DNA-R1B1C7-L ArchivesArchiver > DNA-R1B1C7 > 2011-03 > 1301270158
From: "Don Milligan" <>
Subject: Re: [R-M222] McHarg
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 16:55:58 -0700
THANK YOU JOHN ! DONALD MILLIGAN M-222
[mailto:] On Behalf Of
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 4:22 PM
Subject: Re: [R-M222] McHarg
In a message dated 3/27/2011 7:09:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time, Alan
I have four MacDowall results of which three have at CDYa+b = 36-37 + 37.
These values are different from the cluster I am looking at, do you find a
similar pattern in other surnames these values?
I just spent some time pulling McDowell, Kennedy and Millikan samples from
Ysearch and a few FTDNA sites. I put the spreadsheet online for reference.
I'm sure I missed some samples along the way but I wanted to get a quick
I had no luck with the McDougal site at FTDNA. They have quite a few
members but no results are displayed. That's pretty useless. On Ysearch
most of the McDougals I saw were not M222. Just a handful were. There
were a lot of M222 McDowells on Ysearch though.
There seem to be two groups of M222 McDowells. One has DYS 390 = 25, the
other 24. The only distinctive thing I see about both groups is both have
(mostly) 14-16-16-17 at 464x. Mostly they're right on the M222 modal. I
don't really know if these two groups are related or not. They could be.
I see a few M222 Millkins with this 464x motif of the McDowells but none
among the M222 Kennedys. The Kennedys have a shared marker of their own,
DYS 607 = 15. This shows up in two McDowell samples, the two mentioned
previously that claim a descent from Fergus of Galloway. Aside from that I
don't see much but I have not spent time on the 37-67 marker set yet.
After a fairly quick look at these samples I couldn't say whether the the
M222 McDowells and Kennedys were definitely related or not. Especially
when you consider the proposed common ancestor d. 1161 AD.
For the Kennedys, I just used their Nial group per the FTDNA site.
I don't see a CDYab = 36-37 in the spreadsheet.
Anyone else is free to check the samples and voice their own opinion. I
can also add samples or ditch my own spreadsheet and use something else.
On the question of relatedness going back many centuries:
I've tried without success to find something in the DNA of the various
tribes or clans said to descend from different sons of Nial. I spent most
of the time on McLaughlins and Dohertys, said to descend from different
sons of Nial c. 450 AD. or earlier. I can find nothing that tells me they
are related except for the common M222 haplogroup. I see nothing that
really distinguishes them reliably from the rest of M222. Both are modal
at one marker (DYS 458 = 18) which is somewhat unusual in M222 but does
appear in other Irish and Scottish surnames with no known connection.
I did some work on Kavanaghs and Kinsellas, two Leinster septs said to
descend from Dermot MacMurrough, the King of Leinster, c. 1200 AD. There
is a large group of related Kavanaghs with some distinctive shared markers
which set them apart from the rest of the Leinster cluster. Two Kinsella
samples match them perfectly. But we only have two so far. I'd feel more
comfortable with more samples but none are available.
You can see this DNA at this site:
Scroll down a ways.
The person in question, Fergus of Galloway, is generally dated c. 1090 to
1161. That's a little earlier than Dermot MacMurrough (1110-1171) but not
R1b1c7 Research and Links:
To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to
with the word 'unsubscribe' without the
quotes in the subject and the body of the message