Island Life Part 33

[Ill.u.s.tration]

{414}

The sea around Madagascar, when the shallow bank on which it stands is pa.s.sed, is generally deep. This 100-fathom bank is only from one to three miles wide on the east side, but on the west it is much broader, and stretches out opposite Mozambique to a distance of about eighty miles. The Mozambique Channel is rather more than 1,000 fathoms deep, but there is only a narrow belt of this depth opposite Mozambique, and still narrower where the Comoro Islands and adjacent shoals seem to form stepping-stones to the continent of Africa. The 1,000-fathom line includes Aldabra and the small Farquhar Islands to the north of Madagascar; while to the east the sea deepens rapidly to the 1,000-fathom line and then more slowly, a profound channel of 2,400 fathoms separating Madagascar from Bourbon and Mauritius. To the north-east of Mauritius are a series of extensive shoals forming four large banks less than 100 fathoms below the surface, while the 1,000-fathom line includes them all, with an area about half that of Madagascar itself. A little further north is the Seych.e.l.les group, also standing on an extensive 1,000-fathom bank, while all round the sea is more than 2,000 fathoms deep.

It seems probable, then, that to the north-east of Madagascar there was once a series of very large islands, separated from it by not very wide straits; while eastward across the Indian Ocean we find the Chagos and Maldive coral atolls, perhaps marking the position of other large islands, which together would form a line of communication, by comparatively easy stages of 400 or 500 miles each between Madagascar and India. These submerged islands, as shown in our map at p. 424, are of great importance in explaining some anomalous features in the zoology of this great island.

If the rocks of Secondary age which form a belt around the island are held to indicate that Madagascar was once of less extent than it is now (though this by no means necessarily follows), we have also evidence that it has recently been considerably larger; for along the east coast there is an extensive barrier coral-reef about 350 miles in length, and varying in distance from the land from a quarter of a mile to three or four miles.

This seems to indicate recent subsidence; while we have no record of raised coral rocks inland which would certainly mark any recent elevation, though fringing coral reefs surround a considerable portion of the northern, eastern, and south-western coasts. We may therefore conclude that during Tertiary times the island was usually as large as, and often probably much larger than, it is now. {415}

[Ill.u.s.tration: MAP OF THE MADAGASCAR GROUP, SHOWING DEPTHS OF SEA.]

In this Map the depth of the sea is shown by three tints; the lightest tint indicating from 0 to 100 fathoms, the medium tint from 100 to 1,000 fathoms, the dark tint more than 1,000 fathoms.

{416}

_Biological Features of Madagascar._--Madagascar possesses an exceedingly rich and beautiful fauna and flora, rivalling in some groups most tropical countries of equal extent, and even when poor in species, of surpa.s.sing interest from the singularity, the isolation, or the beauty of its forms of life. In order to exhibit the full peculiarity of its natural history and the nature of the problems it offers to the biological student, we must give an outline of its more important animal forms in systematic order.

_Mammalia._--Madagascar possesses no less than sixty-six species of mammals--a certain proof in itself that the island has once formed part of a continent; but the character of these animals is very extraordinary and altogether different from the a.s.semblage now found in Africa or in any other existing continent. Africa is now most prominently characterised by its monkeys, apes, and baboons; by its lions, leopards, and hyaenas; by its zebras, rhinoceroses, elephants, buffaloes, giraffes, and numerous species of antelopes. But no one of these animals, nor any thing like them, is found in Madagascar, and thus our first impression would be that it could never have been united with the African continent. But, as the tigers, the bears, the tapirs, the deer, and the numerous squirrels of Asia are equally absent, there seems no probability of its having been united with that continent. Let us then see to what groups the mammalia of Madagascar belong, and where we must look for their probable allies.

First and most important are the lemurs, consisting of six genera and thirty-three species, thus comprising just half the entire mammalian population of the island. This group of lowly-organised and very ancient creatures {417} still exists scattered over a wide area; but they are nowhere so abundant as in the island of Madagascar. They are found from West Africa to India, Ceylon, and the Malay Archipelago, consisting of a number of isolated genera and species, which appear to maintain their existence by their nocturnal and arboreal habits, and by haunting dense forests. It can hardly be said that the African forms of lemurs are more nearly allied to those of Madagascar than are the Asiatic, the whole series appearing to be the disconnected fragments of a once more compact and extensive group of animals.

Next, we have about a dozen species of Insectivora, consisting of one shrew, a group distributed over all the great continents; and five genera of a peculiar family, Centetidae, which family exists nowhere else on the globe except in the two largest West Indian Islands, Cuba and Hayti, thus adding still further to our embarra.s.sment in seeking for the original home of the Madagascar fauna.

We then come to the Carnivora, which are represented by a peculiar cat-like animal, Cryptoprocta, forming a distinct family, and having no close allies in any part of the globe; and eight civets belonging to four peculiar genera. Here we first meet with some decided indications of an African origin; for the civet family is more abundant in this continent than in Asia, and some of the Madagascar genera seem to be decidedly allied to African groups--as, for example, Eupleres to Suricata and Crossarchus.[97]

The Rodents consist only of four rats and mice of peculiar genera, one of which is said to be allied to an American genus; and lastly we have a river-hog of the African genus Potamochaerus, and a small sub-fossil hippopotamus, both of which being semi-aquatic animals might easily have reached the island from Africa, by way of the Comoros, without any actual land connection.[98]

_Reptiles of Madagascar._--Pa.s.sing over the birds for the present, as not so clearly demonstrating {418} land-connection, let us see what indications are afforded by the reptiles. The large and universally distributed family of Colubrine snakes is represented in Madagascar, not by African or Asiatic genera, but by two American genera--Philodryas and Heterodon, and by Herpetodryas, a genus found in America and China. The other genera are all peculiar, and belong mostly to widespread tropical families; but two families--Lycodontidae and Viperidae, both abundant in Africa and the Eastern tropics--are absent. Lizards are mostly represented by peculiar genera of African or tropical families, but several African genera are represented by peculiar species, and there are also some species belonging to two American genera of the Iguanidae, a family which is exclusively American; while a genus of geckoes, inhabiting America and Australia, also occurs in Madagascar.

_Relation of Madagascar to Africa._--These facts taken all together are certainly very extraordinary, since they show in a considerable number of cases as much affinity with America as with Africa; while the most striking and characteristic groups of animals now inhabiting Africa are entirely wanting in Madagascar. Let us first deal with this fact, of the absence of so many of the most dominant African groups. The explanation of this deficiency is by no means difficult, for the rich deposits of fossil mammals of Miocene or Pliocene age in France, Germany, Greece, and North-west India, have demonstrated the fact that all the great African mammals then inhabited Europe and temperate Asia. We also know that a little earlier (in Eocene times) tropical Africa was cut off from Europe and Asia by a sea stretching from the Atlantic to the Bay of Bengal, at which time Africa must have formed a detached island-continent such as Australia is now, and probably, like it, very poor in the higher forms of life. Coupling these two facts, the inference seems clear, that all the higher types of mammalia were developed in the great Euro-Asiatic continent (which then included Northern Africa), and that they only migrated into tropical Africa when the two continents became united by the upheaval of the sea-bottom, probably {419} in the latter portion of the Miocene or early in the Pliocene period.[99]

It is clear, therefore, that if Madagascar had once formed part of Africa, but had been separated from it before Africa was united to Europe and Asia, it would not contain any of those kinds of animals which then first entered the country. But, besides the African mammals, we know that some birds now confined to Africa then inhabited Europe, and we may therefore fairly a.s.sume that all the more important groups of birds, reptiles, and insects, now abundant in Africa but absent from Madagascar, formed no part of the original African fauna, but entered the country only after it was joined to Europe and Asia.

_Early History of Africa and Madagascar._--We have seen that Madagascar contains an abundance of mammals, and that most of them are of types either peculiar to, or existing also in, Africa; it follows that that continent must have had an earlier union with Europe, Asia, or America, or it could never have obtained any mammals at all.

{420} Now these ancient African mammals are Lemurs, Insectivora, and small Carnivora, chiefly Viverridae; and all these groups are known to have inhabited Europe in Eocene and Miocene times; and that the union was with Europe rather than with America is clearly proved by the fact that even the insectivorous Centetidae, now confined to Madagascar and the West Indies, inhabited France in the Lower Miocene period, while the Viverridae, or civets, which form so important a part of the fauna of Madagascar as well as of Africa, were abundant in Europe throughout the whole Tertiary period, but are not known to have ever lived in any part of the American continent.

We here see the application of the principle which we have already fully proved and ill.u.s.trated (Chapter IV., p. 60), that all extensive groups have a wide range at the period of their maximum development; but as they decay their area of distribution diminishes or breaks up into detached fragments, which one after another disappear till the group becomes extinct. Those animal forms which we now find isolated in Madagascar and other remote portions of the globe all belong to ancient groups which are in a decaying or nearly extinct condition, while those which are absent from it belong to more recent and more highly-developed types, which range over extensive and continuous areas, but have had no opportunity of reaching the more ancient continental islands.

_Anomalies of Distribution and How to Explain Them._--If these considerations have any weight, it follows that there is no reason whatever for supposing any former direct connection between Madagascar and the Greater Antilles merely because the insectivorous Centetidae now exist only in these two groups of islands; for we know that the ancestors of this family must once have had a much wider range, which almost certainly extended over the great northern continents. We might as reasonably suppose a land-connection across the Pacific to account for the camels of Asia having their nearest existing allies in the llamas and alpacas of the Peruvian Andes, and another between Sumatra and Brazil, in order that the ancestral tapir of one country might have pa.s.sed over to the other. In both {421} these cases we have ample proof of the former wide extension of the group. Extinct camels of numerous species abounded in North America in Miocene, Pliocene, and even Post-pliocene times, and one has also been found in North-western India, but none whatever among all the rich deposits of mammalia in Europe. We are thus told, as clearly as possible, that from the North American continent as a centre the camel tribe spread westward, over now-submerged land at the shallow Behring Straits and Kamschatka Sea, into Asia, and southward along the Andes into South America. Tapirs are even more interesting and instructive. Their remotest known ancestors appear in Western Europe in the early portion of the Eocene period; in the latter Eocene and the Miocene other forms occur both in Europe and North America. These seem to have become extinct in North America, while in Europe they developed largely into many forms of true tapirs, which at a much later period found their way again to North, and thence to South, America, where their remains are found in caves and gravel deposits. It is an instructive fact that in the Eastern continent, where they were once so abundant, they have dwindled down to a single species, existing in small numbers in the Malay Peninsula, Sumatra, and Borneo only; while in the Western continent, where they are comparatively recent immigrants, they occupy a much larger area, and are represented by three or four distinct species. Who could possibly have imagined such migrations, and extinctions, and changes of distribution as are demonstrated in the case of the tapirs, if we had only the distribution of the existing species to found an opinion upon? Such cases as these--and there are many others equally striking--show us with the greatest distinctness how nature has worked in bringing about the examples of anomalous distribution that everywhere meet us; and we must, on every ground of philosophy and common sense, apply the same method of interpretation to the more numerous instances of anomalous distribution we discover among such groups as reptiles, birds, and insects, where we rarely have any direct evidence of their past migrations through the discovery of {422} fossil remains. Whenever we can trace the past history of any group of terrestrial animals, we invariably find that its actual distribution can be explained by migrations effected by means of comparatively slight modifications of our existing continents. In no single case have we any direct evidence that the distribution of land and sea has been radically changed during the whole lapse of the Tertiary and Secondary periods, while, as we have already shown in our fifth chapter, the testimony of geology itself, if fairly interpreted, upholds the same theory of the stability of our continents and the permanence of our oceans. Yet so easy and pleasant is it to speculate on former changes of land and sea with which to cut the gordian knot offered by anomalies of distribution, that we still continually meet with suggestions of former continents stretching in every direction across the deepest oceans, in order to explain the presence in remote parts of the globe of the same genera even of plants or of insects--organisms which possess such exceptional facilities both for terrestrial, aerial, and oceanic transport, and of whose distribution in early geological periods we generally know little or nothing.

_The Birds of Madagascar, as Indicating a Supposed Lemurian Continent._--Having thus shown how the distribution of the land mammalia and reptiles of Madagascar may be well explained by the supposition of a union with Africa before the greater part of its existing fauna had reached it, we have now to consider whether, as some ornithologists think, the distribution and affinities of the birds present an insuperable objection to this view, and require the adoption of a hypothetical continent--Lemuria--extending from Madagascar to Ceylon and the Malay Islands.

There are about one hundred and fifty land birds known from the island of Madagascar, of which a hundred and twenty-seven are peculiar; and about half of these peculiar species belong to peculiar genera, many of which are extremely isolated, so that it is often difficult to cla.s.s them in any of the recognised families, or to determine their affinities to any living birds.[100] Among the other moiety, {423} belonging to known genera, we find fifteen which have undoubted African affinities, while five or six are as decidedly Oriental, the genera or nearest allied species being found in India or the Malay Islands. It is on the presence of these peculiar Indian types that Dr. Hartlaub, in his recent work on the _Birds of Madagascar and the Adjacent Islands_, lays great stress, as proving the former existence of "Lemuria"; while he considers the absence of such peculiar African families as the plantain-eaters, glossy-starlings, ox-p.e.c.k.e.rs, barbets, honey-guides, hornbills, and bustards--besides a host of peculiar African genera--as sufficiently disproving the statement in my _Geographical Distribution of Animals_ that Madagascar is "more nearly related to the Ethiopian than to any other region," and that its fauna was evidently "mainly derived from Africa."

But the absence of the numerous peculiar groups of African birds is so exactly parallel to the same phenomenon among mammals, that we are justified in imputing it to the same cause, the more especially as some of the very groups that are wanting--the plantain-eaters and the trogons, for example,--are actually known to have inhabited Europe along with the large mammalia which subsequently migrated to Africa. As to the peculiarly Eastern genera--such as Copsychus and Hypsipetes, with a Dicrurus, a Ploceus, a Cisticola, and a Scops, all closely allied to Indian or Malayan species--although very striking to the ornithologist, they certainly do not outweigh the fourteen African genera found in Madagascar. Their presence may, moreover, be accounted for more satisfactorily than by means of an ancient Lemurian continent, which, even if granted, would not explain the very facts adduced in its support.

Let us first prove this latter statement.

The supposed "Lemuria" must have existed, if at all, at so remote a period that the higher animals did not then inhabit either Africa or Southern Asia, and it must have {424} become partially or wholly submerged before they reached those countries; otherwise we should find in Madagascar many other animals besides Lemurs, Insectivora, and Viverridae, especially such active arboreal creatures as monkeys and squirrels, such hardy grazers as deer or antelopes, or such wide-ranging carnivores as foxes or bears. This obliges us to date the disappearance of the hypothetical continent about the earlier part of the Miocene epoch at latest, for during the latter part of that period we know that such animals existed in abundance in every part of the great northern continents wherever we have found organic remains.

But the Oriental birds in Madagascar, by whose presence Dr. Hartlaub upholds the theory of a Lemuria, are slightly modified forms of _existing Indian genera_, or sometimes, as Dr. Hartlaub himself points out, _species hardly distinguishable from those of India_. Now all the evidence at our command leads us to conclude that, even if these genera and species were in existence in the early Miocene period, they must have had a widely different distribution from what they have now. Along with so many African and Indian genera of mammals they then probably inhabited Europe, which at that epoch enjoyed a sub-tropical climate; and this is rendered almost certain by the discovery in the Miocene of France of fossil remains of trogons and jungle-fowl. If, then, these Indian birds date back to the very period during which alone Lemuria could have existed, that continent was quite unnecessary for their introduction into Madagascar, as they could have followed the same track as the mammalia of Miocene Europe and Asia; while if, as I maintain, they are of more recent date, then Lemuria had ceased to exist, and could not have been the means of their introduction.

_Submerged Islands between Madagascar and India._--Looking at the accompanying map of the Indian Ocean, we see that between Madagascar and India there are now extensive shoals and coral reefs, such as are usually held to indicate subsidence; and we may therefore fairly postulate the former existence here of several large islands, some of them not much inferior to Madagascar itself. These reefs are all separated from each other by very deep {425} sea--much deeper than that which divides Madagascar from Africa, and we have therefore no reason to imagine their former union. But they would nevertheless greatly facilitate the introduction of Indian birds into the Mascarene Islands and Madagascar; and these facilities existing, such an immigration would be sure to take place, just as surely as American birds have entered the Galapagos and Juan Fernandez, as European birds now reach the Azores, and as Australian birds reach such a distant island as New Zealand. This would take place the more certainly because the Indian Ocean is a region of violent periodical storms at the changes of the monsoons, and we have seen in the case of the Azores and Bermuda how important a factor this is in determining the transport of birds across the ocean.

[Ill.u.s.tration: MAP OF THE INDIAN OCEAN.

Showing the position of banks less than 1,000 fathoms deep between Africa and the Indian Peninsula.]

{426}

The final disappearance of these now sunken islands does not, in all probability, date back to a very remote epoch; and this exactly accords with the fact that some of the birds, as well as the fruit-bats of the genus Pteropus, are very closely allied to Indian species, if not actually identical, others being distinct species of the same genera. The fact that not one closely-allied species or even genus of Indian or Malayan mammals is found in Madagascar, sufficiently proves that it is no land-connection that has brought about this small infusion of Indian birds and bats; while we have sufficiently shown, that, when we go back to remote geological times no land-connection in this direction was necessary to explain the phenomena of the distribution of the Lemurs and Insectivora. A land-connection with _some_ continent was undoubtedly necessary, or there would have been no mammalia at all in Madagascar; and the nature of its fauna on the whole, no less than the moderate depth of the intervening strait and the comparative approximation of the opposite sh.o.r.es, clearly indicate that the connection was with Africa.

_Concluding Remarks on "Lemuria."_--I have gone into this question in some detail, because Dr. Hartlaub's criticism on my views has been reproduced in a scientific periodical,[101] and the supposed Lemurian continent is constantly referred to by quasi-scientific writers, as well as by naturalists and geologists, as if its existence had been demonstrated by facts, or as if it were absolutely necessary to postulate such a land in order to account for the entire series of phenomena connected with the Madagascar fauna, and especially with the distribution of the Lemuridae.[102] I {427} think I have now shown, on the other hand, that it was essentially a provisional hypothesis, very useful in calling attention to a remarkable series of problems in geographical distribution, but not affording the true solution of those problems, any more than the hypothesis of an Atlantis solved the problems presented by the Atlantic Islands and the relations of the European and North American flora and fauna. The Atlantis is now rarely introduced seriously except by the absolutely unscientific, having received its death-blow by the chapter on Oceanic Islands in the _Origin of Species_, and the researches of Professor Asa Gray on the affinities of the North American and Asiatic floras. But "Lemuria" still keeps its place--a good example of the survival of a provisional hypothesis which offers what seems an easy solution of a difficult problem, and has received an appropriate and easily remembered name, long after it has been proved to be untenable.

It is now more than fifteen years since I first showed, by a careful examination of all the facts to be accounted for, that the hypothesis of a Lemurian continent was alike unnecessary to explain one portion of the facts, and inadequate to explain the remaining portion.[103] Since that time I have seen no attempt even to discuss the question on general grounds in opposition to my views, nor on the other hand have those who have hitherto supported the hypothesis taken any opportunity of acknowledging its weakness and inutility. I have therefore here explained my reasons for rejecting it somewhat more fully and in a more popular form, in the hope that a check may thus be placed on the continued re-statement of this unsound theory as if it were one of the accepted conclusions of modern science.

{428}

_The Mascarene Islands._[104]--In the _Geographical Distribution of Animals_, a summary is given of all that was known of the zoology of the various islands near Madagascar, which to some extent partake of its peculiarities, and with it form the Malagasy sub-region of the Ethiopian region. As no great additions have since been made to our knowledge of the fauna of these islands, and my object in this volume being more especially to ill.u.s.trate the mode of solving distributional problems by means of the most suitable examples, I shall now confine myself to pointing out how far the facts presented by these outlying islands support the views already enunciated with regard to the origin of the Madagascar fauna.

_The Comoro Islands._--This group of islands is situated nearly midway between the northern extremity of Madagascar and the coast of Africa. The four chief islands vary between sixteen and forty miles in length, the largest being 180 miles from the coast of Africa, while one or two smaller islets are less than 100 miles from Madagascar. All are volcanic, Great Comoro being an active volcano 8,500 feet high; and, as already stated, they are situated on a submarine bank with less than 500 fathoms soundings, connecting Madagascar with Africa. There is reason to believe, however, that these islands are of comparatively recent origin, and that the bank has been formed by matter ejected by the volcanoes or by upheaval. Anyhow, there is no indication whatever of there having been here a land-connection between Madagascar and Africa; while the islands themselves have been mainly colonised from Madagascar, some of them making a near approach to the 100-fathom bank which surrounds that island.

The Comoros contain two land mammals, a lemur and a civet, both of Madagascar genera and the latter an identical species, and there is also a peculiar species of fruit-bat (_Pteropus comorensis_), a group which ranges from Australia to Asia and Madagascar but is unknown in Africa. Of land-birds forty-one species are known, of {429} which sixteen are peculiar to the islands, twenty-one are found also in Madagascar, and three found in Africa and not in Madagascar; while of the peculiar species, six belong to Madagascar or Mascarene genera. A species of Chameleon is also peculiar to the islands.

These facts point to the conclusion that the Comoro Islands have been formerly more nearly connected with Madagascar than they are now, probably by means of intervening islets and the former extension of the latter island to the westward, as indicated by the extensive shallow bank at its northern extremity, so as to allow of the easy pa.s.sage of birds, and the occasional transmission of small mammalia by means of floating trees.[105]

_The Seych.e.l.les Archipelago._--This interesting group consists of about thirty small islands situated 700 miles N.N.E. of Madagascar, or almost exactly in the line formed by continuing the central ridge of that great island. The Seych.e.l.les stand upon a rather extensive shallow bank, the 100-fathom line around them enclosing an area nearly 200 miles long by 100 miles wide, while the 500-fathom line shows an extension of nearly 100 miles in a southern direction. All the larger islands are of granite, with mountains rising to 3,000 feet in Mahe, and to from 1,000 to 2,000 feet in several of the other islands. We can therefore hardly doubt that they form a portion of the great line of upheaval which produced the central granitic ma.s.s of Madagascar, intervening points being indicated by the Amirantes, the Providence, and the Farquhar Islands, which, though all coralline, probably rest on a granitic basis. Deep channels of more than 1,000 fathoms now separate these islands from each other, and if they were ever sufficiently elevated to be united, it was probably at a very remote epoch.

The Seych.e.l.les may thus have had ample facilities for receiving from Madagascar such immigrants as can pa.s.s over narrow seas; and, on the other hand, they were equally favourably situated as regards the extensive Saya de Malha and Cargados banks, which were probably once {430} large islands, and may have supported a rich insular flora and fauna of mixed Mascarene and Indian type. The existing fauna and flora of the Seych.e.l.les must therefore be looked upon as the remnants which have survived the partial submergence of a very extensive island; and the entire absence of non-aerial mammalia may be due, either to this island having never been actually united to Madagascar, or to its having since undergone so much submergence as to have led to the extinction of such mammals as may once have inhabited it. The birds and reptiles, however, though few in number, are very interesting, and throw some further light on the past history of the Seych.e.l.les.

_Birds of the Seych.e.l.les._--Fifteen indigenous land-birds are known to inhabit the group, thirteen of which are peculiar species,[106] belonging to genera which occur also in Madagascar or Africa. The genera which are more peculiarly Indian are,--Copsychus and Hypsipetes, also found in Madagascar; and Palaeornis, which has species in Mauritius and Rodriguez, as well as one on the continent of Africa. A black parrot (Coracopsis), congeneric with two species that inhabit Madagascar and with one that is peculiar to the Comoros; and a beautiful red-headed blue pigeon (_Alectoraenas pulcherrimus_) allied to those of Madagascar and Mauritius, but very distinct, are the most remarkable species characteristic of this group of islands.

_Reptiles and Amphibia of the Seych.e.l.les._--The reptiles and amphibia are rather numerous and very interesting, indicating clearly that the islands can hardly be cla.s.sed as oceanic. There are seven species of lizards, three being peculiar to the islands, while the others have rather a wide range.

The first is a chameleon--defenceless {431} slow-moving lizards, especially abundant in Madagascar, from which no less than eighteen species are now known, about the same number as on the continent of Africa. The Seych.e.l.les species (_Chamaeleon tigris_) also occurs at Zanzibar. The next are skinks (Scincidae), small ground-lizards with a wide distribution in the Eastern hemisphere. Two species are however peculiar to the islands--_Mabuia seych.e.l.lensis_ and _M. wrightii_. The other peculiar species is one of the geckoes (Geckotidae) named _aeluronyx seych.e.l.lensis_, and there are also three other geckoes, _Phelsuma madagascarensis_, _Gehyra mutilata_ and _Hemidactylus frenatus_, the two latter having a wide distribution in the tropical regions of both hemispheres. These lizards, clinging as they do to trees and timber, are exceedingly liable to be carried in ships from one country to another, and I am told by Dr. Gunther that some are found almost every year in the London Docks. It is therefore probable, that when species of this family have a very wide range they have been a.s.sisted in their migrations by man, though their habit of clinging to trees also renders them likely to be floated with large pieces of timber to considerable distances. Dr. Percival Wright, to whom I am indebted for much information on the productions of the Seych.e.l.les Archipelago, informs me that the last-named species varies greatly in colour in the different islands, so that he could always tell from which particular island a specimen had been brought. This is a.n.a.logous to the curious fact of certain lizards on the small islands in the Mediterranean being always very different in colour from those of the mainland, usually becoming rich blue or black (see _Nature_, Vol. XIX. p. 97); and we thus learn how readily in some cases differences of colour are brought about, either directly or indirectly, by local conditions.

Snakes, as is usually the case in small or remote islands, are far less numerous than lizards, only two species being known. One, _Dromicus seych.e.l.lensis_, is a peculiar species of the family Colubridae, the rest of the genus being found in Madagascar and South America. The other, _Boodon geometricus_, one of the Lycodontidae, or fanged ground-snakes, is also peculiar. So far, then, as the reptiles are {432} concerned, there is nothing but what is easily explicable by what we know of the general means of distribution of these animals.

We now come to the Amphibia, which are represented in the Seych.e.l.les by two tailless and two serpent-like forms. The frogs are _Rana mascareniensis_, found also in Mauritius, Bourbon, Angola, and Abyssinia, and probably all over tropical Africa; and _Megalixalus seych.e.l.lensis_ a peculiar tree-frog having allies in Madagascar and tropical Africa. It is found, Dr. Wright informs me, on the Pandani or screw-pines; and as these form a very characteristic portion of the vegetation of the Mascarene Islands, all the species being peculiar and confined each to a single island or small group, we may perhaps consider it as a relic of the indigenous fauna of that more extensive land of which the present islands are the remains.

The serpentine Amphibia are represented by two species of Caecilia. These creatures externally resemble large worms, except that they have a true head with jaws and rudimentary eyes, while internally they have of course a true vertebrate skeleton. They live underground, burrowing by means of the ring-like folds of the skin which simulate the jointed segments of a worm's body, and when caught they exude a viscid slime. The young have external gills which are afterwards replaced by true lungs, and this peculiar metamorphosis shows that they belong to the amphibia rather than to the reptiles. The Caecilias are widely but very sparingly distributed through all the tropical regions; a fact which may, as we have seen, be taken as an indication of the great antiquity of the group, and that it is now verging towards extinction. In the Seych.e.l.les Islands there appear to be three species of these singular animals. _Cryptopsophis multiplicatus_ is confined to the islands; _Herpele squalostoma_ is found also in Western India and in Africa; while _Hypogeophis rostratus_ inhabits both West Africa and South America.[107] This last is certainly one of the most remarkable cases of the wide and discontinuous distribution of a species; and {433} when we consider the habits of life of these animals and the extreme slowness with which it is likely they can migrate into new areas, we can hardly arrive at any other conclusion than that this species once had an almost world-wide range, and that in the process of dying out it has been left stranded, as it were, in these three remote portions of the globe. The extreme stability and long persistence of specific form which this implies is extraordinary, but not unprecedented, among the lower vertebrates. The crocodiles of the Eocene period differ but slightly from those of the present day, while a small freshwater turtle from the Pliocene deposits of the Siwalik Hills is absolutely identical with a still living Indian species, _Emys tectus_. The mud-fish of Australia, _Ceratodus forsteri_ is a very ancient type, and may well have remained specifically unchanged since early Tertiary times. It is not, therefore, incredible that this Seych.e.l.les Caecilia may be the oldest land vertebrate now living on the globe; dating back to the early part of the Tertiary period, when the warm climate of the northern hemisphere in high lat.i.tudes and the union of the Asiatic and American continents allowed of the migration of such types over the whole northern hemisphere, from which they subsequently pa.s.sed into the southern hemisphere, maintaining themselves only in certain limited areas, where the physical conditions were especially favourable, or where they were saved from the attacks of enemies or the compet.i.tion of higher forms.

_Fresh-water Fishes._--The only other vertebrates in the Seych.e.l.les are two fresh-water fishes abounding in the streams and rivulets. One, _Haplochilus playfairii_ is peculiar to the islands, but there are allied species in Madagascar. It is a pretty little fish about four inches long, of an olive colour, with rows of red spots, and is very abundant in some of the mountain streams. The fishes of this genus, as I am informed by Dr.

Gunther, often inhabit both sea and fresh water, so that their migration from {434} Madagascar to the Seych.e.l.les and subsequent modification, offers no difficulty. The other species is _Fundulus orthonotus_, found also on the east coast of Africa; and as both belong to the same family--Cyprinodontidae--this may possibly have migrated in a similar manner.

_Land-sh.e.l.ls._--The only other group of animals inhabiting the Seych.e.l.les which we know with any approach to completeness, are the land and fresh-water mollusca, but they do not furnish any facts of special interest. About forty species are known, and Mr. Geoffrey Nevill, who has studied them, thinks their meagre number is chiefly owing to the destruction of so much of the forests which once covered the islands. Seven of the species--and among them one of the most conspicuous, _Achatina fulica_--have almost certainly been introduced; and the remainder show a mixture of Madagascar and Indian forms, with a preponderance of the latter.

Five genera--Streptaxis, Cyathoponea, Onchidium, Helicina and Paludomus, are mentioned as being especially Indian, while only two--Tropidophora and Gibbus, are found in Madagascar but not in India.[108] About two-thirds of the species appear to be peculiar to the islands.

_Mauritius, Bourbon and Rodriguez._--These three islands are somewhat out of place in this chapter, because they really belong to the oceanic group, being of volcanic formation, surrounded by deep sea, and possessing no indigenous mammals or amphibia. Yet their productions are so closely related to those of Madagascar, to which they may be considered as attendant satellites, that it is absolutely necessary to a.s.sociate them together if we wish to comprehend and explain their many interesting features.