II 



ON OBJECTIONS WHICH HAVE BEEN RAISED TO THE 

 THEORIES OF MIMICRY, AND THE EVIDENCE ON 

 WHICH SUCH THEORIES ARE BASED 



We have seen that Bates's original theory of mimicry included an explanation of the 

 cause of the phenomenon, and its author did not deem it necessary to do more than state 

 the facts of these resemblances as illustrative of the Darwinian principles. Probably few, 

 if any, of those who have studied the subject at all, would be prepared to make any attempt 

 to disprove the statement that mimicry does in fact exist, whatever may have been the 

 cause from which it originated. More especially will it come as something of a surprise to 

 those who have carefully followed the descriptions in the foregoing pages and examined the 

 figures comprised in the accompanying plates, that in order to deal fully with the subject, we 

 must, so to speak, go behind our title and emphasize the very existence of mimetic resem- 

 blance before attempting to find a cause for its development. Nevertheless R. H. Lock, 

 n his work ' Variation, Heredity, and Evolution ', dismisses the whole subject with 

 the remark that ' Several supposed examples of this phenomenon have been described in 

 the case of different genera of tropical butterflies '. I am content to allow the previous 

 79 pages and the 173 figures on the plates to appear in support of the above perhaps rather 

 inadequate statement, though it may be as well to point out that this work deals only with 

 'several supposed examples' in the Lepidoptera of the Ethiopian region, and that, had 

 space and the cost of lithography permitted, I might have figured and described a large 

 number of the diurnal Lepidoptera of the Oriental and Neotropical regions in support of 

 the preliminary contention that the phenomenon of mimetic association is one the existence 

 of which cannot longer be held in dispute. 



Having so far established the basis of discussion, we may, I think, fairly proceed to 

 consider more fully the question as to how such mimetic associations have been brought 

 about. It has already been stated that natural selection affords a more complete explanation 

 of mimicry than do any of the alternative suggestions which have at various times been 

 put forward. It may be at once stated, however, that alternative theories are neither 

 numerous nor greatly developed, and whilst the Batesian and Miillerian theories based on 

 natural selection, and including their more recent elaborations and extensions, have been 

 frequently doubted and in many cases refused altogether, none of those who have openly 

 stated their disbelief in these theories have been able to offer any alternative explanation 

 which would suffice to account for the cases of mimetic coloration with which we are 

 acquainted. Those who have read the introductory portion of this work will be in a position 

 to appreciate such criticisms as have been put forward, so that we may at once proceed to 

 enumerate the objections which have been thus proposed, and consider the limitations to 

 which such objections are liable, after which it will be possible to fully consider the extent 

 to which the theory of natural selection is supported by observation and experiment. 



