|
Written by John Plummer
Transcribed by  David
Phelps
Resolving
the Identity of George P[?] of Dorchester
Considering the number of Recovery passengers with proved connections
to Devonshire, Dorsetshire, and Somerset and the number of others
for whom connections appear to exist—it would be reasonable to
propose that George P[?] had similar origins. Admittedly, he could have
died
aboard
ship or soon after landing, thereby leaving no New England records.
But if he survived for even a few years, as most did, then it is reasonable
to expect that he might also appearing the records of colonial Dorchester.
A study of these records reveals three men by the name of George P[?],
one of whom is easily eliminated from serious consideration. Of the
three-George Phillips, George Phelps, and George Proctor—the names borne
by the first two are generally interchangeable in this era of lax spelling;
but the Dorchester records appear to render their names with exceptional
consistency. The most relevant information known for each of these can
be summarized as:
George Phillips-can be reasonably eliminated. He was appointed
fence viewer in Dorchester on 24 May 1634, at which time the Recovery
was at sea. 55 He is
certainly the man of this name made freeman of Massachusetts Bay Colony
on 18 May 1631 and had probably come the year before (1630) on the Mary
and John. 56 This George
Phillips should not be confused with the Watertown minister of the same
name.
George Phelps - declared a freeman of Massachusetts Bay Colony
on 6 May 1635. 57 He
was surely of Dorchester at this time, as shortly thereafter he joined
the mass migration from there to Windsor, Connecticut, along with a significant
number of Recovery passengers.
58 He appears to have been a single man until 1637,
59 which would explain the lack of a land grant for him in Dorchester.
Charles Edward Banks concluded from his own study that George Phelps of
Dorchester was from Somerset.
60 If correct, Banks places Phelps solidly amid the pattern
of migration noted for other Recovery passengers.
George Proctor - named a proprietor of Dorchester on 10 February
1634/35. 61 However,
Proctor was not closely associated with the Recovery passengers; and he
is strongly linked with a family from the area surrounding Bristol along
the Glocestershire-Somerset line.
62 In light of social patterns of that era, it is probable
that he was from the environs of Bristol also—significantly north of the
area to which the Recovery passengers have been traced.
In all of New England in the 1630s, there have been found no more than
a dozen men with the given name George and a surname beginning with
P.
On one basis or another, most of these can be eliminated from further
consideration as George P[?]of the Recovery. Of all the towns in New
England, only Dorchester and Salem seem (this early) to have been populated
predominantly by West Countrymen of Devonshire, Dorsetshire, and Somerset.
Of the two colonial towns, Dorchester is the one to which the Recovery
passengers have the strongest ties. Given the information provided by
presently known records, the weight of the evidence supports a contention
that the Recovery's unidentified George P[?] was either George Phelps
or George Proctor of Dorchester-and probably Phelps.
Previous: << Origins of
the Recovery Passengers
Next: Notes and
References >>
David
Phelps
Phelps
Family Research
304 Bridlewood North
Colleyville, Texas 76034 |
