T4 JOURNAL, BOMBAY NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY, 1892. 



brain constituted from ours and, consequently, how dangerous to 

 generalize from insufficient data. However " working hypotlieses" 

 are a necessity, and I have tried to "put myself in her place "(I have 

 always tried to remember that ants are practically all females and 

 * advanced ' females at that) and have enunciated wherever possible 

 a theory. I shall be only too glad if others will collect and record 

 facts enough to upset one or all of them. I propose to do so myself, 

 if I can.* 



The Order Hymenoptera, of the sub-kingdom Insecta, was divided 

 b}'^ Latreille into two primary sections, which are still retained. 

 Kirby in his "Elementary Text Book of Entomology" writes, " It 

 "{i.e., the Order Kymenoptera) is primarily divided into Hymenoptera 

 " terebrantia, in which the ovipositor is used as a borer, and the 

 *' Symenoptra aculeata, in which it is modified into a sting." 

 The ants are usually ranked as the first Family of the aculeata which, 

 considering their social organization, so closely resembling, and even 

 surpassing to some extent, that of the Bees and Wasps(for these latter 

 have in no case a 'soldier' caste or form) seems surprising. The 

 reason probably is that in one whole sub-family of the ants, viz. : — 

 the Formicidce, the sting, the distinguishing feature of the aculeata, 

 is wanting. Dr. Dewitz maintains that the sting in the FormicidcB is 

 undeveloped, but Sir J. Lubbock holds, that it is "a case of retro- 

 gression contingent upon disuse" on the ground that it is "difficult 

 to suppose that organs — so complex and yet so similar — as the stings 

 of ants, bees and wasps should have been developed independently." 

 He declines, however, to hazard an opinion as to whether the sting is 

 or is not a modified ovipositor. The whole question is evidently a 

 most difficult one to resolve, but I would note that Lubbock's argument 

 quoted above, and which he states is, in his eyes, " conclusive" might, 

 with the change of a few words, be used to prove that the Termites 



• I have mentioned three papers on ants as only having come under my notice., 

 I should however record that there is another one of old date by Dr. Jerdon. In this 

 a certain number of species are described and named, but I have not been able to 

 obtain it for study. Some references to it, however, which I have come across, seem 

 to show that the manners and customs incidentally recorded therein are truly, 

 described. The descriptions, however, were very imperfect, and the types having 

 been loat, the Doctor's species are consequently also lost. 



