I’ve received a number of emails and comments (see, e.g., here) complaining about Ancestry.com’s new test, AncestryDNA. Specifically, several test-takers believe that the Genetic Ethnicity Prediction provided by Ancestry.com does not reflect the numbers that they expected based on their own research.
“I just got my DNA test results back from Ancestry.com and I am concerned. I was born in England and I have gone back many generations and have found that all my ancestors as far back as the 1600′s in most cases are English. According to the results I have no British Isles DNA. It states that I have 60% Central Europe, 30% Scandinavian and 7% Southern Europe. I also have 3% unknown. How can this be?”
“Just received my results: 21% Southern European and 79% Central European which doesn’t follow years of work on my family history.”
Do these comments reflect errors in AncestryDNA’s Genetic Ethnicity Prediction, or are there other factors at play?
Although I am not privy to the ‘behind-the-scenes’ at Ancestry.com, I don’t believe that there are serious issues with AncestryDNA’s Genetic Ethnicity Prediction. Ancestry.com’s DNA arm has a solid scientific team and a large and valuable reference database.
Indeed, Ancestry.com is well aware of the limitations and challenges that their Genetic Ethnicity Prediction brings:
We use cutting-edge science as a base for our predictions, but that comes with its own inherent challenges. It’s an emerging field with exciting new discoveries and developments constantly changing the landscape. Right now, your genetic ethnicity may not look quite right, with some ethnicities under or over-represented. As scientists gain a deeper understanding of the data, our prediction models will evolve to provide you with more accurate and relevant information about your family history.
It’s important to understand that biogeographical estimates, which are still relatively new, are notoriously difficult and complicated. Ten different researchers analyzing the same genome can come up with ten different estimates based on a number of different factors, including their algorithm, the reference populations used for comparison, and many others.
Here are just a few factors that can influence a biogeographical estimate, and any one or more of these may be the reason that your Genetic Ethnicity Prediction does not match estimates you make based on your paper trail.
- Different Reference Populations and Algorithms
As I suggested above, different companies use different reference populations and algorithms to create a biogeographical estimate, which can result in varying estimates.
For example, in my previous review of AncestryDNA’s Genetic Ethnicity Prediction, I compared my genetic ethnicity results from three companies (Ancestry.com, 23andMe, and FTDNA), and found that their results varied considerably. I’m not surprised by this, but I do expect that over time – as the industry arrives at more standard reference populations and algorithms (which the cheap whole-genome sequencing revolution will enable) – that estimates from different companies will align much more closely. Be patient and enjoy being a pioneer.
- You Have TWO Family Trees!
Remember that “Everyone Has Two Family Trees – A Genealogical Tree and a Genetic Tree.” Your Genealogical Tree is the tree containing ALL of your ancestors. However, only a tiny subset of these individuals actually (randomly) contributed DNA to the genome that you walk around with today. These ancestors are the only individuals in your Genetic Tree. It has been estimated, for example, that at 10 generations, only about 10-12% of ancestors in your Genealogical Tree are actually in your Genetic Tree!
Accordingly, even if a decent percentage of your ancestors at 10 generations originated in the British Isles, there is possibility that your DNA – and thus your Genetic Ethnicity Prediction – could include very little or absolutely no British Isles ancestry, simply because of the rules of genetics.
Ancestry.com tries to explain this as well (I’m biased, but I think my “Everyone Has Two Trees” explanation is a little clearer; I’ve had great luck explaining this to newbies):
So if you look at your family tree, it may indicate a pedigree-based ethnicity of 30% English, 20% Scandinavian, and 50% Italian (based on birth locations of your great-great-great grandparents). While this is one valid way to look at ethnicity (and in fact has been the only way until recently), DNA analysis can reveal the actual percentage of your DNA that is reflected by these ethnic groups. So your genetic-based ethnicity might reveal you are 40% British Isles, 15% Scandinavian, and 45% Southern European. Both measures are accurate and informative—but they are measuring different things.
- Misleading Labels
Another issue with any biogeographical estimate is the labels used to describe a population. For example, what does “Scandinavian” or “Central European” really mean? Does “Scandinavian” mean that great-grandpa must have been a Swede, or does it mean something else?
Ancestry.com defines the “Scandinavian” with the modern day locations of Norway, Sweden, Denmark, but explains in their FAQ that it can mean much, much more:
Ethnic groups moved around. Because people move over time, (and when they do they take their DNA with them), a group may contribute DNA to other groups at different times. So ethnic groups can be defined by time and place—not just location. For example, if you have German or British ancestors in your family tree, it’s a possibility that your genetic ethnicity may be partly Scandinavian. The Viking invasions and conquests about a thousand years ago are likely responsible for occurrences of Scandinavian ethnicity throughout other regions. And there are similar examples for other ethnicities. With your results, we provide historical information describing migrations to and from the regions to give you a broader picture of the origins of your DNA.
Similarly, the “Central European” label is defined to include the enormous swath of land in Europe including the modern day locations of Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Slovenia, Czech Republic, Luxembourg, and Liechtenstein.
I certainly don’t think of France as being “Central Europe,” which shows that a test-taker shouldn’t rely on the labels alone. Dig a little deeper.
- Non-Paternal Events (NPEs)
I won’t dwell on non-paternal events, because I believe they have become too much of a scapegoat. Non-paternal events, or NPEs, can be broadly defined as secret or unknown breaks in your Genealogical Tree (adoption, infidelity, etc.). At some point every single Genealogical Tree has an NPE, although current estimates vary widely. Consider the possibility of a break in your tree, but focus on the other factors presented here as the more likely explanation for your unexpected results.
Reviewing My Genetic Ethnicity Prediction
I have a fairly well-documented Genealogical Tree. My documented ancestors were mostly from the British Isles (England and Ireland) and France, with far fewer ancestors from Germany, and Central America. Years ago, based on my paper trail, I might have predicted 65% British Isles, 20% Irish, 15% French, and 5% German.
In light of the above, let’s review my AncestryDNA Genetic Ethnicity Prediction:
- Scandinavian – 78%
- Central European – 12%
- Uncertain – 10%
At first glance and without any of the knowledge above, these numbers seem way out of whack. I don’t have a single document ancestor from Scandinavia or the area I think of as “Central Europe.”
However, when I learn that “Central Europe” includes France and Germany, a contribution of 12% “Central European” doesn’t seem far-fetched. Further, considering that ancestry in the British Isles can include “Scandinavian” ancestors as a result of relatively recent Viking conquests (on a genetic timescale), perhaps the 78% Scandinavian isn’t so far-fetched either.
While I am still surprised that I don’t report any British Isles DNA, that could simply be because of difficulties in deciphering between Scandinavian and British Isles, or perhaps because of the random inheritance of DNA from those ancestors rather than others.
Lastly, where’s my confirmed Native American and African DNA? Well, these percentages are rather small (~ or <5% each) and I’m sure they’re contained within the “Uncertain” category.
In any event, I’m not discouraged by my results, and I fully expect my results to change over time.
Lastly, as Ancestry.com has warned, don’t forget that your results are subject to change with revisions of their algorithms and new discoveries. And if Ancestry.com is dedicated to the best and latest results, your results almost certainly will and should change.
What are your percentages? Do they match your expected percentages? If you were unhappy with your AncestryDNA Genetic Ethnicity Prediction, does any of the above change your view?
Hi there! Thank you for a great post! I had a free autosomal test with AncestryDNA. 49% British Isles, 49% Scandinavian, and 2% unknown. No surprise with British Isles, but Scandinavian was unexpected. Then I had an autosomal DNA test done for my father with Family Tree DNA and used the raw data to narrow down the Scandinavian to Norwegian and Swedish with Gedmatch. Since my father was 100% Orcadian with FTDNA, I think that the Scandinavian for my lineage is due to Norwegian influences. I blogged about my autosomal experience on my blog to share with others.
As more people test with AncestryDNA, the more defined the population groups will be. When I called AncestryDNA, they did not have samples from all countries, such as Iceland. There are descriptions for the modern population groups the DNA is associated with, but it provides details that are very vague.
Really, I am more concerned that AncestryDNA does not provide any raw data. Another concern is the ability to attach AncestryDNA results to erroneous family trees. I could not find a common ancestor with any of my matches.
Hopefully AncestryDNA will be able to tweak the beta version in the future and provide raw data for genealogists to use in other admixture tools.
I was surprised with my results, too. My father’s family is from the same region of Germany. I traced them back to the 1600’s. My profile stated that I am only 5% Western European. How can this be? I feel like I was ripped off.
Same here, no Native American or definite Irish ancestry, when I traced back over 20 generations. Am I adopted?
I agree Brandan. My ancestors were here to greet the Mayflower. Seems they have me 79% Great Britain, 10% Italy/Greece, etc. etc. Nothing about native USA. If my Dad had not taken pictures, I also would believe I was adopted.
I also have American Indian ancestry and can track genealogical documents back quite far. My results from AncestryDNA reported 69% Great Britian, 12% Italy/Greece, 10% Scandinavian, and a small percentage of Other-none of which included Native American ancestry. My heart was pounding for a few minutes as I was trying to figure out where the Italian/Greek comes into play–when I realized it must be from way way back. I have no record of this lineage.
But surely it doesn’t matter how long your family was in America, if none of them had a child with a Native American there would be no Native American DNA.. IF you have documented evidence of actual Native American ancestors, then please just ignore my comment.
need fourth generation gradfather
I had a very similar situation. I too feel ripped off.
I am very confused after receiving my Ancestry DNA results. 60% Irish, 31% British, 6% African (specifically from Mali), and 3% other which consists of around 5 other European groups with a very small percentage allocated to each. The British and Irish is no surprise, but confused by the 6% African. Does this mean that one of my great-great Grandparents was African, or does it go back even further that that? My maternal Grandmother was olive skinned with very dark brown hair and eyes. Just put it down to her being a Black Irish throwback to the shipwrecked Spanish sailors from the Armada! Can someone please explain what 6% indicates in regard to it’s recentness? Thanks very much, Katherine
I believe Ancestry.com’s test goes back 500-1,000 years. Do you have any Spanish or Italian in the other European groups? The Moors and Berbers from Africa migrated into parts of Italy and Sicily and Spain…and then the Spanish/Iberians went into Ireland. Remember that you never know what “dose” of DNA you inherit. Even siblings can differ greatly who may favor each other. Sounds like you inherited some very old genes through the Moors/Berbers that ended up in Spain and those folks went to Ireland. Doubt you have a great-great-great grandparent who was fully African-American. Another result surprising folks with these tests is that people who think they are mostly English are coming up with results showing DNA from Scandinavia. This is because the Nordic cultures raided England and other parts of the UK but primarily the coast of England. Sometimes you have to look at history, wars and migration patterns to figure out where your DNA is coming from even if you know where your great-great grandparents were and whey they were from. It can go back farther than that and it’s showing up in your own unique DNA.
you Irish people are always throwing with dark skin and black hair. The people from Spain are fair skin and light eyes please know your facts before throwing your dark hair skin comment at us and blame you own African roots. not ours
Don’t take your AncestryDNA results as definitive. Their ethnicity estimates are known to be inaccurate. Ancestry scores a 3 out of 10 on the Autosomal DNA test comparison chart, and at only 99$, you get what you pay for. I have tested with both AncestryDNA and 23andme. 23andme is far more accurate. If you want to see if you have African in you, I’d suggest testing with 23andme also. It always best to test with two companies to rule out certain ancestries.
Happy I read your post. I had a major shock when I got my results from23 and Me so I did the test with Ancestry DNA. Both of my parents were from the UK father from Bournemouth, mother from Belfast, N Ireland of Scots Irish parents. And further back all their relatives were also from those same areas. My surprise and shock was that besides showing English and Irish I have 48 to 49 % Ashkenazi Jew.
My parents and their parents were Christian. I have no siblings but I asked my cousin to do the test. Our mothers were sisters. He had no AJ in his DNA. therefore the AJ is from my father. Now trying to trace How this could happen. Your post is helpful. If you have any other comments regarding this I would greatly welcome them. Barbara Hamm
The English cronicals say that the English came from Armenia. If that is true, than it’s no surprise to have a J in your lineage. I had the same problem. My fathers have been Armenian for over a thousand years, yet I got cast with a Cohan (priestly cast) type Jew-gene. I got a lot of humor mileage with that with all my Jewish friends.
The Conclusion to all this, is that the Askenatzy Jews, the Armenians, and probably the English, all share a common ancestor, the Hurrians.
The problem with that theory, is that the Hurrians were not a Semitic people. All of us who show traces or percentages of “European Jew” (Ashkenazi or otherwise) indicates we come from either Hebrew or Syrian population, or one that was similar.
Did the Jewish ancestry come up with the test from 23andMe or in the test from AncestryDNA?
See what happens when you go back 27+ generations; Your surname evolves, and you loose, plus your northern Germanic relatives become Danish Scandinavian.
This should answer your question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edict_of_Expulsion
In 1290, King Edward I issued an edict expelling all Jews from England. The expulsion edict remained in force for the rest of the Middle Ages. The edict was not an isolated incident, but the culmination of over 200 years of increased persecution. Oliver Cromwell permitted Jews to return to England in 1657, over 360 years after their banishment by Edward I, in exchange for finance. So there would be Jewish DNA somewhere in the English gene pool and you are most likely related to some of these people. Some of them may have remained behind and changed religions and married English people instead of fleeing the country.
Why should anyone be surprised that if they thought they were English that some of their ancestry is Scandinavian? When humans first came to England or the British Isles they walked across. The area was joined to Europe and the cold had become less severe and
animals such as the Mammoth, Sabre toothed Tiger, Woolly Rhino and Bears, many types of Deer and Wild Horses roamed the tundra. The Haplogroups which dominated and still do are the Anglo Saxons Gaels and Scandinavians, the Latter divided into Danish/Sweden and the Norse. Since then we have been having wars, intermarrying, going on our travels around Europe and the words to describe people from modern countries like German, Italian, Spanish, French did not exist. Gael dominate the whole of Europe and the “blondies” (who one might describe as “fair” AND COME IN EVERY SHADE TO VE
I actually just read (with great interest) your blog post about your testing experiences. Thank you for sharing those, and for stopping by here.
I couldn’t agree more; raw data is essential. More and more genealogists are beginning to understand the value of their raw data, and they will want to be able to access it.
I also agree that the labeling is an issue that needs to be reviewed and modified to help customers understand their results more clearly.
As you know I have had similar experiences. Here is a comparison of my paper tree and the results from all 3 companies and then one of the after market analysis. I will follow with a comment which I hope may help others.
Best Rough guestimate from my paper tree
1/2 English (Colonial)/Scottish (via Ireland)
1/16 Mixed Native American, Dutch,?
60% Scandinavian (shows Sweden, Norway, Denmark on their map)
31% Central European (shows France, Germany, Belgium)
95.61% Western European (Shows British Isles)
4.39% South Asia (Shows India)
And here’s a comparison with World9 DODECAD
0.50% East_Asian (this would also suggest Native American)
0.75% Australasian (Oceania)
0.01% Siberian (this would also suggest Native American)
10.40% Southern (European/Mediterranean)
1)The DNA from my most recent old world ancestors are from Sweden & Norway immigrated in 1855 & 1870. Preceded by German and then Irish which is really Scottish which is probably really Viking. mtDNA is U5a1b2. I tend to think these segments that are inherited from my Scandinavian Great Grandparents are longer (more recent) and therefore have more “influence” on the results. ie.: Longer more clearly defined segments.
The Germans immigrated in the early 1700’s as did the Scottish. The rest is very mixed up and DNA has revealed 2 well defined African segments and small bits of Native American. The Strong South Asian results may be reflective of Roma (Gypsy heritage) which is a family legend about my Swedish “travelers.” The Caucasus Gedrosia may reflect the route of the Swedish travelers AND/OR the German/Austrian Traveler(s) who may have been originally from the Cacasus Mountains area. This appears to be reflected in what I believe is my Father’s Y-DNA and a number of matches with those of recent Turkish ancestry.
My English colonial —what remains in my DNA would be very small segments for the most part. It may also be mixed up with other populations including Native American and early Dutch, Portuguese and French. I have 5 Portuguese matches and they all match each other. My estimates are a common ancestor in the 1500-1600’s. Add in the 2 more recent “African Segments” and a plausible story line emerges and an explanation for the odd dissimilar results from all 3 companies.
2) There is a huge difference between calculating our percentages across our whole genome vs. by Chromosome Analysis vs. by Segment analysis vs. by SNP analysis. If you average across all chromosomes you will skew the results in the majority direction. Here are a couple of examples. My Native American of which I have a confirmed DNA match—is not shown at any of the 3 companies and the World 9 calculator gives a .27% score. However if I look at World 9 by chromosome something different emerges. There is no Native American on 12 Chromosomes. The remaining Chromosomes have from .3 to 5.5% Amerindian. On Chromosome 18 there is:
Which added together is 9.1% potential Native American.
Similarly I show .87% African on World 9 but on Chromosome 8:
So for me I need to look at my paper tree and try to account for things reflected in my DNA. I have come up with several scenarios but here is the most plausible. I have an ancestor in the 1700’s (one of my mystery women perhaps) who is of mixed ancestry. One parent was mixed African and the other was mixed but appeared more European. Both parents had Caribbean Slave ancestry a mix of various European ie: Portuguese, French, Dutch, English with African and Native American. This mystery woman was fair enough to pass—and did. She ends up in South Carolina and marries a former indentured servant from Scotland.
No one knows or no one is passing down the story through the family—but when my DNA results arrived I was presented with a challenge—as in who DO you think you are? So with dogged determination first I had to prove to myself that the results were accurate and not noise or inaccuracies in the various calculators and two what is the story behind the genes. Each Algorithm has its shortcomings. The broader the view or the fewer components the more skewed the results.
If you look at a patterned quilt from a long distance the dominant colors will blend to give you an impression of the color of the quilt. In the shade it looks blue in the sun it appears more purple. The closer you get the more the pattern emerges. The pieces are of different sizes and colors. The closer you get the more you see. Pretty soon you realize that each pattern piece is made up of different fabrics some almost a solid color and some a mix of lots of colors.
Each of us is a quilt. Even a solid color quilt will show some variation up close. The grain and the lay of the fabrics will be different.
As for matches. My experience at all 3 companies has been similar for previously unknown relatives:
Mother’s paternal surname line Lundberg (Sweden) 3rd Cousin 1Removed @Ancestry
Mother’s mother’s father’s line Sheldon (English-New England Colonial US) 5th cousin @FTDNA
Father’s mother’s father’s line Sparks (English-Southern Colonial US) 4th [email protected]
Father’s mother’s mother’s line Franklin (English-Southern Colonial US) 4th cousin 1R @FTDNA
Father’s mother’s mother’s line Barnes (English-Southern Colonial US) 4th cousin 1R @23andme
From my own recruiting
Father’s mother’s line. Henager (German-Southern US) 2nd Cousin
Mother’s line Lundberg / Sheldon (see above) 1st Cousin
Missing Father’s father’s lines (German-Southern US AND English-New England Colonial US) And this is where I believe the African and native American is coming from!
However anything past 4th cousin is pretty hard to find at any of the companies. With New England 9th cousins and further who knows if the person that matches in two trees is the same as that reflected in the DNA. I have found it overall most unhelpful at this level. Autosomal DNA is most helpful for close relationships—to about 5th cousin–for population or ancestry information (if you are willing to use the after market calculators and more detailed information like SNP Smart. And int eh case of 23andme very important medical Information can be gleaned.
And I ECHO all others comments on Ancestry’s need to have RAW data downloadable and hopefully some more advanced matching tools. These shortcomings for me were overcome by the 2 solid matches that confirmed that my paper tree reflects my DNA.
Now if I can just find some matches on my Dad’s side or on those African segments……
Sorry for the ramble but I hope its helpful.
Glad, you didn’t mention Eskimo. I am Eskimo.
Over 40 times of blood what am I
So what DNA test would you recommend for the most solid accurate information about your heritage? Ancestry.com or another test through somewhere else?
So maybe Norman Conquest + Viking Conquest = British Isles paper Tree . . . . when you talk to British and European archaeologists you get an idea of potpourri all over the place. So maybe Roman Conquest would yield significant autosomal results that look “Italian”!
Thanks, Blaine, for reading my blog post about my autosomal DNA tests. I also had one done for my hubs since his mtDNA full sequence was very surprisingly Jewish (he was raised strict Catholic). Cannot wait for his results!
As I keep searching around for more information as to why/how my genetic percentage may have come up 13% Volga-Ural, I came across an article on sciencenordic.com about Vikings and Norway (having norge/danish paternal grandparents and NO scandanavian in my test results) that talks about those that came to Norge and how/why:
Thralls and careerists
Kjeldstadli points out that multiple groups immigrated to Norway in the Middle Ages.
At the bottom of the social ladder were the Irish slaves, or thralls. They might not have had too much of an impact on the culture. Around 1250 the first refugees came from Russia.
That ‘1250’ connection may be stretching it, but it does give me something more to chew upon as I wait for others to show up as matches on Ancestry, and see if my results change at all.
link to article: http://sciencenordic.com/immigration-viking-era
I have some of my ancestors locks of hair. Can DNA be extracted from these which are of help to ancestry?
Genealogy Blog at Hidden Genealogy Nuggets
I’m a bit late to this thread but I found the other comments useful today so I’m adding mine as well.
I have been researching my family tree for about 20 years and have my paper ethnicity as follows.
3/8 – 37.5% Italian
1/8 – 12.5% Spanish
1/8 – 12.5% Danish
5/16 – 31.25% English/Irish
1/16 – 6.25 % Norwegian
On paper, I should be:
50% Southern European
31.25% British Isles
According to AncestryDNA I am:
34% Southern European
31% Central European
The Southern European seems to be about right but the Central European is a complete mystery to me. Perhaps from my Italian ancestry, part of my father’s family was from North of Milan, and he did have blue eyes and lighter brown hair, perhaps there was some Austrian blood in there.
I’m very surprised that I show no DNA Ancestry from England/Ireland although I have heard that there have been problems with distinguishing British Isles DNA with Scandinavian. This might explain the higher than expected Scandinavian DNA in my results.
The Turkish/Persian is nowhere to be found in my 20 years of genealogical research on my ancestry. I realize these tests may go back as far as a thousand years so who knows. Both my paternal Italian Grandfather and my Maternal half Danish grandfather were very dark so perhaps back in the distant past an ancestry may have immigrated from this area.
I have just ordered National Geographics Gen 2.0 so hopefully they will be able to shed some additional light.
The Turkish/Persian is very common in Italian ancestry, and I’d be surprised if anyone of Italian heritage did not show at least a small percentage. From the Moors to the Ottoman Empire, through conquests and trade, Their creed and culture had a large Impact in Italy, particularly Southern Italy and Sicily (where they ruled for nearly 100 years). In fact, many Italians have dark hair and dark eyes today because of this ancestral history. Hope that helps with your surprise.
As far as Persian and Turkish being in Greek/Italian ancestry, I have it, too, with the Ottoman Empire and forced conversions, rapes, etc. Also, many Greeks moved to Padua and Venice, Italy when the Ottomans conquered Constantinople.
I appreciate that these ethnicity results can be difficult to interpret. However, I was somewhat bemused by my own AncestryDNA results. I live in England, all my lines as far back as I can trace are from the British Isles, yet according to AncestryDNA I am 58% Central European, 25% British Isles, 13% Eastern European and 4% unknown. I’m finding that I have lots of matches with Americans who have a mix of British and other European ancestry and many of them are getting much higher percentages of “British Isles” ethnicity than me. I would like to know what Ancestry are using as their reference populations for the British Isles. Unfortunately they do not provide any information on their website and they have not replied to my feedback. It seems to me that these results are completely meaningless unless Ancestry can provide details of the reference populations they are using. In case it’s of interest I’ve done a blog post about my AncestryDNA results and provided a comparison with my ethnicity results from 23andMe and FTDNA:
I appreciate that these ethnicity results can be difficult to interpret. However, I was somewhat bemused by my own AncestryDNA results. I live in England, all my lines as far back as I can trace are from the British Isles, yet according to AncestryDNA I am 58% Central European, 25% British Isles, 13% Eastern European and 4% unknown. I’m finding that I have lots of matches with Americans who have a mix of British and other European ancestry and many of them are getting much higher percentages of “British Isles” ethnicity than me. I would like to know what Ancestry are using as their reference populations for the British Isles. Unfortunately they do not provide any information on their website and they have not replied to my feedback. It seems to me that these results are completely meaningless unless Ancestry can provide details of the reference populations they are using. In case it’s of interest I’ve done a blog post about my AncestryDNA results and provided a comparison with my ethnicity results from 23andMe and FTDNA:
I realize you wrote this about three years ago, but I have something to add about British Isles ancestry that I just found out. It so happens that the vast family tree of New England colonial ancestors I have been able to build at ancestry.com actually seems to coincide with genetic reality since doing 23andme. Now they caution you not to expect that and I did not. But then it turned out that I am exactly what I might have predicted. My mother’s Irish side came in the 19th century to work on the railroads and other transportation it seems (riverboats) – but in Ireland, they were country folk without any significant Industrial Revolution except for the boats that took them to America. So they remained a pretty tight, pure little group until my dad married my mother after WWII, and the whole Catholic thing started to come apart. All my mother’s sisters also married Protestants. My father’s father could have traced his ancestry back to the Mayflower, had he tried. So that takes care of 75% of the ancestry, lumped into the British Isles without distinction. The other 25% was my father’s mother, whose family came from Prussia. But she has hardly any German per se, as she is a mix of every part of Europe. The reason my grandfather’s probable line is what it is has to do with the fact that when his English and Scottish ancestors came to America, they were coming centuries before the Irish, when their own homes were similarly rural and the genes somewhat confined locally. The next most common ethnic group in my mix is – can you guess? – Netherlands, followed by Scandinavia, Germany and France. But given Hanseatic location of most of my grandmother’s ancestors, not too surprising. The point of my remarks is that I am more British than the British because they stayed at home during the age of travel and empire, insuring a break from the isolation of earlier centuries. My founder genes for the US represent a sort of bottleneck, which is now well on its way to breaking out completely. Two of my relatives are married to Asians, for instance, and I am married to a Hungarian Jew. I see the compatibility of certain cultures can allow somewhat large and successful families, too, so that we are likely to have new combinations that become as familiar as the one I come from – now a bit like a given (Christian) name which marks your age and proclaims your generation.
Wish I could edit this – I meant to say that the British “stayed home” during the Industrial Revolution, in the sense that they partook of the changes within their society, including being posted to foreign countries from which at one time people brought home foreign brides (both Princess Diana and Virginia Woolf had Indian foremothers a few generations back). Also immigrants came and worked in factories or took refuge during political upheavals, not something they did as much when my ancestors sailed for America in the 17th century – which is when most of them came, and then no more).
This information is helpful in interpreting the results that I had on my recent DNA test. I expected to see a high percentage British Isles, a small percentage Central European, and possibly some Scandanavian and American Indian. What I got was 96% Scandanavian, 4% Unknown. My family (both sides) go back at least 7-8 generations in the US, and all that I have origins on were from the British Isles. Nobody came from a Scandanavian country. What’s the chances that in all that genetic mixing that only Scandanavian genetics came through in me. I guess it’s possible, but my guess is the answer is that those interpreting these results do not have good references on origin…yet.
my ancestry DNA came back as 81% central euopean 11% brittish isles and 8% finnish/volga-ural (of whick i had never heard of before) i was very surprised and i hope the continue to inprove and or add more information. i was slightly let down with cost vs. information which i felt was very vague. does anyone have a formula for caluclating you genetics through you paper tree? i would love to try this and compare. thanks!
Great insight – thanks. I think many of us with high percentages of “UK ethnicity” may be losing sight of the high percentage of modern British Isle inhabitants and emigrants that actually originated arrived as part of the Norman conquest, Viking invasions and other leaps from the continent to the Isles. To simplify, how many current Brits are descended from the pre-Norman Brits (Britons/Druids, etc.)? Any way, tasty stuff!
Just thought I would throw my two cents in here. And while I get that this cannot literally be mapped to the paper trail….I did and it was dead on in some ways…and not in others.
On paper, I would be 50% Russian, 25% Scottish, and the last 25% is Irish, Dutch and a whole other mixed bag of things.
My results came back as 76% Eastern European, 22% British Isles and 2% mystery meat…
This -mostly- makes sense, in terms of the BI part being just about 100% correct.
and the 50% eastern European…sure…granted I don’t really like their boundary of Eastern Eurpoean not including Russia….since they state
‘The area is considered by many ethnologists to be the homeland of the Slavic people. Most of the nations in the region speak a Slavic language, which spread north and east into Russia and south toward the Balkans in the 5th and 6th centuries.’
Well if its the homeland of slavic peoples, then I would like to know how they are determining ‘russian’ vs the other slavic areas….but thats my own personal ‘a slav is a slav’ quibble.
but then there is that ‘extra’ 26% that is currently also Eastern Eurpopean…which on paper is Irish, Dutch, English and a bunch of other random non-obviously eastern european folks…
My gut logic tells me that not all of them, even if they migrated from somewhere else, would ALL be migrated from Eastern Europe.
So I am sort of hoping to see that 26% and the 2% mystery meat, shift into slightly more accurate categories as time goes on.
That said…it did match me with a 3rd cousin, and we have a common ancestor, and it turns out to be someone I ‘know’ from common research, so they are right on there.
And another possible 4th cousin also had a tree match.
3 other close cousins either had no tree, only had a last name match etc.
So I don’t beleive it has any major issues either….and it makes me want to send off my mother’s spit…since she was the ‘100% Russian side’, just to see what it thinks of her.
I got my results back from ancestry.com and they are “somewhat” in the range of what I thought they would be. 57% British Isles, 35% Central European and 8% Finnish/Volga. I am quite amazed at all these other comments about people showing up with large amounts of Scandinavian. I am about 1/2 Norwegian, documented back some 500 years in some cases, yet my DNA shows no Scandinavian. This Norwegian comes from both sides of the family. I think anyone with European blood could come up with the statistics I showed. Going back 1000’s of years is pretty much a no-brainer with these percents. Ancestry makes you think from the advertising that the results will be much later.
As you stated, ” Ten different researchers analyzing the same genome can come up with ten different estimates”. This in itself makes these tests really invalid since there are so many variables. If these companies were totally honest they would state this clearly instead of masking it in “1000’s of years” double-talk. Maybe at least 2 researchers should evaluate the results. It wouldn’t seem like such a rip-off.
I also had my “ethnicity” done by Tribal DNA. LOL, I was almost 100% Spanish and Brazilian. Go Figure!
I just got my results from AncestryDNA and let first start off by telling you my genealogical family tree: I have ancestors from France, Spain (Canary Islands), Germany and England. I was told I have Irish ancestry too, but I haven’t discovered that part of my tree yet.
So my results of my test show me as: 61% Scandinavian, 33% Southern European and 6% uncertain. I’m very curious to what is that 6% uncertain. I’ve heard a story of a possible Native American ancestor, but don’t know if that’s true or not. Also, I’m positively confirmed to descend partially from Spanish Canary Islanders, and I know that in the Canary Islands before the Spanish conquest, there were North African Berbers. So possibly this 6% could be Berber? Or Native American? I really don’t know. But my money would probably be on the Berber. Does Ancestry detect “North African”?
So my Scandinavian ancestry (61%) must be a conglomeration of my English, Irish and German ancestry. My Southern European ancestry (33%) must be my Spanish Canary Islander ancestry, and my French, could be possibly split between the two. And the 6% uncertain is just puzzling, very puzzling. Well, I guess this is…to be continued…
I’ve been told that my paper heritage is 1/8 English Irish Scotch and German, and 1/4 Russian and Polish. Just got my AncestryDNA results back, and was a little surprised to see no British Isles, but instead 33% Scandinavian, 28% Central European, 23% Eastern European, and 16% Finnish/Volga-Ural. Well, I’m not very seriously trying to trace my roots, but I think I’ll dress up as a Viking for Hallowe’en this year :-).
Hi there. About two years ago, i took an ancestry DNA test to find my true ancestry. I am English but my results left me gobsmacked. I am not an expert on DNA ancestry but i need your help. My results were, Strong English (as expected) Portuguese, Belgian, Dutch and (my biggest surprise) Russian. From what i understand about British history, my Portuguese DNA may stem from the early Basque people that first populated the land over 2000 years ago. My Dutch and Belgian side could be from the Germanic peoples that invaded England as the Anglo-Saxons but i still have no clue as to how i could have very strong Russian DNA. I know almost nothing about my fathers ancestry. Before i took the test, my nephew has always told me that i look like a Polish person. My other nephew is convinced that i must have some Russian ancestry and i have been stopped in the street by two Polsh women that were also convinced that i was Eastern European until i told them that i was not. I sent an email to International Biosciences (where i first took the test and i beeged them to look at my test results and to help in figuring out how i could have strong Russian DNA when i am English. They havent replied and that is why i am here. So please, could someone answer me and tell me how i could have Russian blood when i don’t, many thanks. Ps. i dont have my test results anymore as i have discarded them but i still need help with this.
Oh and just one last thing. I may not know anything about my fathers ancestry but i have two photos of him. He was about 5′ 4″ tall, was naturally olive skinned, had a wide flat nose and jet black hair. Although my test results were 100% European, i do also wonder about the Portuguese DNA that i have. God i’m confused. I though that in taking this test i would get answers but instead i am left with more questions *sigh*.
I got back my ancestry.com dna results two days ago and it has me questioning my paternity. I say this because I came up with;
Scandinavian 39%West African 25%British Isles 13%Middle Eastern 8%Eastern European 6%Southern European 6%Uncertain 3%
The British Isles I expected, the African I expected but the scandinavian NO, and the one thing missing is Asian of any kind. My father listed on my birth certificate and who my son is the spitting image of was indonesian (from indo-china) meaning there should be a bit of Asian in there someplace. My mothers side was primarily English and the roots go back hundreds of years from the British Isles so no big surprise there and my grandmothers father was Armenian so the Middle eastern I understand that. As well as the european stuff. but WHERE is my Asian and where the HECK did the Scandinavian come from and in such a high amount?
If you read the posts above. It seems like most of us with British Isles ancestry, are coming up Scandinavian! While I understand the Viking invasion; why did that wash out most of the British Isles genes? I think this test is flawed in lots of ways. The test does not seem to be able to separate British Isles genes from Scandinavian genes. I guess the mixture goes back so far; that it is difficult to separate now.
I dont know what to do you people got me so scared
Im serious, im multiracially mixed so I know ill be
Mad if my results comeback totally different, I
Heard and read everyones dna results, and not one
Of you are happy with the results,,people get over
It,theres 3 things that went wrong here,number,1
Maybe your family lied about their ancestry, or lied
To, or did not know of any mixture, 2 maybe your
Ancestors adouted somebody elses culture as there
Own, even in generations far back, so far back that
They forgot who they really were, and maybe they
Were ashame of their real family cultures and ancestrty, hello
And them not thinking that thier fellow
Ancestors hundreds and thousands of years
Later, are obiously gonna find outthe truth
One way or another, and number 3 maybe
Ancestrydna, got lazy and putting the same
Results down, because they really dont know,
Like what really got me was the 3% to 10% to
12% unknown, omg I hate thatbecause if
Other things coming up why not the hidden
Unknown dna, I know ancestrydna doing their
Best, no hate their but they need to do better
Because we will always be curious about the
Unknown %, possible a farn little country
Somewhere over the rainbow, but its
Weird because every thing shows up
In the results but the mysteries unknown,
I know when dont have the data base for the
Unknown yet, blah,blah,blah, we citizens of america
Work hard for our money, all we want to known
Is us history in our genes nothings wrong with
Because you dont wont a huge gap n between
Your history, so we want the truth, I don’t
Care if its like 1% unknown, I still want to know,
Hell if we paid good hard working money on it
We again deserve to know all the results every
Penny.worth, thats a fact, I dont want to waist
My money on bullshlt that doesnt make since,
And I dont want ancestry to scam us out justto put fake results
On paper or file, I dont know im a good person
Who like and loves good honest,good,loyal people
So we deserve to know the truth and all our results
Because to me really folks, it makes it seem
Unfisnished and alittle sloppy,,,,every other
D.n.a companies out there,(the teal honest ones)
Have a complete results, and no a unknown,
God knows eberytime I seen unknowni kep
Thinking what the hell was that, and why didn’t
It show up like that, I know im have trouble
If I get a test.donebecause I got so,much blood
That mine will be way off, I have black blood,jewish
Blood,irish blood,scottish blood,white blood, ,and
Native american blood, that native american blood is probably
A lie like alot of families, some of my ancestors
Probably lied to find black blood in them,go figure
So thats why they adopted a fake ass native american lie and myth
Stories, my family is from south carolina and has
Been there for over 100 hundred years, and
When the white settliers came over and remove
The native american indian out the south and north
Carolinas that was in 1830,to the north, or whatever
So how rt he hell could we be indian or have indian
Blood, when all the indians from the south was removed in 1830,
So it would be a complete lie, are they were
Lied to and to stupid to find out if the indian in the family was true,
Anyway I just want to sometime punch that side
Of the family in the face, for lyingabout their
Ancestors, its not right, and thats was we
Get different results from today,but since
Im so mixed up more so than others,mine
Would probably come out,black,irish, and scottish
Blood, thank god my mothers side of the family
Doesnt andnever lies about thier history, thats a
Blessing, but the otherside, my fathers side lies
Like hell, they say we native american indians
Because we look indian, so what, it probably
Cone from the black white unions in myfamily
For generations, and we just morphed into
Other looks of other races over time so whatever
No indian blood will show up, I put money on it
Anyway, I think mine test will say black and white
, thats all,hell my family from south carolina,
And only thing was down there was, blacks,whites,irish,and scottish people
I dont know about jewish people, I guesss my
Clueless,mindless aunt was lying about that to,just
to be special or the queen of exotic race mixing,
Whatever, I know their mixed black and white meaning
The irish blood will show, because we got a irish
Last name, go figure, I know you have been
There with me, you asked your older family
Members, stories about race and history
And they fake being sick like baby I got a headache,
Or im sleepy, or tell somebody to say they aint home
Or just make up lies or been liedto, so I know
You.all understand, and thats why ancestrydna
Resultsare always suprising everytime, because of
The lies from families hiding stuff or they were
Lied to, or stole another persons identidy, or guessing or asuming,
No we want thr truth, the right answers for future
Generations to come,thats a fact, because we
Dont want the younger generation living a lie
They want to know who are they and their ancestors
And genetics, and d.n.a. Truthfulness, no lies,noscamimg, no
Fake results, or no confusing ones, or misleading ones,
Just real true results that make scence, so people be
Careful, I want one so for bad for years a d.n.a.test
But im scared ima be mad, anger, and violent
Towards those liars in my family, lol but whatever I might
For.christmas, as a gifted to me,
Anyway sorry this was long what once you read
Youll get the same vibe, especially fromresults,family,
Cultures, history, and family is everything to me no matter
How they act, I love them,if it wasnt for our ancestors
We would be here, god bless:-) be proud of who you are,:-) ok im really gone now lol:-)
When I got my results from my ancestrydna test I was puzzled as most of my ancestors come from England so I wrote to an English friend to help clear up my concerns. She gave me this explanation.
Here is a brief history of ‘England’ …Archaeologists think, that the first Modern Humans got here about 25,000 years ago, from EUROPE ( so, we all have European roots ) and most importantly, we were JOINED to EUROPE at this point.
Then 10,000 years ago, when the Last Ice Age happened, those inhabitants were forced back into Europe, by the impact, it was like trying to live on the North Pole. 9,500 years ago, the ice began to melt and formed the English channel, separating England as we now call it, from Europe. As time went by, various groups of people arrived over the Channel. One of these being the Beaker People, who built Stonehenge ( c 3000 BC ) circa 2000 AD., the Celtic Tribes started arriving, from Europe ( mainly from the coasts of France and Belgium ).
Around the times of Jesus, the Romans arrived and stayed about 400 years. The angles and Saxons, then started arriving ( from Germany and Holland ). 800 AD., the Vikings then came, from Scandinavia. In 1066 we were defeated by the Normans and the Country was ruled by William the conqueror, they were French, with Scandinavian descent. 80% of the DNA checked in Britain, shows European ‘Hunter Gatherer’ descendancy. There is no ‘ENGLISH / BRITISH Native People’. But we do have a 25,000 year old History ..
What’s not accounted for is Swiss/Italian on my mother’s side, Swiss/German. I have Irish on bot sides and Irish in Newfoundland but no Scandinavian that I have found. So the Scandinavian may be explainable but I’m wondering why no smaller percentages for the other known ancestors.
For #26 Cynthia…Very good information, very well said. My ancestry.com result was 37% Scandinavian, I was very surprised, but in researching my father’s mother’s maiden name it does come from Scandinavia, so there you go…good luck to all.
My ancestry.com results were:
53% British Isles
36% Central European
6% Central Asian
Nothing surprising about the British Isles and Central Europe, but the Central Asian was totally unexpected. I have numerous DNA matches for the British Isles and Central Europe but absolutely no matches for Central Asia. It makes me feel somewhat unique that non of my matches has this component, but I’m just wondering how it factors in. Any idea?
That’s interesting. I remember hearing from my mom that before the nation of Germany was created the Germanic peoples were nomadic and came from central asia and were related to the Huns.
I’ve been thinking about my genetics for decades. All family seem to be from England, but I kept thinking, with England’s history of invasions, where did they really come from. After starting a free account at Ancestry.com, during which period I also was reading a lot more ancient history, I came to suspect that Vikings figured into the picture. And as I learned more from my history reading and more via Ancestry.com, sure enough, back in the mists of time those mariner/warrior/trader/naughty-breeding-boys are there. That knowledge opened my mind to the difference between where my ancestors were born (I’m English) and who they really were (I’m Scandinavian and a lot of other things), and therefore, who I really am.
I’m very proud of my 27th and etc. great grandfathers and grandmothers and all the ones in between (grandmothers are harder to trace, unfortunately), and am thrilled to find them no matter where they came from.
For #29 Kim
Perhaps your Asian dna relates to ancient migration paths.
For more about that, The Seven Daughters of Eve: The Science That Reveals Our Genetic Ancestry by Brian Sykes. Certain parts may now be dated, and the Seven Daughters are fable, but the book is mind-opening.
I just received my husband’s genetic DNA match from Ancestry.com and it does not match either his family tree or his Y-DNA test. He is 1/4 Swedish. His great grandparents immigrated from Sweden in the 1880’s. His Y-DNA test states that he is I1 which I understand is a Scandinavian haplotype. His Ancestry.com dna states that he is 56% British Isle and 44% Central European. Any ideas why no Scandinavian dna shows up?
I found all of your comments very helpful. I found out from the AncestryDNA test that I took that at least one quarter of my ancestry is central european with a very pronounced slant towards Germany in my matches. According to my paper geneaology and family history there are zero German people in my family. We have no history of adoption to my knowledge in my family and no “messing around”. To echo the point by others here when I called ancestry for further clarification I get very vague information. Hopefully with time things will flush out as their testing populations grows.
RESEARCH: GENETIC HISTORY OF THE BRITISH ISLES
“Potentially important historical periods of migration which have
been subject to consideration in this field include the introduction of
Celtic languages and technologies (during the Bronze and Iron Ages), the
Roman era, the period of Anglo-Saxon influx, the Viking era, the Norman
invasion of 1066 and the era of European wars of religion. There are also
similarly many potential eras of movement between different parts of the
British Isles….”A study into the SCANDINAVIAN ANCESTRY OF BRITISH
PEOPLE found that there is evidence of PARTICULAR CONCENTRATIONS IN
Shetland and Orkney in Scotland, Isle of Man, Wirral, West Lancashire and
Cumbria in England, Western Isles and Skye in Scotland, Mid-Cheshire in
England, Western Scotland, and Anglesey in Wales”
My ancestors came from Poland and Slovakia so I expected 100% Eastern European from the Ancestry DNA test. However, it was only 46% EE and 49% British Isles, totally unexpected. Does anyone know if there were there any migrations from the British Isles to Poland/Slovakia?
I just got my results. Turns out I’m 32% African. Only 10% Italian. 56% Irish So the big secret is finally revealed. My Dad is Black not Italian. LOL he is mad. I knew it in my heart. Do I get two acres and a mule? my ancestors passed as white/Italian to escape. So I guess great great great grandpa raped a slave which made for light skin kids. I am a Jones according to my cousin matches. I’m Proud of who I am. My relative were survivors. I know when I watched Obama become President my spirit rose within me. All life began in Africa & we are all the human race. I wonder if I can apply for a minority scholarship now. I hope I don’t get pulled over more now that I know. Can’t wait to say “it’s bc I’m black”. I love being African American. Now when I sing at church they can’t say she sings like a black girl. That’s bc I am.
So what about the 56% Irish. Do you just drop that heritage?
I can be pretty sure that the genealogical DNA tests are not to be used as paternity test EVER. I would strongly encourage you to have Dad have his own test done.
I have a hard time accepting that the vikings bred as crazy as these people’s results indicate. For so many folks outside of Scandinavia to be descent from them and for there to be a stable enough population base remaining in Scandinavia, makes one assume the population must have been relative to other nations so astronomical. And I doubt it was so signifcant compared to the Britons and other people they bred with.
I’m thinking Y DNA with strong R1A DNA is being called “Scandinavian”. Or something a bit like that.
I am African American, and I have long known about my European identify through family history and genealogical records, some discovered through ancestry.com. Indeed, I can trace my roots to King Robert II of Scotland. I have unverified oral history of German ancestry, but so far no leads. My African ancestry has been even more mysterious, so I was looking forward to my genetic results.
I came out 37% Scandinavian and 61% West African. The remaining 2% was uncertain. West Africa is quite diverse, so I know nothing about what tribe my ancestors came from–Yoruba, Igbo, Mandingo? What is curious about the Scandinavian part is that, if I trace my Scottish royal ancestors back enough, I find vikings. So, there is definitely evidence supporting the viking ancestry. Still, the spread through Scotland, Ireland, and maybe even Germany to America suggests that there was something else going on with the Vikings than just the usual rape and pillage.
After reading through most of this it seems to me that the technology is too immature to produce anything other than vague results. DNA is an incredibly complex substance and it could be that it will never be possible to identify racial backgrounds with 100% confidence even with a massive database. Right now any results you get may be kinda-right or may be totally wrong – but you can’t tell.
Just got back the DNA results from ancestry.com. What a mind blowing surprise. According to them I am 100% British Isles descent. I have concrete proof that my great great grandmother came to the U.S. from Sweden and that her people immigrated from Germany. So figure this one out??? My father’s DNA is more the mystery. Some said his father was NezPerce and some said white. Now I wonder what it really was. Also my great-grandmother from my mother’s father was pure Cherokee from South Carolina. I will wonder for awhile what the real truth is. Will take everything with a grain of salt….
My reported Ethnicity: British Isles 71%; Persian/Turkish/Caucasus 14 %; Uncertain 15%
My wife’s reported Ethnicity: Southern European 48%; Persian/Turkish/Caucasus 34; Eastern European 12%; Middle Eastern 6%
Our 100% confirmed son’s reported ethnicity: Central European 66%; Middle Eastern 14%; Persian/Turkish/Caucasus 15%; Uncertain 5%
I understand that this is not an exact science, but how can our known confirmed son have a 66% ethnicity that neither of his parents share!?
Even the test indicates a 99% probability that he is our son!!
I think that with such demonstrable inaccuracies the test is grossly overpriced.
My sister & I had our dna from ancestry.com. They are different. If we do have the same father would our biogeographical dna be exactly the same? Our Mom died 20 yrs ago, can’t ask her. Any of you know the answer?
That’s not an unexpected result based on how genetics work. You and your sister each inherit half your genes from your mother, and half from your father. But what exactly you inherit from each of your parents can and does differ between you and your sister, so even a set of siblings would exhibit variations in their ethnic composition. The “pie charts” shouldn’t look radically different though, I would imagine. Out of curiosity, how different were the results for you and your sister?
I’ve read your entire explanation…and it still doesn’t make sense to me…according to the Ancestry Autosomal DNA test supposedly I am 70% Scandinavian, 23% Eastern European ( which I expected ), 6% Finnish, 1% Unknown.
Ancestry claims that the test is “more recent targeting of family history of a 100 or a few 1,000 years as compared to the Y & Mt DNA test which is 10,000-50,000 yrs.”
They also say that, “If you have German or Brit ancestors your genetic ethnicity may be PARTLY Scandinavian”.
Soooo – My tree – Paternal Grandfather 100% Irish, Paternal grandmother 50% German & 50% English. Each of the G Grandparents being 100% German/English.
My maternal side is Polish/Lithuanian 50/50 or there about.
I STILL have relatives living in the town mine come from (mid Germany) – which was settled in 900 AD. My English relatives go back to the middle ages in Yorkshire…
NONE of which shows up in my DNA as British Isles or Central Europe (?!) Nothing? Not even 5%?? How is this possible? I feel like I’ve been given someone else’s test results!
Your original explanation that everyone has 2 trees is spot on. A great explanation of why this is so seemingly convuluted is a PBS documentary from a few years back called “Map of Human Migration.” “Who” your ancstors are does not always equal “where” your ancestors lived.
Same thing occurs with FTDNA…I’ve been saying this for a long time in regards to autosomal dna testing and people who run out visit relatives after testing 12 markers.
What has occurred is that the base data has been skewed. It get’s worse when base data participants “self identify.” This is particularly problematic with Jewish groups and as we can see it has spread.
In regards to Askenazi Jewish groups a recent paper pointed out that nearly 40% of all Italians share a connection to Ask. Jews. Meaning that Ask.Jews came out of Italy at some point. “The origin of Eastern European Jews revealed by autosomal, sex chromosomal and mtDNA polymorphisms” Avshalom Zoossmann-Diskin,
Since most Mexicans probably have some Spanish ancestry, and Spainards are autosomally connected to Italians next, and Italians are next autsomally connected to A.J. then I think the genetic sites are jumping to the next conclusion that some Mexicans are AJ as well (since AJ is connected to Sephardic)…..I’m not saying that withing reason say 3%-6-10% of Southern Spaniards and Mexicans have some Jewish ancestry, but the reporting I keep seeing is out of bounds.
What is the big stink about no raw data? I just got my results, and it included a link to download the raw dna data…
I tested with Ancestry a few months ago. My paper ancestry is
25% French Canadian (Acadian)
50% English, Scots
75% British Isles
I have not found any exact matches, yet, but most of the surname matches have been to people with the same Acadian surnames – Boudrot, Landry, etc. that are not reflected at all in the DNA test. I am seriously considering doing another test with FTDNA. I had my brother do a Y-DNA test with FTDNA and got some unexpected results, but the Irish and Acadian ancestry is on my mother’s side. Her mother was first generation Irish and her father was born in Nova Scotia. I can see where the Irish might be Scandinavian, and I can see where the French might have some Middle Eastern, but the total lack of Central Europe is a bit surprising.
Sorry about the error in the last post. Should have been
60% British Isles
9% Persian, etc.
I got my results back and frankly they make no sense. I did my mother and myself. My father is 2nd generation and all his family is german and slovene, no question.
1. My mothers results 66% scandinavian, 34% eastern european
2. My results 50% eastern european, 15% german 35% british
My results linked to someone within 3 miles of the town I had identified as my fathers home town, so no question of paternity. How is it then that my mothers putative ancestry is not British while mine is? This would seem to contradict the speculation about invaders and suggests an alternate possibility, that the identification is inaccurate.
Angles, Danes, Jutes, Goths (ancient), Burgundians who are people who migrated and settled much in Central Europe and Britain. What is one thing they have in common? They are all people from Scandinavian origin! Many people who have family from the British Isles also forget the Danes led a conquest to practically seize all of Eastern and Northern England (circa 830-1042 ending with Canute). There is a lot more Scandinavian influence in Britain than what many people really think and/or comfortable of. The Saxons were Germanic/Teutonic people whom shared much in common with their Cimbri cousins in the North in regards to and possible genetics. I read folks who claim central european origins who are coming up with Scandinavian may (theory) have been influenced by the Burgundians and Goths movement into Europe the very early years. This practically goes unnoticed.
How well established are the reference population families in the British Isles? I think there could be quite a problem with these families, or I just oddly ended up having a mere trace amount of my nearly exclusive British heritage. Most of my ancestors were of English/Welsh/Scottish variety (though the largest was English). A few ancestors were French, but none were Irish. My pedigrees are well established, and I have cousin matches to who I should, and many such matches. All of these matches are more British Isles than I am. How am I only 3% British Isles? How am I over 20% Irish? Is Irish really Irish, or is it Celtic? If not, when did the Irish move to Britain? Nearly all of my ancestors have been in North America since the early colonial period, so it must have been before then.
A reply to ‘# 45 M.Martin’
You wrote that you “feel like I’ve been given someone else’s test results!” since you got the results:
“Ancestry Autosomal DNA test supposedly I am 70% Scandinavian, 23% Eastern European ( which I expected ), 6% Finnish, 1% Unknown.” and you have a documented British, German, Balto-Polish background.
Well, I do not know about the accuracy of the test, but to me your results could actually make good sense (perhaps):
The Baltic people have for thousands of years lived along side with the Finns so the Finnish admixture is no surprise. The high percentage Scandinavian genes may not be that strange since you describe your British forefathers originate from Yorkshire which is a area with very concentrated viking settlement. Viking from all areas of Scandinavia (even from the Eastern side o Scandinavia and in Stockholm there are rune-stones describing how explorers earned fortunes in England plus plenty of artifacts). The name York, furthermore, comes from the Scandinavian Jorevik and there is a huge museum in Central York where you can study the city’s Scandinavian heritage. Most Scandinavians outside the city settled down in areas with poorer agricultural conditions which the former Celtic and Germanic (i.e. older immigrant periods from Dutch-German-Scandinavian areas) immigrants had left uncultivated which can be studied in the village names of e.g. Yorkshire.
Also during the age of tribal movements in Europe (circus 200-500 AD), several tribes moved from Scandinavia into today’s England, Finland, France (the Normans in Normandy), Germany, Ireland, Poland, Russia and Scotland among others. Furthermore the Baltic states have for many hundred years been under German and Scandinavian control which also added to admixtures.
Considerable Viking settlements occurred also in the Irish cities of Dublin and Belfast (a part of the UK).
So, perhaps the 70% Scandinavian result can be explained and plausible to some extend?
Later on during the 13-15th century (German), 16th century (Scottish-Dutch), 17th century (French-Belgian) immigrants came to different parts of Scandinavia making up a part of the present day population.
So, I guess the gene map is more or less a patchwork all over the world.
You might read up on the history of Ireland. If there was ever a country that was invaded, over and over again, it was Ireland. The English, the Vikings, the Scotts, the French and so forth. But, I won’t ruin the story for you. Certainly, check it out.
I’ve read all the comments and explanations, and I’m still disillusioned by AncestryDNA’s analysis of my husband’s ethnicity. His ancestors have been in the USA since the 17th century – from England, Germany and Ireland. For many generations they have all lived in the foothills of the Western NC mts – so his dark features have led family to think there is a drop of Native American in his background. However, his AncestryDNA is 46% Scandinavian, 45% Central European, and 9% uncertain. Scandinavian? No way! If Scandinavian means Scottish or English – then why do many members have British Isles ethnicity? As far as I’m concerned the test is a complete waste of money!!!
Mine isn’t as shocking as some of yours but is in its own way:
My paper ancestry is 56.25% Irish, 6.25% Swiss and 37.5% African.
Now, not to take the NPE route but I’ve always suspected something odd on my Father’s side as his Father died before his 1st birthday and was a smidge over 20 years older than my grandmother…
Ancestry DNA comes back with 83% British Isles, 15% West African, 2% Other.
So an entire grandparent drops off from African origins and my Swiss ancestry drops off entirely… though I actually found on the site links via the DNA to 4th cousins who I actually know and share said heritage with which are picked up…
I don’t think the test is totally flawed but their data might have issues due to self selection/etc…
I’m the project admin for the Farrar DNA project at FTDNA.
At FTDNA I’ve tested practically every available test including Y111.
Family Finder has me as as 87.37% Western European which includes, per FTDNA, the British Isles, France, Spain, Germany, Austria, Switzerland
And 12.63% European (which per FTDNA) starts at Corsica, Sardinia, through Italy, Greece, Serbia and stopping at the Black Sea.
According to 23andme my ancestry is per their standard estimate; I am 99.7% European and .3% other. Speculative estimate is 99.8% European, .1% subsaharan African , .1% Oceania and, .1% other
My Y haplogroup per FTDNA is R1a1a, per ISOGG it is R1a1a1b2* (Sarmatian/Scythian)
My mtDNA per FTDNA is J
Per 23andme my YDNA is R1a1a
Per 23andme my mtDNA is J2b1a3
I am non plussed that FTDNA has not narrowed the classification of my mtDNA.
My known and documented ancestry is that my paternal lines earliest documented ancestor lived in Midgley, Halifax Parish, West Riding, Yorkshire in 1471. I have close genetic cousins (within the last 1,000 years at least) with a Douglass (an 18th Century ancestor from Perth, Scotland), an Evans and an English (whose ancestors lived in the same general part of England as mine.
Although my YDNA is R1a1a and is Yorkshire, it is not Norwegian Viking. Norse Viking is CDY 19/21. Mine is CDY 19/23 (old Norse, Slavic, Sarmatian/Scythian)- I am also SNP Z93+ and Z94-
Almost all of my paternal ancestors migrated from England and have been in America since it was a colony of Britain. One exception is an ancestor of my great great grandmother who was, it seems, of mixed blood origin, a Melungeon? perhaps.
My maternal ancestors were of Scots Irish and English ancestry, with my great grandmothers (mothers, mother, mother, mother) parents migrating from Prussia in the mid 19th Century (this is the J or J2ba1a3)
There is absolutely no chance that there is any Oceania in my ancestry, unless Oceania includes some AmerIndian.
The heaviest concentration of R1a1 is in Serbia, Hungary, Macedonia, Croatia, Bosnia, areas subdued and settled by Sarmatian/Scythians whose modern ancestors are Ossetians and whose origin is between the Black and Caspian Sea.
Thus I presume that my FTDNA European component if 12,37% is that R1a1a of my YDNA.
Problem is that the population predictors used by the labs are too broad.
Could Scots-Irish DNA be classified as Scandinavian? It seems like lots of black Americans with historical ties to Scots-Irish slave owners are discovering a Scandinavian genetic heritage….Might there be some Scandinavian DNA present in colonial era eastern woodlands Native Americans?
Mine were 58% British, 40% Scandinavian and 2% uncertain. I too was very suprised and then thought about all my blue eyed grandparents (mine are green from my grandfather who died during WW1). Must be the vikings! I have traced my Granmothers side to 1025 in Wales (funny because she was so proud of being born a cockney (yet her mother was from Berkshire). What I am getting at is that we never really know the whole truth because so often our older relatives either did not talk about their families or did not know very far back. I do find the DNA matches frustrating when they have no fanily trees or when you look at their trees and there appears to be no match. So far I have found one distant cousin who also matches to my tree. I hope things get clearer in the future but I am glad I took the test.
Ancestry.com results were as follows: Central European-43%, British Isles-33%
and Scandinavian-24%. Paper trail looks all British Isles for a number of generations, but there are many lines that have eventually bridged back to northern Europe and Scandinavian areas. Fortunately, or perhaps not, there are many in the ancestral family that left a dent here and there in the mists of recorded history. These results were some confirmation of those findings and spot-on!
My AncestryDNA results were not necessarily all that shocking but my son’s were.
Me: Scandinavian 79%, Southern European 21%.
Son: British Isles 70%, Scandinavian 17%, Southern European 9%, Uncertain 4%. Was kind of surprised since son’s paternal ggGP were born in Italy. Don’t know everything I need to know r/t genetic DNA so will just keep researching.
I am very unhappy. I am a black American adopted person, so I wanted details about my ethnicity as a starting point. Instead, within just 1 week, they claimed that I am 84% West African and 16% Uncertain. That told me nothing that I could not see by looking in the mirror.
I feel it’s inaccurate because I do not look almost 100% African, hence the search. It also is inaccurate based on Family Tree DNA’s maternal results that show that I have Spanish ancestry.
I found the “uncertain” result to be unacceptable. Other DNA services don’t even have such a category. Everything about Ancestry.com like the “still in development” excuse states ‘beta,’ yet they accept your money now.
This is best for people I dare to say of non-African ancestry who know family members for several generations back because the value is in the family tree. If you are adopted with no information on your family — how do you build a family tree? If you are a black potentially ancestor of slaves with few or no records, how deep can your family tree be? But if you are a celebrity or person with financial means, I guess you can pay an outrageous price for a personal aid like the stars on “Who Do You Think You Are?”
The only positive take-away for me is the matching of cousins. I have not yet verified any linkage, but have been in contact with them via Ancestry’s messaging.
One thing I do not understand is how I am related to those without shared ethnicity. So I kind of trust this site and I kind of don’t.
I distrust their percentages about me to the point where I am having the ethnicity test re-done by FtDNA. That test takes months, but their ethnicity results are more detailed. It doesn’t read West Africa, rather details the percentages in each country of Africa. I mean, c’mon Ancestry.com. Get it together.
I did ancestry and FTDNA….Ancestry told me 56% West African, 28% Scandinavian ( a complete surprise), 9% central European ( Jewish ancestry I was aware of), and 7% uncertain (the Native American I expected?)
FTDNA was more detailed…linking me to 3 Akan ethnicities… Fante, Nzima and Mina…and the Fang of Gabon. They also found Saudi and “Brazilian” DNA…..total surprises to me. I’ll be re-reading Maryse Conde’s “Segu” and “Children of Segu” as my ancestry seems very much in line with her historical drama.
What you should do is upload your autosomal results to GedMatch. I believe they will begin accepting new uploads Dec. 1, 2013. You will need your raw data in a zip file so find out how to do that from your testing company. Interpretome is another good calculator to upload to and you will see many results that. But if your original testing site has configured you at 84% W. African, that might configure the same at the other calculators. I didn’t find 23andMe to be very accurate either. Maybe try another service other than 23. I hear DNA Tribes breaks down the results better.
no no no… I think thats what a lot of people ar not understanding. If your father is 100% of A, and your mother is 100% of B, that doesnt mean you will be 50% of each, just that it will be some combination. You can have 99.9% of all ancestors coming from place X, but if that one relative from place Y happens to have more dominant DNA it could show your DNA as being mostly from Y, its not about where people are from as much as it is what DNA is being passed down.
Alice, So sorry. Your story is almost my own. I am a black American but I am not adopted. Most of my family has lived in same farming community in Alabama for 5 generations. I was told African, Irish, Choctaw. I could have cried when my test came back 17% unknown the rest West African. I just paid $200 for Ancesty to tell me I’m black and they don’t know what else. I felt stupid and cheated. Also most of my close match cousins were white people with no West African background. In the “update” all of a sudden they “found” the Irish British DNA my family told me about. I did like they at least told me what parts of Africa in the update instead of so generic but I don’t entirely trust it. Fortunately for me I have done a lot of research by going to courthouses, on line and talking to older relatives so I feel I know the truth at least on my mom’s side. Dad’s is more secretive. I will tell you the match system is reliable. I matched with a guy who turned out his grandma is my grandpa’s first cousin. I don’t recommend this test for black people.
You and the commenter your replying too need to grow some self esteem. You all are mad because the test yold you what you are? Are you that ashamed of being black? I too am a black woman and got my results. I am black and thats what I claim. Thats how others will see you two as well. Now my results did tell me several other things other than black but I dont go around bragging. You guys need to stop your self hate. You sound pathetic.
The Test does not tell people that they are black it says that they are African and Africa is very diverse. The test does not tell people if they are white or spanish either. It just tell them if they are European. At one point in time, Africans inhabited many parts of the earth when it had no names and no borders. The test determines estimates from a geographical point of view based off of family migration patterns. It does not mention color or race. Maybe these women want to learn if they have some diversity in their backgrounds other than African. we do these test to find mysteries in our genetics not to be only told what we already know. Unfortunately some of us our ancestors can only be traced to one place but you have to accept who your ancestors were or where they traveled. These test can be inaccurate the percentages are estimates it states that clearly on the website. Africa is very diverse with many Afro- Asiatic tribes ect.
I agree Dee……this test isn’t for African Americans and I do believe a lot of West Africans are submitting their database to ancestry.com causing the discrepancy. My family is from Alabama as well and there’s certainly a lot of racial admixtures there. My cousins matches came back White and very Light Skinned African Americans. It will be decades until this data can be accurate for Blacks who’s direct descendants came to America. Love and Many of Blessings to you xoxo
Alice….you are black and should be proud. Stop trying to search for things that are barely there. Black people dont come in one color or feature. You came back mostly black because you are. What did you expect? 50% Cherokee, 20% spanish, 5% greek, 5% italian, and the reat west african? Grow some self esteem. Your black! You are african and get over it.
There’s no truism in anything, especially racial ethnicity. I can identify with Alice in her frustration because similar experiences. I’ve been doing research and ancestry.com can only account for 1% of a person’s ethnic genealogy which explains the estimated Ethnicity. It’s not about being ashamed of your race but more wanting to know the complete blueprint of your admixture. No need to go off into a rampage over someone being ashamed of who they are. Have a nice day and God Bless You!
I understand your frustration as well because I just got my ancestry.com DNA results back. I’m also African American and it predicted that I was 87% African and I don’t look like none of the inhabitants of that area. My features, skin tone and hair are totally different so I believe this company is randomly making assumptions about peoples ethnicity based on the guessing game. I don’t have direct relatives from Africa. All of mines have been in America for hundreds of years and we’re a mixture of European, Indian and African. I’m so disappointed with the results. These tests are still new and Scientists say it isn’t accurate. I guess we have to wait until more advancements are being made to improve the testing.
Alice I was shocked to see how much African ancestry that I had to. my percentage was a whopping 86%. European 12% Great Britain 6% Italian/Greek %; Russia/Finaland and other european. East Asia less than1%. From my understanding this test does not determine peoples race. It only gives an estimate on the geographical locations in which your ancestors traveled through and mated with the people in those areas giving off some of their DNA. Just because a person is African does not make them black, just because someone is mostly European does not make them white. Their are white people that live in Africa and Black people that live in Europe. My cousins husband is Arab very fairskinnedno black features but is considered Sub-Saharan African because he was born in Western Sahara he is considered West african because that is where he was born and where his ancestors lived. His tribe was nomadic throughout Africa so he has various African countries in his DNA Ethnicity. He did not freak out because he is African. Many West Africans migrated from North Africa,East Africa and Egypt to West Africa D/T fleeing persecution. There Are Afro Asiatic people and so forth. Be proud of your African Ancestry, be proud that you are black. But Understand that These Test donot determine race. I found out that I am from a tribe that traveled to west Africa from the North and East who are considered mixed/Arab they donot consider themselves negroid but however they come in different hues and some have straight and some have kinky hair. Love yourself. I Uploaded my raw Data to Gedmatch and the results matched my oral history better than Ancestry. It backed up my Middle Easter Heritage and Native American Heritage that Ancestry did not reveal. I saw from other AA results many had Scandanavian even black people who were 95% African. I didn’t get any scandanavian and was baffled because I heard so many other AA almost all reveal that they had Scandinavian results. I know that I am multiracial however I was shocked at the percentages which I know that they are far off and some of my ethnicities didn’t show up on Ancestry but showed up in my DNA matches and on GEDmatch. I think Ancestry went too far back in my Ancestry. I know that my Great Grandmother was white and that makes my grandmother biracial which is my fathers mom. My European percentages should have been higher because of her. My great grandmother was part Black Foot Indian she still practised some Native traditions. When I did not see the percentage on Ancestry I felt like a part of me was wiped away literally. Thank God It showed up on Gedmatch. Dont get me wrong I am proud to be black but all my life I have been proud of all of who I am. Ancetry.com does not have a large enough database to be able to provide this service in my opinion.I think the ethnicity estimates are not very Accurate. I think the DNA part may be accurate but not the Geographical locations. I think they should not label it as Ethnicity Estimate because these test do not determine ethnicity. You cant tell someone what someones race is by using Geographical data many people confuse the two. I was born in America but could move to Asia have a kid in asia then move to Africa one of my children could have kids with someone from Africa. My kids off spring may show American,Asian,and African DNA based on the locations that we mated with people. This test dose not determine your ethnicity.
Hello. I just received my ancestry DNA results and I am a little confused. It reported that I am of British and Finnish origin. There’s no surprise there. My father is 100% Finn and my mother is 100% British. What’s confusing are the % that were given – 73% British and 27% Finnish. That would mean that my father is of partial British origin. But there are absolutely no British ancestors in my fathers family tree. I have family records that go back 400 years and the ancestors are all Finn. Plus I have never heard of British immigrations to Finland in the distant past. Could my father’s British DNA really be Scandinavian?? His family was from the western coast of Finland that was heavily influenced by neighboring Sweden. Plus many of my ancestors had the Scandinavian look and had Scandinavian names.
William I am by no means an expert in all of this but could it be possible that one of your descendants could have been taken from Britain to Finland as a slave hundreds of years ago, male or female and that is where the dna came from?
Hello. I just received my Ancestry DNA results and I’m sort of confused. It stated that my ancestry is Finnish and British. This was what I expected. My father is 100% Finnish and my mother is 100% British. But the results show that I’m 73% British and 27% Finnish. This would mean that my father is of partial British origin. I have researched my father’s family at least 8 generations back to Finland and my ancestors were all Finn. I’m pretty sure that there has been virtually no British immigration to Finland in the very distant past. Finland was and still is a very ethnically homogenous country. Could the British component really be Swedish?? My father’s family was from the western part of Finland that was heavily influenced (language, culture, and genetics) by neighboring Sweden. Many of my ancestors had Swedish first names and last names that were later fennicized (ex. – Knutsson to Knuuttila). Thanks!
William, as far as inheritance goes, its true we inherit 50/50 from our parents, but thats not necessarily the particular genes that determine race. It could be that your racial genetics are determined in part by a more dominant British set than the Finnish. Also, it could be a particularly persistant set from your mothers side that were a result of vikings more than 1500 years ago.
I was wondering about with ancestrydna. The ones colored in and listed. are those ones in the region they believe make up your percentage. or is that simply the ones they include in the region. mine shows 37 percent eastern european , but russia is not listed or colored in. do they as of now not see russian , it not inluded in my genetic tree, or it not included in eastern euope and makes up my uncertain.
I received similar results from Ancestry.com It stated that I have 48% Scandinavian heritage, but I have Scottish & English ancestors in my tree. On top of that, the Brownings & Duncans were so intermarried that it looks positively incestuous. I know for a fact that relatives were marrying relatives, one set of great grandparents were relatives & married to each other. Do their results mean that King Duncan if Scotland descended from Vikings? They nearly drove me crazy with their results. I only have a very few German ancestors, not enough to account for 30% Central European. Not crazy about their results.
There is an ancient historical genealogical record on the origins of Western Europe titled A Companion and Key to the History of England, by George Fisher found in University of Wisconsin Library and published 1833 in London, England. According to both the ancient records of the book and the autosomal DNA as well as the YDNA results of all the DNA testing sites; the people of Western Europe which includes Northern Italy, originate in the Mid East. Their migration spread to Eur-Asia to Scandinavia, to Old Saxony [Bernicia or England] at the same time they went into Ireland and spread from there into Scotland. So to answer your question did King Duncan of Scotland descend from Vikings; yeah he kind a did. All of these many different cultures are actually a single people known as Saxons [called by the Romans] and before that they are known as Celts. Over hundreds of years they splintered and formed separate ethnic and cultural identities’ and nations but their origin remain as a people from the middle east. Herodotus, Josephus, Tacitus, and Moses Maimonides all agree the identity of their Mid East origin were the more than 100,000 Israeli people placed in the Russian Steppes about 1,000 years before Christ. So to be Saxon or Celtic is to have an Israeli origin. Nothing stranger than truth.
I really expected to find Central European (German) ancestry – was also told I was French and French Canadian, and Irish-Welsh. My ancestry results were 60% British Isles, 18% Scandinavian, 15% Eastern Europe, and 6% Southern European, I have Crohn’s disease and read how it was common among those of Eastern Europe descent and I scratched my head wondering how that was possible, but alas, to my surprise, I do have it! Another surprise was the Southern Europe (Italian or Spanish – I wonder)! I am not surprised about the British Isles, however, my research there makes me a mutt! Looks like I have Scottish, Irish, Welsh, and English ancestry. Looking at the map my ancestors went in one big circle around Europe pro-creating. Some of the surnames from my family are Creller and Honsinger (thought were German), Taft, Furgeson, Cady, and Fitzgerald (British Isles). I was wishing my results would give some clue to my paternal line, but I find it an emotional roller coaster (both suspected fathers have Miller and Brown surnames in their trees!). When it comes down to it location, location, location is the key – just because you lived there (as in being French Canadian) does not mean you “are” that. I was hoping it was more conclusive as to ancestry – what % of that British Isles is Irish?
Your ancestry make up sounds like mine. I am an American Mutt too! I also have Crohn’s Disease and was looking for a Jewish ancester. I have 20% Eastern Europe, but it only shows 2% Jewish.
My paternal grandfather had a trace <1% European Jewish. My tree is well document to the early 1600's. I found the ancestor, born in 1616, eleven generations back but still a "trace". He was a founder in Canada and his information was available. A "cousin" linked to me by DNA and our only connection was a common ancestor, born 1615 who I had documented by records to be my ancestor. The ancestor was listed in the tree of the "cousin". I had not linked my tree to my DNA and only the DNA connected up. My sister, niece and great-nephew also took the ancestry.com test and linked to me by DNA with the correct relationship. Comparing the DNA for the four of us, it is very clear there is dominance of some ethnicity categories over others. I have 16% Europe West and my sister has 0%. I know where my family have been for 400+ years but still, some ethnicity predominates and some traces hang in for 400 years as traces. Also, Scotland has native with heavy Scandinavian roots; Britain is a virtual "stew" of persons who flocked there over 1,000 years and left their rich DNA. Some people lived for generations in one place and others fled for their lives and kept moving. Good luck with your research. While ancestry.com is still using a young science, I am convinced. Regards, a Grandma in CT
I am Irish, my parents are both Irish, and although there is a bit of vagueness about my father’s grandfather’s heritage, it came as a shock when I got 15% African, 84% European and 1% Indigenous American from my ancestry test as the most likely ancestry mixture. The tolerance also fluctuates to above 90% European, and in another possibility over 30% African. My siblings are pretty white skin, fair haired, blue and green eyed, and we have often been confused as German/Scandinavian so the African element seems unusual. I don’t know if you should expect to see corresponding genetic traits in oneself based on the results? Seems you can take what you I want from the test, but still I feel a bit unsure about the results with so many possibilities.
I almost forgot! My mother claimed my Grandfather was Blackfoot Indian, but I only have 1 % Unknown…another Grandfather claimed Cherokee Blood. My Husband’s Grandmother claimed To be Native American -he has 5 % Unknown. My question is are they able to identify Native Blood – are we sure this is what the unknown is? I doubt I have any … there seems to be many with similar stories
Can you please tell me which races have both the Spanish and Turkish Gene.
Khawaja A Fawad
I also got results saying first I was part Turkish and later, that I was part Spanish. Your name seems Arabic. I think I have some Middle Eastern from the Ottoman days in the Balkans.
As an African American woman I was quite surprised to find out that my results came back 55% West African, 43% British Isles and 2% unknown. People have often asked what am I mixed with and now I know (I think).
I have to say that so far my Ethnicity Results are comparable to my genealogical records of ancestry. I have an advantage in this area since there are numerous historical books on my ancestry that includes two international trials of my families Ethnicity in London, England dated 1878 and Paris France dated 1879. At the end of more than 100 years of legal research on my family’s lines and two international trials it was concluded by two judicial courts my line extended by lineal descent to the creation of man.
Mine make perfect sense as far as the calculator I used that came back with me placed closer to Norwegian/Swede/Polish than British, with the tiny few Scots in the bunch of UK and a host of others on solely the European component. That Viking gene in the Native people I come from! I kept looking and looking and then, it dawned on me.
Beautiful part of content material. I simply became aware of your blog site and accession investment capital to convey which i get involved actuality liked account a person’s blog page posts. Anyway We’re registering to your current rss feeds and perhaps I actually success you have the ways to access continually speedily.
My ancestry is documented to the late 16th Century. Most of my ancestors are Iberian with one 18th century line of French Canadians. My new ancestry DNA estimates were surprising at first, then very logical after closer review. The results were
Iberian 37%, Italy/Greece 23%, Great Britain 15%, Native American 5% West Asia 4% with traces (less than 4%) of Scandinavian, Irish, North African, West Asian (Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Caucasus, etc.) Western European (which includes France) and European Jewish.
I was born in Cuba with some ancestors born and residing there since the 16th Century. My Native American estimates could very likely involve mixing with the native Taino tribes living on the island during the discovery. Some of my Iberian ancestry stems from the provinces of Galicia, Asturias and Cantabria. These extreme northern provinces are predominantly populated by celtic people with historical interaction with the British Isles. This explains the British component of my DNA, as well as the Irish and Scandinavian traces therein. Iberia was a well established Roman colony during the empire and parts of it was colonized by Phoenicians. That explains the Italy/Greece component. Then of course, Malaga and Seville, where some of my ancestors also come from was ruled by the Moors for 800 years. The Kingdom of Granada was an Islamic state where Jews lived freely during the 800 years of Islamic rule. The 2% Jewish trace of DNA also does not surprise me. In 1492, the Catholic Monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella reconquered the penninsula and expelled the Jews from Spain, some left and some converted to Christianity and still live there today although unaware of their Jewish ancestry. I guess some of them added to my gene pool. Personally, I am very grateful to each and every one of them. They all contributed to the person I am today
Hi – I had my DNA done with Family Tree DNA. I have done my family tree back 7 generations on my father’s side – it shows England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales – possibly Jamaica since my 7th gt. grandfather was a slave trader. I’ve done my mothers back several generations to Scotland. I was born in Ontario – my father is 6th generation Canadian – my mother 4th generation Canadian.
This is my results:
Continent (Subcontinent) Population Percentage Margin of Error
Europe French, Orcadian, Romanian, Spanish 67.99% ±13.02%
Middle East Iranian, Jewish, Adygei, Druze 32.01% ±13.02%
I don’t know what to make of this – can someone please explain this to me in layman’s terms – I always thought I had a bit of Native Ancestry.
How can someone be jewish? Its a religion? Lol. That test lied to you. I wont even get started on who the real jews are…the real hebrews that test have shown. I’ll give you a hint….they dont look like you.
Being Jewish IS an ethnicity AND a religion. And please stop with your anti-semitic B.S.
I too just received my results from ancestry.com, which I found surprising to tell the least. Prior to getting my results I created my family tree on the same site which I regret now ( I deleted it later)…… I hope that ancestry,com does not check on family trees before giving results to the persons who submitted DNA for testing. I was told that I am 100% European which they broke into three parts. 97% East European, 3 other ( 1% Western European , 1 % Irish?, less then 1% North-Western Russian and Finnish). I was born in Russia and as far as I know my Mother’s grandparents on her Mother’s side were German-Danish-Russian. Her Father was of Polish-Byelorussian origin. My Father was born in Belarus but one of his great grandfathers was of unknown origin. The family story tells that he was most probably of Turkish or Caucasian origin which is obvious when you look at my uncles who do not look Byelorussian at all. None of this ancestry came back with my DNA results, and the Ethnic mystery of my family which I wanted to solve is still a mystery. I wonder if I can trust ancestry.com results.
Full farrah abraham sex tape browsing as for an affordable activities is an alibi as
amazing a a little something a person will also can are thinking of.
Example: hope this helps some visually see how after generations you can lose genes.
fathers-father :123 & fathers- mother: 456
mothers-father: 789 & 10 11 12
your father : 136 & your mom 7 10 12
you : 6 7 12. See now you lost all the DNA from your fathers father. I know that is a super small example but it shows that after q few generations you could lose a huge part of ethnicity.
Well my tests tubal DNA, are sort of similar My family is almost all from the British Isles, Ireland a Scotland and North England. my y haplo appears to be from Gotland Sweden as there are many y haplo “neighbors” there. However I have no Scandinavian family names.I read Stephen Oppenheimer’s book on British Isles dna and well what-it comes down to is people have been going back and forth since paleolithic times.
So while DNA is great to confirm family trees by finding other people with the same surnames and DNA, it is pretty much pointless otherwise. Some of my guesses concerning family with repetitive first names(such as Jonas Qumby Jones, Jonas Quimby Smith etc, are indeed related to old Jonas Quimby on the census next to my ancestors) and peoples on census next to them turned out to be relatives.
Just got my ancestry.com results today. My results are as follows
Asia < 1%
Europe 99% with further breakdown below
Europe West 52%
Great Britain 11%
Scandinavia 6% (I heard Dutch ancestry – I am thinking it falls under this)
Then trace regions include what's listed below
Finland/Northwest Russia 5%
Europe East < 1%
I had always heard Scottish, Irish, Dutch, English French and Cherokee. I knew that the Cherokee was questionable as I'd heard yes from some and no from others within the same family. Figured it'd be there and denied through the years when it wasn't vogue to have Native American blood. Some of my family line came from Tennessee so I believed it. According to these results – no. But I also understand that in the past people denied heritage for survival and that infidelity still occurred as frequently as it does today…..just wasn't as easily found out. I have a cousin who was pregnant marrying one man while the Father was another. She wasn't going to tell until the child looked too much like Dad who lived in the same town. Then in eons past when a parent died young and remarriage occurred the child was probably raised not knowing.
Adoption wasn't always through legal means and if a family member had a child out of wedlock another family member might raise the child. I can see many reasons why genealogy might not match DNA heritage. People took secrets to their graves. the 1% Asian surprised me most but hey I think we should all expect a few surprises with DNA results. That's when the FACTS come out.
I got my results from ancestry and was shocked. I knew really nothing about my family tree. It stated that I am 49% nigerian, and the rest was smaller percentages. Mali, senegal, khoisan (south hunter gatherers), benin/togo, cameroon, ivory coast/ ghana, irish, scandinavian, native american, central asia, south asia, west asian (caucasas), and europe east.
Tracing my family tree I knew our ancestors were mostly Scandinavian and English.
But when I rec’d my results from Ancestry.com I found out we were 41% English , 27% Irish,13% Scandinavian ,1% Asian and a few other trace amounts of European.
Knowing my grandmother came from Norway I thought the Scandinavian would be higher. But not surprised with the travel and migration in Europe
My siblings and I all have black hair , dark blue almost black eyes and pale skin. My sis having more slant eyes than the rest of us has always been accused of being Asian . Recently an eye Dr. measured her eyes and told her she had Asian eyes. This is what prompted me to get my DNA test. Was delighted to see 1% Asian. Mystery solved 🙂
I was absolutely delighted and fascinated to receive my DNA results from Ancestry DNA. There were some surprises not just in terms of trace regions but also in terms of some of my main regions. For starters, my ethnic heritage is 1/2 Sicilian, 1/2 European mix (Northern Italian, British/Irish, and Alsatian). Just right there I was expecting to see a mix of bloodlines and DNA, but I guess I didn’t realize how complex or to which places exactly.
Turns out I’m 85% European, 14% West Asian, and <1% South Asian, broken down further as follows:
48% Italy/Greece (expected)
17% Scandinavia (kind of a surprise)
8% Iberian Peninsula (sort of surprised but not overly)
5% Great Britain
3% European Jewish (interesting)
1% Europe West
<1% Europe East
West Asia (interesting as a whole):
4% Middle East
Then finally that interesting little sliver of <1% South Asian in me.
Considering the extensive historical ties between southern Italy/Sicily and the eastern Mediterranean (Caucasus/Middle East), 14% West Asian is not too far-fetched but eye-opening at the same time. It could've gotten there from ancient Neolithic migrations which brought agriculture to Europe from the Near East, Phoenicians, Syrian/Jewish/Anatolian slaves brought to Italy/Sicily during Roman times, medieval Arabic Moors, or all of the above. I suspect that the tiny bit of South Asian is also a legacy of this as well, upon looking at the site's explanation of admixture sources for each genetic ethnicity region.
Going back to the European portion, the 17% Scandinavian was a bit of a shock since I have no documented Scandinavian ancestors, however looking at history, Anglo-Saxons, Vikings, Danes, and Normans (French-speaking descendants of Vikings) all settled in Britain and Ireland in large numbers, so that would explain most of that I'd think, plus the Normans also conquered and settled in Sicily after wresting control of if from the Arabs during the Middle Ages. Iberian Peninsula (Spain/Portugal) is another mystery but I assume it's either Sicily again or my Northern Italian ancestry on account of the extensive trade and cultural exchanges between Italy and Spain throughout history. Jews were present all over Italy in sizable numbers as well as in the France/Germany Alsace region where one of my great-grandfathers was from, so the source of that portion of my ancestry is open to speculation.
I've frequently been asked about my ethnic heritage by quite a few people, and have been mistaken for or told I could pass for almost everything under the sun depending on the person, from Irish to Middle Eastern (something that's now more understandable with my DNA results), with the average person thinking of me as looking either Italian or Greek (and I agree). As for my appearance, I have blue/green eyes but my other features look more typically Southern European/Mediterranean (i.e. thick dark brown/black and slightly wavy hair, larger heavy-lidded eyes, thick eyebrows, an oval face, a rather prominent nose, fuller lips, and a pale but olive-ish skin type that can tan quite well if exposed to a lot of sun).
Just got my DNA results back and I was surprise at some of the results never knew about having Jewish or Scandinavia in my family.
Ivory Coast/Ghana 23% Benin/Togo 16% Cameroon/Congo 14% Asia Central 3% Great Britain 13% Scandinavia 11% European Jewish 8%
I received my dna results from ancestry.com. My daughter had hers done a few months before me. She has a lot of matches to my known relatives,but when I got mine back ,I don’t match any of them,not even my daughter. This is impossible! Do you think they sent me wrong persons results? What can I do?
My results came today, I am 58% European and 29% Native American and 13% North Africa (arabs?), I already knew my dad has Italian heritage and my mother spanish, what is a surprise to me is the North Africa heritage, I have been told that those people from North Africa immigrated to Italy and Spain during the 15th century, thus most people in Spain and Italy have North African genes. Which is the same gene found in the Middle East. Anyway, the test came also with 17% Italian and 5% Scandinavian and 2% British Isles.
My results came back and it turns out that I am: 85.6 European and 14.4 Native-American.
I see you share interesting things here, you can earn some extra cash, your
blog has huge potential, for the monetizing method, just type in google – K2 advices how to monetize a website
For patients who frequently utilize their hands for work, they
may be counseled to amend to better sitting positions for additional comfort, in an attempt to cause less reliance
upon the hnds or wrists. Twilight Sleep will be the type of anesthesia employed for Carpal tunnel surgery.
Every surgical procedure carries from it thee risk of
using a blot clot.
I am an adoptee who found my birth mother many years ago. She told me my father was born in Puerto Rico during in 1939 but his family was from Spain. So I always thought I was half Spanish. I took ancestry DNA test because I was curious about any Moorish or even African admixture. It came back that I am 50 PER CENT EUROPEAN JEWISH. The rest of the profile acurately corresponds with my mother’s ancestry. My mother and I spent hours on the internet trying to figure this out. A plausible explanation is that my father was Asumin– Sephardic Jews who converted to Catholicism to avoid persection. Many took Spanish names. My father’s name is a common Spanish name but it shows up in Sepharidc Jewish lists. But I am very perplexed because as a child my hair was platinum blonde and I have green eyes and neither I nor my children look “Jewish” at all. “European Jew” therefore can mean many things– Askenazi? Sephardim? Kahzak? Lost tribes? If someone has a perspective on this I would be grateful.
If you apply for a governmment grant, and your grant is eligible,
there’s noo need to repay any money. Local libraries usually have valuable information about hand aas welll as the Internet.
If this fails you, you could try visiting another government runn website, cfda.
‘ (NOTE: As you say this, make the “two” sign with your
two fingers and flip your hand back-and-forth. Professor Severus Snape from
the Harry Potter movies – Sorry, Voldemort; everyone may be
afraid to say your silly-sounding name, but Snape has the real
malicious-sounding moniker. “Between 1970 and 1982, the World Bank became a massive presence in the Philippine affairs.
Hey! Would you mind if I share your blog with my facebook group?
There’s a lot of people that I think would really enjoy your content.
Please let me know. Many thanks
I must thank you for the efforts you’ve put in writing this blog.
I really hope to seee the same high-grade content from you later
on as well. In fact, your creative writing abilities haas motivated mme to get my very own blog now ;
You must make sure that you hire the best web hosting
company India to get the best deals and offers for web server hosting.
Good providers instead hire highly trained specialists from their own country to ensure you receive
the specialized care you deserve. The amount of space required by a website should also be considered
while choosing a web host.
Hi my name is Jacobi Thomas and I have some questions about a paper that I found out about that I came across online when I was doing research online. Anyways about the paper that I found out about online it was called boy or girl it’s in the fathers genes. In the paper there’s a scientist named Corry Gellatly that said a guy with many brothers is most likely to have a sons if he has many brothers and a guy is most likely to have daughters if he has many sisters. I’m wondering do you know anything about that I think it’s true because it sounds like it is when I start thinking about people cases and what. The sex of there first child or second child was I saw people talking about this stuff online. Like on blogs and stuff and they all said an I also saw them talking about their chances of having a boy or a girl from the kids father’s family history and they were giving percentages and stuff each one was different but they all found out I guess. I was wondering about my case I talked to an agent at a family tree phone line about this awhile ago and he told me it would depend on my biological father’s side. I was thinking about all the siblings I have period but there all half siblings and I only share a father with two and three with my mother. The ones I share with my father are two girls that he had after me the ones I share with my mother are a boy and two girls. I was wondering if you could tell me about my case or if you can direct me to someone who can it seems like there are people who know about this in certain fields. I sent messages but never got answer at the same time from what my primary care physician told me even though they might be in the right field they have to know about that stuff that that scientist was talking about so I guess some do but some didn’t.
I recieved my DNA results and to be honest I think there BS, Ireland is part of Great Britain, Ireland, Scotland, Wales and England so how do you get two results ? so I will put this down as a rip off.
Ireland is NOT part of Great Britain…
We are checking DNA heritage all of IRELAND was part of Great Britain until the 1920s. Northen Ireland is still part of Great Britain
I found out that about 10% of my genes are derived from the Iberian peninsula. Could that mean that I may have Arab or Jewish lines from that region? Is there any way of knowing the DNA relating to Jewish ancestors as opposed to merely Iberian origins?
wow. this is a very interesting post. I have not taken a DNA test yet, and I would like to. but it seems that I’m not gonna get anything out of it. I know what I am from my dad’s side. Italian, French, German and English. I am Swedish from my mom’s side and one of my aunt’s did some digging around on ancestry.com almost or exactly 3 years ago. and I’m quite surprised that Norwegian is even there, and it showed Russian too. the only thing I don’t know is I don’t know if I’m actually Polish or Lithuanian or both. I personally believe that I have more ancestry that what ancestry.com has shown my aunt. but I’m not gonna say a word to my brother because he’ll claim I’m “thinking too much” anyway, another thing that makes it more complicated is that I’m a Native New Englander and the state I was born and raised in (Massachusetts) people from Ireland, Canada and some other countries immigrated here and settled creating more possibilities of ancestry maybe to show up in my tree.
I can’t believe the number of bloggers and supposed SEO pros who don’t know anything
Problems with AncestryDNA’s Genetic Ethnicity Prediction? – The newest addition to my RSS feed!
President Obama and John Punch – You Tube Is Barack Obama the first U.S. President with Native American ancestry?
In 1995, Dreams from My Father, was published. On pages 12 and 13 of the 2004 paperback edition, President Obama unequivocally asserts his Cherokee ancestry
Excellent explanations here. Had my brother do his Y DNA and got back that we are I2b 1 and was told viking scandanian. We are jewish though. Grandparents on my fathers side are Ashkenazi Jews from Romania – and so this has confused me. However we are a very tall family with lots of blondes blue eyes red hair but also darker hair brown hazel eyes…
Have had people connect with me – some not jewish and some jewish. Emailed berkeley genetics professor who noted Vikings got around and speculated this was source. Comments and suggestions for further research?
I don’t understand how I’m 99% Europe how is this possible. I’m from Texas my family is from Texas all down the line. What does this mean? I’m 22 years old my grand parents have passed and my parents haven’t told me much. Please help.
I am happy w my Ancestry DNA results. But I think I am easy to please being I have no idea who my father is. I have traced France & Germany via paper on my mother’s side. I figured being a blonde, blue eyed person I would have mostly Scandinavia however my results were 81% Great Britain, 5% Scainavia, 5% Iberian, the mixed part would be Caucasus Mtn (SW Asia), Italy/Greek, Ireland. For me I take that to mean a high probability of Celtic ancestry, which the Celtic world did cover much of Western Europe & part of Iberia (Spain). Anyway, i thought it was fun.
Hi, through ancestry.com I found out I was 45 or 48 % Irish, 31 % Italian, 7 % European Jewish, 6% UK, and 2% Caucasian (countries like Romania, Bulgaria, Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia, and Turkmenistan). What I would like to know is do I consider myself white (which is what I’ve been doing up until now); Jewish, or could I get away with saying I am of anglo Russian heritage?
I, too, feel like I’ve been given someone else’s DNA analysis. I got my results yesterday, and while I understand the Scandinavian (term used broadly) because of Irish ancestry well documented, the DNA doesn’t mention Germany or Switzerland which is also well-documented in family genealogy charts back 300 years. It doesn’t explain my mother’s physical characteristics, either, or family stories of Underground Railroad safe houses or horse trainers in Kentucky. I used AncestryDNA as my first test, but in truth, I’m not pleased with the vague flock shot of explanations. Anyone have the same disquieting feeling that autosomal DNA gives only one part of the whole picture?
Hello, I was curious to see what results other Armenian’s got through Ancestry.com. My regions were (listed in order of importance) Caucasus, Italy/Greece, Middle East, and European Jewish. I am interested in finding out if other Armenian’s who tested also got a high percentage for “Italy/Greece”. There are of course a thousand historic reasons why any single Armenian may have Greek ancestors but my interest is in confirming the Phrygian migration theory. Let me know what you think!
After receiving my Ancestry DNA, I was not very surprised. Knowing my mother claimed to be 100% Irish, and knowing that the red-headed population in Ireland comes from Viking roots, I expected some Scandinavian (2%). My maternal grandmother’s line has roots in North America since the 1700s so anything is possible. Anyway, my results showed 54% Irish. Since my father’s family came from Austria, I wonder where the extra Irish genes came from. Can one parent give you more than 50% of their DNA? I don’t think so.
The 24% Eastern Europe and 13% Ital/Geece are no surprise since Austria is very near the Mediterranean and my father said he had cousins from Trieste who spoke Italian. The 3% Fin/Russia is a surprise as is the 1% S. Asian. This all makes me want to learn more about paths of migration. I always knew that my father’s family had a different history than they claimed. They were German speaking Austrians who supposedly came from central Germany in the middle ages, yet they are shorter and darker than Germans I know. I show no German DNA in my results. I hope in the future the Eur/East category can be narrowed down into specific regions.
Both of my parents ancestors came into early colonial Virginia and were from England, Wales, Ireland and Scotland. When I did intensive research I was surprised to find several early marriages into German families and one into a Swedish family (from New Sweden, present day New Jersey) but this was way, way back,
My Family Tree results were:
65% British Isles: No surprise there
14% Scandinavian: No surprise. Besides the distant Swedish ancestry, there was the Viking element in the British ancestry.
0% Central European: Somewhat of a surprise because of the documented German ancestry. If the Scandinavian showed up why not the Central European?
21% Southern European: Big, big, big Surprise!!! Absolutely no indications in my family tree, Not much Southern European blood circulating in colonial or later Virginia and 21% is a fair number. No Italian, Spanish or Greek at all.
I am still scratching my head. Does anyone have any ideas.
My mom just received her DNA test and I am just not buying it. I realize there is a rate of inaccuracy, but the daughter of a Swiss born mother and a father, the first generation of Swiss Immigrants would most likely not come back as 20% Scandinavian and 20% Great Britain. While both Vikings and later on, English, where great travelers/conquerers, you can’t tell me that they hiked for miles into the Alps to conquer a bunch of dairy farmers! My mom’s test did come back with a balance of other Southern Europe ancestry which makes sense (Italian, Iberian Penninsula) but then there was also 14% Irish, which again seems ridiculous to me as the Irish simply did not go ANYWHERE in mainland Europe, let alone Southern/Central. Anyway, I received my kit from Ancestry.com shortly before hearing my mom’s results and now I feel much less interested in what my results are going to show. I’ve been jokingly telling family and friends that I’m going to submit saliva from our family cat in place of mine in my kit. If the cat comes back with a high percentage of Scandinavian then I will know it’s absolute crap!
Are you aware that the people who lived in current day Ireland were a mix of various tribes as well as the offspring of raiders, traders, pirates and the occasional sailor who washed up on their shores? The “Irish” were enslaved by Vikings, Romans, Saxons and their DNA was incorporated into multiple cultures
across Scandinavia, Europe, Africa and the Middle East and probably most of the world as we know the Vikings discovered North America around 1000 AD.
Names and places of birth for centuries may be a strong indicator of ethnic heritage but they are not quantifiable as an exact map of one’s DNA. My son-in laws parents are both Jewish so you might expect that he is 100% Semetic and Eastern European. However…his father converted to Judaism when he married. Additionally his father’s father was adopted by his step-father and his last name was changed. While we know all of this today, these choices and changes were not always readily shared in families.
I encourage you to submit your cat’s DNA (if you can get 1/4 teaspoon of it’s saliva) and to share the response/results. Ancestry sent us a 2nd kit for my husband as they were not able to extract any DNA from his initial sample – that either means he is not human or he did not follow the 30 minute rule before spitting.
Good luck with your quest.
I recently received my DNA results from Ancestry.com. It revealed 45% “European Jewish”. Since “Jewish” is a religion and not necessarily an ethnicity I am a little confused (and clearly not a DNA expert). I also wonder what 45% represents in terms of the generations behind me. I grew up being told that I was half Italian (my mothers side), one quarter German (paternal grandfather) and one quarter Lithuanian (paternal grandmother). Between ship passenger manifests and US Federal and State census’ there is no German and nothing that may indicate Jewish (although I realize that may have been hidden for safety reasons). There is plenty of reference to Russia, Lithuania and Poland. How many generations back would it take for a 45% rating if indeed that has anything to do with that percentage number. Thank you in advance.
The widespread misuse of the word “Jewish” to connote an ethnicity is the problem here. It’s more accurate to say “Ashkenazi.” The Ashkenazim are indeed a genetically-distinct group, which happens to comprise 80-85 percent of all Jews alive today. Historically, they spoke Yiddish, a Germanic language written in Hebrew letters, and they were concentrated heavily in Central and Eastern Europe, at least until the Holocaust and the subsequent creation of modern Israel. All the countries you mention–Russia, Lithuania, Poland–all had massive Ashkenazi populations down to about 70-75 years ago.
I have been watching the Ancestry.com DNA for the last 4 years. It started with one of my 3rd cousins on my mother side of the family. He had his DNA test 4 years ago and his test results showed the percentages of countries, regions and the migration pattern. At the time of his testing, there was no such thing as a “Name of Convenience”. His results were 97% Western European, which were broken down into percentages of Western Europe. His results also showed 2% Eastern Russia and 1% North African. Since then, Ancestry.com has changed the names of the 2% Eastern Russian and 1% North African in what they now call “European Jew”. When Ancestry.com was ask about this name change from the percentages of country and region to European Jew, the reply was changed as a “Name of Convenience”. Therefore, the future generations will not know what makes a “European Jew”. In the case of my 3rd cousin, he knows what makes him a 3% European Jew; 2% Eastern Russian and 1% North African. Ancestry.com keeps changing the names to whatever suits their purposes and evidently, it’s to hide the identity of what constitutes a “European Jew”. Foul Play is what I call it. The whole point of the ancestry test is to find out the countries, regions and migrations of ones ancestors, not to start making up “Names of Convenience”. I call foul play on Ancestry.com.
Well there is 2 definitions of ethnicity where someone is born if I am born in Germany but my parents are from Turkey I am still considered German but in the other definition is what my blood really would look like Turk/Caucasus so I would be a Turk maybe ancestry changed the opinion and a lot of people have trouble of the ethnicity of Jews they are from the MidEast but mostly left to go to Europe around 1000 years ago and became very Europeanized
Well there is 2 definitions of ethnicity where someone is born if I am born in Germany but my parents are from Turkey I am still considered German but in the other definition is what my blood really would look like Turk/Caucasus so I would be a Turk maybe ancestry changed the opinion and a lot of people have trouble of the ethnicity of Jews they are from the MidEast but mostly left to go to Europe around 1000 years ago and became very Europeanized so some people can think of the race as South West Asian or European but genetically are South West Asian though a lot of the Jew/Mideast/Ashkenazic men had kids with Europeans but often kept the kids acting like a Jew
So I don’t think if someone calls a Jew as Eastern European Ethnicity they are Ignorant
Genetic European Jew is of course myth because they were not Hebrews but mostly European converts.
By the way, my paternal DNA test turned out 100% Western European. I’m sure Ancestry.com will change it for a “Name of Convenience” in the future. I’m already hearing rumors that there’s no such thing as a 100% of anything. As of 2014, yes there was 100% Western European. First of all, you can’t get a “Bloodline” from a Mother.
It comes through the seed of the father. It’s just a fact. All Jews claim they get their Jewish-ness from their mother. Anyone in their right mind knows Judaism is a religion and ethnicity, which is not inherited in a DNA or mtDNA. In biology, races are genetically distinct populations within the same species. Ethnicity is the term for the culture of people in a given geographic region, including their language, heritage, religion and customs. For some unknown reason, Ancestry.com wants to combine the race with ethnicity. It doesn’t matter how hard Ancestry.com tries to convince people race and ethnicity are the same, it’s NOT. Europeans are NOT all Jews. Never has been and Never will be. I would like to remind everyone that Ancestry.com works with the Mormons and their vast library of ancestry information. The first page in the Book of Mormon: “Wherefore, it is an abridgment of the record of the people of Nephi, and also of the Lamanites – Written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the house of Israel: and also to the Jew and Gentile”. One thing I do have to give to the Mormons, they do distinguish themselves from the Jew and Gentile. Israel was a man named Jacob and the Mormons are a tribe/family descendants of this man Jacob/Israel, not a Jew or Gentile. Yet, the Mormons open the door to the Jew and Gentile. They want US all to be one big happy family. They use their vast archives and paid off DNA scientist to make it happen. Guess what? It will NEVER HAPPEN! The jig is up Ancestry.com. John 8:44
The term “European Jewish” is a little confusing, but it would be more accurate to use “Ashkenazim,” which are indeed a genetically-distinct group that happens to represent 80-85 percent of all Jews alive today. The Ashkenazim are of obscure Mediterranean origin. They emerged in historical records from the Rhineland of Germany around 800 AD, and then about 300 years later, after the First Crusade, they began to migrate east. So, down to the Holocaust and the creation of Israel, the Ashkenazim predominantly lived in Central and Eastern Europe, speaking Yiddish, a Germanic language written in Hebrew letters. Over the centuries, these people did not often intermarry with the surrounding populations, so they maintained a distinct genetic identity, paralleling their linguistic, cultural and religious identities.
So to sum up, no, you can’t determine someone’s Jewish culture or faith from their DNA. But you can determine whether someone’s genetic background is Ashkenazi, and the Ashkenazim, in turn, comprise the vast majority of all self-identified Jews in the world today.
Oh my God here is my history, I am from east Africa ( Ethiopian ) both my parents and their grand grandparents lived and passed there. No mixed with outsiders (at least we know ). Anyhow, my DNA result turn out 48 % EU ( European ) when the remaining 52 % east African. I love history it was a lot of fun and shocking too! I will continue my research more deeper. I think I get new hobbies hmmm
Took the ancestry dot com dna test this summer. I know very litle about my mother’s family and absolutely nothing about my biological father because there is no father on my birth certificate, so there’s a chance the man my mother claimed is my biological father may not be…and not to be mean, she was not exactly the most sexually chaste person on the planet. So when I took the test I didn’t go in with the idea of running a specific horse in the race. I knew most of it would come back with significant African ancesty (I am Black in skin color/ethnic identity). However, it turns out I have 12 percent European ancestry as well. 4% British, 3% irish, 2 pecent Iberian peninsula. Those don’t surprise me because of the legacy of slavery. However, when I saw the 2% Finnish/NW Russian and 1% scandinavian that threw me for a loop as well as the .5% Caucusus! What’s funny is that for years my daughter and I had been asked by people if we had Russian or Eastern European in our family? and I was like well, maybe, I wouldn’t be surprised…and here I get these results! So while my one “family” will always remain a mystery, my genetic family is known and I find it fascinating. Now I want to learn more about those regions of the world, so it’s a positive thing for me.
Found out I have an “NPE”. Should have been over 25% German and 25% Scandinavian, and the results were different. Hmm, that’s odd, I thought. Then I wondered about those rumors about my mother having a different father. Talked to an older cousin, who confirmed that an older generation all knew my biological grandfather’s identity, but kept it secret. So, like the commercial, I am not really German and am twice as Scandinavian as before. My sister doesn’t want to believe this, but I figure DNA doesn’t lie. Unfortunately, as this happened a hundred years ago, I will probably never know the true identity of my bio. Grandfather. But this is interesting.
I’m an African-American woman from the States, and I’ve taken two DNA ethnicity tests from two separate entities at the same time. The results of my genealogy makeup differs when it comes to my Asian (a total surprise) and European ancestry.
Per The GenoGrapic Project, my haplogroup (maternal) is L2A1F, and I’m:
Sub‑Saharan African -80%
Northern European -6%
South African -6%
Southeast Asian -2% (This is a surprise to me)
Southwest Asian -2% (This is a surprise to me)
Native American -2%
Mediterranean -2% (This is a surprise to me)
Per AncestryDNA Ethnicity:
Africa 87% (My African ancestry breakdown is below.)
-Ivory Coast/Ghana 29%
*Trace Regions 14%
-Africa Southeastern Bantu 3%
-Africa South-Central Hunter-Gatherers 2%
Other Regions Tested
*Africa North 0%
Trace Regions 2%
Native American 2%
Other Regions Tested
Asia South 0%
Asia East 0%
Asia Central 0%
Europe 10% (My European ancestry breakdown is below)
Trace Regions 10%
Great Britain 3%
Finland/Northwest Russia 3%
Scandinavia < 1%
Other Regions Tested
European Jewish 0%
Europe East 0%
Europe West 0%
Iberian Peninsula 0%
Pacific Islander < 1% (Breakdown below)
Trace Regions < 1%
Melanesia < 1%
Other Regions Tested
West Asia 0%
Other Regions Tested
Middle East 0%
With the two given sources, can someone please tell me why one source reference I have Asian and Mediterranean ancestry and the other doesn't is list <1%? What do you make of this? Has anyone taken multiple tests and run across a similar situation as mine?
Thanks for any and all advice and kind response.
My new book called “Separated Lives” is a true story about the adoption of a baby boy and years later a friend taking him on a fascinating but uncertain journey to search for his birth parents. It is available from Dorrance Publishing (in Pittsburgh, PA) http://www.DorranceBookstore.com, Barnes & Noble barnesandnoble.com and Amazon.com.
Author: Lynn Assimacopoulos
I’ve just been working on my Ancestry and will be having the Ancestry DNA test. I didn’t read very much about any French/Canadian/Acadian. Manybif our relatives were exiled out of Port Royal, New Brunswick,Nova Scotia. Is there anyone out there with a similar backgrounf
If we went back just 10 generations we all had just 10 mtDNA females on “mother line” and 10 males on “father line”. Only 20 persons telling something of your ancestors. Very few because in reality we have 2x 1024 female ancestors and 2x 1024 male ancestors in that ancestor tree during ten generation (short period of modern human history). These tests don’t give results of your fathers fathers mother, or your mothers mothers father.
In Europe there are some amazing paradoxies also. For instance genetic gap between Finns living in western Finland and Finns living in eastern Finland is much much wider than that gap between Britons and Germans. Some are even joking that Finns in eastern part of that country are “different race”‘. The reason is not so “shocking” – different bands of hunter-gathers moved to Finland during different period and stayed long period isolated each others causing so called genetic drifting (mtDNA genetic line showing only one female ancestor) after 500-1000 years. So Finns are generally not much different to their neighbours (Scandinavians, North West Russians, Estonians). The gap is between two different main genetic group of Finns -those in east and west.
A new form of astrology?
Anyone’s results just totally confused? I refuse to believe my results:
60 % African
36 % European
2 % Asia
1 % Native American
1 % West Asia
I can accept the 60 % African but not the Native American.
Can’t help you much, but, most anthropologists agree that Native Americans are basically Asians who came over to the New World via boats, canoes, etc., many centuries ago. So, the “Native American” results on your DNA could easily be tied to the Asian results, especially since both indicate “1%”.
I didn’t understand why mine had no Native American as I am part. And didn’t know I had J. either. Is there a better test we can do that Ancestry DNA?
Hello. I am American. As far as I know, I have Irish, German, and Swedish ancestry. My Ancestry.com Autosomal DNA results were a little surprising. I only thought to be 25% Scandinavian. I also thought I was 12.5% or so Irish. My results say I am a bit more. And I also got other results I had no idea about. I got Scandinavia 40%, Ireland 29%, Italy Greece 11% (I have no known mediterranean ancestry!), Europe West 10% (Could account for the German heritage, seems accurate), Great Britain 7%, with trace regions being Iberian Peninsula 2% and European Jewish less than 1% (Is that really a race?) What are your thoughts? I know I am mostly Scandinavian…I just thought it was a bit less. Do you think the percentages are accurate?
Thank you for some other informative website. Where else may just I am getting that kind of info written in such an ideal means? IвЂ™ve a venture that I am just now working on, and I have been on the glance out for such info.
I didn’t understand why mine had no Native American as I am part. And didn’t know I had J. either. Is there a better test we can do that Ancestry DNA?
Yours is a good question, and one that I have had also, concerning a “2%” of a minority group that showed up on my autosomal DNA results which certainly was a surprise. Although some may say it could be just “noise”, I truly don’t think so… at least not in my case. Those who have only ‘traces’ of various groups, this may not mean much. However, the reason it is difficult to answer your question is because usually no one knows if your percentage comes from just one ancestor, or perhaps a combination of a few further back on both your paternal and maternal side. This would cause an accumulate effect, appearing to be closer than it really is. However, for simplicity sake, if you have this DNA from one specific ancestor, even 2% could easily be from a great-great- or third greats grandparent. DNA becomes wobbly after inheriting 50% from both parents, and sibling results prove this… you could have a sibling who wouldn’t have the same percentage at all. Your grandmother could have had one parent who was carrying the African percentage and she could have had as much as 30-40%, her child, (one of your parents) , 15%, etc. Also, be sure to triangulate the cousins that pop up on your results on Ancestry. Go through those who share the same surnames as yourself, and see what ethnic groups dominate. With mine, there is an overwhelming amount of distant cousins who share the same “2%” ethnic group as mine, especially if they are in my generation. Any of these minor groups will become more diminished with each generation however.
My ancestry DNA Test came back stating the I am 91% Western European 7% Irish, 1% Brittain and 1% Iberian Peninsula 0% Native American. In actuality I am almost 1/2 native American (Cherokee, Chowan, Blackfoot and Creek. 1/3 Irish and less than 1/3 Western European (german, French, English, Dutch) I also feel rather ripped off by my 99% accurate Ancestry DNA Test. I am either Indian/Irish or not. I look like I walked off the damned reservation, so when I called and asked whose DNA test they sent me they said I only have genetic markers from a couple of relatives. I can trace my family tree back to the 1600’s I assume the relatives that died in the Chowan extinction and on the Trail of Tears would be surprised to know they don’t exist in their descendants.
I understand ethnicity group the regions you probably came from, but it doesn’t tell you or it’s very hard to understand what nationality you are !!! I’ve always been told I was 50% Mexican 25% Sicilian and 25% a mix.? by the results I don’t understand what to be true I’ve never known my biological father so I’ve been in search for the truth please help !!!
And FYI I given the date my parents were married the full name the location address of their marriage there’s no information on this on my biological father I get no marriage certificate I get nothing I have no way to track this man and find out my true nationality
*Great Britain 30%
*Italy Greece 18%
* Iberian Peninsula17%
Europe West 7%
Native American 8%
I was also VERY surprised when I got my test results back from AncestryDNA. All of my life I was told that I was German, Irish, and Welsh. I mean, with surnames such as Yeager, Reinhardt, and Volkert, I was positive my results would come back like 75% German , and the rest a mix of Irish and Welsh. My grandmother’s family immigrated to the US from Baden- Baden Germany.
To my surprise, my test results came back as listed:
28% Great Britain
Also traces of:
2% Africa (Senegal)
<1% West Asia (Caucusas)
With trace regions being:
2% Europe West (that's right folks… 2% German!)
1% Iberian Peninsula
<1% Europe East
I was stunned at first, and said, I think they mixed my results with someone else's! Once it sank in, I called my mom and made a joke about being switched at birth!
Crazy how things turn out. I'm figuring some of my ancestors (the "Germans") were probably vikings who settled in Germany. That's the only realistic explanation I can come up with.
More than likely, your theory is correct. Here again, many of our ancestors when settling in a new region (no matter how long ago it was), adopted the new language which also meant, if not a new surname, they revised their names to sound more like the new culture. Some still married within their original nationality due to religion, etc., so they didn’t get too much “new” DNA in their blood. My results were just the opposite… I have more German/Irish than English, which is the reverse of what I had assumed.
Actually think Ancestry is fairly accurate now. My wife is a special case. Her family line is exclusively in the Outer Banks of North Carolina and NE North Carolina. Two areas that have seen very little intermingling until the last 100 or so years. Her DNA tested 75% Great Britain. According to Ancestry, natives of Great Britain come in at 60%. Her ancestors have lived in these isolated communities since the 1700s. It makes a lot of sense that they would not have much admixture.
ansestery dna is so vague 67% western european not a village or town or a country but all of western europe. there so meleading in there commercials.am not bitching just disapointed
There is no way that ANY DNA company can zero in on what actual village an ancestor lived. That is where family history and paperwork must come in. It is true that ‘western Europe’ covers a large territory, but considering the wars that have changed not only nation borders but villages as well, it is impossible to narrow down the areas through DNA. Many cities today that are now in France, used to be Germany, as an example. And so far, unless we are referring to those who lived in southern France after the Crusade, there has been no DNA test so far to differentiate between the English and French. Those who have a family history of Southern France many times are darker complexioned because there were rapes from the Arabs when they invaded France as well as Sicily, southern Italy, and Spain.
Great Britain is now very diverse; some Brits today will tell you that those of us who had Colonial ancestors here in the U.S. have more true English/Anglo blood that much of the population of London today. Times change; humans migrate. Even if we had an ancestor who lived in Ireland for hundreds of years but were of German blood and didn’t marry a true Celtic, then our DNA will show “Western European”, not English. It doesn’t matter where our ancestors have lived or migrated to over the years, their DNA tells who they really were. My ancestry goes back to the Colonies but most of my family has been in the U.S. since the early-mid 1600’s. But my DNA results does not show “America”, south, middle or north, or any other continent on the planet. I am 100% European, but that doesn’t reflect all the places my ancestors had lived.
Comments are closed.