488 A CENTURY OF PROGRESS IN THE NATURAL SCIENCES 



insect world would not be "blocked out" as well as it now is. One could debate 

 this point at length. The question remains, however, whether entomology might 

 not have contributed more toward our modern concepts of evolution, genetics, 

 and zoogeography, if more penetrating detailed studies had been made in place of 

 the skimmings in systematics that characterize tlie past. Certainly it is doubtful 

 whether, if other animal groups were as rich in species as the insects, biological 

 science could have attained its present level. Indeed, many of the present con- 

 cepts of enlightened entomological systematists have developed from the study 

 of birds, mammals, and other small groups, whose systematics matured more 

 rapidly. 



The most fortunate modern systematists are those who study the unpopular, 

 difficult-to-handle insect groups that have been largely ignored in the past. Here, 

 in both literature and nomenclature the slate is relatively clean and one can 

 almost at once apply modern techniques and adopt new points of view. This ad- 

 vantage applies particularly to insects that require special preparation on micro- 

 scope slides. Here, in the past, inadequate preparations have been responsible 

 for some very bad work, but when a student has used proper techniques he is 

 often rewarded by a wonderful array of useful details, and his work tends to 

 be sound. 



It is always easy, however, to look at the past and comment on how things 

 should have been done. In order to understand why things happened as they 

 did in systematic entomology, let us briefly summarize the historical develop- 

 ment of our science. 



Beginnings in Europe 



Quite logically, systematic entomology began in northwestern Europe. Here 

 the relative freedom from control by Church and State and the expanding com- 

 munication through printed material were the incentives for increased intellec- 

 tual expression in science as well as in other branches of human endeavor. Here 

 also, wealth from growing industry, trade, and colonialism freed many indi- 

 viduals from a life completely devoted to mere existence. There was time for 

 contemplating the nature of things about one, for the satisfaction of curiosity 

 for curiosity's sake. 



To write or talk about things, things must be named. Linnaeus' binomial 

 system of nomenclature started the great rush to name and classify all of the 

 living things in Europe as well as the strange exotic creatures brought home 

 by travelers. 



Insects provided, and still provide, the most fruitful field for this endeavor. 

 With the prevailing belief in special creation and the relative simplicity of the 

 fauna in northwestern Europe, the early Linnean disciples must have had little 

 idea of the magnitude and complexity of the task which they began. With our 

 present knowledge, even the most ardent modern "species grinder" would derive 

 little satisfaction from the prospect of plodding along on so vast a project with 

 so small an audience. 



The early systematists had one great advantage, however evanescent — a very 

 limited literature and nomenclature. Furthermore, they lived among the crea- 

 tures they described. If written descriptions were poor, they could practically 

 go out into the surrounding countryside and, by a process of elimination, dis- 



