You’ve seen him in history books. He’s usually sporting a dapper goatee, a flowing lace collar, and a look of stern determination. He’s the "Father of New France," the man who mapped the wild coastlines of the North Atlantic and founded Quebec City. But here is the weird, slightly awkward truth: when you look at those famous pictures of Samuel de Champlain, you aren't actually looking at Champlain.
None of them are real.
Honestly, it’s one of the greatest "catfishing" moments in historical record. We have absolutely no idea what the man looked like. Not a single painting, sketch, or doodle from his lifetime survives that shows his face in detail. For a man who spent his life documenting the world with obsessive precision, he left himself a total mystery.
The Great Identity Theft: Michel Particelli d’Émery
So, if that iconic face isn’t him, who is it? This is where the story gets kinda ridiculous.
Back in the mid-19th century, a French artist named Louis-César-Joseph Ducornet created a lithograph. People were desperate for a visual of the great explorer to celebrate Canada’s growing identity. Ducornet "found" a portrait and put Champlain’s name on it.
It worked. Too well.
The image became the gold standard. It was copied by Théophile Hamel in 1870, whose oil painting now hangs in the halls of power. It was used for statues, postage stamps, and textbooks. But in the early 20th century, a historian named Henry Percival Biggar did some digging in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris.
💡 You might also like: Easy recipes dinner for two: Why you are probably overcomplicating date night
He found the original source.
The "Champlain" everyone had been worshipping was actually an engraving from 1654 by Balthasar Moncornet. The subject? A man named Michel Particelli d’Émery. He wasn't an explorer. He was a French Controller-General of Finance under Louis XIV. He was a tax man. A bureaucrat with a reputation for being a bit of a shyster.
Basically, Canada’s most famous pioneer has spent the last 150 years masquerading as a 17th-century accountant.
The One Tiny Clue: Champlain’s Own Sketches
Is there anything authentic? Sorta.
Champlain was a cartographer and an author. He published accounts of his travels, and he liked to include action scenes. In his 1613 book Les Voyages, there is a famous engraving of a battle against the Iroquois at Lake Champlain in 1609.
If you squint—and I mean really, really squint—you can see a tiny figure in the center of the chaos.
📖 Related: How is gum made? The sticky truth about what you are actually chewing
- He’s wearing armor.
- He’s firing an arquebus (an early gun).
- He has a plumed helmet.
- The figure is approximately the size of a grain of rice.
That’s it. That is the only contemporary "picture" we have. It tells us he was a soldier and he was brave (or at least wanted to be seen that way), but it doesn't help much with the facial features. We don't know if he was tall, short, scarred, or had a crooked nose.
Why the Fake Pictures of Samuel de Champlain Persist
You might wonder why we don't just throw the fake ones away. History is about facts, right? Well, history is also about symbols.
By the time the fraud was discovered, the "Particelli-Champlain" face was already baked into the cultural psyche. It represented the "bon vivant" spirit—a man with an iron constitution who could survive brutal Canadian winters. The fake portrait looks like a hero. It looks like someone you’d follow into a frozen wilderness.
The real Champlain was likely much more rugged. He crossed the Atlantic over 20 times. He spent months sleeping in bark shelters and trekking through waist-deep snow. He wouldn't have looked like a pampered courtier in a crisp lace collar.
Artists like C.W. Jefferys and George Agnew Reid eventually tried to create more "realistic" interpretations. They drew him in buckskins or heavy wool, focusing on his role as a navigator and builder. But even these are just educated guesses. They are "imaginary portraits," a term historians use for when we’re basically just making it up.
How to Spot a "Fake" Champlain
If you’re browsing archives or looking for pictures of Samuel de Champlain for a project, here is how you can tell what you’re looking at:
👉 See also: Curtain Bangs on Fine Hair: Why Yours Probably Look Flat and How to Fix It
- The "Tax Man" Look: If he has a curly wig, a thin mustache, and looks like he’s about to audit your taxes, that’s Michel Particelli d’Émery.
- The Statue Look: Most statues (like the one at Nepean Point in Ottawa) use the fake face because, well, it’s easier to sculpt a face people recognize than a blank space.
- The Action Hero: If it’s a tiny woodcut of a guy shooting a gun at Lake Champlain, that’s the only one actually drawn under his direction.
- The 20th Century Reimagining: If he looks like a rugged woodsman in a fur cap, it’s probably a modern artistic interpretation from the 1900s.
What This Teaches Us About History
It’s easy to get frustrated by the lack of accuracy, but there's a lesson here. We often remember people not for who they were, but for what we need them to be.
In the 1800s, people needed a refined, European founder. So they found a face that fit. Today, we might prefer a more rugged, collaborative explorer who worked closely with Indigenous allies like the Huron and Algonquin.
The lack of a real portrait keeps Champlain human. He isn't a static painting; he's the sum of his writings, his maps, and the city he left behind.
Actionable Next Steps for History Buffs
If you want to see the real legacy of Champlain beyond the fake portraits, skip the Google Image search and look at his actual work.
- Check out the 1632 Map: Search for the "Carte de la Nouvelle France." It is his masterpiece and shows what he actually saw with his own eyes.
- Read 'Des Sauvages': His first-hand accounts are far more descriptive than any painting.
- Visit the 'Habitation' site: In Quebec City’s Place-Royale, you can stand where he stood. The architecture he designed tells you more about his mind than a fraudulent lithograph ever could.
We might never know what the man looked like, but through his maps, we know exactly how he saw the world. And honestly? That’s probably how a cartographer would have wanted it.