DNA

---

DNA is playing an integral role in our King family research, and it is important that King researchers understand how to use DNA results.

DNA testing is a simple process for the participant and consists of an inside-cheek swab that is sent to a laboratory for testing.s

Our testing for the following King lines has taken place:  1) John King Sr./William King  2)David King of Scotland and 3) John King of Kentucky.

OUR DNA RESULTS

Our King DNA falls into the I2b1 category known as the Ancestral Modal Signature.

WHAT IS DNA?

(Excerpts taken from Genetics & Genealogy -- An Introduction with Some DNA Case Study Examples by Charles F. Kerchner, Jr.)

"DNA contains the biological, genetic instructions to build an organism.  DNA also controls the day-to-day function of all cells.  These instructions are passed down from parent to child via the DNA we inherit from our parents.  A gene...'contains specific instructions for some specific function such as making a protein.'"

Each parent has DNA.  The DNA we used for our King surname study came down through the King paternal side and, as required, each participant had the King surname.  The DNA we needed is from the Y chromosome which only exists in males.  We find in DNA what is needed to determine relationships because the Y chromosome in males travels largely unchanged down the generations and it is specific to that father's family name.

It is an amazing process.  "A tangible timekeeper of history, the Y chromosome allows us to trace human evolution, track migration patterns and relatedness in groups of people, and answer paternity questions going back generations." 

We do not intend to go into detail on this subject.  If you are interested in more in-depth information, you can find information at Family Tree DNA.
 
OUR DNA PROJECT

Our approach towards genealogy changed about five years ago when male descendants of John King Sr., John King of Kentucky and David King of Scotland took separate steps to have their DNA tested for the sole purpose of using the results to help trace their ancestors.

After the tests were completed, they "found" each other through their DNA testing company, Family Tree DNA.  The results showed that all three branches had matches in the DNA markers which offered undisputed proof that they had shared a common ancestor generations ago, probably around 1700.  Although on paper these three branches do not seem to be related, DNA results have shown they were at one time.

Throughout this past year we have gathered the three branches together on this website so that we can collaborate on our genealogy research.   

Not only is DNA an inclusive and exclusive tool in determining relationships, it also has the ability to pinpoint origin.  Our King DNA points us towards the British Isles, with Ireland and Scotland as possibilities. 

We believe that Scotland or Ireland was the location of our ancestors before they came to America.  First, the DNA test points to Europe including England and Scotland.  Second, David King is a DNA match and we know that he arrived in America from Scotland during the Revolutionary War.  Third, William King, whom we believe to be one of our ancestors who arrived in America during the early 1700’s, settled in at least two well-known Scot-Irish communities:  Beverley Manor in Augusta County, VA and the Waxhaw area of Mecklenburg, NC.  He associated with Scot-Irish neighbors.  

Additionally there was a William King, who may be our ancestor, who gave his importation oath in 1740 in Orange County VA, and indicated that he and the passengers who traveled with him came from Ireland to the Philadelphia Port and then to Virginia.

DNA has given us the information that the three branches whose family trees and research are on this website had a common ancestor at some point.  Unfortunately we do not have the same genealogical lineage (our ancestors at this point are not the same).  For that reason the three lineages below have separate family trees on our genealogy website at www.irishbranch.com.

IDENTIFICATION OF ANCESTORS

• John King, Sr. of Tennessee:  We are researching John's parentage and are trying to prove or disprove that William King of Mecklenburg, North Carolina was John's father.  It is likely that William, who lived in Scot-Irish communities, came to America from Ireland, but that his origin was Scotland.  Family lore is that the brothers who came from Ireland to America in colonial times were Scot-Irish.
• John King of Kentucky:  Exhaustive effort has been made by Robert Strong and relatives to find John's parents.  It is thought that John moved from Virginia to Kentucky before 1800. 
  
• David King of Scotland:  Marie King Bailey and her cousin Melton King have gathered information on their ancestor, David King.  He was born in Scotland and moved to America during the Revolutionary War but before the Declaration of Independence was signed.  In David's revolutionary war pension application he states his birthplace.  Marie and Melton are at the point in their research where further research lies in Scotland's records.
  

We have found other matching results and have made contact with some of the participants to discuss those results and to keep track of their progress in tracing their ancestral line.  At some point we hope to find the ancestor we share with them.  Their research has led them to the following earliest known ancestors.  Many thanks to Robert Strong for collecting this information and keeping it update.  We have a common ancestor with:

• Alexander King, born 1787 in Mecklenburg County, NC; died in 1872 in Greene County, IL
• Joseph C. King, born 1801 in Tennessee; died in 1859 in Izard County, AR
• Zachariah King, died 1832 in Surrey County, NC
• Joseph King, born 1766 in Ireland; died 1858 in Butler County, OH
• John King, born 1804 in Newark, NJ 
• John Alexander King, born 1779 in Chester County, SC; died Newton County, GA

SOMEONE ELSE'S COMMON ANCESTORS; NOT OURS

The genealogical lines listed below do not match ours which indicates that there is not a meaningful genetic connection.  We only share the same surname.  Research of these names will not reveal a common ancestor, for the genetic connection was probably thousands of years ago and most certainly predates the use of surnames.  Having said that, if the individuals who were tested listed the wrong earliest ancestor, then this exercise of eliminating mismatches from our genealogical research would be flawed.

We are providing this list so that you will realize that there is a high probability that research of these names will not yield positive results for us.

·         Aaron DeGroot b. abt 1847 NJs

·         Abraham King b. 1700 France/Germany d. 1766 PA

·         Absolum B. King b. 1805 SC

·         Allen King b. 1822 NC d. 1863 NC

·         Andrew King b. 1770 Greenbrier Co W VA

·         Arthur King d. 1718 Westmoreland County, VA

·         Burwell King b. 1780 VA/NC

·         Charles Graham King 28 Jun 1784

·         Charles Harry King, b. 25 Oct 1853 Pulaski, TN

·         Charles King b. Apr 5, 1750 d. March 1836

·         Duncan King b. 1729 Scotland

·         Edward King b. abt 1745 Rowan Co NC

·         Ephraim King b. abt 1790 NC/TN 1818

·         Francois de Conninck (King) b. late 1500s Flanders

·         George Dexter King 1884, Nova Scotia Canada

·         George King Bladen Co NC

·         George Kinge, b. 1567 d. 1625 Cold Norton, Essex

·         George W. S. King b. abt 1820 VA/PA d. 1881 KS

·         Gottfried Koenig Warsaw, Poland 1768

·         Hamilton F. King b. 1878 IN son of John King

·         Hans Peter Stoneking 1600s Germany

·         Henry King 1658 Isle of Wight VA

·         Henry King 1810 NC

·         Henry King papermaker, b. abt 1830 Clifton Bristol

·         Issac King b. abt 1859 Canada

·         Jacob King

·         James King 1790 KY

·         James King b. 1765 NC d. 1836 Jefferson Co TN

·         James King b. abt 1790 VA

·         Jeremiah King b. 1866/67 County Rosscommon Ireland

·         Jermiah King b. 1764 Bedford Co VA

·         John B. King b. 1805 VA or TN (m Sarah Bowman)

·         John C. King b. abt 1821 PQ, Canada

·         John George King b. 1799 Germany d. 1830

·         John King 1741 England and Ann Beatty

·         John King 1741-1783

·         John King 1746-1795

·         John King b. 1759 unknown birth location

·         John King b. 1790 KY d. Warren Co MO

·         John King b. abt 1784 Greene Co PA

·         John King New York

·         John S. King b. abt 1817 PA or NJ

·         John Wallace King b. 1849

·         John Wesley King b. 1831 GA

·         John/Thomas King Surry Co VA

·         Joseph King 1781 VA

·         Lorenzo King b. abt 1810 Erie Co NY

·         Lyman King d. abt 1858

·         Mark King b. abt 1820/30 Roundstone, Galway Ireland

·         Marshall King 1809 KY / Joseph King b. abt 1745 VA/TN 1818

·         Martin King b. abt 1560 Marshfield Glos UK

·         Michael King b. abt 1630 Norwich Eng

·         Michael King d. 1700 Nansemond VA

·         Patrick King

·         Peter King I b. 1694 VA

·         Peter Noe b. abt 1720 Germany?

·         Robert King 1777 Somerset Eng

·         Robert King b. 1777-9 d. 1838 England

·         Robert King b. abt 1833 NC or VA

·         Samuel King b. 1816 in TN d. Sep 28 1854 Rockw__

·         Solomon King b. abt 1804 NC

·         Spencer King b. abt 1823, AL

·         Thomas Albert King

·         Thomas King b. 1599 Scotland d. Mar 11 1684 Scotland

·         Thomas King III b. 1714 Stafford Co VA d. 1798 Louisa Co VA

·         Thomas King Sr. 1798 VA

·         William B. King b. Apr 23 1783 Fauquier Co VA

·         William Johnson King b. 1797 TN

·         William King b. 1759 VA

·         William King b. 1786 SC? D. 1825 TN

·         William King b. 1847 GA

·         William Kirby King b. 1752 VA

·         William R. King b. abt 1835 VA

·         Wm Alfred King 1652 VA

·         Wm Alfred King b. 1685 d. 1779 Westmoreland Co VA

·         Wm Sanford King b. 1832 KY

DNA MYSTERY -- Are we Galbraiths or are we Kings?  What is in a name?

We all love a mystery.  Within our DNA testing there was an event at some point in history where someone of the Galbraith clan and someone of the Kings (us) crossed surnames.  This unusual event is explained by the Galbraith Clan, and with their permission we have excerpts from their newsletter which explains the mystery.

Gayle Galbraith and William Gilbreath are the Galbraith Clan's DNA experts and the author of the DNA section of the newsletter.  Our King contact with them on the subject of DNA is Christopher King.  Others working on the project include Robert Strong, Melton King, Marie Bailey King, Paul King, and Joyce King Disharoon.


From the Red Tower Newsletter by Clan Galbraith
May, 2009

Note:  Charts are not included.  Names have been removed for privacy reasons.

ACCIDENTAL AND MEANINGFUL DNA MATCHES

"How meaningful are our DNA results?

    1)  If your DNA result does not match or nearly match someone that genealogical studies purport to be a relative of you, then you are not biologically related and the paper studies contains an error(s).   We have dozens of members who have found this to be true and have had to redirect their studies to other Galbraiths and areas.  We need to add that we have a few members where one might belong to a family line we know, but their DNA does not support a biological connection.  There is a break in the line so that you may not be the biological grandson (for example) of whom you think.  You are still legally (and emotionally) a part of this family line, but there is a break somewhere.  Some members know that their heritage became Galbraith from an adoption.  Of course, many members became interested in the Galbraiths through marriage.  We say there are but a few cases within our Clan Galbraith with such a break, but in actuality, virtually every member has a break in their line.  That is why we have nine different major Galbraith DNA groups--there was a non-Galbraith male who became accepted as a Galbraith and began our line.  One Group, not more than that, might be the biological descendants of our first Chief, Bretnach.

    2) If your DNA matches or nearly matches some other male, we can usually say you two are related.  If you both have Galbraith-like names then chances are virtually conclusive that you two are related, provided you have a reasonable match with a reasonable number of markers.  Likewise, there are cases where you will be biologically related to a non-Galbraith surnamed individual.  That is, the individual comes from a line that adopted a Galbraith or a Galbraith was introduced by some other event, or a Galbraith decided to change his name.¹ In Table 1 [not included], two participants are not Galbraith by name -- King and [other participant]. "Both have good matches with Group 3--is this accidental or meaningful?  Meaningful, meaning that they have an actually biological connection to the Group 3 Galbraiths^.2

Before we can say that these two individuals are Galbraiths (or rather, as much Gailbraith or of the same parentage, as the others listed in Table 1) we have to consider if their match to the Galbraiths might be accidental.  [Sentence deleted] FTDNA compares your result with those from 150,000 other males who have tested and the ones closer to you are shown.  We normally look for Galbraiths with close matches; however, if you only have a reading made at the minimum 12-marker level you will get a bunch of other surnames with close or perhaps identical DNA." [Next paragraph deleted]  

Galbraith Group 3. 

Of course, King is a much commoner surname than Galbraith is and the Kings thus far have had 187 Y-DNA participants tested at Family Tree DNA.  From this participation they have 19 King DNA groups and dozens of unconnected singles.  Their K-Group has eight connected participants.  K-Group is not distinguishable from our DNA Group 3, except in surname.

Christopher has, with others, studied the King genealogy of the K-Group.  They have discovered a convergence of their participants’ family histories to the Virginia area and primarily with a John King who lived in the last half of the 18^th century.  Christopher is cautiously confident that these southern American Kings derive from a William King, born about 1700, who married a Mary Ann, about 20 years his younger.  Christopher, because those Table 1 participants who have determined the homeland of their patriarch are all of Ireland, suspects that William King was from there also.  We do know of King-Galbraith connections.

If William King is the nexus, then we need to look around 1700 to find a possible Galbraith connection with the Kings. As most of our readers know, there are few surviving documents from this period, but we do have access to most of the early Galbraith materials.  The Galbraiths of Blessingbourne (often Blessing Burn, in the southwest corner of County Tyrone) are a clear link to the Kings (not necessarily the correct ones), as both are mentioned together in many documents.

                (i) Captain Robert Galbraith, of Blessingbourne and counties Leitrim and Meath, refers to his brother-in-law Charles King, in his will drawn 15 May 1708. (ii) Elizabeth Hume’s will of 1715 makes many bequests, the major one to ‘Robert King, eldest son of my kinsman Charles King, now deceased of Dublin…if failing [to survive Elizabeth] thence to Mrs. Catherine King, widow of Charles’. (iii) There are a dozen other citations to this branch of Kings and Galbraiths.  A number are deeds where Charles King of Dublin acts as attorney to the Galbraiths.  We also have Arthur Galbraith (aka Mad Arthur) who lived from 1660-1736 and another son of John of Blessingbourne) who is identified by genealogist Sir William Betham to be a kinsman of Rev. James King."

Catherine Galbraith married Charles King (fifth son of John King, Esq.) about 1685, she having been born around 1665, last known child of John Galbraith who died at Blessingbourne in 1669.  John’s eldest son Robert, age 12 when his father died, inherited Blessingbourne and later moved beyond the county.  Catherine, a young sister of his, is the one who married Charles King.  

[deletion] There are few surviving documents from this period, but we do have access to most of the early Galbraith materials.  The Galbraiths of Blessingbourne (often Blessing Burn, in the southwest corner of County Tyrone) are a clear link to the Kings (not necessarily the correct ones), as both are mentioned together in many documents    

The Hume legacy to Robert King is interesting in that King, as the half- grandnephew to her husband Hugh Galbraith, is not an especially close relation.

 Could this Robert King or some other boy be a Galbraith raised as a King and his line began Group-K?  Alternatively, could there be at this time a King raised as a Galbraith leading to our Group 3?  It is favored (at least by the Galbraiths) that a King became Galbraith.  We know that 13% of our Galbraiths are in Group 3, while Group-K encompasses but 4% of the Kings.  There is relatively little spread in the K-Group results as only few mutations have accumulated indicating that all of these Kings derived from a single male not long (e.g. perhaps three centuries) ago.  The Group 3 Galbraiths have a diverse background in the United States, and point to several places in Ireland.  Since both the Kings and Galbraiths of I2b1 do not have a clear picture of their genealogy prior to 1750, anything could have happened to form that our I2b1 folk must look for the coincidence of Galbraith and King names in Ireland.  As for our adopted participant, he probably now should spend some research time looking for a King-named grandfather.”

[paragraph omitted] Of course, we expect that all Group 3 participants, as well as those who are related to any of these participants, share the same history and converge perhaps in 17th century Ireland.  Participant (unnamed) has one of Group 3's cleanest genealogies that without a doubt reaches back to Ireland.  His line came to the U.S. from Scotland in 1880, with a (participant) who was born in Ayrshire about 1848.  His parents, (unnamed), came to Scotland from Ireland.  It would be valuable if we could find their home in Ireland to see if it might be in an area where we have 1700 Galbraiths and perhaps Kings.  A possibility is to check the marriage licenses for the children of [deleted parents' names] as the post-1855  records in Scotland usually have background information on the bride and groom's parents.  If their Ireland county or parish (hopefully) can be found, there is some possibility the parents can be traced.  His specific marker mutations suggest that [participant ] might be his nearest relation among our participants.  His John Galbraith was born in Londonderry on 14 March 1790 (from U.S. records).  Even with the birth date and place, it is difficult to track this John further because of the number of Galbraiths of the area.  However, there is a good chance that the baptism record still exists in some local church.  Of course, this would show his parents.

[Participant ] made remarkable progress with his family history, shortly after joining, largely using material from 'Elmer's Book' on our CGA Library CD.  Because of the perfect DNA match between his uncle  and [participant] at 25 markers, [another  participant] genealogy also. They descend from John of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania (think Pittsburgh region), who prepared his will in 1795, naming 14 children and given the ages of the children and grandchildren, John would have been born in the 1730s. The  relevant participants descend from John's son James who went to Kentucky, while another Participant is from the Hugh Galbraith of Virginia who was born about 1742. (The CGA has a dozen member descendants from Hugh.)  Both John and Hugh have been unyielding to their pedigrees.  The match with relevant participants is certainly more than close enough to assume that John and Hugh were brothers.  However, it is not reasonable that two immigrant siblings would have gone to different states.  From Scotch-Irish naming patterns we expect John's father to be William and Hugh's to be Thomas.  Both John and Hugh use the rare Galbraith given name 'David' for a son.  Hugh's grandson James wrote that Hugh came from County Armagh, Ireland.  In Ireland, there are relatively few connections of early Galbraiths to that County.  Jane Johnston was from Ballynemetegue, Armagh, and she married Hugh Galbraith in 1722.  This Hugh is the first cousin of the Robert King we discussed above in the context of looking for a substituted Galbraith son amongst the Kings.  Robert King was of Raven Hill, County Armagh.  Hugh and Jane had several sons, but no reported Hugh, which is somewhat in keeping with the family lore that Hugh ran away to sea at age 12.⁶

Rather curiously, two of our other participants descend from John of Rockbridge and Arthur of Washington County, both of Virginia.  With the added Hugh of Armagh and Virginia, what are the chances we could have three Ib2a1 folk living at the same time in the same area and not have a contemporary relationship?  In fact, the wanted notices from Gov. Patrick Henry of Virginia says 'Hugh Galbraith of Rockbridge'.  At the time, Hugh and John were within a couple miles of each other--but this John (known as Irish John) had moved there from Chester County, Pennsylvania, and we have no document which connects the two.  Chester was across the state from [participant] early John of Allegheny, so even with the near DNAs, it is difficult to imagine a scenario that would have spread these 'brother-like' Galbraiths from Ireland -- so perhaps their grandfather (or the next male back) was the first common male.

…………..Written by William Galbraith and Gayle Gilbreath

ENDNOTES

¹In days when clans were the prevailing social structure of an area it was common to simply take the chief's surname.

²All humans descend from a single male, who lived maybe  60,000 years ago.  This was a few hundred thousand years after the first humans appeared.  For a brief time, all his male descendants had the same DNA.  However, because of mutations the DNAs from the surviving lines diverged over time.  The fact that there are different DNAs allow us to be placed in convenient size groups for studies.  Sometimes, not often, two lines of differing DNA will begin converging.  If we have a modest match such as 21/25, it is quite possible that others, absolutely unrelated, will have a similar DNA.  Usually, a poor matched coupled with a Galbraith surname is sufficient for us to form a reliable group and know that these two Galbraiths had a common male ancestor at some time in the past.

³Thus far [participant] is the only [surname deleted] in the world to be tested.

⁴James King of Antrim had William (Archbishop of Dublin 1650-1729), four daughters and an unnamed son.  Said son had sons James and William, who gave their uncle the Archbishop no little trouble.  James, as an incorrigible ne-er-do-well, was shipped off to Virginia in 1697.  From "A Great Archbishop of Dublin, William King, D.D.: His Autobiography etc]" by William King, et al, pages 51-5 (GOOGLE)

⁵His most recent email concludes:  'Cordially, [participant] who still believes in [a] Gilbreath connection'.

⁶Lastly, and quite possibly coincidentally, Hugh of Virginia is reported to have married Elizabeth Johnston, who was born in that Colony but her father came from Ireland in 1745.  Thus we have two Hughs, possibly related, both marrying Johnston women."

  REMEMBER...

• DNA will continue to have an important role in our King research

• Family lore indicates that brothers (plural) came over from Ireland and that they were Scot-Irish.

• William King is the most likely candidate as our first King direct ancestor in America.  The first record of William in America that we have found to date is dated 1738.  William lived in at least two Scot-Irish communities.  This line is the Samuel/Eli/John Sr./William.

• As we research the Kings, we should keep in mind

I) David King, who is a DNA match to the William King line, was definitely born in Scotland. 

2) The research on John King of Kentucky, who is also a DNA match, has hit a brick wall.  He was born in Virginia, but the detail has not been located.  Keep John in mind while researching.  We need to connect him to the William and David lines, although that connection may be overseas.

3) The three King branches on our website are also related to an Alexander King of Mecklenburg, NC.  William King lived in Mecklenburg. We do not have information on him.  Is anyone interested in researching Alexander?

4) The Galbraith connection could be in America, or in Ireland or Scotland.  Be on the lookout for possibilities.

5) Watch for additional information on our website.

• Keep the basics in mind.  You will see more and more references to DNA.

• If you know of a DNA study for any of our allied families, please let us know.

“DNA evidence is now accepted in mainstream genealogy as being as reliable as, or in some cases more reliable than the evidence from written records genealogists traditionally rely upon.  Inevitably it will increasingly be offered to support future SAR lineages.”

………Quote by Don DeVine in the Sons of the American Revolution Magazine, Spring 2005

 

To learn more about DNA’s role in genealogy, you can read an excellent article written in our language instead of a scientist’s language.  It is at http://www.mcnerneywinkler.com/About%20DNA.html