For such cases there remains the developmental history of the caterpillar, which will almost always furnish us to a certain extent with information respecting the true genealogical relationship of the forms, because it always reveals a portion of the phyletic (ancestral) development of the species. If we see two species of butterflies quite dissimilar in form of wing and other characters, we should be inclined, in spite of many points of agreement between them, to place them in entirely different genera. But should we then find that not only did their adult larvæ agree in every detail of marking, but also that the entire phyletic development of these markings, as revealed by the ontogeny of the larvæ, had taken precisely the same course in both species, we should certainly conclude that they possessed a near blood-relationship, and should place them close together in the same genus. Such an instance is afforded by the two Hawk-moths, _Chærocampa Elpenor_ and _C. Porcellus_, as will appear in the course of these investigations. These two species were placed by Walker in different genera, the form-relationship of the imagines being thus correctly represented, since _Porcellus_ (imago), is indeed more nearly related in form to the species of the genus _Pergesa_, Walker, than to those of the genus _Chærocampa_.[69] Nevertheless, these species must remain in the same genus, as no other arrangement expresses their degree of blood-relationship.
An intimate knowledge of the development-stages of caterpillars thus offers, even from a systematic point of view, an invaluable means of judging the degree of blood-relationship, and from this standpoint we must regard the study of the caterpillar as of more importance than that of the perfect insect. Certainly all groups would not be so rich in information as the _Sphingidæ_, or, as I am inclined to believe, the _Papilionidæ_, since all families of caterpillars do not possess such a marked and diversified pattern, nor do they present such a varied and characteristic bodily form. The representation of the true, _i.e._, the blood-relationship, and through this the formation of natural groups with any completeness, can certainly only be looked for when we are intimately acquainted with the different stages of development of the larvæ of numerous species in every group, from their emergence from the egg to their period of pupation. The genealogical relationship of many forms at present of doubtful systematic position would then be made clear. This investigation, however, could not be the work of a single individual; not only because the materials for observation are too great, but, above all, because they are spread over too wide a field. It is not sufficient to study the European types only--we should endeavour to learn as much as possible of the Lepidoptera of the whole world. But such observations can only be made on the spot. Why should it not be possible to trace the development from the egg, even under a tropical sky, and to devote to breeding and observing, a portion of that time which is generally spent in mere collecting? I may perhaps be able to convince some of the many excellent and careful observers among entomologists, that beyond the necessary and valuable search for new forms, there is another field which may be successfully worked, viz., the precise investigation of the development of known species.