Panther as resembling the Jaguar, in having the same number of rows of
spots, but different in having no full spots, on the dorsal line. If
this be correct, then is the existence of the Panther established as
being distinct from the Leopard: but I do not find that full spots on
the dorsal line always make a specific difference of the Jaguar. When,
therefore, it is said, that the Panther much resembles the Jaguar, it is
always strongly to be suspected that the type whence the observations
are taken is an American animal. If the contrary be clearly established,
and the animal be found to have large round or oval open marks of black,
with a central spot on the sides and back, and a tail longer than from
its insertion to the ground, it may be concluded that it is the real
Panther.
Lastly, that indefatigable investigator, CUVIER, says he was long in
doubt whether the Panther and Leopard were distinct: but a comparison of
a great number of skins, as well as observations on the numerous animals
sent to the French Museum, have satisfied him that they are different;
and he accordingly describes the Panther as having six or seven rows of
rose-like spots in transverse lines, the tail longer and the head larger
than the Jaguar, and the ground-colour of the fur paler. The Leopard he
describes as a little less than the Panther, though with the same
proportions; but the spots, as much more numerous, forming ten
transverse lines.
The opinion of CUVIER is certainly deserving of the greatest attention;
but it may be observed that his enumeration of the six or seven rows of
spots in the Panther, and of ten in the Leopard, is not so certainly
intelligible as might be desired, when it is considered that the spots
or marks in question have really little or no parallelism.
Notwithstanding, therefore, this respectable authority, it seems very
probable that the Panther and Leopard are one and the same species,
which branches into two varieties, the Asiatic and the African; the
former of which is brighter in colour, and probably something larger
than the latter; and that the females of both are paler and less than
the other sex. CICERO, in his letters to ATTICUS, speaks of the Panther
of Africa, and the Asiatic Panther; as if they were different.
The ancient naturalists were not a whit more successful in
distinguishing these two quadrupeds, than the moderns, notwithstanding
the opportunities which they possessed of inspecting so many. MR.
GRIFFITH comments on SHAW, LICHTENSTEIN, and CUVIER; so did CICERO and
PLINY, on ARISTOTLE. Hence their _Panthera_, _Pardus_, and the
_Leopardus_ of the later ages of Rome (the last of which plainly
indicates their supposition that a Lion or Lioness had been concerned in
the generation of this spotted animal.)
It is surprising to reflect on the great number of Panthers, which in
those later ages of Rome, were brought from the deserts of Africa for
their public shows. SCAURUS exhibited an hundred and fifty of them at
one time; POMPEY, four hundred and ten; and AUGUSTUS, four hundred and
twenty! They probably thinned the province of Mauritania almost to
extirpation; which may account for the superior abundance of these
quadrupeds, as well as of Lions, at present, in Guinea, and the more
southern parts of Africa.
It would appear, that after all that has been accomplished by the spot
and row-counting philosophers, the distinction between Panthers and
Leopards is by no means made out; and we take it, that whenever Nature
means to mark a distinction of this sort, she always does it with a
firmer hand, and more decisive line.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration: 14
_E. Spilsbury del^t._ _T. Landseer sculp^t._
LEOPARD & PANTHER after STUBBS.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. XIV.
STUBBS, who had most likely paid sufficient attention to what the
naturalists had previously said on the subject—and whom no naturalist
has exceeded in accuracy of observation—appears to have here sketched
out the differences, and the resemblances, between these two animals—if
two they may be termed. It will be observed that the one which we esteem
to be the LEOPARD—the nearer figure of the two—is somewhat smaller than
the other, and that the dark spots on her body are not clustered in
roselets, or oilettes, as they have sometimes been called; while on the
body of the PANTHER, they are, and indeed everywhere, excepting on his
head and fore-legs. In short, STUBBS’S delineation agrees best with the
definition of CUVIER, whose discernment and philosophical tact are by no
means inferior to that indefatigability for which he is praised by
GRIFFITH.
Of this Leopard and Panther, the actions and expression (although not
the character—their noses and mouths being of longer and larger
proportions) are very much those of the common domestic Cat, when in a
playful mood. Something there is of burlesque clumsiness in their
play—resembling HERCULES with the distaff; and something of that assumed
look which may be observed among Cats while frolicking with their young.
And these kindly and droll expressions of countenance—these “quips and
cranks, and wanton wiles,”—are doubtless very well understood among the
carnivorous comedians, notwithstanding that to some of ourselves, they
may not appear to amount to much: yet the difference of these our
engraved heads of a playful Leopard and Panther, and the ocular
expressions of such animals when raging with hunger, or rendered angry
by opposition, is immense, and could not fail, if presented together, to
be strikingly obvious to those who are in the least studious of the
physiognomical variations of the ferocious tribe. Let the reader compare
them with the threatening LION and defying TIGER among the rocks, after
the same master, which we have numbered 19.
Horse-play is proverbially unwelcome: Panther-play must be worse. We
cannot associate the idea of the endurance of it within reach of man.
But where Cats and Kittens are occasionally permitted in the parlour,
there is comparative harmlessness. And who has not witnessed with
delight, among the rat-catching carnivora in their joyous moments, those
spontaneous and electrical kindlings of various and rapid fun, which
must have made HERACLITUS laugh, could he have seen them, and have been
a lesson to LAVATER.
No. XV.
A LION and LIONESS, after RUBENS, where we esteem the execution—more
especially of the parts which are brought into muscular action, and the
rich hairy texture of the fur—to be highly creditable to the artists
concerned. In these respects, it transcends beyond all comparison the
Etching by PICART of the same subject. We were about to say more of
these things, and to request attention more particularly to the hinder
parts of the female, but the knit brow and threatening eye of the Lion
glares upon us with its high claims, and terrible truth, and we cannot
but perceive a broad, pervading, and dextrous display of light, shade,
and expression of texture.—Now, where there is just harmony of parts, it
is the _whole_ which merits praise; and this praise is of a higher kind
than could possibly be bestowed with propriety on any part.
The Expression of the Lion is not here so self-possessed and majestic as
in some of the examples which we have passed. His magnanimity is
exchanged for that dark treachery and cruel-mindedness, which some
modern authors ascribe to him. Nor is the Lioness more amiable: both
seem lurking, malicious, and as if animated by some horrid hope.
RUBENS seems to have let them into his Assyrian den, in order to let the
world see from how dreadful animals Providence was protecting its
favoured minister.
No. XVI.
RUBENS has here painted one Lion as scowling, another as if in a sort of
mysterious meditation, and a third yawning with ennui—no doubt to
diversify a composition wherein he was of necessity obliged to introduce
a considerable number of animals of the same kind.
The Lion has been, of all quadrupeds whatever, the most idealised by the
Arts, and the most variously represented. The tide of opinion ran for
centuries in his favour. Kings took their designations from him: amongst
whom have been our first RICHARD; but of late years very reputable
travellers and other authors have appeared, who would bring down the
poetic generosity, the reputation of which the Lion has so long enjoyed,
to the plain prose craft and cruelty of the rest of the feline race.
The noble disdain with which a Lioness, though half famished, and “with
udders all drawn dry,”—scorned to prey on a sleeping man—Must we part
with the sentiment? Must we also disbelieve the story which has been
commemorated by a large French engraving, of a Lion gently taking up in
his mouth a fallen infant, and as gently setting it down again, to the
infinite delight of its terrified mother?—Such anecdotes have pleased
and flattered us; but may possibly have gained undeserved credit because
they pleased, and have pleased because they flattered—_human_ nature.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration: 15
_E. Spilsbury del^t._ _T. Landseer sculp^t._
LIONS after RUBENS.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration: 16
_E. Spilsbury del^t._ _T. Landseer sculp^t._
LIONS after RUBENS.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration: 17
_Edwin Landseer delin^t._ _T. Landseer sculp^t._
LIONESS & BITCH from CROSS’S MENAGERIE.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No. XVII.
Repeated instances of FRIENDSHIPS BETWEEN THE LION AND THE DOG, have
occurred at the Menagerie at the Tower, as well as elsewhere in England:
and we have pleasure in adding a corroborating fact of a novel
character. Mr. EDWIN LANDSEER made it the subject of a Drawing from
Nature, and we here present the public with an Engraving after it,
executed by his brother, and numbered in our collection, 16.
A female whelp was accidentally found, quite young, and even before its
eye-lids were unclosed, in an African forest not far from the sea shore.
It was brought on board ship by some sailors, where a smallish black
bitch, by birth quite an ignoble cur, having recently pupped, the
experiment was successfully made, of ascertaining whether she would
suckle the young Lioness, who was christened _Charlotte_.—_Charlotte_
soon began to thrive, and to play kitten frolics; and continued to be
thus nurtured, till, at no great length of time, she became so much
larger than her foster-parent, and required so much food, as to induce
the necessity of weaning her.
But the two quadrupeds continued, ever after, to live together on the
most friendly and affectionate terms; constantly inhabiting the same
cage, and habitually partaking of the same messes of provision. The
Lioness, though now grown large, having never seen any other mother,
continued through life to shew marks of daughterly obedience, and the
bitch, of maternal regard. Mr. EDWIN LANDSEER, as well as many others,
has frequently seen them caressing each other in their cage at the
Exeter ’Change Menagerie, in the manner which he has represented: the
Drawing, which exhibits portraits both of the LIONESS and BITCH, having
been done some years ago.
And these kitten frolics, or the youthful disposition to indulge in
them, continued on the part of the Lioness, till her older and graver
nurse became tired of the lion-play, and would sometimes snarl and bark
forbiddingly. It was very entertaining, and an interesting chapter in
Natural History, to behold this; for the Bitch ever retained an
ascendancy, and much of the authority, of a parent: so that her
foster-daughter, though so much larger, and so tremendously powerful,
would retire obediently to the farther corner of the cage, waiting a
favourable change of temper, on the part of her senior, before she
renewed her playful familiarities.
On a principle of prudence, however, and because it was judged that if
these inmates of the same refectory, ever quarrelled, it would be at a
meal-time, they were of late separately fed: that is to say, not at
separate times, or tables, but, at opposite corners of the apartment:
but the Bitch has often been known to help herself out of _Charlotte’s_
portion, without fear or ceremony, and her majesty to shew no
resentment, nor any kind of royal displeasure or hurt feeling, at the
indecorum.
We esteem this Engraving to afford a fair example of the positive, or
negative, power of the sovereign of the forest, of physiognomically
expressing the gentler emotions. But it occurs to us here—and we mention
it in reference to an argument maintained in an earlier part of this
dissertation—that perhaps licking with the tongue may belong to the dumb
language of quadrupedal expression of affection. But the Dog, and the
Cat, kind, express themselves in this way; and amongst each other, it
cannot be misunderstood—the affectionate idea being impressed at the
period of their very earliest susceptibilities, and associated—perhaps
as indissolubly as the human endearments of smiles and kissing—with
their youngest, purest, and most permanent recollections.
No. XVIII.
In this plate the ideas of expeditious motion, and quest, are admirably
depicted:—kept up from stem to stern; he is evidently bent on
destruction.—This is he that appeared to the terrified imagination of
COLLINS’S Oriental camel-driver, who, in his beautiful Eclogue,
exclaims—
“What, if the LION _in his rage_ I meet!”
And the determined purpose which pervades the whole frame and the mind
of the sallying hero, is seen in his resolute look, as well as in every
motion of his muscular limbs—aye, to the very tuft at the extremity of
his tail. All is expressive of his plenitude of animation, and prey is
obviously his purpose. None can mistake him.
This will probably be thought another of the instances in which the
present artists have been eminently successful in the execution of their
subject. (For the design they were indebted to the etching-needle of
RIDINGER.) The shag of the mane is characteristically varied from the
short hair which covers the face, body, and limbs; the anatomy is ably
indicated; and the chiaroscuro is vigorous.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration: 18
_E. Spilsbury del^t._ _T. Landseer sculp^t._
LION after REYDINGER.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hunters say that a dozen or fifteen dogs, trained to the sport, will
overpower a Lion before he can strike many blows: but these are the
limbs which “at every blow destroy an enemy.”
We have next to treat of the ROYAL TIGER OF BENGAL, beautiful, powerful,
fierce, and unrelenting.—Terrible, yet admirable!
Mr. BEWICK says that the Tiger “is the most rapacious and destructive of
all carnivorous animals. Fierce without provocation, and cruel without
necessity, its thirst for blood is insatiable. Though glutted with
slaughter, it continues its carnage; it fears neither the sight nor the
opposition of man, whom it frequently makes its prey; and it is even
said to prefer human flesh to that of any other animal:” a fact which is
confirmed by COLONEL WILLIAMSON, and Mr. PAUL of Daudpore, the latter of
whom has the reputation of having killed as many Tigers as any hundred
other men in India.
The strength of this animal is so great, that when it has killed a Deer,
it carries it off with much ease. WOOD relates a story, on good
authority, of a Buffalo being carried off by one; but it had previously
refreshed itself by sucking the Buffalo’s blood. The latter had been
hampered, and was weakened by its struggles in a quagmire; and the Tiger
let fall its prey, and fled at the approach of some Indian peasants. We
must suppose, too, this Tiger to have been one of the largest, and of
extraordinary power, for COLONEL WILLIAMSON reports that in the public
combats that are sometimes exhibited in India, between Tigers and
Buffaloes, the latter is commonly the victor.
But the eagerness of its voracity is believed to transcend that of any
other creature whatever. If undisturbed at the commencement of its meal,
it plunges its head into the body of its reeking victim, up to the very
eyes, in order to glut itself with the bloody enjoyment. Oysters are not
opened and swallowed with more zest and avidity.
No. XIX.
The commencement of such A CARNIVOROUS FEAST, where the TIGER has seized
and slain—not a wild Buffalo, but a BULLOCK, from the tame herds of
Hindostan. As the cattle descend toward the river to drink, their crafty
enemy lies in ambush among the jungle, or creeps along cautiously and
unseen; and, watching a favourable opportunity, makes his murderous
spring.
Although WILLIAMSON corroborates MR. BEWICK’S account of the Tiger’s
fondness of human flesh, he does not agree to that of its fearlessness.
On the contrary, he thinks that on occasions where Tigers have seemed
fearless, momentary anguish or resentment, has been their real stimulus;
and adds, that “the Tiger is, of all beasts of prey, the most cowardly;
its treacherous disposition induces it, almost without exception, to
conceal itself until its prey may arrive within reach of its spring, be
its victim either bulky or diminutive. Size seems to occasion no
deviation in the Tiger’s system of attack, which is founded on the art
of surprising. We find, accordingly, that such as happen to keep the
opposite side of a road, by which they are somewhat beyond the first
spring, often escape injury; the Tiger being unwilling to be seen before
he is felt. Hence it is rarely that a Tiger pursues; but, if the
situation permit, his cunning will not fail to effect his purpose, he
will steal along the road-side among the bushes parallel with the
traveller’s course, until one of the many chances which present
themselves of finding him within reach, induces to the attack. Often,
where the country is rather too open to allow his proceeding in this
manner, the Tiger will take a sweep among underwood or through ravines,
in order to meet the traveller again at a spot whence he may make his
spring.
“Tigers are extremely partial to such sites as command a road, selecting
one rather less frequented, in preference to one that is much in use. In
the former, they are certain of finding as much as will answer their
daily wants. If, however, the haunt be on a public road, it is usually
at some spot abounding with grass or bushes, especially the _prauss_,
and in the vicinity of some ample cover supplied with water, to which
the prey can be dragged. There, in some low, opake spot, the sanguinary
meal is consummated in gloomy silence.
“It should be observed, that for the most part the Tiger chooses his
station on that side of the road which is opposite to his haunt; so
that, when he seizes his prey, he proceeds straight forward, without
having occasion to turn, and thus drags it across mostly at a trot. If
he misses his aim, he will rarely return, unless attacked; but, in a
sullen manner, either skulks through the cover; or, if the country be
not sufficiently close to conceal his motions, he moves on at a canter.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration: 19
_E. Landseer del^t._ _T. Landseer sculp^t._
TIGER & INDIAN BULLOCK after NATURE.]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Illustration: 20
SENEGAL LION after REYDINGER.
BLACK-MANED LION after REMBRANDT.
LIONESS after REYDINGER.
_E. Spilsbury del^t._ _T. Landseer sculp^t._]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finding the same anecdotes of Lions and Tigers repeated from book to
book, the present writer has in general avoided to reiterate what he
conceived would in most instances prove to have been already read: but
he cannot wholly pass that in which a lady—next to the Royal Tiger
himself—was the principal figure; more especially as it illustrates a
fact of natural history not useless for Oriental travellers to be
acquainted with—namely, the susceptibility of the Tiger of sudden alarm.
Some ladies and gentlemen being on a party of pleasure, under a shade of
trees on the banks of a river in Bengal, were suddenly surprised at
seeing a Tiger ready to make its fatal spring. One of the ladies, with
amazing presence of mind, laid hold of an umbrella, and unfurling it
directly in the animal’s face, it instantly retired.
The following also confirms WILLIAMSON’S account of the Tigers which are
brought up tame by some of the mendicant Indian priests who inhabit the
banks of the Ganges.
A beautiful young male Tiger was brought from China, some twenty years
ago in the Pitt East Indiaman: at the age of ten months it was so far
domesticated, as to admit every kind of familiarity from the people on
board. It seemed to be quite harmless, and was as playful as a kitten.
It frequently slept with the sailors in their hammocks, and would suffer
two or three of them to repose their heads upon its back, as upon a
pillow, whilst it lay stretched out upon the deck. In return for this,
it would, however, now and then steal their meat. Having one day taken a
piece of beef from the carpenter, he followed the animal, took the meat
out of its mouth, and beat it severely for the theft; which punishment
it suffered with all the patience of a dog. It would frequently run out
on the bowsprit; climb about the ship like a cat; and perform a number
of tricks with an agility that was truly astonishing. There was a Dog on
board the ship, with which it would often play in the most diverting
manner. But it ought to be remembered at the time this Tiger was taken
on board the ship, it was only a month or six weeks old; and when
arrived in this country, it had not quite completed a year.
No. XX.
THREE small LIONS, on a single Plate; forming a sort of tail-piece, and
bringing up the rear of our carnivorous procession.
This plate exhibits three different VARIETIES. THE LION OF SENEGAL,
nearly in profile, reclined, but under the influence of some slight
degree of irritation; the black-maned LION of AFRICA; and the common
LIONESS of ASIA, regaling herself on a dead bird.
The upper and lower subjects, are after RIDINGER. The African Lion, in
the middle, is originally from REMBRANDT, but has passed through the
medium of an indifferent Etching by PICART; and, like the rest, has
finally been corrected by a reference to Nature.—We believe it was
corrected from the specimen that was some few years ago presented to
LADY CASTLEREAGH; which was exhibited at Exeter ’Change, and of which
MR. EDWIN LANDSEER and MR. THOMAS CHRISTMAS had the _post-obit_
reversion.
G. NORMAN, PRINTER, MAIDEN LANE, COVENT GARDEN.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUPPLEMENTARY PLATES.
PLATE XXI.
NEPTUNE, PAINTED BY E. LANDSEER, ENGRAVED BY T. LANDSEER.
A beautiful and highly characteristic engraving of a favourite
Newfoundland Dog. It is engraved by Mr. Thomas Landseer from a drawing
by his brother Edwin, and highly admired as a faithful likeness of the
original.
PLATE XXII.
BRUTUS, PAINTED BY E. LANDSEER, ENGRAVED BY T. LANDSEER.
The property of Edwin Landseer, Esq. Good judges may at once perceive in
this portrait the points that constitute a thorough good one of the
breed. Rough, wiry and strong, with eyes almost concealed, Brutus is yet
active, vigilant and courageous, possessing in great perfection the
qualities most desirable in the terrier.
PLATE XXIII.
A CROSS OF THE DOG AND FOX, PAINTED BY E. LANDSEER, ENGRAVED BY T.
LANDSEER.
The subject of this fine engraving had occasioned much doubt in the
minds of naturalists, but the question as to its reality was decided, by
the fact of the animal whose portrait we give, having been produced from
a tan terrier bitch and a tame dog fox.