Before entering upon the more special subject of this chapter, it will be convenient to clear the ground by insisting on a few morphological conclusions to be drawn from the study of Amphioxus,--a form which, although probably in some respects degenerate, is nevertheless capable of furnishing on certain points very valuable evidence. (1) In the first place it is clear from Amphioxus that the ancestors of the Chordata were segmented, and that their mesoblast was divided into myotomes which extended even into the region in front of the mouth. The mesoblast of the greater part of what is called the head in the Vertebrata proper was therefore segmented like that of the trunk. (2) The only internal skeleton present was the unsegmented notochord--a fact which demonstrates that the skeleton is of comparatively little importance for the solution of a large number of fundamental questions, as for example the point which has been mooted recently as to whether gill-clefts existed at one time in front of the present mouth; and for this reason:--that from the evidence of Amphioxus and the lower Vertebrata[102] it is clear that such clefts, if they ever existed, _had atrophied completely_ before the formation of cartilaginous branchial bars; so that any skeletal structures in front of the mouth, which have been interpreted by morphologists as branchial bars, can never have acted in supporting the walls of branchial clefts. [102] The greater part of the branchial skeleton of Petromyzon appears clearly to belong to an extra-branchial system much more superficially situated than the true branchial bars of the higher forms. At the same time there is no doubt that certain parts of the skeleton of the adult Lamprey have, as pointed out by Huxley, striking points of resemblance to parts of a true mandibular and hyoid arches. Further embryological evidence is required on the subject, but the statements on this head on p. 84 ought to be qualified. Should Huxley's views on this subject be finally proved correct, it is probable that, taking into consideration the resemblance of these skeletal parts in the Tadpole to those in the Lamprey, the cartilaginous mandibular bar, before being in any way modified to form true jaws, became secondarily adapted to support a suctorial mouth, and that it subsequently became converted into the true jaws. Thus the evolution of this bar in the Frog would be a true repetition of the ancestral history, while its ontogeny in Elasmobranchii and other types would be much abbreviated. For a fuller statement on this point I must refer the reader to the chapter on the skull.