Faunistic Work of an Ornithological Swindler, Josef Prokop Pražák (1870–1904): an Assessment
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Mlíkovský J. / Faunistic work of Josef Prokop Pražák Faunistic work of an ornithological swindler, Josef Prokop Pražák (1870–1904): an assessment Zhodnocení faunistického díla ornitologického podvodníka Josefa Prokopa Pražáka (1870–1904) Jiří Mlíkovský Department of Zoology, National Museum, Václavské náměstí 68, CZ-115 79 Praha 1, Czech Republic; e-mail: [email protected] Mlíkovský J. 2012: Faunistic work of an ornithological swindler, Josef Prokop Pražák (1870–1904): an assessment. Sylvia 48: 152–161. Josef Prokop Pražák (1870–1904) published faunistic data on the birds of Austrian East Galicia, China, Chile and Bohemia. Many of these data are highly improbable or even demonstrably fraudulent. As shown elsewhere (Mlíkovský 2011), Pražák was a deliberate swindler from the beginning of his scientific career to the end of his life. Pražák was a talented ornithologist and some of his faunistic data may be genuine. However, such a large amount of the data he published is demonstrably or probably fraudulent that none can be accepted as valid, because there is no way how to discern between Pražák’s genuine and fraudulent data. In 1893 and 1894, Pražák donated voucher specimens of some of his Bohemian “rarities” to the Naturhistorisches Museum Wien, Austria. At least one of these specimens had been previously stolen by Pražák from the collections of this Museum. Thus, none of these specimens can be used as evidence for the occurrence of the species in question in Bohemia. Josef Prokop Pražák (1870–1904) publikoval faunistická data o ptácích rakouské Východní Haliče, Číny, Chile a Čech. Mnohé z těchto údajů jsou vysoce nepravděpodobné či dokon- ce prokazatelně zfalšované. Jak jsem ukázal jinde (Mlíkovský 2011), Pražák byl vědomým podvodníkem od počátku své vědecké kariéry až do konce svého života. Pražák byl dobrým ornitologem, takže některé z jeho faunistických údajů mohou být pravdivé. Z jeho dat je však takové množství prokazatelně či pravděpodobně zfalšovaných, že žádná nelze akceptovat, zejména proto, že nelze odlišit, které z Pražákových údajů jsou pravé a které zfalšované. V le- tech 1893 a 1894 daroval Pražák dokladové exempláře některých ze svých českých “vzácností” Přírodovědeckému muzeu ve Vídni v Rakousku. Alespoň jeden z těchto exemplářů však Pražák předtím z tohoto Muzea ukradl. Žádný z těchto exemplářů nelze tedy použít jako doklad pro výskyt dotyčného druhu v Čechách. Keywords: avifauna, Austrian Galicia, China, Chile, Bohemia, 19th century, fraud, history, or- nithology 152 SYLVIA 48 / 2012 INTRODUCTION realistic data contained in Pražák’s work on the birds of Galicia attracted atten- Josef Prokop Pražák (*22 June 1870, tion of ornithologists connected with Hořiněves, eastern Bohemia – †15 July Vienna, who subsequently documented 1904, Hořiněves) was a talented orni- that many of the data in Pražák’s Ornis thologist who published a number of Ost-Galiziens were fraudulent (Tschusi contributions on the faunistics, ecology 1897, 1899, Lorenz-Liburnau 1898a,b,c, and systematics of birds in 1894–1900 Reiser 1899); see also Reichenow (1899), (Mlíkovský 2011). A complete list of Lorenz-Liburnau (1901), Jourdain (1934), Pražák’s ornithological papers is given Schmuck (2010) and Mlíkovský (2011). in the ‘Literature’ section (below). Their detailed analysis of Pražák’s Ornis Pražák spent most of his life in Bohemia, Ost-Galiziens resulted in a quick end of but lived in Vienna, Austria, in 1893– Pražák’s scientific carrier (see Mlíkovský 1895 and in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 2011 for details). Evidently no faunistic 1896– 1898, and was several times garri- (and other) data published by Pražák on soned in Lemberg, Austrian Galicia (now the birds of East Galicia can be used in Lviv, Ukraine) during his army service ornithological studies, except those on (Mlíkovský 2011). His faunistic papers the history of ornithology. deal primarily with the birds of Bohemia (Pražák 1893a,b,c,d,e, 1894a,b,d,e, Birds of China Kněžourek & Pražák 1894, 1895) and Pražák (1897c) said that he had received Galicia (Pražák 1897e, 1898a), but he a collection of birds gathered in the Hunan allegedly worked also on bird collec- Province, China, by Mr. Jaworowski. tions from Chile (Pražák 1896a) and Both the collector and the collection China (Pražák 1897c). His taxonomic probably existed only in Pražák’s mind papers involved specimens from various (Mlíkovský 2011: 62). Pražák (1897c: parts of the world, for which genuine 328) based Trochalopteron hennickei, or fictitious localities were mentioned. an alleged new timalia species, upon For the discussion of these records see three alleged specimens from this collec- Mlíkovský (2011). tion (allegedly collected by Jaworowski Below I summarize Pražák’s faunis- at the outflow of the Yuan River in the tic achievements and discuss their us- Dongting Lake, Hunan Province on 26 ability for the study of local avifaunas of August 1896). These specimens being Austrian East Galicia, China, Chile and fictitious (Mlíkovský 2011: 62), Pražák Bohemia. This is a companion paper to did not contribute to the knowledge of my study of Pražák’s taxonomic work avifauna of the Hunan Province. (Mlíkovský 2011). Birds of Chile Birds of East Galicia Pražák (1896a: 23) described a new Pražák (1897e, 1898a) published a volu- lapwing species, Vanellus grisescens, minous treatise on the avifauna of East upon a single specimen allegedly col- Galicia, then part of Austria-Hungary, now lected by Mr. Richard Materna in “Nord divided between Poland and Ukraine. He Chili” (northern Chile). Both the collec- visited the country several times during tor and the specimen probably existed army trainings, but he did not show any only in Pražák’s mind (Mlíkovský 2011: interest in local birdlife during these 62). Pražák thus did not contribute to the stays (Lorenz-Liburnau 1898c). Many un- knowledge of the avifauna of Chile. 153 Mlíkovský J. / Faunistic work of Josef Prokop Pražák Birds of Bohemia and that Pražák attributed them to the Pražák wrote several papers on the late Vařečka to increase the credibility birds of eastern Bohemia, where he of his (Pražák’s) papers. There is no was born and where he repeatedly re- indication that Vařečka did anything turned during his life, but his work on dishonest in his ornithological studies. Bohemian birds was not limited to this All records of rarities credited by Pražák region (Pražák 1893a,b,c,d,e, 1894b,d,e). to Vařečka thus should be attributed to Also, Pražák (1894a) wrote a check-list Pražák himself and all are deemed to be of birds of Bohemia, a brief history of fictitious. Bohemian ornithology (Pražák 1897b,d) Kněžourek’s and Pražák’s joint paper and a bibliography of the Bohemian or- nithological literature (Pražák 1897d). In Karel Kněžourek (1857–1921), an or- addition, Pražák edited and co-authored nithologist of high reputation, was Karel Kněžourek’s paper on the birds of a village teacher (Hudec 1999), who rec- eastern Bohemia (Kněžourek & Pražák ognized Pražák’s talents and esteemed 1894, 1895). his ornithological qualities in the mid- 1890s, as evidenced from his Ptactvo Vařečka’s reports české (The birds of Bohemia), a work Pražák (1893a) listed some records of which was never published, but the Bohemian birds as reported to him by manuscript of which survived in the “his friend” Vařečka. Dalimil Vařečka Moravian Museum, Brno (Kněžourek (1867–1893) was a talented ornitholo- 1885–1886). On a later date, presumably gist interested mainly in the avifau- in 1893 or 1894, Kněžourek amended na of Písek, western Bohemia, and its this work according to Pražák (1893a). surroundings (Hudec 1999). He died It is apparent from these additions at a young age shortly before Pražák that Kněžourek trusted Pražák at that started to publish his own papers. time (although he later changed his Records of birds attributed by Pražák to mind; see Kněžourek in Kleinschmidt Vařečka are not contained in Vařečka’s 1905). When Pražák moved to Vienna Ornis kraje píseckého (Birds of the in January 1893, Kněžourek used this Písek District). This manuscript, pre- occasion and sent him a manuscript on sumably unknown to Pražák, was avail- the birds of eastern Bohemia. Pražák able to Karel Kněžourek (1857–1921), edited this manuscript to an unknown who edited and amended it (Kněžourek degree, added new data and co-au- 1895). No extant copy of Vařečka’s man- thored the manuscript (Kněžourek uscript is known to have survived, but & Pražák 1894, 1895). In this paper, Kněžourek’s manuscript from 1895, additions signed by Pražák are printed deposited in the Moravian Museum, as footnotes, while the main text is Brno, was retyped and published by attributed to Kněžourek. I found no Bureš et al. (1995), who, unfortunately, suspect data in the main (Kněžourek’s) did not distinguish between Vařečka’s text and, to the best of my knowledge, original text and Knežourek’s additions. Kněžourek never objected to this work. The absence of records attributed by It is thus probable that the main text Pražák to Vařečka from this manuscript indeed contains genuine Kněžourek’s indicates that Vařečka never communi- data and that Pražák’s data (whether cated such records to Pražák, that these correct or fictitious) are confined to the records existed only in Pražák’s mind footnotes. 154 SYLVIA 48 / 2012 Pražák’s manuscript on bird migration back to the NHMW, how many speci- Probably in 1896 Pražák submitted mens he purchased from natural history a lengthy manuscript on bird migra- dealers and how many (if any) specimens tion in eastern Bohemia with records of he collected in Bohemia. However, the spring arrival spanning over 100 years (!) significant piece of evidence provided to the Hungarian journal Aquila. Pražák’s by Bauernfeind is sufficient for a rejec- data from this manuscript were detected tion of the Pražák collection as a support as fraudulent (Herman 1897, Hegyfoky for his (Pražák’s) records of rarities from 1897) and the manuscript thus was never Bohemia.