I vote for R1b, since I do think it is very possible that we are related through a common ancestor two or three generations before Edward and Joseph. Which one(s) of the middle three fall into the R1b haplogroup? I'll place my bet on that one(s).
I agree, let's transfer this discussion to the online forums. Should be public information. I think we should post on both Cobnet Forum and rootsweb. Might stir up interest in others. If you haven't as yet posted, I'll do so.
PS Do the Picts have their own haplogroup? I haven't been able to find an actual inventory of all the groups and who they correspond to. Any suggestions as to where I could find a complete listing of all the so far identified haplogroups with a description of what populations they seem to be represented in.
Now you are getting into the spirit of the DNA
genealogy. It looks like the results have started to
get you thinking.
Your first conclusion is correct, it looks like there
are more than one progenitor. While a single
progenitor is what one might hope for, I don't believe
that it has or will ever happen in all of surname DNA
At this point we do have 2 general groups, "I"
and "R1b". But there is not enough data to make any
conclusion for the whole surname. 30-35 generations
gives a lot of opportunity for non-standard
descendency. And we do have 3 contributors who don't
have any other connections, at least one of which has
similarities to Eastern European Jews.
The reasons for non-standard descendency can be many.
But it is way too early in data collection to draw any
I had no idea into which group I would fit when my
data was published. Now I know. But more important,
now I know that I tie into another line of Crawfords.
And that part is incredibly important.
In communications with the other fellow who I did not
know beforehand (BTW, his a genetic biologist) he was
very surprised that he would match with someone so
early in the data collection.
But the simple fact that someone with the same surname
has the same genetic code means that this line goes
back at least 300-400 years, making it a substantial
contribution to the surname.
The extent of the contribution of Lineage II relative
to Lineage I is not indicated by such a small sample
of contributors. The small sample is quite obviously
strongly affected by random chance, preventing any
reliable conclusions to be proposed.
One thing that would generate interest is to start a
betting pool (or at least a poll) on how Brian's
analysis will report.
Is Brian going to be:
(5) Pict, or
(6) African Pygmy?
But I think that if we are going to carry on this
discussion, maybe it would be better in the Cobnet
Forum or in the Crawford mailing list of rootsweb, or
I'm sure this data is very preliminary and certainly
the sample is
extremely small to be able to draw any conclusions.
However, even with
this sample it seems clear that the Crawford line(s)
includes at least
two different original progenitors! I assume I'm
The fact that there are at least two independent
belonging to a different haplogroup suggests this.
One progenitor would
be a descendant of Vikings (I), perhaps Thorlungus
and his antecesors.
The other would be a descendant belonging to the
European/Atlantic haplogroup (R1b). Thus the
implication is that not
all the Crawfords descend from a same original
ancestor. Some might
descend from Thorlungus, but it would appear that
others descended from
another (non-Viking) ancestor belonging to the
Did you know there was another different legend
regarding the original
Crawford? This other one would have him be a Norman
accompanied (I think it was) King David from Normandy
to Scotland. I'll
try and find my sources for this. In fact, that is
the story I had
always heard. The one relating us to Thorlungus I had
not heard until I
read what you had put up on the Association web-site.
Certainly the early families frequently incorporated
the relatives of
their female members. Thus one of the lineage may
have been a line
descended from a female Crawford, or rather from her
husband, or not.
In terms of possibilities, there are several possible
alternate lineages, including descendants of septs
who may have at some
point assumed the Crawford surname as their own.
Thought I'd share my thoughts. What do you think of
the implications of
the existence of at least two different Crawford