In a message dated 9/22/2011 8:55:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time, rreid002@insight.rr.com writes: All that can be really said is that the Earls of Atholl were collectively from the 'kindred of Columba' as cited by Moncreiffe and Skeene. I would say that's highly speculative as well. It's based on nothing more substantial than the fact that Columcille (Columba) founded a monastery in that part of Scotland. It does not necessarily follow that a lay abbot centuries later was a descendent of one of the founder monks. I don't know how this idea got started. An article in Wikipedia cites Sir Iain Moncreiffe (the Highland Clans, 1982). A much earlier clan history reported by Buchanan of Auchmar (1723) states the Clan Donnachaidh were descended from a McDonald. "The Surname of Robertson is descended of one Duncan Crosda, or Cross-grained, a son of MacDonald Lord of the Isles about the reign of King William the Lyon...." But he adds: "So that altho' this above account be the most generally received in relation to the descent of that surname, I am not positive how far is is acquiesced by those of the name.." He does not state what other clan histories might have been current in his time. Given the work of Bryan Sykes, it should be obvious the Clan Donnachaidh or Robertsons are not descended from the MacDonalds of the Isles. All three major chieftain lines, MacDonald, MacAillister and MacDougal are R1a. Skene quotes a similar history but says it was Duncan reamhar, son of Angus Mor, lord of the Isles who founded the clan. Skene doesn't believe it. Skene thinks they were descended instead from the ancient Earls of Atholl. Beyond that though he doesn't venture an opinion. There doesn't seem to be much verifiable history on this clan prior to Duncan reamhair, whom Skene calls a son of Andrew. The date seems to be ca. 1300. I can cite any number of Irish septs whose DNA matches perfectly from a common ancestor at about this date, including McLaughlins, Dohertys, Kavanaghs, Kinsellas and O'Byrnes. If the Robertsons and Reids (and Duncans) really are related to the old chieftains of the Clan Donnachaidh it seems their DNA should match up just as well. Just being M222 is not enough. Since most Scottish clan members are not related to the chieftains and the DNA of the chieftains is unknown as far as I know, It's still possible they could be members of the Clan Donnachaidh even if they don't match up well in DNA. Most Scottish clans have at least some M222. But it seems to me to attempt to tie into the tales of the kindred of Columba and Crinan the abbot you would need a sample from the line of the old Robertson chieftains. That's a big problem for most Irish and Scottish researchers. Many do not have an acknowledged clan head to test with a verified pedigree. If you don't know what the DNA is for the line of the chieftains then you have no fixed reference point for comparison. In such cases my own working hypothesis is the largest related cluster in a surname group is most likely the line of the chieftains. That may or may not be valid. But I don't know what else to go on. Perhaps someone else will have so ideas. John

John, Personally I would argue the exact opposite, namely that most noble lines are extinct or near extinct, for a combination of statistical and social reasons. It was proven by nineteenth century statisticians that most lines die out over a period of many centuries. The investigation was started by a suggestion that the British peerage was dying out and it was suggested at the time that the fertility of heiresses was something to do with it. In the Kennedys I have studied, all but one of the landed families daughtered out and often it was the case that it was the younger sons of the cadet families who went off on risky overseas adventures, trading or military, because they had no chance of inheriting the family estates. I posted this link recently on the genealogy-dna list in case anyone is interested and missed it. http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=vL0hq80XXqMC&lpg=PA156&pg=PA156#v=onepage&f=false What are we left with? Lots of common folks who probably weren't related to the chief, whose lines have prospered due to random statistical fluctuations. Can I prove it? Yes, having analysed the ancestry of most of the Scottish Kennedys who still remain. cheers Iain > From: Lochlan@aol.com > Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 23:06:55 -0400 > To: dna-r1b1c7@rootsweb.com > Subject: Re: [R-M222] Crinan ancestry is subject to debate > > > > In a message dated 9/22/2011 8:55:06 P.M. Central Daylight Time, > rreid002@insight.rr.com writes: > > All that can be really said is that the > Earls of Atholl were collectively from the 'kindred of Columba' as cited by > Moncreiffe and Skeene. > > I would say that's highly speculative as well. It's based on nothing > more substantial than the fact that Columcille (Columba) founded a monastery > in that part of Scotland. It does not necessarily follow that a lay abbot > centuries later was a descendent of one of the founder monks. I don't know > how this idea got started. An article in Wikipedia cites Sir Iain > Moncreiffe (the Highland Clans, 1982). A much earlier clan history reported by > Buchanan of Auchmar (1723) states the Clan Donnachaidh were descended from a > McDonald. > > "The Surname of Robertson is descended of one Duncan Crosda, or > Cross-grained, a son of MacDonald Lord of the Isles about the reign of King William > the Lyon...." > > But he adds: > > > "So that altho' this above account be the most generally received in > relation to the descent of that surname, I am not positive how far is is > acquiesced by those of the name.." > > He does not state what other clan histories might have been current in > his time. > > Given the work of Bryan Sykes, it should be obvious the Clan Donnachaidh > or Robertsons are not descended from the MacDonalds of the Isles. All > three major chieftain lines, MacDonald, MacAillister and MacDougal are R1a. > > Skene quotes a similar history but says it was Duncan reamhar, son of Angus > Mor, lord of the Isles who founded the clan. Skene doesn't believe it. > Skene thinks they were descended instead from the ancient Earls of Atholl. > Beyond that though he doesn't venture an opinion. > > There doesn't seem to be much verifiable history on this clan prior to > Duncan reamhair, whom Skene calls a son of Andrew. The date seems to be ca. > 1300. I can cite any number of Irish septs whose DNA matches perfectly from > a common ancestor at about this date, including McLaughlins, Dohertys, > Kavanaghs, Kinsellas and O'Byrnes. > > If the Robertsons and Reids (and Duncans) really are related to the old > chieftains of the Clan Donnachaidh it seems their DNA should match up just > as well. Just being M222 is not enough. > > Since most Scottish clan members are not related to the chieftains and the > DNA of the chieftains is unknown as far as I know, It's still possible they > could be members of the Clan Donnachaidh even if they don't match up well > in DNA. Most Scottish clans have at least some M222. But it seems to me > to attempt to tie into the tales of the kindred of Columba and Crinan the > abbot you would need a sample from the line of the old Robertson chieftains. > > That's a big problem for most Irish and Scottish researchers. Many do > not have an acknowledged clan head to test with a verified pedigree. If you > don't know what the DNA is for the line of the chieftains then you have no > fixed reference point for comparison. In such cases my own working > hypothesis is the largest related cluster in a surname group is most likely the > line of the chieftains. That may or may not be valid. But I don't know > what else to go on. > > Perhaps someone else will have so ideas. > > > John > > > > > > R1b1c7 Research and Links: > > http://clanmaclochlainn.com/R1b1c7/ > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to DNA-R1B1C7-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message