Historically, the comparative merits of the tiger versus the lion was a popular topic of discussion by hunters, naturalists, artists, and poets, and it continues to inspire the popular imagination in the present day.[1][2][3] Lions and tigers have competed in the wild where their ranges have overlapped. They have also been pitted against other in captivity, either as deliberate contests or as a result of accidental encounters.
Contents |
In the circuses of Ancient Rome, exotic beasts were commonly pitted against each other. The contest of the lion against the tiger was a classic pairing and the betting usually favoured the lion.[4][5] A mosaic in the House of the Faun in Pompeii shows a fight between a lion and a tiger.[6] At the end of the 19th century, the Gaekwad of Baroda arranged a fight between a lion and tiger before an audience of thousands. The Gaekwad favoured the lion, the Gaekwad had to pay 37,000 rupees as the lion was mauled apart.[2]
Lions and tigers coexisted in central India until the late 19th century and some accounts of contests were recorded.[7] The University of Minnesota's Lion Research Project describes the resulting findings as unclear: the lions were hunted more than tigers due to them preferring plain land due to which they now only live in Gir forest where no tiger lives.[7] The possibility of conflicts between the two has been raised in relation to the Asiatic Lion Reintroduction Project, which would introduce Gir Lions (Asiatic lions) from Gir Forest National Park to another preserve, the Kuno Wildlife Sanctuary, that contains tigers.[7] Concerns were raised that the co-presence of lions and tigers would "trigger frequent clashes".[7][8] A Lion Research Project website discusses several aspects of the confrontation. Lion advantages include their juvenile male members' combat experience over access to females and later tendency to engage in group combat, along with the protective advantage of their manes.[7] According to the site, tigers generally possess an advantage in size and weight, although these metrics vary by tiger subspecies. But it was thought by experts that lions would seem likely to survive translocation to tiger habitat.[9]
The Amur or Siberian tiger is the largest subspecies of the Panthera genus, known to weigh up to 660 lbs (300 kg),[11] while large African lions weigh up to 550 lbs (250 kg).[12]
The tiger is a solitary hunter while the lion is a social animal, living and hunting in groups called prides. Though lions cooperate in hunting, the pride is very competitive during feeding. Weaker animals are pushed aside or chased off. The competitive nature of this social structure makes the lion more prone to fighting, especially males whose very lives depend (since the male isn't as specialized in hunting on the open plains) on getting a pride of their own. The tiger is very quick so keepers of captive tigers must take care to avoid a sudden attack.[13] Studies have shown that the Lion has the higher relative and actual speed when comparisons were made with the tiger, the study also contains various other relative running speeds [14].
In most historical accounts where lions and tigers have fought, the tiger often came out the victor. In his book The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex, Charles Darwin describes an encounter between a tiger and a lion in captivity: "In 1857 a tiger at Bromwich broke into the cage of a lion, and a fearful scene ensued; "the lion's mane saved his neck and head from being much injured, but the tiger at last succeeded in ripping up his belly, and in a few minutes he was dead." [15] In September 2010 a tiger at Ankara Zoo got into the lion enclosure and killed a lion.[16] "The tiger severed the lion's jugular vein in a single stroke with its paw, leaving the animal dying in a pool of blood", officials said. In 2004, a lion defeated a tiger in a contest over access to a pool in a Chinese zoo, but did not kill the tiger. This was likely more playful in nature, than combative.[17] In 1951 at a circus performance in Milwaukee, a male lion killed a tigress.[13] Clyde Beatty was a world famous trainer of lions and tigers for circus acts, he claims that "In fights betweens lions and tigers he has seen 18 tigers killed and only 4 lions".
Dave Salmoni a Canadian animal trainer, who works extensively with both lions and tigers also states that lions are usually victorious and would pick them over a tiger in a fight. Even though he was in the tigers corner for animal face off this was purely for entertainment purposes, he has been quoted in interviews favouring the lion due to the fact the males lions "only job is to be a good fighter".[18]
Animal Face-Off is a television program that aired on Discovery Channel and Animal Planet in 2004[19]. This program centers on a hypothetical battle between two animals that could possibly meet in the wild, or in some cases, have been compared to each other by scientists. CGI replicas and models were used to collect data (such as strength, bite force, etc.) about the animals. Then, in a virtual arena, a brief computer-animated fight scene reveals the results.
One was the Animal Face-Offs was Asiatic Lion vs. Bengal Tiger, this is what happened: The tiger is eating its kill. The lion comes to a stop several meters away from the tiger and roars loudly. It runs and tackles the tiger, but trips on the other big cat and injures himself. The agile tiger quickly gets up and repeatedly tries to bite the lion's throat ferociously, but the lion shakes off the attacks. The lion gets up and both combatants back away from each other and roar. They scratch each other's faces fiercely. The tiger swoops in to end the fight quickly with a neck bite, but the lion's mane deflects his aim. The tiger backs away and then tackles the lion, but the lion reacts by biting the tiger's throat, killing it. The lion then walks a short distance, then roars in victory.[20]
18th century naturalists and authors were wont to compare the species' characters, generally in favor of the lion.[21] Oliver Goldsmith ranked the lion first among carnivorous mammals, followed by the tiger, which in his view "...seems to partake of all the noxious qualities of the lion, without sharing any of his good ones. To pride, courage, and strength, the lion joins greatness, clemency, and generosity; but the tiger is fierce without provocation, and cruel without necessity."[22] Charles Knight, writing in The English Cyclopaedia, disparages the opinions of naturalists Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon and Thomas Pennant in this context, stating that "...the general herd of authors who eulogise the 'courage, greatness, clemency, and generosity' of the lion, contrasting it with the unprovoked ferocity, unnecessary cruelty, and poltroonery of the tiger, becomes ridiculous, though led by such names as Buffon and Pennant."[21] Knight goes on to write that "The lion has owed a good deal to his mane and his noble and dignified aspect; but appearances are not always to be trusted."[21] In fact, a study was done by scientists Craig Packer and Peyton West which has claimed that the mane of the lion is strictly for mating purposes. Darker-maned lions were more often picked by females to breed, while light-maned lions weren't so lucky. This proves that a lions mane is of no particular help for a male lion in a fight, whether against another male lion or a tiger.[23]
The lion is traditionally thought of as the 'King of the Beasts' in English-speaking countries. But, in many Asian countries, such as China, India (where both big cats were once present), Korea, and Japan, it is the tiger which holds this title.[24][25]
Battles between the two were painted in the 18th and 19th centuries by Eugène Delacroix, George Stubbs, and James Ward. Ward's paintings, which portrayed lion victories in accordance with the lion's symbolic value in Great Britain, have been described as less realistic than Stubbs'.[26] The British Seringapatam medal shows a lion defeating a tiger in battle; an Arabic language banner on the medal displays the words "ASAD ALLAH AL-GHALIB" (the lion of God is the conqueror).[27] The medal commemorated the British victory at the 1799 Battle of Seringapatam (in the town now known as Srirangapatna) over Tipu Sultan—who used tigers as emblems, as opposed to the British emblematic use of lions.[27]
English literature compared their battle strengths.[28] The poets Edmund Spenser, Allan Ramsey, and Robert Southey described lion victories.[28] In the view of a 19th-century literary critic, these contests established "sovereignty of the animal world".[28]