1 68 



NATURE 



\Jtme 2 2, 1876 



zoological division of the earth " is made by '* separating 

 the Australian regions from the rest," and that the best 

 natural division of the remainder is effected by cutting off 

 the Neotropical region. We should then have three 

 primary zoological regions, which first Prof. Huxley, and 

 afterwards Mr. Sclater, in his oral lectures on geogra- 

 phical distribution seemed to consider as of nearly equal 

 importance. On this Mr. Wallace remarks that " in 

 isolation and speciality, determined by what they want, 

 as well as by what they possess, the Australian and 

 Neotropical regions are undoubtedly each comparable 

 with the rest of the earth. But in rlchhess and variety of 

 forms they are both very much inferior, and are much 

 more nearly comparable with the separate regions which 

 compose it." After discussing this subject at some length, 

 and disposing shortly of Mr. Allen's system of "circumpolar 

 zones," Mr. Wallace comes tt) the conclusion that a con- 

 sideration of all the facts zoological and palaeontological, 

 indicates that the great northern division, or Arctogced^ is 

 as much more important than either Australia or S8Ulh 

 America, as its four compotient parts are less impdrtanti 

 He therefore reverts to the six original regions proposed 

 by Mr. Sclater in 1857, as the most workable, and most 

 conveniently adapted for the study of zoological distri- 

 bution. 



Thus much having been settled, Mr. Wallace proceeds 

 to point out the limits of the six great regions, and to 

 indicate the sub-regions into which they inay be best 

 divided. As regards the latter part of this task there is 

 much difficulty. It must be confessed that the sub- 

 regions in many cases are as yet only approximately 

 determined, and that those adopted by Mr. Wallace aire 

 in several instances open to serious questions For 

 example, " the great central mass of South America, froiti 

 Venezuela to Paraguay" is constituted in the present 

 work as a single division of the Neotropical region under 

 the name of the " Brazilian Sub-region." But there can 

 be no doubt that within this area there are two, if not 

 three, distinct sub-regions which deserve recognition. 

 The fauna of south-eastern Brazil, so adtnirably investi- 

 gated by Prince Max. of Neuweid, Burmeister, Rein- 

 hardt, and other well-known naturalists^ is very distinct 

 from that of the great Amazonian valley, and the adjacent 

 flats of Guiana and the Orinoco. Many genera are pecu- 

 liar to each of them, and a whole host of representative 

 species perform similar functions withih the respective 

 areas. Herr von Pelzeln's divisions of the Neotropical 

 region, and those employed by Messrs. Sclater and 

 Salvin in their papers published in the Zoological Society's 

 Proceedings, are much more natural than those suggested 

 by Mr. Wallace. We fear that in spite of what he says 

 on the subject our author has rather allowed a hankering 

 after uniformity to lead him astray and to induce him to 

 restrict his sub-regions to four in each case. 



The chapter on Classification which next follows, and 

 concludes the first portion of the work, contains some 

 very apposite remarks. A natural classification of animals 

 is, as Mr. Wallace observes, of first-rate importance in 

 discussing matters of distribution. But, except in the 

 case of a few groups, we have by no means yet attained 

 to a natural classification of animals, and even as regards 

 these we are, in the opinion of many naturalists, still very 

 far from it. It is only therefore some few of the classes 



of animals that ate sufficiently known to be useful for the 

 study of distribution. As such Mr. Wallace selects the 

 Vertebrata, the butterflies, and six families of Coleoptera 

 amongst the insects, and the terrestrial and fresh- water 

 land-shells amongst the Mollusca. Of these better-known 

 groups he gives us tables of the arrangement which he 

 proposes to adopt for the illustration of his remarks on 

 their geographical distribution. 



{To be continued. ) 



OUR BOOKSHELF 



Notts OH iaoiiecting and Preserinng Natural History 

 Objects, fiy J. E. Taylor, E. F. Elwin, Thos. South- 

 well, Dr. Knaggs, E. C. Rye, J. B. Bridgman, Pro^ 

 Ralph Tate, Jas. Britten, Prof. Buckman, Dr. Braith- 

 waite, Worthington t*. Smith, Rev. Jas. Crombie^ 

 W. H. Grattann. Edited by J. E. Taylor, Ph.D., 

 F.L.S., t'iGiS., &c. (London : Hardwicke and Bogue, 

 1876.) 



This is a republication of a scries of papers from Science 

 Gossip J and the names of the respective authors is a 

 sufficient guarantee for the value and accuracy of the 

 ihforttiation it affords. It is a very useful book to put 

 into the hands of young persons with some taste for 

 natural history but quite ignorant of how to collect and 

 what to observe ; since it devotes as much space to the 

 latter branch as to the former, and is thus a more instruc- 

 tive work than its title indicates. The subjects discussed 

 are — geological specimens, bones, birds' eggs, lepidoptera, 

 beetles, hymenoptera, land and fresh-water shells, flower- 

 ing plants, grasses, mosses, fungi, lichens, and seaweeds. 

 It is a pity that a few other essays were not obtained — on 

 birds, mammals, reptiles, fresh-water fishes, Crustacea, 

 spiders, and sea- shells — so as to make the book somewhat 

 more complete as regards " Natural History Objects ; " 

 but so far as it goes it is an excellent little work, and is 

 perhaps belter adapted to encourage an incipient taste 

 tor the study of nature than niany more pretentious 

 volumes. I'he chapters on birds' eggs, butterflies, and 

 beetles, are especially full and interesting ; while those 

 on bones arid fungi are valuable, as likely to incite the 

 reader to take up the study of these somewhat neglected 

 objects. A. R. W. 



Letters ti) the editor 



\The Editor does not hold himself responsible for opinions expressed 

 by his cotrespondenis. Neither can he undertake to return, 

 or to correspond with the writers of, rejected manuscripts. 

 No notice is taken of anonymous communications.\ 



The Harris Cubit of Karnak 



As tte measures of this Cubit hitherto published are more or 

 less incomplete, the following series may be worth attention. 



For permission to examine this relic, I am indebted to Dr. 

 Birch, mider whose care it is placed in the British Museum ; 

 and who, with his usual courtesy, gave every facility for its 

 measurement. 



The readings were taken by laying this wooden cubit on a 

 brass standard scale, divided to tenttis of an inch and to milli- 

 metres, with its divided face at right angles to that of the scale. 

 Two observers then read the values of the divisions in both 

 inches and metres, giving four readings in all, at about 66* F. 

 The standard scale has since been kindly verified by Mr. H. W. 

 Chisholm, Warden of the Standards, and its error is not of such 

 an amount as to aflfect the figures here given ; it is now in the 

 Loan Collection of Scientific Apparatus (200), the sole repre- 

 sentative at South Kensmgton of Kater's standards. 



The readings were mapped on divided paper, and the mean 

 result for each line caieiuUy es.timaled, with its probable error, 

 by the two observers : and though the following readings of the 

 divisions are of course far from the limit of attainable accuracy, 

 yet as their errors are but a small fraction of those of the gradua- 



