|
Joylouise
I think they are referring to the area covered by that region, rather than telling you you have connections to places like the Channel Islands. With a strong connection myself I find that it doesn’t really show up strongly.
|
|
Not so sure you're right, names, although I appreciate the regional aspect you mention because initially my DNA was defined more regionally.
However, my results seem to have been refined gradually through two updates.
For example, my first results included 6% Europe West ( Belgium, France, Gernany, Netherlands, Switzerland, Lux'bg, L'stein), a smaller percentage from the Iberian Peninsula, Europe South and an even smaller percentage (2%) from Europe East.
The last (second) update whittled this down to 2% Channel Islands and no mention of any other part of Europe (written above).
Similarly with the current result of 2% Swedish DNA.
Initially, the results showed 8% Scandinavian (Sweden, Norway and Denmark).
The first update showed 2% Norway and 2% Sweden.
The second (last) update showed only 2% Sweden.
I realise that these results are only a drop in the ocean of the 3 billion+ years of our ancestors and that, regionally, we ladies will find ourselves in Africa but for the time being my results stand - until, and if, I get a third update. I await with bated breath for that third update!
|
|
Hi JoyLouise
I am fascinated that Ancestry have shown your CI ancestry..
My current results are 83% (prev 76%)England, Wales NWest Europe with the emphasis on Central Southern England (this used to be the South East) with 12% Irish & Scottish,2% Norway (prev 5%). 2% European Jewish and 2 % Germanic Europe.
As your results show the CI I have looked at the ethnicity of close and distant relatives and NONE of them have been given a % for the Channel Islands. I should be around 25% give or take.
I'm also on My Heritage & Living DNA and none of them give the CI as an area. I would say they all lump it in with central southern England.
Curious - or favouritism! ;-)
|
|
I have to say, I was quite surprised how specific the second (last) update was, names.
I was also surprised how my DNA seemed to lack that variety others have from around the world.
It will be interesting to see whether there'll be a third update.
|
|
Ancestry state that they will update the ethnicity estimate periodically. The first update was August 2018 and the second August 2019. So maybe the next will be in a couple of months.
They do indicate the possible errors with each percentage. Thus they say mine is 77% English but could be anywhere between 73% and 99%. In any case the ethnicity should not be taken too seriously.
One advantage of the Ancestry tests is that you can upload the results to other matching programs but it is not usually possible to do the reverse.
|
|
You had me wondering, names, so I looked at my results again as I was relying much on memory for the last update - and I ought not to have done so for, as you will see, I related the Channel Isles percentage the same as Sweden! Sorry.
83% England, Wales and NW Europe - primarily located in Belgium, Channel Isles, England and Wales. It goes on to break this English figure into regions but states specifically Cheshire, Merseyside, South Lancashire and the Isle of Man.
15% Ireland and Scotland - includes Isle of Man (again), Ireland, Northern Ireland and Scotland.
2%. Sweden.
The Channel Isles and Sweden have me flummoxed but not the other regions.
Even my Isle of Man connection I knew about as there is a study of surnames (male only) originating in the Isle of Man and one of my direct ancestors (about fourth great gran) has one of the surnames being studied - passed from her father, clearly.
I have no idea whether the sequence of countries/regions mentioned - first mentioned to last mentioned denotes a high to low percentage but someone on here may know.
All or some of this could change if my results are checked using newer methods, of course.
I find it fascinating and it makes me want to delve deeper into family history.
A few years ago AnnCardiff stayed up into the wee small hours checking my ancestry and she got back several more centuries than I had managed - all kosher using official records. I am still working on it all.
|
|
JoyL - I’m on my iPad at the moment so it is. Memory here too.
Ancestry gives me central southern England as my strongest area. It doesn’t highlight anywhere else, unlike my OH who has 4or5 highlighted areas.
I know I have two Irish lines and am happy with that %. But I am told to ignore the very low %’s as these are more likely to be very faint traces from way, way back.
The other companies also give central south as my strongest area.
Are you aware that the CI’s have fantastic records going back up to 500 years.
I,ve seen programmes on TV which imply that the DNA testing can take you back to a specific place - I still waiting!
|
