Talk:Tamamo-no-Mae

Merger

Recommend the merger of the two articles, as they are essentially facets of the other. Also recommend a partial merge of stuff from Sessho-seki, with that becoming a fork article. Any thoughts?--み使い Mitsukai 18:21, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Illness question

Hi.

I was wondering; does the legend explicitly say if Tamamo-no-Mae was truly plotting against the Emperor, as the astrologer claimed, or is there room for ambiguity on whether or not she was (intentionally or otherwise) trying to harm him?

As in, could the astrologer have been trying to get rid of her, or something? --Nerroth (talk) 23:56, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

The article says "an kind nine-tailed kitsune", so if it meant to say "a kind nine-tailed kitsune", then she had no real malice in her. But the article also says her boss was using her to try to kill the Emperor. So yeah... she was intentionally plotting against the Emperor, but I. at least, am inferring she had no choice in the matter. No wonder she became an onryō after Miura-no-suke killed her. 173.180.75.13 (talk) 10:02, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

On the mention of tamamizu monogatari

The page states:

Stories of Tamamo-no-Mae being a legendary fox spirit appear during the Muromachi period as otogizōshi (prose narratives), one of which is titled Tamamizu monogatari (or "The Tale of Tamamizu") [1]

I seem to recall that tamamizu monogatari is a completely separate story about a kitsune falling in love with a girl. It is possible that tamamo-no-mae is mentioned as a prominent fox spirit but I highly doubt the appears as a character, in which case the phrasing here is misleading. My Japanese is not nearly good enough to consider checking this myself, but I did find the Japanese language page for 玉水物語 (tamamizu monogatari) makes no mention of 玉藻の前 (tamamo-no-mae). Additionally, neither does the quoted source [1] (https://rmda.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/en/item/rb00013653/explanation/otogi_01) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tsukiyomin (talk • contribs) 14:19, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I agree, this looks like it's totally unrelated to me. It doesn't seem like anything was taken from that story either, other than just linking it to this page. I wouldn't have a problem with removing that link/reference. Osarusan (talk) 05:39, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, given some elements, I would not be hugely surprised if there was some kind of link there as far as the literary or folkloric development, but they're definitely not the same story and I don't have any hard evidence or sources on this. 2602:61:7B5B:401:EC47:29C9:5B25:F974 (talk) 22:13, 26 October 2023 (UTC)