Boros István (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 50. (Budapest 1958)

Boros, I.: Kálmán Kittenberger and the Hungarian National Museum - Museum of Natural History

KÁLMÁN KITTENBERGER AND THE HUNG. NAT. MUS. 15 preponderantly from the large genera Papilio, Danais, Colias, Charaxes, Precis, Nymphalis, etc. There are also the small Lycaenids and Hesperids, as also some moths and microlepidoptera; these latter, however, still await working out. Of the other arthropodan groups, 2537 spiders, 92 scorpions, 193 pseudoscorpions, 539 mites, 42 myriapods and 2 solpugids originate from the collectings of Kittenberger, as testified by our books. Amongst them, as became evident from the weighty paper of L. di Caporiacco (Firenze) published in 1947, the spider collection is especially valuable : two new genera : Crocodilosa and Pachynomastus, and more than 60 new species were found in it. Of the recently described taxa, 5 bears the name of its discoverer : Catatemnus Kittenbergeri, Crocodilosa Kittenbergeri, Paralectana Kittenbergeri, Evophryus Kittenbergeri, Pachyonomastus Kittenbergeri (their author is Caporiacco). Only the initiated know of a special problem which is up to me to clear now ; a problem in connection with the aboves, causing many troubles and misunderstandings especially abroad. Namely, — as probably already seen in our discussion — why is it that the names of the new taxa designated to his honor are in some of the cases Kittenbergeri, and, at other times, — unfortunately much too often, — Katonae, Katonai, etc? The name Katona was given by Dr. G. Horváth to Kittenberger, without the knowledge and consent of the latter ; for the simple cause that he wanted to coerce him to a Magyarization of his surname in vogue at that time and because the brothers of Kittenberger have previously changed their name to Katona. As is to be verified from contemporary correspondance, G. Horváth used the name Katona yet in parentheses after the original name on the face of the official documents of the Museum in 1903, therefore in the absence of Kittenberger; then, in 1904, — again without the slightest consent, indeed, to the great annoyance, of Kittenberger —-he put the name Kittenberger in parentheses after that of Katona, and finally, at least in nomenclature, he omitted it completely. Kittenberger protested verbally against this arbitrary use many times, yet without results. He affirmed in vain that, in spite of his name of a German origin, he is a Hungarian, he does not even speak German, and that people are German or Hungarian not according to their names but to their feelings, Horváth, as I have indubitably established on the basis of the data of the official Museum archives, was the more stubborn, even though he thought highly of Kittenberger and also recognized and appreciated his work. And he not only let the name Katona instead of Kittenberger be written in inventory books and on several labels, but even tried to make others christen the animals in his honor by this name. Kittenberger considered this procedure rather disgusting instead of honorable, and though he was everything but vain, —• indeed he could be characterized by an infinite modesty, — he used to mention bitterly his debates with Ho r v á t h, whenever the case cropped up during conversations. And he was absolutely right, since his honest family surname was regarded abroad many times as the locality designation of a captured animal, and those uninformed still consider it as such. In the relevant literature on the East African animal material therefore, the names Kittenberger and Katona designate the one and same collector, that is, the discoverer: Kálmán Kittenberger. Whenever we meet the name Katona in the names of East African animals or on locality labels, we have to refer it always to Kittenberger. Unfortunately, the mandatory rules of international nomenclature prevent us to alter this situation, and we can only alleviate now this iniquity to a certain degree even if we are unable to conciliate him any more. It is known also in narrow circles only that everything I have marshalled up to now to illustrate the activities and East African research work of Kittenberger present but a partial picture of the truth. It is an impossible endeavour to attain completeness in this short commemoration, nor could I strive to do this in the present situation arising from the events of 1956 : a considerable portion of his vertebrate animals, with the exception of the mammals, was wholly annihilated, and even the invertebrate collections forbid a complete survey.