![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Did anyone confirm how La Perouse died in 1828?
News is being bruited about that La Bousolle has only just been found, rather than in 1964 as is mentioned in this article. See, for example http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/05/10/laperouse.wrecked/
It's worth noting that the details here jibe with the details in the article (notably, the placement of the wreck off the island of Vanikoro in the Solomons). I suspect it's just a case of the media misunderstanding the story, and that this was just an expedition to recover some of the already-known wreck. Can anyone shed any light on this?
CNN are confused. The Hakluyt society's edition of La Pérouse's journals (published in 1995) give a brief history of the searches that have been carried out over the years, and they record a visit by the French patrol boat Dunkerquoise in 1964, to bring some items to the surface. The French mapped the sites of other items, and it seems to have been a regular habit of the French Navy to periodically send expeditions to Vanikoro to recover items and check on the state of the monuments: this report is about the results from the latest of them.
Conférence de presse Expédition Vanikoro 2005
Ecb 19:39, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
As to the question above, on how La Pérouse died: He is presumed to have died in 1788, not 1828, and no one knows how he died -- whether it was in the initial wreck off the coast of Vanikoro, or whether he survived the wreck & was then killed or died on the island, or if he was one of the survivors who sailed off in a boat the survivors allegedly made from pieces of the wreckage. Primula ( talk) 03:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
As I was going through and referencing this article, I noticed that, when discussing the death of de Langle, one of the officers on the expedition, it claimed he was the captain of the Astrolabe. My source (Novaresio, Paolo (1996). The Explorers) claimed he was captain of the Boussole, the other ship. I changed this in the article(as I felt a sourced fact superceeds an unsourced one) but I suspect it may be a controversial or unknown point, so further reasearch would be appreciated. Thanks! JesseW 22:12, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
After looking into my copy of La Pérouse's journals (see the comment above), I'm sure that de Langle was captain of L'Astrolabe until his death, although he was promoted afterwards (odd though that might seem!). Here's the source, for future reference.
Appendix II of volume 2 of "The Journal of Jean-François de Galaup de la Pérouse, 1785–1788" ( ISBN 0904180395) gives the muster rolls of the two ships. It includes all the various promotions that occurred on the voyage, and shows that:
Perhaps your source mistakenly assumed that de Langle's promotion in April 1788 was to the captaincy of La Boussole.
Reading between the lines, it appears that ranks were assigned back in France, on the basis of comments by officers sent from foreign ports (Manila, Macao & Kamchatka). Dispatches took months, perhaps years, to get back. In de Langle's case, he was promoted in April 1788 because La Pérouse had sent back favourable comments about him and because France hadn't heard of his death: the first news of it was carried from Port Jackson to France by four of the redundant transport ships of the First Fleet, all of which set sail in July 1788.
Ecb 19:37, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
The result of the vote was move. David Kernow 21:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Jean-François de Galaup, count de La Pérouse → Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse : Consistent use of French; more accurate.
Please add * Support or * Oppose followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using "~~~~"
Bearing in mind it's an article in a general encyclopedia, anyone else feel this article suffers from footnote overkill? I suggest a single acknowledgement of the Novaresio book suffices, perhaps under a "Sources" heading. I wouldn't delete the work done to detail the references, however; I'd transfer it to a subpage. What do people think?
Thanks,
David Kernow
11:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
It is stated in the french wiki ("Exécution de Louis XVI" under wiki-fr) that among the last words of Louis XVI prior to his execution (21 January 1793) was a question to a naval officer inquiring of any news of the La Pérouse expedition. Anyone have any info regarding this? -- Mille Sabord
It may be apocryphal, but many sources on La Pérouse and Louis XVI mention this. He (the about-to-be-beheaded king) is supposed to have said "A-t-on des nouvelles de M. de la Pérouse?" ("Is there any news of Mr. La Pérouse?"). Louis XVI did take a strong personal interest in the expedition, but it's hard to believe this is what was on his mind as he climbed up the scaffold. Primula ( talk) 03:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't have time at the moment, but there are details concerning La Perouse's visit to Nootka Sound and the rest of the NW Coast in Derek Pethick's books on the marine exploration/fur trade in that area; a mountain on one of the Queen Charlotte Islands is also named for him; I'll get its location refs and be back later. Skookum1 17:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems there is spelling mistakes in this article:
1) "Lapérouse" in word word instead of "La Pérouse" in two words (as it should be it seems)
2) "Galaup" instead of "Galoup"
can somebody fix it ? the 2nd mistake is in the article title even ...
-- OC 08:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Is his original name "Jean-François Galaup" or "Jean-François de Galaup"? The title of the article includes the "de", but the text just calls him "Jean-François Galaup". JackofOz 04:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
There's quite a bit of disagreement/variation in the spelling of La Pérouse's name. Galaup, however, is spelled Galaup in nearly every source I've ever looked at. La Pérouse's given name at birth was Jean-François de Galaup. I believe the nobiliary "de" had been in the family for several generations by the time he was born.
"La Pérouse" is a different matter. There's a long discussion of this question in John Dunmore's introduction to his translation of the La Pérouse journals (Hakluyt Society 1995, see pages xi-xiv). Briefly: The "de la Pérouse" was added to his name when he joined the navy, to make him sound more aristocratic. Official documents during his lifetime always use 2 words for the name. La Pérouse himself always signed his name "Laperouse," not even bothering with the accent mark, but his writing tended to be not terribly scrupulous about such things, and he often elided words with their articles (e.g., "leurope," "lamerique"). After his disappearance, his surviving sisters petitioned for the use of his name for themselves and their heirs. Permission was granted in 1815, but the name was misspelled "La Peyrouse," with a "y." The spelling was officially "fixed" in 1839, but now it was rendered one word: Lapérouse. Modern-day Lapérouses all spell their name this way. La Pérouse scholars have gone both ways. The important thing, I think, is consistency. Primula ( talk) 04:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC) The "ey" in La Peyrouse is just another way, and probably a better way, of representing the "é" in La Pérouse. It's probably a better way because the accent above the "e", which makes it a different letter in French with a different pronunciation and meaning, "é", tends to get left off in English writings. (Kattigara)
Where is the evidence that a masscre occurred? GhostofSuperslum 14:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Here it says he arrived at Botany Bay on 26 January 1788.
History of Australia (1788–1850) says: "26 January 1788 was also the date that the French expedition of two ships led by Admiral Jean-François de La Pérouse arrived off Botany Bay and Sydney Cove."
First Fleet says: "[Phillip's] party returned [to Botany Bay from Port Jackson] on 23 January. The party was startled when two French ships came into sight and entered Botany Bay. This turned out to be a scientific expedition led by Jean-François de La Pérouse. The French group remained until 10 March ....".
So, it's not clear to me exactly where they first encountered the British, or exactly when. Did they first meet at Botany Bay on c. 23 January and then follow the British up to Sydney Cove, where they remained for some time; or did they first meet at Sydney Cove on 26 January? -- JackofOz ( talk) 04:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Having posted the information on suitable naming conventions for this article for over one month with only one comment (in the negative) I still do not feel it is appropriate to move without making the matter known. This naming convention has some controversial aspects to it as some are strident about conforming to a naming tradition that is contrary to the bulk of French references. This seems to be a view held particularly strongly by a New Zealand scholar who has done translation work and authored articles on the subject of Lapérouse. However his views do not seem to be supported by any significant French institution, indeed the contrary is the case. Accordingly I proposed the Article is moved (re-named). My reasons and appropriate ref's are detailed on the Discussion page as is a response from ( Ecb (talk) 22:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)), and a reply to that response with further clarifying detail. Felix505 ( talk) 13:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Feel free to re-request on the issue of the capitilization of 'comte' (no consensus on that was found in this discussion). Regards, Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 20:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse →
Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse — The current naming is entirely at odds with the French Navy and their official biography of Lapérouse and the naming of a The French Cruiser Laperouse, c.1898 and a (currently serving) hydrographic survey ship (Bâtiment hydrographique) Lapérouse A791, the Ministère de la défense (French Ministry of Defence) documentation on Lapérouse and his voyages including recent publications, the French Ministry of Culture and other significant French bodies including the maritime museum (The Musée National de la Marine) and the Lapérouse Museum. Comprehensive detail is available on the articles Discussion page under the heading "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse -or- Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse" .
Felix505 (
talk)
13:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
-Skinsmoke- I must disagree that the Australian usage is La Perouse, in fact the opposite seems to be the case. For example the Australian government normally uses "Lapérouse" in publications, ie < http://www.collectionsaustralia.net/org/98/about>. Also have a look at the migration museum, powerhouse museum, and nsw dept of the environment, they use "Lapérouse". < http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/nationalparks/parkhome.aspx?id=N0066> and < http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/online-exhibitions/>. We should not be confused by references to the suburb of La Perouse in Sydney either on maps or in articles as that spelling is of course going to be used in that instance. I have noted extensive use of Lapérouse in Australian reference materials and museums in that country seem to be using Lapérouse as well. I think the Australian maritime museum normally uses Lapérouse as well, except of course when they are referring to the suburb. Another example is the Lapérouse Museum in Sydney, (it is described as "Laperouse Museum, end of Anzac Parade, La Perouse, Sydney, NSW 2036") < http://www.marineartistsaustralia.com.au/index.htm As for the capital "C" (Compte) I have noted that French sources including the French navy do not use that so maybe we should not start using it here. They use " Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse". If you have a look at who has done the editing on the French WP La Perouse article you may note that it appears to have had some influence from two editors who may have a bit of a paradigm mindset about this. see <fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Jacques_Thomas> Jacques Thomas appears to be quite strident about this matter and yet the information he gives to support his assertions (such as his standpoint being supported by the Ministry of Culture) appear to conflict with the facts . The French Minstry of Culture apparently do not support his views and have made this clear. Indeed the French WP needs attention as well as it is at odds with the facts.
However the important issue here is that the man was a Frenchman and an important figure in the 'Age of Enlightenment' as well as being a highly significant figure in French naval and maritime history. This article should not be referring to the man as anything other than Lapérouse as that is the accepted and officially recognised formatting of his name used by the French Government, the French Navy and the French Ministry of Culture. I have even seen photos on an English language website showing the French naval ship Lapérouse with it's name displayed on the ship but then referring to it as this commissioned French Naval Ship as the "La Perouse" despite the correct name being clearly visible in the photo. This is a bit linguistically presumptious I think. My primary concern is that by having Wikipedia use an incorrect name it then perpetuates the error and allows it to propagate further. Surely the ultimate authority here should be the French Ministry of Culture, the French Navy, the French Museums and the mans own family, not Wikipedia editors such as ourselves. WP should be accurate and authoritative. The accuracy here is in question The authoritative aspect should be answered by referring to authoritative sources, the obvious authoritative sources are surely those represented by significant institutions of the French government and the nations historic and cultural bodies, not by citing sources that are influenced by other factors. I would hope the French would not rename Capt Cook 'Capitaine Lacuisinier' so lets try and get the name of a significant French historical figure correctly described in this article. Felix505 ( talk) 15:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I come to this discussion page as an outcome of a wikitravel edit.
When setting about editing the wikitravel entries on the locality of La Perouse (sic) in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia I found a link on that page to the the Wikipedia article on the suburb of La Perouse in Sydney. That page subsequently linked to the Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse article.
I query the spelling of the mans name. I am concerned that this is an anomaly first established by scholars of the past anglicising the spelling of his name. Most of the french language ( and many of the english) sources I can turn up on web searches spell it Lapérouse and I understand he also signed his name in that way. Confusingly [1] Lapérouse described himself at the top of a private letter of 3 july 1783 as "M. De La Perouse" (It may be De LaPerouse but there appears to be a space between La and Perouse). However he then appears to sign the letter at the bottom as "Laperouse".
I have read that some (french) naval records use the spelling La Perouse but I have not been able to locate any. Again I suspect the writers concerned may have anglicising the spelling of his name.
There is a live link on the La Perouse suburb Wikipedia page that describes "Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse" (a link to this WP article). I consider that this may put both the La Perouse (the suburb in sydney) Wikipedia article and the Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse (the man) Wikipedia article at odds to the correct spelling of the name.
Most importantly I note that the The Musée National de la Marine [2] refers to him as "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse". I think that source is more credible than either historic or contemporary scholarly papers and articles that are dealing with the subject by way of translations of text and other content.
There are many journals and other texts that refer to him as Lapérouse, including many French language publications, including also french/canadian. A NSW state library search for Lapérouse [3] a very quick count turns up 25 of the 67 hits as using the La Perouse spelling or other variations. The bulk of these La-Parouse entries appear to be titled to translated works. This leaves the overwhelming majority of 42 articles as having the spelling Lapérouse in the titles. It is of note that in most cases they appear to be the french publications that use Lapérouse and the english language or translated works that use La Perouse.
Obviously if a search is done for La Perouse the documents concerning the suburb of La Perouse then come into play and make it too confusing to sort out the background noise.. also: La Tragique Expédition de Lapérouse et Langle by Paul Fleuriot de Langle (1954). Jean-François de Galaup, Comte de LaPérouse, Dictionary of Canadian Biography IV, 282-83. also: A commemorative stamp depicting French explorer Jean Francois de Galaup is in the 1988 French series honoring explorers and navigators, author: Thompson, Jo-Ann, Publisher: American Publishing Company of New York, Publication Name: Stamps, Subject: Hobbies and crafts, ISSN: 0038-9358, Year: 1993 [4] describes "2.00+.50f featuring the explorers bust and a map of his explorations described "La Perouse".
I have edited the Wikitravel page to reflect the name - Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse - as I believe I have found a sufficient enough body of information to do that withinn the Wikitravel sites less rigid guidlines. As this site represents a more 'encyclodedic' regime I feel compelled to commit this edit and re-name suggestion to debate and scrutiny. Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse is a significant person of the Age of Enlightenment and a significant person of interest to the early history of australia and the exploration of Terra Australis and the South Pacific.
I think he deserves to have his name spelt correctly. I feel that the man himself was probably the best authority on the spelling of his own name most especially as apparently he suffixed it in this manner himself, The de Lapérouse suffix was apparently added by Jean-François de Galaup himself.
It seems we may be dealing with a historical inaccuracy arising from early anglicising of Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse's name.
I would appreciate other editors opinions and views on this before I rush in and make suitable changes to both the articles name and the content. Felix505 ( talk) 04:29, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you Ecb for your considered response to my appeal for examination of the formatting of La Pérouse/LaPérouse/Lapérouse. I am not suggesting the anomaly has arisen only from anglicising early translations. It seems the confusion is a lot more generalised over both time and language. I have read that the French 'modernised' or just changed the name over time. I have read that Lapérouse indicated some ambiguity himself. I also have read that the French navy currently uses and has previously used La Pérouse. You have alluded to that yourself with a document reference.
When I started looking into this matter earlier I found many statements were unsupported when I did some digging of my own. I have unfortunately since deleted my browsing histories on my investigations at that time but I do recall that on that occasion if I did a search and found either a historic document or a contemporary one that was in the English language, translated from the French I found name La Pérouse. If I then did a search for the original French language document I often found Lapérouse. This may indicate some tranlation errrors or simply a desire for unifomity by some English language scolars and researchers toward La Perouse and to Lapérouse by the French. Pity though to just ignore the French name treatment especially when it is coming from authoritative sources such as the French Navy and the Ministry of Culture.. There is no doubt in my mind though that many French texts have recently gone about some revisionism. Indeed changing La Pérouse to Lapérouse, or alternatively Lapérouse to La Pérouse. It all certainly adds to the confusion.
If looking at the The Musée National de la Marine [5] refers to him as "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse". I think this French national institution must be given some credibility in their naming treatment of a significant national figure and representative of the French influence upon the 'Age of Enlightenment'. Additionally I see many comments about the French navy using La Pérouse as opposed to Lapérouse, but do not find any strong evidence of that actually happening.
When the matter is investigated I note the contrary The French Navy when naming the ship Lapérouse (A 791) have not used La Pérouse but have indeed used Lapérouse. It is often stated that they have not done this however that is clearly an error as both the French Navy and the Ministry of Defence are quite clear on this. It also appears to be painted on the ship.
Below is a description of that vessel: (Le bâtiment hydrographique de deuxième classe (BH) Lapérouse a été construit par la Direction des Constructions Navales à Lorient.), Sur cale le 11 juin 1985, Lancé le 14 novembre 1986. Mis au service actif le 20 avril 1988. So a French naval ship in current service carries the name "Lapérouse". Au sein de la flotte du Service Hydrographique et Océanographique de la Marine (SHOM). Depuis sa mise en service, le Lapérouse est basé à Brest." Fittingly the ship is tasked to hydro_oceanographique research and based at Brest.
This link < http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/decouverte/equipements/batiments_de_soutien/batiments/hydro_oceanographique/laperouse_a_791> goes to the ministry of defence publication on the ship Bâtiment hydrographique Lapérouse A791. The above is a publication of Site officiel de la marine nationale. It describes the ship, its colours (Fanion) and coat of arms (Tape de bouche) stating "Lapérouse", and gives what appears to be an official account of the history of the French naval officer Lapérouse published by the Navy. (Biographie de Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse (1741-1788)) and a history of his voyages of discovery, (L'expédition de Lapérouse). This ship named is also fully described in the document available at < http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/content/download/44385/442990/file/Laperouse%20A791.pdf> This documentation somewhat contradicts a lot of the commentary I have seen about on the web stating that the French navy refer to the man as something other than Lapérouse. Simply put this is not so, the French Navy are referring to him as Lapérouse in both historical accounts and back in 1985 they named a ship after him, using the spelling Lapérouse. As he was a serving officer of some distinction in the French Navy I think we should accord some credibility to the official publications and naming protocols of the French Navy.
A search of < http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/dicodsearch/dicodadvancedsearch> all articles (marine) will turn up many Defence ministry and naval docs pertaining to Lapérouse (30) and La pérouse(15)
Also the Ministère de la défense (French Ministry of Defence) < http://jdb.marine.defense.gouv.fr/batiment/lpo>describes BH Lapérouse, "Le bâtiment hydrographique de deuxième classe (BH) Lapérouse a été construit par la Direction des Constructions Navales à Lorient. Also < http://jdb.marine.defense.gouv.fr/tag/Lapérouse> Journaux de bord : Marine nationale Recherche Keyword "Lapérouse" 18 matches on page.
Exposition Lapérouse is an exhibition copyrighted to the Copyright Ministère de la Défense, (French Ministry of the Defense) was held April 2 to June 26 2005 at the Mussée of Maritime history of Nouméa, exposition "Expedition Laperouse, The Road of the Echanges". Clearly they have called the man Lapérouse.
I note the NSW government publication on the subject of Lapérouse < http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibition/objectsthroughtime/laperouse/> uses the Lapérouse spelling. The authoritative source in this case being The Migration Heritage Centre at the Powerhouse Museum. The Powerhouse Museum in Sydney Australia is not a lightweight resource and should also be accorded some credibility in their research and diligence when handling such matters. However just to completely contradict this I note the cover illustration from Atlas du Voyage de La Pérouse used by the migration Heritage section uses the alternative spelling of La Pérouse. La Pérouse is a suburb in Sydney and http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibition/objectsthroughtime/stump/ has a significant place in the early colonial history of the Australian nation. This webpage holds some reasonable historic record concerning Lapérouse: [6]. It appears that the Australian sources including Museums and the Parks service have clearly attempted to clarify their spelling in a historic context.
Other sources: Musée Lapérouse Exposition temporaire consacrée à l’expédition TARA ARCTIC au Musée Lapérouse du 11 juin au 19 septembre 2010
Mystery of the disapearance of Monsieur de Lapérouse : Vanikoro wreckage - Hypothetical visit of New Caledonia-Wreckage of Jean-François de Galaup, count de Lapérouse.< http://www.croixdusud.info/hist_eng/laperouse_eng.php>(croixdusud.info New Caledonia)
Association Lapérouse Albi-France Musée Lapérouse, square Botany Bay 41 rue Porta 81000 ALBI (France)
Un bref historique, de 1785 à nos jours, has 14 matches to the name Lapérouse in this official French Ministry of Defence document and none to La Pérouse. < http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/actualite_et_dossiers/expedition_vanikoro_2005/un_peu_d_histoire>
I refer also to the websites:
Publications:
I think Wikipedia needs to give some credibility to the French navy, the Frence Ministry of Defence, The French Maritime Museum and other credible French historical bodies including the Lapérouse Museum which clearly describe Lapérouse rather than La Pérouse.
Frankly I feel awkward leaping in and challenging those who may have done some considerable research in the past but there appears to be a bit of a paradigm at hand here and some of the information taken at face value by many is just clearly incorrect. By example [Ecb] you yourself refer to the current flagged ship of the French Navy as being called La Pérouse, yet it is not, rather it is called Lapérouse A791, and yes it is a in the Service Hydrographique et Océanographique de la Marine (a naval service hydrographic and oceangraphic survey ship).
I assume the 19C French ship being refered to is the Laperouse Class Unprotected Cruisers. French Laperouse Class Cruisers of the 1870's and 1880's included D'Estaing, Laperouse, Nielly and Primauguet.
They were wooden hulled ships with Iron beams., these ships had plough bows with a forecastle. Displacement: 2363 tons, Speed 15 Knots Compliment: 264 Armament: Fifteen 5.5 inch M1870M guns, which were later replaced in Primauget with Quick Firing Conversions. also each ship had Eight 1 pounder revolvers.
La Classe de Laperouse les Croiseurs sans défense. Les photographies et l'histoire des Croiseurs de Classe de Laperouse français des 1870 et les 1880 y compris D'Estaing, Laperouse, Nielly et Primauguet. Information is available at: [7]
Laperouse1877, Wrecked 1898 < http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/cruisers3.htm>
Under the circumstances this Wikipedia page comes as no surprise to me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_cruiser_Lapérouse:
From < http://combatfleetoftheworld.blogspot.com/2010/05/future-of-french-navy-through-storm-but_12.html> and referring to ships by 'class' in the French Navy:
Bibliothèque numérique proposée par la Bibliothèque nationale de France < http://gallica.bnf.fr/> < http://gallica.bnf.fr/?lang=EN>Gallica
Bibliotheque Toulouse, France
Also < http://gallica.bnf.fr/Search?ArianeWireIndex=index&p=1&lang=FR&q=laperouse> I think gives some pause to the argument that the French commonly called this man by other than Lapérouse in a historical context. The Bibliothèque nationale de France has illustrations including maps, portraiture engravings and publications describing Lapérouse in abundance.
I have no investment in this one way or the other, I just see a conflict with the facts may be at hand and in my opinion Wikipedia should err on the side of the French Naval, Defence and Museum authorities in this matter.
To the contrary of the bulk of the information I have provided above I note the following: Jacques Thomas, La Perouse or Laperouse legitimacy of spelling, in "Bulletin of the Society for Historical Studies of New Caledonia", No. 71, 1987 outlines that...(comprehensive study that demonstrates, with strong support from the Institute France and the Ministry of Culture, the name La Perouse must be written in two words, as he was during his lifetime). Jacques Thomas, Epilogue to the question of the spelling of the name La Perouse, in "Acta Geographica" No. 1508, mars/2003, Geography Society, 184, bd. Saint-Germain 75006 Paris. Jacques Thomas also states his case with some vigour on his Wikipedia discussion page. However I struggle to find support for his assertions from the quarters that he refers to.
I note that the Ministry of Culture does not do what Jacques Thomas believes they are doing, indeed it appears it does quite the opposite. On the webpage < http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/actualites/communiq/albanel/laperouse.htm> is a photo of France's Minister for Culture and Communication opening l’exposition Lapérouse au Musée de la Marine (19 mars 2008) France's maritime museum, the Musée National de la Marine is, alongside the Central Naval Museum of Saint Petersburg, founded in 1709, the oldest maritime museum in the world. In 1748, Henri-Duhamel du Monceau, Inspector-General of the French Navy, presented his collection of model ships and naval machinery to King Louis XV. They were set out in the Marine Room at the Louvre, for the instruction of students of the newly-founded school of naval engineering and architecture. This organisation uses the spelling Lapérouse. The publication 2e Cahier du Conseil national des parcs et jardins=Le voyage des plantes-Les jardins, acteurs culturels de la biodiversité< http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/politique-culturelle/Voyage_des_plantes.pdf> also uses Lapérouse universally, It is a fairly recent Ministry of Culture publication so it seems that no one has told the people at the Ministry of Culture. I have given fuller reference to the Musée National de la Marine above.
As to the FRAN document they are far from convincing and offer as evidence an image of the signature of Lapérouse, as one word, somewhat denying their own argument. They also state that current Lapérouse's also prefer to use one word as their name. With due respect to Dunmore's scholarly achievements, maybe he has it wrong in this matter. [Ecb] I did note your comments about Lapérouse skipping word spaces in his writting but the body of French acceptance of this spelling is quite overwhelming. We must also consider that it was Lapérouse who 'made up' this name as a suffix and if he then chose to sign it as one word, well maybe that was his way of telling us what he intended to do with the name, maybe he was just calling himself Lapérouse as indicated in his handwritten script. Really I think the body of evidence is somewhat in favour of the spelling Lapérouse unless Wikipedia wishes to just ignore the overwhelming majority of the French authorities and academic institutions and press on with other ideas. Maybe someone has some convincing evidence to support the La Perouse spelling, I remain open minded on the subject although quite frankly it is a bit of a struggle to do so. Felix505 ( talk) 20:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Bonjour, My name is Jacques Thomas and I like to say that 'Contra factum non valet argumentum'. Practically, in all the writings of the time, like his own Journal, on the medal especially founded for the departure of the frigates, the name of La Pérouse is always spelled in two words. The exception comes from his signature but at the time, most of the famous French personalities, not to say all of them, whose the name was spelled in two words were signing in a linked manner, in one word. Used to justify the name spelled in one word, this fact has no juridical value. John Dunmore who graces me with his friendship, is surely the most complete, the most precise, the surer of all those who wrote on La Pérouse. He always writes the name in two words. I have made a long study of the correct spelling of the name La Pérouse or Lapérouse (almost 400 pages with correspondence, letters, messages, newspapers articles) and I dare to say that nobody has a better knowledge of the matter than I could have, as the greatest authorities acknowledge it. The navigator made his name after this of a farm named Pérouse which his father had given to him. During all his life, he was named La Pérouse, by His Majesty the King Himself. As he disappeared without having any child, his two sisters and their husbands took for themselves the name La Pérouse but made an official request. Their request was accepted in 1815, but unfortunately with a Y : La Peyrouse. They must have requested for the spelling to be rectified. In 1817, in a letter, chief of the family, Léon de La Pérouse officially required that his name is spelled La Pérouse. The two families made use of this name so spelled up to the end of the century when they were legally obliged to adopt the form Lapérouse because, in 1839, a legal decision had fixed this spelling after the signature of the navigator. What is for a jurist a fault, a signature having no value in such a case. It is the reason why today, the families are named Lapérouse. But the name of the navigator must be spelled La Pérouse. It is a grave historical error to call him Lapérouse which he certainly would not have appreciated. The Institut de France is the supreme authority in this field and here is what I received in a letter from Jean Leclant, Perpetual Secretary: " Je me rallie totalement à votre conclusion - I totally rally to your conclusion... and the Academy comes over to your opinion ..." Despite what is said in a preceding text, the Ministry of Culture wrote me that: " The Minister ( Christine Albanel) asked me to support you in the legitimate fight which you have engaged to denounce this regrettable error. It cannot be contested that this name (of the navigator) must be spelled in two words." After the study which I made of the matter and the most prestigious appreciations of it, I think that Wikipedia should have to correctly inform its readers.
Jacques Thomas -92.157.27.37 (talk) 20:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
- From the INSTITUT DE FRANCE =
" I have been very interested, Dear Sir, by your research on the spelling of the name Lapérouse or La Pérouse. I totally rally your conclusion which is founded on a really very precise inquiry. The 'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres' falls in with your very detailed advice ..." - Jean Leclant, Perpetual Secretary of the Academy -
- From the MINISTRY OF CULTURE =
" Sir, you have wished to attract the attention of the predecessor of Madame Chritine Albanel, Minister of Culture and Commnication, Spokesman of the Gouvernment, on the incorrect manner according to which you observe that the family name of the great navigator Jean-François de La Pérouse is more and more often spelled. The Minister has been very impressed by the terms of your letter which demonstrate a sincere and true attachment to this personality whose disappearing has so deeply marked the history of the French Navy. She also requested of me to support you in the legitimate fight which you have engaged to denounce this regrettable error. As a matter of fact, it cannot be denied that this family name must be spelled in two words. What is confirmed in the most formal manner by the only French institution competent to fix the spelling in France, the Institut..."- Jean-Marie Caillaud, Principal Private Secretary
- From the ARCHIVES DE FRANCE =
" Sir, I well received your last mail in which you mention a mail concerning the spelling of the name La Pérouse, signed by Mr Jean Leclant, Perpetual Secretary of the 'Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres'. The quality of the subscriber and the precision of his answer seem to me sufficient to consider that this answer brings a definitive answer to the question which you have raised..." - Martine de Boisdeffre, Directress of the Archives de France -
- From the FRENCH NAVY =
"All my congratulations for your very interesting study on the legitimacy of the spelling La Pérouse. You have one more adept..." - Admiral Jean-Louis Battet, former chief of staff -
Jacques Thomas, ( 92.157.27.37) 16:18, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Commissariat Officer in the French Navy, Léon Dalmas de La Pérouse is the common ancestor of all descendants of this branch of family up today. In 1817, he wrote an official letter which is the inalterable proof that the name of the navigator was La Pérouse and no other. Here is an excerpt of this letter:
"Dalmas de La Pérouse Vannes 3 Xbre 1817 - Right to go by the name of La Pérouse - By His Enactment of February 21, 1815, His Majesty has authorized my family to add to their name the one of La Pérouse, my maternal uncle... I pray Your Excellency to command that I am mentionned under the designation of Dalmas de La Pérouse - "
I am sorry for all the supporters of Lapérouse but no argument can face this fact.
Jacques Thomas, November 1st, 2010 (unsigned by : Jacques Thomas 92.157.27.37)
Jacques Thomas 92.157.27.37, your assertions are somewhat lacking support. They are also contradictory to the apparent facts. I note upon examining the French articles containing the name Laperouse/La perouse it appears that you have been active in changing, promoting or creating articles using the La Perouse configuration of the name over an extended period of time. This despite the greater part of those article contents dealing with the subject as Laperouse. It is difficult to avoid the overwhelming body of information supporting the established recognition of the name being described as Lapérouse. The French Wikipedia articles that relate to Lapérouse currently have a considerable number of quite ludicrous naming irregularities. For example the school in Albi named after Lapérouse. It seems a Wikipedia editor has named the article on Lycee Lapérouse as Lycee La Perouse. This is entirely misleading and completely inaccurate as the school is clearly named Lycee Lapérouse [1]. On browsing the French WP articles I have found many examples of this absurd behaviour. Another example of absolutely silly behaviour is captioning "La Perouse" to a bust of Lapérouse Fichier:JFdeLapérouse20050110.jpg (Lapérouse par François Rude en 1828)- Bust of Lapérouse, clearly named as "Lapérouse" both on the historic records and on the bust itself. There have been recent activities in the EN WP article on Lapérouse where the French navy ships named Lapérouse have been 'renamed' by editors to show "La Perouse". This is simply vandalism especially when the contents citation links are also changed then breaking those links. I would suggest that it is best if that sort of activity stopped. It is also entirely preposterous for a WP editor to attempt to re-name a commissioned and active ship of the French navy.
Wikipedia is meant to be and encyclopaedic endeavour not a subjective essay. Your opinions appear to be highly subjective and have very little support in either the historic not the contemporary record. Please do not engage in the same activities here on the English language articles as you have on the French articles. What you have done there is quite misleading and in the most part factually incorrect. If a school is officially named Lycee Lapérouse, has a big sign on the front of the building stating Lycee Lapérouse and has a website calling the school Lycee Lapérouse then no one should be establishing an article calling it Lycee La Perouse. That is just ridiculous. The same applies to a statue, a park or a ship. I also note that you have been describing article citations to using the name La Perouse when the cited reference clearly describes the man as Lapérouse. Really this is not a good idea. Today I browsed FR WP articles that only mentioned La Perouse in the article title, everything withing the article including the citations pointing to Lapérouse instead. It makes the WP treatment of Lapérouse just present as a jumbled mess.
Naming convention:
The statue of Lapérouse renamed La Perouse in the WP articles is in fact named Lapérouse. The Statue of Lapérouse in Albi is described and documented in the general catalogue of the Toulouse Bibliothèque as "Statue de Lapérouse, Albi, 8 juillet 1899" see [8]
There are countless other resources of an academic nature, both historic and contemporary that refer the name as Lapérouse. If you wish to explore further afield I have given a number of references to foreign museums including the official maritime museums of other nations. Foriegn academic articles are also provided elsewhere on this discussion page as are historic documents of nations such as Australia who have a significant historical relationship with Lapérouse.
Your activities have made a complete mess of the French WP articles that contain or are specifically about Lapérouse. Please do not continue those activities on the English language pages. I appreciate your drive and determination is no doubt sincere and enthusiastic but your methodology is seriously flawed and your historic and contemporary references are somewhat questionable. If for no other reason please just accept that the man's last written official communication to the King of France and his Naval superiors was signed in the name Lapérouse. Please Jacques Thomas, enough is enough. Felix 11:01, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Everybody can make a mistake when one does not know perfectly well the matter which one is speaking of, but the honest man interested in history must know to perfection what he is proclaiming. Probity requires it. Prudence recommends it. He is pledging his credit. When the first descendant of a family to wear an illustrious name firmly requires that this name is spelled La Pérouse, nobody aware of this fact can honestly ignore it, going against his will and so doing, against the course of History.
Jacques Thomas, ( 92.157.27.37) 13:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I've been monitoring the above discussions loosely; I do know that locations in British Columbia named for him use La Pérouse - Mount La Pérouse, La Pérouse Reef, La Pérouse Bank. It's worth noting that the British Columbia Geographical Names Information System, where those entries are from, originally had the mountain as La Perouse, without the accent, but in correcting the name in 1954, added it - and without conforming to the Lapérouse spelling; even commenting [sic] when that spelling is used in a Victoria Times-Colonist article in 2005. To me the reason for the different spelling is really clear, and muddied by historical context and the habits of latter-day writers - especially French writers, but also the Australian ones. "Lapérouse", like Lasalle vs. La Salle, Le Moyne vs. Lemoyne or Lemoine, a "republican" adaptation of a noble name - whether occasionally used by La Pérouse himself (by way of shorthand, it sounds like) or adamantly used by French (and Australian) authors and officials afterwards. To me, it's what the family wants and uses should be what's most important, and also "period" contexts (how it was most commonly used not only by himself but in his day). With a few exceptions, all the "Lapérouse" rationalizations come from later times; and those from French Polynesia would be influenced by post-Republican French and not reflective of the historically accurate form..... Skookum1 ( talk) 18:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
The best way to know of an historical fact consists in proceeding up to its source. A book was published in Paris, in 1888, by the "Société de Géographie" for the centenary of La Pérouse disappearing. This book includes a rich bibliography compiled by Gabriel Marcel, a celebrated librarian of the French "Bibliothèque nationale". In this bibliography, La Pérouse is cited 145 times and his name is spelled in two words in practically all the documents mentioned as edited in French before 1815. As, in this case, the signature cannot be taken for a proof, that gives us the surest evidence of the right spelling of La Pérouse's name.
Jacques Thomas - ( 92.157.27.37) 05:48, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Dear Mr.Felix, I do not know who you are and I am not vexed or vindictive. I have just read now with attention your response to my interventions in this talk and like Talleyrand, I am saying : 'All which is excessive, is insignificant.' You run a serious risk in attacking me as you do. A former Captain in the French Army Aviation, having fought four years in Vietnam, Knight of the Legion of Honour, Honorary Naval Aviator of the US Navy, Medal of Gratitude of Lyons Town, member of the International Legion of Intelligence, of the Society of Geography, of the Aéro-Club de France, Honorary President and Honorary Member of associations, I have a certain sense of Honour and Probity. As an historian, I am in quest of what is true or untrue. I do not stoop so low as to cheat. I do not need that to be appreciated and to find what I am in search for. I hate that. I try to act in order that all which I say is true. Without any proof, you accuse me of crimes on the La Pérouse French Wikipedia site which of course I never committed. Surprised, I ask you; "Is is quite fair play ?" I would have preferred a courteous discussion with you, between gentlemen and historians. I think that you would have finished being convinced of what I say and I would have liked to shake hands with you.
Jacques Thomas - November 3, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.213.237.236 ( talk) 21:14, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
During the study which we made of the matter, we had in hands a lot of original documents concerning La Pérouse himself, his wife Countess Eleonore of La Pérouse, his sister Victoire de Barthez, descendants of the La Pérouse family from the French Navy Commissariat officer Léon Dalmas de La Pérouse. That permitted us to realize an impressive and certainly unique collection of signatures and of the name written by themselves from 1789 to 1871. We took knowledge of two documents in which La Pérouse speaking of himself spells his name in two words, like it is spelled in his own Journal round the World. Even if by sentimental impregnation, Eleonore de La Pérouse has a signature quite similar to this of her husband, she writes their name in two words. On the contrary of Jean-François de La Pérouse himself, all others sign whith their name in two words. It seems that this fact changes around 1877, when the 'Livret de famille' is created. Despite the King's edit of 1839, wrongly fixing the name according to a signature, the family had continued to write their name in two words, but probably now they are obliged to adopt the name in one word. It seems that it is from this time that the form Lapérouse begins to spread. The family being named Lapérouse, some imagined that it was the name of the navigator. Others wanted to extend the name back to him. What of course was incorrect and might not have been done. We regret that many people follow the wrong track today because they do not know the realty. Even some great institutions follow this track, draped in the folds of their false certitude mostly due to a signature of no significance or to an unwanted modification of the name of a family. We are tempted to say that "There are none so deaf as those who don't want to hear."
Jacques Thomas – November 4, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.213.237.236 ( talk) 06:07, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Jacques Thomas 109.213.237.236 ( talk), this article is about the man Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse, not his family. If some members of his family wish to call themselves by either Lapérouse or La Pérouse then that is entirely their own business. What we need to deal with here is the name of Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse. He was a significant French figure of the Age of Enlightenment, a French explorer, a naval officer of some distinction and the Captain of several vessels of the Marine National. As the French government, the French navy, the historical association in Albi formed in his honour, the museum founded in Albi in his honour, the French Maritime museum and the maritime museums of several other nations all refer to him as Lapérouse and the last time he signed his name on an official naval document he signed as Lapérouse then, here at Wikipedia it is most appropriate that we do the same. Wikipedia is not meant to be a venue for reformation or debate. Rather it is meant to be an encyclopaedic resource. If all those institutions refer to him as Lapérouse then we need to do the same. The policies of Wikipedia dictate that as editors we only follow authoritative and citable information that can be readily supported by published and verifiable information. If all those authoritative French institutions all change to La Pérouse then we would need to document that instead. However at this time the official historical position of those significant French institutions appears to firmly lie with "Lapérouse" as the spelling. I sympathise with you in that this may conflict with your views on the matter and there is clearly some historic confusion surrounding the matter. However we must document the historical record here not attempt to revise nor reform it, that is not the role of Wikipedia. I suggest your energies may be better spent partitioning the Marine Nasional, the Musée National de la Marine and the Ministry of Defence to revise their interpretation of history if you feel sufficiently motivated. However my understanding is that you have done so already with some considerable vigour and enthusiasm and that they have not changed their stand on the matter. Do you have a viewpoint on why Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse signed his name as "Lapérouse". I have read of opinions that he was being "informal" however I note he did this not only on personal letters but also on official documents including naval logs. Felix 13:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
If one has a look at the French Larousse Dictionary, at the Encyclopaedia Britannica, at the Encyclopaedia Quid, at the French version of Wikipedia, one can see that it is wisely and intelligently referred to the navigator as to La Pérouse. There are in the Larousse Dictionary more than 70 persons whose names include the definite article 'La' which is not attached. I could have had in hand original documents written and signed by many of these celebrities. Most of them would have a linked signature, in one word, and nobody would have the idea to change the form of their name today. When writing rapidly with a quill-pen, it was easier so doing than to rise the pen and to precisely form two characters. La Pérouse was far to be alone to do that. It was not an anomaly. It was quite common. Consulted, a specialized lawyer studied the matter and wrote that : " From a graphological point of view, it is quite significant to note that the navigator had a tendency to attached words to other words whereas he separates the article from the other word when he writes his name, La Pérouse, in a text. . . It is quite bold to announce that a signature in one word is a proof of spelling, still more if the author has a linked way of writing while he separates the article when he writes his own name." La Pérouse disappeared in 1788. Before his fatal disappearance he was always during his whole life considered as wearing a name written in two parts. For instance, in the Royal Ordinance signed by His majesty the King making him a Commodore, we find his name four times, written in two words. It is in two words that his name is engraved on the silver or bronze medals stricken on the occasion of the frigates Departure. By this time, everybody knew him as La Pérouse. The linked form, Laperouse, officially appeared 51 years after the navigator's disappearing, as an administrative obligation for the descendants of his two sisters who previously had adopted his name written in two words. How could it be the navigator's name since it did not exist yet ? From this time a myth has started to arise and develop step by step. His heirs had no longer the possibility of wearing the navigator's name in two words, and their name in one word began to be posthumously transferred to La Pérouse himself. Supported by the linked signature of La Pérouse and his heirs' name, the myth grew deeply and was so widely taken for realty than it was adopted by some authors, associations, museums and other institutions. After no longer than a century, very few people were aware of the truth or tried to investigate. However there were a few islets of resistance and disorder reigned which incited me to undertake a complete and exacting study of the matter when, in 1988, the French Navy had abandoned a tradition and given a new survey ship the name "Lapérouse". Maybe not for ever ! Praised by the highest authorities, this study definitely proves that the name of Jean-François de La Pérouse cannot and may not be written otherwise than in two words
Jacques Thomas – November 8, 2010
Indeed the La is not linked to a P as you appear to be suggesting. Rather the La is linked to a p, clearly forming the word Lapérouse in one fluid movement, rather than LaPérouse or La_Pérouse, I suggest you might like to re-examine your conclusions. The image supplied for you on this page is an image of Lapérouse's signed journal despatched with the HMS Siius and originally held in the French naval archives. It seems quite clear and unambiguous in presenting his signature. I not it is an officially archived document of the Marine National.
This idea of yours appears to rather seriously conflict with the Marine National. The French navy were sailing around in a Cruiser named the Lapérouse over 100 years prior to this and indeed named a whole class of ships by this name, there were at least four of them, as lifted above. I have included a photo of that ship with this response to aid in clarity. The French navy were not "breaking from tradition" indeed they were following it, and that was to use the spelling Lapérouse. Felix ( talk) 17:31, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I know well the matter and the ship. I have excellent contacts in the French Navy and I was invited twice aboard the "Lapérouse", one time to cruise. There is aboard a precious collection of copies of ancient documents concerning Jean-François de La Pérouse which I offered to the ship. I know why the Navy abandonned the tradition. Maybe not for long. If you have a look at the official Magazine "Cols bleus" of July 11, 2009, you can read on the front cover: "Carnet de voyage du BH La Pérouse".and if you search for 'Navires célèbres", on Internet <netmarine>,you will see now "La Pérouse" The two last chiefs of Staff of the Navy fully agreed with my views. Admiral Fournery who had commanded the" La Pérouse" in the Indian Ocean was also a good friend of mine. With a Navy Captain, another of my friends, we found the grave of Eleonore de La Pérouse and I organized the two first official ceremonies to Her Memory and to this of La Pérouse. The Ambassador of America and the Navy Chief of Staff were represented. Several Navy officers were present who knew well my point of view. Invited to join by plane the aicraft Carrier USS 'Enterprise' on manoeuver out at sea, I offered to the Captain a portrait of La Pérouse who galantly fought at sea during the American War of Independence. At last, I have the pleasure of keeping bonds of warm friendship with three ladies, sisters born Dalmas de Lapérouse, though they are perfectly aware of my point of view. Jacques Thomas ( talk) 20:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC) 109.213.237.236 ( talk) 19:55,
On Internet, the track is a little more complicated than this previously mentioned : On <net.marine> Histoire et patrimoine : 1 - Thèmes géographiques - La Marine à Mururoa = "La Pérouse" - 2- Divers - Les marins célbres = La Pérouse. Jacques Thomas ( talk) 21:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC) November 8, 2010
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Did anyone confirm how La Perouse died in 1828?
News is being bruited about that La Bousolle has only just been found, rather than in 1964 as is mentioned in this article. See, for example http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/asiapcf/05/10/laperouse.wrecked/
It's worth noting that the details here jibe with the details in the article (notably, the placement of the wreck off the island of Vanikoro in the Solomons). I suspect it's just a case of the media misunderstanding the story, and that this was just an expedition to recover some of the already-known wreck. Can anyone shed any light on this?
CNN are confused. The Hakluyt society's edition of La Pérouse's journals (published in 1995) give a brief history of the searches that have been carried out over the years, and they record a visit by the French patrol boat Dunkerquoise in 1964, to bring some items to the surface. The French mapped the sites of other items, and it seems to have been a regular habit of the French Navy to periodically send expeditions to Vanikoro to recover items and check on the state of the monuments: this report is about the results from the latest of them.
Conférence de presse Expédition Vanikoro 2005
Ecb 19:39, May 12, 2005 (UTC)
As to the question above, on how La Pérouse died: He is presumed to have died in 1788, not 1828, and no one knows how he died -- whether it was in the initial wreck off the coast of Vanikoro, or whether he survived the wreck & was then killed or died on the island, or if he was one of the survivors who sailed off in a boat the survivors allegedly made from pieces of the wreckage. Primula ( talk) 03:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
As I was going through and referencing this article, I noticed that, when discussing the death of de Langle, one of the officers on the expedition, it claimed he was the captain of the Astrolabe. My source (Novaresio, Paolo (1996). The Explorers) claimed he was captain of the Boussole, the other ship. I changed this in the article(as I felt a sourced fact superceeds an unsourced one) but I suspect it may be a controversial or unknown point, so further reasearch would be appreciated. Thanks! JesseW 22:12, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
After looking into my copy of La Pérouse's journals (see the comment above), I'm sure that de Langle was captain of L'Astrolabe until his death, although he was promoted afterwards (odd though that might seem!). Here's the source, for future reference.
Appendix II of volume 2 of "The Journal of Jean-François de Galaup de la Pérouse, 1785–1788" ( ISBN 0904180395) gives the muster rolls of the two ships. It includes all the various promotions that occurred on the voyage, and shows that:
Perhaps your source mistakenly assumed that de Langle's promotion in April 1788 was to the captaincy of La Boussole.
Reading between the lines, it appears that ranks were assigned back in France, on the basis of comments by officers sent from foreign ports (Manila, Macao & Kamchatka). Dispatches took months, perhaps years, to get back. In de Langle's case, he was promoted in April 1788 because La Pérouse had sent back favourable comments about him and because France hadn't heard of his death: the first news of it was carried from Port Jackson to France by four of the redundant transport ships of the First Fleet, all of which set sail in July 1788.
Ecb 19:37, August 16, 2005 (UTC)
The result of the vote was move. David Kernow 21:01, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Jean-François de Galaup, count de La Pérouse → Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse : Consistent use of French; more accurate.
Please add * Support or * Oppose followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using "~~~~"
Bearing in mind it's an article in a general encyclopedia, anyone else feel this article suffers from footnote overkill? I suggest a single acknowledgement of the Novaresio book suffices, perhaps under a "Sources" heading. I wouldn't delete the work done to detail the references, however; I'd transfer it to a subpage. What do people think?
Thanks,
David Kernow
11:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
It is stated in the french wiki ("Exécution de Louis XVI" under wiki-fr) that among the last words of Louis XVI prior to his execution (21 January 1793) was a question to a naval officer inquiring of any news of the La Pérouse expedition. Anyone have any info regarding this? -- Mille Sabord
It may be apocryphal, but many sources on La Pérouse and Louis XVI mention this. He (the about-to-be-beheaded king) is supposed to have said "A-t-on des nouvelles de M. de la Pérouse?" ("Is there any news of Mr. La Pérouse?"). Louis XVI did take a strong personal interest in the expedition, but it's hard to believe this is what was on his mind as he climbed up the scaffold. Primula ( talk) 03:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
I don't have time at the moment, but there are details concerning La Perouse's visit to Nootka Sound and the rest of the NW Coast in Derek Pethick's books on the marine exploration/fur trade in that area; a mountain on one of the Queen Charlotte Islands is also named for him; I'll get its location refs and be back later. Skookum1 17:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
It seems there is spelling mistakes in this article:
1) "Lapérouse" in word word instead of "La Pérouse" in two words (as it should be it seems)
2) "Galaup" instead of "Galoup"
can somebody fix it ? the 2nd mistake is in the article title even ...
-- OC 08:24, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
Is his original name "Jean-François Galaup" or "Jean-François de Galaup"? The title of the article includes the "de", but the text just calls him "Jean-François Galaup". JackofOz 04:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
There's quite a bit of disagreement/variation in the spelling of La Pérouse's name. Galaup, however, is spelled Galaup in nearly every source I've ever looked at. La Pérouse's given name at birth was Jean-François de Galaup. I believe the nobiliary "de" had been in the family for several generations by the time he was born.
"La Pérouse" is a different matter. There's a long discussion of this question in John Dunmore's introduction to his translation of the La Pérouse journals (Hakluyt Society 1995, see pages xi-xiv). Briefly: The "de la Pérouse" was added to his name when he joined the navy, to make him sound more aristocratic. Official documents during his lifetime always use 2 words for the name. La Pérouse himself always signed his name "Laperouse," not even bothering with the accent mark, but his writing tended to be not terribly scrupulous about such things, and he often elided words with their articles (e.g., "leurope," "lamerique"). After his disappearance, his surviving sisters petitioned for the use of his name for themselves and their heirs. Permission was granted in 1815, but the name was misspelled "La Peyrouse," with a "y." The spelling was officially "fixed" in 1839, but now it was rendered one word: Lapérouse. Modern-day Lapérouses all spell their name this way. La Pérouse scholars have gone both ways. The important thing, I think, is consistency. Primula ( talk) 04:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC) The "ey" in La Peyrouse is just another way, and probably a better way, of representing the "é" in La Pérouse. It's probably a better way because the accent above the "e", which makes it a different letter in French with a different pronunciation and meaning, "é", tends to get left off in English writings. (Kattigara)
Where is the evidence that a masscre occurred? GhostofSuperslum 14:15, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Here it says he arrived at Botany Bay on 26 January 1788.
History of Australia (1788–1850) says: "26 January 1788 was also the date that the French expedition of two ships led by Admiral Jean-François de La Pérouse arrived off Botany Bay and Sydney Cove."
First Fleet says: "[Phillip's] party returned [to Botany Bay from Port Jackson] on 23 January. The party was startled when two French ships came into sight and entered Botany Bay. This turned out to be a scientific expedition led by Jean-François de La Pérouse. The French group remained until 10 March ....".
So, it's not clear to me exactly where they first encountered the British, or exactly when. Did they first meet at Botany Bay on c. 23 January and then follow the British up to Sydney Cove, where they remained for some time; or did they first meet at Sydney Cove on 26 January? -- JackofOz ( talk) 04:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Having posted the information on suitable naming conventions for this article for over one month with only one comment (in the negative) I still do not feel it is appropriate to move without making the matter known. This naming convention has some controversial aspects to it as some are strident about conforming to a naming tradition that is contrary to the bulk of French references. This seems to be a view held particularly strongly by a New Zealand scholar who has done translation work and authored articles on the subject of Lapérouse. However his views do not seem to be supported by any significant French institution, indeed the contrary is the case. Accordingly I proposed the Article is moved (re-named). My reasons and appropriate ref's are detailed on the Discussion page as is a response from ( Ecb (talk) 22:16, 14 June 2010 (UTC)), and a reply to that response with further clarifying detail. Felix505 ( talk) 13:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: page moved. Feel free to re-request on the issue of the capitilization of 'comte' (no consensus on that was found in this discussion). Regards, Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 20:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse →
Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse — The current naming is entirely at odds with the French Navy and their official biography of Lapérouse and the naming of a The French Cruiser Laperouse, c.1898 and a (currently serving) hydrographic survey ship (Bâtiment hydrographique) Lapérouse A791, the Ministère de la défense (French Ministry of Defence) documentation on Lapérouse and his voyages including recent publications, the French Ministry of Culture and other significant French bodies including the maritime museum (The Musée National de la Marine) and the Lapérouse Museum. Comprehensive detail is available on the articles Discussion page under the heading "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse -or- Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse" .
Felix505 (
talk)
13:43, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
-Skinsmoke- I must disagree that the Australian usage is La Perouse, in fact the opposite seems to be the case. For example the Australian government normally uses "Lapérouse" in publications, ie < http://www.collectionsaustralia.net/org/98/about>. Also have a look at the migration museum, powerhouse museum, and nsw dept of the environment, they use "Lapérouse". < http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/nationalparks/parkhome.aspx?id=N0066> and < http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/online-exhibitions/>. We should not be confused by references to the suburb of La Perouse in Sydney either on maps or in articles as that spelling is of course going to be used in that instance. I have noted extensive use of Lapérouse in Australian reference materials and museums in that country seem to be using Lapérouse as well. I think the Australian maritime museum normally uses Lapérouse as well, except of course when they are referring to the suburb. Another example is the Lapérouse Museum in Sydney, (it is described as "Laperouse Museum, end of Anzac Parade, La Perouse, Sydney, NSW 2036") < http://www.marineartistsaustralia.com.au/index.htm As for the capital "C" (Compte) I have noted that French sources including the French navy do not use that so maybe we should not start using it here. They use " Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse". If you have a look at who has done the editing on the French WP La Perouse article you may note that it appears to have had some influence from two editors who may have a bit of a paradigm mindset about this. see <fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Jacques_Thomas> Jacques Thomas appears to be quite strident about this matter and yet the information he gives to support his assertions (such as his standpoint being supported by the Ministry of Culture) appear to conflict with the facts . The French Minstry of Culture apparently do not support his views and have made this clear. Indeed the French WP needs attention as well as it is at odds with the facts.
However the important issue here is that the man was a Frenchman and an important figure in the 'Age of Enlightenment' as well as being a highly significant figure in French naval and maritime history. This article should not be referring to the man as anything other than Lapérouse as that is the accepted and officially recognised formatting of his name used by the French Government, the French Navy and the French Ministry of Culture. I have even seen photos on an English language website showing the French naval ship Lapérouse with it's name displayed on the ship but then referring to it as this commissioned French Naval Ship as the "La Perouse" despite the correct name being clearly visible in the photo. This is a bit linguistically presumptious I think. My primary concern is that by having Wikipedia use an incorrect name it then perpetuates the error and allows it to propagate further. Surely the ultimate authority here should be the French Ministry of Culture, the French Navy, the French Museums and the mans own family, not Wikipedia editors such as ourselves. WP should be accurate and authoritative. The accuracy here is in question The authoritative aspect should be answered by referring to authoritative sources, the obvious authoritative sources are surely those represented by significant institutions of the French government and the nations historic and cultural bodies, not by citing sources that are influenced by other factors. I would hope the French would not rename Capt Cook 'Capitaine Lacuisinier' so lets try and get the name of a significant French historical figure correctly described in this article. Felix505 ( talk) 15:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
I come to this discussion page as an outcome of a wikitravel edit.
When setting about editing the wikitravel entries on the locality of La Perouse (sic) in Sydney, New South Wales, Australia I found a link on that page to the the Wikipedia article on the suburb of La Perouse in Sydney. That page subsequently linked to the Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse article.
I query the spelling of the mans name. I am concerned that this is an anomaly first established by scholars of the past anglicising the spelling of his name. Most of the french language ( and many of the english) sources I can turn up on web searches spell it Lapérouse and I understand he also signed his name in that way. Confusingly [1] Lapérouse described himself at the top of a private letter of 3 july 1783 as "M. De La Perouse" (It may be De LaPerouse but there appears to be a space between La and Perouse). However he then appears to sign the letter at the bottom as "Laperouse".
I have read that some (french) naval records use the spelling La Perouse but I have not been able to locate any. Again I suspect the writers concerned may have anglicising the spelling of his name.
There is a live link on the La Perouse suburb Wikipedia page that describes "Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse" (a link to this WP article). I consider that this may put both the La Perouse (the suburb in sydney) Wikipedia article and the Jean-François de Galaup, comte de La Pérouse (the man) Wikipedia article at odds to the correct spelling of the name.
Most importantly I note that the The Musée National de la Marine [2] refers to him as "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse". I think that source is more credible than either historic or contemporary scholarly papers and articles that are dealing with the subject by way of translations of text and other content.
There are many journals and other texts that refer to him as Lapérouse, including many French language publications, including also french/canadian. A NSW state library search for Lapérouse [3] a very quick count turns up 25 of the 67 hits as using the La Perouse spelling or other variations. The bulk of these La-Parouse entries appear to be titled to translated works. This leaves the overwhelming majority of 42 articles as having the spelling Lapérouse in the titles. It is of note that in most cases they appear to be the french publications that use Lapérouse and the english language or translated works that use La Perouse.
Obviously if a search is done for La Perouse the documents concerning the suburb of La Perouse then come into play and make it too confusing to sort out the background noise.. also: La Tragique Expédition de Lapérouse et Langle by Paul Fleuriot de Langle (1954). Jean-François de Galaup, Comte de LaPérouse, Dictionary of Canadian Biography IV, 282-83. also: A commemorative stamp depicting French explorer Jean Francois de Galaup is in the 1988 French series honoring explorers and navigators, author: Thompson, Jo-Ann, Publisher: American Publishing Company of New York, Publication Name: Stamps, Subject: Hobbies and crafts, ISSN: 0038-9358, Year: 1993 [4] describes "2.00+.50f featuring the explorers bust and a map of his explorations described "La Perouse".
I have edited the Wikitravel page to reflect the name - Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse - as I believe I have found a sufficient enough body of information to do that withinn the Wikitravel sites less rigid guidlines. As this site represents a more 'encyclodedic' regime I feel compelled to commit this edit and re-name suggestion to debate and scrutiny. Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse is a significant person of the Age of Enlightenment and a significant person of interest to the early history of australia and the exploration of Terra Australis and the South Pacific.
I think he deserves to have his name spelt correctly. I feel that the man himself was probably the best authority on the spelling of his own name most especially as apparently he suffixed it in this manner himself, The de Lapérouse suffix was apparently added by Jean-François de Galaup himself.
It seems we may be dealing with a historical inaccuracy arising from early anglicising of Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse's name.
I would appreciate other editors opinions and views on this before I rush in and make suitable changes to both the articles name and the content. Felix505 ( talk) 04:29, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
Thank you Ecb for your considered response to my appeal for examination of the formatting of La Pérouse/LaPérouse/Lapérouse. I am not suggesting the anomaly has arisen only from anglicising early translations. It seems the confusion is a lot more generalised over both time and language. I have read that the French 'modernised' or just changed the name over time. I have read that Lapérouse indicated some ambiguity himself. I also have read that the French navy currently uses and has previously used La Pérouse. You have alluded to that yourself with a document reference.
When I started looking into this matter earlier I found many statements were unsupported when I did some digging of my own. I have unfortunately since deleted my browsing histories on my investigations at that time but I do recall that on that occasion if I did a search and found either a historic document or a contemporary one that was in the English language, translated from the French I found name La Pérouse. If I then did a search for the original French language document I often found Lapérouse. This may indicate some tranlation errrors or simply a desire for unifomity by some English language scolars and researchers toward La Perouse and to Lapérouse by the French. Pity though to just ignore the French name treatment especially when it is coming from authoritative sources such as the French Navy and the Ministry of Culture.. There is no doubt in my mind though that many French texts have recently gone about some revisionism. Indeed changing La Pérouse to Lapérouse, or alternatively Lapérouse to La Pérouse. It all certainly adds to the confusion.
If looking at the The Musée National de la Marine [5] refers to him as "Jean-François de Galaup comte de Lapérouse". I think this French national institution must be given some credibility in their naming treatment of a significant national figure and representative of the French influence upon the 'Age of Enlightenment'. Additionally I see many comments about the French navy using La Pérouse as opposed to Lapérouse, but do not find any strong evidence of that actually happening.
When the matter is investigated I note the contrary The French Navy when naming the ship Lapérouse (A 791) have not used La Pérouse but have indeed used Lapérouse. It is often stated that they have not done this however that is clearly an error as both the French Navy and the Ministry of Defence are quite clear on this. It also appears to be painted on the ship.
Below is a description of that vessel: (Le bâtiment hydrographique de deuxième classe (BH) Lapérouse a été construit par la Direction des Constructions Navales à Lorient.), Sur cale le 11 juin 1985, Lancé le 14 novembre 1986. Mis au service actif le 20 avril 1988. So a French naval ship in current service carries the name "Lapérouse". Au sein de la flotte du Service Hydrographique et Océanographique de la Marine (SHOM). Depuis sa mise en service, le Lapérouse est basé à Brest." Fittingly the ship is tasked to hydro_oceanographique research and based at Brest.
This link < http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/decouverte/equipements/batiments_de_soutien/batiments/hydro_oceanographique/laperouse_a_791> goes to the ministry of defence publication on the ship Bâtiment hydrographique Lapérouse A791. The above is a publication of Site officiel de la marine nationale. It describes the ship, its colours (Fanion) and coat of arms (Tape de bouche) stating "Lapérouse", and gives what appears to be an official account of the history of the French naval officer Lapérouse published by the Navy. (Biographie de Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse (1741-1788)) and a history of his voyages of discovery, (L'expédition de Lapérouse). This ship named is also fully described in the document available at < http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/content/download/44385/442990/file/Laperouse%20A791.pdf> This documentation somewhat contradicts a lot of the commentary I have seen about on the web stating that the French navy refer to the man as something other than Lapérouse. Simply put this is not so, the French Navy are referring to him as Lapérouse in both historical accounts and back in 1985 they named a ship after him, using the spelling Lapérouse. As he was a serving officer of some distinction in the French Navy I think we should accord some credibility to the official publications and naming protocols of the French Navy.
A search of < http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/dicodsearch/dicodadvancedsearch> all articles (marine) will turn up many Defence ministry and naval docs pertaining to Lapérouse (30) and La pérouse(15)
Also the Ministère de la défense (French Ministry of Defence) < http://jdb.marine.defense.gouv.fr/batiment/lpo>describes BH Lapérouse, "Le bâtiment hydrographique de deuxième classe (BH) Lapérouse a été construit par la Direction des Constructions Navales à Lorient. Also < http://jdb.marine.defense.gouv.fr/tag/Lapérouse> Journaux de bord : Marine nationale Recherche Keyword "Lapérouse" 18 matches on page.
Exposition Lapérouse is an exhibition copyrighted to the Copyright Ministère de la Défense, (French Ministry of the Defense) was held April 2 to June 26 2005 at the Mussée of Maritime history of Nouméa, exposition "Expedition Laperouse, The Road of the Echanges". Clearly they have called the man Lapérouse.
I note the NSW government publication on the subject of Lapérouse < http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibition/objectsthroughtime/laperouse/> uses the Lapérouse spelling. The authoritative source in this case being The Migration Heritage Centre at the Powerhouse Museum. The Powerhouse Museum in Sydney Australia is not a lightweight resource and should also be accorded some credibility in their research and diligence when handling such matters. However just to completely contradict this I note the cover illustration from Atlas du Voyage de La Pérouse used by the migration Heritage section uses the alternative spelling of La Pérouse. La Pérouse is a suburb in Sydney and http://www.migrationheritage.nsw.gov.au/exhibition/objectsthroughtime/stump/ has a significant place in the early colonial history of the Australian nation. This webpage holds some reasonable historic record concerning Lapérouse: [6]. It appears that the Australian sources including Museums and the Parks service have clearly attempted to clarify their spelling in a historic context.
Other sources: Musée Lapérouse Exposition temporaire consacrée à l’expédition TARA ARCTIC au Musée Lapérouse du 11 juin au 19 septembre 2010
Mystery of the disapearance of Monsieur de Lapérouse : Vanikoro wreckage - Hypothetical visit of New Caledonia-Wreckage of Jean-François de Galaup, count de Lapérouse.< http://www.croixdusud.info/hist_eng/laperouse_eng.php>(croixdusud.info New Caledonia)
Association Lapérouse Albi-France Musée Lapérouse, square Botany Bay 41 rue Porta 81000 ALBI (France)
Un bref historique, de 1785 à nos jours, has 14 matches to the name Lapérouse in this official French Ministry of Defence document and none to La Pérouse. < http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/actualite_et_dossiers/expedition_vanikoro_2005/un_peu_d_histoire>
I refer also to the websites:
Publications:
I think Wikipedia needs to give some credibility to the French navy, the Frence Ministry of Defence, The French Maritime Museum and other credible French historical bodies including the Lapérouse Museum which clearly describe Lapérouse rather than La Pérouse.
Frankly I feel awkward leaping in and challenging those who may have done some considerable research in the past but there appears to be a bit of a paradigm at hand here and some of the information taken at face value by many is just clearly incorrect. By example [Ecb] you yourself refer to the current flagged ship of the French Navy as being called La Pérouse, yet it is not, rather it is called Lapérouse A791, and yes it is a in the Service Hydrographique et Océanographique de la Marine (a naval service hydrographic and oceangraphic survey ship).
I assume the 19C French ship being refered to is the Laperouse Class Unprotected Cruisers. French Laperouse Class Cruisers of the 1870's and 1880's included D'Estaing, Laperouse, Nielly and Primauguet.
They were wooden hulled ships with Iron beams., these ships had plough bows with a forecastle. Displacement: 2363 tons, Speed 15 Knots Compliment: 264 Armament: Fifteen 5.5 inch M1870M guns, which were later replaced in Primauget with Quick Firing Conversions. also each ship had Eight 1 pounder revolvers.
La Classe de Laperouse les Croiseurs sans défense. Les photographies et l'histoire des Croiseurs de Classe de Laperouse français des 1870 et les 1880 y compris D'Estaing, Laperouse, Nielly et Primauguet. Information is available at: [7]
Laperouse1877, Wrecked 1898 < http://www.battleships-cruisers.co.uk/cruisers3.htm>
Under the circumstances this Wikipedia page comes as no surprise to me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_cruiser_Lapérouse:
From < http://combatfleetoftheworld.blogspot.com/2010/05/future-of-french-navy-through-storm-but_12.html> and referring to ships by 'class' in the French Navy:
Bibliothèque numérique proposée par la Bibliothèque nationale de France < http://gallica.bnf.fr/> < http://gallica.bnf.fr/?lang=EN>Gallica
Bibliotheque Toulouse, France
Also < http://gallica.bnf.fr/Search?ArianeWireIndex=index&p=1&lang=FR&q=laperouse> I think gives some pause to the argument that the French commonly called this man by other than Lapérouse in a historical context. The Bibliothèque nationale de France has illustrations including maps, portraiture engravings and publications describing Lapérouse in abundance.
I have no investment in this one way or the other, I just see a conflict with the facts may be at hand and in my opinion Wikipedia should err on the side of the French Naval, Defence and Museum authorities in this matter.
To the contrary of the bulk of the information I have provided above I note the following: Jacques Thomas, La Perouse or Laperouse legitimacy of spelling, in "Bulletin of the Society for Historical Studies of New Caledonia", No. 71, 1987 outlines that...(comprehensive study that demonstrates, with strong support from the Institute France and the Ministry of Culture, the name La Perouse must be written in two words, as he was during his lifetime). Jacques Thomas, Epilogue to the question of the spelling of the name La Perouse, in "Acta Geographica" No. 1508, mars/2003, Geography Society, 184, bd. Saint-Germain 75006 Paris. Jacques Thomas also states his case with some vigour on his Wikipedia discussion page. However I struggle to find support for his assertions from the quarters that he refers to.
I note that the Ministry of Culture does not do what Jacques Thomas believes they are doing, indeed it appears it does quite the opposite. On the webpage < http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/actualites/communiq/albanel/laperouse.htm> is a photo of France's Minister for Culture and Communication opening l’exposition Lapérouse au Musée de la Marine (19 mars 2008) France's maritime museum, the Musée National de la Marine is, alongside the Central Naval Museum of Saint Petersburg, founded in 1709, the oldest maritime museum in the world. In 1748, Henri-Duhamel du Monceau, Inspector-General of the French Navy, presented his collection of model ships and naval machinery to King Louis XV. They were set out in the Marine Room at the Louvre, for the instruction of students of the newly-founded school of naval engineering and architecture. This organisation uses the spelling Lapérouse. The publication 2e Cahier du Conseil national des parcs et jardins=Le voyage des plantes-Les jardins, acteurs culturels de la biodiversité< http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/politique-culturelle/Voyage_des_plantes.pdf> also uses Lapérouse universally, It is a fairly recent Ministry of Culture publication so it seems that no one has told the people at the Ministry of Culture. I have given fuller reference to the Musée National de la Marine above.
As to the FRAN document they are far from convincing and offer as evidence an image of the signature of Lapérouse, as one word, somewhat denying their own argument. They also state that current Lapérouse's also prefer to use one word as their name. With due respect to Dunmore's scholarly achievements, maybe he has it wrong in this matter. [Ecb] I did note your comments about Lapérouse skipping word spaces in his writting but the body of French acceptance of this spelling is quite overwhelming. We must also consider that it was Lapérouse who 'made up' this name as a suffix and if he then chose to sign it as one word, well maybe that was his way of telling us what he intended to do with the name, maybe he was just calling himself Lapérouse as indicated in his handwritten script. Really I think the body of evidence is somewhat in favour of the spelling Lapérouse unless Wikipedia wishes to just ignore the overwhelming majority of the French authorities and academic institutions and press on with other ideas. Maybe someone has some convincing evidence to support the La Perouse spelling, I remain open minded on the subject although quite frankly it is a bit of a struggle to do so. Felix505 ( talk) 20:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
Bonjour, My name is Jacques Thomas and I like to say that 'Contra factum non valet argumentum'. Practically, in all the writings of the time, like his own Journal, on the medal especially founded for the departure of the frigates, the name of La Pérouse is always spelled in two words. The exception comes from his signature but at the time, most of the famous French personalities, not to say all of them, whose the name was spelled in two words were signing in a linked manner, in one word. Used to justify the name spelled in one word, this fact has no juridical value. John Dunmore who graces me with his friendship, is surely the most complete, the most precise, the surer of all those who wrote on La Pérouse. He always writes the name in two words. I have made a long study of the correct spelling of the name La Pérouse or Lapérouse (almost 400 pages with correspondence, letters, messages, newspapers articles) and I dare to say that nobody has a better knowledge of the matter than I could have, as the greatest authorities acknowledge it. The navigator made his name after this of a farm named Pérouse which his father had given to him. During all his life, he was named La Pérouse, by His Majesty the King Himself. As he disappeared without having any child, his two sisters and their husbands took for themselves the name La Pérouse but made an official request. Their request was accepted in 1815, but unfortunately with a Y : La Peyrouse. They must have requested for the spelling to be rectified. In 1817, in a letter, chief of the family, Léon de La Pérouse officially required that his name is spelled La Pérouse. The two families made use of this name so spelled up to the end of the century when they were legally obliged to adopt the form Lapérouse because, in 1839, a legal decision had fixed this spelling after the signature of the navigator. What is for a jurist a fault, a signature having no value in such a case. It is the reason why today, the families are named Lapérouse. But the name of the navigator must be spelled La Pérouse. It is a grave historical error to call him Lapérouse which he certainly would not have appreciated. The Institut de France is the supreme authority in this field and here is what I received in a letter from Jean Leclant, Perpetual Secretary: " Je me rallie totalement à votre conclusion - I totally rally to your conclusion... and the Academy comes over to your opinion ..." Despite what is said in a preceding text, the Ministry of Culture wrote me that: " The Minister ( Christine Albanel) asked me to support you in the legitimate fight which you have engaged to denounce this regrettable error. It cannot be contested that this name (of the navigator) must be spelled in two words." After the study which I made of the matter and the most prestigious appreciations of it, I think that Wikipedia should have to correctly inform its readers.
Jacques Thomas -92.157.27.37 (talk) 20:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
- From the INSTITUT DE FRANCE =
" I have been very interested, Dear Sir, by your research on the spelling of the name Lapérouse or La Pérouse. I totally rally your conclusion which is founded on a really very precise inquiry. The 'Académie des Inscriptions et Belles-Lettres' falls in with your very detailed advice ..." - Jean Leclant, Perpetual Secretary of the Academy -
- From the MINISTRY OF CULTURE =
" Sir, you have wished to attract the attention of the predecessor of Madame Chritine Albanel, Minister of Culture and Commnication, Spokesman of the Gouvernment, on the incorrect manner according to which you observe that the family name of the great navigator Jean-François de La Pérouse is more and more often spelled. The Minister has been very impressed by the terms of your letter which demonstrate a sincere and true attachment to this personality whose disappearing has so deeply marked the history of the French Navy. She also requested of me to support you in the legitimate fight which you have engaged to denounce this regrettable error. As a matter of fact, it cannot be denied that this family name must be spelled in two words. What is confirmed in the most formal manner by the only French institution competent to fix the spelling in France, the Institut..."- Jean-Marie Caillaud, Principal Private Secretary
- From the ARCHIVES DE FRANCE =
" Sir, I well received your last mail in which you mention a mail concerning the spelling of the name La Pérouse, signed by Mr Jean Leclant, Perpetual Secretary of the 'Académie des inscriptions et belles lettres'. The quality of the subscriber and the precision of his answer seem to me sufficient to consider that this answer brings a definitive answer to the question which you have raised..." - Martine de Boisdeffre, Directress of the Archives de France -
- From the FRENCH NAVY =
"All my congratulations for your very interesting study on the legitimacy of the spelling La Pérouse. You have one more adept..." - Admiral Jean-Louis Battet, former chief of staff -
Jacques Thomas, ( 92.157.27.37) 16:18, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Commissariat Officer in the French Navy, Léon Dalmas de La Pérouse is the common ancestor of all descendants of this branch of family up today. In 1817, he wrote an official letter which is the inalterable proof that the name of the navigator was La Pérouse and no other. Here is an excerpt of this letter:
"Dalmas de La Pérouse Vannes 3 Xbre 1817 - Right to go by the name of La Pérouse - By His Enactment of February 21, 1815, His Majesty has authorized my family to add to their name the one of La Pérouse, my maternal uncle... I pray Your Excellency to command that I am mentionned under the designation of Dalmas de La Pérouse - "
I am sorry for all the supporters of Lapérouse but no argument can face this fact.
Jacques Thomas, November 1st, 2010 (unsigned by : Jacques Thomas 92.157.27.37)
Jacques Thomas 92.157.27.37, your assertions are somewhat lacking support. They are also contradictory to the apparent facts. I note upon examining the French articles containing the name Laperouse/La perouse it appears that you have been active in changing, promoting or creating articles using the La Perouse configuration of the name over an extended period of time. This despite the greater part of those article contents dealing with the subject as Laperouse. It is difficult to avoid the overwhelming body of information supporting the established recognition of the name being described as Lapérouse. The French Wikipedia articles that relate to Lapérouse currently have a considerable number of quite ludicrous naming irregularities. For example the school in Albi named after Lapérouse. It seems a Wikipedia editor has named the article on Lycee Lapérouse as Lycee La Perouse. This is entirely misleading and completely inaccurate as the school is clearly named Lycee Lapérouse [1]. On browsing the French WP articles I have found many examples of this absurd behaviour. Another example of absolutely silly behaviour is captioning "La Perouse" to a bust of Lapérouse Fichier:JFdeLapérouse20050110.jpg (Lapérouse par François Rude en 1828)- Bust of Lapérouse, clearly named as "Lapérouse" both on the historic records and on the bust itself. There have been recent activities in the EN WP article on Lapérouse where the French navy ships named Lapérouse have been 'renamed' by editors to show "La Perouse". This is simply vandalism especially when the contents citation links are also changed then breaking those links. I would suggest that it is best if that sort of activity stopped. It is also entirely preposterous for a WP editor to attempt to re-name a commissioned and active ship of the French navy.
Wikipedia is meant to be and encyclopaedic endeavour not a subjective essay. Your opinions appear to be highly subjective and have very little support in either the historic not the contemporary record. Please do not engage in the same activities here on the English language articles as you have on the French articles. What you have done there is quite misleading and in the most part factually incorrect. If a school is officially named Lycee Lapérouse, has a big sign on the front of the building stating Lycee Lapérouse and has a website calling the school Lycee Lapérouse then no one should be establishing an article calling it Lycee La Perouse. That is just ridiculous. The same applies to a statue, a park or a ship. I also note that you have been describing article citations to using the name La Perouse when the cited reference clearly describes the man as Lapérouse. Really this is not a good idea. Today I browsed FR WP articles that only mentioned La Perouse in the article title, everything withing the article including the citations pointing to Lapérouse instead. It makes the WP treatment of Lapérouse just present as a jumbled mess.
Naming convention:
The statue of Lapérouse renamed La Perouse in the WP articles is in fact named Lapérouse. The Statue of Lapérouse in Albi is described and documented in the general catalogue of the Toulouse Bibliothèque as "Statue de Lapérouse, Albi, 8 juillet 1899" see [8]
There are countless other resources of an academic nature, both historic and contemporary that refer the name as Lapérouse. If you wish to explore further afield I have given a number of references to foreign museums including the official maritime museums of other nations. Foriegn academic articles are also provided elsewhere on this discussion page as are historic documents of nations such as Australia who have a significant historical relationship with Lapérouse.
Your activities have made a complete mess of the French WP articles that contain or are specifically about Lapérouse. Please do not continue those activities on the English language pages. I appreciate your drive and determination is no doubt sincere and enthusiastic but your methodology is seriously flawed and your historic and contemporary references are somewhat questionable. If for no other reason please just accept that the man's last written official communication to the King of France and his Naval superiors was signed in the name Lapérouse. Please Jacques Thomas, enough is enough. Felix 11:01, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
Everybody can make a mistake when one does not know perfectly well the matter which one is speaking of, but the honest man interested in history must know to perfection what he is proclaiming. Probity requires it. Prudence recommends it. He is pledging his credit. When the first descendant of a family to wear an illustrious name firmly requires that this name is spelled La Pérouse, nobody aware of this fact can honestly ignore it, going against his will and so doing, against the course of History.
Jacques Thomas, ( 92.157.27.37) 13:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I've been monitoring the above discussions loosely; I do know that locations in British Columbia named for him use La Pérouse - Mount La Pérouse, La Pérouse Reef, La Pérouse Bank. It's worth noting that the British Columbia Geographical Names Information System, where those entries are from, originally had the mountain as La Perouse, without the accent, but in correcting the name in 1954, added it - and without conforming to the Lapérouse spelling; even commenting [sic] when that spelling is used in a Victoria Times-Colonist article in 2005. To me the reason for the different spelling is really clear, and muddied by historical context and the habits of latter-day writers - especially French writers, but also the Australian ones. "Lapérouse", like Lasalle vs. La Salle, Le Moyne vs. Lemoyne or Lemoine, a "republican" adaptation of a noble name - whether occasionally used by La Pérouse himself (by way of shorthand, it sounds like) or adamantly used by French (and Australian) authors and officials afterwards. To me, it's what the family wants and uses should be what's most important, and also "period" contexts (how it was most commonly used not only by himself but in his day). With a few exceptions, all the "Lapérouse" rationalizations come from later times; and those from French Polynesia would be influenced by post-Republican French and not reflective of the historically accurate form..... Skookum1 ( talk) 18:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
The best way to know of an historical fact consists in proceeding up to its source. A book was published in Paris, in 1888, by the "Société de Géographie" for the centenary of La Pérouse disappearing. This book includes a rich bibliography compiled by Gabriel Marcel, a celebrated librarian of the French "Bibliothèque nationale". In this bibliography, La Pérouse is cited 145 times and his name is spelled in two words in practically all the documents mentioned as edited in French before 1815. As, in this case, the signature cannot be taken for a proof, that gives us the surest evidence of the right spelling of La Pérouse's name.
Jacques Thomas - ( 92.157.27.37) 05:48, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Dear Mr.Felix, I do not know who you are and I am not vexed or vindictive. I have just read now with attention your response to my interventions in this talk and like Talleyrand, I am saying : 'All which is excessive, is insignificant.' You run a serious risk in attacking me as you do. A former Captain in the French Army Aviation, having fought four years in Vietnam, Knight of the Legion of Honour, Honorary Naval Aviator of the US Navy, Medal of Gratitude of Lyons Town, member of the International Legion of Intelligence, of the Society of Geography, of the Aéro-Club de France, Honorary President and Honorary Member of associations, I have a certain sense of Honour and Probity. As an historian, I am in quest of what is true or untrue. I do not stoop so low as to cheat. I do not need that to be appreciated and to find what I am in search for. I hate that. I try to act in order that all which I say is true. Without any proof, you accuse me of crimes on the La Pérouse French Wikipedia site which of course I never committed. Surprised, I ask you; "Is is quite fair play ?" I would have preferred a courteous discussion with you, between gentlemen and historians. I think that you would have finished being convinced of what I say and I would have liked to shake hands with you.
Jacques Thomas - November 3, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.213.237.236 ( talk) 21:14, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
During the study which we made of the matter, we had in hands a lot of original documents concerning La Pérouse himself, his wife Countess Eleonore of La Pérouse, his sister Victoire de Barthez, descendants of the La Pérouse family from the French Navy Commissariat officer Léon Dalmas de La Pérouse. That permitted us to realize an impressive and certainly unique collection of signatures and of the name written by themselves from 1789 to 1871. We took knowledge of two documents in which La Pérouse speaking of himself spells his name in two words, like it is spelled in his own Journal round the World. Even if by sentimental impregnation, Eleonore de La Pérouse has a signature quite similar to this of her husband, she writes their name in two words. On the contrary of Jean-François de La Pérouse himself, all others sign whith their name in two words. It seems that this fact changes around 1877, when the 'Livret de famille' is created. Despite the King's edit of 1839, wrongly fixing the name according to a signature, the family had continued to write their name in two words, but probably now they are obliged to adopt the name in one word. It seems that it is from this time that the form Lapérouse begins to spread. The family being named Lapérouse, some imagined that it was the name of the navigator. Others wanted to extend the name back to him. What of course was incorrect and might not have been done. We regret that many people follow the wrong track today because they do not know the realty. Even some great institutions follow this track, draped in the folds of their false certitude mostly due to a signature of no significance or to an unwanted modification of the name of a family. We are tempted to say that "There are none so deaf as those who don't want to hear."
Jacques Thomas – November 4, 2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.213.237.236 ( talk) 06:07, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Jacques Thomas 109.213.237.236 ( talk), this article is about the man Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse, not his family. If some members of his family wish to call themselves by either Lapérouse or La Pérouse then that is entirely their own business. What we need to deal with here is the name of Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse. He was a significant French figure of the Age of Enlightenment, a French explorer, a naval officer of some distinction and the Captain of several vessels of the Marine National. As the French government, the French navy, the historical association in Albi formed in his honour, the museum founded in Albi in his honour, the French Maritime museum and the maritime museums of several other nations all refer to him as Lapérouse and the last time he signed his name on an official naval document he signed as Lapérouse then, here at Wikipedia it is most appropriate that we do the same. Wikipedia is not meant to be a venue for reformation or debate. Rather it is meant to be an encyclopaedic resource. If all those institutions refer to him as Lapérouse then we need to do the same. The policies of Wikipedia dictate that as editors we only follow authoritative and citable information that can be readily supported by published and verifiable information. If all those authoritative French institutions all change to La Pérouse then we would need to document that instead. However at this time the official historical position of those significant French institutions appears to firmly lie with "Lapérouse" as the spelling. I sympathise with you in that this may conflict with your views on the matter and there is clearly some historic confusion surrounding the matter. However we must document the historical record here not attempt to revise nor reform it, that is not the role of Wikipedia. I suggest your energies may be better spent partitioning the Marine Nasional, the Musée National de la Marine and the Ministry of Defence to revise their interpretation of history if you feel sufficiently motivated. However my understanding is that you have done so already with some considerable vigour and enthusiasm and that they have not changed their stand on the matter. Do you have a viewpoint on why Jean-François de Galaup, comte de Lapérouse signed his name as "Lapérouse". I have read of opinions that he was being "informal" however I note he did this not only on personal letters but also on official documents including naval logs. Felix 13:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
If one has a look at the French Larousse Dictionary, at the Encyclopaedia Britannica, at the Encyclopaedia Quid, at the French version of Wikipedia, one can see that it is wisely and intelligently referred to the navigator as to La Pérouse. There are in the Larousse Dictionary more than 70 persons whose names include the definite article 'La' which is not attached. I could have had in hand original documents written and signed by many of these celebrities. Most of them would have a linked signature, in one word, and nobody would have the idea to change the form of their name today. When writing rapidly with a quill-pen, it was easier so doing than to rise the pen and to precisely form two characters. La Pérouse was far to be alone to do that. It was not an anomaly. It was quite common. Consulted, a specialized lawyer studied the matter and wrote that : " From a graphological point of view, it is quite significant to note that the navigator had a tendency to attached words to other words whereas he separates the article from the other word when he writes his name, La Pérouse, in a text. . . It is quite bold to announce that a signature in one word is a proof of spelling, still more if the author has a linked way of writing while he separates the article when he writes his own name." La Pérouse disappeared in 1788. Before his fatal disappearance he was always during his whole life considered as wearing a name written in two parts. For instance, in the Royal Ordinance signed by His majesty the King making him a Commodore, we find his name four times, written in two words. It is in two words that his name is engraved on the silver or bronze medals stricken on the occasion of the frigates Departure. By this time, everybody knew him as La Pérouse. The linked form, Laperouse, officially appeared 51 years after the navigator's disappearing, as an administrative obligation for the descendants of his two sisters who previously had adopted his name written in two words. How could it be the navigator's name since it did not exist yet ? From this time a myth has started to arise and develop step by step. His heirs had no longer the possibility of wearing the navigator's name in two words, and their name in one word began to be posthumously transferred to La Pérouse himself. Supported by the linked signature of La Pérouse and his heirs' name, the myth grew deeply and was so widely taken for realty than it was adopted by some authors, associations, museums and other institutions. After no longer than a century, very few people were aware of the truth or tried to investigate. However there were a few islets of resistance and disorder reigned which incited me to undertake a complete and exacting study of the matter when, in 1988, the French Navy had abandoned a tradition and given a new survey ship the name "Lapérouse". Maybe not for ever ! Praised by the highest authorities, this study definitely proves that the name of Jean-François de La Pérouse cannot and may not be written otherwise than in two words
Jacques Thomas – November 8, 2010
Indeed the La is not linked to a P as you appear to be suggesting. Rather the La is linked to a p, clearly forming the word Lapérouse in one fluid movement, rather than LaPérouse or La_Pérouse, I suggest you might like to re-examine your conclusions. The image supplied for you on this page is an image of Lapérouse's signed journal despatched with the HMS Siius and originally held in the French naval archives. It seems quite clear and unambiguous in presenting his signature. I not it is an officially archived document of the Marine National.
This idea of yours appears to rather seriously conflict with the Marine National. The French navy were sailing around in a Cruiser named the Lapérouse over 100 years prior to this and indeed named a whole class of ships by this name, there were at least four of them, as lifted above. I have included a photo of that ship with this response to aid in clarity. The French navy were not "breaking from tradition" indeed they were following it, and that was to use the spelling Lapérouse. Felix ( talk) 17:31, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
I know well the matter and the ship. I have excellent contacts in the French Navy and I was invited twice aboard the "Lapérouse", one time to cruise. There is aboard a precious collection of copies of ancient documents concerning Jean-François de La Pérouse which I offered to the ship. I know why the Navy abandonned the tradition. Maybe not for long. If you have a look at the official Magazine "Cols bleus" of July 11, 2009, you can read on the front cover: "Carnet de voyage du BH La Pérouse".and if you search for 'Navires célèbres", on Internet <netmarine>,you will see now "La Pérouse" The two last chiefs of Staff of the Navy fully agreed with my views. Admiral Fournery who had commanded the" La Pérouse" in the Indian Ocean was also a good friend of mine. With a Navy Captain, another of my friends, we found the grave of Eleonore de La Pérouse and I organized the two first official ceremonies to Her Memory and to this of La Pérouse. The Ambassador of America and the Navy Chief of Staff were represented. Several Navy officers were present who knew well my point of view. Invited to join by plane the aicraft Carrier USS 'Enterprise' on manoeuver out at sea, I offered to the Captain a portrait of La Pérouse who galantly fought at sea during the American War of Independence. At last, I have the pleasure of keeping bonds of warm friendship with three ladies, sisters born Dalmas de Lapérouse, though they are perfectly aware of my point of view. Jacques Thomas ( talk) 20:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC) 109.213.237.236 ( talk) 19:55,
On Internet, the track is a little more complicated than this previously mentioned : On <net.marine> Histoire et patrimoine : 1 - Thèmes géographiques - La Marine à Mururoa = "La Pérouse" - 2- Divers - Les marins célbres = La Pérouse. Jacques Thomas ( talk) 21:00, 8 November 2010 (UTC) November 8, 2010