Embedded Files
Revised 09/26/2021
In addition to factual information, comment on this page is by Doug Phelps, YDNA Project admin.
11/2019 The Phelps/Ponds of this project, when tested, all have been found to be of haplogroup E-M44 (E1A1) Their origins are from three areas, Caswell County, NC, Albemarle County, VA, and Baltimore County, MD They have an unknown common ancestor with haplogroup SNP Z31502/3 as found by yDNA testing at FTDNA Follow on testing at YFUL.com and Yseq.com confirmed this, and added the estimate of a common ancestor about 500 years ago Many years of genealogical research supports this ydna research.
Relevant information concerning the possible Jewish lineage of these Phelps (revised 7/2022): A Pinto with Portugal origins was found to share a common yDNA ancestor with these Phelps line approximately 2600 years ago ( The testee's father was Jose Antonio Pinto b Ligares, Bragance, PT 1898; his grand-father Adriano Augusto Pinto born about 1869 (I have seen and photographed his grave-site in Ligares, Braganca, Portugal, born in Macores, Braganca, PT; his great-grandfather Antonio Louz Fernades Pinto date and place of birth unknown. He is highly suspected to have some Jewish connection, but unknown if from the Pinto line. His mother was a Ferreira born in Peredo, Dos Castelhanos, PT. All of this is in north eastern Portugal, close to Spain. The provider is somewhat confident that his North African heritage is from his father.
To view an extensive detailed chart showing the yDNA SNPs and Strs of the three major lines, including summary genealogy, click this link.
Topics on this page
An introduction to the use of ydna testing used for these Phelps
An Overview about the new yDNA snp testing and our origins
Important STR and SNP test comparison for all these Phelps
Descendants of the Common Ancestor with SNP/Haplogroup Z31503
How reliable is this information?
Hypothesis for the common ancestor of these lines with a tree diagram Continuous updates, check back soon.
Halpogroup E1a1 (E-M44) and Continent/Country of Origin Implications
What about the Thomas Phelps on the second supply at Jamestown, VA? 2/2016; 11/2016
Origins
Ireland?
Wales?
How long were they there?
Was Your Ancestor an Indentured Servant? If You are at a Brick Wall, Don’t Overlook the Possibility Link to HERE
"The Complete Book of Emigrants in Bondage 1614 to 1775" including a list of Phelps. Find the book or use the ancestry search link HERE Search for Phelps
Indexed List of Documented Southern Phelps Immigrants in Colonial America Go to HERE
Those interested in discussing these topics and the related E1a1 M44, should join the forum Phelps E1a1 Haplogroup - SNP M44
For an review of how SNPs are used in our genealogy, please refer to this site
At that site you will find a reference to a detailed SNP table showing the ongoing SNP testing results. This is a work table and may require explanation by D Phelps
An introduction to the use of ydna testing used for these Phelps
11/2017: SNP tests have uncovered a SNP shared uniquely by the two lines described here. That SNP is FGC67854 which should be tested now in other men of the Felps line. Thus for now, it is difficult to say when this SNP mutated - before or after Felps of Baltimore. To view the details of either line please click the subsections of 06C on the index to the left
5/2018
1. FTDNA provides a simple ydna page to show the kits of all the Phelps as seen here (private as of 2018) . FTDNA simply shows ydna STRs we have known for years and the most downstream SNP they have tested for. I have no control over that. I am allowed to group the Phelps based on how they match. I also give the groupings a name, but i cannot change the oldest named ancestor provided by each testee. THE MOST RECENTLY TESTED MEN ARE NOT VIEWABLE UNLESS LOGs IN TO FTDNA. Thus i try to show the most recent SNP testing in this lineage page. Very recent SNP test results may not show until FTDNA accepts the SNP . It is possible they are not as up to date as the testing company Yfull.com is. For those wanting to see a summary of the critical STRs and SNPs I have a file mostly for my use but you may want to see. It is at this URL LINK
2. In the yDNA lineage pages seen here, I grouped all the M44 haplogroup phelps in a group called 06. Within 06 are the three major lines of Caswell Co, NC 06A , Albemarle Co, VA 06B and the Felps of Baltimore 06C For the group 06C I use what is provided by members plus Ed Phelps' list where applicable. As best I can, I dont change anything based on other's knowledge unless the member agrees.
3. It is critical that all tested men provide me with what they stand behind as their lineage. If Ed Phelps's list is their source that is fine. Ed's detailed list was given on a private google group some months ago and is still retrievable if you are able to access this google group directly.
4. My plan is to use the private Google Felps forum for ydna annoucements and discussion with summary information posted here
Doug Phelps, FTDNA volunteer Phelps yDNA project admin
An Overview about the new yDNA snp testing and our origins
8/2016: This is a BIG subject. First we are talking strictly direct paternal lineages… has nothing to do with all the ancestors on both sides of our family. That is another type of dna research.
We now we have much more insight using YDNA. First, regardless of our paternal ancestor being African, Asian, Indian, or whatever, the basic yDNA STRs don’t change much at all. So if he was an Asian, his basic Ydna STRs would be the same today as a 1000 years ago. Just as you have your father’s yDNA STRS. That is how the basic recent genealogy has been done.
The next step in YDNA development was to test what is called SNPs. SNPs are dna mutations passed down the male YDNA that define the origins of our paternal ancestors. As men moved from one part of the globe to another their SNPs mutated (and never change again). But other SNPs also mutate. By observing the sequence of these mutations and testing men in locations around the world, Science is now able to tell many people their PATERNAL origins even as recently as a 1000 or a few 1000 years. For example African-Americans are usually of one particular grouping of these SNPs. Groupings are called Haplogroups and subhaplogroups. Our Phelps group is NOT considered to be from Europe recently or even 1000s of years ago. It appears now that we originated in the middle east and we moved toward the Med.. and POSSIBLY got to England via the Romans… or something similar to that. . We have even found that within that group the largest number are Ashkenazi Jews. They dispersed probably several 1000 years ago. Others, for example went to deep Africa a few 1000 years ago. We went somewhere else, but we do not have enough information to know that at present.
Currently, our origin is theoretical, but it is very clear we are not from Europe, but might be from England - but not in England much earlier than the Roman period – and possible much later.
The term for these groupings is Haplogroup and subhaplogroups. Our Phelps are in a very small number of men around the world. Very unusual grouping . The New England Phelps are of a haplogroup clearly pointing to the UK for example.
ALSO Our group is on the leading edge of using the ydna SNPs to also do genealogy to a reasonable degree over the past 500 years or so. It is becoming clear that we Phelps did not come from a single man coming to America. It is very likely there were a number of related or distantly related Phelps coming in the 1600s or early 1700s. But this is a theory at present.
Most of the immigrants to VA, NC and Md did come in as the genealogy indicates, but we have one new Phelps in our group who goes back to GA and has NO connections to the rest of us… using genealogy and the new SNPs approach.
A number of us have been working on this SNP approach for a few years. We are in two google forums for that purpose. One for the Phelps and another for a general group called M44 E1a1 which we are.
(Initially yDNA STRs were used to explore the paternal family tree. Their summarized STR markers can be viewed here It is a Google Site , maintained manually using the more extensive ydna table presented by FTDNA at the Phelps Ydna Project.)
Important STR and SNP test comparison for all these Phelps Click here to view
Descendants of the Common Ancestor with SNP/Haplogroup Z31503
2/15/2017 These Phelps are within the major haplogroup E1a1 M44. with a haplogroup SNP of Z31503 and a downstream branches using SNP testing. To view a tree diagram showing the tested Phelps, click on this link NOW OUTDATED, NEEDING REVISION. The tree reflects the findings by YFULL.com analysis, additional SNP testing at ftdna and Yseq.com, and STR testing when appropriate and helpful.
To appreciate the meaning of SNPs as it reflects on those Phelps, your refer to this site.
The detailed SNP haplogroup tree of all M44 men including the Phelps is provided by the analysis company Yfull.com It begins at M44 at https://sites.google.com/site/haplogroupe1a1/home/e
How reliable is this information?
I am confident that SNP testing is far more reliable than STR testing and have written about that elsewhere. SNP mutation aging as used to age TMRCA or branches at Yfull.com can be debated.
Aging: The level of confidence of the Yfull provided aging of our branches (TMRCA) is pretty much an individual decision after study and reflecting on our testing.. Yfull.com offers details on their computations and base their usid of SNP mutation rates of published academic papers. I personally have concluded the ages are good enough in our M44 Phelps line to allow a reasonable hypothesis. That is, one that is offered with some evidence for acceptance, but remaining to be proven or denied.
Here are my reasons for accepting the hypothesis that our genealogical time branch aging , analyzed by YFULL, is within acceptable limits and can be used as a working approach:
o Despite years of unending research, no one has ever found any genealogical connections even between the 3 major M44 lines: Caswell Co NC, Albemarle Co, VA and Baltimore Co. Two other lines have arisen with no connections with them either. Our genealogies date back to the early to md 1700s. IMO, with no records found, that indicates there were no genealogical connection in colonial America. Thus the approximate dating of 500 years indicates to me a pre-American common ancestor or ancestors. Thus it is also mathematically possible for a VERY early common ancestor in the 1500s.
o Briefly stated, comparing Big Y snps of these men identified 2 lines each with identifying snps over the past 500 years. Individual SNP testing supported the 150 years per mutation
§ The James of Caswell line tested 2 known or expected descendent s for the identifying snps, and were found to have matching snps and unmatches snps supporting the hypothesis of about 150 years per SNP mutation.
§ The Baltimore Felps line further tested a known descendant , also testing identifying snps, and found results supporting about 150 years per mutation.
o A distinguishing trait of our Phelps is that they are all certainly haplogroup E-M44. This haplogroup, a branch of E-M96 is a very small group, worldwide. (See the FTDNA M44 yDNA project) Many of these M44 Project other-surname-members have a similar trait, in that they are of early colonial southern America ALSO with no documents of an origin. These men share with us not finding matches of other surnames at FTDNA. IMO, this indicates something very unusual in immigration, aging and in origin. Thus 500 years is all the more possible.
o All of our Phelps men find only 3 other surnames matching at FTDNA even at 12 STR markers, and those 3 are now accounted for and are within historical time. This is very unusual. Seven of our Phelps were Big Y SNP tested and been YFULL analyzed, bringing their terminal haplogroups snps within historical time, according to Yfull.com . In addition other Phelps have tested individual SNPs found in those 7 Phelps , supporting the aging concept. VERY few, if any, other surnames have done this. Most commentators on the subject have not actually done what we have done. Many have worked with different surnames .
Hypothesis for the common ancestor of these lines- (revision needed)
General review 7/22/2016
I think it will help our members if I review what we have accomplished beyond estimates and for sure beyond “guesses”. I suspect most of our members are not aware of the advances of SNP research and all that we have done – which if known will give much more support to our efforts.
There are two separate issues: aging involving ranges - and family branches. . In one major genealogy-dna area I think we have in fact validated SNP research with proven genealogies
· We first matched the unique and shared snps and genealogies of 3 known lines: James of caswell, Felps of Baltimore, and the Albemarle Phelps.
· Their snps were analyzed so that we know each has 3 private snps and they shared a key family snp which is named Z31503. There is no real doubt in this. Z31503 is shared but each also had 3 private snps – mutating from the time of the common ancestor until now. (Later 4 more Phelps were added but that is getting ahead)
· Then we tested those private snps using known descendants, with known genealogies, and known branches.
· The first test was with James of Caswell with a genealogical branch in 1800 and that descendant matched 2 snps but missed on the third. This supports quite well the theoretical mutation rate of 144 years (this is being accepted as an average “estimate” widely) that during the 200 years since 1800 each branch had a unique snp but shared the previous 2 snps back to the common ancestor. Thus estimates of shared and unshared snp testing against the 3 indicator snps was proven.
· This same approach was done with the Baltimore Felps and again the matched and unmatches snps were as expected.
· We just ordered the indicator snps for a known descendant of the Albemarle Phelps which will I hope will be another confirmation.
· Additionally a few of us with known genealogies have tested for snps that we should NOT have and the negative results have supported the approach.
· Where snp testing has not divulged NEW genealogy is where tested men did not have good genealogy. In those cases so far, the SNPs are not matching, but then neither is there any good genealogy so expect a match.
· So the above actually has “validated by proven genealogies” This will allow at least sufficient to others to test for the “indicator snps” and give a reasonably estimate of a family branch. It certainly narrows the genealogy search for those without good genealogy. Unfortunately the failures of snp matching of those tested without good genealogy (back to an origin) tends to reduce confidence of what was found from the tests above.
Recently a fourth Phelps with no genealogy ties to a common acestor has shown he also is in the Z31503 group above but shares none of the identifying snps of those three lines. Unfortunately he did not show any novel snps that would identify his line. The validity of this test is being contested with FTDNA.
08/08/2016 As you view the full M44 E1a1 tree which includes our Phelps, be sue to note a very important item on the tree. Notice the letters YBP this is years before the present Notice it is just after TMRCA or time to most recent ancestor. At present it shows 500 years but could vary some. Also be sure to notice the Ybp in the other tree branches going far back in time. Thus the tree is like a family tree back many 1000s years It separates us from other groups by large time periods. We are one of the few surnames bringing the tree into the present time using Phelps.
The second issue is the mathematical estimates of theoretical time to a common ancestor based strictly on private (novel) snps – where no SOLID genealogy exists. Clearly this is the most controversial and experimental area. That aging is determined by the private snps that are found from multiple snp tests like the Big Y. The approach uses math and concepts that are gaining support. Yfull is very cautious about their aging algorithms and thus gives us a mathematical range with a confidence probability of 95% Even so, it is clear that our phelps lines are staying rather close to 3 novel snps each.. with a range of 2 men of 0 and 5. Please appreciate that yfull is dealing with haplogroups going back many 1000s of years and a very wide range of locations, peoples, and time periods – thus the mutation rates can vary considerably. Their algorithms then must allow for considerable ranges. Not necessarily so with our family’s limited time frame and rather similar world situations. So the ranges we are given, IMO, are quite extreme and I would use caution in using them. If one prefers the low range, one must accept the possibility of the upper range.
Another example of this would be the related Pond and two additional Phelps we tested using BigY tests.. The two Phelps had genealogy back to the Albemarle co area but did not have solid ties to the earliest Albermarle Phelps there. Suprisingly all three had a new SNP, A6108 as well as the upstream Z31503 of the above Phelps - indicating an intermediate common ancestor identified as A6108 . Yet none of the three above Phelps had it. Further testing on three additional Phelps from that area also showed this snp - so they all had that common ancestor. It is clear there was a common ancestor but the aging of when is debatable. The estimate of when is 1500 but that is only an estimate - not a guess - based on the best information and science available.
In general, it has become clear too many of us there is simply NO genealogy out there to dispute the aging theories presented by the limited data. But at least there is some data.. With enough Big y and individual snp testing, we would know so much more . But I doubt that is forthcoming. So what we have on aging is an hypothesis… presented to be proven or disproved.
Added 3/13/2016: A fourth major Phelps line of this grouping is now apparent. In the diagram abovr note there are two major lines in the box on the left; one line in the middle box, and a fourth in the right box. Look at the summary table of ydna here . Also view the FTDNA grouped page, section 06. SNPs are far more reliable than STRs and can be used for genealogy. The 35 in STR DYS449 is now believed to be a mutation for a branch of the Thomas Felps of Md line. 34 is seen in the other Phelps of these highly related Phelps lines. STR DYS439=12 is seen in most all the Phelps lines, yet 13 is seen in ONE group of Albemarle Phelps who are positive for SNP A6108 and whose genealogy continues to be a challenge. Thus STRs continue to remain as ONLY an approximate grouping for recent genealogy. SNP A6108 is now also shown on the FTDNA tree.
Based on past genealogical research, Thomas d 1751Albemarle Co, VA had three sons: Thomas Phelps Jr; John Phelps Sr d 1798; and William Phelps d. 1749. Those with SNP A6108 are not descendants of either of those Phelps. Therefor I found it necessary set up a new Phelps lineage called “Common ancestor A6108 Phelps” A SNP is considered to mutate about every 140 years or so - once only - forever . The aging to common ancestors using SNP tested Phelps, analylzed by YFULL.COM, simply does not allow for a common ancestor of the proposed Albemarle Phelps to have a common ancestor of Thomas d. 1751 - with the A6108 snp mutating on one of the branches later. So the evidence is saying all of the A6108-positive Phelps do not share a common ancestor with Thomas d. 1751. Further YFULL information is viewable by the public at https://sites.google.com/site/haplogroupe1a1/home/e1a1-project-testing-results Find M44. Phelps are represent there beginning at E-z31503. You may click several places to bring up mathmatical detail.
Added 2/25/2016 A common ancestor as recent as 1500 might work. I agree that the age to a common ancestor may not be back as far as the Yfull projection – even though it was based on the consistent number of snps of all our Phelps at Yfull – mostly 3 unique snps, 1 with 2, one with 4 – using a considered scientific mathematical model.
Our 3 major lines had 3 unshared snps each. We know that 2 of these snps occurred before about 1700 (based on Walter’s test of our common line). If we assume your 1500 as the common ancestor date, that means those 2 snps for each line had to mutate in 200 years (1700-1500) or one per 100 years. I really don’t want to go less than 100 years based on current studies.
Regardless…. with those 200 years (1500 to 1700) that is something like 7 generations… certainly not allowing for close relatives between the 1700 known Phelps of Caswell, Md, and ALbemarle. Thus my main point remains. There is no reason to hope for genealogy records showing a close relationship of them in the 1700s.
Added 2/24/2016 After a lot of thinking of what Yfull has provided to us, I have arrived at a conclusion about the three major lines and if there was a possible 1700 connection between them. All based on what we now know. My conclusion is not what we hoped for. I think we were skirting all around this previously. The revised attached snp tree will be used in my comment. Please correct me if you see a major flaw. (The Pond issues and the Albemarle issues are not being discussed in this post.)
In summary: By 1700 there were many descendants of the very early common ancestor or common ancestors – such that the three lines could have been closely related at all.
Recall that each of the 3 major lines each had 3 unique and identifying SNPs. These unique snps were calculated by yfull to point to a common ancestor approx. 550 years ago or 1400 (1950-550) . Whether it was 1400 or 1500 is not critical as will be discussed. From 1400 to 1700 when our 3 lines are known to begin would allow for 10 generations at 30 years per generation. This is a very approximate number but illustrates that a lot of generations occurred from the time of a common ancestor down to 1700.
We cannot ignore the fact that the 3 lines had unique mutations developed from 1400 to 1950. We now have supporting evidence with a 1800 family branch testee (Walter) who tested positive for two of the shared snps meaning the shared snps occurred before 1800 back about 300 years. If the 1700 Phelps had been close relatives, the 3 new snps their descendant lines each developed would have had to occur between 1700 and 1950 or a snp per 80 years – far off the understood mutation rate of SNPs.
Recall I questioned Yfull about why they saw no shared snp between the three lines that would define a major branch back toward 1400. While they suggested a more expensive alternative to Big Y might show a common ancestor, their explanation may not have been understood. They felt there could have been a very early common ancestor of two lines shortly after 1400, while still allowing for the time of 3 snps to develope. This was based on their analysis of STRs suggesting it was the James of Caswell and the Thomas of Baltimore. Yfull had over 400 Strs to analyze. Suggesting, not proven since STRs can be misleading. With this theory they then attempted to illustrate further descendants from the common ancestor from around 1400 in the absence of no shared SNPs in the Big Y tests. But they did not indicate anything like the three 1700 lines were grandsons or even brothers at the 1700 time period – yet we (and I also) may have concluded that.
So to me, it is clear that by 1700 there were many descendants of the very early common ancestor or common ancestors – such that the three lines could not be closely related at all. To account for grandsons at 1700 would require 3 or 4 generations over 100 years, meaning the common ancestor was in 1600 which is far, far removed from Yfull’s calculations. But even that idea falters when we ask how three unique snps could mutate between 1700 and 1950.
Thus, unless I have entirely missed something, or that the concept of YFULL and SNPs is totally flawed, we cant expect to find genealogical records showing a close relationship of these 1700 Phelps. We might speculate several things: They may not even have known one another. These men may well have separately immigrated in the late 1600s or early 1700s. One or more could have descended from an earlier immigrant. Research shows there were a lot of named Phelps who immigrated in this period. What happened to all of them? IMO, it does suggest that their origin most likely was the same place and that the population of Phelps there was not just a single Phelps.
Added 1/28/2016: During 2015 much research of these lines have involved a study of SNPs which are superior to STRs for tracing family branches. See the above diagram showing the current testing of SNPs at FTDNA, Yfull, and Yseq. The diagram is based on an analysis by Yfull.com which continues to analyze the Big Y tests of several Phelps. The testing of snps now indicates the 3 main Phelps lines on the left with their common ancestor, and on the right those whose common ancestor had snp A6108. Both groupings had a common ancestor known as Z31503 who was downstream subgroup of M44 (previously known as E1a1). Please note the TMRCA and “formed” time which are terms used by the Yfull.com analysis. I have added to this chart the individual’s Yfull member number and the FTDNA number, or the Yseq number if appropriate. I also provided the snps in red that define branches . Note that if a snp has a letter prefix it is the official naming of the snp, not the DNA sequence position. If there is no assigned prefix it is the dna snp position. These snps are available for testing at Yseq and some are available at FTDNA.
Revised 6/2015: James of Caswell Co, NC, Thomas of Albemarle Co, VA, and Thomas Felps of Baltimore Co, Md. - And now perhaps 331140 Phelps David W. Phelps b.1817 TN, d.1888 AL and B6124 Frank (Francis) Phelps, b. bf 1797 in GA? Observations an opinion by Douglas Phelps
Assuming the paper trails are valid, and because of the solid research of the majority of the lines and a highly matching YDNA, we can consider some possibilities
If one looks at the ydna for each of these Phelps/Felps lines, we find that the modals (the marker values seen most often) for them is identical. In other words, the earliest patriarch of each of the three major lines all had the same ydna values. So clearly these lines have a common ancestor in genealogical times. We see the same values for the modal when we put all the lines together as seen below.
At present the provided lineages date three lines to a Thomas Felps, in Baltimore Co, Md. d. 1758; a Thomas Phelps d. 1751 Albemarle CO, VA, and a James Phelps d. 1786 Caswell Co. We might assume a birth of these men as early as the late 1600s. At present there is no evidence of any genealogical links between these three lines after those three patriarchs, so we might assume he was before these patriarchs. There is some evidence (click to review) that the Caswell, NC James Phelps may have been in nearby Anne Arundel, Md in 1776, although the most recent finding of another Phelps family there appears to dispute this.. The Thomas of Albemarle line is seen to have a common ancestor with these two lines further back in time, perhaps several generations. Several possibilities of relationships could be suggested.
11/25/2010; revised 8/2014: After considerable discussion and review of the Y-DNA results for these lines lines including a Licklitter/Creed line and a Pond line (confirmed by three tests but removed to the Pond YDNA Project), it is evident from statistical data provided by FTDNA that they all share a common ancestor in genealogical time. This conclusion is quite remarkable considering countless hours of research over the years were not able to arrive at that conclusion using paper trails. We should all congratulate ourselves for a true breakthrough!! Another common indicator for these men is that have dual Y-DNA values of 19 and 20 at DSYS marker #448. The FTDNA reported value does not include dual values for this marker and the default has changed over the years. Nevertheless, followup research has shown all these men have the same dual values. This anomaly is found in all these men and appears to be in all E1a1 (now E-M44) haplogroup men of which these Phelps men are.
8/1/2014: Based on research on two new Ga origin kits, B6124 and 331140, the long-understood three separate lineages are changing to FOUR separate lineages. The below table of marker values shows only those strs which which are different. Using DYS710 as a clue, FTDNA's 90% probability of a common ancestor between 331140 and a James Phelps descendant, 172111, at 111 markers is within 11 generations. (at 25 years per, that is 1725) Currently only 331140 is placed in the fourth line although B6124 may be shown even though there is no know genealogical link between them. At present DYS710 is being tested in other kits. Click this to view the spreadsheet showing the key str markers
10/29/2014 As the table grows, it seems 331140 has a number of marker values seen in the James of Caswell line. Yet it is not as convincing as it needs to be due to other markers not matching in the extend marker range.
Halpogroup E1a1 (E-M44) and Continent/Country of Origin Implications
Since all these Phelps will test positive for M44 E1a1 haplogroup, all paternal descendants of these lines should consider themselves E-M44 (E1a1)
Haplogroup implications: A haplogroup is a genetic population group associated with early human migrations and which can today be associated with a geographic region. It is important to note that even though female and male haplogroups may have the same letters, their definitions are different. While our understanding of our origins is often thought of in 10s of thousands of years ago, new research using YDNA SNPs (which mutate every 150 years +-) may be able to reduce the origins greatly. New testing of member SNPs at the E1a1 M44 haplogroup project is underway. Clearly the original and still existing project of upstream E1a is comprised of very likely African Americans. My personal theory which might suggest an origin of an immigrant to America or to the British Isles/Europe, then to America, originating from one of a number places during the UK surname period of 1000-1600 - has not been well accepted. My theory is found at the E1a1 site. here Various other somewhat recent origins have been suggested by enthusiasts and include and include a Semitic connection, African slaves, and Mediterranean origins among others. I have developed a timeline of emigrations to the British Isles which may be of interest. It is HERE
8/8/2018 Sardinia or Mauritania (Modern Morocco) before they entered Britain ??. The following is by a Robert Hall who has researched his Hall E-M44 line. The Hall line is similar to these E-M44 Phelps in that it has not yet identified a clear country of origin.
I am still learning about our haplogroup. Here are some of my findings:
I now have Strs from two men in Sardinia. The assumption is that they descended from the Mauritanians that the Vandals sent there as fighters. This is likely the case, but there were Africans in Sardinia during the B.C. period as well.
There is a Mauritanian Wedding tradition still alive in Sardinia today.
Mauritanians were sent to Britain earlier than those sent to Sardinia during the Vandal period. Some of those who fought for Rome in other places in Europe are pictured and honored on Trajan's Column in Rome today.
The Fulani pastoralists (the nomads) were in Eastern Africa before they moved to central Africa. One study has the following statements about the lactase persistence phenotype among the Fulani: "We detected strong signatures of recent positive selection in eastern African populations and the Fulani from central Africa." The same study also states: "Last but not least, the 13,910C>T variant enabling the lactase persistence phenotype (Lokki et al., 2011) is one the Fulani nomads also share with Europeans."
It is clear that the Fulani met up with E1a1 (E-M44)in either Eastern Africa or somewhere in the Levant and carried it to the Mauritanians, who are regarded as Berbers, in North Africa.
Because so much of the population in Britain was wiped out from 1300-1500, we will never have all the answers about our ancestors. However, whether they were in Sardinia or Mauritania (Modern Morocco) before they entered Britain, they (meaning mine and yours) likely were some of the Mauritanians.
4/2016 As you view the full M44 E1a1 tree which includes our Phelps, be sue to note a very important item on the tree. Notice the letters YBP this is years before the present Notice it is just after TMRCA or time to most recent ancestor. At present it shows 500 years but could vary some. Also be sure to notice the Ybp in the other tree branches going far back in time. Thus the tree is like a family tree back many 1000s years It separates us from other groups by large time periods. We are one of the few surnames bringing the tree into the present time using Phelps.
E-M44Z17473 * Z17434 * V2981/Z17442+128 SNPsformed 19100 ybp, TMRCA 3700 ybpinfo
id:YF04870FRA
E-Y15944Y15944 * Y17557formed 3700 ybp, TMRCA 3300 ybpinfo
E-Z17699Z36090 * Z17699 * Z36091formed 3300 ybp, TMRCA 2900 ybpinfo
E-Z17467Z17467formed 3300 ybp, TMRCA 3100 ybpinfo
id:ERS255970ITA [IT-CA]new
id:YF04871ENG
E-Y20219Y20219formed 3100 ybp, TMRCA 1450 ybpinfo
id:ERS255972ITA [IT-CA]
id:YF04466ENG
E-Y20284Y20285 * Y20284 * Z20649+12 SNPsformed 3100 ybp, TMRCA 1000 ybpinfo
id:YF05333 The African american man in the E1a1 m44 project.
id:HGDP01284 MANDENKA African (not in the M44 project)
E-Z31503 Y17372 * Y17371 * Z31503+17 SNPs formed 3100 ybp, TMRCA 500 ybp
THE PHELPS WHO HAVE TESTED with E-M44 all have Z31503
Quite some years ago, when i first started this effort, it seemed for a while that all of us E1a men were of rather recent sub-sahara Africa. Further testing brought out E1a1 (E-M44) We know that most African Americans are E1b or to a smaller extent, E1a2 and 3. But were there were Africans in our E1a1 and how far back was the common ancestor. The E1a1 M44 Haplogroup project has been working for years to discover an african connection. It was known at Yfull and ISOGG of a current Mandenkan africa with the M44 SNP. But none of our previous testing placed anyone into even his general subclade breakout. Finally one African American in that project was Big Y tested and does match the Mandenkan man. We have only 1 more that might match and i will try to get them to test. Others have tested and dont match either.
The interesting thing is that the common ancestor of us and others who are not known to be African - with this new subgroup is shown to be so far back....3100 years... even if the calculated number is off by a good amount, it is distant.
YF05333 is the African American man named Simms. So it seems he is clearly has a common ancestor with the Mandenka African man at 1000 years. . Notice the 3100 years to "formed" which points to a time for all of us as well as a number of other major splinter groups including Ashkenazi Jews. .
It is now thought by some that a number of splinter groups from E1a1 (E-M44)somewhere in the Egyptian to the Middle east spread out. One or more went to parts of African including lower Africa with descendants coming to America as African Americans. It appears that was a minority and some studies have concluded those groups have "jewish" customs. . Others spread out over the Med, etc .
UPDATE 3/2016: Much E1a1 (M44) and Phelps yDNA testing of FTDNA Big Y tests now clearly shows no evidence of sub-Saharan-Phelps common ancestor within the past 3000 years, however this research is ongoing. Within the E1a1 project of 66 men, only 4 may be African American but that is under study. The majority there are Ashkenazi Jews but again the common ancestors of these men were several thousand years ago. Recommended reading includes the E1a1 project page here
Update: 1/30/2016 FTDNA has revised their definition of the very inclusive Haplogroup E. Their comment to our tested Phelps is "Haplogroup E [comprising an extremely diverse number of downstream subclades] is an African lineage. It is currently believed that this haplogroup dispersed south from northern Africa with the Bantu agricultural expansion. E is also the most common lineage among African Americans. It is an old, diverse haplogroup with many branches and is found distributed throughout Africa today. It is also found at a very low frequency in North Africa and the Middle East." The Phelps are very likely to have been in that low frequency population.
Update 6/2015: The latest E1a1 (E-M44) subclades resulting from SNP testing using Big Y tests at FTDNA and analyzed by ISOGG [now also YFULL>COM] are viewable at this page Two"sister" haplogroups, E1a2 and E1a3 are distinct from us an are considered to be from Africa in early colonial America. Our E1a1 branched from them many 1000s of years ago. After considerable testing of the E1a1 (snp M44) project members, under the guidance of the International Society of Genetic Genealogy (ISOGG), it has become clear that we Phelps broke away from the E1a men whose descendants are understood now to have origins in Sub-Saharan Africa. According to the ISOGG representative, that breakout was probably 19,000 years ago. Also breaking away (downstream subclades) were the Ashkenazi E1a1 men and separately what appears to be loosely defined Europeans. At present the Phelps are defined in one breakout. Another downstream subclade includes a current day Mandinkas Africans. Further testing should eventually confirm the ISOGG findings.
Notice the African Mandinkas subclade that separated from us. Based on that, IMO we E1a1 Phelps should - at present - be considered to be separated from those Mandinkas Sub-Saharan African of recent origins. This doesn’t clarify where our subclade wound up in the world. We all can speculate on that. And there are probably further subclades to be found below us.
The E1a1 M44 Project has found nearly half the members to be Ashkenazi Jews with only two possible African Americans. On the other hand the other E1a subclades appear to be mostly African Americans.
All these Phelps may join the e1a1 E-M44 project and associated E1a1 private google group. Much more about E1a1 is now found at a new public web site https://sites.google.com/site/haplogroupe1a1/ Members of the M44 project now include a Phelps descendant from each of the four lines here. Of the other E1a1 members there, two or three appear to be of African-American black ancestry but have not been confirmed by SNP testing. Of the rest of the members, many have English surnames and about half have Ashkenazi Jewish ydna.
Members of these four Phelps lines are now being designated by FTDNA as E-M96, E-M132, E-M33, or E-M44 (Formerly E1a1)) depending on testing choices. These varying breakouts of E can cause some confusion on FTDNA reports. For example, FTDNA reports that E1b - a very different subclade of E, is the usual haplogroup of current day African-Americans. Should you test for E-M44 (E1a1) if you are match these kits? Familytreedna said this some years ago: "We recommend against testing everyone for the Deep Clade. If some are confirmed E1a1 and everyone in the group in question is matching or very similar at 25 or 37 markers, we feel confident that everyone in that group is also E1a1. Therefore the only true value in everyone testing the Deep Clade is getting the physical confirmation of E1a1 and having everyone's haplogroup listed in green as E-M44 on the Phelps YDNA project page. This does not necessarily tell you anything that you can't already conclude given the results you already have."
What about the Thomas Phelps on the second supply at Jamestown, VA?
11/2016: Considering our unique M44 Haplogroup which has caused some of us to delve into our origins,, I wanted to provide you all with this information which appears to be revised information (or was to me) about the Thomas Phelps, tradesman (formerly described as artisan) of the second supply to Jamestown.
At the Jamestown Rediscovery site, is found this comment: “October 1608 Newport lands with the “Second Supply.” 70 new immigrants arrive, including 8 “glasse-men” of either German or Polish origin…” More comment is here: “… enlisting English glassmakers to leave a flourishing industry at home [England] and set up business in a strange land across the ocean was not easy. Therefore, the Company looked abroad, and among the 70 settlers who sailed for Virginia in the summer of 1608 were "eight Dutchmen and Poles," some of whom were glassmakers. The so-called Dutchmen probably came from Germany, for Captain John Smith in one of his letters mentions that the London Company had sent to Germany and Poland for "glasse-men and the rest," "the rest" referring to the makers of pitch, tar, soap ashes and clapboard. It was also customary to refer to Germans as "Dutchmen."
We have never found a connection of our Phelps to the known “tradesman” Thomas of Jamestown of the second supply, but I was curious and wrote to the Jamestown Rediscovery the following, concerning Thomas Phelps.
Dear Sir,
The Jamestown settlement site clearly lists a Thomas Phelps in the second supply, 1608, under Tradesmen http://historicjamestowne.org/history/history-of-jamestown/the-second-supply/. Yet in your list of genealogical records beginning at http://historicjamestowne.org/history/genealogy-records/ no Phelps is found. A Thomas Phillipes and a Thomas Phillips are listed.
Why is this? Regards, Doug Phelps
Dear Doug, I am not in charge of our website genealogy so I can't speak to the records we have or don't have. Our database is not considered 100% complete. Records are spotty from this period. Your ancestor is listed in Martha McCartney's book "Virginia Immigrants and Adventurers: 1607-1624" on page 558. It lists Thomas Phelps as a tradesman on the second supply in 1608 and that this is only according to Captain John Smith. The John Smith source is referenced in Phillip Barbour's Travels and Works of Captain John Smith, 1986. My guess is Smith is the only source for this name. I have no doubt this man was a tradesman at Jamestown but as a working class fellow left a less complete biography. We probably didn't have him listed on our database because it wouldn't be proper to charge for a bio that is one sentence or so.
Warmest Regards, Mark Summers Manager, Public and Educational Programs Historic Jamestowne (Preservation Virginia)
2/2016: There is a Thomas Phelps, artisan of the 1608 second supply to Jamestown . But there are two more Thomas's to consider. We see in the Jamestown 1624/5 Muster Records -muster web site these similar surnames:
Thomas Phillipes : Muster Thomas Phillipes, head, Basses Choyse, James City, age 26 ship William & Thomas arriva 1618
Elizabeth Philllipes, Muster Thomas Phillipes, same location, age 23, ship Sea Flower arival 1621
Thomas Phillips: Hog Island, James City, ship Bona Nova, no date of arrival.
Below are articles on the the Phillipes from Virginia Immigrants and Adventurers, p 559. Chickahominy River is a tributary to the James River.
In most resources Thomas Phelps of the second supply of Jamestown is named as a tradesman or artisan . Unfortunately another less authoritative book, Conquest of Virginia, 1929 incorrectly shows him as a “gentleman”. Several other names are misplaced. I talked with Mark Summers and a Megan at the Jamestown Rediscovery Staff who strongly suggested I use instead the more reliable Complete works of Captain John Smith “Tradesman” is listed there. Interestingly Mr. Summers considered the 1624/5 muster list of Jamestown to be more reliable as a genealogical source – considering that the earlier data came from memory and the latter census was an official government record.
We know these men were from England. Last names certainly must have sounded like Phelps, but could have sounded like Phelps. Current yDNA testing gives almost no hope in connecting Phillips or Felts with Phelps - surprising as that may be.
Doug Phelps' opinion of possible movement from Jamestown: So which direction would be the next movement of these men? As the representative of Jamestown staff said, wouldn't you want to strike out from Jamestown - assuming you remained alive? Living near northeast NC I have traveled extensively by car and boat in the areas of northeast NC, eastern VA and Md. I have traveled by boat in the Albemarle Sound, the Hampton, VA waters including a bit of the James River, the many areas of the Chesapeake including Annapolis and Baltimore and the adjacent islands and rivers on both shores. In the 1600s where would I go? It would have been a very long travel by land from Jamestown to Baltimore or Annapolis due to the major eastern shore rivers leading far inland. Even now by car the western shore drive is a haul. By boat would have been the chosen approach but that is also a long haul north up the Chesapeake in some very open waters. I could have considered the relatively near trip to the Albemarle sound area, bypassing the Dismal Swamp possibly traveling by water via the Currituck Sound. The Quaker Phelps from New England (a different yDNA group) came down to the wilds of that area in the 1600s (featured in historic records in Perquimans Co, NC. ) Recent DNA testing of Phelps decendants of NE NC show another 2 major and different Phelps groups, so that route was not likely. More likely I would have looked quite close by to the areas near the Jamestown settlement on the James River. I might have use small boats to travel up the James toward current day Richmond... eventually with descendants arriving in Albemarle County upstream. In my opinion Baltimore would have been my last option unless there were some significant reason - yet to be discovered. Up the James would have been the easiest, with the Albemarle Co. area an eventual destination.
Origins (9/2014) Revised 11/2017; 2/2018; 11/2018
2/2018 Origins Before the British Isles: Sardinia or the area near Italy?? An interesting and detailed study of the theoretical movements of haplogroup M44 included our Phelps. "The Two Main Divisions of E1a1 (M44), With an Emphasis on North Africa." by Robert Hall. HERE Hall discovered the Fulani pastoralists have 10.2% of M44 (E1a1), they also have 18.8% of M35 (E1b1b1), thus those two haplogroups traveled together. E1b1b1 is one of 3 haps said to be Jewisih.
John Phelps reports this which may be relevant to the above: There is a story of the Phelps 'Guelph' lineage and coming to England from Italy (link ). I didn't give it much credence due to early Genealogists known embellishments but, I did some googling and found that the Guelph were in Republic of Florence which is directly across from Corsica and Sardinia. It is a long-shot but,still possible that the E1a1 Phelps are the direct decedents.
It is also possible that it was another Italian family from the Guelph region that embellished their family history.
Ireland?
One testee points to Georgia and suggests VA with a source back to Ireland, His ydna is related to the Albemarle Co, VA Phelps. His ancestor is Frank/Francis Phelps b bf 1797 Ireland to VA to Ga ??? His information is at this web page As far as I know his civil war survey information is the first official document we have ever seen that names a country of origin for one of the descendants of this line. It comes from a Tennessee survey of civil war Phelps veterans. The details are provided at that page. Scroll down to view pdfs, including a hand-written response from William Alexander Phelps (Tennessee Pension # 9671) stating clearly his "grandfather" was from Ireland (question 9). Please review my comments at the end of the page HERE. More ydna testing is under way. Recall that some time ago the consensus was that the Limerick Ireland Phelps was not us.
Wales or England?
Many of you were not involved in the 2008 announcement of a possible origin in Wales. There have been some updates to that also. So I have posted a revised long article about the 1899 letter describing the origin of the elder Thomas Phelps of Caswell Co, NC as from Wales - thus possibly also James d. 1786 Caswell Co, NC. .IMO it is not as convincing as the single and brief Ireland document above is. Below is the introduction section of the full article "Evidence that the older Thomas Phelps was from Wales - based on a 1899 letter and other clues" See the full article here. : Living in Caswell County at the time of our James, d. 1786 Caswell Co, was a Thomas Phelps (1727-1823), whose wife's name we do not know. This Thomas was not James' son, Thomas, and is now referred to as the "elder" or "older" Thomas. (Supportive detail is foundhere andhere.) With the discovery of 1899 letter in 2008, written by a great granddaughter of this Thomas,, there is now some evidence indicating that Thomas, or possibly his father, was an emigrant from Wales. The evidence is based on an 1899 letter written by a Bellonie Griffin Kelly to a cousin describing their ancestry which included Thomas.. Could it be possible James and this elder Thomas were related? (Please understand that several Phelps researchers have concluded from many documents with confidence that the other Thomas Phelps living in this area at this time was a son of James Phelps. That Thomas married Mary Pass and Mary "Polly" McKissack. ) No evidence of a direct paternal relationship between this older Thomas and any other Phelps has ever been discovered despite countless hours of research. However several pro and con clues are worthy of consideration, allowing the reader to form his opinion:
For this and other articles go to the Southern Phelps Research site.
Arguments for Wales or England:
1. Thomas' (of Wales) great-grandaughter, Elizabeth Thomas, married Ambrose Phelps (d. 1850 Caswell), a grandson of James Phelps (Thomas Phelps>Nancy+Thomas Roan>Fanny+Jacob Thomas>Elizabeth)
2. A Delphia Phelps, another daughter of Thomas Phelps, married a George Roan March 29, 1788 in Caswell and was bonded by a Reuben Phelps. We now know that Reuben was a son of James Phelps d 1786. Reuben even named his own daughter Delphia. Even though there are no other records indicating a family tie of Thomas to James, this information may indicate one. (Research by Mark Phelps, 2008)
3. From "Karen" living in the UK karenandcarlphelps AT yahoo.co.uk Phelps name here in the U.K. and it is a Welsh/West county name in that it is from the South Wales, and the English county,s on the southern borders and across the Seven Estuary, Glostershire in particular, It is some time ago since i checked the possible origins of the name but as far as i could see it was mostly Southern Wales and the west country.
4. Three reports of Wales or England origins have been submitted.
- 11/2017 From Walter Phelps of the James of Caswell line: My grandmother told me my 2nd great grandfather James Galen "Gale" Phelps great grandson of our James said we were Welsh! Of course he married Irish as many of our Phelps line did. kit # 172111
From a Marilyn Phelps mjphelps AT gmail.com 3/2008, a descendant of James. My great-grandmother Clara McCreary Phelps told me in 1981 when I asked her the ethnic background of the family that the Phelps' were Welsh and her side was Welsh-Irish. (Seefurther comment here)
- A 1903 questionnaire responded to by Jean Holt, daughter of Britain Felps (a Thomas Felps, Md descendant) who when asked ifher grandfather Abner Phelps immigrated from Europe, wrote "yes, and was from England (I suppose)" Weakening the statement is that Abner is the grandson of the patriarch in Md. and that she certainly appeared to be giving her best guess. This information is available here The actual image of the responses are in the Tennessee section of the SOuthern Phelps Research site.
5. From Mark Phelps: WILLIS BUCKINGHAM--HUSBAND OF JAMES PHELPS' DAUGHTER LUCY--PURCHASED AT THE SALE. Page 260: Sales property of Thomas Phelps sold 6 November 1823 to: Maj. James Currie, Archibald Lipscomb; Issac D. Vanhook, Cuthbert Wagstaff, Robert D. Wade, Willis BUCKINGHAM , John Mathis, Robert Yalock, Joseph Langley, John Broughton, Solomon Whitlow, Elizabeth Sargent, James Roan, James Jay Sen., Nathaniel Torian, John Fullington, John C. Vanhook, Miram Lockard, Alexander Griffin, Abner Wisdom, Wm. McMurray, Barzillai Nelson, Young Burt, Jesse Westbrook, Thomas Roan, Demsey Sargent, Thomas Greenway, David Drake, Sally Roan, Wm. Wisdom, Lewis Yalock, et al.
6. Added 5/2016: Kit 407481's ancester is Aquilla Phelps b. abt 1822, Rowan Co? Wilkes County? , NC?, d. Dec. 13, 1913, Van Lear, KY Ky Census records of 1900 and 1910 for an elderly Aquilla show his father as born in England. The 1910 census record shows his mother as born in Scotland. This line is yet to be connected to any of the known major lines. Aquilla’s Deatj Certificate states his father was born in NC but that was reported by a Lee Phelp who was living nearby, who may well have not known. If we assume England to be true, it would indicate this line was not of the Felps of Baltimore line. It would also be one of the very, very few clues as to the origin of this whole group of Phelps Combined with recent SNP research this implies another Phelps immigrant
7 Added 11/2018 From Walter Phelps: A re-read of Phelps Families of Virginia and Kentucky and Allied Families by Nancy R Roy (deceased) 1960 might help. There was a newspaper article included in the writing that is pertinent to our Phelps and I quote: Under date of Nov. 1907, Mr A. C. Quisenberry, of Washington, D. C. wrote, "The first Virginia Phelps I have been able to find records of was WILLIAM PHELPS, who came from Somersetshire, England, in 1685. I find nothing about him in Virginia, except the fact of his arrival. He was one of the soldiers who fought in the Duke of Monmouth's Rebellion against James ll. and was tried and transported to Virginia with many other good men. (From the papers of Mrs. Frank Jennings. (I have not found this record. N. R. Roy) Based on ydna testing some of us have suggested there had to be a William Phelps whose sons were William d. 1811 Buckingham co, VA, John Phelps Halifax d 1794, and our James Phelps d. 1786. See all this at the top of this page. So if the Monmouth Phelps was sent to America in 1685 and was 21 or so, I guess the years would fit. But to make this work, seems to me we have to find that William somewhere in the records. The Monmouth Rebellion of 1685 saw the banishment to America of a William Phelpes. Southwest England was the rebellion area. (Wales was NOT part of the southwest England area involved in that rebellion. Since Wales has been suggested as the Phelps origin, Wales was hoped to connect to the William of the rebellion, but no.)
8. . In a review of family oral histories some years ago, there were several who had heard of three brothers from England coming to America. Could this have been the related yDNA related Thomas of Maryland, James of Caswell, or Pheps of Albmarle Co, VA?
Arguments against Wales or England:
1. The Phelps paternal lineage of the 4 major Phelps lines have a YDNA"haplogroup" of E1a1" which does not point to the British Isles or western Europe. This unexpected result is under study. 2016: As research using SNPs continues this unusual and small Haplogroup designation may not be sufficient to discount the British Isles.
2. Thomas Phelps lived in the Gloucester District of Caswell - in the Leasburg area - NOT the area where James lived which was the Richmond District where Mary, Rueben, and James' son Thomas were shown in the 1790 Census . Other than the above evidence, no additional records have been found indicating any type of business or personal contact.
3. Thomas seemed to be of a higher status than the other nearby Phelps. He owned owned 14 slaves and was responsible for legal work in VA. See further detail here
4. In a review of family oral histories some years ago, there were several who had heard of three brothers from England coming to America. Could this have been related to the three New England Phelps lines, now known not to be related to us??
5. How much importance should we give to the two origins presented in #3 and #4 (For) above? IMO, the evidence is not convincing but remains a possible clue, but that is your decision of course.
6. The Monmouth Rebellion of 1685 saw the banishment to America of a William Phelpes. Southwest England was the rebellion area. Wales was NOT part of the southwest England area involved in that rebellion. Since Wales has been suggested as the Phelps origin, Wales was hoped to connect to the William of the rebellion, but no.)
How long were they in there m (British Isles)?
From Doug Phelps, project admin: My hypothesis - mostly NOT agreed to by others due to the small numbers of E1a1 tested men - that if our paternal ancestor(s) came from the British Isles, they were there only for 2-3 generations, coming from some now unknown location.
"After 1066, the Norman barons introduced surnames into England, and the practice gradually spread… New surnames continued to be formed long after 1400, and immigrants brought in new ones." (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/familyhistory/get_started/surnames_01.shtml and other related web sites.
1. Assume our paternal ancestors came to England in roman times. If our paternal ancestors arrived in England in Roman times – year zero or so, or arrived there even in 500 or even 800, by 1100 or 1300 or 1400, they should have had lots of descendants who had no idea they were related. In 1066 to 1400 our ydna matching family men would not have known they were related.. probably living in diverse areas and previously had no surname at all. When they took surnames, only those who knew they were related would take the same surname. They would be a small cluster of a very few men. So these unknowing men would have taken all sorts of different surnames: Smith, Jones, Baker, etc etc. This is clearly the case of R1a and R1b men. Only a few close living together and knowingly related would have taken something like Phelps. So it would be only improbable wild luck if men who did not know they were related took the same surname Phelps. They would have taken other surnames.
So…. The descendants today of different surnames but matching ydna would be taking ydna tests. They would find that they match other surnames at 12 or 25 or more but with different surnames. This is clearly the case with R1a and R1b men. BUT we do NOT find this in our Phelps lines. No other surnames. Why is this? Could it be that over the hundreds of years from the Romans or 500 or 800 only a very small core of related men who knew they were related survived and they ALL took the same surname like Phelps. I contend this is simply not reasonable and extremely unlikely.
2. Assume a small group of our ydna matching paternal ancestors arrived in England say in 1200 or 1300 or even 1400 and a few years later began to take surnames. They would have known they were related and all took the same surname, Phelps. Their descendants, us, would then see exactly what we are seeing: no other surnames EVEN 12 markers ! We see this same oddity in the other m44 men except for the Jews among us.
Now add to that argument that immigrants were coming into England after 1400 and either already had a surname or took one soon after. This also supports my theory.
3. Assume other origins of major British inflow would account for our ancestor being in England.. View these movements to England at a graph showing the African & Jewish Movement to the BI 55 ad to 1700. https://sites.google.com/site/haplogroupe1a1/home/British-Isles/african-and-jewish-movement-to-the-british-isles-55ad-1700 Notice when surnames were being taken. Surnames were taken far, far later after the Romans and my points above apply. And for the Sub-saharan slave period,the Barbary Pirates , the Jewish influx, and the Spanish armada, they were after the surname period. One period DOES fit: the Normans invading England with invited Jews which took place just before and during the surname period. So this is a possibility of our origin but even then if they were there several hundred years before they took surnames, my theory above applies.
Therefore I conclude that while I believe in an immigration from England to America, they were not there long before…. If not that then they came from some other area of the world. Most of our FamilyOrigins at ftdna for us show a small percentages pointing to Spain/Portugal/Morroco, Northeast Africa/and on up to Turkey. This might be showing the influence of our paternal E1a1 M44 ancestor. Certainly this does not appear in the FTDNA data shown for the New england Phelps who have good sources for their origin.
Below is a typical map of origins of ALL our ancestors for our Phelps at FTDNA. Perhaps our unique M44 paternal ancestor is being seen in the purple areas?
Researched articles that may be useful for this line are in the viewable files below:
Early Jamestown and the Spry connection??
The Phelps Families of Anne Arundel , MD by Robert W. Barnes, professional genealogist. Maryland Genealogical Society Bulletin Vol 34 #4 (Winter 1993), see the file below BarnesWalterPhelps
Further Notes on Phelps [Walter Phelps line] Maryland Genealogical Society Bulletin Vol 37 #1 (Winter 1996). See the file below GilesWalterPhelps
Unplaced Phelps [of Maryland By Robert W. Barnes. Transcripted by Doug Phelps. See the file below.
Phelps named from Baltimore County Families, 1659-1759, by Robert W. Barnes, page 503 See the file below Baltimore County Families
Inventory of Phelps in Anne Arundel Co pre-1800 See the file below.
Thomas Phelps, 1650 Baltimore/AA County Indentured servant from "Colonial Families of Maryland: Bound and Determined to Succeed" by Robert W. Barnes, 2007 See the file below
The claim of Mary Arden that her children were fathered by Thomas Felps
Also see other files below
Theories on the origin of Thomas Felps/Phelps d. 1758/9 Baltimore Co.
For a detailed review of some theories on the origin of Thomas Felps/Phelps d. 1758/9 Baltimore Co., Md click to go to the page Theories_on_the_Origin_of_Thomas_ Felps
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse