Considering this to be established, we have next to deal with the uniformity of the developmental phenomena, from which we may then attempt to trace out the inciting causes underlying this development.
The law, or, perhaps better, the line of direction followed by the development, is essentially the following:—
1. The development commences with a state of simplicity, and advances gradually to one of complexity.
2. New characters first make their appearance in the last stage of the ontogeny.
3. Such characters then become gradually carried back to the earlier ontogenetic stages, thus displacing the older characters, until the latter disappear completely.
The first of these laws appears almost self-evident. Whenever we speak of development, we conceive a progression from the simple to the complex. This result therefore does nothing but confirm the observation, that we have actually here before us a development in the true sense of the word, and not simply a succession of different independent conditions.
The two following laws, on the other hand, lay claim to a greater importance. They are not now enunciated for the first time, but were deduced some years ago by Würtemberger[127] from a study of the ammonites. In this case also the new characters predominate in the later periods of life, and are then transferred back to the younger ontogenetic stages in the course of phyletic development. “The change in the character of the shell in ammonites, first makes itself conspicuous in the last chamber; but in the succeeding generations this change continually recedes towards the beginning of the spiral chambers, until it prevails throughout the greater part of the convolutions.”
In the same sense must also be conceived the case which Neumayr and Paul have recently made known respecting certain forms of Melanopsis from the West Sclavonian Paludina bed. In M. Recurrens the last convolutions of the shell are smooth, this being a new character; the small upper convolutions, however, are delicately ribbed, as is also the case with the last convolution of the immediate progenitor. The embryonic convolutions again are smooth, and the author believes (on other grounds) that the more remote progenitor possessed a smooth shell.
In this case therefore, and in that of the ammonites, every shell to a certain extent proclaims the ancestral history of the species; in one and the same shell we find different phyletic stages brought into proximity. The markings of caterpillars do not offer similar facilities; nevertheless I believe that by their means we are led somewhat further, and are able to enter more deeply into the causes underlying the processes of transformation, because we can here observe the living creature, and are thus enabled to study its life-history with more precision than is possible with a fossil species.
When, in 1873, I received Würtemberger’s memoir, I was not only struck with the agreement of his chief results with those which I had arrived at by the study of larval markings, but I was almost as much astonished at the great difference in the interpretation of the facts. The latter indicate the gradual backward transference of a new character from the latest to the earlier ontogenetic stages. Without further confirmation Würtemberger assumes that it is to a certain extent self-evident that the force producing this backward transference is the same as that which, according to his view, first called forth the character in question in the last stage, viz., natural selection. “Variations acquired at an advanced age of the organism may, when advantageous, be inherited by the succeeding generations, in such a manner that they always appear a little earlier than in the preceding generations.”