374 CARNIVORES. 
Next to the absence of the mane in the male, and likewise of any tuft at the 
extremity of the tail, the most important external difference between the lion and 
the tiger is that of colour. The general ground-colour of the fur of the tiger is a 
rufous-fawn on the upper part and sides of the body, but the tint may vary in 
different individuals from pale rufous to brownish-yellow, the under-parts of the 
body being white. This rufous ground-colour is striped transversely with black 
throughout the head, body, and limbs, while the tail is ringed with black. The 
ears are black, with the exception of a large white spot. These striking colours, 
which are fully developed at birth, are brightest in young and vigorous animals, 
gradually fading in intensity with advancing age; and it is stated that tigers 
inhabiting forest districts are the reddest in ground-colour As rare exceptions, 
both white and black tigers are occasionally met with. Thus a white tiger, in 
which the fur was of a creamy tint, with the usual stripes faintly visible in 
certain parts, was exhibited at the old menagerie at Exeter Change about the 
year 1820. A second example of a white tiger was recently obtained at Puna, 
India, by Major D. Robinson, of the Lancashire Fusiliers, and it appears 
to have been a male in the prime of life; while Colonel H. H. Godwin-Austen 
states that he has known of a third specimen. A perfectly black tiger, according 
to Mr. C. T. Buckland, was found dead many years ago near Chittagong, on the 
north-east frontier of India. 
With the exception of a ruff of longish hair round the neck and throat of old 
males, which represents the mane of the male lion, the hair on the head and body of 
the Indian tiger is generally short and thick, but it is considerably more elongated 
and shaggy in Siberian examples. There is, moreover, a certain amount of variation 
in the length of the hair of the Indian tiger according to the season of the year. 
The tail of the tiger, in both sexes, tapers regularly from root to tip; its total 
length being about half that of the combined length of the head and body. 
When describing the lion, it has been mentioned how the skull of that animal 
can be distinguished at a glance from that of a tiger. And it may be added that 
a tiger’s skull, according to Mr. Blanford, is, on the average, even wider and more 
massive than that of the lion. Moreover, in correlation with the more curved 
profile of the head of a tiger, as compared with that of a lion, the skull has its 
outline more convex, while the inferior border of the lower jaw is also straighter. 
The tiger stands lower on the limbs than the lion, and is thus proportionately 
longer in the body. In regard to the size attained by tigers there has been even 
more exaggeration than in the case of the lion; this being in great part due to the 
measurements having been taken either from skins after they had been removed 
from the animal and pegged out on the ground to dry, or from tigers which had 
been carried for several hours thrown across the backs of elephants, and thus 
considerably stretched beyond their normal length. Mr. Blanford states that 
full-grown male tigers measure from 54 to 64 feet from the tip of the nose to 
the root of the tail; the length of the tail bemg about 3 feet. In one example, 
whose total length was 9 feet 6 inches, the length of the head and body was 6 
feet 4 inches, and that of the tail 3 feet 2 inches. Female tigers are generally 
about a foot shorter in the length of the head and body than males. The height 
of a tiger at the shoulder varies from about 3 feet to 3 feet 6 inches. 
