The size of the Barbary lion

[GuateGojira]

(01-14-2022, 01:40 PM)Spalea Wrote: @GuateGojira :

About #92: Thank you for answering me. The examples you give are very interesting because is there somebody, at first sight, who could have believed that the indochinese tigers are able to be as big as some Amur tiger ? Bengal tigers yes, because we know that they can always prey on big animals within small areas (Indian parks aren't particularly vast) while as concerns the Siberian tigers it's more difficult to kill a big prey, and this often after having covered several kilometers or tens kilometers only to locate it !

As for the Atlas lions, because of their very generous mane, they have been mythologized by the french settlers of the XIXth century during the Romantism Period. The french painter Eugene Delacroix (1798-1863) glorified them through his famous oil paintings and watercolors after a long trip through Morocco. Jules Gérard* (1817-1864) was renowned as a famous lions hunter especially in the Atlas mountains. He spoke in his stories about 17 feets-longed Atlas lions (C.A.W Guggisberg "Simba, the life of the lion", publication date: 1961) !

Thus, I believe, because of all this, a myth survived till our days as concerns these famous, unlucky extinct in wild, lions... It just needs to see some youtubers videos.

*: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_G%C3%A9rard

The idea that the Indochinese tiger is small came from Mazak and Gugguisberg, which used Malayan tigers (measurements from Locke and other sources) as surrogates for the entire population. However Baze already mentioned that Indochinese tigers were bigger, up to 220 kg and he reported that his biggest tiger (570 lb) was as big as a big Bengal tiger. Interestingly, new measurements from scientists in the field, from Thailand, shows that the head-body length taken in straigh line, is about the same as the Bengal and Amur tigers and the weights are just slightly smaller than those of the modern Amur tigers. This image is interesting:

*This image is copyright of its original author

So it seems that the late Dr Rabinowits was aware of this, but as must of the sources quote the table of Mazak, we still believe that Indochinese tigers were smaller overall, when actually they are only a little lighter in weights.

The idea of the giant "Siberian tiger" and the "Barbary lion" is embedded in the mind of people in such a hard way that you can see dozens of videos in Youtube repiting the same thing again and again, even popular books and webpages like NatGeo and Discovery repeat the same mantra. Check since when I am showing this information and there is still people out there that deny these facts with all they heart! 

It seems that these myths are going to stay around for a couple of more years, I hope so. Reply