88 PBOCEEDINOS OF THE 



80 tliat the fauna of New Zealand might represent tlie life of one 

 iuterglacial antarctic phase and that of Australia another. 



Or f^liall we consider that Tertiary Antarctica was an archipelago, 

 the islands of which carried such different fauna and flora that 

 emigrants from one quarter differed from those of another. It is 

 not yet known whether the area between Xing Edward VII. Laud 

 and (Jraham Land is a lobe of the continent or an archipelago, or an 

 independent island (Darwin, Proc. Eoy. J^oc. A, vol. Ixxxiv, 1910, 

 p. 420; and Maw son, Geogr. Journ. xxxvii. 1!)11, map, p. 6L*J). 

 In the latter ease it is possible that King Edward YIl. Land may 

 havejoimd New Zealand, while Tasmania was separately linked 

 to 8outh Victoria Land. Under these circumstances New Zealand 

 and Tasmania may have simultaneously imported an Antarctic and 

 yet a different fauna and flora. 



Or both conditions of iuterglacial succession and insularity may 

 have combined in the past to produce present effects. 



Prof. 11. Pilsbry has shown (Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philad. 1900, 

 p. 5G8) that the land molluscan faunas of the Marquesas, Hawaii, 

 and Society Islands are closely related, and that though of primitive 

 type they are harmonic such as befits continental laud, not a drift 

 selection such as oceanic islands have. He proposes them as 

 witness to the existence of a Palaeozoic or early Mesozoic land 

 mass. The tree-lobelias also testify to the antiquity and associ- 

 ation of these distant Pacific archipelagoes (Guppy, ' A Naturalist 

 in the Pacific,' ii. 1906, p. 250). Their rehirious are with the 

 alpine floras of South America and Equatorial Africa. A third 

 of the mountain flora of Hawaii is derived from high southern 

 latitudes. It is now suggested that these primitive continental 

 plants and animals reflect a meridional Pacific land-ray, the first 

 visible vestige of Antarctic extension, as Tasmania was the last. 

 To carry a cold flora across the Equator the land must have been 

 lofty and continuous. In such a range some might see the rib of 

 a fornier tetrahedral world. 



As the Eocene w as both a warm period and a time when land 

 was largely developed in the Patagonian area, it is likely that the 

 Archiplatan fauna then or earlier entered Antarctica. If the 

 Tasmanian fossil Wynyardia is rightly dated Eocene, then during 

 that age some at least of the American migrants reached Australia. 



Whereas New Zealand in its relation with South America, via 

 Antarctica, appears both as a giver and a receiver, Australia, on 

 the contrary, seems to have made no return to South America, but 

 to have i-eceived all and given nothing.* No Eucalypts, for 

 instance, crossed from Tasmania to Patagonia. One explanation 



* Ortniann (Proc. Am. Pliilos. Soc. xli. 1902, p. 340) considers that the 

 freshwater Crustacea Parastacid.T spread from Australia into Antarctica and 

 tbence into Chili. But the distribution of this group in Australia as detailed 

 by G. Smith (Pnoc. Zool. Soc. 1012, p. 149) appears to uie to be that of 

 immigrants from an east and wc>t base respectively. 



