__ | __|__ | __| | | | | __ | | | | |__|__ | _William Whaples ____| | (.... - 1602) | | | __ | | | | | __|__ | | | | |__| | | | | __ | | | | |__|__ | _John Whaples _______| | m 1617 | | | __ | | | | | __|__ | | | | | __| | | | | | | | | __ | | | | | | | | |__|__ | | | | |_Margaret ___________| | | | | __ | | | | | __|__ | | | | |__| | | | | __ | | | | |__|__ | | |--John Whaples | | __ | | | __|__ | | | __| | | | | | | __ | | | | | | |__|__ | | | _____________________| | | | | | | __ | | | | | | | __|__ | | | | | | |__| | | | | | | __ | | | | | | |__|__ | | |_Mary Collett _______| (.... - 1645) m 1617| | __ | | | __|__ | | | __| | | | | | | __ | | | | | | |__|__ | | |_____________________| | | __ | | | __|__ | | |__| | | __ | | |__|__
1646 Whaples, William Great Waltham 165 BW 58
Twelth day January 1643 Caroli Regis decimo nono (19). I William Whaples of Great Waltham (one of the sonnes of John Whaples of the same parish).... Being sick, etc.... My crofte or p'cell called Warditche to Robert Whaples my brother forever.... Rents and proffitts of said land to my loving mother until Robert come to 21.... John Bernard the elder of Kings in Great Waltham should occupy said land paying rent to my said mother. To Thomas Whaples my brother term of years I have in two p'cells of land called Barne Croft & Buttons and the orchard of my fathers.... I am endebted unto Francis Tanner of Great Waltham he have & enjoye all residue of my goods, etc. he paying my father twenty shillings within 3 months he to be executor. Wit: John Barnard and Thomas Parker. Proved 19 Apr 1645.
!SOURCE: Email from Dr. Al Church (undisclosed at example dot net) to the Whipple Website, 3 Oct 2018. Regarding John Whipple, Captain b. Abt 1617 in England, d. 16 May 1685 in Providence, Providence, RI, he writes:
I've been researching my Church family roots (Richard Church, immigrated to NewTown MA ~1632 --> Hartford - 1636), and encountered a curious given name, namely Nathaniel Whipple Church (b. 1704 in Hadley, MA, great grandson of Richard). I have not been able to find any indication where that Whipple name came from. After noting that your Whipple immigrant came on the Lyon, I've started to consider that he was the source of that given name. It seems clear that my ancestor came from Essex county England, not far from Chelmsford (part of Hooker's company). In looking for records in the Essex archive, I found a baptismal entry for John Whaples in 1618 from St. Mary & St. Lawrence Church in Great Waltham. I'd be happy to share this image, if you're interested. There was a passenger named on the Lyon as John Churchman, who I suspect may have been Richard Church. Perhaps he (or his son) befriended John Whipple / Whaples onboard the Lyon. Richard --> Samuel 1 --> Samuel 2 --> Nathaniel Whipple ChurchIn another email the same he writes:
Attached are two images of the same record. One is an annotated version of the other that highlights the entry that I believe is John Whaples. Note that it does not show any family connections, but it does match the suspected year and location. I havenut deciphered the actual date of the baptism, since it appears to be written in some kind of code.
As I have become more familiar with the history of this area (in and around the 1630s), it seems that most of the passengers onboard the 1632 Lyon were from the area surrounding Chelmsford (the site of Thomas Hookerus inspirational sermons). While this observation may be old news, it would certainly fit with Capt. John Whipple coming from the Great Waltham area. A key player with respect to safeguarding Rev. Thomas Hooker was the (2nd) Earl of Warwick, one Robert Rich, who provided the bail to spring Hooker from a court appearance, and who sheltered Hookerus family while Hooker was in exile in the Netherlands. The Earl of Warwick had a major residence just north of Great Waltham (known as Leez Priory that still exists today), which raises the question as to whether he might have had some role in helping young John Whaples / Whipple migrate on that voyage of the Lyon. Hooker eventually secretly returned from the Netherlands and sailed with his family on the Griffin in 1633. The Griffin was said to have sailed from The Downs in Kent, but I have found a place called The Downs in Maldon that is just east of Chelmsford. It also happens that the Earl of Warwick was a member of Parliament from Maldon in the 1620s. The Earl was not only a noted mariner and financier of privateers, but was also a prominent supporter of puritan settlements by way of The New England Company that became the Massachusetts Bay Company. He was later appointed in 1642-3 to be the Lord High Admiral of the English fleet by Parliament, contrary to the Kingus orders. Given the location of John Whaples / Whipple and the elegance of that church, it might be worthwhile to research whether the Whaples family had some connection to the Earl. As you can see from the church register, there were not a lot of people associated with this church.
Here is a link to a description of that church (said to have been built in the 11th century) - https://britishlisted buildings.co.uk/101122058-church- of-ss-mary-and-laurence-great-waltham#.W7T3vBNKjXQ
!SOURCE: Email from Dr. Al Church (undisclosed at example dot net) to the Whipple Website, 10 Oct 2018. Regarding John Whipple, Captain b. Abt 1617 in England, d. 16 May 1685 in Providence, Providence, RI, he writes:
My search continues for the origin of Whipple in my ancestorus name (i.e., Nathaniel Whipple Church). The only likely connection that I can see is Capt. John Whipple, since he and Richard may have sailed together on the Lyon in 1632 and both were probably from an area in Essex not far from Chelmsford. If my ancestorus birthdate is correct (listed as 1610, though I strongly suspect it is earlier), he would have been at least 22 at the time of the voyage, while John was just 15. In any case, they must have at least made an acquaintance during the 12 weeks at sea.
(Note that I have just discovered a reference to a group of early CT pioneers that came mostly from Dorchester MA to Windsor CT in 1635, but do not know whether my immigrant ancestor was part of this group. If he was, this could further reinforce the connection to John Whipple. More on this later.)
It is clear that my immigrant ancestor Richard was very committed to Hooker and his philosophy of small independent churches existing apart from the government. He joined Hooker in founding the new settlement of Hartford in 1636, and our first constitution was born in Hartford around 1639, having been strongly influenced by Hooker. After Hooker died in 1647, Richard Church became concerned about the direction that the Hartford church was taking, and signed a SRemonstranceT to that effect. Later, he pulled up stakes and removed with Rev. John Russell Jr. of Wethersfield CT to found Hadley MA in about 1660. Rev. Russell is said to have secretly boarded two regicides (Generals William Goffe and Edward Whalley) at his house in Hadley beginning about 1664. It seems clear that Richard and his sons (Edwardus residence shown, Samuel residing with Richard not shown) would have known Mr. John Russell, Jr. quite well as shown by the map of Hadley below.
Your immigrant ancestor, John Whipple, also appeared to share this love of personal liberty based on how he pulled up stakes from the theocratic Massachusetts Bay area and removed to Providence RI in 1658. This part of his timeline is curiously similar to Richardus departure from Hartford. I referred to MA as theocratic based on an assessment made by Edward Hooker regarding his immigrant ancestor:(From page xix of The Descendants of Rev. Thomas Hooker: Hartford, Connecticut 1586-1908. Edward Hooker)"As I have studied the character of Thomas Hooker, more and more I have come to see him as a statesman, rather than as a preacher. It was his to champion the cause of liberty, rather than to preach the creeds of theology. It was his to found democracies rather than to establish churches. At Newtowne he had as devoted a congregation as ever listened to the preaching of a preacher, for it was a congregation of men and women who had left all to follow him and his principles.
"But Massachusetts was a theocracy and consequently an aristocracy, and Thomas Hooker was a Democrat. In Massachusetts it was the church that ruled, almost as the church ruled at Rome, only it was another church and there was no Pope. No man could vote unless he was a church member. Out of more than three thousand inhabitants, two thirds of them men of mature age, there were only three hundred qualified electors. The church was dominant in the State, and the dominancy of the church is always despotism.
"Hooker was not at all in accord with the theocratic idea. It has been said that he removed his congregation to Connecticut because he and they differed with the majority of the inhabitants of Massachusetts upon religious questions. It is a mistake. He moved from Massachusetts to Connecticut for the same reason that he had moved from England to Holland and from Holland to America, to find a place not so much where he could worship God as he chose as where he could be a free citizen, with the right and the power to work out his own destiny for himself and to found a real democracy for himself and for his devoted followers. He moved from the valley of the Charles to the valley of the Connecticut in order to escape from a government theocratic in its origin and inevitably aristocratic in its nature, to a place where a real democratic government could be establishedv where the people could rule. It was a political rather than a religious migration."
!SOURCE: Blaine Whipple, 15 Generations of Whipples: Descendants of Matthew Whipple of Ipswich, Massachusetts, Abt 1590-1647, volume 1 (Baltimore, MD: Gateway Presss, 2007), p. 998, 1008-1009.
!SOURCE: Blaine Whipple, 15 Generations of Whipples: Descendants of Matthew Whipple of Ipswich, Massachusetts, Abt 1590-1647, volume 1 (Baltimore, MD: Gateway Presss, 2007), p. 999: "The child John does not seem to have died in infancy, and the fact he was the only brother not named in [his brother] William's will does indicate he could well have been the ancestor [i.e. Capt. John Whipple of Dorchester/Providence]. ... The baptism of a John Whaples at Great Waltham in 1618 does more or less agree with our information that the emigrant [John Whipple of Dorchester/Providence] was aged 15 or 16 in 1632."
!SOURCE: Email from Dr. Charles Whipple (undisclosed at example dot net) to Weldon Whipple, 2 Apr 2016. He writes:
John was born around the year 1617. Debrett uncovered the name of only one individual whose christening was close to that date. His name was John Whaple, baptized 13 December 1618..."
Debrett sent me that information in 1990 long before the Fiske article appeared. Perhaps Fiske's guess was wrong, and the two families are not related. John Whaple could have spelled his name Whiple at one point in his life? As you are aware, even the educated spelled their names in a variety of ways. Or as was typical at Ellis Island, the immigration authorities could have misspelled the name.
RIN 159672. Quick link to this page: https://whipple.org/159672
View this person at db.whipple.org: https://db.whipple.org/159672