174 
BRAUER AND MIK 
me as somebody (“jemand ”). If in my references to Brauer’s ill-will towards me 
I have not always been able to maintain the tone suitable to scientific gravity, the 
fault is not on my side! 
Prof. Josef Mik’s greatest merit, as dipterologist, consisted in his 
intimate knowledge of the dipterological fauna of central Europe, 
as far as it is represented in the “Fauna Austriaca” of Schiner. 
Within this department, and especially during the earlier part of 
his activity, Mik contributed a considerable amount of useful 
descriptive work to nearly all the families of Diptera. In addition 
to this, during his whole career he never ceased to produce papers 
on the biology of Diptera, carefully worked out, and provided with 
well-drawn illustrations. In both respects, in descriptive as in 
biological work, he deserves an honorable place among the special¬ 
ists in this order of insects. Another merit of his consisted in 
his correspondence with many dipterologists in different parts of 
Europe, in his correct naming of specimens for them, and his 
naturally obliging disposition in assisting them. lie has been very 
useful in diffusing the study of Diptera in France, Italy, England, 
and even in North America; and this merit, so far as I have 
been able to observe during my travels, has been duly appreciated 
everywhere. 
Loew, in a letter to me, dated from Guben, March 20-22, 1875, 
that is, twelve years after the appearance of Mik on the scientific 
stage and twenty-five years before the end of his career, spoke of 
him as follows: “ Mik, who is perfectly capable of good work, is 
prevented by his scrupulosity, and other peculiarities of his charac¬ 
ter, from making as much progress as one could wish.” 1 
What Loew meant by “ scrupulosity ” I do not quite understand, 
unless it refers to Mik’s exaggerated attention to trifles, and his 
principal defect, the propensity to scatter his working power, 
instead of concentrating it on some well-defined task. It was 
especially since 1882, when the Wiener Entomologische Zeitsclirift 
began to appear, that an unlimited facility for publication was 
offered to Mik, and he soon displayed a foible which may be 
called, to use a mild term, an excess of self-assertion , stimulated by 
1 “ Mik, der Gutes zu leisten alle Fahigkeit hat, kommt in Folge seiner Scrupulo- 
sitat und anderer Charactereigenthumliclikeiten, nicht so vorwarts, als wold zu wiin- 
schen ware.” 
