84 
Introduction: Wallace’s line. 
the frontier to the north-west of Timor; the sea-depths would allow it just as 
well, and in this case at least a separation of geognostically different regions 
would be attained.” (A. Wichmann, however, appears to reckon Timor, etc., 
to the former Asiatic continent, see: Samml. des geol. Reichs-Mus. in Leiden. 
1. Ser. Bd. II, p. 201, 1887.) 
O. Crude, 1884 (“Die Florenreiche der Erde”: Erg. Heft Nr. 74 zu 
Petermann’s Mitth. p. 62^), acknowledges the line as a holistic frontier, to 
which opinion he still adheres in 1890 (“Handbuch der Pflanzengeographie”, 
p. 150 and Map I; see also: “Atlas der Pflanzenverbreitung” Berghaus’ Phys. 
Atlas. 5, No. 1, 1887). 
A. Heilprin, 1887 (“The Geographical and Geological Distribution of 
Animals” p. 107, and map), adopts an Austro-malaysian Transition Region, which 
is bounded to the west by Wallace’s line, to the east and south by New Guinea 
and Australia, to the north by Mindanao. 
W. Marshall, 1887 (“Atlas der Tierverbreitung”: Berghaus’ Phys. Atlas. 
VI. Abth. p. 1% Map III), simply adopts the line. 
C. M. Kan, in a paper published in 1888 on the “Bodengesteldheid der 
eilanden en diepte der Zeeen van den ind. Archip.” (see: T. Ned. Aard. Gen. 
2. ser. vol. V. Meer uitgebreide art. p. 219, with map IV) does not recognize the 
line for reasons indicated in the title of his paper. 
A. Reichenow, in 1888 (“Die Begrenzung zoogeographischer Regionen 
vom ornithologischen Standpunkt”: Zool. Jahrb. Abt. f. Syst. Ill, 699), recognizes 
an Eastern Zone with an Eastern Temperate Region, an Ethiopian Region and 
a Malayan Region as far as Wallace’s line (see also map XXVI), and a Southern 
Zone which extends to the west up to Wallace’s line; he, therefore takes 
Celebes as non-Oriental. 
R. Schuiling, in a special dissertation: “De grenslijn van Wallace eene 
continentale grens”, 1888 (T. Ned. Aard. Gen. 2. ser. V, p. 523), came to the 
conclusion (p. 548), that Geology, Zoology and Oceanography teach: “Celebes 
belongs to Asia”. 
E. A. Jentink, in 1889 (1. c. VI, 244), showed (p. 246), that we are very far 
from such an adequate knowledge of the mammals of Bali and Lombok as to justify 
Wallace’s affirmation (Island Life 1880 p. 4): “Bali and Lombok differ far 
more from each other in their birds and quadrupeds than do England and 
Japan,” neither was Wallace justified in basing an argument on 16 land- 
mammals as the ascertained number from Celebes, because as early as 1878 
21 were already known and this large island has not been at all thoroughly 
investigated yet. In 1888 there were already 26 land-mammals and 19 bats extant 
from there, a number which is probably still far from the true total. There 
was therefore no good reason whatever for drawing important conclusions with 
such scanty knowledge.^) 
We can only point to Mr. Whitehead’s recent discoveries of mammals on the high mountains of the 
Philippines (see: Ann. Mag. N. H. 1895, 6. ser. vol. XVI, 160), in the conviction that such an experienced 
