Part 1

Transcriber’s Note

Obvious typos and missing punctuation corrected.

Antiquated use of ‘V’ for ‘U’, older spellings (e.g. opake), inconsistent spellings (e.g. artist names and work titles), and some inconsistencies in formatting of text have been retained.

Work titles “Tiger Hunt” and “Tiger taking the Water” have been added to the captions of Plates XXXVI and XXXVII respectively.

Small caps in the original are represented by ALL CAPS.

Italics in the original are represented by underscores surrounding the _italic text_.

Superscripts in the original are represented by a caret ^ preceding the raised character.

The first plate shows a lion’s head breaking through an engraved tablet, removing some of the letters in the middle.

ENGRAVINGS

OF

LIONS, TIGERS, PANTHERS, LEOPARDS DOGS, &c.

CHIEFLY AFTER THE DESIGNS OF

SIR EDWIN LANDSEER,

BY HIS BROTHER,

THOMAS LANDSEER.

PRINTED FROM THE ORIGINAL PLATES PUBLISHED BETWEEN 1823 AND 1828.

LONDON: HENRY G. BOHN, YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN. MDCCCLIII.

LIST OF PLATES.

DESIGNER ENGRAVER

1 Lion couchant, _Frontispiece_ EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

2 Leopard, after Ridinger SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

3 Lions, after Rubens SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

4 Tiger, from Nature SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

5 Leopards, after Rubens SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

6 Contending Group, from Nature EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

7 Lion and Snake, from Nature SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

8 Senegal Lion and Lioness, after SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_ Ridinger

9 Lion and Tiger, after Stubbs SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

10 Tigress, from Nature T. LANDSEER _T. Landseer_

11 Lions, after Rubens SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

12 Panthers, after Stubbs SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

13 Panthers, after Stubbs SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

14 Leopards and Panthers, after Stubbs SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

15 Lions, after Rubens SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

16 Lions, after Rubens SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

17 Lioness and Bitch, from Cross’s EDWIN _T. Landseer_ Menagerie LANDSEER

18 Lion, after Ridinger SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_

19 Tiger and Indian Bullock, from Nature EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

20 { Senegal Lion, after Ridinger } { Black-maned Lion, after Rembrandt } SPILSBURY _T. Landseer_ { Lioness, after Ridinger }

21 Neptune, a Newfoundland Dog EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

22 Brutus, a Terrier EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

23 Portrait of a Cross of the Dog and Fox EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

24 Dogs setting a Hare EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

25 Vixen, a Scotch Terrier EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

26 Fox Hounds of the Hatfield Hunt EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

27 Proctor, Study of a Blood-hound’s Head EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

28 Bob, a favourite Terrier EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

29 The Poacher, “The Wily Fox” EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

30 Alpine Mastiff EDWIN _T. Landseer_ LANDSEER

31 Old Dog looks like a Picture EDWIN _J. Webb_ LANDSEER

32 Fight between “Jacko Maccacco,” } a celebrated Monkey, } T. and Mr. Thos. Cribb’s } LANDSEER _T. Landseer_ well known bitch “Puss” }

33 Little Billy, a celebrated Bull Dog T. LANDSEER _T. Landseer_

34 Black Cap, a Harrier’s head G. H. LAPORTE _T. Landseer_

35 Dead Red Deer EDWIN _J. R. Scott_ LANDSEER

36 Tiger Hunt T. LANDSEER _T. Landseer_

37 Tiger taking the Water SIR C. _T. Landseer_ D’OYLY, Bart.

38 Elephants returning from the Hunt SIR C. _T. Landseer_ D’OYLY, Bart.

39 Red Deer R. HILLS _T. Landseer_

CARNIVOROUS QUADRUPEDS.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PLATES.

That there has hitherto existed no good book of Engravings of the nobler wild animals, to assist the progress of the student in that department of Art, is to be regretted. The talents of Mr. JOHN SCOTT, brought into action by those of GILPIN, COOPER, and the REINAGLES, have presented the public with excellent representations of the distinguished ornaments of the turf: the sports of the field, and the habits and manners of the canine race, were also duly honoured: but of the ferocious TIGER tribe, and the lordly LION, we have nothing extant that would bear critical inspection, beyond a few detached prints:—nothing like a collection of figures, whose justness and accuracy of form, action, character, and expression, might be relied on.

Does any reader imagine that the various Etchings which have been performed—chiefly abroad—by Artists of no mean ability, may be considered as exceptions? They are not exceptions: or at best, the number which might be so regarded is but small, and those, for the most part, of dimensions not accommodated to the drawer of the cabinet, or the shelf of the library.

But they are not objectionable on this ground alone. Speaking of them in the aggregate, the heavier charge lies against them of being insufficient to those purposes of taste and information which are the ends of Art. Even those after TITIAN and after RUBENS (the latter of whom has perhaps painted a greater number than any other of the old masters) are far more deficient in form, character, and expression, than is generally supposed, or than will be easily believed, by those who have not actually compared them with the Lions, Leopards, and Tigers of Nature. They have been taken too much on the credit which attaches to the great names of their authors.—Nor is this intended to impugn the merits, as historical or poetical painters, of those distinguished Artists, but simply as an assertion of truth. It is possible, that as a painter of allegory, RUBENS might consider that strong infusion of _human_ form, character, and expression, by which his Lions, for example, are distinguished, as necessary, or conducive, to his allegorical purposes; or, it is possible that his knowledge of this animal may not have been thoroughly well-grounded, and that he may have laboured under early prejudice of mind, or of vision, in this part of his education as a Painter, and may not have seen Lions as they really are. This is what the writer is most inclined to believe, (though not to insist); for even in treating the subject of Daniel in the den of Lions—the scene of which, by the way, he has not represented as a royal menagerie, but as a wild, rocky cavern—his animals partake of the artificial character of which we cannot bring ourselves to approve.

Of this fact, however, we purpose to exhibit proof with our assertion. Improved versions, to the best abilities of our Artists, of some of these Lions of RUBENS and the Assyrian king, will here be introduced, which the reader, who pleases, may compare with the originals. Our second, third, and fourth Plates are of the number.

The Lions of RUBENS are _humanized_. We do not intend to discuss at length whether the ideality of allegorical painting required this: we only state the fact: yet the opinions which we felt at liberty to form on the subject, we feel at liberty to utter. So much in apology for using the licence of asserting that the heads of many of the Lions of RUBENS rather resemble those of frowning old gentlemen decorated with Ramillies wigs; as if Nature’s journeymen had made _manes_, and not made them well. There is a profusion of flowing and curling hair, which seems rather to solicit the unguents of the perfumer, than to have endured the torrid heats of the desert, or the rough storms of the forest. The shag of a Lion’s mane is a very different sort of thing.

However such dressed Lions may be thought to accord with Allegory, they are demonstrably at variance with Nature. To be sure, what might become a Lion in the procession of the Cardinal Virtues, might be rather unsuitable in his den, or within the precincts of those wild haunts, where he is accustomed to roam in his natural state. We have often read of the fabled Men-bulls, or (Minotaurs,) and we find such on the coinage of Crete. These allegorical creatures of RUBENS, which, alas! have sometimes been _quoted_ by Artists without half his genius, and placed in savage conflicts, or beside their Britannias—are a species of Men-lions. Placed among the Sabæan sculptures, they might pass for incarnations of Sol in Leo; but would very ill pass for Leo alone.

Among the observers of this poetic improvement, or this natural and unpoetical deficiency, on the part of RUBENS, TITIAN, JULIO ROMANO, and other painters, both ancient and modern; and of the consequent _desideratum_ on the part of the public, of a cabinet or library collection of the nobler wild animals in a state of Nature, so as to answer the purposes of reference, while they conduced to the pleasures of Taste, were Mr. EDGAR SPILSBURY and Mr. THOMAS LANDSEER. Whether or not the public “looked up to them for light” on that subject, (to use the language of STERNE,) they thought the Public “deserved it;” and they therefore, as the best practical means of eliciting that light, first copied the general forms and attitudes of most of the wild animals that appear in this book, from the old masters—generally speaking, from works that are well known—and then, went to Nature and corrected the details. They carried with them what, in those ancient masters, was meritorious in composition, attitude and chiaroscuro, and brought away, to the best of their ability—superadding it to, and blending it with, the above—accuracy of detail.

Every artist does best, that which he is best qualified and best disposed to do. In completing the number of plates that has been found necessary for the Work, Mr. EDWIN LANDSEER has chosen to proceed toward the same purpose, upon a different principle. He has gone, without any introductory medium, directly to the living animals, and has exhibited the savage manners and habits of these quadrupeds, according to his own ideas and observations.

On the distinction between CHARACTER and EXPRESSION, we shall now deliver our opinion. By the _Character_ of an animal, we mean those permanencies of his look and features which he always offers to view when in a placid, or unimpassioned state: by his _Expression_, the variations of muscular action superinduced on character, to which he is liable, as the storms of passion sweep by, and his mind becomes agitated by external circumstances acting on the ardours of his instinct.

The former, seems to hold its court in the solid and massy parts: the latter, agitates, ofttimes rebelliously, the nerves and muscles. Character is ever present, both in the animal countenance, and in the “human face divine.” The most violent expression does not proscribe, or obliterate, character. Individuality consists of it, as far as concerns external appearance; and it forms the system of vowels of the language of Nature, without which no Expression could be.

Whoever regards the faces of a flock of Sheep, will see in them an infinite variety of Character, with very little Expression, and that little without diversity: and if we descend a step lower in the scale of being, and contemplate the finny tribe, where Character is not wanting, we find no Expression at all. Even Trees and inanimate objects, possess Character. We recollect a poetical friend of ours, now in Italy, saying that every tree and every rock had a _face_—but of this we are not so certain; though very certain, that there is enough of _Character_ in rocks and trees, to make a poet think so.

_Character_ and _Expression_, in the carnivorous class of animals, to which we here solicit attention, are always co-existent—their proportions varying with the existing occasions—in pictorial exhibitions of such subjects.

No. II.

There is much Character, and little Expression, in the reposing Leopard with his sheathed claws, which is shewn in the present engraving, copied by Mr. SPILSBURY from RIDINGER, and corrected from Nature. RIDINGER was an artist of great power, who studied wild animals in their sequestered haunts, as is shewn in his grand forest back-grounds; and who, generally speaking, left little or no room for others to improve, except on some few of his inferior works. The present is an interesting and beautiful animal, yet there is a latent capability of mischief characterised in his countenance, and we might ask, in the language of Job, “Who shall dare to rouse him up?”

No. III.

TWO COUCHANT LIONS, AFTER RUBENS, taken from his celebrated picture before alluded to, of the Prophet Daniel incarcerated in the den. The Lions are here supposed to be miraculously held in a state of tranquillity. Here, too, is not much Expression, but an extraordinary grandeur of Character, suited to the greatness of an occasion where the Deity himself especially interferes to seal up the voracious energies of the most terrible of his creatures, in calm submission. There is a character of royal dignity mingled with this submission, which is very impressive, and even sublime.

The writer esteems this to be a successful restoration of the Nature that was wanting in the prints of this subject, (which has often been engraved by PICART and others,) after RUBENS. The original picture it has been our ill-fortune never to have seen. The shaggy manes, and the latent terror that sits gloomily enthroned in the open eyes of the superior Lion—suited to the darkness of the den, and the nature of this animal’s sense of vision,—are as well thought of, as they are executed; and are varied with much address from the closed eyes of the couching Lion beyond, of which also the character is most happily marked. A powerful and divine spell possesses them both.

No. IV.

THE TIGER WHICH MARCHES IN OUR PROCESSION, without an object before him to call forth emotion, possesses a calm character, combined with the resistless strength of that dreadful quadruped; whose very tranquillity, in his leisure sauntering, when no excitement is acting on his nerves, has an appalling effect.—His brow is clouded, though his claws are sheathed. There is a possibility of a dreadful storm which may not be far distant, and that is enough to stamp the Tiger’s character. None shall dare to arouse his energies, nor to encounter them when aroused.

No. V.

THIS GROUP OF PLAYFUL LEOPARDS, AFTER RUBENS, must be supposed to belong to the jocund train of Bacchus, since they are luxuriating at their ease, among grapes and vine branches. These Leopards are doubtless intended to have a degree of playful expression—induced perhaps by the exhilarating juice of the grape: and we should “guess” (as _Jonathan_ says) that this group was studied from a litter of half-grown kittens. Few, however, except the sailors who were accustomed to gambol with the Tiger-cub on board the Pitt East-Indiaman, would like to venture to frolic _with_ them.

No. VI.

In this GROUP by MR. EDWIN LANDSEER there is much of violent animal _Expression_, and Character fades before it, or rather, is absorbed in it. It tells a story of the past as well as the present, and is pregnant with a catastrophe not difficult to anticipate from the actions and expressions of the parties engaged. A FAWN has been seized by a LEOPARD, who has been despoiled of his prey by a more powerful TIGER. The Tiger in his turn becomes the victim of an enraged LION.

The expression of the wounded Leopard is that of painful suffering mingled with dread. Together, they amount to agony. He shrieks while he submits. The Tiger is still enraged and resisting, though astounded with the power and suddenness of the Lion’s attack. He is losing his energy of resistance, and is beginning to feel that all resistance is vain. He roars with anguish; while his expression is that of terror, and indignation not yet subdued.

The Lion, who has just made his thundering spring, appears conscious of having fatally seized his adversary, and luxuriates fearlessly in his victory; and with a powerful and just expression of carnivorous enjoyment.—Meanwhile the characters of the animals, severally, are faithfully and specifically represented.

Although our main purpose be to exhibit rather a pictorial than a physiological view of the subject: having descanted on the word Character, we shall probably be expected to add, at least a word or two, on the leading characteristics of the carnivorous class of quadrupeds.

The generic characters of the Feline, or Cat, kind, are easily enumerated in the concise language of the naturalists. Their heads are round; their visages short: they have six cutting teeth, and two canine, in either jaw: their tongues are aculeated, the prickles inclining backward; their claws sharp, hooked, and retractile; their ears small and acuminated; they have five toes on each of the fore-feet, and four only on those behind.

Of this genera of Cats, we here exhibit the four principal species, Lions, Tigers, Leopards, and Panthers, of which the Lion is justly placed at the head—at least, the unanimous voice of ages has pronounced him to be the king of beasts, and we have enthroned him accordingly in our Title-page, (No. I.) They form a tribe that is especially and properly _Carnivorous_, being the only class of quadrupeds that are exclusively _flesh-eaters_. Their jaws are very completely armed for this purpose; their canine teeth being very long and angular, with the edges of the angles turned toward the inside of their mouths; so that when the animal has caused them to meet, or cross each other in the flesh of its prey, these formidable teeth will cut or tear a way through, by drawing them back without opening his mouth.

Their claws, and the formation of their feet, too, are eminently conducive to their predacious and carnivorous habits. They walk on their toes: yet not so much from that habitual stealthiness of pace, by which they advance unperceived till within a spring of their prey; as because it is also the means of that celerity of motion which is necessary to the very existence of animals that can feed only on flesh.

Their claws are exceedingly powerful; and they are enabled to draw them up into sheaths between their toes, so as to prevent their points from touching the ground; whence they are called retractile; and those claws are, in consequence, always kept sharp, unworn, and ready for active service.

The eyes of the Feline tribe—of every face in nature a striking and important feature—vary in the different species, and are capable of much alteration in the same animal; as instinctive impulse, or internal emotion, changes the expression of his countenance; and also from the degrees of light which act upon their pupils. Of Lions the pupils of the eyes are circular, and not of a yellow colour, as has been stated in the most diffuse modern dissertations on the Carnivora, but black. It is the iris of the Lion’s eye that is yellow. They appear to be best suited to nocturnal, or twilight, vision; and hence the Lion rarely hunts his prey while the sun is above the horizon—perhaps never, but when pressed by hunger in an extraordinary degree. The Tiger, on the contrary, will seek his prey by day as well as by night; and during twilight the colour of his eyes is that of a blue-green flame. If a stranger passes near a Tiger in a menagerie, the colour of the animal’s eyes will sometimes alter suddenly, from yellow-green to blue-green; not from any alteration in the degree of light acting upon them, but from mental excitement, and from a certain natural facility of expansion and contraction of the eye-pupils.

Hence a characteristic difference between the Lion and the Tiger. The habits of the latter are diurnal, and he disregards night-fires: the Lion, on the contrary, whose eyes are not calculated for the glare of day, cannot bear to encounter fire-light at night. Yet these physical conformations are sometimes overcome by the rage of hunger; and hence, in MR. EDWIN LANDSEER’S contending group, the Lion is represented as attacking the Tiger although it be day.

MR. BELL treats learnedly, and we believe with much originality, of the facial-muscles of this class of quadrupeds, in his “Anatomy of Expression.”—We shall offer a few extracts, by which the reader will perceive how limited are their powers of expression of countenance, when compared with those of human nature, notwithstanding their superiority over all other quadrupeds.