Vosmaer's Eclectus Parrot ssp. (1 Viewer)

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Which is the proper spelling of the Given name of the Dutch guy commemorated in ...

vosmaeri as in:
• the Eclectus Parrot subspecies Eclectus roratus vosmaeri ROTSCHILD 1922 (here, in text), as "Larius [sic] roratus vosmaeri":

... P. L. S. Müller has applied the name roratus to Vosmaer’s bird, which was ... and I propose for it the name of vosmaeri, nom. nov. ...

... which ought to be in reference to Vosmaer's "Purpur-roode Lori", from 1769 (i.e. Lory Rouge-Pourpré, (de Ceylan); here, by "A. Vosmaer"* (with a Plate, here).

Is it "Arnout Vosmaer" (1720–1799) like in today's Key, or should it be: "Aernout Vosmaer", as in (for example) in our Dutch friend (and BirdForum member) Justin Jansen's Paper The Bird collection of the Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle: the first years (1793-1823), here (on page 86) ... ?!?

English Wikipedia here, German ditto here (both have him as: "Arnout Vosmaer").

However, for other example/s where it's written "Aernout Vosmaer", see here, here (in text), or here versus "Arnout Vosmaer", here, here and here. Or elsewhere, all over, in similar ways ...

And note that (the Dutch) zoologist/ornithologist L. C. ('Kees') Rookmaaker wrote the name "Aernout Vosmaer" ...

Sigh, I simply don't know what to think ...

Which version is the most correct one?

Which version to use ...

Björn

---

*BHL (Biodiversity Heritage Library) itself has the Author of the latter piece as: "Vosmaer, A. (Arnout), 1720-1799" (here).

 

[l_raty]

Which version is the most correct one?

He is Arnout, son of Jacob Vosmaar [sic] and Susanna Arkell, on his baptism record, 28 Oct 1720 (attached).

 

[l_raty]

See also : Geslachten der vogelen - Biodiversity Heritage Library

 

[Björn Bergenholtz]

Thanks Laurent!

But ... to me, in the record of baptism it looks like it's written "Arnéut", or "Arne-út" ...



Sigh, once again ... I'm nothing but confused.

 

[l_raty]

But ... to me, in the record of baptism it looks like it's written "Arnéut", or "Arne-út" ...

The "accent" is above the 'u'; it is present on many other 'u's on this page and I have frequently seen it in old Dutch handwritten documents. As 'ú' is not normally used in Dutch, I have always assumed that this was simply how the letter was written. (This being presumably analogous to how 'u' was written in Kurrentschrift ?)

Compare the 'o' to those in 'gedoopt' (= baptized) and 'octob' (= October), towards the end of the record.

Definitely "Arnout" for me.

 

[l_raty]

See also : Geslachten der vogelen - Biodiversity Heritage Library

Also in full on the title page, actually : Geslachten der vogelen - Biodiversity Heritage Library
(This is a book he edited and published, so should be trustworthy, I would think.)

En naar die Vertaaling uitgegeeven en met eene Voorre-
den, Aantekeningen en Naamlyst der voornaamste
Schryveren die over de Vogelen geschreeven
hebben vermeerderd, door
ARNOUT VOSMAER​

(And published according to this Translation and augmented with a Foreword, Annotations and a List of the names of the main Writers who have written about the Birds, by ARNOUT VOSMAER)

 

[JustinJansen]

Here some info on Vosmaer.