Next: Hill Pippin Up: book-08-web Previous: book-08-web
There are a number of myths and legends concerning early Pippins in America that people just beginning to trace their Pippin roots seem invariably to run into. Some of these can be traced to the work done by Rev. Walter W. Pippen, Jr. and those people who cooperated with him back in the 1940's, or tried to supplement his work later. This is my attempt to address a few of these issues.
Rev. Walter W. Pippen, Jr., was an early researcher into Pippin genealogy. Around 1941 he typed a manuscript of some hundred pages detailing his findings and incorporating genealogical information contributed by several other Pippins. I have a copy that was kept by Dru L. Pippin of Waynesville, Missouri, who collaborated with him in the project. Rev. Pippen's correspondence shows that he had at least done some preliminary work as early as the 1920's, because he had correspondence with J. B. Pippin at that time. I don't know what happened to Rev. Pippen or his archives.
Late in his life, Dru Pippin corresponded with Martin Dunville of Detroit and sent Dunville materials from his archive, including Rev. Pippen's manuscript. Dunville already had a substantial body of data of his own, to which he added this new data. A cursory inspection of a major database posted on the internet, Maddigan1, suggests that it incorporates large portions of Dunville. Dunville seems to have applied Rev. Pippen's theory that all Pippins in America are related (discussed below) by linking as many lines as possible on any possible basis. Although Dunville's database contained a great deal of useful facts, its overall theory that all Pippins are related is flawed. I don't know if Dunville actually believed this theory, or whether he was simply looking at the results that would follow if the theory were true, but his construction of the family tree survives to this day, and some people believe it.
Rev. Pippen had a cluster of notions regarding the origin of the Pippin family in America. Here are some illustrative statements of his beliefs:
All Pepins and Pippins and Pippens in Canada and America were descended from [the sons of Charlemagne]. Those in America using the French spelling of Pepin were late comers by way of Canada. The English spelling crowd are descendants of the 17th Century emigrants. It would be a costly task to authentically connect these lines with Charlemagne but family tradition and historical data make it too circumstantially strong to be reasonably denied. - Rev. Walter W. Pippen, Jr., typescript, c. 1942.
We are all descendants of Charlemagne thru his son Pepin, King of Italy. - Rev. Walter W. Pippen, Jr. Letter to Eva Luther Pippin. 1941.
For the past two years, I have been gathering data on the Pippen family in America. The first two brothers came from France and settled in Northumberland & Northampton counties, Va. in 1635 - 1639. All Pippens in Amer. are descendants of those two brothers. - Rev. Walter W. Pippen, Jr. Letter to Eva Luther Pippin. April 22, 1941.
There is a tradition in the family of W.W. Pippen, Jr. of Eutaw, Ala., that two brothers came to this country from France (descendants of Emperor Charlemagne) and settled in Va. and N.C. respectively. It is evident from the above that Wm. and Matthew were the brothers and that they settled first in Va., and their descendants later went to N.C. by way of Md. - Rev. Walter W. Pippen, Jr.
Most of the French refugees to this country came via England & to that extent he is correct in saying they came from England & in the 17th Century. ... These two Pippin brothers, immigrants, came here poor as so many fine people did in those early days, when religious persecution was rampant in Europe. - Rev. Walter W. Pippen, Jr. Letter to Dru L. Pippin. 1941.
My reading of these passages is that Rev. Pippen claims the tradition is from his - Rev. Pippen's - family. I would like to know what Rev. Pippen heard, from whom he heard it, and the basis his informants advanced in support of their claims of authenticity and accuracy. We have none of that.
There are five themes in these statements that appear in Rev. Pippen's manuscript and seem to turn up over and over. They are: (1) the family descends from Charlemagne; (2) the family originated in France; (3) the family is descended from two brothers; (4) the Pippins - and in particular the brothers - came to America because of religious persecution - they were Huguenots; and (5) all Pippins in America are related.
Rev. Pippen claims that family tradition supports a claim of descent from Charlemagne. I am reluctant to dismiss claims of family tradition out of hand. Many are the source of truth just awaiting research and documentation. What about Rev. Pippen's claim of family tradition? One problem is exactly what the family tradition was. Insofar as his claim is that there is a tradition in his family that claims descent from Charlemagne, I suspect that the origin of the claim was wishful thinking creatively combined with the bare fact of a surname that figured in the Charlemagne story. Descent from Charlemagne has not been proven, probably cannot be, and to me seems doubtful.
Rev. Pippen doesn't expressly cite any documents, books, or records in support of his claim of descent from Charlemagne. What is the historical data he claims supports his theory? Fundamentally the only historical fact that he relies on is the fact that some members of Charlemagne's line had the name ``Pippin'' itself. His recitation of the Line of Charlemagne at the beginning of his manuscript serves the dual function of documenting the presumptive beginning of the Pippin line, and of presenting the evidence in support of the claim of relationship.
Elsewhere in his manuscript there are other examples of Rev. Pippen's application of the name theory. Rev. Pippen speculates that one Denis Papin, an associate of Huygens, was a relative. The basis for that notion was simply that the surname was a form of the Pippin name. In another place, he fleetingly speculates that von Papen (Franz von Papen, Chancellor of Germany 1932) was also also a relative, again because of the similarity of surnames.
Rev. Pippen does recognize that his claim of descent from Charlemagne is not well supported: he notes that it would be a costly task to connect the line of Matthew or William Pippin to the line of Charlemagne. This deserves some further elaboration. To do this would require us to trace the descent of someone born in 1615 (Matthew, for example) back to roughly the year 700, through more than one country, at a time when paper, literacy, and record keeping were very limited, and when even tombstones would have weathered into illegibility. Indeed, we cannot even trace from the 1800's or 1700's back to Matthew.
The other side of this coin is the fact that there has been careful record keeping of the descendants of Charlemagne. After all, in the age of monarchies questions of descent were important matters of state. Thus, it is well known who was a descendant of William the Conqueror, as it is well known who was descended from other royal houses. I read once that Charlemagne was probably the name most frequently the object of attempts to connect family lines to famous royal personages of the past, but that because the line of Charlemagne is so thoroughly documented, such attempts are futile.
There is a phenomenon that suggests the probable relationship of the Pippin family name to Charlemagne. People often adopt the name of famous leaders as their own. Famous examples include the adoption of the surnames Washington and Jefferson by people with no relation to those two presidents. This is true with respect to the Pippin name as well. In the dictionary entry quoted below it is said that the name is popular in France ``in memory of''' the line of Charlemagne.
Three possible bases for the claim of French ancestry are descent from Charlemagne, Pippin the name, and that the family were refugees from France, possibly religious refugees, namely Huguenots.
Let's consider the idea that since the name is French, the brothers must have been French.
The name Pippin has a very long history in England as well as in France. The following early examples of the name and possible origin are from A Dictionary of English Surnames2:
Pepin Peppin Pepys Pippin Pipon Ralph, Henry Pipin 1086, 1195 John Pepin c1160, 1202 William, Walter Pipun 1176, 1212 Reginald Peppin 1205 William Pippin 1279
from Old French: Pepin, Old German Pipin
``Pepin, from the root 'to tremble', popular in France in memory of the founders of the Carolingian monarchy, Pepin d'Heristal and Pepin le Bref, with the occasional variant Pipun. Pepis is a nominative form. Later examples of the surname may be from OFr pepin, pipin 'seed of a fleshy fruit', used for a gardener.''
It can be seen here that the name had been established in England for hundreds of years prior to the arrival of Pippins in the New World; and therefore the name Pippin name is insufficient to base a claim of French ancestry.
The third basis for the French ancestry claim is that the early Pippins were refugees of some sort, possibly Huguenots. One might first consider the documentary support. This theory appears not only in the work of Rev. Pippen, but also in a manuscript titled In Memory of Miriam by Edna Guilford Cook. I haven't been able to identify Edna Cook. One source says, ``Mrs Edna Guilford Cook was a secretary in the U.S. Congress. During legislature recess she spent many hours researching her family. Her position in the senate opened many doors which helped to find data. She would visit the homes of relatives, gathering information from bible, court, graves, etc.''3
In 1998 on Genforum4 Jim Pippin described Cook's manuscript, which he reviewed in the Edgecombe County Memorial Library in Tarboro, North Carolina. According to Jim, the book is dated 5 Nov 1957 and the foreword claims that the research had been done fifteen years prior to that date, meaning roughly 1942. Edna Cook's statements regarding the two brothers seem to be simply an elaboration of Rev. Pippen's beliefs to which she has added tantalizing new details. Cook writes (as quoted by Jim):
Matthew Pippen probably born in Blois, France, around 1615. Fled with his brother William Pippen to England due to religious persecution in France. They were French Hugenots. Upon arrival in England they, together with many others of the Pepin family, became communicants of the Church L'Anglaise in Threadneedle Street, London, later coming to America with letters of recommendation from the English clergyman of that church. Matthew arrived in 1635, his sponsor being Southy Littleberry of Northampton County, Virginia, so evidently he settled there and his descendants married into the Littleberry, Cullen and Banister families of Northampton County.
Jim said, ``There is much more erroneous data in the manuscript, too much to print here. The manuscript is not documented.'' Even with the tantalizing level of detail (e.g. Blois, Threadneedle Street), without documentation we cannot rely on it. While Edna Cook's manuscript does not sound like it advances adequate support for a claim of French origins, I have not personally read it. I have no means to try to verify her statements regarding the ``church on Threadneedle street''.
Setting asside for a moment any doubts about the documentation, let's consider the likelihood of the conclusion. Rev. Pippen alludes to religious persecution, and Cook identifies these presumptive forbears as Huguenots. Quick reference to the Encyclopedia Americana revealed the following. The origins of the Huguenots trace to 1560, with the intellectual leadership being Calvin in Geneva. They were sponsored and led by certain members of the House of Bourbon, in particular King Henry of Navarre. Later Henry became King Henry IV of France and converted to Catholicism 1593. In 1562 religious civil war began and ran until around 1598. Henry's accession and the Edict of Nantes resulted in some tolerance, but it was slowly whittled away and died with the accession of Louis XIII in 1629. (At this point the early Pippins left to the New World.) Louis XIV continued to reduce their rights and abolished them completely in 1685 with the abolition of the Edict of Nantes. While this 1685 act led to the mass emigration of some 400,000 Huguenots to America, the supposed brothers left for North America around 1635.
Rev. Pippin did not invent Matthew and William Pippin, the individuals he identified as the first arriving brothers. Therefore, even if he had never set forth this theory, the question of how Matthew Pippen and William Pippen relate to any Pippins of the present would have arisen. Rev. Pippen thought that these two early arrivals (they did not arrive simultaneously) were the two brothers he had heard of in his family tradition. Who were Matthew and William, where did they come from, were they related, and how are any of us related to them?
One can imagine Rev. Pippen taking his first steps to research the family tradition of two brothers by going to a library and looking for the earliest Pippins. It's clear he did a fair amount of library research. Rev. Pippen turned up the names of those he believed to be the two earliest Pippins to have emigrated to the New World:
Early Virginia Immigrants by Hotten: 1623 - 1666: William Peppin, Jas. City Co., Va. Sept. 11, 1639 (Later Northumberland); Matthew Peppin (g) Apr. 16, 1635. (Northampton Co. Va. in Dec. 26, 1660). Matthew Pippen came on the ship Expectation, whose captain was a Mr. Billinge. See Nugent's Cavaliers and Pioneers at page 532, etc.
In the documentation of the dates of the voyage of the Expectation I found a passenger manifest showing sex and age of the passengers, and the ship's destination, Providence Island. When I first read that name, I assumed it had something to do with Providence, Rhode Island, but nothing could be further than the truth. Providence Island is a location in Central America. So the Expectation did not bring one of our ancestors to Virginia or North Carolina.
The preface to the book in which I found documentation of the Expectation voyage noted that the passengers were frequently orphans swept from the streets. The data concerning the passengers of the Expectation are consistent with this. The Expectation's passengers included 45 men (average age 23) and 27 women (average 25) with the modal age for both groups being between 16 and 20.
English history of the time suggests that emigration was probably impelled on economic rather than religious grounds. Matthew Pippin is said to be 20 on his voyage aboard the Expectation. Therefore we roughly figure his date of birth to have been in the year 1615. Reference to the Brittanica for the historical context shows that Elizabeth I died in 1603. Oliver Cromwell was born in 1599. Therefore Matthew might well have served for (or against) Cromwell in the Civil War had he not emigrated. England at that time had a population of around 4 million. (The population of London was around 500,000.) The population had doubled over the past hundred years. There had been Elizabeth's war with Spain. Price inflation had taken hold with disastrous consequences for many. For the first 20 years of the century there was a ``rural subsistence crisis'' from which it took almost 50 years to recover. The Thirty Years War of 1618-48 magnified the economic problems. In 1627 England was at war with both France and Spain, although peace treaties were signed in 1628-29.
The following facts were also abstracted from the Brittanica. Barbados had been depopulated by Spain for slaves in the 16th Century, and then colonized by England in 1627. Attempts were made to grow tobacco and cotton, but they were not successful. In 1640, with Dutch help, the economy was successfully converted to sugar, but this necessitated the use of slaves, who then began to be imported in great numbers.
The Providence Island Company was established in 1630 in an attempt to open trade with Spanish America. Providence Island is located about 140 statute miles east of Nicaragua and about 1,500 miles west of Barbados (which is off Venezuela). Pym had been treasurer and Warwick, who had to resign the presidency of the New England Company in 1632, continued to manage the Bermuda Company and the Providence Island Company, which, according to the Brittanica ``provided a convenient meeting place for critics of royal policy''.
Even though Matthew did not come to North American colonies aboard the Expectation, could he have somehow come here nevertheless? Jim Pippin posted the following on Genforum:
Mathew Pypinge was imported into Norhampton Co., VA by Southy Littleton during 1656 from Barbados, British West Indies.
...extracts from Northampton Co, VA court records. -
30 Jan 1656/7 Mathew Pipen entered into bond with Jno Marshall. 30 Aug 1657 Mathew Pepin became livestock agent for Gyler Budd. 1660 Mathew Pepin convicted of drunkenness, fined fifty pounds of tobacco. 1662-1664 & 1665-1671 Mathew Pippin was a tithable in Northampton Co, VA. 21 Jun 1667, 7 Feb 1669, 9 Nov 1670, 29 Dec 1671 Jury duty 1658 Mathew Pepin received land patent for 100 acres in Accomack Co, VA. 1660 Mathew Pepin assigns land patent to Francis and Mary Vincent. - Virginia's Eastern Shore, Vol. I, by Ralph T. Whitelaw.
These facts suggest that there was an early Matthew Pippin who could have been the founder of a Pippin line in North America. There would seem to be no way to conclusively establish that the Matthew or Matthews mentioned are the same person as the Expectation Matthew. But in any event, it would appear that a William Pippin was in fact the first Pippin in North America.
Since Rev. Pippen's research, which was conducted from the 1920's to the 1940's, more data has become available; here is what I have been able to compile. From Passenger and Immigration Lists Index5:
Original volumes:
PIPPIN, Mathew 20; Providence, Isl. of, 1635 ...
PIPPIN, Wm. (no age); Virginia, 1638 ...
1982-85 Supplement:
PIPPIN, Mathew 20; Barbados, 1635 ...
PIPPIN, Mathew 20; Providence, Isl. of, 1635 ...
PIPPIN, William (no age); Virginia, 1649 ...
PIPPIN, Wm (no age); Virginia, 1638 ...
1991-95 Supplement:
PIPPIN, Mathew 20; Island of Providence
PIPPING, Matt; Virginia, 1682
Rev. Pippen seems to have concluded that the William who arrived in 1638 was Matthew's brother because their arrivals were (presumptively) fairly close together in time. However, now that we see the earliest Matthew in North America arrived in 1656, would he be the brother of the 1638 William? The fact that Matthew even had a brother, much less that his name was William, has not been documented.
My notes show two references to William Pippin. The dates are somewhat confusing and I haven't figured out how these two records relate. However, the list of names suggests we are talking about the same group of people. Were there two different events?
Patent Book No. 1 - Part II at p. 97:
Richard Wilcox: 700 acs in Chichahominy Riv. James Citty, 11 Sept. 1638, p. 597. N.E. adj. land of Robert Freeman. Due for trans. Of 14 pers: John February, We. Lowder, Jon. Warren, Wm. Pippin, Rich. Stephens, William Hix, Jon. Butler, Humphry Blackman, Roger Crabbe, Humphry Dale, Jon. Chappell, John Richford, Tho. Fowler, Peter Willett.
Patent Book No. 2 at p. 185:
Mr. William Presly, 150 acs. Northumberland Co., 14 Oct. 1649, p. 186. Lyeing on Potomeck Riv. between Chingehan Cr. & Presly's Cr. mouth over to the Codd point, Mattrams Cr. parting this from land of Mr. John Motrums, & Chingehan Cr. parting this from land of Mr. Robert Newman. Trans. of 23 pers.: John February, Richd. Steevens, Robert Crabbe, John Ridford, William Louder, William Hicks, Hump. Dale, Tho. Fowler, John Warren, John Buttler, John Chappell, Peter Willet, William Pippin, Tho. Spalding, Humph. Blackman, Peter Callay, Jno. Wildblood, Henry Plumpton, We. Presly, Jane his wife, Wm. Presly, Payle (or Paule) Presly, Peter Presly.
Matthew and William assume a position of importance when it is believed that one or both founded the Pippin lines in North America. It is certain that they were not the founders of at least one of the lines (John and Rebecca). But could they have at least been the founders of some of the lines? All efforts to link to them to any current or known line of North American Pippins have so far failed.
Were Matthew and William brothers? The Matthew who for years was assumed to have been the first Pippin to set foot on North American soil was certainly not the first. If the Expectation Matthew was the Matthew who ultimately arrived in North America, the delay in his arrival and the difference represented by his itinerary make it less likely that he was a brother of the William identified as having arrived in 1638. Indeed there may have been Pippin brothers. But at this point we have only an ill-defined family legend, no clear connection of that legend to the documented William and Matthew, and a lot of speculation.
It seems doubtful that Matthew and William were French. It seems more likely that they fell into the class of orphans or economic refugees from England.
Thanks to Pippin Pathways6, we now know that all Pippins in America are not related. But without this research work to consult, how did Rev. Pippen attempt to prove the claim?
Rev. Pippen had a problem with his claim that all Pippins in America were descended from Matthew or William Pippin. The problem was and is that there is no information regarding the descendants of any early Matthew or William. The next documented step on Rev. Pippen's family tree was Matthias Pippin, and the problem was to link the early Pippin ``brothers'' to Matthias. Rev. Pippen never succeeded, but he thought he was on the right track when he discovered a reference to one Edward Addison Pippin. Per Rev. Pippen's typescript:
Edward A. Pippen sold land in Warwick Co. Va. prior to 1727. He was probably an ancestor of Wm. Pepin of 1790 Fed. Census. Edw. A. is a family name.
In a Genforum post Jim Pippin quotes statements made in Mrs. Cook's book on the issue:
Edward Addison Pippen, of Warwick County Virginia, 1727. Little is known of him except with him the name ``Addison'' came into the Pippin family. He was probably a grandson of Matthew Pippin of Northampton.
Jim felt that this was a mistake. Jim said, ``Edward never existed. The reference probably came from Genealogies of Virginia Families which printed the will of Matth' Jones of Isle of Wright Co, VA. Jones' will as published shows he left property to his son that he purchased of 'Edward Pippin or Kippen'. A review of the hand written copy of the will shows the name to be Edward Rippin.'' Jim didn't note who analyzed the handwriting.
At another place in his manuscript, Rev. Pippen states:
The last known Addison Pippen was Edgar Addison of Greene Co., Ala., who died in 1915 and was buried in Clinton, Ala. Uncle of Rev. W.W. Pippen, Jr.
Here the ``E'' is for Edgar, not Edward, so query to what extent we can really believe he was a namesake.
The problem is that to link Matthew with an established 18th century line, anywhere from 2 to 7 generations may be needed. According to Jim Pippin's posting, Mrs. Cook proposes a line from Matthew to Edward Addison, to Matthias to John. She may have been one of the first to advance this theory, but she probably will not be the last. Nevertheless, the theory is not completely documented and the documentation advanced by proponents of the theory is questionable.
The Pippin name is frequently associated with a variety of apple. I haven't really looked into this much, but I found two items relating to the apple issue in my uncle's box of Pippin odds and ends.
Rev. Pippen wrote:
Pippin Apple named for Pippins in Normandy France because they were a round, florid apple like the typical ``Pippin Face''. See Encyclopedia. Introduced to Albemarle Co. Va. from N.Y. in 1741 by Dr. Thos. Walker of King and Queen Co. Va.
Dru L. Pippin wrote to Rush Pippin of Henryetta, Oklahoma, about Pippin matters and received a reply from Rush's father, J.W. Pippin, on June 14, 1941. In his letter, J.W. said:
My father had two cousins who moved to Missouri. One of them came to visit in our home when I was ten years old. These brothers were associated in the fruit business. This family is known to have originated the ``Missouri Pippin Apple''.
