George, Georges, Gustave
I am a careful researcher but not infallible, and I wish to clarify a point about a certain Monsieur Herpin here.
My book, Blue Mauritius, included a brief history of philately to set the scene, mention of which must include a word on the origins of the history of the word philately, or more specifically, the man who coined the word – who also happened to be the first person to remark on the curious issue of Mauritius, the ‘Post Office’ – one G. Herpin.
Ah, there’s the rub. It doesn’t sound right does it, writing G. Herpin in a narrative kind of sentence (although writing J. K. Rowling does, so what was I concerned about?!). Who was Monsieur Herpin and what was his first name? This was definitely not one of the main (or really even minor) concerns in my book, although I would like to have been able to have felt more authoritative about my eventual use of George without an S. (You see how clear statements that avoid verb after verb after verb in the ‘I’ll have a bob each way’ tense is preferable, and the problem inherent in writing so called literary or narrative non-fiction?)
Why did I do so in the book? I think because the earliest French source I could find wrote it thus and I had to trust it.
But in the companion website** to the book I slipped (again) – as easily as the Williams brothers – into the usage Georges, with an S, and I have been called on this by another researcher, happily so I might add – as it proves the worth of sharing your research widely via the Web. I will do what I should have done in the first place, on the Web at least, and revert to what is known, what the original, contemporary literature supports – G. Herpin!
Christian Boyer, in compiling his research into the origins of the word philately came across my website and contacted me about some records I had imaged and queried my use of Georges. I wrote in reply:
Ah, I have been sloppy here, much to my shame. I have just checked the text of my book and see that he appears as George Herpin throughout the book. As you point out, in the contemporary texts that I saw I only saw his name signed as G. Herpin…
This issue of the spelling did exercise my mind. There must be a reason that I decided to use George in the book but I can’t remember why (quite possibly because the Williams brothers used Georges and I don’t trust them)…
I only had limited access to the French philatelic journals (on two brief trips to London – I live in Australia – in 2003 and 2004) at the Royal Philatelic Society there, and I regretted that I wasn’t able to go through them in any kind of thorough fashion, as I did through the early English language journals, readily accessible to me here in Melbourne… the issue of Herpin’s name didn’t exercise my mind until much later in the writing when it was impossible to do the checking I would have liked.
Christian, based in France, has been more thorough. He did not turn up any usage other than G. Herpin in the philatelic literature but followed through on the tip that Herpin was also a numismatist and checked the numismatic literature. There he found abundant evidence of a Gustave Herpin. Why would Herpin style himself differently in these two aspects of his research and writing life? Je ne sais pas. I concur with Christian’s conclusion that G. Herpin might be Gustave and not George/s, and that until such time as the mystery is quite definitively solved we are better not perpetuating the assumptions of others (oh woe is me) and sticking with a simple G!
I recommend Christian’s website on the origins of the word philately to you: http://cboyer.club.fr/philatelie
**Currently in need of some minor updating, which is not likely to be done for a few weeks.
It’s tempting to use a full name, not just an initial, in order to humanise the person being referred to. Where I work, the house style generally prohibits initials except in bibliographic references, hence Charles Bean NOT C.E.W Bean, in ordinary text.
You are right, its best to stick to the initial if one is unsure. But crikey! Don’t be too hard on yourself!
I’ve always thought of Bean as C.E.W. Anne-Marie! Was that his choice to be identified that way in publication?
It’s annoying, re. Herpin, because I think I thought about it and still did the wrong thing!
Yes, he always published as C.E.W. It’s a decision of ours to refer to him as Charles, except in a bibliography. Some of his friends called him Charlie. Strangers and subordinates as Captain, Mr or Dr Bean. A former colleague calls him Chuckie Cheese, after the American kids’ restaurant chain Chuck E. Cheese (”Where a Kid can be a Kid!”). The real question is what his wife called him?
Remembering that it was once more common for people to adopt aliases and variants on their name, maybe we might speculate that M. Herpin just liked projecting a different version of himself to suit different circumstannces?
I guess no-one calls him Mr Bean now!