ON THE EDGE OF EXTINCTION - A - THE TIGER (Panthera tigris)

[peter]

ON MR. LIMOUZIN'S SKULL AND THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN SKULLS OF DIFFERENT BIG CAT SPECIES - I

a - Introduction

Some weeks ago, in the thread 'Size Comparisons', member 'Luipaard' posted information about a debate on a skull of a big cat shot in India in the early twenties of the last century. The debate in The Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society (JBNHS) attracted some attention.

A Mr. Limouzin, who shot the big cat, thought the skull belonged to a very large male leopard. He was supported by Mr. Prater, one of the editors of the JBNHS and an undisputed authority on big cats and skulls. The JBNHS published a photograph taken by Mr. Prater. It showed the skull of the big cat shot by Mr. Limouzin next to the skulls of a male leopard, a male Indian lion and a male Indian tiger. 

R.I. Pocock, of the British Museum, saw the photograph and quickly concluded it was a tiger skull. Mr. Limouzin and Mr. Prater disagreed. Pocock offered to examine the skull himself. Mr. Limouzin accepted the offer. When he returned to England in 1929, Pocock got the skull. He concluded it was the skull of a young adult tigress. The letter he wrote after examining the skull was published in the JBNHS. Not much later, Mr. Prater responded. In his letter, he explained why he got to his, incorrect, conclusion.  

b - On the origins of errors

A century ago, letters were often used to communicate. It took time to write a long letter, especially if accuracy was needed and drawings and photographs had to be included. It also took time to deliver a letter. Furthermore, magazins were only published once a month. Not seldom, it was less frequent. For this reason, it often took a long time to conclude a discussion. It is, therefore, quite likely that some of those who read Mr. Praters letter on Mr. Limouzin's skull missed the letter of Mr. Pocock published in 1929.  

Today, as a result of the internet, communication is direct and fast. If you want to find information on a specific topic, a day is needed. At most. That, however, doesn't mean you can get to conclusions in a day. In order to get to a conclusion, overview is needed. This means you have to read everything available. Furthermore, one has to remember that experts lost quite a bit of authority over the years. This means readers are more or less on their own these days. You have to be well-informed, that is. To be well-informed, however, is far from easy. It takes time to find good information and read all of it.    

Member 'Luipaard' knew about Mr. Limouzin's skull, but didn't know about Pocock's letter published in the JBNHS. Same for the one who informed him. A pity, as he seems to be an authority on leopard skulls. The result is both, until recently, thought Mr. Limouzin had shot a leopard. Reply