84 
ORIGINAL ARTICLES. 
even in the Sal forests of North-Western India, at the extreme 
northern limit of the species at the present day, the difference of 
slender-bnilt and sqnat-built Elephants is well-known, being ex¬ 
pressed by Corse, for the Bengal variety, under the designation of 
‘ mirghij or Cervine for the former, and ‘ Koomarea ’ for the latter, or 
when the characters are combined ‘ Sunkareah' f The trunk varies 
in a similar manner, being somewhat short and thick in some, and 
long and more slender in others. The fringe of bristles to the tail, 
is variable in degree, according to the sex, age, and vigour of the 
animal. A good fringe is seldom retained long in captivity; when 
present, it always enhances the price of the animal in the estimation 
of the natives of India. That the animal varies considerably in ap¬ 
pearance, according to the district in which he has been captured, 
has long been well known in India. Aboo Euzl, in his account of 
the Elephant stables of Akbar, enumerates six varieties, distinguished 
by form, different marks, or colouring and the experienced mahouts 
attached to the Government Commissariat in Bengal, will tell, at a 
glance, the district where a recently caught Elephant has been bred;§ 
whether the Sal Forests of the North-West Provinces, Assam, Silhet, 
Chittagong, Tipperah, or Cuttack. The distinction, therefore, founded 
upon the external characters of E. Sumatranus, completely fails. 
I believe that the same could be shown, as regards the asserted 
difference of intelligence and aptitude for instruction; but as this 
is not a tangible, specific character, I leave it undiscussed. 
The Osteological distinctions in the skull, which Prof. Schlegel 
advanced in Temminck’s work, he has since seen reason to abandon. 
But the identity of form is a strong argument in support of the 
unity of species. Not only is the general form of the cranium alike 
in both, but the relative proportions, and connexions of constituent 
bones, are the same in the wild Elephant of the North-West Pro¬ 
vinces and in that of Ceylon. The difference of variety, implied by the 
terms * Mukna? ‘ small-tusked,’ and 1 Dauntelo ,’ large-tusked, neces¬ 
sarily involves a proportional degree of difference, in the develop¬ 
ment of the intermaxillary bones, in the depth and breadth of the 
trough between the tusk sheaths, and in the amount of development 
of the occipital bosses. But the connexions of the bones remain the 
same ; and all the leading modifications of form and proportion, so 
clearly indicated by Cuvier, as distinctive of the Indian from the 
African form, are maintained in the Continental aud Ceylon Ele¬ 
phants, within a range of variation which is common to both. 
Review,’ is “ that the rump at the end is more broadened, and covered with longer 
“ and stronger hairs,” (Op. cit. p. 76). In Tennent’s ‘ Natural History of Ceylon,’ 
the character of flattening with longer hair, is made to apply to the extremity of 
the proboscis , instead of the tail. (Op. cit. p. 66.) The version given in the text 
is the correct one. 
f Philosoph. Transacts. 1799, p. 205. 
j Ayeen-Akberry, translated by Gladwin, Vol. i. p. 126. 
§ Hooker, ‘Himalayan Journal,’ Vol. ii. p. 302. 
