Page 53 - Hikayat-Patani-The-Story-Of-Patani 1

44 HIKAYAT PATANI
happened at the end of T 20 and the beginning of T 21. T does not
mention the gift of prisoners from Pegu and Lancang to Sultan
Mudhaffar Syah; in the Malay text it is one of these Burmese
prisoners who as an astrologer makes a prophecy to Manzur Syah
about his prospective kingship three months after the king’s return
to Patani. In T this astrologer is not referred to as a Burmese, and
he makes his prophecy during the king’s three months’ absence. Is
this a deliberate change — was it not proper for the Thai writer
to tell the story of these prisoners being presented to the king of
Patani, either for political or other reasons? Or is T based on a
different, and more original version of the Malay text? See also
below, Chapter VI, p. 233.
5. A remarkable difference in both story 10 and 11 of the Malay text,
as compared with T 30 and 31, is that in the Malay version the real
culprit in both rebellions is not the half-brother of the king himself,
but a treacherous courtier, Seri cAmrat and Seri Amar Pahlawan,
who incite Raja Bambang and Raja Bima respectively to insurrect­
ion. In the Thai text these courtiers kill the rebels after the murder
of the Sultan, but there is no indication that they were themselves
involved in the rebellion. Consistently with this T lacks the story of
the killing of the second courtier on the orders of the queen, which
the Malay text gives in some detail in section 13.
6. A minor detail occurs in T 30, where Raja Bambang and Seri Amar
are said to be “walking past the ruins” of the surau at the pintu
gerbang. A 37 and B mention no ruins but only the langgar (surau).
Is this an anachronistic slip by the copyist of the Malay original
of T?
7. In T 33 it is stated twice that the canal should be, and is “cut from
the north”. A does not have this specification, which is correct
geographically, even though the addition “boring through the mouth
of the river” is not quite clear.
8. In the story of Phaya Deca and Raja Kuning there are some obvious
differences which should most probably be explained as conscious
“corrections” by the Thai translator. In T 35 the text implies that
Raja Kuning followed Phaya Deca to Siam, as after his death she
is invited to return to Patani. From A it is fairly clear that Phaya
Deca is dismissed without his wife being allowed to follow him. His
death is not mentioned in A, and he is the man who because of a