Discontinuity of the Area of Parus palustris.—Mr. Seebohm, who has travelled and collected in Europe, Siberia, and India, and possesses extensive and accurate knowledge of Palæarctic birds, has recently called attention to the varieties and sub-species of the marsh tit (Parus palustris), of which he has examined numerous specimens ranging from England to Japan.[11] The curious point is that those of Southern Europe and of China are exactly alike, while all over Siberia a very distinct form occurs, forming the sub-species P. borealis.[12] In Japan and Kamschatka other varieties are found, which have been named respectively P. japonicus and P. camschatkensis and another P. songarus in Turkestan and Mongolia. Now it all depends upon these forms being classed as sub-species or as true species whether this is or is not a case of discontinuous specific distribution. If Parus borealis is a distinct species from Parus palustris, as it is reckoned in Gray's Hand List of Birds, and also in Sharpe and Dresser's Birds of Europe, then Parus palustris has a most remarkable discontinuous distribution, as shown in the accompanying map, one portion of its area comprising Central and South Europe and Asia Minor, the other an undefined tract in Northern China, the two portions being thus situated in about the same latitude and having a very similar climate, but with a distance of about 4,000 miles between them. If, however, these two forms are reckoned as sub-species only, then the area of the species becomes continuous, while only one of its varieties or sub-species has a discontinuous area. It is a curious fact that P. palustris and P. borealis are found together in Southern Scandinavia and in some parts of Central Europe, and are said to differ somewhat in their note and their habits, as well as in colouration.
Discontinuity of Emberiza schœniclus.—The other case is that of our reed bunting (Emberiza schœniclus), which ranges over almost all Europe and Western Asia as far as the Yenesai valley and North-west India. It is then replaced by another smaller species, E. passerina, which ranges eastwards to the Lena river, and in winter as far south as Amoy in China; but in Japan the original species appears again, receiving a new name (E. pyrrhulina), but Mr. Seebohm assures us that it is quite indistinguishable from the European bird. Although the distance between these two portions of the species is not so great as in the last example, being about 2,000 miles, in other respects the case is an interesting one, because the forms which occupy the intervening space are recognised by Mr. Seebohm himself as undoubted species.[13]
The European and Japanese Jays.—Another case somewhat resembling that of the marsh tit is afforded by the European and Japanese jays (Garrulus glandarius and G. japonicus). Our common jay inhabits the whole of Europe except the extreme north, but is not known to extend anywhere into Asia, where it is represented by several quite distinct species. (See Map, Frontispiece.) But the great central island of Japan is inhabited by a jay (G. japonicus) which is very like ours, and was formerly classed as a sub-species only, in which case our jay would be considered to have a discontinuous distribution. But the specific distinctness of the Japanese bird is now universally admitted, and it is certainly a very remarkable fact that among the twelve species of jays which together range over all temperate Europe and Asia, one which is so closely allied to our English bird should be found at the remotest possible point from it. Looking at the map exhibiting the distribution of the several species, we can hardly avoid the conclusion that a bird very like our jay once occupied the whole area of the genus, that in various parts of Asia it became gradually modified into a variety of distinct species in the manner already explained, a remnant of the original type being preserved almost unchanged in Japan, owing probably to favourable conditions of climate and protection from competing forms.
Supposed Examples of Discontinuity among North American Birds.—In North America, the eastern and western provinces are so different in climate and vegetation, and are besides separated by such remarkable physical barriers—the arid central plains and the vast ranges of the Rocky Mountains and Sierra Nevada, that we can hardly expect to find species whose areas may be divided maintaining their identity. Towards the north however the above-named barriers disappear, the forests being almost continuous from east to west, while the mountain range is broken up by passes and valleys. It thus happens that most species of birds which inhabit both the eastern and western coasts of the North American continent have maintained their continuity towards the north, while even when differentiated into two or more allied species their areas are often conterminous or overlapping.
Almost the only bird that seems to have a really discontinuous range is the species of wren, Thryothorus bewickii, of which the type form ranges from the east coast to Kansas and Minnesota, while a longer-billed variety, T. bewickii spilurus, is found in the wooded parts of California and as far north as Puget Sound. If this really represents the range of the species there remains a gap of about 1,000 miles between its two disconnected areas. Other cases are those of Vireo bellii of the middle United States and the sub-species pusillus of California; and of the purple red-finch, Carpodacus purpureus, with its variety C. californicus; but unfortunately the exact limits of these varieties are in neither case known, and though each one is characteristic of its own province, it is possible that they may somewhere become conterminous, though in the case of the red-finches this does not seem likely to be the fact.
In a later chapter we shall have to point out some remarkable cases of this kind where one portion of the species inhabits an island; but the facts now given are sufficient to prove that the discontinuity of the area occupied by a single homogeneous species, by two varieties of a species, by two well-marked sub-species, and by two closely allied but distinct species, are all different phases of one phenomenon—the decay of ill-adapted, and their replacement by better-adapted forms, under the pressure of a change of conditions either physical or organic. We may now proceed with our sketch of the mode of distribution of higher groups.
Distribution and Antiquity of Families.—Just as genera are groups of allied species distinguished from all other groups by some well-marked structural characters, so families are groups of allied genera distinguished by more marked and more important characters, which are generally accompanied by a peculiar outward form and style of colouration, and by distinctive habits and mode of life. As a genus is usually more ancient than any of the species of which it is composed, because during its growth and development the original rudimentary species becomes supplanted by more and more perfectly adapted forms, so a family is usually older than its component genera, and during the long period of its life-history may have survived many and great terrestrial and organic changes. Many families of the higher animals have now an almost worldwide extension, or at least range over several continents; and it seems probable that all families which have survived long enough to develop a considerable variety of generic and specific forms have also at one time or other occupied an extensive area.
Discontinuity a Proof of Antiquity.—Discontinuity will therefore be an indication of antiquity, and the more widely the fragments are scattered the more ancient we may usually presume the parent group to be. A striking example is furnished by the strange reptilian fishes forming the order or sub-order Dipnoi, which includes the Lepidosiren and its allies. Only three or four living species are known, and these inhabit tropical rivers situated in the remotest continents. The Lepidosiren paradoxa is only known from the Amazon and some other South American rivers. An allied species, Lepidosiren annectens, sometimes placed in a distinct genus, inhabits the Gambia in West Africa, while the recent discovery in Eastern Australia of the Ceratodus or mud-fish of Queensland, adds another form to the same isolated group. Numerous fossil teeth, long known from the Triassic beds of this country, and also found in Germany and India in beds of the same age, agree so closely with those of the living Ceratodus that both are referred to the same genus. No more recent traces of any such animal have been discovered, but the Carboniferous Ctenodus and the Devonian Dipterus evidently belong to the same group, while in North America the Devonian rocks have yielded a gigantic allied form which has been named Heliodus by Professor Newberry. Thus an enormous range in time is accompanied by a very wide and scattered distribution of the existing species.
Whenever, therefore, we find two or more living genera belonging to the same family or order but not very closely allied to each other, we may be sure that they are the remnants of a once extensive group of genera; and if we find them now isolated in remote parts of the globe, the natural inference is that the family of which they are fragments once had an area embracing the countries in which they are found. Yet this simple and very obvious explanation has rarely been adopted by naturalists, who have instead imagined changes of land and sea to afford a direct passage from the one fragment to the other. If there were no cosmopolitan or very wide-spread families still existing, or even if such cases were rare, there would be some justification for such a proceeding; but as about one-fourth of the existing families of land mammalia have a range extending to at least three or four continents, while many which are now represented by disconnected genera are known to have occupied intervening lands or to have had an almost continuous distribution in tertiary times, all the presumptions are in favour of the former continuity of the group. We have also in many cases direct evidence that this former continuity was effected by means of existing continents, while in no single case has it been shown that such a continuity was impossible, and that it either was or must have been effected by means of continents now sunk beneath the ocean.
Concluding Remarks.—When writing on the subject of distribution it usually seems to have been forgotten that the theory of evolution absolutely necessitates the former existence of a whole series of extinct genera filling up the gap between the isolated genera which in many cases now alone exist; while it is almost an axiom of "natural selection" that such numerous forms of one type could only have been developed in a wide area and under varied conditions, implying a great lapse of time. In our succeeding chapters we shall show that the known and probable changes of sea and land, the known changes of climate, and the actual powers of dispersal of the different groups of animals, were such as would have enabled all the now disconnected groups to have once formed parts of a continuous series. Proofs of such former continuity are continually being obtained by the discovery of allied extinct forms in intervening lands, but the extreme imperfection of the geological record as regards land animals renders it unlikely that this proof will be forthcoming in the majority of cases. The notion that if such animals ever existed their remains would certainly be found, is a superstition which, notwithstanding the efforts of Lyell and Darwin, still largely prevails among naturalists; but until it is got rid of no true notions of the former distribution of life upon the earth can be attained.
CHAPTER V
THE POWERS OF DISPERSAL OF ANIMALS AND PLANTS
Statement of the general question of Dispersal—The Ocean as a Barrier to the Dispersal of Mammals—The Dispersal of Birds—The Dispersal of Reptiles—The Dispersal of Insects—The Dispersal of Land Mollusca—Great Antiquity of Land-shells—Causes favouring the Abundance of Land-shells—The Dispersal of Plants—Special adaptability of Seeds for Dispersal—Birds as agents in the Dispersal of Seeds—Ocean Currents as agents in Plant Dispersal—Dispersal along Mountain-chains—Antiquity of Plants as affecting their Distribution.
In order to understand the many curious anomalies we meet with in studying the distribution of animals and plants, and to be able to explain how it is that some species and genera have been able to spread widely over the globe, while others are confined to one hemisphere, to one continent, or even to a single mountain or a single island, we must make some inquiry into the different powers of dispersal of animals and plants, into the nature of the barriers that limit their migrations, and into the character of the geological or climatal changes which have favoured or checked such migrations.
The first portion of the subject—that which relates to the various modes by which organisms can pass over wide areas of sea and land—has been fully treated by Sir Charles Lyell, by Mr. Darwin, and many other writers, and it will only be necessary here to give a very brief notice of the best known facts on the subject, which will be further referred to when we come to discuss the particular cases that arise in regard to the faunas and floras of remote islands. But the other side of the question of dispersal—that which depends on geological and climatal changes—is in a far less satisfactory condition, for, though much has been written upon it, the most contradictory opinions still prevail, and at almost every step we find ourselves on the battle-field of opposing schools in geological or physical science. As, however, these questions lie at the very root of any general solution of the problems of distribution, I have given much time to a careful examination of the various theories that have been advanced, and the discussions to which they have given rise; and have arrived at some definite conclusions which I venture to hope may serve as the foundation for a better comprehension of these intricate problems. The four chapters which follow this are devoted to a full examination of these profoundly interesting and important questions, after which we shall enter upon our special inquiry—the nature and origin of insular faunas and floras.
The Ocean as a Barrier to the Dispersal of Mammals.—A wide extent of ocean forms an almost absolute barrier to the dispersal of all land animals, and of most of those which are aerial, since even birds cannot fly for thousands of miles without rest and without food, unless they are aquatic birds which can find both rest and food on the surface of the ocean. We may be sure, therefore, that without artificial help neither mammalia nor land birds can pass over very wide oceans. The exact width they can pass over is not determined, but we have a few facts to guide us. Contrary to the common notion, pigs can swim very well, and have been known to swim over five or six miles of sea, and the wide distribution of pigs in the islands of the Eastern Hemisphere may be due to this power. It is almost certain, however, that they would never voluntarily swim away from their native land, and if carried out to sea by a flood they would certainly endeavour to return to the shore. We cannot therefore believe that they would ever swim over fifty or a hundred miles of sea, and the same may be said of all the larger mammalia. Deer also swim well, but there is no reason to believe that they would venture out of sight of land. With the smaller, and especially with the arboreal mammalia, there is a much more effectual way of passing over the sea, by means of floating trees, or those floating islands which are often formed at the mouths of great rivers. Sir Charles Lyell describes such floating islands which were encountered among the Moluccas, on which trees and shrubs were growing on a stratum of soil which even formed a white beach round the margin of each raft. Among the Philippine Islands similar rafts with trees growing on them have been seen after hurricanes; and it is easy to understand how, if the sea were tolerably calm, such a raft might be carried along by a current, aided by the wind acting on the trees, till after a passage of several weeks it might arrive safely on the shores of some land hundreds of miles away from its starting-point. Such small animals as squirrels and field-mice might have been carried away on the trees which formed part of such a raft, and might thus colonise a new island; though, as it would require a pair of the same species to be thus conveyed at the same time, such accidents would no doubt be rare. Insects, however, and land-shells would almost certainly be abundant on such a raft or island, and in this way we may account for the wide dispersal of many species of both these groups.
Notwithstanding the occasional action of such causes, we cannot suppose that they have been effective in the dispersal of mammalia as a whole; and whenever we find that a considerable number of the mammals of two countries exhibit distinct marks of relationship, we may be sure that an actual land connection, or at all events an approach to within a very few miles of each other, has at one time existed. But a considerable number of identical mammalian families and even genera are actually found in all the great continents, and the present distribution of land upon the globe renders it easy to see how they have been able to disperse themselves so widely. All the great land masses radiate from the arctic regions as a common centre, the only break being at Behrings Strait, which is so shallow that a rise of less than a thousand feet would form a broad isthmus connecting Asia and America as far south as the parallel of 60° N. Continuity of land therefore may be said to exist already for all parts of the world (except Australia and a number of large islands, which will be considered separately), and we have thus no difficulty in the way of that former wide diffusion of many groups, which we maintain to be the only explanation of most anomalies of distribution other than such as may be connected with unsuitability of climate.
The Dispersal of Birds.—Wherever mammals can migrate other vertebrates can generally follow with even greater facility. Birds, having the power of flight, can pass over wide arms of the sea, or even over extensive oceans, when these are, as in the Pacific, studded with islands to serve as resting places. Even the smaller land-birds are often carried by violent gales of wind from Europe to the Azores, a distance of nearly a thousand miles, so that it becomes comparatively easy to explain the exceptional distribution of certain species of birds. Yet on the whole it is remarkable how closely the majority of birds follow the same laws of distribution as mammals, showing that they generally require either continuous land or an island-strewn sea as a means of dispersal to new homes.
The Dispersal of Reptiles.—Reptiles appear at first sight to be as much dependent on land for their dispersal as mammalia, but they possess two peculiarities which favour their occasional transmission across the sea—the one being their greater tenacity of life, the other their oviparous mode of reproduction. A large boa-constrictor was once floated to the island of St. Vincent, twisted round the trunk of a cedar tree, and was so little injured by its voyage that it captured some sheep before it was killed. The island is nearly two hundred miles from Trinidad and the coast of South America, whence the reptile almost certainly came.[14] Snakes are, however, comparatively scarce on islands far from continents, but lizards are often abundant, and though these might also travel on floating trees, it seems more probable that there is some as yet unknown mode by which their eggs are safely, though perhaps very rarely, conveyed from island to island. Examples of their peculiar distribution will be given when we treat of the fauna of some islands in which they abound.
The Dispersal of Amphibia and Fresh-water Fishes.—The two lower groups of vertebrates, Amphibia and fresh-water fishes, possess special facilities for dispersal, in the fact of their eggs being deposited in water, and in their aquatic or semi-aquatic habits. They have another advantage over reptiles in being capable of flourishing in arctic regions, and in the power possessed by their eggs of being frozen without injury. They have thus, no doubt, been assisted in their dispersal by floating ice, and by that approximation of all the continents in high northern latitudes which has been the chief agent in producing the general uniformity in the animal productions of the globe. Some genera of Batrachia have almost a world-wide distribution; while the tailed Batrachia, such as the newts and salamanders, are almost entirely confined to the northern hemisphere, some of the genera spreading over the whole of the north temperate zone. Fresh-water fishes have often a very wide range, the same species being sometimes found in all the rivers of a continent. This is no doubt chiefly due to the want of permanence in river basins, especially in their lower portions, where streams belonging to distinct systems often approach each other and may be made to change their course from one to the other basin by very slight elevations or depressions of the land. Hurricanes and water-spouts also often carry considerable quantities of water from ponds and rivers, and thus disperse eggs and even small fishes. As a rule, however, the same species are not often found in countries separated by a considerable extent of sea, and in the tropics rarely the same genera. The exceptions are in the colder regions of the earth, where the transporting power of ice may have come into play. High ranges of mountains, if continuous for long distances, rarely have the same species of fish in the rivers on their two sides. Where exceptions occur, it is often due to the great antiquity of the group, which has survived so many changes in physical geography that it has been able, step by step, to reach countries which are separated by barriers impassable to more recent types. Yet another and more efficient explanation of the distribution of this group of animals is the fact that many families and genera inhabit both fresh and salt water; and there is reason to believe that many of the fishes now inhabiting the tropical rivers of both hemispheres have arisen from allied marine forms becoming gradually modified for a life in fresh water. By some of these various causes, or a combination of them, most of the facts in the distribution of fishes can be explained without much difficulty.
The Dispersal of Insects.—In the enormous group of insects the means of dispersal among land animals reach their maximum. Many of them have great powers of flight, and from their extreme lightness they can be carried immense distances by gales of wind. Others can survive exposure to salt water for many days, and may thus be floated long distances by marine currents. The eggs and larvæ often inhabit solid timber, or lurk under bark or in crevices of logs, and may thus reach any countries to which such logs are floated. Another important factor in the problem is the immense antiquity of insects, and the long persistence of many of the best marked types. The rich insect fauna of the Miocene period in Switzerland consisted largely of genera still inhabiting Europe, and even of a considerable number identical, or almost so, with living species. Out of 156 genera of Swiss fossil beetles no less than 114 are still living; and the general character of the species is exactly like that of the existing fauna of the northern hemisphere in a somewhat more southern latitude. There is, therefore, evidently no difficulty in accounting for any amount of dispersal among insects; and it is all the more surprising that with such powers of migration they should yet be often as restricted in their range as the reptiles or even the mammalia. The cause of this wonderful restriction to limited areas is, undoubtedly, the extreme specialisation of most insects. They have become so exactly adapted to one set of conditions, that when carried into a new country they cannot live. Many can only feed in the larva state on one species of plant; others are bound up with certain groups of animals on whom they are more or less parasitic. Climatal influences have a great effect on their delicate bodies; while, however well a species may be adapted to cope with its enemies in one locality, it may be quite unable to guard itself against those which elsewhere attack it. From this peculiar combination of characters it happens, that among insects are to be found examples of the widest and most erratic dispersal and also of the extremest restriction to limited areas; and it is only by bearing these considerations in mind that we can find a satisfactory explanation of the many anomalies we meet with in studying their distribution.
The Dispersal of Land Mollusca.—The only other group of animals we need now refer to is that of the air-breathing mollusca, commonly called land-shells. These are almost as ubiquitous as insects, though far less numerous; and their wide distribution is by no means so easy to explain. The genera have usually a very wide, and often a cosmopolitan range, while the species are rather restricted, and sometimes wonderfully so. Not only do single islands, however small, often possess peculiar species of land-shells, but sometimes single mountains or valleys, or even a particular mountain side, possess species or varieties found nowhere else upon the globe. It is pretty certain that they have no means of passing over the sea but such as are very rare and exceptional. Some which possess an operculum, or which close the mouth of the shell with a diaphragm of secreted mucus, may float across narrow arms of the sea, especially when protected in the crevices of logs of timber; while in the young state when attached to leaves or twigs they may be carried long distances by hurricanes.[15] Owing to their exceedingly slow motion, their powers of voluntary dispersal, even on land, are very limited, and this will explain the extreme restriction of their range in many cases.
Great Antiquity of Land-Shells.—The clue to the almost universal distribution of the several families and of many genera, is to be found, however, in their immense antiquity. In the Pliocene and Miocene formations most of the land-shells are either identical with living species or closely allied to them, while even in the Eocene almost all are of living genera, and one British Eocene fossil still lives in Texas. Strange to say, no true land-shells have been discovered in the Secondary formations, but they must certainly have abounded, for in the far more ancient Palæozoic coal measures of Nova Scotia two species belonging to the living genera Pupa and Zonites have been found in considerable abundance.
Land-shells have therefore survived all the revolutions the earth has undergone since Palæozoic times. They have been able to spread slowly but surely into every land that has ever been connected with a continent, while the rare chances of transfer across the ocean, to which we have referred as possible, have again and again occurred during the almost unimaginable ages of their existence. The remotest and most solitary of the islands of the mid-ocean have thus become stocked with them, though the variety of species and genera bears a direct relation to the facilities of transfer, and the shell fauna is never very rich and varied, except in countries which have at one time or other been united to some continental land.
Causes Favouring the Abundance of Land-Shells.—The abundance and variety of land-shells is also, more than that of any other class of animals, dependent on the nature of the surface and the absence of enemies, and where these conditions are favourable their forms are wonderfully luxuriant. The first condition is the presence of lime in the soil, and a broken surface of country with much rugged rock offering crevices for concealment and hibernation. The second is a limited bird and mammalian fauna, in which such species as are especially shell-eaters shall be rare or absent. Both these conditions are found in certain large islands, and pre-eminently in the Antilles, which possess more species of land-shells than any single continent. If we take the whole globe, more species of land-shells are found on the islands than on the continents—a state of things to which no approach is made in any other group of animals whatever, but which is perhaps explained by the considerations now suggested.
The Dispersal of Plants.—The ways in which plants are dispersed over the earth, and the special facilities they often possess for migration have been pointed out by eminent botanists, and a considerable space might be occupied in giving a summary of what has been written on the subject. In the present work, however, it is only in two or three chapters that I discuss the origin of insular floras in any detail; and it will therefore be advisable to adduce any special facts when they are required to support the argument in particular cases. A few general remarks only will therefore be made here.
Special Adaptability of Seeds for Dispersal.—Plants possess many great advantages over animals as regards the power of dispersal, since they are all propagated by seeds or spores, which are hardier than the eggs of even insects, and retain their vitality for a much longer time. Seeds may lie dormant for many years and then vegetate, while they endure extremes of heat, of cold, of drought, or of moisture which would almost always be fatal to animal germs. Among the causes of the dispersal of seeds De Candolle enumerates the wind, rivers, ocean currents, icebergs, birds and other animals, and human agency. Great numbers of seeds are specially adapted for transport by one or other of these agencies. Many are very light, and have winged appendages, pappus, or down, which enable them to be carried enormous distances. It is true, as De Candolle remarks, that we have no actual proofs of their being so carried; but this is not surprising when we consider how small and inconspicuous most seeds are. Supposing every year a million seeds were brought by the wind to the British Isles from the Continent, this would be only ten to a square mile, and the observation of a life-time might never detect one; yet a hundredth part of this number would serve in a few centuries to stock an island like Britain with a great variety of continental plants.
When, however, we consider the enormous quantity of seeds produced by plants, that great numbers of these are more or less adapted to be carried by the wind, and that winds of great violence and long duration occur in most parts of the world, we are as sure that seeds must be carried to great distances as if we had seen them so carried. Such storms carry leaves, hay, dust, and many small objects to a great height in the air, while many insects have been conveyed by them for hundreds of miles out to sea and far beyond what their unaided powers of flight could have effected.
Birds as Agents in the Dispersal of Plants.—Birds are undoubtedly important agents in the dispersal of plants over wide spaces of ocean, either by swallowing fruits and rejecting the seeds in a state fit for germination, or by the seeds becoming attached to the plumage of ground-nesting birds, or to the feet of aquatic birds embedded in small quantities of mud or earth. Illustrations of these various modes of transport will be found in Chapter XII. when discussing the origin of the flora of the Azores and Bermuda.
Ocean-currents as Agents in Plant-dispersal.—Ocean-currents are undoubtedly more important agents in conveying seeds of plants than they are in the case of any other organisms, and a considerable body of facts and experiments have been collected proving that seeds may sometimes be carried in this way many thousand miles and afterwards germinate. Mr. Darwin made a series of interesting experiments on this subject, some of which will be given in the chapter above referred to.
Dispersal along Mountain Chains.—These various modes of transport are, as will be shown when discussing special cases, amply sufficient to account for the vegetation found on oceanic islands, which almost always bears a close relation to that of the nearest continent; but there are other phenomena presented by the dispersal of species and genera of plants over very wide areas, especially when they occur in widely separated portions of the northern and southern hemispheres, that are not easily explained by such causes alone. It is here that transmission along mountain chains has probably been effective; and the exact mode in which this has occurred is discussed in Chapter XXIII., where a considerable body of facts is given, showing that extensive migrations may be effected by a succession of moderate steps, owing to the frequent exposure of fresh surfaces of soil or débris on mountain sides and summits, offering stations on which foreign plants can temporarily establish themselves.
Antiquity of Plants as affecting their Distribution.—We have already referred to the importance of great antiquity in enabling us to account for the wide dispersal of some genera and species of insects and land-shells, and recent discoveries in fossil botany show that this cause has also had great influence in the case of plants. Rich floras have been discovered in the Miocene, the Eocene, and the Upper Cretaceous formations, and these consist almost wholly of living genera, and many of them of species very closely allied to existing forms. We have therefore every reason to believe that a large number of our plant-species have survived great geological, geographical, and climatal changes; and this fact, combined with the varied and wonderful powers of dispersal many of them possess, renders it far less difficult to understand the examples of wide distribution of the genera and species of plants than in the case of similar instances among animals. This subject will be further alluded to when discussing the origin of the New Zealand flora, in Chapter XXII.
CHAPTER VI
GEOGRAPHICAL AND GEOLOGICAL CHANGES: THE PERMANENCE OF CONTINENTS
Changes of Land, and Sea, their Nature and Extent—Shore-deposits and Stratified Rocks—The Movements of Continents—Supposed Oceanic Formations; the Origin of Chalk—Fresh-water and Shore-deposits as proving the Permanence of Continents—Oceanic Islands as indications of the Permanence of Continents and Oceans—General Stability of Continents with constant Change of Form—Effect of Continental Changes on the Distribution of Animals—Changed Distribution proved by the Extinct Animals of Different Epochs—Summary of Evidence for the general Permanence of Continents and Oceans.
The changes of land and sea which have occurred in particular cases will be described when we discuss the origin and relations of the faunas of the different classes of islands. We have here only to consider the general character and extent of such changes, and to correct some erroneous ideas which are prevalent on the subject.
Changes of Land and Sea, their Nature and Extent.—It is a very common belief that geological evidence proves a complete change of land and sea to have taken place over and over again. Every foot of dry land has undoubtedly, at one time or other, formed part of a sea-bottom, and we can hardly exclude the surfaces occupied by volcanic and fresh-water deposits, since, in many cases, if not in all, these rest upon a substratum of marine formations. At first sight, therefore, it seems a necessary inference that when the present continents were under water there must have been other continents situated where we now find the oceans, from which the sediments came to form the various deposits we now see. This view was held by so acute and learned a geologist as Sir Charles Lyell, who says:—"Continents, therefore, although permanent for whole geological epochs, shift their positions entirely in the course of ages."[16] Mr. T. Mellard Reade, late President of the Geological Society of Liverpool, so recently as 1878, says:—"While believing that the ocean-depths are of enormous age, it is impossible to resist other evidences that they have once been land. The very continuity of animal and vegetable life on the globe points to it. The molluscous fauna of the eastern coast of North America is very similar to that of Europe, and this could not have happened without littoral continuity, yet there are depths of 1,500 fathoms between these continents."[17] It is certainly strange that a geologist should not remember the recent and long-continued warm climates of the Arctic regions, and see that a connection of Northern Europe by Iceland with Greenland and Labrador over a sea far less than a thousand fathoms deep would furnish the "littoral continuity" required. Again, in the same pamphlet Mr. Reade says:—"It can be mathematically demonstrated that the whole, or nearly the whole, of the sea-bottom has been at one time or other dry land. If it were not so, and the oscillations, of the level of the land with respect to the sea were confined within limits near the present continents, the results would have been a gradual diminution instead of development of the calcareous rocks. To state the case in common language, the calcareous portion of the rocks would have been washed out during the mutations, the destruction and redeposit of the continental rocks, and eventually deposited in the depths of the immutable sea far from land. Immense beds of limestone would now exist at the bottom of the ocean, while the land would be composed of sandstones and argillaceous shales. The evidence of chemistry thus confirms the inductions drawn from the distribution of animal life upon the globe."
So far from this being a "mathematical demonstration," it appears to me to be a complete misinterpretation of the facts. Animals did not create the lime which they secrete from the sea-water, and therefore we have every reason to believe that the inorganic sources which originally supplied it still keep up that supply, though perhaps in diminished quantity. Again, the great lime-secreters—corals—work in water of moderate depth, that is, near land, while there is no proof whatever that there is any considerable accumulation of limestone at the bottom of the deep ocean. On the contrary, the fact ascertained by the Challenger, that beyond a certain depth the "calcareous" ooze ceases, and is replaced by red and grey clays, although the calcareous organisms still abound in the surface waters of the ocean, shows that the lime is dissolved again by the excess of carbonic acid usually found at great depths, and its accumulation thus prevented. As to the increase of limestones in recent as compared with older formations, it may be readily explained by two considerations: in the first place, the growth and development of the land in longer and more complex shore lines and the increase of sedimentary over volcanic formations may have offered more stations favourable to the growth of coral; while the solubility of limestone in rain-water renders the destruction of such rocks more rapid than that of sandstones and shales, and would thus, by supplying more calcareous matter in solution for secretion by limestone-forming organisms, lead to their comparative abundance in later as compared with earlier formations.
However weak we may consider the above-quoted arguments against the permanence of oceans, the fact that these arguments are so confidently and authoritatively put forward, renders it advisable to show how many and what weighty considerations can be adduced to justify the opposite belief, which is now rapidly gaining ground among students of earth-history.
Shore Deposits and Stratified Rocks.—If we go round the shores of any of our continents we shall almost always find a considerable belt of shallow water, meaning thereby water from 100 to 150 fathoms deep. The distance from the coast line at which such depths are reached is seldom less than twenty miles, and is very frequently more than a hundred, while in some cases such shallow seas extend several hundred miles from existing continents. The great depth of a thousand fathoms is often reached at thirty miles from shore, but more frequently at about sixty or a hundred miles. Round the entire African coast for example, this depth is reached at distances varying from forty to a hundred and fifty miles (except in the Red Sea and the Straits of Mozambique), the average being about eighty miles.
Now the numerous specimens of sea-bottoms collected during the voyage of the Challenger show that true shore-deposits—that is, materials denuded from the land and carried down as sediment by rivers—are almost always confined within a distance of 50 or 100 miles of the coast, the finest mud only being sometimes carried 150 or rarely 200 miles. As the sediment varies in coarseness and density it is evident that it will sink to the bottom at unequal distances, the bulk of it sinking comparatively near shore, while only the very finest and almost impalpable mud will be carried out to the furthest limits. Beyond these limits the only deposits (with few exceptions) are organic, consisting of the shells of minute calcareous or siliceous organisms with some decomposed pumice and volcanic dust which floats out to mid-ocean. It follows, therefore, that by far the larger part of all stratified deposits, especially those which consist of sand or pebbles or any visible fragments of rock, must have been formed within 50 or 100 miles of then existing continents, or if at a greater distance, in shallow inland seas receiving deposits from more sides than one, or in certain exceptional areas where deep ocean currents carry the débris of land to greater distances.[18]
If we now examine the stratified rocks found in the very centre of all our great continents, we find them to consist of sandstones, limestones, conglomerates, or shales, which must, as we have seen, have been deposited within a comparatively short distance of a sea-shore. Sir Archibald Geikie says:—"Among the thickest masses of sedimentary rock—those of the ancient Palæozoic systems—no features recur more continually than the alternations of different sediments, and the recurrence of surfaces covered with well-preserved ripple-marks, trails and burrows of annelides, polygonal and irregular desiccation marks, like the cracks at the bottom of a sun-dried muddy pool. These phenomena unequivocally point to shallow and even littoral waters. They occur from bottom to top of formations, which reach a thickness of several thousand feet. They can be interpreted only in one way, viz., that the formations in question began to be laid down in shallow water; that during their formation the area of deposit gradually subsided for thousands of feet; yet that the rate of accumulation of sediment kept pace on the whole with this depression; and hence that the original shallow-water character of the deposits remained, even after the original sea-bottom had been buried under a vast mass of sedimentary matter." He goes on to say, that this general statement applies to the more recent as well as to the more ancient formations, and concludes—"In short, the more attentively the stratified rocks of the earth are studied, the more striking becomes the absence of any formations among them, which can legitimately be considered those of a deep sea. They have all been deposited in comparatively shallow water."[19]
The arrangement and succession of the stratified rocks also indicate the mode and place of their formation. We find them stretching across the country in one general direction, in belts of no great width though often of immense length, just as we should expect in shore deposits; and they often thin out and change from coarse to fine in a definite manner, indicating the position of the adjacent land from the débris of which they were originally formed. Again quoting Sir Archibald Geikie:—"The materials carried down to the sea would arrange themselves then as they do still, the coarser portions nearest the shore, the finer silt and mud furthest from it. From the earliest geological times the great area of deposit has been, as it still is, the marginal belt of sea-floor skirting the land. It is there that nature has always strewn the dust of continents to be."
The Movements of Continents.—As we find these stratified rocks of different periods spread over almost the whole surface of existing continents where not occupied by igneous or metamorphic rocks, it follows that at one period or another each part of the continent has been under the sea, but at the same time not far from the shore. Geologists now recognise two kinds of movements by which the deposits so formed have been elevated into dry land—in the one case the strata remain almost level and undisturbed, in the other they are contorted and crumpled, often to an enormous extent. The former often prevails in plains and plateaus, while the latter is almost always found in the great mountain ranges. We are thus led to picture the land of the globe as a flexible area in a state of slow but incessant change; the changes consisting of low undulations which creep over the surface so as to elevate and depress limited portions in succession without perceptibly affecting their nearly horizontal position; and also of intense lateral compression, supposed to be produced by partial subsidence along certain lines of weakness in the earth's crust, the effect of which is to crumple the strata and force up certain areas in great contorted masses, which, when carved out by subaërial denudation into peaks and valleys, constitute our great mountain systems.[20] In this way every part of a continent may again and again have sunk beneath the sea, and yet as a whole may never have ceased to exist as a continent or a vast continental archipelago. And, as subsidence will always be accompanied by deposition, of sediments from the adjacent land, piles of marine strata many thousand feet thick may have been formed in a sea which was never very deep, by means of a slow depression either continuous or intermittent, or through alternate subsidences and elevations, each of moderate amount.
Supposed Oceanic Formations;—the Origin of Chalk.—There seems very good reason to believe that few, if any, of the rocks known to geologists correspond exactly to the deposits now forming at the bottom of our great oceans. The white oceanic mud, or Globigerina-ooze, found in all the great oceans at depths varying from 250 to nearly 3,000 fathoms, and almost constantly in depths under 2,000 fathoms, has, however, been supposed to be an exception, and to correspond exactly to our white and grey chalk. Hence some naturalists have maintained that there has probably been one continuous formation of chalk in the Atlantic from the Cretaceous epoch to the present day. This view has been adopted chiefly on account of the similarity of the minute organisms found to compose a considerable proportion of both deposits, more especially the pelagic Foraminifera, of which several species of Globigerina appear to be identical in the chalk and the modern Atlantic mud. Other extremely minute organisms whose nature is doubtful, called coccoliths and discoliths, are also found in both formations, while there is a considerable general resemblance between the higher forms of life. Sir Wyville Thomson tells us, that—"Sponges are abundant in both, and the recent chalk-mud has yielded a large number of examples of the group porifera vitrea, which find their nearest representatives among the Ventriculites of the white chalk. The echinoderm fauna of the deeper parts of the Atlantic basin is very characteristic, and yields an assemblage of forms which represent in a remarkable degree the corresponding group in the white chalk. Species of the genus Cidaris are numerous; some remarkable flexible forms of the Diademidæ seem to approach Echinothuria."[21] Now, as some explanation of the origin of chalk had long been desired by geologists, it is not surprising that the amount of resemblance shown to exist between it and some kinds of oceanic mud should have been at once seized upon, and the conclusion arrived at that chalk is a deep-sea oceanic formation exactly analogous to that which has been shown to cover large areas of the Atlantic, Pacific and Southern oceans.
But there are several objections to this view which seem fatal to its acceptance. In the first place, no specimens of Globigerina-ooze from the deep ocean-bed yet examined agree even approximately with chalk in chemical composition, only containing from 44 to 79 per cent. of carbonate of lime, with from 5 to 11 per cent of silica, and from 8 to 33 per cent. of alumina and oxide of iron.[22] Chalk, on the other hand, contains usually from 94 to 99 per cent. of carbonate of lime, and a very minute quantity of alumina and silica. This large proportion of carbonate of lime implies some other source of this mineral, and it is probably to be found in the excessively fine mud produced by the decomposition and denudation of coral reefs. Mr. Dana, the geologist of the United States Exploring Expedition, found in the elevated coral reef of Oahu, one of the Sandwich Islands, a deposit closely resembling chalk in colour, texture, &c.; while in several growing reefs a similar formation of modern chalk undistinguishable from the ancient, was observed.[23] Sir Charles Lyell well remarks that the pure calcareous mud produced by the decomposition of the shelly coverings of mollusca and zoophytes would be much lighter than argillaceous or arenaceous mud, and being thus transported to greater distances would be completely separated from all impurities.
Now the Globigerinæ have been shown by the Challenger explorations to abound in all moderately warm seas; living both at the surface, at various depths in the water, and at the bottom. It was long thought that they were surface-dwellers only, and that their dead tests sank to the bottom, producing the Globigerina-ooze in those areas where other deposits were absent or scanty. But the examination of the whole of the dredgings and surface-gatherings of the Challenger by Mr. H. B. Brady has led him to a different conclusion; for he finds numerous forms at the bottom quite distinct from those which inhabit the surface, while, when the same species live both at surface and bottom, the latter are always larger and have thicker and stronger cell-walls. This view is also supported by the fact that in many stations not far from our own shores Globigerinæ are abundant in bottom dredgings, but are never found on the surface in the towing-nets.[24] These organisms then exist almost universally where the waters are pure and are not too cold, and they would naturally abound most where the diffusion of carbonate of lime both in suspension and solution afforded them an abundant supply of material for their shelly coverings. Dr. Wallich believes that they flourish best where the warm waters of the Gulf Stream bring organic matter from which they derive nutriment, since they are wholly wanting in the course of the Arctic current between Greenland and Labrador. Dr. Carpenter also assures us that they are rigorously limited to warm areas; but Mr. Brady says that a dwarf variety of Globigerina was found in the soundings of the North Polar Expedition in Lat. 83° 19′ N.
Now with regard to the depth at which our chalk was formed, we have evidence of several distinct kinds to show that it was not profoundly oceanic. Mr. J. Murray, in the report already referred to, says: "The Globigerina-oozes which we get in shallow water resemble the chalk much more than those in deeper water, say over 1,000 fathoms."[25] This is important and weighty evidence, and it is supported in a striking manner by the nature of the molluscan fauna of the chalk. Dr. Gwyn Jeffreys, one of our greatest authorities on shells, who has himself dredged largely both in deep and shallow water and who has no theory to support, has carefully examined this question. Taking the whole series of genera which are found in the Chalk formation, seventy-one in number, he declared that they are all comparatively shallow-water forms, many living at depths not exceeding 40 to 50 fathoms, while some are confined to still shallower waters. Even more important is the fact that the genera especially characteristic of the deep Atlantic ooze—Leda, Verticordia, Neæra, and the Bulla family—are either very rare or entirely wanting in the ancient Cretaceous deposits.[26]
Let us now see how the various facts already adduced will enable us to explain the peculiar characteristics of the chalk formation. Sir Charles Lyell tells us that "pure chalk, of nearly uniform aspect and composition, is met with in a north-west and south-east direction, from the north of Ireland to the Crimea, a distance of about 1,500 geographical miles; and in an opposite direction it extends from the south of Sweden to the south of Bordeaux, a distance of about 840 geographical miles." This marks the extreme limits within which true chalk is found, though it is by no means continuous. It probably implies, however, the existence across Central Europe of a sea somewhat larger than the Mediterranean. It may have been much larger, because this pure chalk formation would only be formed at a considerable distance from land, or in areas where there was no other shore deposit. This sea was probably bounded on the north by the old Scandinavian highlands, extending to Northern Germany and North-western Russia, where Palæozoic and ancient Secondary rocks have a wide extension, though now partially concealed by late Tertiary deposits; while on the south it appears to have been limited by land extending through Austria, South Germany, and the south of France, as shown in the map of Central Europe during the Cretaceous period in Professor Heer's Primeval World of Switzerland, p. 175. To the north the sea may have had an outlet to the Arctic Ocean between the Ural range and Finland. South of the Alps there was probably another sea, which may have communicated with the northern one just described, and there was also a narrow strait across Switzerland, north of the Alps, but, as might be expected, in this only marls, clays, sandstones, and limestones were deposited instead of true chalk. It is also a suggestive fact that both above and below the true chalk, in almost all the countries where it occurs, are extensive deposits of marls, clays, and even pure sands and sandstones, characterised by the same general types of fossil remains as the chalk itself. These beds imply the vicinity of land, and this is even more clearly proved by the occurrence, both in the Upper and Lower Cretaceous, of deposits containing the remains of land-plants in abundance, indicating a rich and varied flora.
Now all these facts are totally opposed to the idea of anything like oceanic conditions having prevailed in Europe during the Cretaceous period; but they are quite consistent with the existence of a great Mediterranean sea of considerable depth in its central portions, and occupying either at one or successive periods, the whole area of the Cretaceous formation. We may also note that the Maestricht beds in Belgium and the Faxoe chalk in Denmark are both highly coralline, the latter being, in fact, as completely composed of corals as a modern coral-reef; so that we have here a clear indication of the source whence the white calcareous mud was derived which forms the basis of chalk. If we suppose that during this period the comparatively shallow sea-bottom between Scandinavia and Greenland was elevated, forming a land connection between these countries, the result would be that a large portion of the Gulf Stream would be diverted into the inland European sea, and would bring with it that abundance of Globigerinæ, and other Foraminifera, which form such an important constituent of chalk. This sea was probably bordered with islands and coral-reefs, and if no very large rivers flowed into it we should have all the conditions for the production of the true chalk, as well as the other members of the Cretaceous formation. The products of the denudation of its shores and islands would form the various sandstones, marls, and clays, which would be deposited almost wholly within a few miles of its coasts; while the great central sea, perhaps at no time more than a few thousand feet deep and often much less, would receive only the impalpable mud of the coral-reefs and the constantly falling tests of Foraminifera. These would imbed and preserve for us the numerous echinoderms, sponges, and mollusca, which lived upon the bottom, the fishes and turtles which swam in its waters, and sometimes the winged reptiles that flew overhead. The abundance of ammonites, and other cephalopods, in the chalk, is another indication that the water in which they lived was not very deep, since Dr. S. P. Woodward thinks that these organisms were limited to a depth of about thirty fathoms.
The best example of the modern formation of chalk is perhaps to be found on the coasts of sub-tropical North America, as described in the following passage:—
"The observations of Pourtales show that the steep banks of Bahama are covered with soft white lime mud. The lime-bottom, which consists almost entirely of Polythalamia, covers in greater depths the entire channel of Florida. This formation extends without interruption over the whole bed of the Gulf Stream in the Gulf of Mexico, and is continued along the Atlantic coast of America. The commonest genera met with in this deposit are Globigerina, Rotalia cultrata in large numbers, several Textilariæ, Marginulinæ, &c. Beside these, small free corals, Alcyonidæ, Ophiuræ, Mollusca, Crustacea, small fishes, &c., are found living in these depths. The whole sea-bottom appears to be covered with a vast deposit of white chalk still in formation."[27]
There is yet another consideration which seems to have been altogether overlooked by those who suppose that a deep and open island-studded ocean occupied the place of Europe in Cretaceous times. No fact is more certain than the considerable break, indicative of a great lapse of time, intervening between the Cretaceous and Tertiary formations. A few deposits of intermediate age have indeed been found, but these have been generally allocated either with the Chalk or the Eocene, leaving the gap almost as pronounced as before. Now, what does this gap mean? It implies that when the deposition of the various Cretaceous beds of Europe came to an end they were raised above the sea-level and subject to extensive denudation, and that for a long but unknown period no extensive portion of what is now European land was below the sea-level. It was only when this period terminated that large areas in several parts of Europe became submerged and received the earliest Tertiary deposits known as Eocene. If, therefore, Europe at the close of the Cretaceous period was generally identical with what it is now, and perhaps even more extensive, it is absurd to suppose that it was all, or nearly all, under water during that period; or in fact, that any part of it was submerged, except those areas on which we actually find Cretaceous deposits, or where we have good reason to believe they have existed; and even these need not have been all under water at the same time.
The several considerations now adduced are, I think, sufficient to show that the view put forth by some naturalists (and which has met with a somewhat hasty acceptance by geologists) that our white chalk is an oceanic formation strictly comparable with that now forming at depths of a thousand fathoms and upwards in the centre of the Atlantic, gives a totally erroneous idea of the actual condition of Europe during that period. Instead of being a wide ocean, with a few scattered islands, comparable to some parts of the Pacific, it formed as truly a portion of the great northern continent as it does now, although the inland seas of that epoch may have been more extensive and more numerous than they are at the present day.[28]
Fresh-water and Shore Deposits as Proving the Permanence of Continents.—The view here maintained, that all known marine deposits have been formed near the coasts of continents and islands, and that our actual continents have been in continuous existence under variously modified forms during the whole period of known geological history, is further supported by another and totally distinct series of facts. In almost every period of geology, and in all the continents which have been well examined, there are found lacustrine, estuarine, or shore deposits, containing the remains of land animals or plants, thus demonstrating the continuous existence of extensive land areas on or adjoining the sites of our present continents. Beginning with the Miocene, or Middle Tertiary period, we have such deposits with remains of land-animals, or plants, in Devonshire and Scotland, in France, Switzerland, Germany, Croatia, Vienna, Greece, North India, Central India, Burmah, North America, both east and west of the Rocky Mountains, Greenland, and other parts of the Arctic regions. In the older Eocene period similar formations are widely spread in the south of England, in France, and to an enormous extent on the central plateau of North America; while in the eastern states, from Maryland to Alabama, there are extensive marine deposits of the same age, which, from the abundance of fossil remains of a large cetacean (Zeuglodon), must have been formed in shallow gulfs or estuaries where these huge animals were stranded. Going back to the Cretaceous formation we have the same indications of persisting lands in the rich plant-beds of Aix-la-Chapelle, and a few other localities on the Continent, as well as in coniferous fruits from the Gault of Folkestone; while in North America cretaceous plant-beds occur in New Jersey, Alabama, Kansas, the sources of the Missouri, the Rocky Mountains from New Mexico to the Arctic Ocean, Alaska, California, and in Greenland and Spitzbergen; while birds and land reptiles are found in the Cretaceous deposits of Colorado and other districts near the centre of the Continent. Fresh-water deposits of this age are also found on the coast of Brazil. In the lower part of this formation we have the fresh-water Wealden deposits of England, extending into France, Hanover, and Westphalia. In the older Oolite or Jurassic formation we have abundant proofs of continental conditions in the fresh-water and "dirt"-beds of the Purbecks in the south of England, with plants, insects and mammals; the Bavarian lithographic stone, with fossil birds and insects; the earlier "forest marble" of Wiltshire, with ripple-marks, wood, and broken shells, indicative of an extensive beach; the Stonesfield slate, with plants, insects, and marsupials; and the Oolitic coal of Yorkshire and Sutherlandshire. Beds of the same age occur in the Rocky Mountains of North America, containing abundance of Dinosaurians and other reptiles, among which is the Atlantosaurus, the largest land-animal yet known to have existed on the earth. Professor O. C. Marsh describes it as having been between fifty and sixty feet long, and when standing erect at least thirty feet high![29] Such monsters could hardly have been developed except in an extensive land area. A small mammal, Dryolestes, has been discovered in the same deposits. A rich Jurassic flora has also been found in East Siberia and the Amur valley. The older Triassic deposits are very extensively developed in America, and both in the Connecticut valley and the Rocky Mountains show tracks or remains of land reptiles, amphibians and mammalia, while coalfields of the same age in Virginia and Carolina produce abundance of plants. Here too are found the ancient mammal, Microlestes, of Wurtemberg, with the ferns, conifers, and Labyrinthodonts of the Bunter Sandstone in Germany; while the beds of rock-salt in this formation, both in England and in many parts of the Continent, could only have been formed in inland seas or lakes, and thus equally demonstrate continental conditions.
We now pass into the oldest or Palæozoic formations, but find no diminution in the proofs of continental conditions. The Permian formation has a rich flora often producing coal in England, France, Saxony, Thuringia, Silesia, and Eastern Russia. Coalfields of the same age occur in Ohio in North America. In the still more ancient Carboniferous formation we find the most remarkable proofs of the existence of our present land masses at that remote epoch, in the wonderful extension of coal beds in all the known continents. We find them in Ireland, England, and Scotland; in France, Spain, Belgium, Saxony, Prussia, Bohemia, Hungary, Sweden, Spitzbergen, Siberia, Russia, Greece, Turkey, and Persia; in many parts of continental India, extensively in China, and in Australia, Tasmania, and New Zealand. In North America there are immense coal fields, in Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, from Pennsylvania southward to Alabama, in Indiana and Illinois, in Missouri, and even so far west as Colorado; and there is also a true coal formation in South Brazil. This wonderfully wide distribution of coal, implying, as it does, a rich vegetation and extensive land areas, carries back the proof of the persistence and general identity of our continents to a period so remote that none of the higher animal types had probably been developed. But we can go even further back than this, to the preceding Devonian formation, which was almost certainly an inland deposit often containing remains of fresh-water shells, plants, and even insects; while Professor Ramsay believes that he has found "sun-cracks and rain-pittings" in the Longmynd beds of the still earlier Cambrian formation.[30] If now, in addition to the body of evidence here adduced, we take into consideration the fresh-water deposits that still remain to be discovered, and those extensive areas where they have been destroyed by denudation or remain deeply covered up by later marine or volcanic formations, we cannot but be struck by the abounding proofs of the permanence of the great features of land and sea as they now exist; and we shall see how utterly gratuitous, and how entirely opposed to all the evidence at our command, are the hypothetical continents bridging over the deep oceans, by the help of which it is so often attempted to cut the Gordian knot presented by some anomalous fact in geographical distribution.
Oceanic Islands as Indications of the Permanence of Continents and Oceans.—Coming to the question from the other side, Mr. Darwin has adduced an argument of considerable weight in favour of the permanence of the great oceans. He says (Origin of Species, 6th Ed. p. 288): "Looking to existing oceans, which are thrice as extensive as the land, we see them studded with many islands; but hardly one truly oceanic island (with the exception of New Zealand, if this can be called a truly oceanic island) is as yet known to afford even a fragment of any Palæozoic or Secondary formation. Hence we may perhaps infer that during the Palæozoic and Secondary periods neither continents nor continental islands existed where our oceans now extend; for had they existed, Palæozoic and Secondary formations would in all probability have been accumulated from sediment derived from their wear and tear; and these would have been at least partially upheaved by the oscillations of level, which must have intervened during these enormously long periods. If then we may infer anything from these facts, we may infer that, where our oceans now extend, oceans have extended from the remotest period of which we have any record; and, on the other hand, that where continents now exist, large tracts of land have existed, subjected no doubt to great oscillations of level, since the Cambrian period." This argument standing by itself has not received the attention it deserves, but coming in support of the long series of facts of an altogether distinct nature, going to show the permanence of continents, the cumulative effect of the whole must, I think, be admitted to be irresistible.[31]
General Stability of Continents with Constant Change of Form.—It will be observed that the very same evidence which has been adduced to prove the general stability and permanence of our continental areas also goes to prove that they have been subjected to wonderful and repeated changes in detail. Every square mile of their surface has been again and again under water, sometimes a few hundred feet deep, sometimes perhaps several thousands. Lakes and inland seas have been formed, have been filled up with sediment, and been subsequently raised into hills or even mountains. Arms of the sea have existed crossing the continents in various directions, and thus completely isolating the divided portions for varying intervals. Seas have been changed into deserts and deserts into seas. Volcanoes have grown into mountains, have been degraded and sunk beneath the ocean, have been covered with sedimentary deposits, and again raised up into mountain ranges; while other mountains have been formed by the upraised coral reefs of inland seas. The mountains of one period have disappeared by denudation or subsidence, while the mountains of the succeeding period have been rising from beneath the waves. The valleys, the ravines, and the mountain peaks, have been carved out and filled up again; and all the vegetable forms which clothe the earth and furnish food for the various classes of animals have been completely changed again and again.