TLDR: Circumstantial evidence suggests tigers would win. Edit: added TLDR. Edit, spelling mistakes.
Seems like no one has answered your question. I studied Roman animal games in college. I was more interested in how the animals were procured and transported instead of what animal would win.
The question is who would win between a tiger and lion in an ancient Roman animal game. Circumstantial evidence suggests that tigers are the favored animal, but direct evidence seems scarce.
Romans loved animal games, called venatios. Large cat games were probably high quality games that attracted many spectators since tigers were harder to source than lions. Lions predominantly came from North Africa. Lions became common combatants in Roman games after they first appeared in Rome in 186 BCE. (Livy, 39.22.1-2). According to Livy, lions and leopards were first debuted in Rome in the same year. There are numerous Roman mosaics depicting lions in great and accurate detail suggesting they were familiar with the animal. Many attribute the disappearance of the North African lion to venatios.
Tigers seem to be the favored animal because they are slightly more aggressive. The reasons are two fold: 1) tigers are mostly solitary animals while lions live and fight in packs/prides; 2) tigers are more aggressive, going straight for the kill, where as lions tend to pounce and exhaust their prey.
In 1899, the Gaekwar of Baroda in Hindostan, hosted a battle between a lion and a tiger. He had a specially prepared amphitheatre and hosted the games for local and European guests. Apparently, he set the odds at 1 to 37,000 rupees, against the tiger. The tiger won; the Gaekwar of Baroda lost 37,000 rupees. (Lion Against Tiger, Baltimore Sun, Jan. 26, 1899).
In 2011, a Bengal tiger killed a lion in a Turkish zoo in Ankara. The tiger broke into the lion's cage through a gap in the fence. Allegedly, "the tiger severed the lion's jugular vein in a single stroke with its paw, leaving the animal dying in a pool of blood." (Tiger kills lion in Turkish zoo, BBC, Mar. 7, 2011).
Furthermore, Smithsonian Zoo biologist Craig Saffoe also favors the tiger. In an interview with Live Science, Saffoe suggested a tiger would win because "[w]hat I've seen from tigers, they seem to be more aggressive; they go for the throat, go for the kill ... [w]hereas lions are more 'I'll will just pound on you and play with you." (What Would Happen If a Lion Fought a Tiger? , LiveScience, Jul. 16, 2012). There are, however, mitigating circumstances. If a lion is older, he is more likely experienced in combat. But, if he is older, he is probably more used to going along unchallenged in a pride. Younger lions, especially lions without prides, are less experienced fighters (ergo, no pride).
From what I studied in college, I will add that a tiger raised in captivity would probably be more aggressive than a lion in captivity. One of the ways big cats were captured and sold was by a process called cubbing. Cubs were abducted because they were easier to capture, easier to transport, and less dangerous to handle. Tigers are generally solitary animals and have little inclination to work in a group. On the other hand, lions are "pack animals." Lions can coexist in a social unit. If a lion was raised in captivity, it is less likely to be a dominant animal because a human would attempt to curb any dominant behaviors. A tiger, however, would be less indomitable. (This is my speculation).
However, a lion may have been favored against a leopard. Some direct Roman evidence of big cat fights is found in the House of the Doves in Pompeii. Mosaic VIII.2.34 shows a snarling lion pinning a wounded leopard to the floor. The leopard's blood gushes unto the floor from its neck and from a wound on it's flank.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/tiger-vs-lionwho-would-win-83275452/?no-ist
http://www.livescience.com/21619-lion-tiger-fight.html?cmpid=514626
https://books.google.com/books?id=3xfjyTqqR7IC&pg=PA440#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-12669308
http://www.pompeiiinpictures.com/pompeiiinpictures/R8/8%2002%2034%20entrance%20p2.htm
As a follow up, do we have records of which of the varieties of gladiators tended to win?
Such as a man with a spear and net having an advantage over an opponent with a sword and shield?
Hi all. There have been several attempted answers removed for not meeting subreddit rules, so before answering, do please review the rules, particularly regarding the expected level of expertise and source citation. Here's a handy link: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/rules#wiki_answers
Additionally, do also actually answer the OP's question: this subreddit is /r/AskHistorians, not /r/WhoWouldWin: OP is asking for records from Ancient Rome, not Youtube videos of animal-x vs. animal-y.
Thanks!
how did the roman empire get tigers? I didnt realize they had access to India