[11]
E. Spilsbury delt. T. Landseer sculpt.
Lions after Rubens.
We believe that this subject also, has passed through the medium of an Etching by Bloteling, for it differs in some minor respects from the picture in the gallery of Sir John Sebright. It however affords further illustration of the theory of expression laid down by Mr. Bell, while it embodies the Scriptural idea of a “ramping and roaring Lion seeking whom he may devour.”
We have mentioned above, our having been disposed, on a certain occasion of visiting a public menagerie, to pat and stroke a Royal Tiger as he lay in his den with his nose toward the spectator, and whose looks, though certainly far from angelic, we could almost have called amiable: yet this is very far from being the character of the Tiger. To stroke, or pat, or touch them in any way, however, no person should ever venture, except their keepers; even the tame Tigers, that are sometimes brought up almost without animal food by the mendicant priests of Hindostan, are strictly prohibited from being touched—“under the utmost rigours of religious anathema,” says Col. Williamson, who relates a circumstance of his having visited a Faukeer who kept a Tiger of this kind in the wilds of Colgong.
[No. XII.]
The amiable-looking Tiger of whom we have spoken, lay something in the attitude and manner of the principal Panther, in the present picturesque group which Mr. Spilsbury copied from the Sketch-book of that admirable painter and anatomist of animals, Stubbs.
Perhaps this sentiment of ours, may be ascribed—in part at least—to the undulations of form, glossiness of surface, and brilliancy of colours, of these interesting creatures, reviving the early mental impressions which we remember to have received at the sight of shining and speckled shells, butterflies’ wings, and other objects of pure beauty; and in part to our having associated ideas of innocence and domesticated habits and comfort, with the “sympathetic mirth” (as Goldsmith’s phrase is) of sportive kittens.
It may not be unworthy of our best philosophy to pause here, and observe how Nature contrives to mingle, and seems to insist on mingling, sentiments and mental impressions, which analysing man is so fond of reducing to first elements—as he calls them. Surely there is, about these Carnivorous and terrible creatures, a saving grace—a beauty in their dreadfulness, which is exceedingly interesting, although it co-exist with cruelty: for if they are cruel, their cruelty is involuntary, and not implacable; and therefore, if not pardonable, not hateful—while the external beauty which they possess, is of a positive nature.
Reverting here to our own scholastic distinction, we think that Nature has, in the instance of this species of quadrupeds, mingled with similar success, energy of character, with a degree of mildness of expression. The natural character of the Panther is fearfully ferocious, yet a superinduced kindly expression may be seen in this group from the pencil of Stubbs—a sworn disciple of Nature—which may shew that in their home retiredness, they have not been left destitute of the means of letting each other see that they are sociable, friendly, and not entirely without the means of expressing the gentler emotions. Men are perhaps too exclusively disposed to look at the objects around them, as those objects immediately concern themselves: Mr. Stubbs, in composing this capital group, took a more extensive and genuine view of things; and notwithstanding the Panther is larger and more formidable than the Leopard (from which quadruped he is not always easily distinguishable), has depicted them as scarcely less mild and gentle than the domestic Cat.