ELEPHANTS. 527 



employment of the trunk of the Indian elephant for all manner of purposes, 



Sanderson observes that " the idea that he can use it for any purpose, from 



picking up a needle to dragging a piece of ordnance from a bog, is, like many 



others, founded entirely on imagination. An elephant might manage the former 



feat, though I doubt it ; the latter he would not attempt. Elephants engaged in 



such work as dragging timber, invariably take the rope between their teeth ; they 



never attempt to pull a heavy weight with the trunk. In carrying a light log, 



they hold it in the mouth as a dog does a stick, receiving some little assistance in 



balancing it from the trunk. Tuskers generally use their tusks for this and 



similar purposes, and are more valuable than females for work. An elephant is 



powerful enough to extricate a cannon from a difficult situation, but he does it by 



pushing with his head or feet, or in harness — never by lifting or drawing with 



his trunk." 



An equal degree of misapprehension is prevalent as to the 

 InteUigence. . . 



intelligence of elephants, at least so far as the Indian species is 



concerned ; and all competent observers who have had much practical experience 



of these animals are of opinion that their intellectual faculties have been greatly 



overrated in popular estimation. It is true, that when in captivity the Indian 



elephant exhibits a marvellous docility and obedience, and is also capable of 



learning to perform certain kinds of labour, such as stacking logs of timber, which 



at first sight appear to demand a considerable amount of intellectual power. 



There is here, however, a considerable amount of confusion, as Mr. Blanford 



remarks, between high intelligence and mere docility and capacity for receiving 



instruction ; and there can be little doubt that the usefulness of the elephant is 



due to the latter rather than to the former trait. Indeed, the size and structure of 



the brain is quite sufficient to prove that the intellectual capacity of elephants is 



far inferior to that of dogs, and is probably below that of most other Ungulates. 



This view of their intelligence is strongly confirmed by the circumstance that 

 elephants, in spite of many statements to the contrary, are wanting in originality, 

 and do not rise to the occasion when confronted by any sudden emergency or 

 event beyond the range of their ordinary daily experience. As Sir Samuel Baker 

 pertinently observes, an elephant " can be educated to perform certain acts, but he 

 would never volunteer his services. There is no elephant that I ever saw who 

 would spontaneously interfere to save his master from drowning or from attack. 

 An enemy might assassinate you at the feet of your favourite elephant, but he 

 would never attempt to interfere in your defence ; he would probably run away, 

 or remain impassive, unless guided and instructed by his mahout. This is incon- 

 testable ; the elephant will do nothing useful unless he is specially ordered to 

 perform a certain work or movement." At the same time, in addition to its 

 capacity for receiving instruction, an elephant undoubtedly appears to have a very 

 retentive memory, both for acts of kindness and of cruelty; and this has doubtless 

 partly contributed to its character for general intelligence. 



In this connection it may be observed that the Indian species, at any rate. 

 differs from all other main n ials in the readiness with which it may be tamed and 

 domesticated when fully adult; nearly all those which are captured in India being 

 fully mature. 



