Research Article |
Corresponding author: Johannes Mattes ( johannes.mattes@iakh.uio.no ) Academic editor: Fabio Stoch
© 2024 Johannes Mattes.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Mattes J (2024) Collecting empires: Dominik Bilimek and early subterranean zoology between politics and field research. Subterranean Biology 49: 117-137. https://doi.org/10.3897/subtbiol.49.132266
|
The Moravian Cistercian monk and collector Dominik Bilimek (1813–1884) is considered one of the earliest European naturalists to conduct zoological research on subterranean fauna in Latin America. During the second French invasion of Mexico, from 1861 to 1867, he accompanied Maximilian of Habsburg, the newly enthroned emperor of Mexico, to the region. There, he explored the Grutas de Cacahuamilpa near Taxco de Alarcón, comparing its fauna to his earlier discoveries in Postojnska jama in Carniola (Slovenia). After the victory of the Mexican republican forces and Maximilian’s execution, Bilimek retained his role as curator of the emperor’s collections, which he took back with him to Europe and exhibited at Miramare Castle near Trieste. Prior to his Mexican venture, Bilimek had embraced the imperial goals and intellectual agendas of the Viennese central administration while teaching at the monarchy’s military institutes. Following the revolutions of 1848/49, extensive research undertakings—including geoscientific, biological, and archaeological surveys—were initiated to preserve the Habsburg monarchy as a supranational entity amidst internal and external crises, and to legitimize its territorial framework as both a natural and cultural unit. These developments coincided with the initial surge of zoological interest in Carniolan caves, which spurred efforts to gather similar findings in other karst regions of the monarchy. Drawing on historical sources, this article explores the intersection of political concepts and fieldwork practices in the early study of cave biology. Special attention is given to the sites, networks, and modes of collecting during this transformative period.
Bilimek, cave fauna, collecting, entomology, Habsburg monarchy, history of zoology, Mexico
My companion, endowed with an entomological instinct, meticulously explored every crevice [of Koblarska jama in Slovenia] where insects might hide. His perseverance was richly rewarded when he discovered, beneath scattered rocks, the eyeless cave beetle Anophthalmus schmidti. It was first identified by the eminent Carniolan entomologist, Ferdinand Schmidt, initially in Predjama and later in another cave on Mount Krim in Carniola, always in very limited numbers. Thus, [my companion] found the third known location of this beetle and, to his indescribable delight, captured 14 specimens. Two of them are now preserved in the Imperial Collections in Vienna (
The lucky finder was none other than the Cistercian monk Dominik Bilimek, a notable naturalist and avid collector who made significant contributions to cave entomology in the 1850s and 1860s. Beginning with the earliest discovery of a cave-dwelling insect in Postojna jama in 1832, the search for these specimens over the next two decades would focus mainly on the karst area between Ljubljana and Trieste. These efforts were driven primarily not only by learned communities within the Habsburg monarchy but also by individual foreign scholars. Through comparative observations, these scientists and collectors formulated initial hypotheses about the interdependence of cave specimens and their unique ecosystems.
This article explores the political and social landscapes that fostered the emergence of subterranean zoology within and beyond the Habsburg monarchy, examining how these frameworks shaped research agendas and practices. Approaching the topic from a history of science perspective, I draw on the valuable works of
Bilimek, who has recently gained attention in museological and postcolonial scholarship (
This article argues for a deeper consideration of geopolitical agendas and scholarly exchange in the development of knowledge about subterranean organisms and its emergence as a distinct field of study in the nineteenth century, later defined and systematized by Racoviță and his French collaborator René Jeannel (1879–1965). My essay seeks to shift the understanding of these early steps by viewing them not only as the achievement of a few “professional” scientists but also as a collaborative effort of diverse local, regional, and (trans)national practitioners motivated both by the prospect of public benefit and the hope for personal gain. Based on a (re-)evaluation of published and archival historical sources on cave fauna in the Habsburg monarchy, I will examine the changing conditions, goals, and profit expectations that motivated various stakeholders to engage in cave entomology; the resources they tapped; and the (collaborative) practices they developed. A key focus will be on Bilimek’s role, the methods he employed, and the impact of his international ventures. I will assess how these factors shaped the emergence of subterranean zoology, considering the influence of the increasing specialization and imperial-colonial dynamics extant at that juncture. To this end, I will first introduce Bilimek as a scientific collector, highlighting his lesser-known interest in cave fauna. I will then analyze how the study of cave specimens developed under the Habsburg monarchy and conclude with Bilimek’s exploration of Mexican caves and his comparative approach.
The second son of a German-speaking butcher in the small Moravian town of Nový Jičín (Neu Titschein, today in the Czech Republic), Bilimek entered the Cistercian monastery of Neukloster in Wiener Neustadt after completing his schooling (Fig.
In the later stages of his career, Bilimek was employed as a professor of natural history and theology at the Convent School in Wiener Neustadt and at various military educational institutions, including the Cadet Institutes in Hainburg, Łobzów (Krakow), and Eisenstadt and the Military Academy in Wiener Neustadt (
In 1865, Bilimek entered the service of the Habsburg Archduke Ferdinand Maximilian (1832–1867), who had taken the Mexican crown as Emperor Maximilian I amid the second French invasion of Mexico. On his arrival in the Americas, Bilimek was appointed curator of the Imperial Mexican Museum at Chapultepec Castle in Mexico City (
A lesser-known aspect of Bilimek’s multifaceted biography, shaped by the imperial politics of the time, was his profound interest in caves and karst. Raised during a period when research in subterranean zoology was just gaining momentum with the first descriptions of cave fauna, Bilimek and his fellow collectors placed special emphasis on underground habitats (
At the time of his trip to Lower Austria and his journey to the Bakony Mountains in Hungary, Bilimek probably explored caves, although published records of these expeditions are scarce. There are references to his 1846 trip to Carniola and the Austrian Littoral, jointly undertaken with the botanist and pharmacist Alexander
To understand the collecting practices of Bilimek and his fellow naturalists, they must be located within a larger societal context. Collecting was not just a passion; it was a crucial method of appropriating nature and, arguably, the most important way to study the natural world at that time (
The multinational Habsburg monarchy, Europe’s second largest state after Russia at the time, was a complex mosaic of diverse territories and cultures stretching from the Alps to the Balkans and the Adriatic to the Carpathians. In contemporary travel reports, learned journals, and descriptions of the empire’s natural wonders published in the early nineteenth century, mountains, caves, and other underground sites were often highlighted (
Habsburg policymakers viewed state unity and regional identity not as contradictory but rather as complementary. They aimed to foster “unity in diversity,” a slogan marking the deliberate recognition of the empire’s natural and cultural diversity (
In 1824, Postojnska jama came to be officially supervised with the establishment of the k. k. (imperial–royal) Cave Management (Grottenverwaltung) and the introduction of regular guided tours (
After the revolutions of 1848/49, the Habsburg central administration promoted the formation of scientific societies in Vienna, particularly in fields, such as biology and geography, not addressed by the few state-run research facilities. These private societies, comprising up to 2,000 members from across the empire and abroad, including aristocrats, scholars, bureaucrats, teachers, and military officers, saw themselves as extensions of existing state institutions (
The Zoological-Botanical Society, of which Bilimek was among the first board members, emerged as a significant forum for the study of cave biology (
Often, collectors such as Bilimek did not identify the new species themselves but entrusted this task to the curators of the Imperial Zoological Cabinet. Notable among these curators were the entomologists Vincenz Kollar (1797–1860) and Ludwig Redtenbacher (1814–1876) (
The significance of subterranean zoology during the Society’s two formative decades is illustrated by the president’s regular reports of his excursions to Carniola. Prince Khevenhüller-Metsch, a dedicated ornithologist and collector, visited the caves near Postojna annually in the early 1850s, and documented his findings meticulously:
On August 9th, I arrived in Adelsberg [Postojna] with all the equipment I deemed necessary for this expedition and promptly secured reliable guides. … We searched diligently until around five o’clock in the afternoon and discovered three exquisite specimens of Leptodirus in the canyons of Mount Calvary [in Postojnska jama]. … The Leptodirus appears to be nocturnal, as we predominantly found the beetles in the evening. Its habitat seems confined to Mount Calvary, where it moves slowly in the deepest gorges, undisturbed by visitors’ torches, on very clean, damp stalactite walls that are not excessively wet. It likely also takes shelter in these cavities. Its natural adversaries include the Obisium [Neobisium spelaeus] and undoubtedly the eyeless cave spider Stalita taenaria [Schiødte, 1847]. … From this account, you will appreciate that I have diligently endeavored to explore every facet of organic life in this cave, and I may perhaps boast that few can match my wealth of results and experiences (
Khevenhüller-Metsch’s hours spent crawling through crevices in search of troglobites were somewhat unconventional, given his high aristocratic status. Nonetheless, he shared his passion for entomology with members of the Habsburg family, notably the abdicated Emperor Ferdinand (1793–1875), who commissioned artists to illustrate insects, including numerous cave specimens, in detail (Fig.
Ferdinand Josef Schmidt (1791–1878), a German-speaking merchant and collector based in Ljubljana, held a longstanding monopoly on the lucrative trade in cave insects (
Until the early 1850s, apart from the blind fish Amblyopsis spelaea De Kay, 1842 and the trechine beetle Neaphaenops tellkampfii Erichson, 1844 from Mammoth Cave, Kentucky (
The discovery and naming of new species held significant prestige and symbolic importance within the zoological–botanical community. Following nomenclatural conventions, the author who described and named the species is identified after the species name, while a specific epithet (the second part of the binomen) is often selected to honor the discoverer or a prominent scholar. By immortalizing the names of researchers and their collaborators, this practice has been and continues to be essential for sharing scientific credit, thereby ensuring that contributors receive due recognition for their work. A lithograph by entomologist Ernst Heeger (1783–1866) (Fig.
In January 1866, Bilimek, accompanied by Wilhelm Knechtel (1837–1924), a Bohemian botanist and gardener at Chapultepec Castle, set out on a collecting trip from the Mexican emperor’s country house in Cuernavaca. After a 70-kilometer journey, they finally arrived at the impressive entrance to the Grutas de Cacahuamilpa (Fig.
Although
Bilimek’s rather sober account of his zoological expedition to the Grutas de Cacahuamilpa, presented to the Vienna Zoological-Botanical Society six months after Maximilian’s death, was a significant milestone as it was possibly the first article on cave-dwelling organisms in the Americas outside the United States (
This article examines the emergence of subterranean zoology as a research field in mid-nineteenth-century Central Europe, focusing on the multifaceted activities of Dominik Bilimek and his fellow collectors. While historical studies of biospeleology, often referring to Anglo-American and French scholarship, have examined major advances in species discovery and scientific thought, this paper centers on the sociopolitical frameworks that shaped early understandings of cave fauna. Tracing the origins of cave entomology within the Habsburg monarchy has opened avenues for examining research practices in specific historical contexts, shedding light on imperial agendas and the interplay between science and society.
Mid-nineteenth-century studies of (cave) fauna differed methodologically from contemporary geoscientific fieldwork in its less coordinated and systematic approach, influenced by collectors’ varying focuses and access to sites. Bilimek’s visit to the Grutas de Cacahuamilpa exemplifies how such ventures, under individuals’ own initiative, were nonetheless integrated into broader natural history inquiries. The collection, classification, and publication of findings involved multiple contributors and relied on transregional networks. While local stakeholders, supported by family members or hired indigenous workers, often captured and prepared the specimens, “professionals”—especially curators in Vienna or provincial capitals—subsequently documented these findings. The Vienna Zoological-Botanical Society was the sole association of its kind in Central and Southeastern Europe until the 1870s. It formalized these cooperative networks, facilitating the exchange of cave insect specimens and related knowledge, particularly concerning sites and environmental conditions. Furthermore, through its journal, the Society provided a platform for accrediting and internationalizing findings.
Thus, by exploring the social and political contexts of the emergence of subterranean zoology, I have highlighted the significance of lesser-known actors like Bilimek in producing, accumulating, and disseminating knowledge on cave fauna. However, their profile gradually diminished with the professionalization of research. Cooperation within these early networks relied on mutual recognition, evident through publications; the acknowledgment of both authors and finders in naming new specimens; and the prestige associated with private collections. Troglobites, valued for their scarcity and the exoticism of their habitats, occupied a prominent position in specimen circulation, which was driven by their purchase, exchange, or donation. Initiated by the discovery of Leptodirus hochenwartii, collecting cave insects became a fashion in mid-nineteenth-century Vienna that transcended class and political divisions. Empire-wide initiatives, aiming to pool sources and specimens from the crown lands and centralize them in Vienna, paved the way for the expansion of faunistic research from Carniola to the monarchy’s other karst regions. Until the discovery of extensive fauna in Pyrenean caves by Charles
Overall, Bilimek’s impact on early subterranean biology extends beyond the discovery of two species, which had placed him in the community of zoologists, naturalists, and collectors exploring the entomological “Eldorado” of the Carniolan caves in the 1840s and 1850s. The extensive geographical scope of his work, facilitated by his service to two empires, allowed for collecting specimens on a significant scale (and without ethical concerns). However,
I would like to express my gratitude to Erhard Christian (University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Vienna), Walter Klappacher (Salzburg Speleological Society), Sandra Klos (Austrian Academy of Sciences), and Pater Roman (Heiligenkreuz Abbey) for reading and commenting on this article and/or providing sources. I am also thankful to Martin Krenn (NHM Vienna) and Manfred Walzl (University of Vienna) for granting me access to the History of Science Archives of the Vienna Natural History Museum and the Austrian Zoological-Botanical Society Archive.
This research was funded by the Marie Skłodowska-Curie actions (MSCA) grant agreement No 101066820 (Poles and People) from the European Commission.