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.

Blue Mauritius won the literature class at the recent National Philatelic Exhibition held in Sydney (15-17 June 2007). There were 12 entries (or exhibits, as they are termed). The other books and catalogues entered were all very worthy and I am pleased to have won in that company. In addition to the gold medal, I received a pair of Waterford crystal glasses, donated by the Parramatta Philatelic Society.

Jury member and organising committee secretary Linda Lee also donated a copy of Blue Mauritius to the winner of the best exhibit in the youth class (for exhibiting stamps, not books) and I hope the winner enjoys it!

The recognition, and gifts, are much appreciated. I thank the organising committee and the Parramatta Philatelic Society both.

I hadn’t looked for any more reviews of Blue Mauritius after the appearance of Susan Skelly’s ‘Stamp & Deliver: The Journey of the Blue Mauritius from mail to million-dollar must-have is a saga of collectors, curios and cheats’ in The Bulletin (6 February 2007, p.68). The subsequent small reviews in Brisbane’s Courier Mail and the Adelaide Advertiser have been positive bonuses.

But most enjoyable, and unexpected, was the phone call from my friend Georgie in Canberra a few weekends ago to let me know how thrilled she was to see a long and good review in the Canberra Times. She read it out over the phone and it made me laugh. Reviewed with a sense of humour!

The reviewer’s byline read, ‘Richard Begbie is neither Mauritian nor a stamp collector’. He began the review by stating, ‘A book on stamps and stamp collecting would seem unpromising territory for the ordinary reader. As a stamp collector for about two days in 1953, and as one whose history interests had never extended to the fabled island of Mauritius, I was an unlikely reader’. But he was precisely the sort of reader I was targeting. I did not write this book for philatelists (most of whom, let’s face it, would rather spend their money on stamps). I always imagined the Richard Begbies of this world as my audience. So I am glad that, for Richard Begbie, ‘evocative detail, constructed around meticulous research, made this one a reading pleasure’.

He is right too that my ‘Mauritian husband undoubtedly played his part in arousing an interest far beyond the fabled stamp’. I had never encountered the Post Office stamp till that fateful day in Mauritius when we visited the Postal Museum in Port Louis in January 2000. Enamoured of Mike I became enamoured of Mauritius too. I am a researcher through and through. To take up a research project about Mauritius was a logical way for me to learn more about this culture and country – and become a little Mauritian myself.

Like Simon Caterson in The Age review, Begbie raises the issue of analysis regarding collecting per se: ‘given its surprisingly diverse dramatis personae, Morgan’s study could perhaps have spent more time exploring the fascinating psyche of the collector. But perhaps that was asking too much of a book which already achieves a great deal.’ Yes, it was! I had choices to make and in the end a finite time in which to research, write and deliver. I know from my art history days how much work (I feel) would be required to do justice to that enormous topic, and that was not my project. As I wrote previously, ‘I analysed the mass of my research and selected the sliver that best illustrated points I wanted to make in telling a story as I saw it’.

But that’s enough of quoting myself! I’d rather quote the end of the review under discussion: ‘These are minor quibbles, and detract little from a quirky study which consistently retains its capacity to charm and engage’. Thank you kind sir!

Richard Begbie, ‘Quest for Blue Mauritius stamped with intrigue’, review of Blue Mauritius, Canberra Times, 17 February 2007, p.17.