# Human baby raised by lions vs elephants



## caters (Mar 4, 2017)

Not saying this is likely but one of the people on stack exchange said that namely because of the size of the baby, a human would more likely be raised by lions than by elephants if it were raised by wild animals in Africa. I see this as being almost impossible for 100% wild lions(in other words, lions that have never been tamed by humans).

I mean yes a newborn human baby and a lion cub are closer in size than a newborn human baby and newborn baby elephant and yes I have seen bonds between a lioness and an animal that would otherwise be prey, like for example in the documentary on youtube called Survivor. In that wildebeest documentary, a newborn wildebeest named Survivor looks as though it is being hunted by a lioness but this lioness in fact saved the newborn wildebeest from other predators while it was away from its mom and the wildebeest survived through the whole migration.

But only those 2 things, size and bonding would make me think that a human baby would more likely be raised by lions than by elephants.

For 1 thing, weaning for lion cubs starts at 3 months. Humans start weaning around 6-9 months. That means that milk might still be needed at 1 year old when the lionesses would definitely not be lactating or at least trying not to lactate. And even if vitamin C deficiency isn't a problem with eating raw meat, illness is. Infantile food poisoning is worse than food poisoning would be in an adult. It could easily mean death from dehydration.

The male or males in the pride might go after the baby as though it was a lion cub not from their own pride, in other words killing but not eating the baby.

And then there are all the bites and claw marks the baby would get from the lioness carrying the baby in her mouth and from lion cubs playing with the baby. And being licked clean would likely hurt, even if it doesn't cause bleeding wounds since a cat's tongue is like sandpaper.

But here is the biggest thing that for me makes being raised by lions a no no, even if elephants would stampede and squish the baby by accident. That is the predatory nature of lions. A lone baby animal or a straggler would most likely be killed and eaten by lions instead of adopted.

Even though elephants are fast compared to human babies and would stampede and probably squish the baby by accident, there is a lot more human nature in elephants. They fiercely protect their babies from predators, they more easily adopt babies, their diet is less likely to lead to vitamin C deficiency, they can feel vibrations through the ground and know that someone is in trouble without having to use their ears, they have prehensile trunks and can easily carry a 10 lb load.

So besides the comparative size and the fact that predators do sometimes form bonds with prey, what else would make a human baby more likely to be raised by lions than by elephants and more likely survive with the lions than with the elephants?


----------



## psychotick (Mar 4, 2017)

Hi,

I think the usual explanation for these events of wrong species mothering, is that the mother has just given birth to a still born so is full of hormones and needs something to mother.

But there's one obvious reason that elephants could never mother a human baby. Elephants don't lie down to let their offspring feed, and a human baby could never reach high enough. They'd starve.

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## skip.knox (Mar 4, 2017)

Neither is likely for the simple reason that it has not happened. Not lions. Not elephants.


----------



## Butterfly (Mar 4, 2017)

caters said:


> And then there are all the bites and claw marks the baby would get from the lioness carrying the baby in her mouth...



There is the reason why the baby would die. Lions cubs, like many other mammals, such as pups and kittens, can be carried in the mother's mouth only because they have a scruff. This is loose and non-sensitive area of skin at the back of the neck. As humans we simply don't have this. So if a lioness were to carry a baby, she would do so as if it were a lion cub, by the back of the neck, right where there are major arteries. this would lead to severe injuries resulting in catastrophic blood loss, possibly even a broken neck and more than likely, death.

The same situation applies to wolves and dogs.


----------



## TheCatholicCrow (Mar 4, 2017)

Butterfly said:


> There is the reason why the baby would die. Lions cubs, like many other mammals, such as pups and kittens, can be carried in the mother's mouth only because they have a scruff. This is loose and non-sensitive area of skin at the back of the neck. As humans we simply don't have this. So is a lioness were to carry a baby, she would do so as if it were a lion cub, by the back of the neck, right where there are major arteries there would be severe injuries resulting in catastrophic blood loss, possibly even a broken neck.



What about a Kangaroo ?


----------



## staiger95 (Mar 4, 2017)

If this is for a potential story you are trying to construct, I would consider making the child an early toddler perhaps at the time of 'adoption' in order to help surmount some of the obstacles mentioned above.  Beyond that, if it is a fantasy setting, there may be mystical or deific intervention involved.


----------



## skip.knox (Mar 4, 2017)

I forgot about fantasy. If the lion is Aslan, no problem. But if it's science fiction, then I would not accept the premise.


----------



## psychotick (Mar 4, 2017)

Hi,

Isn't Aslan male? If so has someone placed him on an extreme form of hormone replacement therapy so he can produce milk?!!

Cheers, Greg.


----------



## CupofJoe (Mar 5, 2017)

Aslan is a god as well... so making milk for a baby shouldn't be too taxing for him.


----------

