference to a "Black man from Mozambique".
At that time, Mozambique was a Portuguese colony and a country with many slaves. From this point, the misconception that "blacks in Mozambique = slaves" was spread by European nationalism in the 17th century.
However, by the mid-16th century, "Mozambique" was used to refer not only to the "country of Mozambique", but also to the "broader region of East Africa". Both "Ethiopia" and "Mozambique" are located in East Africa.
For more information, check here.
Sub Contents
At that time, Mozambique was a Portuguese colony and a country with many slaves. From this point, the misconception that "blacks in Mozambique = slaves" was spread by European nationalism in the 17th century.
However, by the mid-16th century, "Mozambique" was used to refer not only to the "country of Mozambique", but also to the "broader region of East Africa". Both "Ethiopia" and "Mozambique" are located in East Africa.
For more information, check here.
Sub Contents
From Valignano's letter of 1585, the word "Cafraria" appears instead of "Moçambique".
This later led to the derogatory term "cafre" for blacks, but "cafre" was not a discriminatory term when it was first used (and the word "cafre" was not used in the letters of the Japanese missionaries of the time). The word "cafre" was also not used in the letters of the Japanese missionaries at that time. The word "Cafraria" began to be used around the end of the 16th century, but the meaning was "Southeast Africa", another word used to refer to a wide range of areas. It was not until the late 17th century that it began to be used in a discriminatory sense.
For more information, check here.
If anything, "Moors" is a more pejorative term used to refer to the Muslims who are spread throughout North Africa, so this is a more pejorative term.
Sub Contents
This later led to the derogatory term "cafre" for blacks, but "cafre" was not a discriminatory term when it was first used (and the word "cafre" was not used in the letters of the Japanese missionaries of the time). The word "cafre" was also not used in the letters of the Japanese missionaries at that time. The word "Cafraria" began to be used around the end of the 16th century, but the meaning was "Southeast Africa", another word used to refer to a wide range of areas. It was not until the late 17th century that it began to be used in a discriminatory sense.
For more information, check here.
If anything, "Moors" is a more pejorative term used to refer to the Muslims who are spread throughout North Africa, so this is a more pejorative term.
Sub Contents
During the 16th century, Ethiopia is also referred to as "Ethiopia" or "Mozambique (East Africa)" and from the end of the 16th century as "Cafralia (Southeast Africa)". In the 17th century, so Ethiopia and Mozambique are firmly separated and described separately.
In Portuguese
In other words, the word "cafre" was used in the Jesuits in the 17th century to refer to the people of Southeast Africa, including Mozambique.
Sub Contents
In Portuguese
▶ "Etiópia" or "Abissínio" to refer to the Ethiopians.came into use.
▶ "Moçambicano" or "Cafre" to refer to the people of Mozambique.
In other words, the word "cafre" was used in the Jesuits in the 17th century to refer to the people of Southeast Africa, including Mozambique.
Sub Contents
You may often hear the explanation that "Valignano brought Yasuke to Japan" (although apparently it was another missionary who brought him to Japan).
This Valignano, when he came to Japan, brought two Asian Indian slaves (although some other missionaries' letters say five) in addition to his bodyguards. Some people seem to have confused this "slaves" part with "Yasuke". For this reason, Ryotaro Shiba and others came up with the "Yasuke Asian Indian" theory.
Sub Contents
This Valignano, when he came to Japan, brought two Asian Indian slaves (although some other missionaries' letters say five) in addition to his bodyguards. Some people seem to have confused this "slaves" part with "Yasuke". For this reason, Ryotaro Shiba and others came up with the "Yasuke Asian Indian" theory.
Sub Contents
In fact, there are records of a very different black man coming to Japan (and a few others).
In 1593, a black man named "João" was baptized in Sakai and received the baptismal name "Paulo". This black man was a slave brought to Japan by the Portuguese merchant Antonio. The missionary Luis says that João was a runaway slave from Goa, India, but we do not know if he was really a runaway slave from India.
Have you ever seen this in the theory of "Yasuke"?
I often see secondary historical documents that seem to confuse this black "João" with "Yasuke" (When I research about Yasuke, I sometimes come across an explanation that "Yasuke was baptized in Japan"). Also, there are Japanese who were baptized in Japan, but some missionaries' letters are written with their baptismal names, so I have found several references that refer to it as "Yasuke" because that is their baptismal name.
Sub Contents
In 1593, a black man named "João" was baptized in Sakai and received the baptismal name "Paulo". This black man was a slave brought to Japan by the Portuguese merchant Antonio. The missionary Luis says that João was a runaway slave from Goa, India, but we do not know if he was really a runaway slave from India.
Have you ever seen this in the theory of "Yasuke"?
▶ "A slave from Asian India"Some of these come from an anecdote about this black man, Joan (although some come from other sources, too).
▶ "Brought by Portuguese traders"
▶ "Baptized in Japan"
I often see secondary historical documents that seem to confuse this black "João" with "Yasuke" (When I research about Yasuke, I sometimes come across an explanation that "Yasuke was baptized in Japan"). Also, there are Japanese who were baptized in Japan, but some missionaries' letters are written with their baptismal names, so I have found several references that refer to it as "Yasuke" because that is their baptismal name.
Sub Contents
Nationalism
Even in the Jesuit records, the first time "Yasuke is a slave" clearly appears is a creation from the "History of the Church of Japan" published in 1630, written in 1626, when researched.
Until then, "Yasuke is a slave" does not appear.
Sub Contents
Until then, "Yasuke is a slave" does not appear.
Sub Contents
At that time, Frois and others wrote letters in two languages.
・One is "Portuguese", sent to the King of Portugal, the Jesuit headquarters, etc.
・The other is "Spanish", sent to the King of Spain, the Vicar General of India, etc.
As far as the volume of the letters is concerned, the Portuguese one is larger.
Do not be surprised if Spanish appears occasionally.
If it is Latin that appears as a "primary source", it is a manuscript or compilation, so it is usually correct to assume that there is a forgery, distortion, or postscript.
Also, Yasuke is written "Negro", "Negro of Ethiopia", "Negro of Mozambique" or "Negro of Cafraria", and the notation of name is "Lacù", "Lasù", or "Lazù" (the Portuguese pronunciation of Yasuke's name. It is difficult for Japanese to pronounce). If you see "Yasuke", "cafre" or "Issacu", it is almost always correct to assume that it is a fake.
Sub Contents
・One is "Portuguese", sent to the King of Portugal, the Jesuit headquarters, etc.
・The other is "Spanish", sent to the King of Spain, the Vicar General of India, etc.
As far as the volume of the letters is concerned, the Portuguese one is larger.
Do not be surprised if Spanish appears occasionally.
If it is Latin that appears as a "primary source", it is a manuscript or compilation, so it is usually correct to assume that there is a forgery, distortion, or postscript.
Also, Yasuke is written "Negro", "Negro of Ethiopia", "Negro of Mozambique" or "Negro of Cafraria", and the notation of name is "Lacù", "Lasù", or "Lazù" (the Portuguese pronunciation of Yasuke's name. It is difficult for Japanese to pronounce). If you see "Yasuke", "cafre" or "Issacu", it is almost always correct to assume that it is a fake.
Sub Contents
The meanings of words change over time, so if you think a translation is strange, research the meaning of the word at the time it was written.
For example, "Moçambique", which I mentioned earlier, was often used to refer to "East Africa" until the mid-16th century. We have to keep in mind that Freud was educated in the first half of the sixteenth century, and that he began to go abroad as a missionary in the 1550s. From the end of 16th century, however, "Mozambique" is used only to refer to "Mozambique" as a country. Mozambique was a Portuguese colony where many people were enslaved, and from there the perception of "Mozambican = slave" became generalized in Europe, including among the Jesuits. Therefore, even though the letter was written in the 16th century, many people do not recognize "Mozambique (Moçambique)" as a region called "East Africa", but as a country called "Mozambique" in the 17th century and later.
Also, the missionary Valignano began to use the word "Cafraria" in 1585. In the 17th century, this also led to "cafre" (a derogatory term for black people), but in the late 16th century, when it was first used, it did not have such a meaning, and the word "Cafraria" refers to "Southeast Africa". The word "cafre" is also used to refer to "Southeast Africans". This also changed to a pejorative meaning in the 17th century.
The word "cafre" itself is not found in the letters of missionaries from Japan at that time.
Recently I heard a theory that Yasuke wrote "cafre" in a letter of Freud, a primary historical source of the Jesuits, but it was written in a book in the late 17th century.
Each missionary's letter must also be read while investigating "the meaning of the word at that time", otherwise the text may be read incorrectly.
Sub Contents
For example, "Moçambique", which I mentioned earlier, was often used to refer to "East Africa" until the mid-16th century. We have to keep in mind that Freud was educated in the first half of the sixteenth century, and that he began to go abroad as a missionary in the 1550s. From the end of 16th century, however, "Mozambique" is used only to refer to "Mozambique" as a country. Mozambique was a Portuguese colony where many people were enslaved, and from there the perception of "Mozambican = slave" became generalized in Europe, including among the Jesuits. Therefore, even though the letter was written in the 16th century, many people do not recognize "Mozambique (Moçambique)" as a region called "East Africa", but as a country called "Mozambique" in the 17th century and later.
Also, the missionary Valignano began to use the word "Cafraria" in 1585. In the 17th century, this also led to "cafre" (a derogatory term for black people), but in the late 16th century, when it was first used, it did not have such a meaning, and the word "Cafraria" refers to "Southeast Africa". The word "cafre" is also used to refer to "Southeast Africans". This also changed to a pejorative meaning in the 17th century.
The word "cafre" itself is not found in the letters of missionaries from Japan at that time.
Recently I heard a theory that Yasuke wrote "cafre" in a letter of Freud, a primary historical source of the Jesuits, but it was written in a book in the late 17th century.
Each missionary's letter must also be read while investigating "the meaning of the word at that time", otherwise the text may be read incorrectly.
Sub Contents
In Japan, the barbaric acts of Portuguese merchants (there are several incidents of Japanese people being taken away to be traded as slaves, and the "Batenren ki (Batenren are religious who were raised to the priesthood, priests. In turn, Christian or Christianity)" describes an incident around 1590 in which local samurai tried to recover people taken away by Portuguese merchants in a port in Kyushu). In the "Chronicle of the Batenren", there are also reports of Japanese being sold as slaves and the miserable conditions of Chinese slaves, and criticized Portuguese slavery, saw the miserable conditions of those being sold as slaves and Hideyoshi issued an edict banning the Bantenren. Earlier, it is confirmed that he directly informed the Portuguese and Spanish kings about the prohibition of the slave trade and asked the Jesuits for their cooperation in this regard.
Originally, Nobunaga allowed missionary work in Japan, but denied any political involvement or slave trade.
The Daimyo of Kyushu also engaged in overseas trade, and it is clearly written that they "hired him as a vassal" to serve as an interpreter for them. It is only "hired as a person", and there are no such rumors as "kept as a slave.
For more information, there is an article here.
However, the Jesuits at that time were deeply involved in slavery and the slave trade, and in Brazil and other countries, the Jesuits ran plantations and used slaves directly. Although there were some who opposed slavery and the slave trade, they generally agreed with it and left many statements justifying it.
This may be one of the reasons why some letters from this period have been rewritten to criticize Japan.
The 1583 edition of the April 11 Japan Correspondence (1581) contains this statement.
In the original, it seems that he was quite kind and guided a black man who did not know Japan.
The description in the 1583 manuscript would fit perfectly if the translator had intended to "show the Japanese as barbarians".
Moreover, in 1598, the description changes to one in which traces of the original text are missing.
This is strange because the letter of the missionary who was in Japan is a report with information about Japan, addressed to Portugal, Spain, and the head of the diocese of Asian India. Therefore, it is more of a letter to fellow countrymen from fellow countrymen. Let us quely that most of these documents, which are exaggerated to glorify Christianity, are fictional texts invented in later times.
This is a change in the description of the letter, but given the changes in Japan and in the world, it may help to understand why it was done this way.
For more information, please read the topic of Slavery Issues at the Time of "Yasuke".
The missionaries who came to Japan at that time also complained to the Jesuits about the brutality of the Japanese slave trade by Portuguese merchants.
Not a few Jesuits in the 1600s were involved in the slave trade and slavery, and some Jesuits in Brazil used slaves on Jesuit-run farms and made statements justifying slavery. Of course, some Christians criticized the slave trade as an immoral practice, but this is a small minority of the total.
For example, Luis Frois, who is also mentioned in the Chronicle of the Bateren, wrote a letter arguing that the slave trade was an act contrary to God's teachings (it seems that Frois was a man who was very little racist. It is because I learned that he was such a person that I noticed that the word "cafre" in Frois's letter was strange, and I also noticed that "servant" had been changed to "slave" in the translation of the Portuguese original into Latin).
The missionaries drew criticism when they reported to Europe about the slave trade of Portuguese merchants in Japan. These reports had a certain effect on changing attitudes toward slavery in Europe. It can be said that "Japan clearly stated its negative position on slavery", which was getting worse in the world, and influenced the world to reform its attitude toward slavery. Although Jesuit involvement in slavery remained controversial, and the Jesuit chancellor declared the abolition of slavery in 1591, Jesuit involvement in slavery continued into the 19th century.
Conversely, if we look at the period after that, there are more and more descriptions of Japan that are damning, perhaps because of its opposition to the anti-slavery movement by Japan.
It's similar to today, isn't it?
Sub Contents
Originally, Nobunaga allowed missionary work in Japan, but denied any political involvement or slave trade.
The Daimyo of Kyushu also engaged in overseas trade, and it is clearly written that they "hired him as a vassal" to serve as an interpreter for them. It is only "hired as a person", and there are no such rumors as "kept as a slave.
For more information, there is an article here.
However, the Jesuits at that time were deeply involved in slavery and the slave trade, and in Brazil and other countries, the Jesuits ran plantations and used slaves directly. Although there were some who opposed slavery and the slave trade, they generally agreed with it and left many statements justifying it.
This may be one of the reasons why some letters from this period have been rewritten to criticize Japan.
The 1583 edition of the April 11 Japan Correspondence (1581) contains this statement.
【Original】But in the original, which is the 1581 edition on which this is based,
"E por ser negro, o agarraram, e o mostraram por toda a cidade, como se fosse algum monstro."
【English translation】
"And because he was black, the people around him caught him and took him around the citylike some kind of monster."
【Original】The description (and translation) has changed considerably, albeit by a small margin.
"E por ser negro, o agarraram, e o mostraram por toda a cidade."
【English translation】
"And because he was black, the people around him took him around and showed him the city."
In the original, it seems that he was quite kind and guided a black man who did not know Japan.
The description in the 1583 manuscript would fit perfectly if the translator had intended to "show the Japanese as barbarians".
Moreover, in 1598, the description changes to one in which traces of the original text are missing.
【Original】The description changes to portray Japan as more foolish and barbaric, and an excessive amount of descriptions praising Christianity are added.
"Ce anno in Meaco aduenit quidam negro ex India, quem Dux Nobunaga adduxerat, ut ostenderet populo suo, & homines ex ipso caperent admirari, & Deum laudare, qui creavit homines tam diuersorum colorum. Et quia erat res noua & insolita, multos homines ad se attraxit, & nonnulli lapides in eum iactabant, & cum alijs pugnabant, adeo vt quidam grauius laesi fuerint. Dux Nobunaga, vt hominem a tantis molestijs liberaret, & simul vt fidem Christianam commendaret, eum in suam familiam recepit, & ei stipendium & habitationem assignauit. Hic homo, vt postea cognitum est, Christianus erat, & a quodam Rege in India missus fuerat, vt in Iaponia fidem Christianam propagaret. Sed quia nihil scire videbatur de rebus fidei, & Portugallenses eum non admiserant ad societatem nostram, Dux Nobunaga eum ad nos misit, vt eum instrueremus in rebus fidei. Nos vero, cum eum vidissemus, & cognouissemus nihil scire de rebus fidei, nec velle Christianum fieri, cum licentia Ducis Nobunaga, eum remisimus ad Regem, qui eum miserat."
【English translation】
"In that year, a black man came to Kyoto from India. He was brought by Oda-dono, who wanted the people to see him and praise the greatness of God. The negroes attracted the attention of the people, some of whom threw stones at them and fought among themselves. Some of them were seriously injured. In order to save the Negro from such suffering and at the same time promote Christianity, Oda-dono took him in as a retainer and gave him a stipend and a place to live. This negro, it was later learned, was a Christian who had been sent to Japan by an Indian king. But he seemed to know nothing of the faith, and the Portuguese did not accept him as one of their own, so Oda-dono sent him to us and asked us to teach him the faith. But when we met the negro and learned that he not only knew nothing about the faith but also did not wish to become a Christian, we sent him, with Oda-dono's permission, to the king who had sent him away."
This is strange because the letter of the missionary who was in Japan is a report with information about Japan, addressed to Portugal, Spain, and the head of the diocese of Asian India. Therefore, it is more of a letter to fellow countrymen from fellow countrymen. Let us quely that most of these documents, which are exaggerated to glorify Christianity, are fictional texts invented in later times.
This is a change in the description of the letter, but given the changes in Japan and in the world, it may help to understand why it was done this way.
For more information, please read the topic of Slavery Issues at the Time of "Yasuke".
The missionaries who came to Japan at that time also complained to the Jesuits about the brutality of the Japanese slave trade by Portuguese merchants.
Not a few Jesuits in the 1600s were involved in the slave trade and slavery, and some Jesuits in Brazil used slaves on Jesuit-run farms and made statements justifying slavery. Of course, some Christians criticized the slave trade as an immoral practice, but this is a small minority of the total.
For example, Luis Frois, who is also mentioned in the Chronicle of the Bateren, wrote a letter arguing that the slave trade was an act contrary to God's teachings (it seems that Frois was a man who was very little racist. It is because I learned that he was such a person that I noticed that the word "cafre" in Frois's letter was strange, and I also noticed that "servant" had been changed to "slave" in the translation of the Portuguese original into Latin).
The missionaries drew criticism when they reported to Europe about the slave trade of Portuguese merchants in Japan. These reports had a certain effect on changing attitudes toward slavery in Europe. It can be said that "Japan clearly stated its negative position on slavery", which was getting worse in the world, and influenced the world to reform its attitude toward slavery. Although Jesuit involvement in slavery remained controversial, and the Jesuit chancellor declared the abolition of slavery in 1591, Jesuit involvement in slavery continued into the 19th century.
Conversely, if we look at the period after that, there are more and more descriptions of Japan that are damning, perhaps because of its opposition to the anti-slavery movement by Japan.
It's similar to today, isn't it?
Sub Contents
The first time it is explicitly said that "Yasuke is a slave" is probably from the "History of the Western Church in Japan" written in 1626 and published in 1630. This book was written in Macau by a missionary named João. This missionary, João, was said to have been captured by the Nagasaki Magistrate's Office in 1610 and severely interrogated (tortured), but he did not give up his faith... But the "captured by the Nagasaki Magistrate's Office" is a record that the Nagasaki Magistrate's Office has no record of, nor can they find any petitions from the missionaries.
There is another theory that he left Japan in 1610, in addition to the one that he left Japan in 1611.
It seems that he had quite a grudge against Japan because of the banishment of the Bantenren and the Christian Banishment Ordinance.
Another source that is not a primary source is the "History of Japan" (also known as "History of Japan by Frois"), which is a compilation of Frois' letters translated into Latin. These are,
As for the contents of this book, as mentioned in the anecdotes of "Yasuke", it was considerably falsified and added to as the edition progressed.
However, this edition has been translated and circulated in various languages.
There are also many fales changes in meaning due to translation.
The Portuguese word "serviu" is translated as "servus" in Latin. This "servus" can be translated as "slave" in Old Latin, but the translation "slave" is used in this translation of the History of Japan. Note that the word "Ethiopia" is omitted, and "Mozambique" is translated in other languages as "Mozambican slaves" instead of "East Africa" (as can be seen in several Japanese editions).
Such "Yasuke slave theory" and "misunderstanding of the Japanese Warring States period" are spread by falsifications and additions during the creation, revision, and translation of the part of the book that was created. In Europe, "Yasuke is a slave" has been widely spread since about 1670.
In Japan, however, the "Yasuke is a slave" theory emerged much later, in the late 18th century. It was only after Perry's arrival in Japan that Japan actively traveled overseas to learn more about the world. The result was the "colonial system", and Japan became the first country in the world to raise its voice against the colonial system.
This is the idea of "Heaven does not create one person above another or one person below another" (Words of famous Japanese figures).
Sub Contents
There is another theory that he left Japan in 1610, in addition to the one that he left Japan in 1611.
It seems that he had quite a grudge against Japan because of the banishment of the Bantenren and the Christian Banishment Ordinance.
Another source that is not a primary source is the "History of Japan" (also known as "History of Japan by Frois"), which is a compilation of Frois' letters translated into Latin. These are,
Part I: compiled 1598-1603, published 1615 in Lisbon: written 1585-1592This is the organization of the book. Note that the description of this compilation records, not the original, is the one that often appears in searches.
. Part II: compiled in 1615, published in Lisbon in 1624, written between 1593 and 1598.
Part III: Compiled in 1626, published in Lisbon in 1636, written between 1598 and 1602.
As for the contents of this book, as mentioned in the anecdotes of "Yasuke", it was considerably falsified and added to as the edition progressed.
However, this edition has been translated and circulated in various languages.
There are also many fales changes in meaning due to translation.
The Portuguese word "serviu" is translated as "servus" in Latin. This "servus" can be translated as "slave" in Old Latin, but the translation "slave" is used in this translation of the History of Japan. Note that the word "Ethiopia" is omitted, and "Mozambique" is translated in other languages as "Mozambican slaves" instead of "East Africa" (as can be seen in several Japanese editions).
Such "Yasuke slave theory" and "misunderstanding of the Japanese Warring States period" are spread by falsifications and additions during the creation, revision, and translation of the part of the book that was created. In Europe, "Yasuke is a slave" has been widely spread since about 1670.
In Japan, however, the "Yasuke is a slave" theory emerged much later, in the late 18th century. It was only after Perry's arrival in Japan that Japan actively traveled overseas to learn more about the world. The result was the "colonial system", and Japan became the first country in the world to raise its voice against the colonial system.
This is the idea of "Heaven does not create one person above another or one person below another" (Words of famous Japanese figures).
Sub Contents
Before and after the Perry Expedition
Things were a little different before Perry Expedition and after Perry Expedition.
Sub Contents
Sub Contents
The Before Perry Expedition, few people in Japan had seen "Black man".
Especially from the middle to late Edo period, people did not understand "Black man" and thought of them only as "foreigners". Even "Yasuke Who Served Nobunaga", a white man, was read and performed without Black elements. In the Kabuki play "Nobunagaki" and other works, he was created as an 18-year-old colored youth or as a woman, a freedom common in today's Japanese subculture.
However, in "Shincyou Koki" and "Ietada Nikki" there are references to "black as an ox".
And "slave" was something that very few people in Japan at that time knew a little about foreign countries, and very few people could understand.
This is because what we have in Japan is a "apprenticeship system", not "slavery".
Sub Contents
Especially from the middle to late Edo period, people did not understand "Black man" and thought of them only as "foreigners". Even "Yasuke Who Served Nobunaga", a white man, was read and performed without Black elements. In the Kabuki play "Nobunagaki" and other works, he was created as an 18-year-old colored youth or as a woman, a freedom common in today's Japanese subculture.
However, in "Shincyou Koki" and "Ietada Nikki" there are references to "black as an ox".
And "slave" was something that very few people in Japan at that time knew a little about foreign countries, and very few people could understand.
This is because what we have in Japan is a "apprenticeship system", not "slavery".
Sub Contents
However, after the Perry Expedition in 1853, overseas ships began to appear outside Nagasaki's Dejima, and stories of "black slaves" were passed on among them.
In 1855, the word "black slave" first appeared in reading materials in fictional story to Yasuke.
However, there were many people who felt antipathy toward "slavery", which treated human beings as objects and property, because it was unfamiliar in Japan.
Sub Contents
In 1855, the word "black slave" first appeared in reading materials in fictional story to Yasuke.
However, there were many people who felt antipathy toward "slavery", which treated human beings as objects and property, because it was unfamiliar in Japan.
▶ Tesshu Yamaoka's "Historical Discourse" in 1886: Yasuke is described as "Nobunaga's slave.It was only after the Perry Expedition in Japan that it became that "Yasuke was a slave". In Europe, the "Yasuke slave theory" has been around for almost 400 years, but in Japan it is a fairly new theory that has only been around for 140 to 150 years.
▶ Hisasada Muraoka's "Negro Yasuke" in 1888: A novel featuring Yasuke. Yasuke is brought to Japan as a slave to serve Nobunaga.
▶ In Otojiro Kawakami's "Yasuke", performed in 1912 or shortly before, Yasuke was a slave. There was much criticism of this in Japan.
Sub Contents
Acquisition of Jesuit Records
In 1939, Tokyo Imperial University received the Jesuit records on microfilm. The microfilmed records are translated into Japanese in an old translation book.
This microfilm was donated and is now in the National Diet Library.
There are quite a few parts of these Jesuit records that were mistranslated when they were translated into Japanese.
The translation is an old one, and it is influenced by the edition of the book it is based on, as well as books translated into other languages that were used as references. For example, "Annual Report of Japan, 1581" cannot be used as a primary source to confirm historical facts unless the edition of the book is also checked and used. Also, if the book is a translation, it is necessary to check the source of the translation and what edition it is from.
Sub Contents
This microfilm was donated and is now in the National Diet Library.
There are quite a few parts of these Jesuit records that were mistranslated when they were translated into Japanese.
The translation is an old one, and it is influenced by the edition of the book it is based on, as well as books translated into other languages that were used as references. For example, "Annual Report of Japan, 1581" cannot be used as a primary source to confirm historical facts unless the edition of the book is also checked and used. Also, if the book is a translation, it is necessary to check the source of the translation and what edition it is from.
Sub Contents
For example, in the 1582 Jesuit Yearbook of Japan
However, there is no mention of this in the original text.
The original text is able to explained as follows.
This mistranslation of "offer" in the Japanese translation book applies to the 1939 translation as well as the 1977 translation, but in fact the "Yasuke slave theory" did not appear widely until after these were known. By the way, the 1999 translation translates it as "introduced".
By the way, in the Jesuit Yearbook of Japan, the original text is written as "da Ethiopia (from Ethiopia)".
The other mention is on October 15, 1581 in "the Japanese.Correspondence".
Sub Contents
"hum lacù da Ethiopia, que o anno passado o Padre Visitador trouxe ao Xogum, & o fez Christao."The original text is often translated as
"Yasuke, a black man from Ethiopia, who was presented to Nobunaga and made a Christian."This "presented" has given rise to the theory that he was a slave.
However, there is no mention of this in the original text.
The original text is able to explained as follows.
▶ The subject of the letter is "hum lacù da Ethiopia" i.e., "Ethiopian yasuke".So, the translation would be...
▶ "que o anno passado" is "last year," which refers to events that took place in 1581, since this is a 1582 letter.
▶ "o Padre Visitador" means "the priest who visited".
▶ "trouxe" is a verb meaning "to bring" or "to show", not "to offer" (for "to offer", "presente" is used; for "to give", "dar" is used). So, it would be more correct to translate this as "have an audience (that mean's to meet a noble or superior)" or "introduced".
▶ "& o fez Christao" can be translated as "became a Christian", so "hum lacù da Ethiopia & o fez Christao" means "Ethiopians who became Christians" (check here for the background).
"hum lacù da Ethiopia, que o anno passado o Padre Visitador trouxe ao Xogum, & o fez Christao."(The phrase "Yasuke is an Ethiopian" is found in several texts by missionaries Froiss and Valignano).
"Yasuke, an Ethiopian, a Christian, whom the visiting priest introduced to the general (Nobunaga) last year."
This mistranslation of "offer" in the Japanese translation book applies to the 1939 translation as well as the 1977 translation, but in fact the "Yasuke slave theory" did not appear widely until after these were known. By the way, the 1999 translation translates it as "introduced".
By the way, in the Jesuit Yearbook of Japan, the original text is written as "da Ethiopia (from Ethiopia)".
The other mention is on October 15, 1581 in "the Japanese.Correspondence".
"hum negro que o Padre Valignano trouxe consigo da India, chamado Lasù, o qual o Xogum tanto estimou."However, the Portuguese original does not contain the word "presented" and the word "slave". If you read the original text correctly, the translation would be something like this.
"Father Varignano presented a black slave named Yasuke, brought from India, and the general (Nobunaga) was very pleased."
"hum negro que o Padre Valignano trouxe consigo da India, chamado Lasù, o qual o Xogum tanto estimou."There are other sources of misunderstanding in the text of this letter. See here for details.
"The general (Nobunaga) thought very highly of a black man named Yasuke from India who accompanied Father Valignano."
Sub Contents
This is also a mistranslation.
The word "serviu" is originally translated as "servant". I have already told you how to translate "Moçambique".
The correct translation of this phrase is,
If it were a "vassal",
If he was a "slave",
Upon further research, it appears that the word "slave" was translated from the 17th century Latin translation as it was further translated into French, English, Italian, and other languages.
The Latin is a tricky one, as the Portuguese word "serviu" is translated as "servus" in Latin. The word "servus" is translated as "servant" un Latin, but as "slave" in Old Latin. This is how "serviu" is translated as "slave" in other translations of the book after Latin transratuin book. This is explained in detail here.
Sub Contents
"Um serviu negro de Moçambique chamado Lacù que serviu Xogum"The translation of the description is,
"A black slave named Yasuke from Mozambique who served the shogun (Nobunaga)."However, This "serviu" is a "servant", but it is not a "slave".
The word "serviu" is originally translated as "servant". I have already told you how to translate "Moçambique".
The correct translation of this phrase is,
"A black servant named Yasuke from East Africa who served the shogun (Nobunaga)."The correct translation of this sentence is this sentence.
If it were a "vassal",
"Um vassalo negro de Moçambique chamado Lacù que serviu Xogum".If it were written in Portuguese, it would wride.
If he was a "slave",
"Um escravo negro de Moçambique chamado Lacù que serviu Xogum".If it were written in Portuguese, it would wride.
Upon further research, it appears that the word "slave" was translated from the 17th century Latin translation as it was further translated into French, English, Italian, and other languages.
The Latin is a tricky one, as the Portuguese word "serviu" is translated as "servus" in Latin. The word "servus" is translated as "servant" un Latin, but as "slave" in Old Latin. This is how "serviu" is translated as "slave" in other translations of the book after Latin transratuin book. This is explained in detail here.
Sub Contents
イエズス会から入手したマイクロフィルムは、一次史料に使える書簡だけではありません（そして翻訳自体は一次資料だけが大事だというわけではありません。あくまで「戦国時代の史実」を調査するための一次史料になるかが、今のこの弥助問題で大事になるのだけです。別の時代で写本や編纂された版も、原本との違いから「当時の認識」や「世論」を知る為の立派な一次史料になります）。
よく知られているのですと『日本年次報告』や『日本通信』ですが、これ自体も写本が存在します。例えば1581年の物は、1583年や1598年にも製作されており、比較すると原文には無かった文章が追加されているものも多いです。それ以外にも17世紀に製作されたり編纂された本である『日本史』『日本教会史』『日本西教史』『日本戦国史』などがありますし、さらにはそれらをラテン語に翻訳されたもの、はそれを様々に言語に翻訳された版などもあります。
既に書いてありますが、17世沖からは黒人を差別的に扱うナショナリズムなども拡大されます。
「negro」は、差別的な意味の「cafre」と書き換えられていたり、エチオピア人という記載が消え「モザンビークの奴隷」という表記が増えます。それを翻訳や、原本でもそんな編纂本・翻訳本を参考にされて訳されている物もあります。基本的に、「弥助の史実」について調査する場合は、イエズス会の史料は1598年以降の版や、それを元にした翻訳本は利用しない、とした方がいいかと思います。
勿論ですが、写本や編纂本と原書の違いや、版毎の違いなどを比較する事により、当時の「当時の認識」や「世論」を知る為であれば、それらの資料も一次資料として使えます。
何を目的にその資料を使うか、です。
日本ではこの1939年以降は、弥助は奴隷説が広まり、『イエズス会の記録』だけでなく『信長公記研究本』でも「弥助奴隷説」が一般として広がります。
Sub Contents
よく知られているのですと『日本年次報告』や『日本通信』ですが、これ自体も写本が存在します。例えば1581年の物は、1583年や1598年にも製作されており、比較すると原文には無かった文章が追加されているものも多いです。それ以外にも17世紀に製作されたり編纂された本である『日本史』『日本教会史』『日本西教史』『日本戦国史』などがありますし、さらにはそれらをラテン語に翻訳されたもの、はそれを様々に言語に翻訳された版などもあります。
既に書いてありますが、17世沖からは黒人を差別的に扱うナショナリズムなども拡大されます。
「negro」は、差別的な意味の「cafre」と書き換えられていたり、エチオピア人という記載が消え「モザンビークの奴隷」という表記が増えます。それを翻訳や、原本でもそんな編纂本・翻訳本を参考にされて訳されている物もあります。基本的に、「弥助の史実」について調査する場合は、イエズス会の史料は1598年以降の版や、それを元にした翻訳本は利用しない、とした方がいいかと思います。
勿論ですが、写本や編纂本と原書の違いや、版毎の違いなどを比較する事により、当時の「当時の認識」や「世論」を知る為であれば、それらの資料も一次資料として使えます。
何を目的にその資料を使うか、です。
日本ではこの1939年以降は、弥助は奴隷説が広まり、『イエズス会の記録』だけでなく『信長公記研究本』でも「弥助奴隷説」が一般として広がります。
Sub Contents
トンデモ考察
ロックリーの本なんかもこれに入りますが、ノンフィクションとは言えない、フィクション内容ですね。
『信長公記』に関する研究本も色々ありますが、その中身も色々あります。
まず、『信長公記』に関しては、何の版を主として、何と比較してその説を出してきたかをはっきりさせないといけませんね。
それらの研究本では『弥助奴隷説』『弥助刀持ち（小姓）説』『弥助物持ち説』など色々出ており、弥助の人種も『アフリカ人説』だけでなく『インド人説』や『中東人説』など、様々にありますね。その中に『弥助サムライ説』もあります。
司馬遼太郎の研究本がなかなかいつも通りの司馬節なのでよく覚えているのですが、「弥助はインド人奴隷で、インドの僧の息子」「弥助は槍の名手」とあります。まぁ、これは「ヴァリニャーノがインド人奴隷を連れていた」というのと、「（元は弥六と書かれていたが版で書き換えられ）弥助が槍の名手」という本を参考にしたのは、色々調べていく中で分かりましたが。
Sub Contents
『信長公記』に関する研究本も色々ありますが、その中身も色々あります。
まず、『信長公記』に関しては、何の版を主として、何と比較してその説を出してきたかをはっきりさせないといけませんね。
それらの研究本では『弥助奴隷説』『弥助刀持ち（小姓）説』『弥助物持ち説』など色々出ており、弥助の人種も『アフリカ人説』だけでなく『インド人説』や『中東人説』など、様々にありますね。その中に『弥助サムライ説』もあります。
司馬遼太郎の研究本がなかなかいつも通りの司馬節なのでよく覚えているのですが、「弥助はインド人奴隷で、インドの僧の息子」「弥助は槍の名手」とあります。まぁ、これは「ヴァリニャーノがインド人奴隷を連れていた」というのと、「（元は弥六と書かれていたが版で書き換えられ）弥助が槍の名手」という本を参考にしたのは、色々調べていく中で分かりましたが。
Sub Contents
とんでもない事を書かれているのが幾つもありますね。
先ほども出ている、原書の誤訳をそのまま載せているというのは、そういう訳は実際にあるので構いませんが。
中には、前半だけは原本の原文のものですが、後半は創作の文章のものがあったり。
そもそもが全部が創作された文章のものもありました。
他にも、ソースとされている物が17世紀に製作されている本であったりしますし、ラテン語のものもありましたね。
16世紀後期の書き方をしていないものを典拠としてあるところも多く、まぁ、間違いですので利用する時は要確認です。
他にも、日本の研究本を海外で訳されたものをソースとしていたものもありますね。
調べていくと、考察の典拠は海外で翻訳された日本の研究本で、その研究本は1977年に出版されたイエズス会にある文章の研究本であり、そのイエズス会にある文章が1770年代にイエズス会で編纂されたラテン語のものであり、その編纂本自体が原本と記載が違う。というものまでありますね。
――途中でどれだけ意訳や誤字・誤変換や意図的な文字変更、追記などがあったのでしょうかね？
Sub Contents
先ほども出ている、原書の誤訳をそのまま載せているというのは、そういう訳は実際にあるので構いませんが。
中には、前半だけは原本の原文のものですが、後半は創作の文章のものがあったり。
そもそもが全部が創作された文章のものもありました。
他にも、ソースとされている物が17世紀に製作されている本であったりしますし、ラテン語のものもありましたね。
16世紀後期の書き方をしていないものを典拠としてあるところも多く、まぁ、間違いですので利用する時は要確認です。
他にも、日本の研究本を海外で訳されたものをソースとしていたものもありますね。
調べていくと、考察の典拠は海外で翻訳された日本の研究本で、その研究本は1977年に出版されたイエズス会にある文章の研究本であり、そのイエズス会にある文章が1770年代にイエズス会で編纂されたラテン語のものであり、その編纂本自体が原本と記載が違う。というものまでありますね。
――途中でどれだけ意訳や誤字・誤変換や意図的な文字変更、追記などがあったのでしょうかね？
Sub Contents
日本の史料でもそうですが、イエズス会の資料もそれが何版でどうやって書かれたものかまで追求していく必要があります。
日本の文献も海外の文献も情報汚染が激しいので。
ラテン語で出てくる、イエズス会やキリスト教を賛美する様な記載になってる、というのは疑うポイントです。
また、1581年の書簡だと、それが写本された1583年版の内容だと記載が増えていたりします。1598年版以降は、かなり内容が膨らまされている物が多いです。ですので、しつこいほど原本を探す方がいいです（1581年の1581年版は、全部がある訳でないので探しても出てこない事があります。その場合は、1583年版を少し疑いつつ内容を読む事になります）。また、何年版から増えているかというのを探したり比較していくと、それが後で追加された物かどうかが分かります。
特に、17世紀に入ってから複数の宣教師により編纂されたもの、ラテン語訳されたものは、大抵、装飾や追記がされている『二次創作本と言われても仕方がない内容』が入ってきています（これは日本の資料も同じですが）ので、必ず、原本の原文や、原本の原文に近い年代のものまで探し出し調査する必要があります。また、版毎の比較調査をして追加されている部分を明らかにし、それが創作された内容なのかどうかを、それとも新規の文献が見つかり加わった物なのか、そのような事をしながら創作部分をそぎ落としていく事が必要になります。
例えば、またイエズス会の『日本教会史』や『日本史（通称フロイス日本史）』『日本西教史』『日本戦国史』などは、17世紀になって書かれたり、編纂されたり、翻案されたり、それ以降の版で改定しているものは基本的に『全て二次資料』です。よく出てくるもので村上氏の日本語訳など『日本語翻訳本から』の内容も出して来る人もいますが、それはやはり『全て二次資料』でしかありません。
よく、日本語訳のそれらの本では『フロイス著』となっていますが、実際はどの著を翻訳したものなのかまで調べると、フロイスが書いた著を翻訳したものではなく、フロイスの書簡を基にはしていますが他の人物たちが作った書籍の、版案がすすんだ書籍の翻訳本、と史料としてはかなり離れた位置にある書籍だと思えばいいものを利用している人も多いです。言うなれば……『フロイスが書いた書簡、それが後世になり別の人物が編纂や写本や翻案されたり改定されたで、追記や改竄、創作などの内容を含んで製作された書籍を基に自身の考えも入れて作った書籍、それを日本語訳した書籍』を「一次史料だ」として出している、という事とあまり変わらないですよね。
これ、話題の某イギリス人の書いた「信長と弥助」の書籍の事でもありますが、日本で発刊されている翻訳本の事でもあります。
また、これは日本の史料でも同じです。
一次史料としてよく出される『信長公記』ですが、これも原本は分からず、その写本や活字本の版が70版以上あります。その中には、古い原書に近い版だと20世紀では言われていた（中には太田牛一の自筆本と言われていた）版も幾つかありますが、最近の科学的分析により17世紀後半〜19世紀初頭の版だと判明してきている版もあります。版を重ねているので、追記や改竄となっている部分も様々にありますので、自分で様々な版を比較したり、最近の研究論文を確認して、どの版のどの部分が、戦国時代の一次史料として使える部分であるかを探し出す必要があります。
また、太田牛一も伝聞で書いている部分も多いです。『家忠日記』も同様ですので、出来るだけ古い原書に近い版や、古いその他の書物などを比較しながら確認する必要があります。
「研究本」「現代語訳本」はありますが、それの元になる『原本』がどのような版で何年に製作された版か、その時代の他の版やもっと古い版ではどう書かれているかも確認する必要があります。
これらをよく勘違いして『一次史料を確認した』と出している人がいますが、それらは二次史料や場合によっては創作内容でしかない為、記載情報には注意して扱われているか（他の版と比較するなどをきちんとしているかなど、チェックされているかなど）に注意して、情報を利用しましょう。
Sub Contents
日本の文献も海外の文献も情報汚染が激しいので。
ラテン語で出てくる、イエズス会やキリスト教を賛美する様な記載になってる、というのは疑うポイントです。
また、1581年の書簡だと、それが写本された1583年版の内容だと記載が増えていたりします。1598年版以降は、かなり内容が膨らまされている物が多いです。ですので、しつこいほど原本を探す方がいいです（1581年の1581年版は、全部がある訳でないので探しても出てこない事があります。その場合は、1583年版を少し疑いつつ内容を読む事になります）。また、何年版から増えているかというのを探したり比較していくと、それが後で追加された物かどうかが分かります。
特に、17世紀に入ってから複数の宣教師により編纂されたもの、ラテン語訳されたものは、大抵、装飾や追記がされている『二次創作本と言われても仕方がない内容』が入ってきています（これは日本の資料も同じですが）ので、必ず、原本の原文や、原本の原文に近い年代のものまで探し出し調査する必要があります。また、版毎の比較調査をして追加されている部分を明らかにし、それが創作された内容なのかどうかを、それとも新規の文献が見つかり加わった物なのか、そのような事をしながら創作部分をそぎ落としていく事が必要になります。
例えば、またイエズス会の『日本教会史』や『日本史（通称フロイス日本史）』『日本西教史』『日本戦国史』などは、17世紀になって書かれたり、編纂されたり、翻案されたり、それ以降の版で改定しているものは基本的に『全て二次資料』です。よく出てくるもので村上氏の日本語訳など『日本語翻訳本から』の内容も出して来る人もいますが、それはやはり『全て二次資料』でしかありません。
よく、日本語訳のそれらの本では『フロイス著』となっていますが、実際はどの著を翻訳したものなのかまで調べると、フロイスが書いた著を翻訳したものではなく、フロイスの書簡を基にはしていますが他の人物たちが作った書籍の、版案がすすんだ書籍の翻訳本、と史料としてはかなり離れた位置にある書籍だと思えばいいものを利用している人も多いです。言うなれば……『フロイスが書いた書簡、それが後世になり別の人物が編纂や写本や翻案されたり改定されたで、追記や改竄、創作などの内容を含んで製作された書籍を基に自身の考えも入れて作った書籍、それを日本語訳した書籍』を「一次史料だ」として出している、という事とあまり変わらないですよね。
これ、話題の某イギリス人の書いた「信長と弥助」の書籍の事でもありますが、日本で発刊されている翻訳本の事でもあります。
また、これは日本の史料でも同じです。
一次史料としてよく出される『信長公記』ですが、これも原本は分からず、その写本や活字本の版が70版以上あります。その中には、古い原書に近い版だと20世紀では言われていた（中には太田牛一の自筆本と言われていた）版も幾つかありますが、最近の科学的分析により17世紀後半〜19世紀初頭の版だと判明してきている版もあります。版を重ねているので、追記や改竄となっている部分も様々にありますので、自分で様々な版を比較したり、最近の研究論文を確認して、どの版のどの部分が、戦国時代の一次史料として使える部分であるかを探し出す必要があります。
また、太田牛一も伝聞で書いている部分も多いです。『家忠日記』も同様ですので、出来るだけ古い原書に近い版や、古いその他の書物などを比較しながら確認する必要があります。
「研究本」「現代語訳本」はありますが、それの元になる『原本』がどのような版で何年に製作された版か、その時代の他の版やもっと古い版ではどう書かれているかも確認する必要があります。
これらをよく勘違いして『一次史料を確認した』と出している人がいますが、それらは二次史料や場合によっては創作内容でしかない為、記載情報には注意して扱われているか（他の版と比較するなどをきちんとしているかなど、チェックされているかなど）に注意して、情報を利用しましょう。
Sub Contents
私も分からない時は利用したり、原文をメモを忘れた時には何処だったかを探すのに利用する時もあります。
ただ、その際も6〜7のAIを並行して利用し、さらに頻繁にページを更新して更地にした上で「本当に戦国時代の一次史料となる原本の原文にあるか」をしつこいほど確認しながら利用します（そうしないと、AIは前の回答に固執し続け嘘を言い続ける事がありますので）。私の場合は、調教しすぎて軽く噂話を調査したいので気軽に使っても、まず公的文書を探しに行くというAIになってしまいましたが……。
また、AIが出してきた回答は、自身できちんと再確認の調査をしましょう。かなりの確率で、間違っています。
で、最近でも「イエズス会の記録で、弥助が信長に紹介された時の原文」を探し直すのに使うと、とんでもない回答が出てきました。
ルイス・フロイス『日本通信』の『1581年（天正9年）に書かれた書簡で、弥助が信長に初めて謁見した様子を詳細に記述』というAI回答で
私も散々に原書の原文を読んできましたが、こんな文章を見た事がありません。
というので、明らかに間違いと分かる部分（文章全体だけではなく、単語単位でもイエズス会の当時の原本となる書簡で使われていない単語が使われておりおかしかったので。思えば、随分とフロイス書簡を読みポルトガル語に慣れたものです）を問い詰めていくと、これはどこか単一のサイトを参照にしたものではなく、複数のサイトを参照しAIが創作した文章ということが判明しました。いや、AIの利用は気を付けましょう。
「>」と最初にあるように、どこかのネット内にサイトに書かれていた文章を参照しているようです。
こういう「文章自体を創作しているらしい人達もいる」事が調査を難しくしていますね。
このAIが出てきた文章、幾つもおかしい所があります。たぶん、注意して見ている部分が違うと思いますが、私が「おかしい」と思うのは文章の内容そのものではありません。
日本の文献でも、原本に書かれていない文章というのはよく見つかります。
かならず原本まで確かめる、というのをしつこくする必要があります。
Sub Contents
ただ、その際も6〜7のAIを並行して利用し、さらに頻繁にページを更新して更地にした上で「本当に戦国時代の一次史料となる原本の原文にあるか」をしつこいほど確認しながら利用します（そうしないと、AIは前の回答に固執し続け嘘を言い続ける事がありますので）。私の場合は、調教しすぎて軽く噂話を調査したいので気軽に使っても、まず公的文書を探しに行くというAIになってしまいましたが……。
また、AIが出してきた回答は、自身できちんと再確認の調査をしましょう。かなりの確率で、間違っています。
で、最近でも「イエズス会の記録で、弥助が信長に紹介された時の原文」を探し直すのに使うと、とんでもない回答が出てきました。
ルイス・フロイス『日本通信』の『1581年（天正9年）に書かれた書簡で、弥助が信長に初めて謁見した様子を詳細に記述』というAI回答で
"> Et quia de servis Lusitano, qui Nobunagam sequuntur, aliquid dicendum est, unum hic referam, quem Nobunagam a Lusitanis accepit, nomine Iascu, natione Aethiopem. Hic cum ad Nobunagam pervenisset, admiratus est illum Dominus, tam pro colore eius nigro, quam pro statura procera, et corporis robore. Et quia nolebat eum inter alios servos versari, mandavit, ut in palatio suo educaretur, et a suis militibus instrueretur in usu armorum, et rebus bellicis."ジョアン・ロドリゲス『日本年報』の『1582年（天正10年）に書かれた年報』で、弥助が信長の行列に参加した様子を記述と回答があり、
">また、信長に従うポルトガル人の奴隷について少し述べましょう。その一例として、信長がポルトガル人から受け取った「ヤスケ」という名のエチオピア人のことを挙げます。ヤスケが信長に謁見すると、信長は彼の黒い肌、長身、そして強健な体格に感銘を受けました。そして、彼を他の奴隷とは区別して扱い、自分の宮殿で育て、兵士たちに武器の使い方や戦闘術を教えるように命じました。"
"> Iasque, Aethiops quidam, quem Nobunagam a Lusitanis acceperat, in pompa illa cum caeteris Nobunagæ satellitibus incedebat, ensem ad latus gerens, et hastam longam manu tenens."――なんじゃこりゃ？というのが出てきました。
">信長がポルトガル人から受け取ったエチオピア人の「ヤスケ」は、他の信長の家臣たちと一緒にその行列に加わり、腰に刀を佩び、手に長い槍を持っていました。"
私も散々に原書の原文を読んできましたが、こんな文章を見た事がありません。
というので、明らかに間違いと分かる部分（文章全体だけではなく、単語単位でもイエズス会の当時の原本となる書簡で使われていない単語が使われておりおかしかったので。思えば、随分とフロイス書簡を読みポルトガル語に慣れたものです）を問い詰めていくと、これはどこか単一のサイトを参照にしたものではなく、複数のサイトを参照しAIが創作した文章ということが判明しました。いや、AIの利用は気を付けましょう。
「>」と最初にあるように、どこかのネット内にサイトに書かれていた文章を参照しているようです。
こういう「文章自体を創作しているらしい人達もいる」事が調査を難しくしていますね。
このAIが出てきた文章、幾つもおかしい所があります。たぶん、注意して見ている部分が違うと思いますが、私が「おかしい」と思うのは文章の内容そのものではありません。
【言語】こう言った、文章の内容以外の部分が、私にとって「あきらかにおかしい」と調査するきっかけになります。前に珍しく、信長の事を「征夷大将軍」と書いている部分があったので、かなり調査をしました（その部分は原文にもきちんとありました）。
ラテン語で書かれていますから、まず一次資料ではありません。当時の書簡は、多くはポルトガル語で一部はスペイン語で書かれています。ラテン語版は意訳が多いので、一次史料として使えません。
【日付】
もしこれの記載が本当にあるなら、1581年4月の記載として存在するでしょう。例えばこの文章の元ネタになったであろう二次資料となる書籍でも4/14、原本を辿れば4/11に関連してくる記載が存在します。
【弥助の名前】
「Iascu」「Iasque」は「弥助」を日本語から外国語訳する際の候補として出てきますが、実際、フロイスなどは弥助の事をその様に書いている記載は原本にはありません。
【奴隷という描写】
日本には奴隷制度は当時もありませんね。あるのは奉公制度です。また、フロイスが弥助の事を「奴隷」と記述している書簡はありません（構成で編纂されたり写本された中には出てくるのですが、フロイス本人の書簡には出てきません。フロイスは奴隷貿易に反対していましたし、人種差別も少ない人物だったようです。
【信長の名前】
「quem Nobunagam」と書いてありますが、当時の今頃(1581〜1582年頃）は信長の事をその様に書いていません。
日本の文献でも、原本に書かれていない文章というのはよく見つかります。
かならず原本まで確かめる、というのをしつこくする必要があります。
Sub Contents
タグ