RootsChat.Com
General => Ancestral Family Tree DNA Testing => Topic started by: Norfolk Nan on Friday 07 November 25 12:37 GMT (UK)
-
Sorry for the 'obvious' question but according to Ancestry's latest update I have 9% genes from the north east only on my father's side. So far, that tree hasn't gone higher than Norfolk. The Davison name populates the north east but so far his Davison ancestors are from London right down to the early 1700s. Can anyone explain what 9% might mean in terms of generations please?
Thank you.
-
My paternal half sister has Durham ancestors from the mid 1800's back to pre 1600 but is just 2% north east, I have none north of Sheffield and Manchester but have 21%
Our paternal Irish changes every update but the figures are basically reversed each time, one year it's 60/20, the next it's 20/60
-
Mmmm, not much help for sorting things out then...oh well ;D ;D
Thank you, btw.
-
Knowing my luck I have an Irish ancestor 5 generations back but they are the result of four generations of cousins marrying cousins so the O'Blimey gene is just stronger than anything else in me.
-
you mentioned an Irish gene - apparently mum has Munster genes (she had no idea) which helps narrow down where in Ireland her John Lee comes from. Doesn't pinpoint, but narrows the search area, I hope ;D ;D
-
One of the most useless ancestry updates yet. Has completely ignored where I know my family were for at least 200 years, and introduced two completely out of left field locations.
Treat them like most of ancestry's hints. Ignore.
-
Dublin it probably looks back one generation further than you have!
Zaph
-
There are a few maps online of where ancient Britons lived.
Around the country are stone circles and I am looking forward to future postings where chatters have discovered their DNA roots, then visited the areas of their primitive ancestors.
With the experiences of some chatters in mind who found headstones in cemeteries when they had no maps Will their memory banks contain any passed down ancient memories of tribal ceremonies performed near the ancient stones?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/british_prehistory/iron_01.shtml
https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/arts/classics/warwickclassicsnetwork/romancoventry/resources/prehistoricbritain/ironage/tribes/
-
That's done it, all I can think about now is Bobby 'Boris' Pickett singing his song the Munster Match
-
Hi,
I realise no one has really answered your question.
9% means 9% of your DNA matches most strongly with the Ancestry panel from the NE.
This can go wrong for many reasons. It may be that the difference between NE and SE is small, but that is not visible in the summary.
The numbers may be reflecting reality. A lot of Ancestry’s numbers seem to based on assumptions that I’m not sure really hold for the Uk. The reference panel is supposed to be people with deep roots in an area, but 1700 is not really that long ago, and I certainly had ancestors who move large distances and then settled for 200 years or so, so this may produce false groups.
You mention that Davison is a potentially NE name, though you can’t get that far back. However I see you also have Murray in your name list, a good Scots name, if this is in your DNA tree this may also be skewing your results.
Finally it is telling you something about your DNA, perhaps beyond a paper trail and not absolute, but real. I have a similar situation with “Irish” DNA, is this real or simply reflecting the cultural links with SW Scotland where I know I have ancestors. Ancestry have that Data but deem it too complex for us. MyHeritage seems to be leading the way on this front.
https://support.ancestry.co.uk/s/article/AncestryDNA-Reference-Panel
-
David - thank you for bringing us back to my question. I really appreciate it.
Both my Davison and Murray branches are stuck in London into the 1700s. Both brickwalls appear at their weddings c1770 fully formed but without any identifying information to use to find a birth or parents. It's a common problem. But how do you make a viable connection with another part of the country? if anyone has experience during this period I'd like to hear about it please...
Thank you.
-
Mine is pretty good.
This is my Irish.
Only issue is there are minimal records to support this spread.
-
I'm embarrassed to say I have Irish links too but just don't know how to get started. DNA says Munster but that's all I know and a common set of names really isn't helpful. Oh well, who said family history was easy?
-
This might shed some light of the 2025 Origins update.
https://support.ancestry.co.uk/s/article/Deep-Dive-AncestryDNA-2025-Origins-Update
The reference “panels” are still limited in numbers and Ancestry still has a strong reliance on the Family Trees of subscribers & we all know how accurate many of those are.
Probably best to still think of the Ancestry Ethnicity predictions as a “loose guide”.
-
I'm embarrassed to say I have Irish links too but just don't know how to get started. DNA says Munster but that's all I know and a common set of names really isn't helpful. Oh well, who said family history was easy?
My Irish is still a WIP.
I subscribed to two websites that were specific to Irish research.
One was pretty useless, the other gave me about 20 screenshots of potentials. So whilst I have added a few useful records there is still no specific records that I can find to substantiate a few of my probably Irish ancestors.
Tis a bit frustrating.
-
Hi again,
This is where you needs to go wide and deep with your DNA match groups and associated trees.
The answer will probably lie in amongst the 10 to 20cM matches. You may never get absolute certainty but if you are lucky and get a bit of pedigree collapse in one of those groups you may get pretty certain.
I am working through some similar situations myself, an Aberdeenshire family who apparently appear from nowhere in the 1700’s and a family in Kent with the same Surname in Lincolnshire, definitely linked, but finding it is proving a slow process.
-
I can link two surnames (one on each side), as Irish, the main problem is the UK matches tend to be pretty small, at best 40ish cM but often lower. I've built some VERY wide and deep branches though it often just leads me round to locations with large Irish populations that married into other Irish families. On the plus side bringing them forwards to the present day and in some cases having 150-200 individuals with the surname can make placing new matches on those branches far easier, I've already had the person in my tree when they appear in my matches more than once before now.
I give each match a special profile image (I also add the cM figure in the suffix box), and their ancestors get a special profile pic too so I can see the 'dna route' easily in tree view.
One thing it really highlights is how many generations can include a match, I think my deepest floating branch is 10 generations to the mrca and there are matches spanning four generations, I'm often surprised that the most recent generation can share two or there times the cM than someone two generation further up but with small matches it's hard to know if that's significant or perhaps indicates a case where we link in multiple ways.