LERON: 261 
Oo 
With regard to the lion in India, Mr. Blanford states that “there are probably 
a few still living in the wild tract known as the Gir, in Kattywar, and a few more 
on the wildest parts of Rajputana, especially southern Jodhpur, in Oodeypur, and 
around Mount Abu. About twenty years ago lons were common near Mount 
Abu, several were shot near Gwalior, Goona, and Kota, and a few still existed near 
Lalotpur, between Saugor and Jhansi. One is said to have been killed near Goona 
in 1873. In 1864 one was killed near Sheorajpur, twenty-five miles west of 
Allahabad; and when the railway was being made from Allahabad to Jabalpur 
in 1866, a fine lion, with a good mane, was shot by two of the engineers, near 
the eightieth milestone from Allahabad. About 1830, lions were common about 
Ahmedabad. Several years previously, in the early part of the century, lions were 
found in Hurriana to the northward, and in Khandesh to the south, in many 
places in Rajputana (one was shot in 1810, within forty miles of Kot Deji, in 
Sind), and eastward as far as Rewah and Palamow. It is probable that this 
animal was formerly generally distributed in North-Western and Central India.” 
A few years will probably witness the extinction of the lion throughout the 
peninsula. It is noteworthy that the lion, unlike the tiger, has never been known 
in the Malayan region, or, indeed, anywhere to the eastward of the Bay of Bengal. 
For a long period it was considered that the Indian lon differed from its 
African relative by the total absence of the mane in the male, which was hence 
regarded as indicating a distinct species. Moreover, owing to the differences in 
the length and colour of the manes of African lions from different districts, it was 
likewise held that there were two or more species in Africa. It, however, has been 
definitely settled that such variations are not constant, and that there is but a 
single species. Although it may be that some adult specimens of the Indian lion 
are maneless, yet well-maned examples have been killed, while those which were 
stated to prove the existence of a maneless race are now known to have been 
immature individuals. 
With regard to the variations of the African lion, Mr. Selous says that the 
Dutch hunters maintain the existence of from three to four distinct species, which 
they assert themselves to be capable of recognising. “For my part,” adds Mr. 
Selous, “and judging from my own very limited experience of lions, I cannot see 
that there is any reason for supposing that more than one species exists, and as 
out of fifty male lon skins scarcely two will be found exactly alike in the colour 
and length of the mane, I think it would be as reasonable to suppose that there are 
twenty species as three. The fact is that between the animal with hardly a 
vestige of a mane, and the far handsomer but much less common beast, with 
a long flowing black mane, every possible intermediate variety may be found.” 
It is then stated how the narrator on one occasion shot two old male hons, which 
he found lying together under the same bush, both of which agreed as near as 
possible in size, but while the one was full-maned, with a very dark-coloured fur, 
the other was very yellow and had but little mane. Shortly after, Mr. Selous, 
with a brother sportsman, again met with a dark, full-maned lion in company with 
a nearly maneless light-coloured one. Of still more importance is the account by 
the same hunter of his killing a lioness with three unborn cubs, of which two were 
males and one a.female. “Of the two male cubs,” says Mr. Selous, “the one, owing 
