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 08-09-2013, 08:44 PM
 
Location: 60630
11,626 posts, read 17,035,814 times
Reputation: 10632

Advertisements

I'd love to have a DNA test done. I was born and raised in Sweden from Swedish parents. But if you look at me I look more south European....I think...I have a more olive skin tone, brown hair and hazel eyes. My family on my mothers side have been working on our family tree. She was born in a small town in Harnosand, Sweden. They were able to trace her family back to the 1500's . All Swedish. We have not traced my dads side of the family back as far, but it is not from his side my darker pigment comes from. It comes from my mothers side. And it is only me, my mother who are darker on her side.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-09-2013, 08:48 PM
 
Location: Utopia
1,999 posts, read 9,193,347 times
Reputation: 1472
Quote:
Originally Posted by gwillyfromphilly View Post
No, your the one that seems to be confused. I have already explained myself clearly on the subject. No one is confused about the regions of Africa. The OP was shocked that she had Sub-Saharan ancestry. All I suggested was that if her Sub-Saharan ancestry was on her maternal side of the family which is of Italian origin, there is a good chance that her ancestry is actually Moorish instead of Sub-Saharan. I'm not saying that it's impossible for her to have Sub-Saharan ancestry on her Italian side but it would most likely be North African/Arab if it's on that side of the family. Remember that this is a hypothetical suggestion. If her Sub-Saharan ancestry actually came from her father's side of the family then all bets are off. I think the OP can agree with that as well.

However, Ancestry.com makes a point of telling that they consider Sub-Saharan south of the northern African countries which is roughly south of Algeria, Libya, Morrocco, Egypt and so forth. I am assuming then that Sub-Saharan is what we term Black or African-American today. But I get totally what you are saying.

AND since it is 3%--which seems like a pretty big percentage to me IF the Sub-Saharan relative was when slaves existed in Italy--well, wouldn't it be diluted a whole lot more than 3%? 3% is a great, great, great grandparent.

Since my dna type is T2b I did some research, and there seems to be a strain of T2b--which is heavily Italian--in (of all peoples) the Cherokee Indian which my grandfather claimed he was. Since it was common for the Africans to marry the Cherokee in the 1800's (probably before then, too), I am assuming it might be from my maternal grandfather's side most likely instead of some slave that was brought to Siciliy too many generations ago to give me 3% Sub-Saharan dna. Sound right?

It seems there is no real answer to why T2b dna was in some Cherokee from what I can find on the net.

My fantasy says--since T2b is NOT common at all and rather rare--that maybe some Cherokee snatched a woman of Italian descent off a wagon train...and the rest is history once she bred little Cherokee-Italian kiddos. It sounds good anyway..LOL!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2013, 10:37 AM
 
5,799 posts, read 4,810,185 times
Reputation: 17499
Just want to say there were hundreds and hundreds of different tribes of "Indians". Even now there are around 400 recognized tribes.

For some reason modern Americans have latched onto the term "Cherokee", probably because this tribe has been written about most, and because of the Trail of Tears story. If everyone who says they are descended from the Cherokee truly are, the tribe would have had to have encompassed most of the continent.

If you have Indian ancestry many generations back it could just as probably have been Tunica, or Cheraw, or Croatan, or some group not now known.

It is also pretty well known now that 19th century Americans who didn't want to admit that they had any African ancestry told their children and grandchildren that they were of Portuguese or Mediterranean or Indian ancestry.

Nothing to be ashamed of now, just an interesting part of each person's ancestral story.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2013, 01:03 PM
 
Location: Utopia
1,999 posts, read 9,193,347 times
Reputation: 1472
That's what I'm figuring is right, also. Unfortunately, nobody ever met anyone on my maternal grandfather's side, never knew any of his family and so who knows? And you are right about Cherokee seeming to be THE Indian tribe everyone says they belong to. I know when I lived in Houston every other person was part-Cherokee it seemed.

However, I've had more fun with this 3% than anything lately. Just trying to figure it out has let to some really great conversations at parties so far. Who would have thought dna would be a great ice breaker? LOL!
Once you start discussing dna--since so many only know bits and pieces about the subject--you get lots of opinions and bits of information to put together which makes it interesting and fun for sure. DNA is a fascinating subject for everyone it seems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-10-2013, 07:27 PM
 
Location: La lune et les étoiles
17,413 posts, read 18,272,289 times
Reputation: 18588
Quote:
Originally Posted by 601halfdozen0theother View Post
Just want to say there were hundreds and hundreds of different tribes of "Indians". Even now there are around 400 recognized tribes.

For some reason modern Americans have latched onto the term "Cherokee", probably because this tribe has been written about most, and because of the Trail of Tears story. If everyone who says they are descended from the Cherokee truly are, the tribe would have had to have encompassed most of the continent.

If you have Indian ancestry many generations back it could just as probably have been Tunica, or Cheraw, or Croatan, or some group not now known.

It is also pretty well known now that 19th century Americans who didn't want to admit that they had any African ancestry told their children and grandchildren that they were of Portuguese or Mediterranean or Indian ancestry.

Nothing to be ashamed of now, just an interesting part of each person's ancestral story.

Many African Americans who were light enough (including members of my own family) "passed" for white prior to the Civil Rights Movement.

The link below is the story of NYT columnist and writer Anatole Broyard who passed for many years. Even actress Carol Channing has stated in her autobiography that her family passed for white.

The Passing of

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/21/bo...anted=all&_r=0
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-11-2013, 10:17 AM
 
269 posts, read 425,965 times
Reputation: 429
Your DNA percentages are not going to match your *Racial* fractions. If you have one 2nd great grandparent, who is African for example, you have 6.25% of that ancestors genetic contributions does not mean you will show 6.25% SSA with autosomal testing, you can show as little as 1%, due merely to recombination. However, you may have inherited zero genes from this ancestor.

Also, with regard to Cherokee. Unless you have a documented ancestor to one of the three federally recognized Cherokee tribes; The United Keetoowah, Cherokee Nation of Ok and the Eastern Band of Cherokees should solve any ambiguity. All three Cherokee tribes have census "Pre" and "Post" Trail of Tears (Indian Removal Act). Is every Cherokee documented? No, but most were. The one's that did not, are an exception rather than the norm. It seems the group of folks that cannot establish a connection have the more elaborate stories.

Last edited by AppalachianGumbo; 08-11-2013 at 10:46 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2014, 01:25 PM
 
1 posts, read 4,174 times
Reputation: 10
I have a similar situation. I tested with SSA of 1.1% through 23andme (I am primarily European - mostly British, Irish, and French - with about 7% Iberian (4% from my mom through the Canary Islands) and then 3% from my dad). However, my family has mostly been in the US for over 3 centuries in the south. THe SSA is highest on my dad's side (1.4%) and my mom, about .6%.

So…here's the thing. I had my results analyzed by Doug McDonald (a former professor at U of Illinois). He verified the SSA was West African at 1.3% (higher than 23andme), indicating Black ancestors.

I do have Spanish - but my ancestors came from Spain over 300 years ago. Now presuming these ancestors had a typical rate of SSA DNA at about 1.2% (which is the case for most native Spainards - maybe a little higher for those from the Canaries given proximity to N. Africa- my SSA 300 years, and many generations ago, would not be as high as it is on 23andme. This suggests my SSA originates from Blacks not from South Europeans.

Thus, I believe your 3%, even with your known southern European/greek heritage - would not be that high, as it isn't even that high for most NATIVE southern Europeans.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2014, 07:37 AM
 
101 posts, read 147,542 times
Reputation: 53
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 believe it is 5 Generations but I could be wrong. It really depends on life expectancy as well. Average life expectancy back then was lower then it is now so that can also play a factor.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2014, 03:18 PM
 
210 posts, read 213,483 times
Reputation: 187
Didn't read the entire thread, but between the Roman Empire and Muslim control/influence in Sicily I can see quite a few ways that some Sub-Saharan could sneak into your Italian blood line.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2014, 03:50 PM
 
8,089 posts, read 4,446,122 times
Reputation: 8711
if you a male the y chrom will be the same or almost the same for thousands of years, so if your male grandfather couple hundred years ago was sweden then that what you are itt doesn't change. its basically the same with female or x chromo. now the problem is everything else, if you male and you trace your mama side then you could get anything, after about five generation, it is so small, it could be anything. like somebody said, just because your grandmother 4th generation back was 100 native american, that doesn't make you native because you might not inherited any of the genes. But if it was on the male side then you are..

what I'm saying if your grandmother a thousand years ago was rape by a viking, then you a viking, the male y doesn't change much in thousands of years.

by doing y dna, i found what town i was from in 1200, and my paperwork only goes back to 1650
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

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.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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