African American 23andme Results (Spanish, Russian, Italian, tribe)
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.
Always wondered what was my exact ancestry. I look black with noticeable European ancestry. Finally got the results and it matches up with what I thought.
you should do one of those autosomal tests where they can show you which tribes/groups in Africa you share the most genetic similarity with and the percentage matches
if you ever watch that show "Finding your roots" with Henry Louis Gates Jr. He does that all the time for his African American guests.
it's good. I not only shows where in Africa you match with most but which groups even in the same region of West Africa you match with at different degrees/percentages
There are two regions where the blacks have an almost Afro Caribbean culture. Louisiana and South Carolina. In the case of the latter its because many of the slaves were imported from the former British Caribbean colonies and the prevalence of rice and peas in the diet offers a clue.
One issue with the Akans is that they were among the earlier wave of slaves taken to the BWI colonies. I saw a slave survey from St Kitts taken just before slavery ended. The ethnic affiliations were included for the African born. Even though about 25% of the slaves taken to St K were of Akan origin, almost none of the slaves were listed as such. What is interesting is that many of the Creole slaves had traditional Akan names.
I say this to say that the more distant one's ancestry is the less it contributes to one's ancestral DNA make up, so Akan ancestry will be "under estimated".
When I did my ancestry test I began to do more research on the slave trade I learned the following.
1. Senegal/Gambia and Guinea were closely related.
2 Liberia/Sierra Leone/western Ivory Coast ditto.
3. Eastern Ivory Coast and most of Ghana ditto.
4. Eastern Ghana and Togo/Benin was a transitional zone.
5. Much of Benin and south western Nigeria closely related.
6. South eastern Nigeria and Cameroons close.
7. Relatively few slaves taken from the regions south of Cameroon and north of the Congo basin.
8. Congo/Angola related but divided by the Congo River. Those to the north were taken to the Caribbean and North America and those to the south to Brazil and Argentina.
9. More slaves were taken from what is now Mozambique and Madagascar than with think. In fact 10% of the Trans Atlantic slaves came from there with many being sent to Argentina, Brazil and Cuba.
So what we have to do is attempt to reconcile the ancestry data with these facts. So when Ancestry.com links Cameroon-Congo it is mistaken. It also has a single category for Nigeria, which was broken into two distinct groups. Mali also probably refers to Guinea or to Sierra Leone as there are similar ethnic groups.
it's been shown that the Igbo people from southern Nigeria probably contributed the most number of slaves than any other groups in the Atlantic slave trade
Even many historians think that just about every single African American has at least one Igbo ancestor, because the percent of slaves from this one group were so high, compared to the others
especially in the South and Caribbean, it says slave traders chose Igbo people on purpose to send to Virginia and Maryland (Chesapeke colony) and to South Carolina and the Caribbean (Barbados) too
it's been shown that the Igbo people from southern Nigeria probably contributed the most number of slaves than any other groups in the Atlantic slave trade
Even many historians think that just about every single African American has at least one Igbo ancestor, because the percent of slaves from this one group were so high, compared to the others
especially in the South and Caribbean, it says slave traders chose Igbo people on purpose to send to Virginia and Maryland (Chesapeke colony) and to South Carolina and the Caribbean (Barbados) too
No it's not. Most slaves in the Americas came from Angola. Just look at the huge number of slaves that Brazil had alone mainly from Angola-Congo region. About 40 % of all slaves in the Americas came from that region. Even in the US, slaves from the Kongo kingdom were the largest with 26 % against 24 % from east Nigeria and Cameroon. It's estimate that 1/5 African Americans have Kongo origin but I don't understand why when Black Americans make a DNA test most of the time they traced their ancestry to Sierra Leone, Cameroon or Togo instead of Angola or Congo.
No it's not. Most slaves in the Americas came from Angola. Just look at the huge number of slaves that Brazil had alone mainly from Angola-Congo region. About 40 % of all slaves in the Americas came from that region. Even in the US, slaves from the Kongo kingdom were the largest with 26 % against 24 % from east Nigeria and Cameroon. It's estimate that 1/5 African Americans have Kongo origin but I don't understand why when Black Americans make a DNA test most of the time they traced their ancestry to Sierra Leone, Cameroon or Togo instead of Angola or Congo.
The paper upholds whatever is written, but DNA doesn't. This is like wondering why on paper so many African Americans have Cherokee ancestry but in DNA testing most don't have a drop of Native American blood, in fact what on paper has said Cherokee for centuries in the blood it says that its truly European.
The paper upholds whatever is written, but DNA doesn't. This is like wondering why on paper so many African Americans have Cherokee ancestry but in DNA testing most don't have a drop of Native American blood, in fact what on paper has said Cherokee for centuries in the blood it says that its truly European.
Not to discount that since I think that's a huge part of it, but it also has to do with comparing modern day populations and DNA with historical populations. A modern population in Congo might actually have a close admixture to what was in Angola during the height of the slave trade.
The paper upholds whatever is written, but DNA doesn't. This is like wondering why on paper so many African Americans have Cherokee ancestry but in DNA testing most don't have a drop of Native American blood, in fact what on paper has said Cherokee for centuries in the blood it says that its truly European.
The paper trail doesn't even necessarily support this. The paper trail, with some exceptions, largely shows points of departure where slavers left Africa with their human cargo. Many look at this and assume that this necessarily shows point of origin, but that's not necessarily the case. This is a point I've long made. At a minimum, DNA testing calls into question the accepted narrative in this matter as African American DNA testing is showing significantly different genetic relationships/ethnic makeup than the paper trail suggests. For instance, the paper trail suggests that African Americans don't have very much Akan ancestry, but DNA testing consistently shows otherwise. Also, while not discounting this point completely, I tell people to be careful about making the argument that population shifts and genetic mutations (for lack of a better word) may lead to "inaccurate" genetic DNA results. At the end of the day, for the purposes of genetic DNA research, African Americans are not that distantly removed from their African relatives and population centers really haven't drastically moved in Africa (in terms of ethnicity) to the point where we'd see these kinds of variations.
The reason for this is that both SC and LA had large mixed race freed populations which were considered as a distinct buffer group between blacks and whites. With the implementation of Jim Crow and the one drop rule its likely that the lightest of these mulatto elites "passed" for white, and in two states with relatively little in migration from other parts of the USA, these people will account for a larger % than elsewhere.
SC had also the largest slave population, indeed it was the only state where blacks outnumbered whites until the beginning of the 20th C when massive migration to the North reduced the black population. Many of these slaves in the rice lands lived isolated from whites and so less of the hanky panky that went on between slave owners and overseers and enslaved women would have occurred. FL, GA, MI and AL also had large slave population, and very highly enforced racial segregation. Contrast that with states like NY where poor Irish lived alongside the blacks, most often hostile, but with more mixing than one would think. Irish women were known to favor black men.
While one cannot look at some one and always accurately assume their ancestry its likely that some one who is 85% African will have a more sub Saharan appearance than some one who is 60%.
Very true about the first part, as New Orleans and Charleston, 2 port cities with a French influence, both had its share of free "people of color". Like you mentioned, some married into White families. Knowing this, it isn't that surprising.
My parents come from very Black areas of MS and SC and some family members on both sides if you said that they came from Africa, many wouldn't question it.
I'm curious about the 73% number given that some information says 80%.
No it's not. Most slaves in the Americas came from Angola. Just look at the huge number of slaves that Brazil had alone mainly from Angola-Congo region. About 40 % of all slaves in the Americas came from that region. Even in the US, slaves from the Kongo kingdom were the largest with 26 % against 24 % from east Nigeria and Cameroon. It's estimate that 1/5 African Americans have Kongo origin but I don't understand why when Black Americans make a DNA test most of the time they traced their ancestry to Sierra Leone, Cameroon or Togo instead of Angola or Congo.
26% vs 24%??? that's it?
then it means they both played a large role and contributed heavy to the slave population in America.
that's almost 80% together, collectively
plus you cant say the same for all of the Americas
different slaves from different tribes/areas were purposefully destined to go to different places or countries in the new world.
South America had a moderate portion of slaves even from south-east Africa which was extremely uncommon in North America.
again, the link I showed just has different regions.
like the Chesapeke Bay area, which shows the single largest contribution came from Nigeria/the Igbo people.
along with others. But since it was more of them than anyone else, it means African Americans from the South probably have a large portion of Nigerian/Igbo ancestry which if you've ever seen the show "Finding your Roots" with Henry Louis gates Jr. seems to be the case.
of course that doesn't account for slaves brought to the port of Charleston and New Orleans
but obviously the Igbo and other Nigerians contributed heavy to those places and the Caribbean too.
please, show a source that shows what you said.
I'm not saying you are wrong. Or questioning you. I'd really just like to see where you got it and what it has to say about it, honestly.
because I didn't know that until you mentioned it.
Most slaves in the Americas came from Angola. It's estimate that 1/5 African Americans have Kongo origin but I don't understand why when Black Americans make a DNA test most of the time they traced their ancestry to Sierra Leone, Cameroon or Togo instead of Angola or Congo.
you just made your own counter argument.
and you just made my argument for me too with your statement above, thank you.
but anyway it's probably because people in the Kingdom of Kongo were closely related to earlier people in Sierra Leone, Nigeria, Cameroon etc..
the indigenous people in the Congo or Angola are the pygmy type hunter-gatherers not the Bantu people who came there from other parts of west Africa like Nigeria or Sierra Leone.
on a DNA test Congo population could be a reference population of mainly pygmy Congolese people like South African would mean specifically having do with the Khoisan Bushmen people there on a genetic test as far as reference populations go and not the Bantu tribes in South Africa.
If they use the entire population of the Congo basin as a whole for a reference population, whish includes both Bantu west Africans and pygmy congo people then most African Americans probably will have stronger matches for populations of west Africa like Sierra Leone and more secondary or sublte matches for Angola or the Congo as a whole.
there's 2 major, genetically distinct populations in the Congo and Angola.
and the pygmies are usually historically subjugated by the Bantu.
they may have mixed to some degree but not much. doesn't seem like it. Not in historical times or historically.
No it's not. Most slaves in the Americas came from Angola. Just look at the huge number of slaves that Brazil had alone mainly from Angola-Congo region. About 40 % of all slaves in the Americas came from that region. Even in the US, slaves from the Kongo kingdom were the largest with 26 % against 24 % from east Nigeria and Cameroon. It's estimate that 1/5 African Americans have Kongo origin but I don't understand why when Black Americans make a DNA test most of the time they traced their ancestry to Sierra Leone, Cameroon or Togo instead of Angola or Congo.
did you even read the links I posted?
because they said the Igbo and their home in southern and eastern Nigeria did contribute more than any other group.
you even said so with your statement about most African Americans having DNA matches with Sierra Leone ad Nigeria but not for Angola or Congo.
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.
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.
