this; since _not only one but two mermen_ together were seen by so many
eye-witnesses. Should the stubborn world, however, hesitate to believe
it, it matters nothing; as there are people who would even deny that
such cities as Rome, Constantinople or Cairo, exist, merely because they
themselves have not happened to see them."
But what are such incredulous persons, he continues, to make of the
circumstance recorded by Albert Herport in his account of India[1], that
a sea-man was seen in the water near the Church of Taquan, on the
morning of the 29th of April 1661, and a mermaid at the same spot the
same afternoon?--or what do they say to the fact that in 1714, a mermaid
was not only seen but captured near the island of Booro? "five feet
Rhineland measure in height, which lived four days and seven hours, but
refusing all food, died without leaving any intelligible account of
herself."
[Footnote 1: Probably the _Itinerarium Indicum_ of ALBRECHT HERPORT.
Berne, 1669.]
Valentyn, in support of his own faith in the mermaid, cites numerous
other instances in which both "sea-men and women" were seen and taken at
Amboina; especially one by an office-bearer in the Church of Holland[1],
by whom it was surrendered to the Governor Vanderstel.
[Footnote 1: A "krank-bezoeker" or visitant of the sick.]
Of this well-authenticated specimen he gives an elaborate engraving
amongst those of the authentic fishes of the island--together with a
minute ichthyological description of each for the satisfaction of men of
science.
[Illustration: THE MERMAID (From VALENTYN)]
The fame of this creature having reached Europe, the British Minister in
Holland wrote to Valentyn on the 28th December 1716, whilst the Emperor,
Peter the Great of Russia, was his guest at Amsterdam; to communicate
the desire of the Czar, that the mermaid should be brought home from
Amboina for his Imperial inspection.
To complete his proofs of the existence of mermen and women, Valentyn
points triumphantly to the historical fact, that in Holland in the year
1404, a mermaid was driven during a tempest, through a breach in the
dyke of Edam, and was taken alive in the lake of Purmer. Thence she was
carried to Harlem, where the Dutch women taught her to spin; and where,
several years after, she died in the Roman Catholic faith;--"but this,"
says the pious Calvinistic chaplain, "in no way militates against the
truth of her story."[1]
[Footnote 1: VALENTYN, _Beschryving, &c_., p. 333.]
Finally Valentyn winds up his proofs, by the accumulated testimony of
Pliny [1], Theodore Gaza, George of Trebisond, and Alexander ab
Alexandro, to show that mermaids had in all ages been known in Gaul,
Naples, Epirus, and the Morea. From these and a multitude of more modern
instances he comes to the conclusion, that as there are "sea-cows,"
"sea-horses," and "sea-dogs;" as well as "sea-trees" and "sea-flowers"
which he himself had seen, what grounds in reason are there to doubt
that there may also be "sea-maidens" and "sea-men!"
[Footnote 1: _Nat. Hist_. l. ix. c. 5, where Pliny speaks of the
Nereids.]
_List of Ceylon Mammalia._
A list of the Mammalia of Ceylon is subjoined. In framing it, as well as
the lists appended to the other chapters on the Fauna of the island, the
principal object in view has been to exhibit the extent to which the
Natural History of the island had been investigated, and collections
made up to the period of my leaving the colony in 1850. It has been
considered expedient to exclude a few individuals which have not had the
advantage of a direct comparison with authentic specimens, either at
Calcutta or in England. This will account for the omission of a number
that have appeared in other catalogues, but of which many, though
ascertained to exist, have not been submitted to this rigorous process
of identification.
The greater portion of the species of mammals and birds contained in
these lists will be found, with suitable references to the most accurate
descriptions, in the admirable catalogue of the collection at the India
House, published under the care of the late Dr. Horsfield. This work
cannot be too highly extolled, not alone for the scrupulous fidelity
with which the description of each species is referred to its first
discoverer, but also for the pains which have been taken to elaborate
synonymes and to collate from local periodicals and other sources,
(little accessible to ordinary inquirers,) such incidents and traits as
are calculated to illustrate characteristics and habits.
QUADRUMANA.
Presbytes
cephalopterus, _Zimm_.
ursinus, _Blyth_.
Priamus, _Elliot & Blyth_.
Thersites, _Blyth_.
Macacus pileatus, _Shaw & Desm_.
Loris gracilis, _Geoff_.
CHEIROPTERA.
Pteropus Edwardsii, _Geoff_.
Leschenaultii, _Dum_.
Cynopterus
marginatus, _Ham_.
Megaderma spasma, _Linn._
lyra, _Geoff_.
Rhinolophus _affinis_, _Horsf_.
Hipposideros
murinus, _Elliot_.
speoris, _Elliot_.
armiger, _Hodgs_.
vulgaris, _Horsf_.
Kerivoula picta, _Pall_.
Taphozous
longimanus, _Har_.
Scotophilus Coromandelicus, _F. Cuv._
_adversus_, _Horsf_.
Temminkii, _Horsf_.
Tickelli, _Blyth_.
Heathii.
CARNIVORA.
Sorex coerulescens, _Shaw_.
ferrugineus, _Kelaart_.
serpentarius, _Is. Geoff._
montanus, _Kelaart_.
Feroculus macropus, _Kel_.
Ursus labiatus, _Blainv_.
Lutra nair, _F. Cuv_.
Canis aureus. _Linn._
Viverra Indica, _Geoff_., _Hod_.
Herpestes vitticollis, _Benn_.
griseus, _Gm_.
Smithii, _Gray_.
fulvescens, _Kelaart_.
Paradoxurus typus, _F. Cuv._
Ceylonicus, _Pall_.
Felis pardus, _Linn._
chaus, _Guldens_.
viverrinus, _Benn_.
RODENTIA.
Sciurus macrurus, _Forst_.
Tennentii, _Layard_.
penicillatus. _Leach_.
trilineatus, _Waterh_.
Sciuropterus Layardi, _Kel_.
Pteromys petaurista, _Pall_.
Mus bandicota, _Bechst_.
Kok, _Gray_.
Mus rufescens. _Gray_.
nemoralis, _Blyth_.
Indicus, _Geoff_.
fulvidiventris, _Blyth_.
Nesoki _Hardwickii_, _Gray_.
Golunda Neuera, _Kelaart_.
Ellioti, _Gray_.
Gerbillus Indicus, _Hardw_.
Lepus nigricollis, _F. Cuv._
Hystrix leucurus, _Sykes_.
EDENTATA.
Manis pentadactyla, _Linn._
PACHYDERMATA.
Elephas Sumatranus, _Linn._
Sus Indicus, _Gray_.
_Zeylonicus_, _Blyth_.
RUMINANTIA.
Moschus meminna, _Eral_.
Stylocerus muntjac, _Horsf_.
Axis maculata, _H. Smith_.
Rusa Aristotelis, _Cuv_.
CETACEA.
Halicore dugung, _F. Cuv._
CHAP. II.
THE ELEPHANT.
* * * * *
_Structure and Functions._
During my residence at Kandy, I had twice the opportunity of witnessing
the operation on a grand scale, of capturing wild elephants, intended to
be trained for the public service in the establishment of the Civil
Engineer;--and in the course of my frequent journeys through the
interior of the island, I succeeded in collecting so many facts relative
to the habits of these interesting animals in a state of nature, as
enable me not only to add to the information previously possessed, but
to correct many fallacies popularly received regarding their instincts
and disposition. These particulars I am anxious to place on record
before proceeding to describe the scenes of which I was a spectator,
during the progress of the elephant hunts in the district of the Seven
Korles, at which I was present in 1846, and again in 1847.
With the exception of the narrow but densely inhabited belt of
cultivated land, that extends along the seaborde of the island from
Chilaw on the western coast to Tangalle on the south-east, there is no
part of Ceylon in which elephants may not be said to abound; even close
to the environs of the most populous localities of the interior. They
frequent both the open plains and the deep forests; and their footsteps
are to be seen wherever food and shade, vegetation and water[1], allure
them, alike on the summits of the loftiest mountains, and on the borders
of the tanks and lowland streams.
[Footnote 1: M. AD. PICTET has availed himself of the love of the
elephant for water, to found on it a solution of the long-contested
question as to the etymology of the word "elephant,"-a term which,
whilst it has passed into almost every dialect of the West, is scarcely
to be traced in any language of Asia. The Greek [Greek: elephas], to
which we are immediately indebted for it, did not originally mean the
animal, but, as early as the time of Homer, was applied only to its
tusks, and signified _ivory_. BOCHART has sought for a Semitic origin,
and seizing on the Arabic _fil_, and prefixing the article _al_,
suggests _alfil_, akin to [Greek: eleph]; but rejecting this, BOCHART
himself resorts to the Hebrew _eleph_, an "ox"--and this conjecture
derives a certain degree of countenance from the fact that the Romans,
when they obtained their first sight of the elephant in the army of
Pyrrhus, in Lucania, called it the _Luca bos_. But the [Greek: antos] is
still unaccounted for; and POTT has sought to remove the difficulty by
introducing the Arabic _hindi_, Indian, s thus making _eleph-hindi_,
"_bos Indicus_." The conversion of _hindi_ into [Greek: antos] is an
obstacle, but here the example of "tamarind" comes to aid; _tamar
hindi_, the "Indian date," which in mediæval Greek forms [Greek:
tamarenti]. A theory of Benary, that helhephas might be compounded of
the Arabic _al_, and _ibha_, a Sanskrit name for the elephant, is
exposed to still greater etymological exception. PICTET'S solution is,
that in the Sanskrit epics "the King of Elephants," who has the
distinction of carrying the god Indra, is called _airarata_ or
_airavana_, a modification of _airavanta_, "son of the ocean," which
again comes from _iravat_, "abounding in water." "Nous aurions done
ainsi, comme corrélatif du gree [Greek: elephanto], une ancienne forme,
_âirâvanta_ ou _âilâvanta_, affaiblie plus tard en _âirâvata_ ou
_âirâvana_.... On connaît la prédilection de l'éléphant pour le
voisinage des fleuves, et son amour pour l'eau, dont l'abondance est
nécessaire à son bien-être." This Sanskrit name, PICTET supposes, may
have been carried to the West by the Phoenicians, who were the purveyors
of ivory from India; and, from the Greek, the Latins derived _elephas_,
which passed into the modern languages of Italy, Germany, and France.
But it is curious that the Spaniards acquired from the Moors their
Arabic term for ivory, _marfil_, and the Portuguese _marfim_; and that
the Scandinavians, probably from their early expeditions to the
Mediterranean, adopted _fill_ as their name for the elephant itself, and
_fil-bein_ for ivory; in Danish, _fils-ben_. (See _Journ. Asiat._ 1843,
t. xliii. p. 133.) The Spaniards of South America call the palm which
produces the vegetable ivory (_Phytelephas macrocarpa_) _Palma de
marfil_, and the nut itself, _marfil vegetal_.
Since the above was written Gooneratné Modliar, the Singhalese
Interpreter to the Supreme Court at Colombo, has supplied me with
another conjecture, that the word elephant may possibly be traced to the
Singhalese name of the animal, _alia_, which means literally, "the huge
one." _Alia_, he adds, is not a derivation from Sanskrit or Pali, but
belongs to a dialect more ancient than either.]
From time immemorial the natives have been taught to capture and tame
them and the export of elephants from Ceylon to India has been going on
without interruption from the period of the first Punic War.[1] In later
times all elephants were the property of the Kandyan crown; and their
capture or slaughter without the royal permission was classed amongst
the gravest offences in the criminal code.
[Footnote 1: ÆLIAN, _de Nat. Anim._ lib. xvi. c. 18; COSMAS INDICOPL.,
p. 128.]
In recent years there is reason to believe that their numbers have
become considerably reduced. They have entirely disappeared from
localities in which they were formerly numerous[1]; smaller herds have
been taken in the periodical captures for the government service, and
hunters returning from the chase report them to be growing scarce. In
consequence of this diminution the peasantry in some parts of the island
have even suspended the ancient practice of keeping watchers and fires
by night to drive away the elephants from their growing crops.[2] The
opening of roads and the clearing of the mountain forests of Kandy for
the cultivation of coffee, have forced the animals to retire to the low
country, where again they have been followed by large parties of
European sportsmen; and the Singhalese themselves, being more freely
provided with arms than in former times, have assisted in swelling the
annual slaughter.[3]
[Footnote 1: LE BRUN, who visited Ceylon A.D. 1705, says that in the
district round Colombo, where elephants are now never seen, they were
then so abundant, that 160 had been taken in a single corral. (_Voyage_,
&c., tom. ii. ch. lxiii. p. 331.)]
[Footnote 2: In some parts of Bengal, where elephants were formerly
troublesome (especially near the wilds of Ramgur), the natives got rid
of them by mixing a preparation of the poisonous Nepal root called
_dakra_ in balls of grain, and other materials, of which the animal is
fond. In Cuttack, above fifty years ago, mineral poison was laid for
them in the same way, and the carcases of eighty were found which had
been killed by it. (_Asiat. Res._, xv. 183.)]
[Footnote 3: The number of elephants has been similarly reduced
throughout the south of India.]
Had the motive that incites to the destruction of the elephant in Africa
and India prevailed in Ceylon, that is, had the elephants there been
provided with tusks, they would long since have been annihilated for the
sake of their ivory.[1] But it is a curious fact that, whilst in Africa
and India both sexes have tusks[2], with some slight disproportion in
the size of those of the females: not one elephant in a hundred is found
with tusks in Ceylon, and the few that possess them are exclusively
males. Nearly all, however, have those stunted processes called
_tushes_, about ten or twelve inches in length and one or two in
diameter. These I have observed them to use in loosening earth,
stripping off bark, and snapping asunder small branches and climbing
plants; and hence tushes are seldom seen without a groove worn into them
near their extremities.[3]
[Footnote 1: The annual importation of ivory into Great Britain alone,
for the last few years, has been about _one million_ pounds; which,
taking the average weight of a tusk at sixty pounds, would require the
slaughter of 8,333 male elephants.
But of this quantity the importation from Ceylon has generally averaged
only five or six hundred weight; which, making allowance for the
lightness of the tusks, would not involve the destruction of more than
seven or eight in each year. At the same time, this does not fairly
represent the annual number of tuskers shot in Ceylon, not only because
a portion of the ivory finds its way to China and to other places, but
because the chiefs and Buddhist priests have a passion for collecting
tusks, and the finest and largest are to be found ornamenting their
temples and private dwellings. The Chinese profess that for their
exquisite carvings the ivory of Ceylon excels all other, both in density
of texture and in delicacy of tint; but in the European market, the
ivory of Africa, from its more distinct graining and other causes,
obtains a higher price.]
[Footnote 2: A writer in the _India Sporting Review_ for October 1857
says, "In Malabar a tuskless male elephant is rare; I have seen but
two."--p. 157.]
[Footnote 3: The old fallacy is still renewed, that the elephant sheds
his tusks. ÆLIAN says he drops them once in ten years (lib. xiv. c. 5):
and PLINY repeats the story, adding that, when dropped, the elephants
hide them under ground (lib. viii.) whence SHAW says, in his _Zoology_,
"they are frequently found in the woods," and exported from Africa (vol.
i. p. 213): and Sir W. JARDINE in the _Naturalist's Library_ (vol. ix.
p. 110), says, "the tusks are shed about the twelfth or thirteenth
year." This is erroneous: after losing the first pair, or, as they are
called, the "milk tusks," which drop in consequence of the absorption of
their roots, when the animal is extremely young, the second pair acquire
their full size, and become the "permanent tusks," which are never
shed.]
Amongst other surmises more ingenious than sound, the general absence of
tusks in the elephant of Ceylon has been associated with the profusion
of rivers and streams in the island; whilst it has been thrown out as a
possibility that in Africa, where water is comparatively scarce, the
animal is equipped with these implements in order to assist it in
digging wells in the sand and in raising the juicy roots of the mimosas
and succulent plants for the sake of their moisture. In support of this
hypothesis, it has been observed, that whilst the tusks of the Ceylon
species, which are never required for such uses, are slender, graceful
and curved, seldom exceeding fifty or sixty pounds' weight, those of the
African elephant are straight and thick, weighing occasionally one
hundred and fifty, and even three hundred pounds.[1]
[Footnote 1: Notwithstanding the inferiority in weight of the Ceylon
tusks, as compared with those of the elephant of India, it would, I
think, be precipitate to draw the inference that the size of the former
was uniformly and naturally less than that of the latter. The truth, I
believe to be, that if permitted to grow to maturity, the tusks of the
one would, in all probability, equal those of the other; but, so eager
is the search for ivory in Ceylon, that a tusker, when once observed in
a herd, is followed up with such vigilant impatience, that he is almost
invariably shot before attaining his full growth. General DE LIMA, when
returning from the governorship of the Portuguese settlements at
Mozambique, told me, in 1848, that he had been requested to procure two
tusks of the largest size, and straightest possible shape, which were to
be formed into a cross to surmount the high altar of the cathedral at
Goa: he succeeded in his commission, and sent two, one of which was 180
pounds, and the other 170 pounds' weight, with the slightest possible
curve. In a periodical, entitled _The Friend_, published in Ceylon, it
is stated in the volume for 1837 that the officers belonging to the
ships Quorrah and Alburhak, engaged in the Niger Expedition, were shown
by a native king two tusks, each two feet and a half in circumference at
the base, eight feet long, and weighing upwards of 200 pounds. (Vol. i.
p. 225.) BRODERIP, in his _Zoological Recreations_, p. 255, says a tusk
of 350 pounds' weight was sold at Amsterdam, but he does not quote his
authority.]
But it is manifestly inconsistent with the idea that tusks were given to
the elephant to assist him in digging for his food, to find that the
females are less bountifully supplied with them than the males, whilst
the necessity for their use extends equally to both sexes. The same
argument serves to demonstrate the fallacy of the conjecture, that the
tusks of the elephant were given to him as weapons of offence, for if
such were the case the vast majority in Ceylon, males as well as
females, would be left helpless in presence of an assailant. But
although in their conflicts with one another, those which are provided
with tusks may occasionally push with them clumsily at their opponents;
it is a misapprehension to imagine that tusks are designed specially to
serve "in warding off the attacks of the wily tiger and the furious
rhinoceros, often securing the victory by one blow which transfixes the
assailant to the earth."[1]
[Footnote 1: _Menageries, &c._, published by the Society for the
Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, vol. i. p. 68: "The Elephant," ch. iii.
It will be seen that I have quoted repeatedly from this volume, because
it is the most compendious and careful compilation with which I am
acquainted of the information previously existing regarding the
elephant. The author incorporates no speculations of his own, but has
most diligently and agreeably arranged all the facts collected by his
predecessors. The story of antipathy between the elephant and rhinoceros
is probably borrowed from ÆLIAN _de Nat._, lib. xvii. c. 44.]
So harmless and peaceful is the life of the elephant, that nature
appears to have left it unprovided with any weapon of offence: its trunk
is too delicate an organ to be rudely employed in a conflict with other
animals, and although on an emergency it may push or gore with its tusks
(to which the French have hastily given the term "_défenses_"), their
almost vertical position, added to the difficulty of raising its head
above the level of the shoulder, is inconsistent with the idea of their
being designed for attack, since it is impossible for the elephant to
strike an effectual blow, or to "wield" its tusks as the deer and the
buffalo can direct their horns. Nor is it easy to conceive under what
circumstances an elephant could have a hostile encounter with either a
rhinoceros or a tiger, with whose pursuits in a state of nature its own
can in no way conflict.
Towards man elephants evince shyness, arising from their love of
solitude and dislike of intrusion; any alarm they exhibit at his
appearance may be reasonably traced to the slaughter which has reduced
their numbers; and as some evidence of this, it has always been observed
that an elephant exhibits greater impatience of the presence of a white
man than of a native. Were its instincts to carry it further, or were it
influenced by any feeling of animosity or cruelty, it must be apparent
that, as against the prodigious numbers that inhabit the forests of
Ceylon, man would wage an unequal contest, and that of the two one or
other must long since have been reduced to a helpless minority.
Official testimony is not wanting in confirmation of this view;--in the
returns of 108 coroners' inquests in Ceylon, during five years, from
1849 to 1855 inclusive, held in cases of death occasioned by wild
animals; 16 are recorded as having been caused by elephants, 15 by
buffaloes, 6 by crocodiles, 2 by boars, 1 by a bear, and 68 by serpents
(the great majority of the last class of sufferers being women and
children, who had been bitten during the night). Little more than
_three_ fatal accidents occurring annually on the average of five years,
is certainly a very small proportion in a population estimated at a
million and a half, in an island abounding with elephants, with which,
independently of casual encounters, voluntary conflicts are daily
stimulated by the love of sport or the hope of gain. Were the elephants
instinctively vicious or even highly irritable in their temperament, the
destruction of human life under the circumstances must have been
infinitely greater. It must also be taken into account, that some of the
accidents recorded may have occurred in the rutting season, when
elephants are subject to fits of temporary fury, known in India by the
term _must_, in Ceylon _mudda_,--a paroxysm which speedily passes away,
but during the fury of which it is dangerous even for the mahout to
approach those ordinarily the gentlest and most familiar.