Is There A Special Clan Munro DNA? by Colin Munro

We might think that because we are all Munro or one of the variants we have a special Clan Munro DNA. This article by Colin Munro, one of our DNA experts sheds light on this subject. 

The DNA of the male (Y) chromosome is passed on uniquely from father to son, and so usually travels with the surname. However, surnames have only been in use in Scotland for about 700 years. Historically, the chief could expect the allegiance of all those who lived in the clan territory, whether related or not, not just his kinsfolk. Men of different ancestral origins will have adopted their chiefs’ name, so even the earliest clans will have had many different kinds of male DNA.

 Many events will have increased the Y-chromosome diversity since the early origins of a clan. For example, it is said that the Munros of Lealty in Ross-shire were founded by a MacRae who married a 16th century Munro heiress and took her name. Other reasons for different Y-DNA include adoption, undisclosed paternity (such as Neil Munro, the author) and extramarital affairs. As the clan scattered throughout the world, dozens more Y-DNA types came to be associated with the name Munro.

 Despite this, among men tested in the Munro DNA Project there are large groups who are related in the male line. Nearly fifty, though still only a fifth of participants, have Y-DNA which matches men who trace their ancestry to the 14th century Hugh Munro, 9th baron of Foulis. Another large, and probably equally ancient, cluster comes from near Inveraray in Argyll. These Munros, for very practical reasons, gave their allegiance to the Campbell Dukes of Argyll. Legends tell of ancestors from the North, but the Y-DNA reveals a male ancestral line from Central Scotland or Ulster. The surname Munro was probably chosen as an anglophone equivalent to their Gaelic name, McInrioch. A third large group, in America, descends from John Munro of Bristol, Rhode Island, a Scots prisoner of war sent into indentured servitude after the Battle of Worcester in 1651. He was said to belong to the Foulis family, but his progeny (who include Marilyn Monroe’s grandfather) have an unrelated Y-DNA type. While this pattern was probably present in a few Munros in Scotland, it is also found in men called Bean or Bayne, a clan with a nearby homeland. Clan allegiance may have changed for geographical reasons. Other small groups of related Munros have Highland ancestry, but other project participants don’t match Munros, instead having male-line relatives with North Highland names like Matheson, Sutherland, Mackay, MacRae, etc.

So, while a DNA test may sometimes show that a man belongs to one of the larger genetic groups, being called Munro (or one of its many variants) does not always mean sharing Y-DNA with others of the name. Relatively few Munros from the ancestral clan terrritory have had DNA tests so it is not clear how much of the diversity originates there. There is a particular need for those who can clearly trace their male-line ancestry to Munros in these areas to participate in the project.

 Finally, Y-DNA contributes only a tiny part of a person’s DNA, and can have no effect on shared appearance or attributes. Half one’s DNA is inherited from each parent (mothers are as important as fathers), a quarter each grandparent, etc. Within a few generations, genetic make-up is really just a sample of the genetic pool of the communities of one’s ancestors, whatever their names might have been.

You may also like...

12 Responses

  1. Malcolm Hamilton says:

    No!

  2. Great article, I agree with everything in it. By the way group 07 in the Munro Y-DNA project includes a relation of James Munro who was once Prime Minister of Victoria, Australia. Could be our group’s claim to fame :_

  3. Ryan Marksberry says:

    Interesting, my mother is from the Monroe family. Would that mean that I share a lot of DNA with the Munro family? My grandfather was Lovell Monore. The original was Munro back in the 1700s.

    • Ryan Marksberry says:

      original spelling*

    • Colin says:

      Hi Ryan

      You will have roughly 1/4 of your Monroe grandfather’s total DNA, but if his immigrant Munro ancestor was 10 generations back, you will have up to 1023 other ancestors that long ago, so only on average a thousandth of any one person’s DNA. However chromosomes are chopped up, shuffled, recombined and randomly passed on every generation so in reality you would not reliably have any of any one individual’s DNA from that far back. Except that in small communities the same ancestor will appear more than once, and the same DNA segments may reach you through more than one route. Far enough back we are all related.

      Only the Y-DNA is preserved intact in the male line (and mitochondrial DNA in the female line), which allows it to be traced through many, many generations.

      So while there are some traceable male lines which tell interesting and different stories, my blog post explains that surnames are not, and never were, tied to DNA. It is best to think of yourself as genetically coming from one or more communities of origin. In the case of Ross-shire in Scotland the community would include not just the “Munro family” but folk with surnames like Mackenzie, MacRae, Mackay, Fraser, Bain, Ross, Bethune, etc. etc., and before about 1200 CE, no such identity. Your “heritage” is much more about the people, customs, and beliefs of those who happened to share that DNA pool. Whatever the limited options open to our Highland forebears who happened to live in the territory of a particular chief, clan allegiance is nowadays a choice influenced by the stories your family tells itself about its journey. Where DNA can help is in identifying likely communities of origin where the paper trail is lost, or indeed ancestry is unknown. Warning: sometimes there are surprises!

  4. Colin says:

    Hi Ryan

    You will have roughly 1/4 of your Monroe grandfather’s total DNA, but if his immigrant Munro ancestor was 10 generations back, you will have up to 1023 other ancestors that long ago, so only on average a thousandth of any one person’s DNA. However chromosomes are chopped up, shuffled, recombined and randomly passed on every generation so in reality you would not reliably have any of any one individual’s DNA from that far back. Except that in small communities the same ancestor will appear more than once, and the same DNA segments may reach you through more than one route. Far enough back we are all related.

    Only the Y-DNA is preserved intact in the male line (and mitochondrial DNA in the female line), which allows it to be traced through many, many generations.

    So while there are some traceable male lines which tell interesting and different stories, my blog post explains that surnames are not, and never were, tied to DNA. It is best to think of yourself as genetically coming from one or more communities of origin. In the case of Ross-shire in Scotland the community would include not just the “Munro family” but folk with surnames like Mackenzie, MacRae, Mackay, Fraser, Bain, Ross, Bethune, etc. etc., and before about 1200 CE, no such identity. Your “heritage” is much more about the people, customs, and beliefs of those who happened to share that DNA pool. Whatever the limited options open to our Highland forebears who happened to live in the territory of a particular chief, clan allegiance is nowadays a choice influenced by the stories your family tells itself about its journey. Where DNA can help is in identifying likely communities of origin where the paper trail is lost, or indeed ancestry is unknown. Warning: sometimes there are surprises!

  5. Michael Munro says:

    Its interesting how you have mentioned that as per Alexander Mackenzie’s book, the Munros of Lealty in Ross-shire descend in the direct male (Y) line from a a MacRae who married a Munro heiress. As it happens Mackenzie also details yet another cadet branch of the Munros of Foulis where this happened: The Monros of Allan. Pages 294 – 296 of MAckenzie’s book explains that upon the death of David Monro VII of Allan in 1767 the estate passed to his nephew Charles Mackenzie (son of his sister Margaret Munro) – and this Charles Mackenzie took his mother’s maiden name of Monro, thus becoming Charles Mackenzie Monro, VIII of Allan. Mackenzie’s book shows that this line continued for several generations right up until when his book was published and although they were really Mackenzies they carried the Monro surname. I would have thought there could be descendants out there today. My guess is that as this situation which also took place with the Munros of Lealty, then there are probably also lots of other Munros out there who may descend from the Foulis Munros, not through the male line but through a female ancestor, and as such the Y-DNA is different.

    I have two 19th century books that describe my 4th great-grandfather Alexander Munro as of the family of Foulis. The books are Burke’s Colonial Gentry (1891) and Australian Representative Men, 1887 (2nd Edition only – not to be confused with Vol 2), which give a genealogy of his grandson, James Munro, Premier of Victoria. However, my Y-DNA does not match that of Munro of Foulis. One of the books (1887) says that Alexander removed from his native county of Ross-shire in 1784 to Sutherland. I think I have found through various bits of circumstantial evidence that he actually came from Milton (Milntown) in the parish of Kilmuir Easter, Ross-shire. Just north of Alness, Kilmuir Easter parish was long Clan Munro country until about the 1640’s when the last Munro of Milntown sold the estate to the Mackenzie’s of Tarbat (who would later become of Earls of Cromartie). The Earl of Cromartie supported the Jacobite rebellion of 1745, but I have found a list of people in the National Archives, London of men who lived on his estate in the parish of Kilmuir Easter but who did not support him in the rebellion, and I think one name on the list, another Alexander Munro who was a “wright” could be the father of my 4th great-grandfather Alexander Munro who was also a “wright” and who was also from Ross-shire. There is also an Alexander Munro in Milntown in 1745 who was recorded in George Munro of Culcairn’s Independent Company who could be the same man (the elder Alexander)

    There are various other bits of circumstantial evidence that lead me to this area: two of my distant Y-DNA “Munro” matches trace their ancestry back to the same parish of Kilmuir Easter, although they are only 12/12 marker matches. I have an Autosomal DNA relative found via testing with Ancestry who is a predicted 6th cousin and whose ancestry I think goes back to a David Munro, and the Alexander Munro “wright” on the list of non Jacobites in the parish in 1745 had a “brother” David Munro on the list. This is about the right number of generations back to fit with the Autosmal DNA.

    Also, going back to the Jacobite Lord Cromartie, although he was pardoned from the death sentence, he was never permitted to go north of the river Trent in England again and died in poverty in Soho Square, London. However, his son John Mackenzie, Lord MacLeod did manage to get his estates restored in 1784 – which is the same year my 4th great-grandfather Alexander Munro of Armadale apparently removed from Ross-shire. Lord MacLeod then set about carrying out “imrpovements” (removals) on his estates and began building the mansion Tarbat House at Milntown.

    Autosomal DNA testing with Ancestry has also confirmed my descent from my 4th great-grandfather Alexander Munro: there are two people who are descended from him through female lines in the paper trail/written records who are exact 5th cousins to me, and Ancestry’s Autosomal DNA test shows them as predicted 5th – 8th cousins.

    Anyway, hope this is interesting. Caisteal Folais ‘na Theine!

  6. Munro, Kevin E says:

    My understanding of my family’s tree and DNA is that we are descended from Hon. Capt. John Munro U.E. of Foulis who fought in the Revolutionary War as a Loyalist (red coat). He had a few scrapes with Ethan Allen of Vermont and ended up moving to Canada after the War. His ancestors included some of the early Barons. Is this all correct Colin?

    • Don says:

      Hi Kevin

      According to a birth brief of 1768 signed by Sir Harry Munro of Foulis (which I would love to see), Capt. John was descended from Hugh Munro of Coul, younger son of George, 10th baron or laird of Foulis, via Hugh’s 4th son Alexander. The DNA STR markers in your part of the family are at least consistent with this, though we don’t yet have a specific SNP marker for Hugh of Coul himself. This may change soon with some tests under way. Incidentally President James Monroe appears to have descended from Hugh’s eldest son John, though he didn’t know it, so these distant cousins were on opposite sides. On the other hand, DNA recently showed some American Munros were descended from Robert, 14th baron via another UE Loyalist, Cot. John’s contemporary Cpt. Hugh Munro. It would be good if some more Canadian Munros could test their DNA, as I am sure there are more of the Foulis family about.