The mysterious Monsieur Pecquet, Pecqnet or Pesquet … or whatever his name was!? (1 Viewer)

Here´s another long and lingering Post, regarding a true Mystery Man … who we might solve with help by our French knowing readers!

Or does anyone already know the man behind the Common name Pesquet’s Parrot Psittrichas fulgidus?

This species was described by The French ornithologist Lesson, firstly in 1830, as "BANKSIEN NOIR ET ROUGE; Banksianus fulgidus" (whithout a word of any persons involved), and again(!) by the same Lesson, in 1831 (1832), as "LE PSITTRICHAS DE PECQNET, Psittacus Pecquetii” (excerpts attached) that later turned out to be the same Species. In this description, of the latter, Lesson writes:

"Ce magnifique perroquets nous a été communique par M. Pecqnet, qui l’avait reçu par la voie du Hàvre, avec beaucoup d’oiseaux de la Patagonie et du territoire de la Plata. Son plumage indique un oiseaux du Sud de la Patagonie, si nous en jugcous par l’Arara patagonica que nous avons figuré (Zool. coq., pl.35); mais d’un autre côté, il se pourrait qu’il fùt originaire de la Nouvelle-Guinée. Enfin, le fragment que possède le Muséum paraît appartenir à cette espèce, bien qu’il y ait quelques différeances dans les parties que représente le débris conservé dans les galeries, et celle de l’oiseauu qui nous occupe."

Click to expand...

So here we suddenly have three(!) different spellings of the name of the person involved: Monsieur Pesquet (in its modern English, as well as in its French, name; Psittrichas de Pesquet), and Lesson's Monsieur Pecquet (in the Scientific name) and Monsieur Pecqnet (in both the first French Common name and in text of it)!

I guess there must be some kind of mishap or typo behind it all?

Even Lesson seem to have realized the confusion he had caused, since he in June 1831 (published in 1832) once again (!) wrote about the same "species" … this time under the head-line "”LE PSITTRICHAS DE PESQUET, Psittacus Pesquetii”. " (Attached; Plate, and its un-paginated text). The text is more or less the same as his earlier one (above), but he changed the beginning sentences to:

” ... par M. Pesquet, qui lʼavait reçu par la voie du Havre, de la Nouvelle-Galles du Sud, dans la Nouvelie-Hollande. Des fragments que posséde le Muséum paraissent appartenir à cette espèce, bien quʼil y ait quelques différences entre les parties conservées dans les galeries et celles de lʼOiseau qui nous occupe.”

Click to expand...

In trying to figure out the truth of this chaos, or at least understand some more of it, I now need some help from you guys "out there" …

With only limited knowledge (close to none!) of French I hope that any of Bird Forums readers feel like translating those two quotes for me!? If so, please as accurate as possible, as I would like to quote them myself in Swedish. And don´t hesitate to remark on any errors that I might have done transcribing it.

Anyone feel up to it?

Anybody know who the poor sod in the middle of this mishmash really was? And how he actually spelled his name? Do we even know, for certain, that he was French?

Anybody?

PS. Later it turned out as fulgidus simply being the Male and "Pesquetii" the Female! And don´t hesitate to remark if you think I have missunderstood or gone astray in the twist and turns behind the name/s of this "his" Parrot.

PPS. Is he maybe the same person as the French Collector "Pesquet-Deschamps, à Caen" mentioned by Lesson and Buffon, as well as others, in and about the 1830's (from 1929 to 1838)?

Not knowing French well enough to translate, it still looks quite confusing to mention all those different regions in more or less one sentence.

Niels

I agree ... but that´s how he wrote it!

I'll try some translation.

Ce magnifique perroquets nous a été communique par M. Pecqnet, qui l’avait reçu par la voie du Hàvre, avec beaucoup d’oiseaux de la Patagonie et du territoire de la Plata. Son plumage indique un oiseaux du Sud de la Patagonie, si nous en jugcous (jugeons) par l’Arara patagonica que nous avons figuré (Zool. coq., pl.35); mais d’un autre côté, il se pourrait qu’il fùt originaire de la Nouvelle-Guinée. Enfin, le fragment que possède le Muséum paraît appartenir à cette espèce, bien qu’il y ait quelques différeances dans les parties que représente le débris conservé dans les galeries, et celle de l’oiseau qui nous occupe.

Click to expand...

These magnificent parrots have been sent to us by Mr Pecqnet, who recieved them via the route of Le Havre, together with many birds from Patagonia and the territory of La Plata. Its plumage indictes a bird of the south of Patagonia, judging from the Arara patagonica that we have illustrated (Zool. coq pl. 35); but on the other hand, it also could originate from New Guinea. Finaly, the fragment owned by the Museum seems to belong to this species, even though there are some differences between the parts belonging to the debris conserved in the galleries and those of the bird in question.

The second one is the same, except that bit:

par la voie du Havre, de la Nouvelle-Galles du Sud, dans la Nouvelie-Hollande.

Click to expand...

.... via the route of Le Havre from New South Wales in Australia.

Thanks, Florian!

We´re on our way ... Great!

But this doesn´t help us much regarding the basic question itself: who he was?

I haven´t got a clue!?

Anyone? Any ideas, suggestions, plausibilities or pure speculations ... whatever small or large, however far-fetched or not?

Who was this Monsieur Pe... ?

I actually read "Pecquet" in the first publication, not "Pecqnet", even if on the attached scan it's admittedly not very easy to ascertain. See it [in BHL] and [in Google Books].
Note that "-qn-" does not occur at all in French (nor, actually, in any of the western European languages I can think of right now)--so "Pecqnet" would probably imply a really, really exotic origin.

In the first publication (Bull.Sci.Nat.Géol. t.25), a "M. Pecquet" is cited in the descriptions of three birds; in the second publication (Illustr.Zool.), the same three species accounts all cite "M. Pesquet" instead:
* Psittacus Pe[c/s]quetii, Bull.Sci.Nat.Géol. t.25 vs. Illustr.Zool.
* Attagis Latreillei, Bull.Sci.Nat.Géol. t.25 vs. Illustr.Zool.: "Cette belle espèce conservée dans [la collection/le cabinet] de Mr. Pe[c/s]quet...", "This beautiful species preserved in [the collection/the cabinet] of Mr. Pe[c/s]quet..."
* Tinochorus Swainsonii, Bull.Sci.Nat.Géol. t.25 vs. Illustr.Zool.: "Cet oiseau est dans la collection de M. Pe[c/s]quet, à Caen", "This bird is in the collection of Mr. Pe[c/s]quet, in Caen."
...Additionally, the following similar double publication occurred a bit later:
* Rhynchaea Hilairea, Bull.Sci.Nat.Géol. t.26 vs. Illustr.Zool.: "...se trouve dans la collection de M. Pesquet", "...rests in the collection of Mr. Pesquet", was altered into "...se trouve dans la collection de M. Pesquet-Deschamps, à Caen", "...rests in the collection of Mr. Pesquet-Deschamps, in Caen."

I would assume that all these indeed refer to the same person. "Pecquet" and "Pesquet" could be pronounced identically in French, but the spelling "Pecquet" may be more widely known due to the French anatomist Jean Pecquet--which might quite easily be the origin of a mistake. (I doubt that he was cited by Buffon, though; his name appears in the Compléments de Buffon, which are included in some editions of "Buffon's complete works", but actually are a later work by Lesson. [Where he basically repeats once more what he had already published in the references listed above.])

One "M. Pesquet Deschamps", or "Pesquet-Deschamps", owner of a beautiful collection of birds in Caen, is cited a few times in the Mémoires de la société linnéenne de Normandie, vol.6 (published 1838 but supposed to cover the years 1834-38), including to report his death (in a rather long list of deceased persons; no date given). See also the Annuaire des cinq départements de la Normandie, 1835: "Il existe à Caen des collections particulières d'histoire naturelle, qui méritent d'être signalées. Ce sont celles de [...] MM. Lesauvage, Pesquet, de Roncherolles, pour l'ornithologie [...]", "There are in Caen private collections of natural history that are worth mentioning. These are those of [...] Messrs. Lesauvage, Pesquet, de Roncherolles, for ornithology [...]."

"Pesquet" is probably the correct spelling, with "Pesquet-Deschamps" (perhaps originally "Pesquet des Champs"?) a longer variant.

That's all I find right now.


PS - Correcting the French, if it is to be quoted "as is" (quite a few accent problems ):

"Ce magnifique perroquet nous a été communiqué par M. Pecquet, qui l’avait reçu par la voie du Hâvre, avec beaucoup d’oiseaux de la Patagonie et du territoire de la Plata. Son plumage indique un oiseau du Sud de la Patagonie, si nous en jugeons par l’Arara patagonica que nous avons figuré (Zool. coq., pl.35); mais d’un autre côté, il se pourrait qu’il fût originaire de la Nouvelle-Guinée. Enfin, le fragment que possède le Muséum paraît appartenir à cette espèce, bien qu’il y ait quelques différences dans les parties que représente le débris conservé dans les galeries, et celle de l’oiseau qui nous occupe."

Click to expand...

(Note that the first sentence is singular, "This magnificent parrot has been" etc.; it ended up plural in Florian's translation, probably as a result of the 's' that had accidentally been added to "perroquet".)

” ... par M. Pesquet, qui lʼavait reçu par la voie du Havre, de la Nouvelle-Galles du Sud, dans la Nouvelie-Hollande. Des fragments que possède le Muséum paraissent appartenir à cette espèce, bien quʼil y ait quelques différences entre les parties conservées dans les galeries et celles de lʼOiseau qui nous occupe.”

Click to expand...

(The second sentence is also a bit different from [clearer than, I think] the first publication, "Some fragments that are owned by the Museum seem to belong to this species, even though there are some differences between the parts kept in the galleries and those of the bird in question.")

No info here about any birds, but there certainly was a Norman family named Pesquet who apparently handed down the title 'sieur Deschamps'

http://asteria.fivecolleges.edu/findaids/mountholyoke/mshm168.html

Great work, guys!

Once again you´ve proven your searching skills ... well done.

And Laurent, Thanks for finding better versions, easier to read, of those first texts. Ok, so let´s forget about the "Pecqnet", and focus of Monsieur Pesquet (or Pecquet).

And the basic question: Who was he?

Disclaimer: Just to be on the safe side; so far I have no connection whatsoever (more than what Laurent has shown us) between this "our" Mr. (First name/s unknown) Pesquet/Pecquet and the "Pesquet-Deschamps, à Caen" I mentioned in Post #1. At least not in any direct connection to the Parrot. That´s just a name I happened to stumble upon, when searching for anything, anyone of a similar name, in that Era, connected to Birds. It might be him, it might not, but so far … I do not know.

But it sure looks like it´s him, doesn´t it?

So let´s walk down that lane … what about that "Jean Baptiste Pesquet (sieur Deschamps) of Normandy, France," (found by "narteb") in connection to "Caen"? (Caen, in northwestern France, the capital of the Basse-Normandie region. Not to be confused with Cannes, Southern France). Also Jobling's HBW Alive key for pesqueti.

So far we now know that there was a contemporary "M. Pesquet-Deschamps, à Caen" to "M. Pe[c/s]quet, à Caen", that (I agree, it has to be the same person) had a noteworthy Collection of Birds, well known, and spoken of, by several Ornithologist at the same time.

Maybe he is; Jean Baptiste Pesquet (ca. 1790-1819), from Haute-Normandie (!?), that died "à l’âge de peut-être 59 ans" (about the age of 59)? See link to Geneanet. But maybe that´s too early. Or is Pesquet a very common name?

Also see the earlier "Jean-Baptiste Pesquet, écuyer, sieur des Champs, auditeur en la Chambre des comptes, aides et finances de Normandie …" mentioned on Page 32 in: Inventaire sommaire des Archives départementales antérieures à 1790 (1897).

Does any of those makes us any wiser of who this Mystery man was?

PS: Also see my "... little side-step", if it might help!?

I think the reference to Le Havre port in the description makes the Normandie Pesquet more likely?

"mb1848", maybe I´m missing something ... but I don´t understand which Pesquet (or "Pesquet-Deschamps") you suggest? All (or he?), this far mentioned, was from Normandy (Normandie).

Caen, in today's Basse-Normandie, is situated 96 km South-west of Le Havre. Seine Maritime is 76 km East of Le Havre, both in today's Haute-Normandie.

The two regions, Basse-Normandie and Haute-Normandie, was created in 1956 and are both part of Normandy.

So; which "Pesquet" is it that you find "more likely". And why?

Cheers!

Sorry! Nevermind. I thought the choice was between a Norman Pesquet and a Pecnet from somewhere else.

Thanks, guys!

"mb1848", no problem ...

nartreb said:

No info here about any birds, but there certainly was a Norman family named Pesquet who apparently handed down the title 'sieur Deschamps'

http://asteria.fivecolleges.edu/findaids/mountholyoke/mshm168.html

Click to expand...

"nartreb, I e-mailed the Staff at Mount Holyoke College Archives and Special Collections, that posseses the Papers of "Jean Baptiste Pesquet (sieur Deschamps) of Normandy, France,", mentioned in your link (above), and this is what they replied:

"... Unfortunately the information we have does not include a birth or death certificates for Jean Baptiste Pesquet. There are legal documents but none include that information. There is also no information regarding his collecting."

Click to expand...

So, it´s a "dead end". Sorry, We´re back at Post #6, still dealing with an unknown Monsieur Pesquet (or "Pesquet-Deschamps"), without any first names whatsovever.

But it was sure worth a try!

What about this guy?

"Pesquet-Deschamps, à St.-Loup-de-Fribois." (attached)

Found under the head-line "Membres Non Résidans" (Non-resident Members, I assume?) for "Arrondissement de Lisieux" in Précis des Travaux de la Société Royale d'Agriculture et de Commerce de Caen, depuis son rétablissement en 1801 jusqu'en 1810 ... issued in 1827 (Page XXXVIII). See link (here)

The small village Saint-Loup-de-Fribois (in the Calvados department in the Basse-Normandie region in northwestern France) is situated only 40 km East of Caen and 77 km South of Le Havre ...

Is he maybe linked or equal to the "Pesquet (Evremond)", also from "Caen" ... mentioned (here)!?

Does anyone of you French knowing guys think those links gives us any reason, any clues, small or large, to keep on searching?

Or are we stuck? Is Mr. Pesquet (or "Pesquet-Deschamps", "Pesquet Des Champs" alt. "Pesquet Sieur Deschamps" lost in the shades for ever?

PS: And what does the "sieur" or "Sieur" part mean alt. indicate?

In my view sieur is shorthand for monsieur. It is not an official title. It can be used like Lord or Sir, but then for people who havn't received this title (yet). I think the Dutch Heer is an equivalent.

Theo

"Sieur" is tough to translate. Like many male titles, it comes from a root meaning "father", and can be translated as "lord". But it might be best translated as "sir" - it *might* indicate a form of minor nobility [e.g. knighthood], but it's also used for non-titled men when wishing to show extra respect. (In civil suits for example the litigants were often identified as "sieur..." even if they were commoners.) It's not an everyday title like "mister" (that would be "monsieur", never mind that
"monsieur" is simply "my sieur"). It's one step up.

In my view "sieur deschamps" was a conferred title, which later generations may not have wished to drop entirely but did not want to insist upon either. The de-aristocratization of names is a fairly common phenomenon in French history, for example the painter Degas (previously de Gas).

I have no idea what the Dutch do / did ...


In the Annuaire (1836), the simplest reading of would be that Pesquet-Deschamps of Caen, and Evremond Pesquet of St Loup, are two different people. Both are listed as landowners, and the proximity and the shared whiff of money do raise reasonable suspicion that they might be related. Add the mention in the Precis (1827) of a "Pesquet-Deschamps" in St Loup and the suspicion strengthens to the point one wonders if they could be the same person.

This is speculation until we can get some details like birth and death dates.

The name "Evremond" is rather unusual. Here's an interesting (if not clearly sourced) lead giving some details about an Evremond Pesquet des Champs from Caen in about the right time period: http://gw.geneanet.org/pierfit?lang=fr;p=evremond;n=pesquet+des+champs
There's info about his wife and children, but all it says about him is that he was a bodyguard for two kings. Doesn't sound like an ornithologically-minded guy, at first blush...

To recap, we have an 1827 listing of a M. Pesquet-Deschamps in St. Loup, then an 1834 Annuaire des cinq départements de la Normandie, citing a private collection held by "M. Pesquet des champs" in Caen, an 1836 Annuaire listing a M. Pesquet-Deschamps of Caen plus an "Evremond Pesquet" of St. Loup, then an 1836 Memoires of the Linnean Society citing the Caen collection of "M. Pesquet Deschamps" (also written in the same book as "Pesquet-Deschamps").

So, three spellings "Pesquet des Champs", "Pesquet Deschamps", "Pesquet-Deschamps", clearly refer to the same person, the owner of the collection. [I suppose it could be two people if, for example the collection was transferred to a close relative.] Evremond Pesquet of St Loup, presumably the same Evremond whose wife died in Caen, could well be the same person as the 1827 Pesquet-Deschamps of St Loup, and *might* also be the owner of the collection, but might not.

Thanks Theo and "nartreb"!

And an extra thanks to "natreb" for the summary, that about as far as I got myself ...

Ok, I think this is as far we get on this man and "his" Parrot. After this my somewhat "wild-goose-chase" trying to trace him, or just to find any link, to any Pesquet, whatsoever, from that time, in that certain location, I feel we´re stuck. Any further research will require fluent knowledge of French, access to local archives and a lot, and I mean a lot, of time… far more than I can master.

In my Swedish MS I will settle with an entry, something like this:
● the Common name Pesquet’s Parrot Psittrichas fulgidus (as well as the synonyms "Pecquetii/pecquetii" and "Pesquetii/pesquetii")
.. commemorate the totally unknown French M. [= Monsieur] Pesquet, de Caen (Mr. Pesquet, from Caen) equal of Monsieur Pesquet-Deschamps, à Caen (Mr. Pesquet-Deschamps, from Caen) a k a simply Monsieur "Pecquet" (most likely a error!) alt. (in various ways of writing it): Monsieur "Pesquet des Champs", "Pesquet Deschamps", "Pesquet-Deschamps" or "Pesquet Sieur des Champs" alt. "Pesquet (sieur Deschamps)".

Who he was we simply do not know!

More than; he supposedly had a private collection of various Birds and that he was the one that obtained the Type specimen in the French Port of Le Havre, then handing it over to "M. Canivet" (most likely Monsieur Emmanuel Jacques Canivet) who, in his turn, forwarded it to Lesson – who described the "species" (the "Pe[c/s]quetii", i. e. a female specimen, of Lesson's own fulgidus from 1830).

There are a few candidates, in the area surrounding Caen and Le Havre, of whom he might have been our "Pesquet", but there seem to be no certain evidence, nor even the smallest hints, connecting either one of them to this particular Parrot.

That´s about it!

Mr.Pesquet (alt. Pesquet-Deschamps) seem to stay in the shades. A White spot on the Eponymical map. One of very few that we haven´t been able to trace. In a way it feels good. There ought to be some remaining Mysteries left in the World.

Pesquet … over and out!

Laurent ...

I still potter about with my finicky entry regarding our mysterious Mr. Pesquet …

And I´m stuck on two, maybe three, small, hopefully quick (!?), questions:

First; regarding Lesson two "OD's; those description of "Pecquetii" (June 1831) vs "Pesquetii" (November 1831, published 1832)

"Ce magnifique perroquet nous a été communiqué par M. Pecquet, qui l’avait reçu par la voie du Hâvre, avec beaucoup d’oiseaux de la Patagonie et du territoire de la Plata."

versus

"Ce magnifique perroquet nous a été communiqué par M. Pesquet, qui l’avait reçu par la voie du Havre, de la Nouvelle-Galles du Sud, dans la Nouvelle-Hollande."

Click to expand...

Are those, Hâvre vs Havre, still the same place? Are sure he´s talking about the well-known coastal City/Port of Le Havre, in Normandy, France? I simply wonder why he changed that particular spellling? Or is it a place in "Nouvelle-Galles du Sud" (New South Wales, in "New Holland" i.e. Australia")? Sydney!?

-----

And; if you or anyone else is interested, I think I´ve got one little step further regarding when he died …

If I understand the following article properly:
De Caumont, M. 1838. Extrait des rapports sur les travaux annuels de la société (1), Anné 1833-1834; Rapport lu à la Séance publique tenue à Falaise, le Juin 1834. in Mémoires de la société linnéenne de Normandie, Années 1834, 35, 36, 37, 38. Vol 6: pp. 1-8.

Pages 1 and 7-8 attached. The part between is all part of the same Rapport. Link to full Volume (here). Beware: It´s a thick document to download (vol. 1-6, all in one; 41,8 MB heavy), the pages that I´m referring to (are, in that pdf/document): pp. 551-558).

… Monsieur "Pesquet Deschamps" apparently passed away between 1833 and 1834: " … don’t la collection d'oiseaux est une des plus belles du département."

Isn´t that so?

After having this confirmed I hope I can let go of him … but who knows, we´ll see.

Cheers!

PS. Note that he, in the volume before (covering the years 1830-33, p. XVIII, in the same pdf; p.240) appears in the "Liste de MM. les Memres de la société linnéenne de Normandie", for "Membres résidans" as: "Pesquay-Deschamps, propriétaire, membre de l'Association normande"!? (attached, as well) Yet another spelling of his name! It seems purely hopeless to get a grip of this guy! With all those various versions alt. spellings of his name I assume he couldn´t have been a very well-known man.

PPS. And he is not in the list of "Membres décédés" in 1833 (p. 36, or in the pdf; 282).

Calalp said:

Hâvre vs Havre, still the same place?

Click to expand...

I see no reason to doubt it. It is a rather common error in French, even nowadays, to add a circumflex to the noun havre (= haven/harbour). One explanation that I have seen is that the old name of the town was Le Havre de Grâce (Haven/Harbour of Grace), and that the circumflex of Grâce "contaminated" the word Havre. Anyway, the graphy "Le Hâvre", for the town, has been common in the past, even though it is now regarded as incorrect.

… Monsieur "Pesquet Deschamps" apparently passed away between 1833 and 1834: " … dont la collection d'oiseaux est une des plus belles du département."
Isn´t that so?

Click to expand...

Seems so.
This is a text read at a public meeting of the society on 5 Jun 1834, and he says he has to talk about the "pertes douloureuses que nous avons faites depuis l'année dernière" (painful losses that we experienced since last year).
In the previous volume, there are texts about the meetings of 1832-33, the last one dated 27 May 1833.
He must have died between these two dates.

Thanks, Laurent, …

… I just wanted to be on the safe side!

If nothing sensational turns up, this thread will stay:

Pesquet … over and out!

---

One last try …

Regarding our search for the shady Mr. "Pesquet …"

I e-mailed the Archives départementales du Calvados in Caen, and asked them if they know of any Monsieur Pesquet-Deschamps deceased between May 1833 and June 1834, and this is what they answered:

Monsieur,
Suite à votre mail je l’ai regret de vous faire savoir que je n’ai pas trouvé dans les tables décennales de CAEN entre 1823 et 1853 de décès de Pesquet-Deschamps. Il est fait mention du décès d’un PESQUET-DESCHAMPS-EVREMOND dans l’acte de mariage de sa fille le 16 avril 1849 à Caen. Famille originaire de Pierrefitte-en-Auge (commune du Calvados, arrondissement de Pont-l’Evêque).

Cordialement,

Click to expand...

I think I get the drift of it, that we´re out of luck, but I don´t feel I get the whole picture ...

Once again that even more mysterious "Evremond" pops up (see post No. 13 & 15)!?

Anyone, whith proper understanding of French, feel like translating?