278 JOURNAL, BOMBAY NATDEALHISTORY SOCIETY, Vol. XIX. 



tupid as domesticated oxen, but in some localities there is no warier beast. 

 Where the peafowl is sacred, it is as unfearing as the denizens of the farm- 

 yard ; but in other parts of the country there are few birds more difficult to 

 approach. 



Perhaps the dread of man in the great carnivora is more difficult to account 

 ior than it is in other animals. It is remarkable, for instance, that a predace- 

 «)us beast possessing the strength, activity, and armature of the lion or tiger 

 should be cowed by the presence of a human being. But when they have 

 once tried their strength against man, these creatures soon come to know that 

 they have nothing to apprehend if they take him unawares. And although a 

 small herd-boy may drive the ordinary tiger from his flocks, the man-eater 

 soon becomes the terror of the country he infests ; while the wounded lion or 

 tiger loses all fear of man. I have come upon a panther sitting quite uncon- 

 cernedly by the side of the road upright on its 'haunches, looking at us, when 

 I was passing with a number of men. 



That animals left long unmolested in time lose their fear of man, would 

 appear to favour the now generally accepted principle that acquired charac- 

 teristics are not inherited. This principle is also supported by the fact that 

 the young of wild beasts exhibit fear in a less degree than adults. It is also 

 worthy of observation that the females of deer and antelope are frequently 

 easier to approach than the males, perhaps because they are disregarded by 

 sportsmen ; but this may be due to some inherent quality of natural feminine 

 curiosity, found also in the higher animals. 



Taking all the facts into consideration I think it must be accepted that there 

 is no " natural fear of man," due to hereditary instincts in wild animals; but 

 that where such fear exists it is an attribute acquired during life as a result of 

 experience and education. 



The question of keenness of sight in wild animals, recently referred to on 

 several occasions in this Journal, is perhaps to some extent connected with 

 that of the fear of man. For where animals do not fear man, they will pre- 

 sumably appear largely indifferent to his presence. There are many animals, 

 among them elephants and bears, notoriously deficient in keenness of vision. 

 My own experience goes to show that the keenness of sight of wild animals has 

 in many cases been much exaggerated, and that as a general rule wild beasts have 

 not a keener vision than man. In some instances, as in the case of the ibex and 

 other hill animals, an almost telescopic power of sight has been ascribed. But 

 it is noteworthy how wild beasts will fail to distinguish a man, even at a com- 

 paratively short distance, so long as he remains motionless. They are very 

 quick to detect movement, but after watching for sometime an object to 

 which their attention has thus been directed, they will frequently resume their 

 indifferent attitude. I must maintain my opinion that the sight of animals of 

 the cat tribe is not keen ; this I have observed frequently in the case of tigers 

 and panthers. Keenness of sight appears to be to a large degree a question of 

 training, and animals exposed to constant danger are naturally quick to appre- 



