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.
My paternal haplogroup is I2-CTS10228 (I2a Din-north). I2 is most dominant haplogroup among Serbs. Male relatives of my mother belong to I2-PH908 (I2a Din-south) haplogroup, and male relatives of my grandmother (father's mother) are R1b-U152 (Italo-Celtic brunch).
My results were pretty much what I expected. My father was jewish, my mother was not. So I am 44% European jewish, 26% Great Britain, 12% Europe West and 7% Irish. Of the balance, another 9% is various parts of Europe. So 98% European.
The problem with the Ancestry results is the extent to which it is dominated by people in the USA which limits its usefulness in my opinion. I was born in the UK and grew up in the UK. I have traced my mother's family back 300 years in England and my father's family have been in the UK for 150 years (arriving from Lithuania). Almost all of my matches are for people in the USA. Logically, most of those are for my father's side given the extent of jewish immigration at the end of the 19th century. Some of the other tree matches are interesting and have pointed to two branches of my mother's family emigrating to the USA around 1890. But I cannot help feeling that I am missing a huge chunk of potential matches.
I still subscribe to Genes Reunited which is one of the UK genealogy sites. So I went into the forum there to see what people were saying about DNA testing. They were not. It does not seem to be a topic of much interest. Maybe that will change in the next few years.
If it was something like "95%" and "5%" I would be disappointed because I would feel the test malfunctioned or something.
A friend of mine is 100% Italian and got an insane amount of Northern African and Jewish ancestry. I'm taking mine in July and expect the breakdown to be very surprising as I'm a huge mutt from the Northeast.
Mine was 55%, but that doesn't really mean anything. My northern European DNA is too commonly found in many regions to tell apart so while AncestryDNA gives me 55% for Great Britain, FTDNA gives me 0% for British Isles, 23andMe 17.2% for British & Irish, etc.
AncestryDNA said I was 83% British, which is quite high since the typical person in Great Britain is 60%. Good old Southern stock with very little immigration to that region after the colonial period accounts for that I imagine. 23andMe lumps British and Irish together and it came in at 64.5%. I would imagine its safe to say most of my ancestry is the old Neolithic tribes that settled Great Britain after the Ice Age and the Celts who came later. I would think that's what counts as "British" vs. Scandinavian and Europe West (which are other common components of the region - Anglo-Saxons and Vikings/Normans).
No I've never been disappointed in my DNA tests and I've been taking them for a very long time, I took the first one with DNA tribes.I got all Eastern European results,I honestly cried because I had been obsessed with Eastern Europe since I was a child and had no familial connections to there.Now I know DNA tribes is sort of forgotten now, but I did get Eastern Europe again in the newer tests (23andme) and even with decodeme.I have alot of ancestral dreams that tell me about my ancestry e.g I dreamt I was part Polish,I dreamt I was from the Igbo tribe,a lot of the time the DNA tests confirm that.
Oh I'd give anything to be that British,I feel like such a Briton.To be really deeply connected to the land like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeauCharles
AncestryDNA said I was 83% British, which is quite high since the typical person in Great Britain is 60%. Good old Southern stock with very little immigration to that region after the colonial period accounts for that I imagine. 23andMe lumps British and Irish together and it came in at 64.5%. I would imagine its safe to say most of my ancestry is the old Neolithic tribes that settled Great Britain after the Ice Age and the Celts who came later. I would think that's what counts as "British" vs. Scandinavian and Europe West (which are other common components of the region - Anglo-Saxons and Vikings/Normans).
This thread just gave me an idea for the Ancestry.com backed TV show! First it was family history digging shows, like Who Do You Think You Are and Finding Your Roots. Then it was the adoption reconnection show Long Lost Family. All brought to you by Ancestry.com.
How about they get white supremacists, anti-semites, etc, and do their DNA testing, and the big "reveal" can be how much DNA they actually have from the populations they have hate for. Then we get to see their reactions. It would be hilarious. Like a KKK guy can learn that he is 6% African, 4% East Asian, or 3% European Jewish. They might start yelling that the test must be wrong, someone mixed up samples, then the host can be like "We thought you'd say that, so we ran 3 more tests, and this is still the result." Then they can show the person their family tree and the stories of the so-called undesirable people they've descended from. Then maybe some will experience some enlightenment, and some might just get angrier. I'd love it. And it would be much better than half the crap on TV like the 600 pound life or the Kardassians.
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.
