CHAPTER LXX 

 ANIMAL FOES THE PERSONAL ENEMIES OF MAN 



PERSONAL ENEMIES AMONG MAMMALS (MAMMALIA). We are 

 not justified in calling the fiercer and larger Mammals or other 

 animals our enemies, simply because they defend themselves when 

 attacked, and in most cases man will probably be found to have 

 been the first aggressor. And even when that is not the case, at 

 least when carnivorous forms are in question, casualties are usually 

 the outcome of the Law of Hunger, or it may be parental solici- 

 tude. 



Partly owing to its comparatively straightforward habits, the 

 Lion (Felis led), when left alone, does not attack human beings 

 to the extent that might be supposed, unless pressed by hunger. 

 Speaking of North- East Africa, Sir Samuel Baker says (in Wild 

 Beasts and their Ways):"\n the locality which I have men- 

 tioned, the lions, although numerous, were never regarded as 

 dangerous unless attacked; there was an abundance of game, 

 therefore the carnivora were plentfully supplied, and a large area 

 of country being entirely uninhabited, the lions were unaccus- 

 tomed to the sight of human beings, and held them in respect. 

 During the night we took the precaution to light extensive bon- 

 fires within our camp, which was well protected by a circular fence 

 of impenetrable thorns, but we were never threatened by wild 

 animals except on one occasion." 



Where the country is thickly populated it is only to be 

 expected that individual animals may at times acquire bad habits, 

 or, as Vogt puts it (in Mammalia): "Old experienced lions who 

 know how little danger they are exposed to in breaking in upon 

 the villages of the badly -armed negroes will, it appears, hanker 

 after human flesh ". 



The stealthy cat-like habits of the Tiger (Felix tigris, fig. 

 1234) render it a good deal more dangerous to man than its 



331 



