A few days ago I posted the following to the searoom list, in response to
one of those perennial debates within the naval history community: how does
one really pronounce the surname of Samuel “Pepys”, the great English
diarist cum naval administrator of the late-17th century. (It was Pepys, of
course, who as the Admiralty’s Clerk of the Acts, built the administrative
structure of the Royal Navy.) Through a series of “off-list” messages, I’ve
come to believe that the members of this list might find it of
interest as well.
***************************
I originally wrote, (in part), regarding the pronunciation of “Pepys”:
>> For what it’s worth, I have a small research file-folder with notes on
the matter, the gist of which I would gladly share as a posting to the list,
as long as I am fairly certain that in doing so I am not simply repeating
what has already been said.
**************************
To which Eric S. Raymond responded:
>
>I think you may safely post, sir.
>
>As the first respondent to the original question, I can say that what
>has followed has largely been (like my response) mere repetitions of
>the conventional wisdom. The single dissenter’s claim, while
>interesting, was equally unvarnished by source references or any other
>form of scholarly apparatus.
>
>It is true that one person quoted a BBC dictionary of British names
>to good effect. But I think you may regard the ground as unplowed,
>and that others will await a truly knowledgeable exposition with
>the same tempered but positive interest as myself.
**********************
So here goes. I must forewarn you, however, if you are looking for a
definitive resolution to the debate at the end of this msg, you will be
disappointed. As I suspected, there is some overlap between what I have to
say and what has already been posted, (the poems); but since the other
postings did not provide references, I have decided not to cut them out.
As was mentioned in a few of the previous postings, the best sources for
trying to deduce the correct pronunciation of Pepys’ name are, of course,
contemporary references. In this regard, Dr. R.C. Anderson mentioned in a
Note to the “Mariner’s Mirror”, Vol 50, #3, (May 1964), p. 135, that he had
edited the journals of a contemporary of Pepys named Allin. In these
writings, Allin indicated that he had dined with and visited the Great
Diarist on several occasions, and Anderson notes that he (Allin) had always
written the name as “Peppis”. Anderson concludes his note by suggesting
that: “it seems almost impossible that Allin could fail to know how his host
pronounced his name.”
Another friend and contemporary of Pepys, James Carcasse, published a poem
in 1679 which seems to strongly suggest the correct pronounciation was
“Pips”, to wit:
“Him must I praise who opened hath my lips,
Sent me from the Navy to the Ark by Pepys…”
(This appears in a footnote of the “Everyman’s” edition of Pepys’s diary.)
There was some interesting correspondence regarding this topic in “The
(London) Times” of 11 and 13 September 1963, during which Mr D. Pepys
Whiteley, the Custodian of the Pepys Library, Magdalene College, Cambridge,
UK, presented the following poem:
Oh, Samuel who on some folks’ lips
Art designated Samuel Pips,
While others follow in the steps
Of those who call you Samuel Peps,
At Cottenham the proper step is
To sound the ‘Y’ and call you Pep-is.
At such ignorance all Magdalene weeps,
Well knowing you are Samuel Peeps.
Another correspondent suggested that the contemporary pronunciation was
“Papes”, (but this is the only time I have ever heard this assertion and
would therefore tend to discount it).
Mr Dudley Pope, (a rather prolific writer on British naval matters in the
post-war period), joined the fray on the side of “Peppis”, based upon the
following rationale.
“..today, almost 300 years later, many people living in the New Cross area
of London still refer to Pepys Road, (London S.E.14, opposite the junction
of New Cross Rd and Queen’s Rd), as “Peppis” Rd. I discovered this when
being given directions how to find a road nearby, and I mentioned “Peep’s”
Rd. This produced no reaction from my informant, who then referred to
“Peppis” Rd. It transpired that he lived within 500 yards of Pepys Rd for
more than 35 years, and said he had never heard it pronounced other than
‘Peppis’…”
In recognition of the 300th anniversary of his birth, “Samuel Pepys” was the
title of the NRS’s Annual Lecture for 1933, [published in the Mariner’s
Mirror, Vol 29, #2, (April 1933)]. At the time, the lecturer, Mr Chappell,
was recognised as a leading expert on Pepys, having just been responsible
for curating a major exhibition entitled “Pepysiana” at the NMM, Greenwich.
In his lecture, when referring to a slide showing legal documents concerning
the Great Diarist’s ancestors, (c. 1519 and 1563), Chappell commented:
“Observe the varied spellings of the names, among which you will find
evidence for whatever pronunciation you favour. You can even be original
and start a ‘Pipes’ school!” (pp. 213-4)
A little later in the lecture, Chappell dealt with the pronunciation issue
square-on.
“And now I come to an eternal subject of discussion — the pronunciation of
the name. One of the chief arguments of the ‘Peeps’ school, to which I do
not really belong, is that the name must have been pronounced in that way by
Samuel, because his sister’s descendants, the Pepys-Cockerells, have
pronounced it so to this day. I will now show you what this tradition is
worth.
Rather than quote directly, I will paraphrase the next part of the lecture,
since it refers to some slides the audience would have been viewing, dealing
with the Pepys’ family geneology. Samuel Pepys survived the other members
of his immediate family by fourteen years. On his death in 1703, the name
became extinct in his immediate branch of the family. His sister did not
carry her maiden name after marriage, and neither did her children. The
name Pepys, however, was once again adopted by Samuel’s sister’s grandchild,
(ie., Frances Pepys Cockerell). To continue with Chappell’s lecture:
“…so there was no continuity between (Samuel’s generation and the one
which re-adopted it) in 1754..after being in abeyance for 51 years. What is
the value of a tradition with a 51 year break in it? To Frances Cockrell,
the name was her grandmother’s maiden name, and as I do not even know what
either of my grandmothers’ maiden names were, I cannot help thinking that a
grandchild may not be a very reliable authority where the pronunciation is a
matter of doubt. For this reason, I do not attach much importance to the
Pepys Cockerell tradition and so I prefer to follow that of all the
surviving branches, who have pronounced their names Peppis, perhaps every
day for seven or eight hundred years. When I show my true colours, I am a
‘Peppisite’.”
In a similar vein, George Pepys, who was an RNVR Chaplain during WWII, and
eventually rose to the position of “Bishop Suffragan of Buckingham”,
pronounced his name ‘Peppis’
So far, ‘Peppis’ seems to be the favourite.
However, in a note to the “Mariner’s Mirror”, (Nov 64; p. 296), Mr John
Bennell pointed out that it was common practice for different branches of
great (and perhaps even not-so-great) English families to deliberately adopt
different pronunciations, in order to distinguish between themselves.
“Debrett’s Correct Form: Social and Professional Etiquette, Precedence and
Protocol”, is perhaps the closest thing there is to an accepted authority on
such things now-a-days. I have its 1976 edition, which, in the appendix
entitled “Pronunciation of Titles and Surnames” says:
“Pepys: (pronounced as) ‘Peppis’, ‘Peeps’ has become archaic, except for the
Diarist, and the Pepys Cockerell family”. (p. 405)
Anna Ravano , told the subsribers of Searoom-l what the
“BBC Pronouncing Dictionary of British Names” (1983 ed.) has to say on the
matter:
“Pepys: f.n.; pepiss; peeps; pepps.
The first is appropriate for the family name of the Earl of Cottenham. The
second was apparently that of the diarist Samuel Pepys, and this is the
pronunciation used today by the Pepys Cockerell family, lineal descendants
of the diarist’s sister Paulina.”
And, finally, for what it’s worth, the “Britannica Encyclopedia on CD-ROM
(1997)” simply states:
“Samuel Pepys, (pronounced ‘Pepys’)…..”
[My constant companion, the OED, manages to stay aloof on this issue, given
its well-known policy of avoiding proper names.]
Hmmmm…so where are we?
It seems that the two favourites are “Peeps” and “Pepis”. Chappell gives a
compelling argument that the currently accepted basis for “Peeps”, (ie.,
this is the way Pepys’ descendants currently pronounce it), is far from as
compelling as one might first think. This certainly seems to strengthen the
“Pepis” camp’s position, especially when coupled with the evidence of the
two suriving contemporary sources quoted above (ie., Allin and Carcasse),
which both seem to clearly indicate that the accepted pronunciation in
Pepys’ own day was “Pepis”. If, in fact, we accept that it was common
practice for different branches of families to purposely adopt different
pronunciations of their common name, (as John Bennell suggests), is it not
feasible that those descendants who — for whatever reason — decided that
they wanted to be clearly recognised as a member of the Great Diarist’s
family branch, would not have set themselves apart by adopting a unique
pronunciation. This, according to the BBC’s and Debrett’s surname
pronunciaton guides, is exactly the case we are facing today: everybody else
with the surname Pepys seems to pronounce it “Pepis”, EXCEPT for those
descended from Frances Cockerell, Samuel Pepys’ grand-niece. (Moreover,
even if they didn’t purposely chose to pronounce the name differently, it
could just as easily be — as Chappell argues — that they got its
pronunciation wrong; mistakes happen, afterall.)
For what its worth, I’ve been swayed to pronounce it “Pepis”. Like most
matters concerning language, however, the important thing is consistency. My
suggestion is to chose a pronunciation and stick with it. Moreover, be
charitable to those with divergent pronunciations. I may say “Pepis”, and
you may say “Peeps”; but whatever we say, since a piece of evidence which
solves the debate once and for all is unlikely to emerge at this late date,
we shouldn’t allow our diverging pronunciations to divert us from the task
at hand, (whatever that might be). Afterall, when, for example, an American
and a Canadian naval officer work together, do they allow their different
pronunciations of “lieutenant” bar their progress? Of course not!
Now for the next challenge: how do we pronounce “purser”?
Cheers,
Glen
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Glen “I-was-a-teenage-fogey” Hodgins
A Medal Collector and Commonwealth/Empire Naval Historian
temporarily imprisoned at:
Her Canadian Majesty’s C/O Po Box 500 (CLMBO)
High Commission for Sri Lanka Station A
6 Gregory’s Road OTTAWA, Ontario, K1N 8T7
(PO Box 1006) Dominion of CANADA
Cinnamon Gardens
Colombo 7, Sri Lanka [still Canada’s OFFICIAL title!]
Fax, (from overseas): 94-1-687-815