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.
The membership options allow you to do research on Ancestry, the $59 is for the DNA testing. Membership is around $40 a month. Personally I don't like Ancestry for research there is too much bad/incorrect information in individual people's research. If you are just starting use the genealogical research tools @ familysearch.org. The site is maintained by Mormon's and has a lot of very good information. I mainly use My Heritage, it's much cheaper than Ancestry (around $130 a year) and has a good amount of data from european countries which is where all of my ancestors came from
I use family search too. Thanks for the my heritage European records input. I've needed Hungarian records which ancestry doesn't have much of
I decided that I'm not wasting any money on DNA testing. I already know I'm German-Dutch-Irish-English. I doubt there's much more in there worth knowing about.
IMO, it's not a waste of money, especially since you say you have a Native American great, great grandmother, I believe it's on your dad's side.
My MIL has one too but there is no native showing at Ancestry or My Heritage, it shows on GEDmatch. I have the paper trail, her Great great grandmothers family was also very closely tied to the Native family. I used to ask her nephew if he would test his mother but she passed away, then the nephew passed suddenly about 6 months later, so I'll never know if MIL's sister got some NA genes that would show on ancestry. This could happen to you too where you didn't inherit but a sibling did. It also could have diluted too much to turn up on the sites I mentioned because of their DNA parameters.
If she was on your dad's side, it is worth it to test him since he is closer. Once he passes away, you lose the chance to know if he did.
Native Americans have different teeth then we have, they're called shovel teeth. There are images on google, see if your dad has shovel teeth that he inherited.
A lot of people have been told they had an NA relative but doing DNA, they do not show NA DNA, they instead have African American related ethnicity instead. That is because the "Indian princess" relative was actually African American but able to pass as white way back when. They told people they had the NA relative because it was hard to be AA back then. If you were to do your dad, it would be interesting to see if he shows any AA ethnicity. My MIL does not. She's pretty much white bread like I am except I'm Hungarian. She has a mix of English and other European ethnicity results.
I decided that I'm not wasting any money on DNA testing. I already know I'm German-Dutch-Irish-English. I doubt there's much more in there worth knowing about.
Not trying to convince you otherwise, but on almost every page you will see someone who thought they "knew" that they were XYZ and they were actually MSKBRL by their DNA.
My paternal line was always thought to be "German", as if that was some sort of trophy. Oops -- not so fast -- DNA threw a wrench into the mix by adding Eastern Europe (West Slavic Pomeranians and Kashubians from the Baltic coast of (now) Poland). Heads exploded. Sure, they were German culturally. Sure, there was some German DNA from Bavaria and Lower Saxony but also Swedish and North Sea Danes/Frisian/Dutch. My Y haplogroup points to the area of Frisia & Denmark, not Eastern Europe. So, the most likely narrative is early Frisians who migrated east along the Baltic Sea coast, probably following the Danes to Pomerania and intermarrying with existing West Slavic people near present Gdansk. That is more interesting than "German" to me. The Bavarian/Saxon part was added after coming to the US.
My maternal line is more complicated -- once you get past the 1/2 Kerry Irish DNA you are in the weeds.
Trying to prove Native American ancestry is one of the top reasons people take these tests, and are usually disappointed to find out they don't have any NA DNA, even though they swear up and down that their great-grandmother was Native and people in their family have "Native features." It's probably the most common fable told in families that we hear about over and over again. People get very defensive when this is challenged.
I ended up with a small amount, and being adopted had no knowledge of any family history, but building out my biological family tree I know all my Native ancestry came from the East Coast, both New York (Mohawk) and from some ancestors in the Carolinas, unknown tribe. I also get a little Subsaharan African and South Asian that show up in multiple tests. So it is possible that NA will show up in a test even if your ancestors came from the East Coast.
In my 23andMe test, even using the most conservative setting (90% certainty) these show up. Ancestry shows them also.
The image shows 23andMe's "90% certainty" setting, with Ancestry's estimates below. Ancestry thinks my NA is from Mexico, and they used to say specifically Yucatan, but that seems highly unlikely! Although pre-conquest peoples did travel far and wide and were not hindered by borders. Interesting that both tests identify Nigeria and the Congo in small amounts. Ancestry says the Nigerian came from my maternal side, and Congo from my paternal side. Not something I can back up with research. The South Asian comes from the same ancestor on my paternal side as Subsaharan, and whose family were Free People of Color. Trade routes connected India and Africa with the Americas so evidently some mixing happened somewhere.
It's these results in small amounts that seem to be more accurate and reliable than my overall European results which vary widely from company to company, and change over time.
Trying to prove Native American ancestry is one of the top reasons...
People get very defensive when this is challenged.
I ended up with a small amount...
Not so small if it's actually detactable in the DNA results.
Quote:
...results which vary widely from company to company, and change over time.
Not trying to convince you otherwise, but on almost every page you will see someone who thought they "knew" that they were XYZ and they were actually MSKBRL by their DNA.
My paternal line was always thought to be "German", as if that was some sort of trophy. Oops -- not so fast -- DNA threw a wrench into the mix by adding Eastern Europe (West Slavic Pomeranians and Kashubians from the Baltic coast of (now) Poland). Heads exploded. Sure, they were German culturally. Sure, there was some German DNA from Bavaria and Lower Saxony but also Swedish and North Sea Danes/Frisian/Dutch. My Y haplogroup points to the area of Frisia & Denmark, not Eastern Europe. So, the most likely narrative is early Frisians who migrated east along the Baltic Sea coast, probably following the Danes to Pomerania and intermarrying with existing West Slavic people near present Gdansk. That is more interesting than "German" to me. The Bavarian/Saxon part was added after coming to the US.
My maternal line is more complicated -- once you get past the 1/2 Kerry Irish DNA you are in the weeds.
Agree that people do these tests to see people who "knew" they were XYZ but found out otherwise.
As was said, a lot of people do the DNA tests because they're looking for an NA connection. Being first generation Hungarian born in the US, I don't get why it's so "in vogue" to have the NA ethnicity.
Aries mentioned "East coast NA" which is what my MIL's great grandmother was, from the Lenni Lenape of NJ which, weirdly enough, I have a very close tie to but not genetic. My dad came here in 57, in 1967 he leased a gas and service station in a town 10 miles from home. A regret of mine is I never asked him how he chose this town and business. He's been gone 20 years so I can't ask.
My dads property was along two mountains, a creek/brook across the street where I used to hang out or fish. I used to love looking at the waterfall. I also used to walk the mountain behind the station, going up to the top. The town had a sign with native Americans standing in front of the water and mountain, I saw this sign multiple times a day when working with my dad.
I didn't realize that MIL's NA relative would be the same ones that walked past my dad's property long before it was there. They may have even camped on it. Even weirder, MIL's sister who I mentioned above, owned the property right behind my dad's business. I don't know if her son ever made the NA connection with our properties to let his mother know. I'm sure she would have gotten a kick from it. That is what fascinates me, since I'm tied to MIL with my son.
Anyway, Pathfinder has not done DNA, has decided not to do DNA, so she may never know if she inherited NA DNA from her father if it is even true. IIRC, her dad is about 102, so her chances to do his DNA are ticking away. I know what it is like to not be able to have your parents DNA to compare, to see what DNA you did get from them since the DNA you get is like a bowl of alphabet soup where your spoon full contains different ingredients then your sibling. One may get more pasta while another gets more peas or carrots.
She may decide to do it later on to find a grandparents father is not who it was thought to be. DNA proves that there is no tie to who they thought was the father/ grandfather. You can have a paper trail that is deemed accurate until doing DNA throws a wrench into it. It is proof that the paper trail is just that, paper. It's like taking a match to it, a whole branch, sometimes more, is gone.
I think some people do not do DNA because they do not want to see the paper trail they spent 20, 30, 40+ years working on is not accurate. Money and time was wasted researching (the old way by flying to other countries) the branches that turn out to not be accurate.
Not trying to convince you otherwise, but on almost every page you will see someone who thought they "knew" that they were XYZ and they were actually MSKBRL by their DNA.
My paternal line was always thought to be "German", as if that was some sort of trophy. Oops -- not so fast -- DNA threw a wrench into the mix by adding Eastern Europe (West Slavic Pomeranians and Kashubians from the Baltic coast of (now) Poland). Heads exploded. Sure, they were German culturally. Sure, there was some German DNA from Bavaria and Lower Saxony but also Swedish and North Sea Danes/Frisian/Dutch. My Y haplogroup points to the area of Frisia & Denmark, not Eastern Europe. So, the most likely narrative is early Frisians who migrated east along the Baltic Sea coast, probably following the Danes to Pomerania and intermarrying with existing West Slavic people near present Gdansk. That is more interesting than "German" to me. The Bavarian/Saxon part was added after coming to the US.
My maternal line is more complicated -- once you get past the 1/2 Kerry Irish DNA you are in the weeds.
That is fascinating, and shows a good deal of research.
First of all, I wrote a typo upthread. I meant to write "great" grandmother not "great great" grandmother. She passed away in 1959 while I was still a little kid. Never met her in person; she lived back east (NE). She herself knew that she was Native American, so I don't get where people think that others just make things up. (Not getting at you, SunGrins - would never as I have mad respect for you, as well as the others here.)
As for surnames, my surname is actually Dutch, which through some research we learned that there is a German form of the surname that is also a diminution. (Meaning that the full surname is also in use.) The Dutch part of our family line goes waaay back. More recent lines are Irish.
Now shaddup people before I go all Viking on ya!
Last night I was doing some research and was able to get all the way back to 194 on my father's side where it goes dead. When I checked "person" and then "relationship" to me, I learned that my parents are related going back 15 generations, through a surname that my brother happened to marry the first time. (Probably not the same surname line.) I called my dad and we had a good laugh about that. I'm sure there are lots of people who are distantly related, like research shows various unlikely people are related to the BRF who actually to some people are not the actual royal family line.
Trying to prove Native American ancestry is one of the top reasons people take these tests, and are usually disappointed to find out they don't have any NA DNA, even though they swear up and down that their great-grandmother was Native and people in their family have "Native features." It's probably the most common fable told in families that we hear about over and over again. People get very defensive when this is challenged.
I ended up with a small amount, and being adopted had no knowledge of any family history, but building out my biological family tree I know all my Native ancestry came from the East Coast, both New York (Mohawk) and from some ancestors in the Carolinas, unknown tribe. I also get a little Subsaharan African and South Asian that show up in multiple tests. So it is possible that NA will show up in a test even if your ancestors came from the East Coast.
In my 23andMe test, even using the most conservative setting (90% certainty) these show up. Ancestry shows them also.
The image shows 23andMe's "90% certainty" setting, with Ancestry's estimates below. Ancestry thinks my NA is from Mexico, and they used to say specifically Yucatan, but that seems highly unlikely! Although pre-conquest peoples did travel far and wide and were not hindered by borders. Interesting that both tests identify Nigeria and the Congo in small amounts. Ancestry says the Nigerian came from my maternal side, and Congo from my paternal side. Not something I can back up with research. The South Asian comes from the same ancestor on my paternal side as Subsaharan, and whose family were Free People of Color. Trade routes connected India and Africa with the Americas so evidently some mixing happened somewhere.
It's these results in small amounts that seem to be more accurate and reliable than my overall European results which vary widely from company to company, and change over time.
I have such a small amount that it is negligible. I wouldn't assert to anyone in Indian Country or any tribe that I'm Native American. Apparently my ancestor was from a small band of a larger but small tribe in Western Massachusetts.
Your results are fascinating.
As more and more people enter the gene pool of these companies, and scientific research improves the results will become more accurate. I waited for version 4.0 to have my dogs' DNA studied. I was happy with one result, and mystified by the other. When I had my son's dog done 3 years prior to that (version 2.0) it was spot on. So even with time and a wider gene pool we just don't know enough yet.
Dismissing someone's anecdotal evidence is questionable, just as anecdotal evidence might be questionable. The relative in question lived to be just under 100 years old, born in the mid-1850's. A large percentage of "evidence" was anecdotal back then.
Dismissing someone's anecdotal evidence is questionable, just as anecdotal evidence might be questionable.
The relative in question lived to be just under 100 years old, born in the mid-1850's.
A large percentage of "evidence" was anecdotal back then.
You've just mentioned this point twice now.
You have a complete misapprehension ... NO ONE is dismissing anecdotes from their own family.
Most are charming and some are even completely accurate. Some.
Thank you Mr. Rational. I would expect nothing less, or different, than this comment.
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.
