Origin of Species Variorum

Comparison with 1872

in the north and south, and sometimes on the intermediate mountain-ranges, are removed on the views above given. ↑ The exact lines .. of migration ... cannot be indicated. >We cannot say why certain species and not others have migrated; why certain species have been modified and have given rise to new forms, whilst others have remained unaltered. ↑ We cannot hope to explain such facts, until we can say why one species and not another becomes naturalised by man's agency in a foreign land; why one ranges twice or thrice as far, and is twice or thrice as common, as another species within their own homes.

Text in this page (from paragraph 4400, sentence 010 to paragraph 4400, sentence 300, word 28) is not present in 1872

in the northern and southern tem- perate zones and on the mountains of the intertropical regions, are removed on the views above given. It is extremely difficult to understand how a vast number of peculiar forms confined to the tropics could have been therein preserved during the coldest part of the Glacial period. The number of forms in Australia, which are related to European temperate forms, but which differ so greatly that it is impossible to believe that they could have been modified since the Glacial period, perhaps indicates some much more ancient cold period, even as far back as the miocene age, in accordance with the recent speculations of certain geologists. So again, as I am informed by Mr. Bates, the strongly marked character of several species of Carabus, inhabiting the southern parts of America, indicates that their common progenitor must have been introduced at some early period; and other analogous facts could be given. The exact lines and means of migration during the recent Glacial period cannot be indicated; nor the reason why certain species and not others have migrated; why certain species have been modified and have given rise to new groups of forms, and others have remained unaltered. ↑ We cannot hope to explain such facts, until we can say why one species and not another becomes naturalised by man's agency in a foreign land; why one species ranges twice or thrice as far, and is twice or thrice as common, as another species within their own homes.

I have said that many difficulties remain to be solved: some of the most remarkable are stated with admirable clearness by Dr. Hooker in his botanical works on the antarctic regions. These cannot be here discussed. I will only say that, as far as regards the occurrence of identical species at points so enormously remote as Kerguelen Land, New Zealand, and Fuegia, I believe