I wasn't keeping count, but there are more than about 25 lions at the zoo: roughly half of these are kept in the lion house or adjoining enclosures, and the rest are in a set of similarly-sized cages nearby.
Being a big, spacious hall (I presume), they could have some really roomy cages, albeit for a smaller pride.
It's a shame Egypt's got little money and not much concern for there animals, since (structurally) I find Alexandria Zoo quite nice. It's just the state of the animals in their barren, tiny homes that gets me (although i understand why they're like it).
1 - I didn't say they shouldn't, as Alexandria Zoo clearly does have some care for their animals (the elephant now has a shade, the hippo enclosure has now had some grass planted).
2 - If people can like the Tecton buildins of Dudley (which I find quite ugly), can't I like the Victorianesque buildings of Alexandria Zoo? I find them quite charming even if they do need a lick of paint, some plexiglass in place of bars, logs and rocks, foliage, natural substrate and their inhabits rearranged (here I'm taling about the elephant getting an acre to roam in, monkeys tall spaces to climb and mounds of rocks to clamber over, etc). I'm sure, as with Dudley's old ones, there are ways to make them comfortable (or at least adequate) for those that occupy them (again, with suitable rearrangement).
Thanks Jacobea! Some differences in opinion between us:
1. I hate it when poor countries (and rich, for that matter) have zoos when there is not much concern for their animals - to use your own phrase .
2. Aha... you were commenting on the architecture! I did not understand that and have no problem with your view, of course. Though as it happens I am one of those fans of the Tecton buildings -purely from architectural standpoints of course. I know they are disastrous from an animal welfare point of view. (Perhaps not as totally disastrous as the prison/concentration camp for big cats documented here by forumster nayer, but still...).
