Commentary on DNA article by Geoff and Hank Grant in Standfast (June 2018)

The update on the DNA project in the last Standfast was interesting, but..... Yes, there is a "but".....

First of all we should note a cautionary little tale - of a family of Black Caribbean Grants. They are Grants because of a white Grant who came to Jamaica, some think from America, in the early 1800s. Their descent from him is secure and, broadly speaking, all the rest of the ancestors are black. They sent their DNA for analysis with a company rival to FTDNA and the answer came back that they were mostly black, but 10% Finnish!!! Now even if the white Grant were 100% Finnish, his DNA would account for a good deal less than 10% in the current generation. So the DNA community is prone to excessive assertion without due regard to common sense. The science is still in its infancy.

Geoff and Hank's article is interesting where it is fully based on facts, but less so where it is mere assertion - and some of the phraseology is unnecessarily contentious. Thus:

1. The MacRobbies

The conclusion drawn from the SNPs is convincing, but there is no need to posit an "unknown Robert". Tradition has it that they descend from Robert Grant, our 9th chief; the DNA suggests that this cannot be a direct male line - but this does NOT mean that the Robert is unknown. Rather it shows that somewhere in the several missing generations about which we know nothing the line must have failed to an heiress and a new closely related scion married the heiress to continue the line. There is no reason to posit an "unknown" Robert. Further DNA testing may determine who the 'interloper' was. My guess is that when the line failed the elder daughter retained Glenlochy while the younger daughter inherited Inverlochy. [The door here is also open also to an 'extramarital event' of course.]

2. The ClanAllan

The Clanallan has a broadly Viking DNA signature. Thus it would be truly remarkable if their Y DNA signature bore any relationship to the current line of the chiefs since Andrew Stewart married Maud - the heiress of that Viking line. And this demonstrates clearly the nature of their relationship to the current chiefs. But Geoff and Hank go on to rehearse the tired old Fraser canard. "They probably aligned themselves with the Lairds of Freuchie and assumed the surname Grant before the year 1569." What an insult! This baseless assertion has NOTHING to do with the DNA. It is also historically rubbish as the Clanallan were based at Dunan right next to Castle Grant from 1420 at the very latest.

3. The Clan Ciaran

Geoff and Hank would have been better saying nothing when they have nothing to say. The fact that there are some members of the DNA project who claim some association with this cadet branch is very far from saying that there is any DNA signature which can tell us anything of value about its origins.

4. The Stewart Line

And so we come to another bland and baseless assertion: "It has been determined that the lineage of our Chief, Lord Strathspey, does not descend from the line of the Royal Stewarts". So many times I have asked Geoff for his evidence on this and never has he ventured any explanation.

Here is the problem:

So far as we can see the surname Stewart was adopted by Walter fitz Alan the 3rd High Steward and his brother David around the year 1200. He was probably born around 1180. David married Isobel Grant and it appears that they had no children. All Stewarts should, therefore, descend from Walter. Walter had 5 sons (born in the period 1200 - 1220). Of these Alexander had 3 sons and Walter (of Menteith) had three sons, so we may suppose something of the order of a dozen grandsons born in the general period 1230-50. Our Andrew Stewart was born c1275. So given that Andrew was called Stewart there were in fact very few individuals who might have been his putative father - and it is quite impossible that anyone from outside the family should have adopted the name by that time - it would have been a huge insult both to the Stewart family and their own.

Making sense of the old histories the allegation must be that Andrew was the son of James Stewart, 5th High Steward whose mother was Jean Macrory (of Bute whence the misunderstood Bute connection). Andrew was, however, born before James Stewart married, so clearly this was a mistress.

So let us be clear that the fact that Andrew Stewart was called Stewart demonstrates

  • (a) that his mother claimed that his father was a Stewart and
  • (b) that his father accepted that he was a Stewart.

However the scenario does indeed offer plenty of opportunity for an extra-marital 'event'. If the DNA wonks are so sure, let them set out their evidence that actually he was not the son of his purported father.

Further Obfuscation

While a properly scientific update about the DNA project is welcome, it is sad that in this case other spurious misdirection has been included here. Thus the authors say: "There were Grants in England, Wales, Ireland, and on the European continent long before the surname Grant was noted in the annals of Scotland". There are at least two major problems with this throwaway line:

1. It is preposterous to equate the earliest extant reference in the annals of Scotland to the origin of the name. Actually the earliest records we have are of Robert and Lawrence Grant in Invernessshire dating to the 1250s. But the name had been adopted as a surname as such in 1174 and had been in heritable use by the progenitors of the original Viking chiefs as a nickname since about 1060 (initially also by the proto Macgregors. MacAulays and Macnabs).

2. Collation and interpretation are quite separate skills. Hank has done a thorough job trawling old records to collate instances of someone being called "Grant" or some such (usually "Grand"). In almost all cases this was NOT a surname as we would understand it, but rather a nickname - and this is illustated by one of the male line ancestors of Oliver Cromwell having just that soubriquet. So far as I am aware there is only one instance of a nickname "Grand" passed from father to son and even then it is far from clear whether this was an inherited name as such or an inherited physical attribute. As a nickname amongst Normans it meant "big" or "tall" or even "great". But the use in the Clan derives from the given name (from low Latin) "Grento" meaning gritty - cognitive with "grain" - and the reason for the choice of it is set out in detail in my book "Scottish Clans: Legend, Logic & Evidence" - which clearly neither Hank nor Geoff have read.

The throwaway line also misses the point that the clansmen unrelated to the chiefs were required to adopt the surname (whether or not they actually used it or maintained the previous patronymic system in any specific circumstance). The date of this requirement is generally understood to have been c1482. So of course the vast bulk of Grants have no male bloodline connection to the chiefly one and there is no need to go fishing abroad for an explanation of the 10% 90% discrepancy.

Cadet Origins

For the record, here, in chronological order, are the progenitors of most of the cadet branches mentioned by Geoff and Hank with other extant lines:

Viking Line
1. Clanallan: Allan, 3rd son of Gregory Grant, 2nd chief
2. Clan Ciaran: Lucas, 4th son of Gregory Grant 2nd chief

Stewart Line
[3. Quetteville/Vaux: Thomas, 3rd son of Thomas son of Sir Patrick Grant (7th chief)]
4. Macrobbie/Glenlochy & Inverlochy: Robert 'natural' son of Robert Grant (9th chief) - but male line subsequently broken.
5. Clan Phadruig (Tullochgorm): Patrick, 'natural' son of John Roy Grant (11th chief) and the daughter (or wife!) of Baron Lamb of Tullochcarn
6. Clan Donachie (Dalvey): (updated 2025) Duncan, 'natural' son of John Roy Grant (11th chief) and a Castle Freuchie lady's maid.
7. Blairfindie: William, youngest son of John Grant younger of Freuchie
8. Glenmoriston: John 'natural' son of John Grant "Bard Roy" (13th chief) and daughter of Stewart of Kincardine
9. Corrimony: John son of John Grant "Bard Roy"
[10. Monymusk: Archibald, 3rd son of James Grant (14th chief)]
[11. Rothiemurchus: John, 2nd son of John Grant "The Gentle" (15th chief)]
[12. Ballindalloch: cadet of Rothiemurchus]