226 



THEORIES OF MIMICRY 



Resemblances in general. Mimicry becomes, as A. R. 

 Wallace expresses it, merely ' an exceptional form of 

 protective resemblance '- 1 The following classification 

 was suggested by the present writer, with the assistance 

 of Mr. Arthur Sidgwick, in 1890 : 2 



Thus the facts of Mimicry fit into a broad system 

 which includes many other resemblances in organic 

 nature. The relation between Protective Resemblance 

 (I. A. i) and Protective Mimicry (I. B. i) is as follows : 

 In the former an animal resembles some object which is 

 of no interest to its enemy, and in doing so is concealed ; 

 in the latter an animal resembles an object which is well 

 known and avoided by its enemy, and in doing so becomes 

 conspicuous. Thus Mimicry as interpreted by H. W. 

 Bates finds its place in I. B. i, while the resemblance 

 between protected conspicuous forms (sometimes, but, as 

 I think, erroneously, called Mimicry), as interpreted by 

 Fritz M uller, 3 falls into II. i. Such cases only differ 



1 Darwinism, London, 1889, p. 265. 



5 The Colours of Animals, Internal. Sci. Ser., London, 1890, p. 338. 

 8 Kosmos, May 1879, p. 100, translated by Meldola in Proc. Ent. Soc., 

 Lond., 1879, p. xx. 



