Leigh Hunt

The Glove and the Lions

The Glove and the Lions.
"The Glove and the Lions" was one of my early reading-lessons. It is an incisive thrust at the vanity of "fair" women. A woman should be a "true knight" as well as a man. Leigh Hunt (1784-1859).
King Francis was a hearty king, and loved a royal sport,
And one day as his lions fought, sat looking on the court;

The setup: courtly performance

Hunt establishes this as theater—the king watches lions, nobles watch the spectacle, and the Count watches his lover. Everyone is performing for someone else. This layered watching matters to what comes next.

The nobles filled the benches, with the ladies in their pride,
And 'mong them sat the Count de Lorge with one for whom he sighed:
And truly 'twas a gallant thing to see that crowning show,
Valour, and love, and a king above, and the royal beasts below.
Ramp'd and roar'd the lions, with horrid laughing jaws;
They bit, they glared, gave blows like beams, a wind went with their paws;
With wallowing might and stifled roar they rolled on one another,
Till all the pit with sand and mane was in a thunderous smother;
The bloody foam above the bars came whisking through the air;
Said Francis then, "Faith, gentlemen, we're better here than there."
De Lorge's love o'erheard the King,—a beauteous lively dame
With smiling lips and sharp, bright eyes, which always seem'd the same:
She thought, "The Count, my lover, is brave as brave can be;
He surely would do wondrous things to show his love of me;

Love as test, not feeling

The lady doesn't ask the Count to prove love through conversation or loyalty—she invents a physical dare. This shifts 'love' from emotion to public performance, which is Hunt's real target.

King, ladies, lovers, all look on; the occasion is divine;

The glove as currency

Dropping the glove isn't accident—it's a calculated move to gain 'glory.' Hunt uses the glove as a token of social value that the lady can trade for attention and status.

I'll drop my glove, to prove his love; great glory will be mine."
She dropp'd her glove, to prove his love, then look'd at him and smiled;
He bowed, and in a moment leapt among the lions wild:
His leap was quick, return was quick, he has regain'd his place,
Then threw the glove, but not with love, right in the lady's face.

The actual test begins

Notice the speed: 'leap...quick, return was quick.' The Count completes the task instantly, but then the verb shifts to 'threw'—and it's thrown 'not with love' but at her face. Hunt tips his hand here about what's really happening.

"Well done!" cried Francis, "bravely done!" and he rose from where he sat:
"No love," quoth he, "but vanity, sets love a task like that."
Leigh Hunt.
Source Wikipedia Poetry Foundation

Reading Notes

The poem as social critique, not romance

Hunt's subtitle—'an incisive thrust at the vanity of "fair" women'—tells you this isn't a love story. It's a moral fable about performance and self-interest disguised as devotion. The lady doesn't love the Count; she loves the idea of being loved publicly enough that a man will risk death. She manufactures a test not to discover his character but to generate spectacle around herself.

The genius move is the Count's response. He completes the task—proving he *can* be brave—but then throws the glove in her face. This is not rage; it's clarity. By returning with the glove and flinging it at her, he's saying: I did this, I proved nothing about love, and now you see what you actually asked for. The king recognizes this immediately and calls it by its real name: vanity setting a task, not love.

Hunt's critique works because he never lets the lady off as merely vain. She's performing the role society taught her—that a woman's power lies in commanding men's dangerous devotion. She's not evil; she's trapped in a system where love is currency and proof is spectacle. The Count's refusal to pretend otherwise is the real bravery.

Why Hunt cared about this story

CONTEXT Hunt was a radical writer and editor in early 19th-century England, imprisoned for criticizing the Prince Regent. This poem likely appeared in his magazine *The Examiner* as social commentary—critiquing aristocratic women's complicity in vanity culture, not attacking women themselves.

The poem's formal choice matters: it's written in bouncy, accessible couplets, not the dense blank verse of 'serious' poetry. This makes the moral lesson feel urgent and clear rather than ornamental. Hunt wants you to *see* the problem, not admire his technique. The speed of the narrative—setup, test, result, verdict—mirrors the Count's leap itself: quick, efficient, undeniable.

Notice that the Count never speaks. He acts, and his action speaks for him. This silence is the poem's real power. He doesn't argue with the lady or defend himself; he simply completes her request and returns it to her, letting the king name what happened. That's the model of masculine behavior Hunt is offering: not romantic self-sacrifice, but clarity and refusal to participate in the lie.