|
|
Post by Strewthless on Sept 14, 2020 18:10:04 GMT -5
I did a test last year as got one for my birthday, bulk of my DNA is England & NW Europe & it even managed to narrow me down to Central Southern England (I'm from Portsmouth). Rest of that region isn't surprising either as my paternal grandfather was born in France, his mother was French & his father was Belgian. Next biggest percentage is Scottish, followed by Norwegian/Swedish (which was surprising as have no known connections there), then some Irish, a little Welsh & some Germanic Europe. I started doing my family tree last year & managed to trace my ancestry right back through French aristocracy, via my paternal great grandmother, all the way back to the Franks & beyond. Well they say that most Europeans are descendants of Charlemagne & he was my 40 x great grandfather. I wasn't aware of any Scottish family connections either, but I found that I am related to the Wallace Clan of Renfrewshire, as a William Wallace was my 15 x great grandfather. Obviously not THE William Wallace, but must be related to him in some way. It's really interesting when you start looking into your history & when you do a DNA test you get matches with people you are distantly related to which is quite bizarre but fun. Sounds really specific, what test did you do? |
|
|
|
Post by flamingGalah on Sept 14, 2020 18:15:10 GMT -5
I did a test last year as got one for my birthday, bulk of my DNA is England & NW Europe & it even managed to narrow me down to Central Southern England (I'm from Portsmouth). Rest of that region isn't surprising either as my paternal grandfather was born in France, his mother was French & his father was Belgian. Next biggest percentage is Scottish, followed by Norwegian/Swedish (which was surprising as have no known connections there), then some Irish, a little Welsh & some Germanic Europe. I started doing my family tree last year & managed to trace my ancestry right back through French aristocracy, via my paternal great grandmother, all the way back to the Franks & beyond. Well they say that most Europeans are descendants of Charlemagne & he was my 40 x great grandfather. I wasn't aware of any Scottish family connections either, but I found that I am related to the Wallace Clan of Renfrewshire, as a William Wallace was my 15 x great grandfather. Obviously not THE William Wallace, but must be related to him in some way. It's really interesting when you start looking into your history & when you do a DNA test you get matches with people you are distantly related to which is quite bizarre but fun. Sounds really specific, what test did you do? It was Ancestry.com. My sister had done a test on there too & it matched us as full siblings. |
|
|
|
Post by Mörön on Sept 14, 2020 18:42:58 GMT -5
And I also don't feel like giving strangers free access to my DNA. If they want it, they will have to pay up, not me paying them lmao. I don't care if they clone me or something.  Why would cloning you be good?  |
|
|
|
Post by Doña Jimena on Sept 15, 2020 0:41:09 GMT -5
I don't care if they clone me or something. Why would cloning you be good? I do not think that I am that special to clone me, unlike 99% of people who think that their data are very important and that CIA, Mossad and other secret services think about them all the time. |
|
|
|
Post by Mörön on Sept 15, 2020 0:43:36 GMT -5
Why would cloning you be good? I do not think that I am that special to clone me, unlike 99% of people who think that their data are very important and that CIA, Mossad and other secret services think about them all the time. Ok. |
|
|
|
DNA tests
Sept 15, 2020 0:53:50 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Doña Jimena on Sept 15, 2020 0:53:50 GMT -5
Not far? Nothing is the same, not a single component. LOL both eastern european tho Ashkenazi jewish people always lived very isolated from other populations and your result is kinda typical with over 90% of it. Small percenrages are just noice. |
|
|
|
Post by Donar on Sept 16, 2020 13:56:26 GMT -5
Would be interesting to see the results but I guess I'm to a very high percentage Germanic/Central European anyway as I don't know of any foreign ancestors.
|
|
|
|
Post by Strewthless on Sept 16, 2020 14:59:24 GMT -5
I know my mum's side are most from north Wales, dad's side is more of a mix. Some Irish via immigrants to Liverpool and my gran is half Scottish, her mum was from Dumfries and Galloway in south west Scotland, although I think she grew up in Cumbria where her dad owned a farm.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doña Jimena on Sept 19, 2020 4:05:06 GMT -5
Would be interesting to see the results but I guess I'm to a very high percentage Germanic/Central European anyway as I don't know of any foreign ancestors. There are two types of Germans who "don't know of any foreign ancestors": 1. With high % of Eastern European or Baltic who suddenly start to remember their grandparents actually lived in Poland, Baltics,etc. 2. Those who get high % of Scandinavian and English. That makes sense again as other Germanic people must be related to Germans. |
|
|
|
Post by Donar on Sept 19, 2020 13:57:23 GMT -5
Would be interesting to see the results but I guess I'm to a very high percentage Germanic/Central European anyway as I don't know of any foreign ancestors. There are two types of Germans who "don't know of any foreign ancestors": 1. With high % of Eastern European or Baltic who suddenly start to remember their grandparents actually lived in Poland, Baltics,etc. 2. Those who get high % of Scandinavian and English. That makes sense again as other Germanic people must be related to Germans. Nah, I don't have (great-)grandparents from the former eastern territories, not even the GDR but funnily enough I've heard a few times that I look slavic.
|
|
|
|
Post by Babu on Sept 20, 2020 11:07:57 GMT -5
This is what I'd expect based off what I know of my ancestory. It'd be interesting to see if there's any jewish in me, or if the share of eastern european would be higher than I know of. Or if there'd be anything unexpected with a higher level than just standard 1-5% noise.  |
|
|
|
Post by aabc123 on Sept 21, 2020 5:26:07 GMT -5
There are a few things to consider here. The first is that the DNA of Estonians themselves varies quite strongly from north to south throughout the country especially considering the small size of the country and those Estonians who have a greater DNA similarity with Finns live in the northern part of Estonia. Another thing that is good to know is that there have been quite intense Finnish colonization in the northern parts of Estonia in past centuries but over time Finns who once settled in northern Estonia have taken over the Estonian language and ethnic identity. So I want to say that the Estonians in many parts of northern Estonia are actually partly fake-Estonians in some sense because they are actually Finns (especially in West-Viru county). Thus, if the aforementioned Finnish colonization in northern Estonia had not taken place the DNA similarity of Estonians to Finns would have been even smaller and to Balts even greater.
Finns have also a big genetic variation between east and west (left map), roughly following the 1323 Treaty of Nöteborg border (centre map), and the prehistoric old settlement areas, and the "new" medieval settlement area (right map). The people who colonised Ingria and parts of Swedish Estonia were mostly from the blue dot hotspot (Savonian expansion).
And that NE Estonia area was colonized by the Finns not only in the very old days but also in much later times, for example after World War II a lot of Ingrian Finns migrated there from the Russia's Leningrad region. Compared to Estonians in other counties there are even now far more East-Baltic-looking snub-nosed blondes with typically Finnish -nen ending family names and slightly chinky faces. The fact that the inhabitants of the northeast are more borealized is even visible to the naked eye if you are attentive enough and drive back from there to some regular Estonian county. (But this is not always the case. One of my great-grandmothers was from the NE coast too, but her facial features were very (Indo)European. So even though I personally haven't let anyone study my genes so far, I hope for the best. ) In short, I want to say that the Estonians 'in the original' were probably (paradoxically, no matter the "Finnish" language) Indo- European a r1aians but the northern part of them has been tilted away by Siberian guys like you. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Sept 21, 2020 7:15:23 GMT -5
And that NE Estonia area was colonized by the Finns not only in the very old days but also in much later times, for example after World War II a lot of Ingrian Finns migrated there from the Russia's Leningrad region. Compared to Estonians in other counties there are even now far more East-Baltic-looking snub-nosed blondes with typically Finnish -nen ending family names and slightly chinky faces. The fact that the inhabitants of the northeast are more borealized is even visible to the naked eye if you are attentive enough and drive back from there to some regular Estonian county. (But this is not always the case. One of my great-grandmothers was from the NE coast too, but her facial features were very (Indo)European. So even though I personally haven't let anyone study my genes so far, I hope for the best. ) In short, I want to say that the Estonians 'in the original' were probably (paradoxically, no matter the "Finnish" language) Indo- European a r1aians but the northern part of them has been tilted away by Siberian guys like you.
Well, all of the Nordics and Baltics were settled at the same time after the last ice age, so "looks" depending on modern nationality is just bs. Neither is there any evidence of any migration from "Siberia".
|
|
|
|
Post by aabc123 on Sept 21, 2020 9:02:59 GMT -5
And that NE Estonia area was colonized by the Finns not only in the very old days but also in much later times, for example after World War II a lot of Ingrian Finns migrated there from the Russia's Leningrad region. Compared to Estonians in other counties there are even now far more East-Baltic-looking snub-nosed blondes with typically Finnish -nen ending family names and slightly chinky faces. The fact that the inhabitants of the northeast are more borealized is even visible to the naked eye if you are attentive enough and drive back from there to some regular Estonian county. (But this is not always the case. One of my great-grandmothers was from the NE coast too, but her facial features were very (Indo)European. So even though I personally haven't let anyone study my genes so far, I hope for the best. ) In short, I want to say that the Estonians 'in the original' were probably (paradoxically, no matter the "Finnish" language) Indo- European a r1aians but the northern part of them has been tilted away by Siberian guys like you.
Well, all of the Nordics and Baltics were settled at the same time after the last ice age, so "looks" depending on modern nationality is just bs. Neither is there any evidence of any migration from "Siberia".
I do not want to go into details here because it is off-topic but recent research shows that the Estonian territory was inhabited by Indo-Europeans before the Uralic tribes got here (an inconvenient knowledge for some Estonian Baltophobic/IE phobic nationalists who have always tried to prove that the Uralic tribes arrived first but who cares). Later, the Uralic tribes came and extended to the territory of present-day Lithuania. North of the Daugava river the contact of the locals with the arrived Uralics was more intense as the Uralic language was taken over there. In short I personally have been quite skeptical of those 'we are Finno-Ugric people' stories and statements because Estonians are actually fake Finno-Ugric aka Uralic people because the characteristics other than language are not Uralic. |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Sept 21, 2020 9:13:32 GMT -5
I do not want to go into details here because it is off-topic but recent research shows that the Estonian territory was inhabited by Indo-Europeans before the Uralic tribes got here (an inconvenient knowledge for some Estonian Baltophobic/IE phobic nationalists who have always tried to prove that the Uralic tribes arrived first but who cares). Later, the Uralic tribes came and extended to the territory of present-day Lithuania. North of the Daugava river the contact of the locals with the arrived Uralics was more intense as the Uralic language was taken over there. In short I personally have been quite skeptical of those 'we are Finno-Ugric people' stories and statements because Estonians are actually fake Finno-Ugric aka Uralic people because the characteristics other than language are not Uralic.
Well the Uralic language arrived approximately 2000 years ago, while people had lived in Estonia and Finland for 5000 prior. And it took about 2000 years for the earliest proto-Uralic languages to spread to the Baltic Sea. So of course.
I don't know what you mean with "characteristics", but if you mean looks, it's completely arbitrary.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doña Jimena on Sept 23, 2020 11:16:57 GMT -5
I do not want to go into details here because it is off-topic but recent research shows that the Estonian territory was inhabited by Indo-Europeans before the Uralic tribes got here (an inconvenient knowledge for some Estonian Baltophobic/IE phobic nationalists who have always tried to prove that the Uralic tribes arrived first but who cares). Later, the Uralic tribes came and extended to the territory of present-day Lithuania. North of the Daugava river the contact of the locals with the arrived Uralics was more intense as the Uralic language was taken over there. In short I personally have been quite skeptical of those 'we are Finno-Ugric people' stories and statements because Estonians are actually fake Finno-Ugric aka Uralic people because the characteristics other than language are not Uralic.
Well the Uralic language arrived approximately 2000 years ago, while people had lived in Estonia and Finland for 5000 prior. And it took about 2000 years for the earliest proto-Uralic languages to spread to the Baltic Sea. So of course.
I don't know what you mean with "characteristics", but if you mean looks, it's completely arbitrary.
Actually, there is evidence for massive migrations from Siberia/Urals to Finland and the Baltics. There are not only autosomal tests, but Y DNA tests for men (Family Tree DNA and other companies do such tests). Over 60% of Finnish men and 30-40% in the Baltics belong to the haplogroup N which originated in China. In other European countries, the proportion of this haplogroup is close to 0: www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N-M231#Origins |
|
|
|
Post by Yahya Sinwar on Sept 23, 2020 12:08:11 GMT -5
heres my (((dna test)))  Amazing , 96% of my DNA is european Jewish as well ( not)! Clearly you are from the Middle East and we are cousins ( not). |
|
|
|
Post by Ariete on Sept 23, 2020 12:11:27 GMT -5
Actually, there is evidence for massive migrations from Siberia/Urals to Finland and the Baltics. There are not only autosomal tests, but Y DNA tests for men (Family Tree DNA and other companies do such tests). Over 60% of Finnish men and 30-40% in the Baltics belong to the haplogroup N which originated in China. In other European countries, the proportion of this haplogroup is close to 0: www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtml
Meanwhile, there's no evidence whatsoever for a targeted deliberate migration. The genes spread during a very long time, and all genes have a origin somewhere. The original R1 Y-dna haplogroup most commonly found in Slavic people is also ancient, but believed to be "younger" than the N haplogroup. It is believed that N was born 40000 years ago somewhere in Eastern Asia, while R1 was probably split from R 25000 years ago, most likely in modern day Iraq.
R1a is the dominant in Eastern Europeans, but have several sub-branches like R1a1a1b1. Most Finns with an N is the subtype N1a1a1a1a1a1a, and most Baltics have the N1a1a1a1a1a1a1 subgroup (one 1 more).
Anyway, the point being, that just looking at genes and their grand origin reveals little to nothing. To get some meaningful history you have to mainly look at other things, like in archaeology or linguistics.
The somewhat of a consensus in Finland why the N-haplogroup being so common in Finland and somewhat common in the Baltic States is that is that these N-persons and their culture brought the Uralic language to the region some 2500 years ago (it is believed that the proto-Sami language group split from the general branch back then). The language evolved into proto-Finnic roughly at the time when Jesus was born.
How the language spread was likely both with awe and the sword. Violence because Finnish, Estonian and Latvian females have much more stereotypical western mt-DNA in them. Therefore you can assume that the N-people killed the men and married the women. Swedish archeologists have come to the conclusion from their evidence, that beer brewing spread to Sweden via Finland, and that was probably because of the culture the N-people spread here.
|
|
|
|
Post by aabc123 on Sept 23, 2020 16:30:11 GMT -5
Well the Uralic language arrived approximately 2000 years ago, while people had lived in Estonia and Finland for 5000 prior. And it took about 2000 years for the earliest proto-Uralic languages to spread to the Baltic Sea. So of course.
I don't know what you mean with "characteristics", but if you mean looks, it's completely arbitrary.
Actually, there is evidence for massive migrations from Siberia/Urals to Finland and the Baltics. There are not only autosomal tests, but Y DNA tests for men (Family Tree DNA and other companies do such tests). Over 60% of Finnish men and 30-40% in the Baltics belong to the haplogroup N which originated in China. In other European countries, the proportion of this haplogroup is close to 0: www.eupedia.com/europe/european_y-dna_haplogroups.shtmlen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_N-M231#OriginsThere is no doubt that the N haplogroup exists in the region of the eastern shore of the Baltic Sea and it also seems that this haplogroup can be associated with the Finno-Ugric language group. According to the Eupedia source you cited, 67% of Udmurts and 61% of Maris have it. In the Baltic Sea region it is owned by 61.5% of Finns, 42% of Lithuanians and 38% of Latvians. Interestingly Estonians have 34% of haplogrup N which is somewhat less than Indo-European Balt-speaking Latvians and Lithuanians. ps Ariete, I hope you didn't take some of my previous comments too death seriously. |
|
|
|
Post by Doña Jimena on Sept 24, 2020 10:58:29 GMT -5
Meanwhile, there's no evidence whatsoever for a targeted deliberate migration. The genes spread during a very long time, and all genes have a origin somewhere. The original R1 Y-dna haplogroup most commonly found in Slavic people is also ancient, but believed to be "younger" than the N haplogroup. It is believed that N was born 40000 years ago somewhere in Eastern Asia, while R1 was probably split from R 25000 years ago, most likely in modern day Iraq. R1a is the dominant in Eastern Europeans, but have several sub-branches like R1a1a1b1. Most Finns with an N is the subtype N1a1a1a1a1a1a, and most Baltics have the N1a1a1a1a1a1a1 subgroup (one 1 more).
Anyway, the point being, that just looking at genes and their grand origin reveals little to nothing. To get some meaningful history you have to mainly look at other things, like in archaeology or linguistics. The somewhat of a consensus in Finland why the N-haplogroup being so common in Finland and somewhat common in the Baltic States is that is that these N-persons and their culture brought the Uralic language to the region some 2500 years ago (it is believed that the proto-Sami language group split from the general branch back then). The language evolved into proto-Finnic roughly at the time when Jesus was born.
How the language spread was likely both with awe and the sword. Violence because Finnish, Estonian and Latvian females have much more stereotypical western mt-DNA in them. Therefore you can assume that the N-people killed the men and married the women. Swedish archeologists have come to the conclusion from their evidence, that beer brewing spread to Sweden via Finland, and that was probably because of the culture the N-people spread here. Personally, I think that genes do reveal something. You can change your surname, change your language, change your nationality, but you cannot change your genes. There have also been migrations and based on scientific research the haplogroup N has arrived in Finland and Baltics from North East (you can trace the migration path by mutations which have accumulated with time, as you have said not all N are the same, for example), that's it. You cannot prove exactly what language they spoke, but there is a certain correlation with the situation nowadays. I don't like the idea of languages spreading with violence. Finns aren't 100% N, just approx. 60%. Not all were killed? j/k And of course this is a very patriarchal view that languages are spread by men and women have nothing to say. My mt-DNA is H: www.eupedia.com/europe/Haplogroup_H_mtDNA.shtml |
|
