tains, a fauna of the North American table-land, a fauna of the Northwest
coast, a fauna of the middle United States, a fauna of the southern
United States, and a Californian fauna, the characteristic features of
which I shall describe on another occasion.
When we consider, however, the isolation of the American continent
from those of the Old World, nothing is more striking in the
geographical distribution of animals, than the exact correspondence
of all the animals of the northern temperate zone of America with
those of Europe: all the characteristic forms of which, as may he seen
by the fourth column of our Tableau, belong to the same genera,
with the exception, only of a few subordinate types, not represented
among our figures — such as the opossum and the skunk.
In tropical America we may distinguish a Central American fauna,
a Brazilian fauna, & fauna of the Pampas, & fauna of the Cordilleras, a
Peruvian fauna, and a Patagonian fauna ; but it is unnecessary for
our purpose, to mention here their characteristic features, which may
be gathered from the works of Prince Hew Wied, of Spix and Martius,
of Tschudi, of Poppig, of Ramon de la Sagra, of Darwin, &c.
The slight differences existing between the faunie of the temperate
zone have required a fuller illustration than may be necessary to characterize
the zoological realms of the tropical regions and the southern
hemisphere generally. It is sufficient for our purpose to say here, that
these realms are at once distinguished by the prevalence of peculiar
types, circumscribed within the natural limits of the three continents,
extending in complete isolation towards the southern pole. In this
respect there is already a striking contrast between the northern and
the southern hemisphere. But the more closely we compare them
with one another, the greater appear their differences. We have
already seen how South America differs from Africa, the East Indies,
and Australia, by its closer connection with Horth America. Hot-
withstanding, however, the absence in South America of those
sightly animals so prominent in Africa and tropical Asia, its general
character is, like that of all the tropical continents, to nourish
a variety of lypes which have no .close relations to those of other
continents. Its monkeys and edentata belong to genera which
have no representatives in the Old World; among pachyderms it has
pecaris, which are entirely wanting elsewhere; and though the tapirs
occur also in the Sunda Islands, that type is wanting in Africa, where
in compensation we find the hippopotamus, not found in either Asia or
America. We have, already seen that the marsupials of South America
differ entirely from those of Australia. Its ostriches differ also
generically from those of Africa, tropical Asia, Hew Holland, &c.
If we compare further the southern continents of the Old World
with one another, we find a certain uniformity between the animals
of Africa and tropical Asia. They have both elephants and rhinoceroses,
though each has its peculiar species of these genera, which
oecur neither in America nor in Australia; whilst cereopitheci and
antilopes prevail in Africa, and long-armed monkeys and stags in
tropical Asia. Moreover, the black orangs are peculiar to Africa, and
the red orangs to Asia. As to Australia, it has neither monkeys nor
pachyderms, nor edentata, but only marsupials and monotremes. We
need therefore not carry these comparisons further, to be satisfied that
Africa, tropical Asia, and Australia constitute independent zoological
realms.
The continent of Africa south of the Atlas has a very uniform
zoological character. This realm may however be subdivided, according
to its local peculiarities, iuto a number of distinct faunae. In its
more northern parts we distinguish the fauna of the Sahara, and those
of Hubia and Abyssinia; the latter of which extends over the Red
Sea into the tropical parts of Arabia. These faunae have been particularly
studied by Riippell and Ehrenberg, in whose works
more may be found respecting the zoology of these regions. They
are inhabited by two distinct races of men, the Hubians and Abys-
sinians, receding greatly in their features from the woolly-haired
Hegroes with flat broad noses, which cover the more central parts of
the continent. But even here we may distinguish the fauna of
Senegal from that of Guinea and that of the African Table-land. In
the first, we notice particularly the chimpanzee ; in the second, the
gorilla. There is no anthropoid monkey in the third. The fifth
column in our Tableau gives figures of the most prominent animals
of the genuine West African type. A fuller illustration of this subject
might show, how peculiar tribes of Hegroes cover the limits of the
different faunae of tropical Africa, and establish in this respect a parallelism
between the nations of this continent and those of Europe.
We are chiefly indebted to French naturalists for a better knowledge
of the Hatural History of this part of the world. In the sixth column
of our Tableau, we have represented the animals of the Cape-lands,
in order to. show-how the African fauna is modified upon the southern
extremity of this continent, which is inhabited by a distinct race of
men, the Hottentots. The zoology of South Africa may he studied
in the works of Lichtenstein and Andrew Smith.
The East Indian realm is now very well known zoologically, thanks
to the efforts of English and Dutch naturalists, and may be subdivided
into three faunae, that of Dukhun, that of the Indo-Chinese peninsula,
and that of the Sunda Islands, Borneo, and the Philippines. Its
characteristic animals, represented in the seventh column of our