If we look at the modal value on line 11 and compare it to individual members values we see that 2 members match 25/25 (rows 6 and 7), 4 match 24/25 (rows 4, 8, 9, and 10). The most distant members are rows 1, 2, and 5 that match 23/25. One member descended through Robert’s son William matches the modal 12/12. Of the six members that have tested at 37 markers (see the attachment 37 Marker Table.doc) one matches the 37 marker modal exactly (row 7), 3 match 35/37 (rows 2, 4, and 5) and 2 match 34/37 (rows 1 and 9). For both panels all members are related to the modal value. At 67 markers rows 1 and 9 match 61/67. Two of our known descendents (rows 4 and 6) are very close to the modal values. Two others (rows 5 and 9, both descended through James) are often the most distant from the modal and have matches 22/25 and 32/37. These matches fall in the red and blue regions of Table 2 suggesting no genetic relationship between them. However they match 24/25 and 23/25 with the third member descended through James. This shows the presence of a genetic relationship. The members on rows 5 and 9 were our first members known to be descended from Robert. I was quite concerned about the reliability of the tests when the results for these two showed them unlikely to be related genetically, but each had a well-defined paper trail back to Robert. If we compare the actual marker values for these members we find a distance of 2 for DYS 437 and distances of 1 each for 3 fast mutating markers. I think we are simply observing the consequence of the occurrence of some unlikely probabilities. Given that each is related to the third member descended from James I am confident that the test results are valid.
Now that we have sample results from members descended through 3 of Robert’s sons can we begin to determine which son those members who cannot trace their line back to Robert are descended from? Unfortunately the answer is “not yet with any reliability”. The member descended through William tested only 12 markers. We need more markers to begin any evaluation of descendants through William. The member descended through Finley tested 37 markers with a 35/37 match to the modal. The two non-matches (DYS458 and DYS570) are both fast mutating markers and the values are unique in the Table. Given these unique values one could propose that no other members are descended through Finley. I would like to have another member descended through Finley before I would be comfortable with that assertion. One member who cannot trace his line back to Robert (row 7) has modal values at both 25 and 37 markers. Given that the modal is weighted toward values of those known to be descended through James a strong probability exists that this member is also descended through James. I cannot see a pattern for the other members who cannot trace their line back to Robert that might suggest which son there are descended from. We really need 67 marker results for members to try to tease this information out of the data.
IV. Thomas McGrew’s Line
We have 4 Project members probably descended from Thomas McGrew who have returned samples. We have one known descendant who has not yet returned his sample. Their DNA results are shown in blue on Table 3. These four members are descended from 2 individuals who were brothers. Their father was John H. McGrew who I believe to be a grandson of Thomas by his son John. This link is tenuous, but we should have results from a known descendent of Thomas through a different line in late April. Then we should know for certain if this line is descended from Thomas.
Interestingly there is only a single marker mismatch among the 4. It is in row 12, DYS391. The 2 members who tested 25 marker panels (rows 14 and 15) are both 4 generations removed from John H. McGrew who is their Most Recent Common Ancestor (MRCA). Probability would predict a 24/25 match for individuals separated by 8 transmission events and 25 markers. These individuals matched 25/25. In comparing the Thomas McGrew’s 25 marker modal with the Robert McGrew modal we find a 21/25 match, which is Not Related according to Table 2. However if we compare the Thomas McGrew modal with row 8, the descendent of James A. McGrew, we find a 22/25 match, which is Probably Not Related. This slightly closer relationship may be significant since if James A was a nephew or cousin of Robert he may have been more closely related to Thomas than Robert was. The closer match is in marker DYS449. There are 2 others in Robert’s row who have a 31 for that marker. This is a fast mutating marker and is the most variable in Robert’s line. A 37 or better a 67 marker panel for one of Thomas’s descendents would help answer questions about the relationship between these lines.
V. Alexander MacGruar’s Line
We have 3 Project members descended from Alexander MacGruar/McGrew who according to the McGrew database was born in Scotland in 1706 and is found in SC in 1752. His name changed from MacGruar to McGrew sometime before he died about 1777. He had 4 sons: John, Peter Alexander, James, and William. John, James, and William moved to the Alabama Territory where John had a land grant.
Their DNA results are shown in green on Table 3. One member (row 17) is a known descendant of Alexander’s son James. The other two (rows 18 and 19) are known descendants of Henry Mortimer McGrew who was assumed to be a grandson of Alexander because he grew up in the same area of AL and MS that Alexander’s sons had moved to. Henry’s father was unknown so his connection to Alexander was tenuous, however. There are 24/25, 35/37, and 64/67 matches between rows 17 and 19 verifying Henry Mortimer’s relationship to Alexander. I should also note the 25/25 and 37/37 matches between the 2 descendents of Henry Mortimer (rows 18 and 19). This line seems to have a lower average mutation rate than the McGrew lines do.
These results are not consistent with the NW Irish haplotype of the McGrew line. This DNA appears to be Scots or northern English. Additional testing may be able to show what region this line originated in.
VI. Individual Lines
We have 3 surnamed McGrew members who do not belong to any of our previous lines. Their DNA results are shown in brown on Table 3. Row 21 has a paper trail back to Robert McGrew but has a non-paternity event in his line.
Row 22 traces his line back to Andrew McGrew born about 1760 in Baltimore. Nothing is known of this Alexander’s ancestry. He changed his name to Megrue about 1800 supposedly to not be known as Irish. Some of his male line is Megrue, others are McGrew. The R1a1 haplogroup is unusual for the British Isles and is often considered Norwegian Viking. It would seem possible that this member’s McGrew ancestor was sired by a Viking raider. This member (a McGrew) and I are working on obtaining a second sample from his near relatives and have identified a very distant relative (a Megrue) who may be willing to provide a sample.
Row 23 traces his line back to a Henry McGrew born about 1819 in MD. His E1b1b1 haplogroup is typically identified as Mediterranean. This member and I are attempting to locate another descendant of Henry to verify these results. The most likely explanation for this haplogroup with a McGrew surname is either a name change at some point, an adoption, or a non-paternity event that could have been a Roman soldier 1600 years ago.
Hopefully additional samples can be obtained in both of these lines that will shed more light on their ancestry.
VII. Haplogroups
Row 2 has an R1b1b2a1b5 haplogroup in green. This member recently had a Deep Clade R test done with Family Tree. Whereas the marker panel tests estimate your haplogroup based on your haplotype results, the Deep Clade test unambiguously determines your haplogroup. The former method tests Short Tandem Repeats (STR’s) in your DNA. The Deep Clade tests the Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNP’s) in your DNA that define all haplogroups. The R1b1b2a1b5 haplogroup is equivalent to the R1b1c7 haplogroup mentioned in the 2006 Report. There has been a change in naming conventions. This is the North West Irish haplotype common to as much as 20% of the male population in N. Ireland and 5% in parts of Western Scotland (Argyll). Mark McDonald writes,
“The Dal Riada (Dalriads) leadership who came from Ireland in circa 500AD into what is now Argyll spoke a language akin to what is now called Erse (Irish Gaelic to the Scots) and introduced that language into Scotland - the root of modern Scots Gaelic. They were called 'Scoti' by the Romans it is said - a word for 'raider' used in those days, and it is the root of the name Scotland which later developed as the tribes cohesed into a nation.”
One member (row 9) has a predicted haplogroup of R1b1b2a1b5. He has refined his marker panel to 64, which could be why Family Tree was able to predict this haplogroup for him but not any of our other members. The results of the Deep Clade test should apply to both Robert and Thomas’ line since their haplotypes fit the pattern for this haplogroup as pointed out by David Wilson (who first identified it) several years ago. It would appear that these Dalriads are the ancestors of the Robert and Thomas McGrew lines.
VIII. Miscellaneous
One of the initial goals of this Project was to learn the identity of the Clan that the McGrew’s were associated with. My family tradition, which I believe is the usually accepted one in the McGrew Family as a whole, is that we were part of the MacGregor Clan. I have compared our DNA results with those in the MacGregor DNA Project and have found no matches or anything close to a match.
A Project member recently loaned me his copy of a book titled McGrew Families 1726-1928 by Ruth Wallace McGrew. The book is primarily a compilation of letters that Mrs. McGrew received from other McGrew’s from all over the country. On page 4 is this entry.
“Mr. John MacGregor, 3 Conte Crescent, Edinburgh, Scotland, writes as follows:
My Dear Sirs:
I duly received your letter of the 17th Oct. regarding the name McGrew. It is certainly not Highland. It may be Gallwegian or Irish – I think the latter.
Yours faithfully,
John MacGregor.
(The above is referred to as good authority on the origin of names.)”
From Wikipedia: “Galwegian Gaelic is an extinct Goidelic dialect formerly spoken in South West Scotland”.
Also the following:
“MacGrowther, MacGruder, MacGruther, etc. There is some considerable difficulty in determining the particular clan origin of the aforementioned names, especially because, owing to their being derived from a profession “Grudsir” (Anglice “Brewer”) they may be appropriate to several clans. The names seem, however, to be more closely associated with the Macgregor’s and the Drummonds than with any other clan.”
From the Internet (www.electricscotland.comwebclans/septs.htm) I have found the following list of Septs whose name resembles McGrew:
Clan Buchanan - Macgreusich
Clan Drummond - Grewar, Gruer, Macgrewar, Macgrowther, Macgruder, Macgruther
Clan Fraser - Macgruer, Macgreusich
Clan MacFarlane - Macgreusich
Clan MacGregor - Macgrewar, Macgrowther, Macgruder, Macgruther
At http://www.celticbritain.net/schotse-clanindex.htm there is a map of Scotland showing the locations of the major Clans. When this map is compared to the map at http://www.familytreedna.com/public/R1b1c7/default.aspx, which shows the location of the R1b1b2a1b5 haplogroup in Scotland, Clans Drummond and Buchanan are centrally located in the region of that haplogroup and Clan Macgregor is on the periphery. Also while I cannot cite the source there is one assertion in the Notes of the McGrew database stating that McGrew’s were a sept of Clan Buchanan.
The Clan relationship of the MacGruar line also needs to be examined. The Sept list above shows that Clans Drummond, Fraser, and MacGregor have Septs named Macgruer or Macgrewer. I found the following post on the Internet (http://genforum.genealogy.com/gruar/messages/1.html):
Brief History of the name Gruer / Grewar / Gruar / Grewer
The name is found predominatly around Braemar in Strath dee, Scotland. It is found elsewhere in Scotland, Boleskine, Invernesshire, North of Glasgow, around Loch Lomond and the Trossachs, in Perthshire, around glen Artney. The name is originally derived from the Scots Gaelic MacGrudaire (pro. Makgroodiru)meaning the son of a Brewer or Distiller of Scotch Whisky. The name Gruer is one of the oldest recorded surnames in Braemar.
The name is one of a variety of names deriving from the son of the Brewer. Namely, Magruder, MacGruder, MacGruther, MacCrouther, MacGruer, MacGrewar, MacGruar, Gruer, Gruar, Grewer and Grewar. Unlike most surnames, its transition from MacGrudaire to Grewar occured very early. Gruers are recorded in Braemar as early as the 15th Century. Therefore, although the names listed above are derived from the same name, their histories have quite distinct differences.
MacGruer originates almost exclusively from Boleskine Invernesshire, and was a Highland clan in its own right. In 1479 Gruer Mor (big or Great Gruer) on his wife being insulted by the grants of Foyers and Boleskine, sent galleys across Loch ness to make him pay for his bad manners. The MacGruers were victorious and won the lands of Boleskine for themselves. Latter, when the Gruer influence faded, they became the hereditary standard bearers to the Frasers of Saltoun.
I will continue to examine these relationships by looking for Clan DNA results to compare with ours.
Last year one of our Project members suggested I look at DNA & Genealogy by Colleen Fitzpatrick and Andrew Yeiser. He recommended it highly. Indeed it is a very readable description of the science of DNA and how it can be used in genealogy. It is written for the layman and is very informative. I also recommend it highly. At the moment it comes with a coupon for $10 toward a new test at Family Tree. If you buy the book and have no use for the coupon please send it to me. I can always apply it to new members.
IX. The Future
What direction should we be moving in 2009 and beyond? First we need more members with known lines back to our founding patriarchs. Ideally we should have at least 2 members descended from each of Robert’s sons. We now have 3 descended from James but only one each from William and Finley. I am currently in touch with a descendant through John and am encouraging him to join the Project. I have not been able to locate a descendant of Alexander who is interested in joining.
We now have one member who is a known descendant of Thomas. I would like another from a different family branch. We have 3 known members of Alexander MacGruar’s line. Additional members descended through other sons would assist us inn examining genetic differences among the son’s lines. Also if a member descended from John (Flood) McGrew could be found, we might answer the question of the identity of the ancestor of that line.
We have 4 members of Robert’s line who cannot trace their line back to Robert. If we knew the genetic differences in the lines of Robert’s sons we might be able to determine which son these individuals were descended from. To do this we need to refine our 25 or 37 marker panels to 67 markers. Only with more markers for comparison can we hope to tease out genetic differences in Robert’s line.
Finally I must mention that accomplishing the goals that I set out above will require money that the Project can use to pay for individual testing and for refining panels to 67 markers. There is a link on the left side of the Project website (www.familytreedna.com/public/mcgrew) that you can use to donate money to the Project General Fund. Donations of any amount would be welcomed and appreciated. I have discretionary authority over this money. I will use it only to further the goals above as we seek to learn more of our family genealogy.
Suggested reading:
Fitzpatrick, Colleen, and Yeiser, Andrew, DNA & Genealogy, Rice Book Press, 2005 ($15.30 from Amazon)
John G. McGrew, Project Administrator
mcgrewjg@email.com