U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-31-2013, 11:14 AM
 
Location: Jamestown, NY
7,841 posts, read 7,293,414 times
Reputation: 13779

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandviewGloria View Post
The Italian ancestors are probably where the Sub-Saharan component came from. Rome was the greatest slave-driven empire ever: worse than Imperial England, The Ottoman Empire, or Imperial Japan, by far.

Where I'm from, 'Italian' is code for Sicilian. Sicily was transformed, via forced immigration and importation of slaves, into a vast land of agricultural serfs, forced to feed Italy-proper. This system continued, really, until Americans modernized the Island around WWII (with also a brief moment of benign rule under the Normans, many centuries back). Some of the imported slaves were African. And some Africans were imported into Italy-proper, where some probably were bred to the vastly more numerous white slaves.

My 'Real Daddy' was Sicilian, so I've studied the Island, traveled there, and read a bit on the subject. I would particularly recommend Sicily: three thousand years of human history/Sarah Benjamin . This is not light reading. Be prepared to spend the winter reading it, if you want to get your money's worth from that analysis of the three-thousand-year history of the Sicilian People.
I'd agree. My Italian ancestors are from Abruzzi on the Adriatic (eastern) coast of Italy. My Italian aunts, second generation in US, always considered Sicialians to be -- ahem -- "Africans" but they didn't use such a polite term. Luckily, most of them were gone or mellowed with age by the time my brothers married Sicilian girls!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-02-2013, 04:54 PM
 
1,661 posts, read 1,984,299 times
Reputation: 2141
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyGem View Post
What many people do not understand is that the concept of "race" is cultural and has no genetic basis.

Every human on the planet has traces of African dna because every human on the planet can trace their genetic heritage to the continent of Africa.

These numbers are not a measurement of "whiteness" or "blackness". Modern anthropologists do not use "race" as a measurement. Ethnicity and culture but never race, because race is a social construct with no basis in human biology.

The Human Journey - Migration Routes - National Geographic

Archeologists Say Humans Left Africa For Asia Only 60,000 Years Ago, Rejecting Previous Theory
Don't think he asked if we thought he was 3% black. Just asked if we thought he had an ancestor that was from sub Sahara Africa within the time frame that those tests are supposed to correspond.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 10:16 AM
 
9,985 posts, read 6,732,986 times
Reputation: 5607
Quote:
Originally Posted by TootsieWootsie View Post
Mother's maternal side: Italian as far back to great great Grandma.

Mother's paternal side: No idea. Grandpa looked Caucasian, said he was Cherokee but that would be impossible since the test came back 97% European. Grandma said Grandpa probably was lying. They were divorced, so guess Grandma knew Grandpa...LOL!

***How many generations would I have to go back to have 3% Sub-Saharan?
I would disagree with other posters who have guessed the Sub-Saharan 3% is on the
Italian side. Far more likely to be on your Grandpa's side, who may have confused Cherokee
with Sub-Saharan. That cross likely ocurred in the mid-latter 1800s, garnishing your 1/32 whereas any Sicilian cross would have been in the very distant past, barely even registering at all in your profile, and less likely to be Sub-Saharan but more likely to be Arabic or North African. Also, if your mother's side is Italian, and not Sicilian, there is virtually no chance of Sub-Saharan admixture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2013, 10:28 AM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,481 posts, read 10,423,117 times
Reputation: 5377
Quote:
Originally Posted by TootsieWootsie View Post
Mother's maternal side: Italian as far back to great great Grandma.
It's just a thought but maybe you could have some Moorish ancestry on your mother's maternal side. It could very well explain why you have 3% African ancestry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2013, 07:30 AM
 
Location: Utopia
1,999 posts, read 9,422,351 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowball7 View Post
I would disagree with other posters who have guessed the Sub-Saharan 3% is on the
Italian side. Far more likely to be on your Grandpa's side, who may have confused Cherokee
with Sub-Saharan. That cross likely ocurred in the mid-latter 1800s, garnishing your 1/32 whereas any Sicilian cross would have been in the very distant past, barely even registering at all in your profile, and less likely to be Sub-Saharan but more likely to be Arabic or North African. Also, if your mother's side is Italian, and not Sicilian, there is virtually no chance of Sub-Saharan admixture.


Have to agree with you that it is on the Grandfather's side as we have alot of geneological studies (ship charters and documents to verify my mother's maternal side came from Genoa, Italy, which is Northern Italy.

The entire family on my mother's Italian side was very light ivory colored Caucasian--except my mother's brother who everyone said took after the Italian side. Well, it must have been their fantasies because everyone in every photo is pretty white-white. Now that I know someone was Sub-Saharan in his father's family I don't think his dark olive coloring was from the Italian side...nope, not at all. So, either my Grandfather didn't know that his great grandmother or great grandfather was Sub-Saharan/African or he wasn't telling...who knows? And I wonder how common that was in that era to be a mixed couple or maybe it was just a one night stand????

I've also concluded that the relative for my 3% had to exist in the mid-1875 years and on my Grandfather's side.

We have come to the same conclusions I guess here.

The Sub-Saharan region, from my understanding, is below Libya, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria which would be considered Moorish. Sub-Saharan is definitely what we would term today as African-American or Black.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2013, 10:25 AM
 
Location: Vineland, NJ
8,481 posts, read 10,423,117 times
Reputation: 5377
Quote:
Originally Posted by TootsieWootsie View Post
We have come to the same conclusions I guess here.

The Sub-Saharan region, from my understanding, is below Libya, Egypt, Morocco, Algeria which would be considered Moorish. Sub-Saharan is definitely what we would term today as African-American or Black.
When it comes to DNA results I wish they would get rid of terms like Sub-Sahara Africa because it just creates more confusion. I believe if your going to divide Africa into sections, then why not use terms like west, south, east, etc. If someone if going to lump Africa together than why not use the whole continent. In my opinion, saying that I have Sub-Saharan ancestry doesn't really describe much when you look at the grand scheme of things.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2013, 01:13 PM
 
1,176 posts, read 2,030,626 times
Reputation: 1400
Quote:
Originally Posted by TootsieWootsie View Post
Mother's maternal side: Italian as far back to great great Grandma.

Mother's paternal side: No idea. Grandpa looked Caucasian, said he was Cherokee but that would be impossible since the test came back 97% European. Grandma said Grandpa probably was lying. They were divorced, so guess Grandma knew Grandpa...LOL!

***How many generations would I have to go back to have 3% Sub-Saharan?
I was going to ask if you were Greek, Italian or Spanish. There was a lot of cultural and genetic exchange between SW Europeans, Africans and Europeans for thousands of years. That 3% could be "background" for your ethnic groups. OR you could have had a great, great, great grandparent that was 100% sub-saharan. OR you could have had several ancestors with dilute sub-saharan ancestry that convergent into your particular code. Or I could be full of it and the test is flawed. Or you could have African American ancestry from the other side.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2013, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Utopia
1,999 posts, read 9,422,351 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cleonidas View Post
I was going to ask if you were Greek, Italian or Spanish. There was a lot of cultural and genetic exchange between SW Europeans, Africans and Europeans for thousands of years. That 3% could be "background" for your ethnic groups. OR you could have had a great, great, great grandparent that was 100% sub-saharan. OR you could have had several ancestors with dilute sub-saharan ancestry that convergent into your particular code. Or I could be full of it and the test is flawed. Or you could have African American ancestry from the other side.

Funny you should ask that, because my father was from Greece. His family has been there since time began.
My mother's family came over in 1875, well documented, from Genoa, Italy. Course, my great grandmother, grandmother and mother all married non-Italians which diluted the nationality.

What is meant by "background" for my ethnic groups?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2013, 08:05 PM
 
Location: Utopia
1,999 posts, read 9,422,351 times
Reputation: 1479
Kinda like Southern Germany where when I got off the train I saw all these dark, olive skinned, short, stocky men. I asked where they came from since I had been in Berlin where everyone was rather light complected and blondish. Italy and Greek workers that came over was the answer. So it goes.....on and on and on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2013, 10:32 PM
bjh
Status: "Lazy Sunday" (set 1 day ago)
 
Location: Memphis - home of the king
30,241 posts, read 23,697,458 times
Reputation: 122187
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
When it comes to DNA results I wish they would get rid of terms like Sub-Sahara Africa because it just creates more confusion. I believe if your going to divide Africa into sections, then why not use terms like west, south, east, etc. If someone if going to lump Africa together than why not use the whole continent. In my opinion, saying that I have Sub-Saharan ancestry doesn't really describe much when you look at the grand scheme of things.
The term Sub-Saharan has been around a long time to differentiate between the earliest Africans and North Africans of middle eastern descent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top