180 
Psyche 
[December 
from the so-called “Protohymenoptera”, which have been 
shown by Carpenter to be merely modified Megasecoptera, 
having nothing to do with the true ancestors of the Hymen- 
optera. The Megasecoptera belong in the division Palseop- 
terygota, whose members are incapable of laying the wings 
back along the body in repose, while the Hymenoptera were 
evidently descended from ancestors which were capable of 
laying the wings back along the abdomen in repose. Their 
ancestors apparently were Protorthoptera with bodies like 
those of primitive Isoptera and Embiids, while the venation 
was probably like that of certain Protoblattids. In other 
words, the Hymenoptera were descended from a common 
ancestry with the Sialid Neuroptera (and the Lampyroid 
Coleoptera), and their line of descent also merges with that 
of the Mecoptera and Trichoptera, or branches off from the 
common stem near the point of origin of the lines of descent 
of the Mecopteroid insects. The most primitive living rep- 
resentatives of the Hymenoptera are the Xyelidse, and the 
Cephidse are the nearest representatives of the ancestors 
of the higher Hymenoptera (or Clistogastra) , whose most 
primitive representatives are the Trigonalidse. 
The views briefly summarized above, have already been 
presented in a series of papers dealing with the comparative 
morphology of recent insects in the light of what is known 
of the fossil forms, but since these views differ very radically 
from those commonly accepted by recent writers, or by those 
who have reviewed the recent progress in insect phylogeny, 
they have not been taken into consideration by recent 
writers. When a more extensive study of the available 
evidence is made, however, it becomes readily apparent that 
many of the currently accepted views are quite untenable; 
and the foregoing brief summary of certain alternative 
views on the subject has been made in order to call attention 
to the fact that the currently accepted views concerning the 
origin and interrelationships of the insectan orders are not 
the only possible ones, or necessarily the correct ones, and 
some consideration should also be given to these alternative 
views if they are evidently more nearly in accord with the 
available evidence on the subject. 
