Engravings of Lions, Tigers, Panthers and Leopards

No. VIII

Neither is there any expression of ferocity, but of home comfort, in these two maneless Lions—or Lion and Lioness of Senegal. That which is asleep, however, rather illustrates our definition of Character, and is so far out of the question. The Lioness—who is awake, is a kind of Belle-Sauvage. Entirely without ferocity, she has some little expression of attention gently aroused by some slight cause—less important, we should think than the distant cry of a Chacal—a noise in the den, perhaps, not loud enough to make it worth while to wake her companion in order to see what’s the matter. But her expression of countenance, is almost as mild as that of a kitten in a chimney corner.—In fact, they seem—notwithstanding their Herculean strength—a kind of hearth-rug Lions.1

After venturing to express this slight difference of opinion (if it amount to so much) with our distinguished anatomist of Expression, we return, with becoming respect, to his valuable Treatise: though as we do not propose to exhibit, like him, an anatomical and comparative view of the Carnivorous and Gramnivorous genera, we shall confine ourselves to a short extract or two, relating to the Carnivora alone—

“It is of man alone that we can with strict propriety say the countenance is an index of the mind, having expression corresponding with each emotion of the soul. Other animals have no expression but that which arises by mere accident, the concomitant of the emotions necessary to the accomplishment of the object of the passions.”—

“I have to remark, as relative to painting, (my original subject of enquiry) that this remarkable difference between the expression in man, and animals, naturally leads us to investigate what are the peculiarities of mere animal expression.

“In order to see distinctly what the peculiarities of mere animal expression are, it seems proper to reduce the muscles of expression in animals, to their proper classes. These muscles, as they appear in the several quadrupeds, may be distinguished into—1. Those which raise the lips from the teeth: 2. Those which surround the eye-lids: and 3. Those which move the nostrils.”

He next proceeds to state that “in the Carnivorous animal, the muscles of the lip are so directed as to raise the lip from the canine teeth;”—and these he distinguishes by the name of “Ringentes, or snarling muscles.”

---

The snarling muscles take their origin from the margin of the orbit of the eye, and from the upper jaw, and are inserted into that part of the upper lip from which the whiskers grow, and which is opposite to the canine teeth; and although they are assisted in this office by other muscles, (the masticating and zygomatic muscles,) I have ventured to distinguish them particularly as the muscles of snarling. This action of snarling is quite peculiar to the ferocious and carnivorous animals.

“2. Muscles which surround the eye-lid. In man the upper eye-lid is raised by a muscle coming from the bottom of the orbit. But, besides this muscle, animals of prey in whom there is that peculiar and ferocious splendour of the eye, which we distinguish in the Tiger, for example, or the Lion—have three muscles infixed in the eye-lids, which drawing the eye-lids backward upon the peculiarly prominent eye-ball, produce the fixed straining of the eye, and by stretching the coats, give a greater brilliancy to the reflection. These muscles may be classed under the term Scintillantes.

“3. The muscles of the nostril are not less distinct and peculiar, in different classes of animals, than those of the eyes and lips. In the Carnivorous animals, the nose is comparatively insignificant, provision being made in the open mouth for any occasional increase of respiration above the uniform play of the lungs.”

Taking respectful, friendly, and reluctant leave of Mr. Bell, we trust that conformity will be found between these pictorial remarks and anatomical elucidations of his, and our engraved representations of the Carnivora.