Schmarda, may furnish more details upon the zoology of these
countries.
Here, again, it cannot escape tlie attention of the careful observer,
that the European zoological realm is eircumserihed within exactly
the same limits as the so-called white race of man, including, as it
does, the inhabitants of south-western Asia, and of north Africa,
with the lower parts of the valley of the Nile. We exclude, of
course, modern migrations and historical changes of habitation from
this assertion. Our statements are to be understood as referring only
to the aboriginal or ante-historical distribution of man, or rather to
the distribution as history finds it. And in this respect there is a
singular fact, which historians seem not to have sufficiently appreciated,
that the earliest migrations recorded, in any form, show us
man meeting man, wherever he moves upon the inhabitable surface
of the globe, small islands excepted.
It is, farther, very striking, that the different sub-divisions of this
race, even to the limits of distinct nationalities, cover precisely the
same ground as the special faunae or zoological provinces of this most
important part of the world, which in all ages has been the seat of
the most advanced civilization. In the south-west of A,sia we find
(along the table-land of Iran) Persia and Asia Minor; in the plains
southward, Mesopotamia and-Syria; along the sea-shores, Palestine
and Phoenicia; in the valley of the Mile, Egypt; and along the
southern shores of Africa, Barbary. Thus we have Semitic nations
covering the north African and south-west Asiatic faunse, while the
south; European peninsulas, including Asia Minor, are inhabited by
Graeco-Roman nations, and the cold, temperate zone, by Celto-Ger-
manic nations; the eastern range of Europe being peopled by Sclaves.
This coincidence may justify the inference of an independent origin
for these different tribes, as soon as it can be admitted that the races
of men were primitively created in nations; the more so, since all
of them claim to have been autochthones of the countries they inhabit.
This claim is so universal that it well deserves more attention. It
may be more deeply founded than historians, generally, seem inclined
to grant.
The third column of our Tableau exhibits the animals characteristic
of the temperate part of the European zoological realm, and shows
their close resemblance to those of the corresponding Asiatic fauna;
the species being representative species of the same genera, with the
exception of the musk-deer, which has no analogues in Europe.
Though temperate America resembles closely, in its animal creation,
the countries of Europe and Asia belonging to the same zone
we meet with physical and organic features in this continent which
differ entirely from those of the Old World. The tropical realms,
connected there with those of the temperate zone, though bound
together by some analogies, differ essentially from one another.
Tropical Africa has hardly any species in common with Europe,
though we may remember that the lion once extended to Greece, and
that the jackal is to this day found upon some islands in the Adriatic,
and in Morea. Tropical Asia differs equally from its temperate
regions, and Australia forms a world by itself. Mot so in southern
America. The range of mountains which extends, in almost unbroken
continuity, from the Arctic to Cape Horn, establishes a
similarity between Morth and South America, which may be traced
also, to a great degree, in its plants and animals. Entire families
which are peculiar to this continent have their representatives in
Morth, as well as South America, the cactus and didelphis, for
instance '; some species, as the puma, or American lion, may even be
traced from Canada to Batagonia. In connection with these facts,
we find that tropical America, though it has its peculiar types, as
characteristic as those of tropical Africa, Asia, and Australia, does
not furnish analogues of the giants of Africa and Asia; its largest
pachyderms being tapirs and pecaris, not elephants, rhinoceroses, and
hippopotami; and its largest ruminants, the llamas and alpacas,
and not camels and giraffes; whilst it reminds us, in many, respects,
of Australia, with which it has the type of marsupials in common,
though ruminants and pachyderms, and even monkeys, are entirely
wanting there. Thus, with due qualification, it may be said, that the
whole continent of America, when compared with the corresponding
twin-continents of Europe'—Africa or Asia— Australia is characterized
by a much greater uniformity of its natural productions, combined
with a special localization of many of its subordinate types, which
will justify the establishment of many special faunae within its
boundaries.
With these facts before us, we may expect that there should be no
great diversity among the tribes of man inhabiting this continent;
and, indeed, the most extensive investigation of their peculiarities
has led Dr. Morton to consider them as constituting but a Bingle race,
from the confines of the Esquimaux down to the southernmost extremity
of the continent. But, at the same time, it should be
remembered that, in accordance with the zoological character of the
whole realm, this race is divided into an infinite, number of small
tribes, presenting more or less difference one from another.
As to the special faun® of the American continent, we may distinguish,
within the temperate zone, a Canadian fauna, extending from
Newfoundland across the great lakes to the base of the Rocky moun