Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

No French Ancestry?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • No French Ancestry?

    Hello,

    My father is 3/4 French Acadian and I figured it would show in my Family Finder results. However on MyOrigins it does not show any Western and Central Europe. It shows 48% British Isles, 29% Southern Europe and 24% Scandinavia.

    Any reason for no Western and Central Europe being detected when I am over a third French Acadian?

  • #2
    Originally posted by rmurphy View Post
    Hello,

    Any reason for no Western and Central Europe being detected when I am over a third French Acadian?
    Perhaps your French Acadian ancestors aren't what they said they were? I have found cases of ancestors adopting a new identity to cover up what their background really was.

    Jack

    Comment


    • #3
      British Isles and Southern Europe are both closely related to West/Central Europe, it's possible your French ancestry is showing up under one of those categories instead.

      In my experience, FamilyTreeDNA has the worst ethnicity reports. I have several known British branches in my tree, and Ancestry.com's DNA test says 55% Great Britain, and 23andMe say 17.2% British & Irish, yet FTDNA says 0% British Isles. It's all showing up under Scandinavian and West/Central Europe instead.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks for the replies!

        I would assume that at least some of my many Acadian ancestors would have been from France? I also do not have anything in my detailed family tree that shows ancestors from Southern Europe (Spain, Italy) so it must be the French that is showing up.

        Comment


        • #5
          You might want to read this http://dna-explained.com/2016/02/10/...g-a-conundrum/

          My mother gets:

          72% British Isles
          19% Southern Europe
          9% Scandinavia

          She had one French great-grandparent from a village a few miles west of Metz, whose ancestors (those I have been able to trace) lived in the area since at least the 1500s. He married a woman from Luxembourg. Another great-grandparent came from the Bas-Rhine area of France, but had a lot of Swiss ancestry. Only two great-grandparents were of colonial American Ancestry (UK, Netherlands, France). The others were German.

          Comment


          • #6
            Get use to it, I am nothing I thought I was. I am 55% Central and Western European and mainly Eastern Euro with a small bit of BI, SE, and Fin. I thought I would have been 60%+ British Isles as my family comes from Somerset England. Funny how we think we are something and find we are not what we thought we were....lol

            Comment


            • #7
              I don't necessarily believe that we're not what we think we are. I think these ethnicity tests aren't very accurate.

              Those at Ancestry and 23andMe may be more accurate because they focus the more recent past. FTDNA says their test is based on 1,000 to 10,000 years ago. Few of us know where our ancestors lived that long ago, at least if they were European.

              Comment


              • #8
                Claims about an ethnic origins test "representing" populations that lived 1000 or 10000 years ago have to be regarded as iffy, at best. Those populations have not been tested, and we have no way of knowing what the deep ancestry of any of the modern samples supposed to represent, say, Germany, actually was. For me, the most troubling aspect of the ethnic origins industry is that I don't see any independent way to verify the results. The most common argument I've heard in support of the current methodology is that the results "make sense", but this evidence appears to be anecdotal, and the comments in this and other forums tell us that many people have received results that are either way off the mark, or else so vague as to be nearly meaningless. So far, this does not sound like science.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by John McCoy View Post
                  Claims about an ethnic origins test "representing" populations that lived 1000 or 10000 years ago have to be regarded as iffy, at best. Those populations have not been tested, and we have no way of knowing what the deep ancestry of any of the modern samples supposed to represent, say, Germany, actually was. For me, the most troubling aspect of the ethnic origins industry is that I don't see any independent way to verify the results. The most common argument I've heard in support of the current methodology is that the results "make sense", but this evidence appears to be anecdotal, and the comments in this and other forums tell us that many people have received results that are either way off the mark, or else so vague as to be nearly meaningless. So far, this does not sound like science.
                  Thanks for saying this.

                  My research is finding a lot of dispersal of mtDNA haplogroups within the last 300 years. However the "experts" act like that is an impossibility, preferring to attribute the movement to something that happened thousands of years ago.

                  Which is more plausible (though plausibility does not really matter, because I have the data)?

                  Jack

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The way people have been moving around during the last 300 years, I would expect a lot of dispersal.

                    I think the ethnicity part of the DNA tests started out as a fun little bonus you got with an autosomal DNA test in addition to your "real" results - your list of people sharing DNA segments with you. Ancestry, knowing full well that it wasn't accurate, turned it into an ad campaign to sell tons of DNA tests. Ancestry was great when the original owner was in control, but I think they're very unethical now.

                    But we can't do without them. The digital images of documents are great. But collections of digital images disappear from the free FamilySearch and reappear a year or two later on Ancestry. How they can do that I don't know. And some images that used to come with an Ancestry subscription, you now have to order from VitalCheck. Ancestry is all about raking in money.

                    I think we should all send them feedback every few days asking for a chromosome browser.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      If you go over to gedmatch.com, register, and upload your data file, if you run your kit number in the Eurogenes K13 admixture tool with Oracles, I would not be surprised if the Oracle-4 identifies your French.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by rmurphy View Post
                        Hello,

                        My father is 3/4 French Acadian and I figured it would show in my Family Finder results. However on MyOrigins it does not show any Western and Central Europe. It shows 48% British Isles, 29% Southern Europe and 24% Scandinavia.

                        Any reason for no Western and Central Europe being detected when I am over a third French Acadian?
                        The results may depend greatly on what part of France your ancestors were from. For instance, Scandinavian could indicate immigrants from Normandie and Southern European immigrants from Provence. France has experienced a lot of immigration over the past 3,000 years and the little ethnic group of people unique to that country is kind of contained in the middle of it. To be perfectly honest, the land now known as France was not ethnically unified back when they called it Gaul!
                        Sorry for the late reply.
                        Last edited by Rhonda Hatton; 8th January 2018, 06:28 PM. Reason: Didn't make sense

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X