The arrival of fall signals pumpkin season, a time synonymous with pumpkin patches and the comforting aroma of pumpkin spice. Pumpkins, these iconic gourds of autumn, surprisingly feature prominently in the classic nursery rhyme, “Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater.” Most English speakers are familiar with the verses:
“Peter, Peter, pumpkin eater,
Had a wife but couldn’t keep her;
He put her in a pumpkin shell
And there he kept her very well.
Peter, Peter, pumpkin eater,
Had another and didn’t love her;
Peter learned to read and spell,
And then he loved her very well.”
But where does this curious rhyme originate, and what hidden meanings might lie beneath its seemingly innocent surface? Many theories, some quite dark, attempt to explain the puzzling narrative of Peter and his pumpkin. Let’s delve into the intriguing origins and interpretations of “Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater.”
From Old England to Mother Goose: Tracing the Rhyme’s Roots
While pumpkins might evoke images of American harvest festivals, the earliest known appearance of “Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater” is rooted in England. Folklore experts Iona and Peter Opie pinpoint its first print appearance in Noel Turner’s Infant institutes, part the first. Or, a nurserical essay on the poetry, lyric and allegorical of the earlier ages, published in London in 1797. Although pumpkins weren’t native to the UK, they had been introduced in the 16th century, making their presence in the rhyme plausible.
The rhyme’s journey across the Atlantic is evident in its inclusion in an early American Mother Goose collection, published by Munroe & Francis sometime between 1824 and 1827. Interestingly, a Scottish variant, published in 1868, strips away the pumpkin imagery entirely:
“Peter, my neeper,
Had a wife,
And he couldna’ keep her.
He pat her i’ the wa’,
And lat a’ the mice eat her.”
In Scots, neeper translates to “neighbor,” and i’ the wa’ means “in the wall.” This version starkly contrasts with the pumpkin shell, suggesting a darker fate for the wife – immurement and being left to be consumed by mice. While the pumpkin version leaves the wife’s fate ambiguous, the Scottish rendition hints at a more sinister outcome.
Chimney Sweepers and Skipping Games: Alternative Versions Emerge
Another gourd-less variation, dating back to the early 20th century, further illustrates the rhyme’s fluid nature and adaptation over time. This version transforms Peter into a chimney sweeper:
“Eeper Weeper, chimney sweeper,
Had a wife and could not keep her;
Had another, did not love her,
Up the chimney he did shove her—
Please turn over my head.”
Sometimes beginning with “Eaver Weaver,” this version, as noted by the Opies, was often sung by children during skipping games. If a child successfully skipped through the rhyme, additional lines were added, such as “How many miles did he shove her? One, two, three, four.” A chimney sweeper iteration also served as a counting-out rhyme, similar to “Eeny, Meeny, Miney, Mo,” showcasing the rhyme’s versatility in children’s play.
Unpacking the Pumpkin Shell: Darker Interpretations and Adult Themes
On the surface, “Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater” seems like a whimsical tale of a man and his unusual domestic arrangement. The child-friendly explanation often suggests that Peter’s wife is prone to wandering, and the pumpkin shell is simply a quirky way to keep her safe and sound. However, a closer look reveals darker, more adult interpretations.
The most prevalent R-rated theory paints a picture of infidelity and violence. The unnamed wife, according to this interpretation, was unfaithful – some speculate she was a sex worker – leading to Peter murdering her and concealing her body within a hollowed-out pumpkin. This gruesome theory casts a chilling shadow over the seemingly innocent rhyme.
A less violent, though still unsettling, interpretation proposes that the “pumpkin shell” is a euphemism for a chastity belt. In this reading, Peter, consumed by jealousy, locks his wife in a chastity belt, symbolized by the pumpkin shell, to prevent her from being with other men. This theory, while less gruesome than murder, still reflects themes of control and suspicion.
Historical Echoes of Murder: The Maud de Braose Theory
The Scottish version, with its image of a wife walled up and eaten by mice, lends credence to the darker interpretations. One compelling theory connects this version to the historical death of Maud de Braose in the early 13th century. Maud, wife of William de Braose, a once-favored nobleman of King John of England, fell from royal grace.
When King John demanded one of her sons as a hostage, Maud famously refused , stating that the King had murdered his own nephew. In retaliation, King John imprisoned Maud and her son in Corfe Castle in 1210. In a cruel act of vengeance, they were reportedly sealed in a room with only minimal sustenance. After eleven days, their prison was opened, revealing that both had starved to death. Disturbingly, accounts suggest Maud even resorted to cannibalism, eating her son’s cheeks in a desperate bid for survival.
Magna Carta and Royal Cruelty: A Potential Connection
The horrific treatment of Maud de Braose and her son may have even influenced the inclusion of Clause 39 in Magna Carta. Clause 39 declares that imprisonment or exile should only be imposed “by the lawful judgment of his equals or by the law of the land.” However, Magna Carta primarily protected noble men, and Maud, as a woman, would not have been covered by its provisions even if it predated her demise.
Conclusion: The Enduring Enigma of Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater
From its seemingly innocuous pumpkin imagery to its unsettling undertones of infidelity, murder, and imprisonment, “Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater” remains a nursery rhyme shrouded in mystery. Whether interpreted as a lighthearted verse about a runaway wife and a pumpkin shelter, or a dark allegory of violence and control, the rhyme’s enduring appeal lies in its ambiguity and the chilling questions it subtly raises. The next time you hear “Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater,” remember to consider the pumpkin shell – it might hold secrets darker than you imagine.
Read More About Nursery Rhymes:
