From Fables & Folk-Tales from an Eastern Forest, Collected and Translated by Walter Skeat, M.A., Illustrated by F. H. Townsend; Cambridge: At the University Press; 1901; pp. 9-12, 75-76.
(Here the story of What the Otter did stops and the story of What happened when the Woodpecker sounded the war-gong commences.b) The Mouse-deer was Chief Dancer of the War-dance, and as he danced, he trod on the Otter’s Babies and crushed them flat. Presently the Otter returned home, bringing a string of fish with him. On arriving he saw that his children had been killed, and exclaimed, “How comes it, Friend Mouse-deer, that my Babies 10 have died?” The Mouse-deer replied, “The Woodpecker came and sounded the war-gong, and I, being Chief War-Dancer, danced; and forgetting about your children I trod upon them and crushed them flat.”
III. “Presently the Otter returned home,” . . . and “saw that his children had been killed.”
On hearing this the Otter went and made complaint unto King Solomon, prostrating himself and saying, “Your Majesty’s most humble slave craves pardon for presuming to address your Majesty, but Friend Mouse-deer has murdered your slave’s children, and your slave desires to learn whether he is guilty or not according to the Law of the Land.” King Solomon replied, saying, “If the Mouse-deer hath done this thing wittingly, assuredly he is guilty of death.” Then he summoned the Mouse-deer before him.
And when the Mouse-deer came into the presence of the King, the King enquired of the Otter, “What is your charge against him?” The Otter replied, “Your slave accuses him of the murder of your slave’s children; your slave would hear the Law of the Land.” Then the King said unto the Mouse-deer, “Was it your doing that the Otter’s children were killed?” The Mouse-deer replied, 11 “Assuredly it was, but I crave pardon for doing so.” “How was it then,” said the King, “that you came to kill them?” The Mouse-deer replied, “Your slave came to kill them because the Woodpecker appeared and sounded the war-gong. Your slave, as your Majesty is aware, is Chief Dancer of the War-dance, therefore your slave danced, and forgetting about the Otter’s children, your slave trod upon them and crushed them flat.” Here the King sent for the Woodpecker also, and the Woodpecker came before him. “Was it you, Woodpecker,” said the King, “who sounded the war-gong?” “Assuredly it was,” said the Woodpecker, — “forasmuch as your slave saw the Great Lizard wearing his sword.”c The King replied, “If that is the case, there is no fault to be found in the Woodpecker” (for the Woodpecker was Chief Beater of the War-gong). Then the King commanded the Great Lizard to be summoned, and when he arrived, the King enquired, “Was it you, Lizard, who were wearing your sword?” The Great Lizard replied, “Assuredly it was, your Majesty.” “And why were you wearing your sword?” The Great Lizard replied, 12 “Your slave wore it forasmuch as your slave saw that the Tortoise had donned his coat of mail.”d So the Tortoise was summoned likewise. “Why did you Tortoise, don your coat of mail?” The Tortoise replied, “Your slave donned it forasmuch as your slave saw the King-crab trailing his three-edged pike.”e Then the King-crab was sent for. “Why were you, King-crab, trailing your three-edged pike?” “Because your slave saw that the Crayfish had shouldered his lance.”f Then the King sent for the Crayfish and said, “Was it you, Crayfish, who were shouldering your lance?” And the Crayfish replied, “Assuredly it was, your Majesty.” “And why did you shoulder it?” “Because your slave saw the Otter coming down to devour your slave’s own children.” “Oh,” said King Solomon, “if that is the case, you, Otter, are the guilty party and your complaint of your children’s death cannot be sustained against the Mouse-deer by the Law of the Land.”
a Who killed the Otter’s Babies?
This is another of Che Busu’s Tales, but when he told it to me there was a missing link, that of the king-crab, which he could not recollect. As, however, I heard the story re-told and the link supplied in Kedah, I take the opportunity of making good the omission. The Malay word ‘anak’ may mean either ‘child’ or children, according to the context, but as in this context it is impossible to tell whether the singular or the plural is intended, I have thought it best, the Otter being a fairly prolific animal, to keep it to the plural. In either case, however, it does not affect the point of the tale.
The otter is, so far as I am aware, much the same as the common otter (Lutra vulgaris).
The tale is of a kind which may perhaps best be called an all-round-the-clock or more simply a ‘clock’ story, as it ingeniously sets forth the chain of incidents, by which the responsibility for the death of its own children was brought home to the Otter itself, thanks to the wisdom of king Solomon, who here figures, as in so many other Eastern fables, as a judge of extraordinary discretion.
b the Woodpecker . . .sounded the war-gong : this of course is an allusion to the tapping of the woodpecker’s bill upon the bark of tree-trunks in its search for insects.
c the Great Lizard wearing his sword. The Great Lizard is the “Iguana,” as it is often called (more correctly, the Monitor Lizard of the Far East). It grows to an immense size, even reaching a length of more than six feet. From three to 76 five feet however is the common size. The Great Lizard’s sword is of course the long and tapering tail which he trails behind him.
d the Tortoise had donned his coat of mail. This refers clearly enough to the mail-like shell by which the tortoise is protected. The expression here used is a favourite paraphrase such as with the Malays often takes the form of a riddle. “An old hunchback wearing a coat of mail armour; What is it?” the answer being of course “A tortoise” : most of the paraphrases referred to in this tale are also I believe known to the Malays in the form of riddles.
e the King-crab trailing his three-edged pike. The king-crab is a limulus. The pike here referred to is a bayonet-shaped spike which (like our own “Morning Star”) was specially used in former times by the Malays for piercing chain-armour. Hence it is here employed as usually, in conjunction with the armour. The allusion in this instance is to the curious spike at the end of the king-crab’s tail.
f the Crayfish had shouldered his lance. The Malay word may either signify crayfish, in which case it belongs to the family of the Astacidæ, the ‘lance’ being an allusion to the crayfish’s long feelers or antennæ when turned backwards over its shoulder; or else it may mean prawn, in which case it probably refers to the fretted spike or saw on the prawn’s head. The word used for lance in the Malay refers to the fringed or tasselled lance which is used in many parts of the Far East as one of the insignia of royalty, and which is decorated, in various localities, with yak or cow-tails, with horse-hair &c. &c.