Families who claim descent from the Earls of Fife

Sir Robert Douglas, who compiled Peerage of Scotland (1764), dismissed the supposed descents of Mackintosh, Duff of Braco, Finday, and Craigton from the old earls of Fife, saying he had never seen any documents to support them.

Hi Justin,

It sounds like, it might be simpler to add the branches which have a rightful claim as descendants, instead of discussing those refuted. 😯

The Wemyss / Weems family is supposed to be male-line descendants of the Earls of Fife.

But, see Sir William Fraser, Memorials of the Family of Wemyss of Wemyss (1888), 3 vols.
https://archive.org/stream/memorialsoffamil01fras#page/n3/mode/2up

The author debunks the tradition that the Wemyss family branched off from the Earls of Fife about 1150. He shows that Sir John of Wemyss/Methill was son of Michael Wemyss of Methil & Wemyss, not son of Hugh MacDuff (Edigus) (Eguis) (Giles) of Fife, and there is no evidence Michael was related to the Macduffs. Then he shows that “no such tradition existed in the beginning of the fifteenth century”.

He says, “In the absence of authentic charter evidence a tradition arose, in comparatively modern times, that the Wemyss family were descended from the ancient Earls of Fife, and were their oldest male representatives. But in the investigations which have been made in the course of the present work nothing has been found which could in any way substantiate such a tradition.”

One of the traditional evidences that the Wemyss family is descended from the Earls of Fife is their old coat of arms, which has the Macduff lion in the 1st and 4th quarters. However, the family’s earlier arms were very different. Sir John Wemyss of Reres, Leuchars and Kincaldrum changed to these arms, probably for reasons that had nothing to do with any tradition of a descent from the Macduffs.

“The Wemyss family do not appear to have taken any interest in the question of their supposed descent from the Earls of Fife until the time of David, the second Earl of Wemyss” (1610-1679). He carried on a genealogical correspondence with his son-in-law Sir James Wemyss, Lord Burntisland. In one of the letters Burntisland says the family was descended from the Earls of Fife but the family had not kept a genealogical tree and it would be difficult to create one. The two of them were looking into their genealogy for the benefit of their cousins in Venice who had become Counts de Wemyss there. The end result was that the Earl got a birth-brief under the great seal of Charles II that certified the Wemyss descent from the Earls of Fife in a general way.

But, David Wemyss, 2nd Earl of Wemyss was so little concerned about his supposed descent from the Macduffs that when his brother-in-law the Earl of Rothes was being made a duke and wanted the new title to be Duke of Fife, the Earl of Wemyss made no objection. The king refused the application (on the ground that Fife was a royal title) so that the Earl of Rothes became Duke of Rothes instead of Duke of Fife.

That’s where the matter rested for another hundred years (1754), when the 4th Earl of Wemyss hired Sir Robert Douglas to research the family’s history. Interesting, because this is the same Sir Robert Douglas who compiled Peerage of Scotland (1764). The record of the payment to Douglas for £10 10s. is preserved in the Wemyss family papers.

Douglas had access to the old Wemyss family papers. He traced the family to Gillimichael, Earl of Fife, who he said was a great grandson of Macduff (died 1139). Gillimichael had two sons, Duncan and Hugh. (This is the same story everyone was reporting in this period.) Then Hugh had a son Hugh. (That’s supported by charter evidence.) Then, according to Douglas, the second Hugh was the father of Sir John who adopted the name Wemyss from his lands. Douglas provided no evidence for this statement. He was an illustrious authority but modern research shows Douglas was wrong. John Wemyss was the son of Michael of Methil “who does not appear in any generation of the Earls of Fife.”

> it might be simpler to add the branches which have a rightful claim

Sure. In a perfect world ;)

Our problem here is that many of these families are already on Geni with the false line connecting them to the Earls of Fife. I'm thinking those people are going to want to see why their lines are being disconnected.

Does my branch have a rightful claim? Re: descendants of Macduff.

According to Geni, "Macduff" is my 25th great grandfather.

http://www.geni.com/path/Loretta-Alexandra-vacationing-in-Texas-for...

If my branch has been wrongly connected, I certainly have no objection to being disconnected. No reason to cling to my link to him, if the connection is fabricated. I'd rather the data be accurate.

Loretta, we'll have to see as the research develops. I have a lot of miscellaneous notes but certainly not everything.

Wonder if Y-DNA research has shed any light on this subject. Granted it's wildly improbable for a male line to go back *that* far without some kind of Non-Paternal Event - or even to be documentable that far back. But it might be worth looking into.

Sure enough, they've been looking into it, although not with quite the same emphasis: http://www.clanmacfie.co.uk/clanhome/surname_project.php

Mt father's line in a direct Finley descent - as this line has been tested. FYI. You will find a cousin of mine - Wm Earl Finley - in the DNA project. There is more than the one study that is mentioned.

I have also invited members/ancestors of the MacDuff Clan to participate in these discussions, perhaps they can give another perspective.

http://www.worldfamilies.net/surnames

Now that I know we have a Finley descendant with a tested line, I'll make a special point of watching for that. I had a quick peek at one of the DNA projects when this discussion started, but didn't see anything notable. It looks like it's still too early to draw many conclusions.

William Earl Finley adds a new wrinkle to all of this with a study on Haplogroup R1b-M269 and YDNA Haplogroup R1b-U106/S21. He writes the following:

“I was invited to join this DNA study group that shares this haplotype. A deeper analysis on my personal DNA turned up that my DNA has a new and unique SNP they are calling L5. They asked and I approved for my results to be made public, because it is the only DNA known at this time to have this SNP. My immediate Finley branches’ deeper subclade sequence would be R-U106 L5+.

“The ramifications this may have for others (Finleys) is they may want to consider doing these much deeper subclade tests to learn more and see if deeper subclade sequences present themselves that may be unique to ‘immediate families’ and or even ‘immediate septs’ as well.

“The new nomenclature applied to my DNA is presently named R1b1b2a1a4 or R1b1b2a1d, depending on which DNA study you are participating in. I am in the FTDNA study. This designation is very close or similar to R1b1b2a1a5 to which members of the Farquhar study have been assigned.”

William Earl Finley also adds: “Robert Edward Finley, Glen Finley and I are very closely related, likely here in America, and trace back to the John Finley and Sarah Craigie generation. If there has been some mutation like this L-5 SNP and it occurred after the John Finley and Sarah Finley generation and closer to modern times, it might possibly and partly explain why others who also share connection to John Finley and Sarah Craigie generation DNA do not match as closely (I.e. our DNA has possibly mutated some since John Finley and Sarah Craigie). Clearly more Finley test participants are needed.”

He later added the following: “I am being told I am Saxon rather than Celt. Also, Macbeth it seems may have been a Pict rather than Celt. Anyone have any information on whether Macbeth was a Pict?

“I have also have comparisons with my DNA to King Niall’s DNA and it did not match up so well (9/12). However, I also compared my DNA to a Farquharson and a Farqhar in their respective studies and our DNA matches up better as 11/12 and 12/12 which indicated we are related but distantly, giving support to the claim Finleys took the name of Farquharson for a time after Macbeth was defeated in battle.

“I think some of us on the e-mail if memory correctly serves are 11/12 matches as well indicating a distant relationship likely back over the ocean. You may match up with the Farquharsons and Farquhars equally well.”

Genebase.com comments on the Halpogroup R1b1b2 (formerly R1b1c):

“Most of the present-day European males with the M343 marker also have the P25 and M269 markers. These markers define the R1b1b2 subclade.

“This subgroup is believed by some to have existed before the last Ice Age and has been associated with the Aurignacian culture (32,000-21,000 B.C.). Although the precise route of the M269 marker is not known, it is theorized to have originated in Central Asia/South Central Siberia. Archeological evidence supports the view of the arrival of Aurignacian culture to Anatolia from Europe during the Upper Paleolithic rather than from the Iranian plateau. It could have entered prehistoric Europe from the area of Ukraine/Belarus or Central Asia (Kazakhstan) via the coasts of the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea. It is considered widespread in Europe throughout the Paleolithic already before the last Ice Age.”

Going to Irish genealogy, Genebase.com says this about Niall of the Nine Hostages:

“In 2006, a subgroup of R1b common among people of Irish matrilineal descent was identified as the probable haplotype of many within the septs associated with Niall of the Nine Hostages, an Irish king in the Dark Ages. SNP testing has shown that the cluster of haplotypes purported to be associated with the matrilineal descendants of the Ui Neill clan displays the M222 mutation that defines Haplogroup R1b1c7.”

Yet another DNA study is the Oxford Genetic Atlas Project (OGAP). Among its findings:

“It will be noted that the frequency of the Clan Donnachaidh results does not fully correspond to the frequency with which these results are found in Britain. In particular, the Northwest Irish haplotype, OGAP8 (which includes the haplotype associated with Niall of the Nine Hostages) has occurred more frequently among Clan Donnachaidh members than in the British population sampled for the Oxford Genetic Atlas Project.

“In some other ways, the results reflect the general population pattern: the two most frequent results among Clan Donnachaidh participants are also the most common in the population at large. Variations are revealed when these haplotypes are expanded -- some participants in each grouping are apparently not closely related in the recent historical period.”

Alene Neff states most Finleys are part of OGAP 1, of which the study says, “The core haplotypes for the full British Isles are OGAP1, OGAP2 and OGAP3. By their nature, these haplotypes are considered oldest and progenitors of the British R1b lines. This means that these haplotypes by their very nature should be, and are, much diffused. OGAP1 has a slight predisposition to Scotland and has its greatest concentration in Wales. OGAP2 has a slight affinity for Ireland, and OGAP3 has a slight affinity for Southern England. It is unclear if much more can be said about these haplotypes but with them one might see the original immigrants to the Isles and their possible paths along the western and eastern coasts.”

Further explanation of the OGAP1 haplotype and the L5 SNP comes from Alice Fairhurst:

“Other new SNPs have been found so the naming of the clades keep changing. I chair the ISOGG Y-DNA group. When we say your group is OGAP1, one of the oldest groups to come into Wales and Scotland, that is based upon population genetics which uses STR markers (the numbers that are compared to see who you match. These are called haplotypes.

“The following is talking about haplogroups which are deep ancestry and are measured by SNPs. SNPs mutate much more slowly than STR markers alleie numbers so we can watch over thousands of years.

“So every time they add another letter or number to R1b, we are coming closer in time. Wikipedia says that U106 is 3,100-3,900 years ago, so L5 would be even younger. So everyone at U106 was of one group and then that group splintered into smaller groups that can be separately identified. On the ISOGG tree, we tell that L5 is a private SNP under U106, but we don’t give private SNPs a number on the tree except when an academic paper comes out and puts it on a tree. The reason it is private is because we need to see multiple cases and with different surnames and some sort of genetic distance between the testers -- otherwise the SNP is private (also called a family SNP). So right now it looks like L5 is the Finley family SNP.”

She says the ISOGG tree can be seen at http://www.isogg.org/tree/index.html. Click on the letter “R” to see the part she is talking about.

So there you have it. The genetic links to Finleys can help confirm our lines and I would encourage more people to join in the DNA studies. I have not done it myself, due to my financial constrictions, but I would be willing to submit to it if I could find a sponsor. I would be interested in hearing about other studies and any comments on this article.

http://www.angelfire.com/biz/finleyfindings/FinleyDNA.html

http://www.worldfamilies.net/surnames/findley/results

12-marker matches are old stuff. Nowadays they recommend you go for a minimum of 37 - and with the R1bs they recommend as high as you can afford.

Macbeth as a Pict - it *has* been claimed that his line traces back to the Cenél Loairn, but the details aren't all that clear. Ethnolinguistically they seem to have been Celts, but P-Celts (related to the Welsh and the Brythons) rather than Q-Celts (Irish and their Scotti offshoots). By Macbeth's time there had been so much interbreeding going on (with even the Norse getting into it) that it's hard to say if anybody was "pure" anything. (Thorfinn, the Mighty, remember, was genetically something like 7/8 Celt.)

This is good information, Jacqueli, but it seems to be a mix of old and new.

The info on the SNP called L5 is new stuff. It's an example of what people are finding by doing the "Deep Y". But, if "it occurred after the John Finley and Sarah Finley generation and closer to modern times" then it won't be much help linking the Finleys to a family in medieval Scotland.

But the comparison to Niall of the Nine Hostages at 11/12 and 12/12 is very old. This probably comes from the old days when a 12-marker test was standard. Nowadays the normative test is 111 markers. The old comparisons, based on just 12 or even 24 markers have been replaced by much better information.

Reading between the lines, it sounds like the theory you are testing is whether your Finlays were part of the Finlay family who belonged to the Farquharson clan. This is a clan that at one point claimed descent from the Shaws, who in turned claimed descent from the Macduffs. If so, I can see your interest in this subject.

Your cousin asks whether Macbeth might have been a Pict. Macbeth's line wouldn't be relevant here, but the answer might be interesting. I wouldn't want to say that Macbeth's ancestry is known with an certainty, but the traditional genealogy for him makes him a member of the royal family of Moray and takes his line back to the same origin as most other Scottish royals -- a line that originated in Ireland, pushed into Dalriada, and ended up dominating the old Pictish kingdoms. The debate about whether this is really what happened has been going on for 200 years.

For you as a Finley it's probably more relevant that the connection of the Shaws to the Macduffs is probably fake. I'm a Shaw descendant myself, descended from a man transported to Virginia after the '45. I have some notes I plan to collate and put on Geni someday. The general idea is that the Shaws jettisoned their traditional genealogy in favor of a new one in the 17th century, if I remember correctly. The existing Shaw connection to the Macduffs on Geni will probably get cut. Then we'll have to re-build the Shaws and take a look at the Farquharsons.

There's always a twinge of regret at losing these old lines, but we end up with a much more solid base.

Thank you Justin - this I found interesting when William had sent it my way a few years back, "old stuff" or not. ;)