ally the older the land) the
greater the number of species <which> would tend to be formed. The
inhabitants of a continent being thus derived in the first stage from
the same original parents, and subsequently from the inhabitants of one
wide area, since often broken up and reunited, all would be obviously
related together and the inhabitants of the most _dissimilar_ stations
on the same continent would be more closely allied than the inhabitants
of two very _similar_ stations on two of the main divisions of the
world{410}.

{409} See the comparison between the Malay Archipelago and the
probable former state of Europe, _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 299, vi. p.
438, also _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 292, vi. p. 429.

{410} _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 349, vi. p. 496. The arrangement of the
argument in the present Essay leads to repetition of statements
made in the earlier part of the book: in the _Origin_ this is
avoided.

I need hardly point out that we now can obviously see why the number of
species in two districts, independently of the number of stations in
such districts, should be in some cases as widely different as in New
Zealand and the Cape of Good Hope{411}. We can see, knowing the
difficulty in the transport of terrestrial mammals, why islands far from
mainlands do not possess them{412}; we see the general reason, namely
accidental transport (though not the precise reason), why certain
islands should, and others should not, possess members of the class of
reptiles. We can see why an ancient channel of communication between two
distant points, as the Cordillera probably was between southern Chile
and the United States during the former cold periods; and icebergs
between the Falkland Islands and Tierra del Fuego; and gales, at a
former or present time, between the Asiatic shores of the Pacific and
eastern islands in this ocean; is connected with (or we may now say
causes) an affinity between the species, though distinct, in two such
districts. We can see how the better chance of diffusion, from several
of the species of any genus having wide ranges in their own countries,
explains the presence of other species of the same genus in other
countries{413}; and on the other hand, of species of restricted powers
of ranging, forming genera with restricted ranges.

{411} _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 389, vi. p. 542.

{412} _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 393, vi. p. 547.

{413} _Origin_, Ed. i. pp. 350, 404, v