Chapter II · (continued 2)

Recent investigations have also brought out more prominently the resemblances to the Worms. Of late, considerable attention has been directed to Peripatus (see pp. 1-26), and the resemblances to the Myriapods in its anatomy and development are such that Latzel has actually included it in the Myriapods as an Order, Malacopoda. Now Peripatus also shows resemblances to the annelid Worms, and thus affords us a connexion to the Worm type hardly less striking than that to the Insect. This resemblance to the Worms, which Myriapods certainly bear, was noticed by the ancient writers, and as they had for the most part only external appearances to consider, they pushed this idea to extremes in actually including some of the marine Worms (Annelida) among the Centipedes. Pliny talks of a marine Scolopendra as a very poisonous animal, and there is little doubt that he meant one of the marine worms. An old German naturalist, Gesner, in a very curious book published in 1669 gives an account of an annelid sea-worm which he calls Scolopendra marina, and which is in all probability the sea Scolopendra which Pliny mentions. From Gesner's account it seems to have been used as a medicine (externally only). "The use of this animal in medicine. The animal soaked in oil makes the hair fall off. So do its ashes mixed in oil." It was also pounded up with honey.

This idea of Centipedes living in water survived among later naturalists. Charles Owen, the author before quoted, mentions them as amphibious in 1742. "The Scolopendra is a little venomous worm and amphibious. When it wounds any, there follows a blueness about the affected part and an itch all over the body like that caused by nettles. Its weapons of mischief are much the same with those of the spider, only larger; its bite is very tormenting, and produces not only pruriginous pain in the flesh, but very often distraction of mind. These little creatures make but a mean figure in the ranks of animals, yet have been terrible in their exploits, particularly in driving people out of their country. Thus the people of Rhytium, a city of Crete, were constrained to leave their quarters for them (Aelian, lib. xv. cap. 26)."

Myriapods have been considered to bear resemblances to the Crustacea, and this to a certain extent is true, though only to a certain extent, the resemblances being confined to the more general characteristics that they share with other groups of animals.

Of late years attempts have been made to speculate about the origin of the Myriapods—that is, to endeavour to obtain by means of investigation of their anatomy, embryology, and palaeontological history, some idea of the history of the group. Such attempts at research into the phylogeny, as it is called, of a group must be more or less speculative until our knowledge is much greater than it is at present. But such inquiries have their value, and the schemes of descent and phylogenetic trees, at any rate, indicate a real relation to different groups, even if they do not provide us with a real and actual history of the animals.

There have been two main theories about the descent of the Myriapoda. One of these derives them directly from the Insecta through the forms known as the Thysanura, which resemble in such a degree the Myriapod Orders of Symphyla and Pauropoda. The other theory holds that the Myriapods, as well as the Insecta, have been derived from some ancestor bearing a resemblance to Peripatus. In other words, one theory claims that the relationship of Myriapoda to Insecta is that of father and son; the other that the relationship between the two is that of brother to brother. The arguments by which these theories are respectively supported consist for the most part of an analysis of the different characters of the anatomy and embryology and the determination of the most primitive among them. For example, the supporters of the theory that the Thysanura are the most nearly allied to the Myriapod ancestor lay great weight on the fact that some Myriapods are born with three pairs of legs only, and they compare this stage in the life history of the Myriapoda to the metamorphosis and larval stage of Insects. For the supporters of this view the Orders of Symphyla and Pauropoda are the most primitive of the Myriapods. On the other hand, the followers of the other theory do not allow that the characters in which the Myriapods are like Insects are primitive ones, but they lay more stress on the characters found in the early development, such as the character of the process of the formation of the body segments, the mesoblastic segmentation, and the origin of the various organs of the body.

It may be easily understood that such differences in the estimation of the primitive characters of the embryology of a group may arise. Embryology has been compared by one of the greatest of modern embryologists to "an ancient manuscript with many of the sheets lost, others displaced, and with spurious passages interpolated by a later hand." What wonder is it that different people examining such a record should come to different conclusions as to the more doubtful and difficult portions of it. It is this very difficulty which makes the principal interest in the study, and although our knowledge of the language in which this manuscript is written is as yet imperfect, still we hope that constant study may teach us more and more, and enable us to read the great book of nature with more and more ease and certainty.

If any of my readers should wish for a more full account of the natural history of this group I must refer them to the following works, which I have used in compiling the above account. In the first of these there is an excellent bibliography of the subject:—

Latzel, Die Myriapoden der Oesterreichisch-Ungarischen Monarchie, Wien, 1880.

Zittel, Handbuch der Palaeontologie, 1 Abth, II. Bd., Leipzig, 1881-1885.

Korschelt and Heider, Lehrbuch der vergleichenden Entwicklungsgeschichte der wirbellosen Thiere, Jena 1891.