- This topic has 8 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hello Parosphromenus friends around the world,
when i looked in an Aquarium Magazine of the “ancient” times i found a stock list that seems to be interesting. It is “Wochenschrift für Aquarien und Terrarienkunde” from 1912. Nearly 100 jears old. Can it be true that Parosphromenus was a usual Fish these days? Of course not! But for some specialists this must be a well known species. If nobody would have known Parosphromenus the advertisement would not have been successful. On the other hand showing rare and exotic Fish names is also successful advertisement in modern days.
What is the history of Parosphromenus in the aquarium hobby? Who got some Infos about this topic?
Were Fish Dictionaries usual at this time and how many species were in it (Makropode for sure but Parosphromenus also)? Are there any book or magazine articles before WW2 write about Parosphromenus? Is this topic known in other forums(IGL)?
Felix[IMG]http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/Parosphromenus/paro100002.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/Parosphromenus/Parosphromenus%201912/Paro40001.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/Parosphromenus/par060001.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/Parosphromenus/paro70001.jpg[/IMG]
These illustration give an idea about how aquariums looked like at the beginning of the 20th century. They are from the Book Das “Leben im Wasser und das Aquarium”.Jaeger.ca.1920
Dear “Oberhausener”, your finding in the “Wochenschrift” of 1912 is remarkable. Is that really true, is that advertisment dated from 1912??
There is – to my knowledge – no proof of a Parosphromenus being imported commercially earlier than in the thirties of the 20th century. And then only some fish as a “side-catch”, and nobody was interested in them. There was certainly no specific book on them (there is none at present …) and we don’t know of any detailed article in magazines. All that began after WWII (as you mention rightly).
It would be useful to know the company which authorized that advertisment. It is really remarkable. It’s one more of the few dates we have on the history of the knowledge on our fish.Thank you very much dear Peter Finke for answering some of my questions. I changed my first post to present the whole site of the magazine. I hope its still possible to read it in this worse quality. The magazine is dated August 1912 as you can see in the second scan that shows the headline of the frontpage. Where from you got the Information about commercially imported Parosphromenus in the thirties if i may ask? Would be nice to collect such dates or texts just for the fun of it. I like those old Aquarium Magazines (that includes the DATZ from the 50s) not only because of the “style” presented in it (as you can see in the scans number 3 and 4) but also because of a different way to deal with the fishkeeping hobby. In my opinion back in the days there was more attention and enthusiasm for the little details. It was possible to write about mistakes and to integrate sketches of diy.
Back to topic. I want to know which ichthyological reference works were common at these days. If anybody out there has an idea or wants to scan the labyrinth fish or maybe Parosphromenus section this thread could evolve nicely. Although there is no specific book on Parosphromenus the addressee of the advertisement had an idea to have what this fish is. Qustion is: Where from the hobbyist gets this knowledge in 1912? _______The “Back in the days” thread is officially opened !;-)
FelixThat’s interesting to see! Not only the fact Parosphromenus were already imported commercially back then but also the other fish on the list. Apparently angelfish, Mesonautas, Betta splendens(and even a wild species) and other guramis were already being kept 100 years ago. Also, I wonder why there are still very few people who ever heard of Parosphromenus and even less who keep them. They arent THAT hard to keep!
Very interesting discovery! Are there any pictures of the fish? It would be cool to see if they have changed during a century.Angelfish were new in 1912. In the “Vereinschronik of Triton 1888 – 2008” its written that on the “Jubiläumsausstellung 1913” (25 anniversary) Pterophyllum scalare new imported from Brasil was the center of the exhibition. On the pictures below you can find a photo of the anniversary and the exhibition catalog.
[IMG]http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/Parosphromenus/Triton250001.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/Parosphromenus/scalar10001-1.jpg[/IMG]
There are no pictures of Parosphromenus in the few magazines i own. What pictures looked like you can see in the scan of the Betta article.[IMG]http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/Parosphromenus/bettaspec10001.jpg[/IMG]
Although the article is about Betta it gives interesting notes about fish- keeping those days. For the international readers I try to give a little summary of some parts: The author gives an explanation why he prefers labyrinth fish. The reason is that the aquatic plants only in summer grow well and because of this reason in winter a lot of fish died in his small aquarium. The technology for oxygen ventilation was not invented or to expensive he says. Heating with a lamp reduces more oxygen and only labyrinth fish and those with intestine breathing survive. He wishes that imports of labyrith fish will increase in different shape and colour. He says that it is a pity that only a few Labyrinth fish that are nice looking, different or with new interesting brood care are imported. He says that he do not believe to get better looking Betta than Betta pugnax which he described as the colibri among the betta. Some would prefer Betta rubra that he calls a variety of B. pugnax.
This article shows, if he speaks for a big group of aquarists of the time, that the desire for new colourful and interesting labyrinth fish was immensely. On the next page he describes the visit of a commercial ornamental fish breeder and a new unknown betta. The way he describes the new imported fish makes me sure he would have loved Parosphromenus. 🙂 If this attitude was common it can explain the advertisement I posted on the first page.
FelixFelix: Excellent summary of the important issues. Yes, they would have loved Parosphromenus, but they were entirely unable to keep them alive, not to speak of successful breeding. They had no knowledge whatsoever on the specifics of blackwater aquaristics. Even the famous ichthyologist Michael Tweediei, curator of the fish section of the Raffles National Museum in Singapore at the beginning of the fifties (1950 …) kept for some times “Parosphromenus deissneri” (today we would probably say: P. alfredi or P. tweediei) in aquaria. He loved them, decribed them as “marvellous” when displaying, “the most beautiful of all small aquarium-fish I know”, but then he added (I cite it from the head): “There must be more skillfull aquarists than I am to keep them alive. After a few weeks the joy of life seems to fade out of their bodies, they become dull and die.”
This was the case until Dr. Walter Foersch exercised his famous experiments in the seventies and published them in the DATZ-journal 1974/75. Only then the Paro-aquaristics really began. All imports before were surely gone after some weeks time and no breeding was accomplished.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.