Great Britain DNA result from Ancestry DNA

[kirsten elise]

Hello!
My known ancestry is from the Netherlands through my father and Denmark through my mother. I know my family tree quite well - depending on the line 6-10 generations back. There is no recent known Great Britain ancestry. I match to distant cousins I would expect on each of my lines, so there is definitely not a grandparent or great-grandparent from Great Britain. My result from ancestry.com was 20% Great Britain. Is this most likely to reflect:

a) deep ancestry in Great Britain, which is adjacent to both my known ancestry regions and so would likely share ancestry in the past 1000 years and beyond;
b) an interesting (and mistaken) result based on the combination of western European and Scandinavian ancestry from each of my parents;
c) an element held in the Danish ancestry as a result of Viking voyages/slave taking/returning home from the GB region.

Any thoughts would be welcome!

Thanks Eupedia,
K

 

[LeBrok]

Hello!
My known ancestry is from the Netherlands through my father and Denmark through my mother. I know my family tree quite well - depending on the line 6-10 generations back. There is no recent known Great Britain ancestry. I match to distant cousins I would expect on each of my lines, so there is definitely not a grandparent or great-grandparent from Great Britain. My result from ancestry.com was 20% Great Britain. Is this most likely to reflect:

a) deep ancestry in Great Britain, which is adjacent to both my known ancestry regions and so would likely share ancestry in the past 1000 years and beyond;
b) an interesting (and mistaken) result based on the combination of western European and Scandinavian ancestry from each of my parents;
c) an element held in the Danish ancestry as a result of Viking voyages/slave taking/returning home from the GB region.

Any thoughts would be welcome!

Thanks Eupedia,
K

It might feel like, but math tells us that it is extremely hard to find most of them. At 6 generations we are talking about 64 ancestors, at 10 generations over one thousand!

 

[OkTex]

I go with "B"

 

[I1a3_Young]

The pre-Roman Belgae tribes had been moving across the channel for some time. Then, the Anglo-Saxon-Jute migration sent more DNA across the channel.

So, it's not that anybody of yours was from Great Britain, but that the British today match your people and it's too hard for companies to distinguish the difference.

When results like that are given, I would leave it to you to interpret the finer details. You know you are from the Netherlands but you can see the close ties between the people.

I would say the same for a person from England getting very high Western European when they know they are all British.

I have a K36 map I'll post when I get back to a computer. My similarities to southern England and Belgium have the exact same numerical rating according to the Eurogenes calc on GEDmatch.com

Sent from my XT1080 using Eupedia Forum mobile app

 

[kirsten elise]

Thanks folks. I had the same thought as Young...the recent past is known-ish, and further back, like LeBrok says, we have such a large # of ancestors that distinctions within a relatively small geographic area are difficult to make. For me the interesting part of this, taking it back to the present (nice signature LeBrok!) is that although I belong to a recent newcomer (to Canada) family and had considered my roots somewhat out of the mainstream here, I'm in actual fact really closely related to one of the historic European settler groups here. With ties to the French not too far back before that and, going back far enough (like 40,000 years) to the Bering Strait crossers. The connections and shared inheritance are fascinating to me. Cheers Eupedia, K