9% north east England - what does that mean?

[David Nicoll]

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

[Norfolk Nan]

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.

[Biggles50]

Mine is pretty good.

This is my Irish.

Only issue is there are minimal records to support this spread.

[Norfolk Nan]

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?

[Biggles50]

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”.

[Biggles50]

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.

[David Nicoll]

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.

[Glen in Tinsel Kni]

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.   

[Biggles50]

I also do that, it makes following DNA branches far easier.

If there is an image of a person I use an app to place a small DNA symbol in the corner so I have the best of both worlds.

Do feel free anyone to borrow these for your own DNA branches.