Dna and ethnicity

[Jaslima]

Ok, i know this is going to sound really sad :-D

I'm Northern Irish, have Irish parents, Irish grandparents, Irish ancestry as far as I knew etc but there has always just been something about my mother's side that I just couldn't put my finger on. It's a certain look: dark eyes, dark hair, certain features...not tanned skin but definitely a certain vibe that made me think maybe our distant ancestors weren't European. I always suspected Middle Eastern but had no way of knowing. This was a lineage I invented in my head.

I remember being about 20 and looking in the mirror and thinking 'I just know there is something in my blood from somewhere far away'. My husband used to joke that people from Arabic countries were 'my people'. All my friends knew my crazy theory.

Anyway, at Christmas I decided to do one of those dna tests to see if we had any Middle Eastern heritage. I know they are based on an algorithm, aren't an exact science and can be misleading but the kit was on sale so I did it.

Anyway, the results came in yesterday. It was exactly what I thought.

93% of the Ethnic group of the Irish/Northern Irish/Scottish/English/Welsh (as expected),

5%Finnish (makes sense being so close to the above).

1.2% West Asian and 0.8 Middle Eastern! I can't tell you how not surprised I was by this. In my heart it made perfect sense.

I only know one Irish person who did a dna test and hers was pretty much 100% British Isles, more or less. I told someone about my results and she said that everyone probably everyone has some Middle Eastern dna somewhere. I felt a bit deflated!

Is this true? Again I know that these are just estimates and should be taken with a pinch of salt. I just can't help thinking how strange it is that my totally unfounded hunch that my family has Middle Eastern roots was backed up by the DNA test, even if it was just 0.8%. I feel like this has kind of validated a feeling I've had all my life but am wondering what the chances are that it's not true.

If you got your dna done, what did it come back with? Did it line up with any research you did? I find it all insanely interesting!

She explained upthread, her mum has facial features that look non irish. I think we can all wonder about a lot of things at once, OP comes across as somebody interested in her own story, I'll admit to that too. It's a jigsaw piece, a clue, one clue on mumsnet is not a fetish fgs

You think I'm getting some kind of perverse kick out of the thought I might have Arabic ancestry? How did this thread devolve to this level?

Desperate?

I felt an affinity for a part of the world I lived in, always wondered about my family heritage, did a DNA test and got a small percentage from that region, could mean nothing. It was fun, a bit of trivia that brightened up my week. How did such cynical undertones creep into me feeling happy with the thought of having a genetic link to the Middle East? I've always been fascinated with the area and the people because I find the cultures and languages interesting. I'm a Christian and also love learning about the Israelites in the Old Testament, the Hebrew language, the culture and history of the Canaanite people and lots of things connected to that region. There is nothing sinister to it.

For what it's worth, I generally fascinated with lots of other cultures. One of my good friends is Japanese and I love learning about the culture there. Years ago I went to Urdu classes as I worked in an area in England where lots of people spoke the language. I currently live in a community with lots of people of Kazakhstan and love learning about their country. One of my friends is half Greek/half Egyptian and love hearing about how her cultures combine. When I lived in the Middle East, I organised an Iftar meal where everyone brought a dish from their country. We had South African, Lebanese, Italian, Spanish and Indian fare. I made potato bread:-)

well of course you have genetic links to the middle East, everyone does

Op while I believe you are genuine. I am mixed race. I can get the other posters comments/assumptions.

Theres is a trend for people to try and claim the most tenuous link to other cultures and ethnicities, by (mainly) white people. Almost in an attempt to either enter a marginalised group or to try claim a ‘exotic’ culture. Which is then claimed as their own and often disrespected.

I have seen it more and more in the UK recently. The US equivalent is ‘my great grandmother was a Cherokee princess’.

Not saying you are doing this, but it’s frustrating for those of us that have faced discrimination, racism etc due to our backgrounds and culture when people trying and claim it as their own. As though it’s fashionable. So people can be sensitive about it.

Personally, because I am not very dark, I have been accused of similar. People don’t recognise I am mixed race, quite often. I get grouped in with these people whenever I wear my cultural items. So it’s frustrating for me.

Again, I am not saying you are doing this. But, I can see how some people could read it that way

@Bellalalala thanks for your perspective. I really am sorry if I offended anyone.

The anglo-saxons were not a few boat-loads of roman ex-auxiliaries. Both the Angles and the Saxons are of Germanic origin.

Guys I'm actually mortified that I've come across as some kind of cultural fetishist, especially when it's over a culture I've just loved so much. Without going into detail, there are aspects of my own identity which I don't appreciate being appropriated and I would hate for anyone to think I was doing the same, intentionally or otherwise.

Hi , I class myself as british , born in the same town as both parents were born in.
My Ancestry DNA is
80% England & Northwest Europe
11% Welsh
6% Norway

3% Sweden & Denmark

Armada survivors were massacred in Galway , Clare, Kerry . The handful of important noblemen who were kept for ransom were sent to Dublin or even London.

The only reason de Cuellar and his mates survived is because they were lucky enough to land in the North West , an area controlled by the O Rourke and O Donnell chieftains. The south was firmly under English control since the collapse of the Desmond Rebellion in 1583 and the massacre at Smerwick Head. The English do love a good massacre.

However people will always believe many Irish people have dark hair because of the Armada. Everyone wants to be descended from a handsome Spaniard . Or a Viking . There's worse things to believe , so leave them at it I say !

as were many of the roman auxillaries

There were around 20 boat-loads of them, mercenaries from the roman army called upon by british warlords

Most DNA in the british population is ancient British, from before the romans. There were celtic invaders, but they just settled along the West coasts- they were dominant pre-roman, but by superior technology and power, never by number. The "anglos" or the "saxons" - also known as "anglosaxons" were not a national group, just a few boatloads of left over mercenaries, of mixed origin, of which germanic was probably dominant

what you have got to understand is where this myth of the noble celt s driven out by the blood thirsty anglosaxons has come from.

Henry Tudor, the Welsh conqueror king, invented it.

He needed as many props to his claim to the throne as possible

His idea was to claim that the celts lived all over the UK and owned the land by right, until the lawless anglo saxons took over.

This story stood from the 1600 to the late twentieth century

Proper REAL DNA analysis, and other forms of scientific archeology show a completely different story

The population of the british isles/ireland are basically descendent of the ancient brits. There is influence from celtic invasions in the west, but they did not diplace the ancient brits, and anglosaxons from the east, who also did not displace them

Roman influences can be found, but genetically indistinguishable from "anglo saxons" as they were basically the same soldiers fighting for different armies. Same individuals.

YOU might be interested to know large amounts of DNA from Africa also brough over by the Romans, particularly to North England and Scotland

There was Viking influences too, but almost no Norman influence, for the same reason. The "Norman" army and the "Viking" army were largely the same men fighting for different armies. Same individuals even, not just same families

Of course not one iota of ay of this shows up in these commercial companies, because all of this DNA, including the African DNA, is found in the UK, so in their spread sheet, likely to be classed as UK most of the time.

But of course, any Brit is largely British, but also a mixture of all these other influences, African, Norwegian, Germanic, Mediterranean, middle eastern. Asian too, it would only take one Asian Roman soldier on the scottish border 1800 years ago for every single Brit to have a tiny fraction of his DNA now

Go back to Edward first, every Brit is related to every other Brit, (and descended from Edward first)

(By Brit I am talking about the indigenous population - obviously)

But if one of these companies tells you about a percent of African DNA, its just most likely picked up on what is normally counted as British DNA, but does originate in Africa,

“Theres is a trend for people to try and claim the most tenuous link to other cultures and ethnicities, by (mainly) white people. Almost in an attempt to either enter a marginalised group or to try claim a ‘exotic’ culture. Which is then claimed as their own and often disrespected.”

Elizabeth Warren and her claims spring to mind!

I really don’t get why people do this. It doesn’t make you special.

My DNA is 98% from one region in one country and 2% from the bordering one. I’m proud to be a thoroughbred and it’s actually more rare to have such concentrated ancestry.

Brittany in North West France is so called after the British refugees who settled there to escape the Anglo Saxons.

As for Henry Tudor - who needs him. I have my handy copy of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle wherein their victories over the British are described. Apart from early Welsh sources long predating Mr Tudor.

But they didnt come from these places, they were just dubbed "anglo saxons" by the Brits. There was no actual people called "anglosaxons". They were just left over from the roman empire, and could have originated anywhere

Really, not so different to the British army today, a group could retire, and they could be called the "Billybobs" and land on a south sea Island and help uphold a particular cheif there, then people generations later might say "o we are descended from the Billybobs who came from England"

But the ethnic origins and DNA of those soldiers could come from anywhere, they were brought together in the army, and a certain proportion might be ethnically English, but an awful lot wont be

This very interesting. I’m intrigued to know from @Nimbostratus100 why there is so much secrecy around Cheddar Man?

largely because of privacy for the local population, who are very closely genetically related to him, and some of whom gave DNA samples as children, and/or without understanding the implications. Some permissions to publish information have been redacted

Why are you "proud to be a thoroughbed"? I mean, you've had no control over it.

I can see why people get excited at the idea, however inaccurate, that they may have ancestors who were from further away than the British Isles. It makes for a more interesting story about ourselves. It's not to be "special".

There were far more of them than that. And they arrived following the withdrawal of the Romans. There were also the Jutes and Frisians who arrived around the same time. Your description of a few boatloads of mercenaries of mixed origin, some of whom were of Germanic descent does not coincide with the evidence I have seen over several decades' worth of genealogical study, nor does it explain why such a large proportion of the English language is derived from Germanic words.

the history of the English language shows a temporary influence by "anglosaxons" in some official documents before reverting to the original

hence why "middle English" is incomprehensible, but older English much closer to what we speak today

I am a geneticist by training, and I dont really have any confidence in anything calling itself a "genealogical study" . Is it genetic? or isnt it?

but you know, when English was first spoken, Britain was joined to Europe.

After separation, there was more movement around Europe, and less into and out of Britain,

so there is a very good argument that English is an isolated fragment of the original Languages spoken In Europe, so which way the influence went is an interesting question

Norman Lords used to send their sons to Ireland to learn the best high quality English there!

The history of sea based trade between Britain, Ireland, and continental Europe from early medieval times onwards would say otherwise, @Nimbostratus100 - Viking settlements in Ireland were major trading centres.

would say otherwise to what?

A friend did one of these kits- she’s Russian and Eastern European heritage but came back as 2% Brazilian. Another friend did one as she was adopted as a child and it showed her which area her father was most likely from (she vaguely knew where her mother was from from the birth certificate). We’re all human and all have the same genetic heritage if you go back far enough. It also feels uncomfortable to me to be more proud of certain results “I’m a pure bred” or “I’m exotic” than others. Why would it matter if you’re partly from X or Y rather than A or B?

It’s also worth remembering that as more people take these tests, your results can change. Mine has changed at least once this year.