Probably the best take I've seen around this subject, it's worth a watch:
His conclusions after
consulting with Thomas Lockley himself, the historian who wrote the
African Samurai book (the fictional story that keeps getting quoted as historical record):
- There's no proof whatsoever that Yasuke was made samurai.
- There's no proof he
wasn't made samurai either.
- There are conflicting facts, on one hand he was given a weapon and a stipend, on the other he was not required to commit seppuku after Oda Nobunaga did.
- Which is also not all that important because the term Samurai wasn't really used during that period anyways. Nobles would be called by their formal titles (like William Adams was given the title of Hatamoto). Regardless, whether or not Yasuke achieved some kind of nobility is unknown.
So.. yeah, the guy who wrote the "African Samurai" book that everyone keeps quoting as proof that Yasuke was a Samurai... says
there's no way to know for sure whether he was given any type of nobility / Samurai.
As for me, after reading Luís Fróis' mentions in Portuguese I still interpret Nobunaga's interest in Yasuke as curiosity and "entertainment" (this is actually the word Fróis uses to describe Nobunaga's reaction to Yasuke). Had that been written in modern times I'd definitely keep that interpretation, though I guess 1586 Portuguese can be different from modern day Portuguese.
After the video I'll change my stance from "no way he was ever a Samurai" to "there's no way to know for sure".
This 2016 article from a guy who studies Oda Nobunaga also seems to point out that it was Luís Fróis who seemed to be fond of Yasuke, so his descriptions ended up a bit biased.
I don't change my stance on Ubisoft's choice for using a black samurai and a ninja woman to be rooted in DEI ideology, though. It has nothing to do with artistic vision, only corporate virtue signaling and far-left activists in the story team.