The “King of Beasts” must, of course, be placed at the head of our list
of beasts of prey, for although he is excelled in size and ferocity
by the Tiger, in elegance of form by the Leopard and Jaguar, and in
beauty of colouring by most of the great Cats, yet it would be useless,
even if it were advisable, to depose him from the throne he has, by
the universal consent of mankind, so long occupied. And, truly, who
would wish to uncrown him? He is anything but an amiable beast--cruel
and cowardly, greedy, treacherous, noisy, and self-asserting, never
forgetful of the “divine right of kings” to prey upon their subjects;
but still he is quite on a level, in the matters of morality and
fitness to reign, with a very large proportion of his brother
sovereigns of the genus _Homo_, with whom he well deserves a place in
that limbo where, according to the mildly-spiteful poet of Olney, dwell
“all that ever reigned” of the kings of men.
The Lion is entirely confined to the Old World, where it ranges through
Africa from Barbary to Cape Colony, and extends into the south-west
corner of Asia, where its range just overlaps that of the Tiger. Except
in this “debateable land” the two monarchs keep clear of one another,
the Lion keeping court over Africa and South-west Asia, and the Tiger
ruling in Southern and Eastern Asia, the most important pretender in
either kingdom being the Leopard.
With respect to the subject of distribution of the Lion in ancient
times, we will quote from a late able writer. “That Lions were once
found in Europe there can be no doubt. Thus it is recorded by
Herodotus that the baggage camels of the army of Xerxes were attacked
by Lions in the country of the Pæonians and Crestonœi, on their march
from Acanthus (near the peninsula of Mount Athos) to Therme, afterwards
Thessalonica (now Salonika). The camels alone, it is stated, were
attacked, other beasts remaining untouched as well as men. The same
historian also observes that the limits in Europe within which Lions
were then found were the Nessus or Nestus, a Thracian river running to
Abdera, and the Achelous, which waters Acarnania. Aristotle mentions
Europe as abundant in Lions, and especially in that part which is
between the Achelous and Nessus, apparently copying the statement of
Herodotus. Pliny does the same, and adds that the Lions of Europe are
stronger than those of Africa and Syria. Pausanias copies the same
story as to the attack of the Lions on the Camels of Xerxes; and he
states, moreover, that Lions often descended into the plains at the
foot of Olympus, which separates Macedonia from Thessaly, and that
Polydamas, a celebrated athlete, a contemporary of Darius Nothus, slew
one of them, although he was unarmed. The passage in Oppian, which some
have considered as indicating the existence of Lions up to the banks
of the Danube, fails, as an authority, for placing the Lion in that
locality, because, as Cuvier observes, the context shows plainly that
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account