Regarding Yasuke, the next protagonist of Assassin’s Creed, whom I wrote about last week, Thomas Lockley, who claims to “research” Yasuke’s history, responded to criticism about him in The Japan Times.
Gaming’s latest culture war targets Yasuke, Japan’s Black samurai
Thomas Lockley’s Rebuttal in The Japan Times
“What it seems to me is that people who know nothing about Japanese history, know nothing about Japan in most cases and certainly know nothing about the Japanese language and the terminology they’re talking about — suddenly, they know everything,” Lockley tells The Japan Times.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2024/05/25/digital/yasuke-assasins-creed-samurai/
At least I am a native Japanese.
In a country embroiled in a civil war with dozens of belligerent fiefdoms, “there was no clear division between ‘samurai’ and others” until 1588, when Toyotomi Hideyoshi, Nobunaga’s successor, began prohibiting the possession of weapons by all but the hereditary nobility.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2024/05/25/digital/yasuke-assasins-creed-samurai/
Indeed, as I mentioned in my previous post, the definition of samurai during the Sengoku period was ambiguous. However,
Being samurai, then, was defined by other means. Whether Yasuke was ever ceremoniously endowed with the rights, privileges and responsibilities of a samurai, he was addressed as “tono” (literally, “lord” or “master”), received a stipend from Nobunaga and carried Nobunaga’s arms, itself a rank of immense honor for the era.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2024/05/25/digital/yasuke-assasins-creed-samurai/
He is clearly lying here. Yasuke was not referred to as “tono” in historical records. It was mentioned that “some thought Nobunaga will make him tono,” which was merely a rumor.
“There’s no piece of paper that says Yasuke was a samurai,” Lockley says, noting that some critics are simply misunderstanding how to interpret the historical record. “But then there’s no piece of paper that says anybody else was a samurai.”
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2024/05/25/digital/yasuke-assasins-creed-samurai/
How unreliable he is. A proper historian would conclude, “There is no historical evidence that Yasuke was called a samurai. His status was likely that of a page.” However, he says, “There is no evidence that Yasuke was called a samurai, but nobody else was called a samurai at that time either. So let’s call him a samurai.”
Moreover, his logic seems to be that Yasuke should be considered a samurai because he was treated as a tono. However, there is no evidence that Yasuke was a tono, so that premise is incorrect. Since the premise is wrong, the conclusion is also obviously wrong.
Most telling to Lockley, however, is that no reputable Japanese historian has raised doubts about Yasuke’s samurai bonafides, including Sakujin Kirino, who served as a fact-checker for “African Samurai” and is one of the country’s foremost experts on the 1582 Honnoji Incident, for which Yasuke was believed to be present.
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2024/05/25/digital/yasuke-assasins-creed-samurai/
It seems that Sakujin Kirino is a historical writer. He is apparently a visiting researcher at the Musashino University Institute of Political Economy, but his degree is a bachelor’s, and it is clear he is not a foremost researcher. Asked about his statement, Sakujin Kirino himself said this on his X like this:
Translation:
https://x.com/kirinosakujin/status/1795768862652449021
To answer your question:
Regarding the Japanese edition of “Nobunaga and Yasuke” by Thomas Lockley, published by Ohta Publishing in 2017, translator Yoshiko Fuji asked me to read through it and provide my thoughts. I gave a few comments, but it was nothing as grand as a fact-check.
He says he wasn’t involved with “African Samurai” and didn’t do any fact-checking for it.
Disappointment in Thomas Lockley
I used to think he was just a presumptuous, speculative researcher. However, what I understand from his interview in The Japan Times is that he is deliberately lying. He, who distorts history for his political beliefs, is not qualified to be a historian.
Without his book, the latest Assassin’s Creed would have featured a Japanese ninja as the protagonist. Even if Yasuke could act as a mediator between the Jesuits and Nobunaga, that was not a role significant enough to make him the protagonist. At most, he would have been an NPC. Once again, I strongly feel that his “research” has changed the content of the game set in Japan and Japanese history.
The Absurdity of Western Fabrication of Japanese History
Regarding this historical fabrication, Japanese people have been left behind. French company Ubisoft, relying on the fabricated history by British historian Thomas Lockley, felt compelled to include a Black character in their visual work due to Western values. As a result, Yasuke, who has almost no record in actual history, was made the protagonist.
Atonement to black people should be done by Western countries that used them as slaves, and altering Japanese history for their past misdeeds is unacceptable. Atonement to black people is a Western issue, but they think it is a global standard. They need to realize that this thinking is outdated Eurocentrism.
Lockley has retracted his claim that Sakujin Kirino fact-checked “African Samurai.” However, he has not retracted any of his other falsehoods. Related Article:
