Talk:Kitsune

The source for the oldest fox legend is given as Hamel 2003, p.89.^[1]The text however, is from 1915 and does not provide a name for the respective "old legend of 545." I have never found a reference to such an old text in academic works. I assume that Hamel actually refers to the story in Nihon ryôiki (Miraculous stories of Japan), a collection of stories from the early 9th century (c.f. Nakamura 1997: 104-105). Wikipedia Japan, btw, also gives the Ryôiki as the oldest source of kitsune legends. The Ryôiki dates the story into the era of Kinmei Tennô (r. 539–571) and Ono is actually a place name, but otherwise Hamel's version is in essence a shortened version of the Ryôiki text. The end, however, is different: The fox woman reappears only once and finally vanishes for ever. This tragic highlight of the story is exemplified in a poem that became a constant element also in several later versions of the same story:

Love fills me completely / After a moment of reunion / Alas, she is gone (Nakamura 1997, pp. 104–105)^[2][3]

--Bescheid (talk) 20:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC) reformated with bibliographical additions Kiyoweap (talk) 23:21, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

I don' think your summary (she reappears only once and finally vanishes for ever) is correct, Bescheid.

In the primary text I've linked to, the husband asked "Please come ALWAYS and sleep with me", and the vixen-wife complied: so the logical conclusion was that "..every evening she stole back and slept in his arms", just as Hamel had surmised.^[1]

That said, the opinion/POV (by Shimeru in the edit here) that "This story is an exception to the norm in that it does not end tragically" does not seem to appear in the source given (Goff).^[4] so it could still be faulted as a {{cn}}.--Kiyoweap (talk) 23:21, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to say, I'm not fully convinced by the new WPJ high rating. I agree that in Japan kitsune have significant coverage in folklore (after all there's enough to write a featured article on it!), my concern is that to be "high" the topic must have "had some impact outside Japan" which I'm not sure is the case. I think it would be a surprise to many that the fox is an important aspect of Japanese folklore, it doesn't epitomise Japan like the crane or the cherry blossom. Yes, there are examples of foxes in Japanese products which have been exported, but I would doubt that many would make the link between the products and kitsune. Please feel free to give me examples to convince me otherwise JTST4RS (talk) 10:22, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree that "kitsune" may not have significant impact outside Japan, though I'm not sure how stringently we should apply that criteria. I also consider this: If I was to pick up a hard-copy encyclopedia of Japan, how likely would I find "kitsune" in there? It might not be in the most essential categories (Top-importance), but could I reasonably expect to find it in a text with broad, comprehensive coverage of Japan? Boneyard90 (talk) 13:01, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree that "kitsune" is likely warrant a few sentences/maybe a paragraph or two in a comprehensive encyclopaedia/in a text focussed on folklore, though to me that seems to fulfil "Subject fills in more minor details" as opposed to "Subject contributes a depth of knowledge to the encyclopaedia". Regardless, I don't feel I have a strong enough objection to the rating of "high" if the "outside of Japan" criteria is not strongly adhered to, though I fear that it could end up being another topic for Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan since the assessment page does claim that it is a "must"... JTST4RS (talk) 13:57, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree with JTST4RS on it being of lower importance. I do think it is of great importance to the lore of Japan but can't see the greater world impact. Mid seems most applicable with the topic not being well known to people outside Japan. I am no expert on folklore however so I could be persuaded otherwise. --Molestash (talk) 03:39, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Fair enough. Let's give it a week from the first post, and if nobody else weighs in, we can downgrade it. Boneyard90 (talk) 12:54, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Paragraph 3 of Kitsune § Shapeshifting reads:

One folk story illustrating these imperfections in the kitsune's human shape concerns Koan, a historical person credited with wisdom and magical powers of divination. According to the story, he was staying at the home of one of his devotees when he scalded his foot entering a bath because the water had been drawn too hot. Then, "in his pain, he ran out of the bathroom naked. When the people of the household saw him, they were astonished to see that Koan had fur covering much of his body, along with a fox's tail. Then Koan transformed in front of them, becoming an elderly fox and running away."[reference]

The link for "Koan" is a disambiguation page, and it mentions only one individual, Emperor Kōan. From that article, § Legendary narrative:

• the sixth emperor of Japan, according to the traditional order of succession
• Kōan is regarded by historians as a "legendary emperor" and there is a paucity of information about him. There is insufficient material available for further verification and study.
• The Japanese have traditionally accepted this sovereign's historical existence, and an Imperial misasagi or tomb for Kōan is currently maintained; however, no extant contemporary records have been discovered that confirm a view that this historical figure actually reigned.

The article mentions nothing about divination or foxes in any form. The reference is to a book that I have no access to. I'm removing the dab link, but of course not the reference. --Thnidu (talk) 17:28, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Sometimes things just "creep in" so would someone look at the "External links" section. It currently has 6 links and I would think some could be incorporated into the article or trimmed. Otr500 (talk) 14:52, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

To the well-meaning editor who is editing this page because he or she doesn't like that math behind how kitsune get multiple tales: this is folklore. It may not make sense, but that's what it is. There's no "rule" that says every 100 years a kitsune magically sprouts a tale. Folklore can be contradictory and can be illogical. Please do not apply mathematical formulas to make uncited changes to this page. If you have a reliable source that specifically details the process in which kitsune grow their tales, feel free to cite it and make edits. But please do not edit the existing citations just because you don't like the math. Your edits will be reverted. Osarusan (talk) 11:14, 23 April 2019 (UTC)

To be honest Kitsunes are the worlds intresting creatures it would be a please to have a pet kitsune - A.K — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.30.252.198 (talk) 02:32, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

This is a 2006 Featured article that has not been maintained to FA standards:

• Have the issues above been addressed (External links have not)?
• There is considerable uncited text.
• There are listy sections that should be converted to prose.
• See MOS:BADITALICS (non-English proper nouns are not italicized).
• There is considerable MOS:SANDWICHing and poor image layout.
• There is not a consistent citation style.

Unless the article can be brought to FA standard, it should be submitted to Featured article review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/unsuccessful-wwii-plot-fight-japanese-radioactive-foxes-180975932/ about using foxes to demoralize the Japanese during WW2. 2001:56A:FA85:3800:C8CC:F2FB:E25A:C6A5 (talk) 04:23, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps add a section or list with folk tales that contain kitsune in them?Bchene (talk) 00:54, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Maybe a section with modern fiction could be added? Brandon Sanderson has a species of Kitsune in his Skyward fiction series, specifically 'Starsight' and 'Cytonic.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Californicus (talk • contribs) 10:20, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Please see section 2 above about fiction and fancruft. Osarusan (talk) 22:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

Shouldn't this section be merged with "Characteristics"? "Traits" are a type of "characteristic" (or vice versa), correct? ZFT (talk) 05:48, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

The definition given in the opening section is a bit misleading. Kitsune (狐) is simply the Japanese word for "fox". The Japanese version of the article is entitled "Foxes in Japanese culture"! So in some sense it's less that in Japanese folklore there's this special kind of fox with mystical powers, and more that Japanese folklore attributes mystical powers to foxes. In the occasional case where a special distinction is made between the magical kind of fox and the non-magical kind, the former is called a bakegitsune (化け狐) or yōko (妖狐)—cf. tanuki vs. bakedanuki, which interestingly has its own page too.

The article's usage of the word is consistent with its meaning as a loanword into English—if you see the word "kitsune" in an English-language text, it means "Japanese fox with mystical powers". However, knowing how this differs from the Japanese meaning is crucial to understanding the actual folkloric concept being referred to—way more important, I'd say, than all of the information currently in the "Etymology" section.

98.243.254.38 (talk) 22:19, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

The article name kitsune is fine, because Japanologists writing in English routinely use kitsune to refer to the fox in this supernatural sense.

It is also not standard practice in Japan that you have to qualify the creature as a bake-gitsune or bake-danuki whenever magic is involved.

As for "foxes in Japanese culture", I would advise against innovated solution, when you can follow the established practice exemplified by salamander article carrying a hatnote nav to cultural depictions of salamanders (also lions, elephants, etc.).--Kiyoweap (talk) 09:43, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Japanologists also used to say that tanuki were raccoons or badgers. That doesn’t mean we should give credence to that claim. And some Japanologists in Japan themselves avoid using the term "kitsune" in English precisely because it can create an ambiguity that prevents the work from being anthropologically rigorous.

Bake-gitsune and bake-danuki are indeed not used in everyday speech, but they are frequently seen in reference works or on online platforms such as Pixiv. However, it is not necessary to create a dedicated article on yōko or bake-gitsune; it is enough to transfer part of the content into the article Fox spirit. From a Japanese and a Chinese perspective, yōko and hulijing are the same thing; the same goes for kyūbi and kumiho from both a Japanese and a Korean perspective.

The purpose of Wikipedia is to improve articles so that they remain as up to date as possible; this often involves rewriting articles and changing titles. Whatever approach to writing articles you use, one thing is certain: referring to the kitsune as a "fox spirit" is misleading in contemporary Japanese. Saying that a legendary creature is called kitsune and saying that the fox was sometimes considered a supernatural entity in ancient Japan are two completely different things. We should be honest in acknowledging that the meaning of the word kitsune has shifted between Japanese and Western languages, rather than presenting the "fox spirit called kitsune" as a general truth.

As far as I am concerned, I do not have strong enough linguistic skills to rewrite the articles on the English Wikipedia, but it would really be preferable for someone to do it properly before someone else takes it up. In Japan, the culture surrounding the fox has expanded far beyond the sphere of the Inari cult and local folklore. Taking an anthropological approach allows for a better understanding of the contemporary developments surrounding the animal in this culture. Futsuli (talk) 13:31, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

On citing Lafcadio Hearn's Glimpses I'm removing the below as WP:FRINGE:

These kyūbi no kitsune (九尾の狐; 'nine-tailed foxes') gain the abilities to see and hear anything happening anywhere in the world.^{[citation needed]} Lafcadio Hearn buys into a Buddhist sermon that beasts, including foxes, naturally possess the Divine Eye (divyacakṣus, tengan (天眼), here "Infinite Vision").^{[1][unbalanced opinion?]}

--Kiyoweap (talk) 15:58, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Kiyoweap (talk) 15:58, 10 March 2025 (UTC)