266 THK PANORPOiD coMPlp:x (Introduction), 



poidea also, to have been derived from the obscure Megasecoptera 

 of the Upper Carboniferous- an Order which, at the best, can 

 be regarded only as a specialised side-branch of the Pal?eo- 

 dictyoptera. 



AVe are thus faced with the fact that, in Handlirsch's opinion, 

 the Holometabola are a composite group of polyphyletic origin. 

 Such a view is, indeed, fairly generally held amongst entomolo- 

 gists; for no satisfactor}^ reason seems to have been brought 

 forward why the evolution of the resting-pupa should not have 

 been accomplished more than once, along several quite distinct 

 lines of ascent. 



Having for a very long time carefully read and studied Hand- 

 lirsch's views, I have to confess that, in spite of many excellent 

 arguments brought forward, there seems to me to be much that 

 is unsatisfactory in them. As examples, I might refer to his 

 discussion of the origin of the Hymenoptera, which fails to con- 

 vince me in a single point. The same may be said of the sug- 

 gestion that the Panorpatse are derived from the Megasecoptera. 

 It seems to me that any unbiassed student of the Phylogeny of 

 the Holometabola must come to the following conclusions : — 



(1) That the origin of the Hymenoptera is still about as great 

 a m\^fetery as it well can be; and that Handlirsch's solution of 

 this problem has many inherent defects that make it unaccept- 

 able. 



(2) That the origin of the Coleoptera from a Blattoid type of 

 ancestor is a fair prolmbilit}-; but that much more research of 

 an intensive character must be carried out before this theory can 

 be either proved or disproved. 



(3) That the origin of the Neuropteroidea from Palseodicty- 

 opterous ancestors is extremely probable: nevertheless here also 

 any researches that tend to strengthen the argument would be 

 very welcome. 



(4) That the origin of the Pauorpoidea from the Megasecoptera 

 is not supported by a single piece of evidence worth considering; 

 but that the possibility of the relationship between Keuropter- 

 oidea and Panorpoidea being exceedingly close requires recon- 

 sideration, and the coincident possibility of the Panorpoidea 



