Mytrueancestry.com

Wait, so through some algorithms we can now feel that we wuz related to some Ancient people named "Hellenic Roman", "Central Roman", "Visigoths" and so on?

Conclusion: This test is autistic, created for people with identity issues. Of course, the team of Mytrueancestry.com is located in the US, where we wuz is the strongest.


I'll say it again: yDNA is better for tracing your ancestry than the autosomalautism changing every generation.
 
Wait, so through some algorithms we can now feel that we wuz related to some Ancient people named "Hellenic Roman", "Central Roman", "Visigoths" and so on?

Conclusion: This test is autistic, created for people with identity issues. Of course, the team of Mytrueancestry.com is located in the US, where we wuz is the strongest.


I'll say it again: yDNA is better for tracing your ancestry than the autosomalautism changing every generation.

You have received an infraction. If you have an issue with the calculator, you can voice it in a less antagonistic and puerile manner directed at particular nationalities. Spare us the vitriol.
 
Wait, so through some algorithms we can now feel that we wuz related to some Ancient people named "Hellenic Roman", "Central Roman", "Visigoths" and so on?
Conclusion: This test is autistic, created for people with identity issues. Of course, the team of Mytrueancestry.com is located in the US, where we wuz is the strongest.
I'll say it again: yDNA is better for tracing your ancestry than the autosomalautism changing every generation.

Everyone who visits this forum, let alone contributes to it, is bound to have "identity issues" somehow. And this includes you.

We all need, and cherish, our own private legends and intimate myths. It doesn't imply we should visit a psychoanalyst. And it certainly is nobody else's business.

Edit : oops, sorry, Jovialis. You posted while I was writing.
 
visigodogerona.jpg


Proposal for MyTrueAncestry on a section where you can see who were all these people without having to go crazy looking online.

It would also be very interesting if MyTrueAncestry started making a character card for each individual or as many as possible. Who, where, how and when, photographs of the burial, if there is facial reconstruction include it, e.t.c. everything that is known about the ancient character. It would be the bomb, a great disclosure and a closeness for the general public in a more understandable, tangible and close to the multitude of cold data and figures They would cover themselves and earn a lot of money materializing all this data in images. I renounce my percentage, life is so fleeting.

I hoped that the combination of ancient peoples in MTA who were closest to modern Iberian populations would be the one corresponding to Portugal. But in my case it ended up being Spanish Castilla La Mancha and Spanish Castilla Y Leon.
I believe I was moved to Spain in the face of the Spanish ancestry of my maternal grandmother's family.

Hxcq5vc.png

rQvjfv8.png

NgdsFqR.png
 
I hoped that the combination of ancient peoples in MTA who were closest to modern Iberian populations would be the one corresponding to Portugal. But in my case it ended up being Spanish Castilla La Mancha and Spanish Castilla Y Leon.
I believe I was moved to Spain in the face of the Spanish ancestry of my maternal grandmother's family.

Hxcq5vc.png

rQvjfv8.png

NgdsFqR.png

I have always seen you so Spaniard, even I have Bronze Portugal. And you've taken out Guanche, can you ask for more? I am a lover of Tenerife. One day I picked up a popular pilgrimage from Tenerife and you can not imagine the people who went there, especially women, did not believe, I was stunned, one day I'll tell you.
 
Mytrueancestry is really going to have to rename these samples. The "Visigoth" to whom they're referring is 85% Native Iberian. The Gepid/Goth Vim 22 is probably the only "Germanic" Goth in their reference set. Out there beyond the borders of people like those of us here don't read academic papers. It's like those silly ads on tv about people changing from kilts to lederhosen or whatever on the basis of the test.

As for this "identity" issues stuff, I take a slightly different view. I really don't think I have one in terms of ethnicity. I'm Italian, have always known that, have always been extremely proud of that, mainly because I was raised that way. When I saw from 23andme that I plotted in modern Italy, right where my ancestry would indicate, it was a confirmation of what I knew. Would I have been upset had it shown I was adopted or something and wasn't Italian? Probably, for a myriad of reasons, most of them far more important than ethnicity.

There's still room for curiosity, though, curiosity about what went into making "us", "us". I didn't get into this hobby to prove I was descended from any particular "tribe". I got into it because I've been studying Italian history since my teens, and this just takes it a step further.

Now, given that I've been studying ancient cultures for decades, I'm bound to have formed opinions about them based on my values and character. Some I like better than others. I've always been partial to the culture of the ancient Minoans and Etruscans. I seem to have an attenuated relationship with one Minoan at least. We'll see about Etruscans. It doesn't change my real identity, which is Italian and always will be.

It seems to me you're the one who has a hang-up about identity, and is aggressive about it as well, given your posts on other threads. It's just that you want to base it on your uniparental signature alone because that reinforces the ancestors you "want" to claim, and lets you ignore all the others.

An example of how wrong both that and an undue reliance on IBD analysis can be:

I carry mtDna U2e. It stems from the Paleolithic in Europe, the earliest "native" Europeans. Should I go around saying I'm the only true native and all the rest of you aren't European? Do you know where it is most often found in ancient samples so far? It's found in steppe people and Corded Ware and northeastern Europeans and Central Europeans.

However, the salient point is that while it is a clue that I have some of that ancestry, the mtDna itself represents only about 2% of all my genes.

Now, in terms of overall genetic relatedness, the comparison of all my genes to all the genes of these people, the fit is very bad, i.e. probably over 24 or something. That's because that mtDna represents only one of my many ancestors.

Or, let's look at IBD, which someone on another thread considers the be all and end all for studying our ancestors and with whom we "should" be identifying. If mytrueancestry is correct, the only snippet of actual IBD I have with the ancient samples for which they have data is Crete Armenoi, a more "steppe" admixed Minoan sample. I score a 4cm snip with her. Yes, I was happy about that, as I like Minoan civilization very much.

Does that mean I should suddenly stop thinking of myself as Italian and start thinking of myself as being Cretan or even Greek? Of course not. My overall relatedness to that sample is about 22. something. It would be ridiculous. My closest overall relatedness to an ancient sample so far is from a place in Hungary where a lot of Roman burials were found: 3.64.

If people posting on these topics would take the time to review some textbooks on population genetics, or even just the tools and statistics involved, a lot of confusion and contentiousness would ameliorate.
 
I may be off the mark here due to my unfamiliarity with the topic, but I agree with Angela on the "identity" issue. I'm an American and that's how I identify. My family has been here for 2-3 generations and these little samples are only a small part of who I am and what constitutes my family's experience over the last few generations. My grandfathers and uncles shed blood for this country. Anyways, humankind will continue to migrate and evolve and our genetic histories reflect this. It'll be interesting to see how Europe and the rest of the world will look a 1000 years from now. I think it's rather interesting to study history (my first 4 year degree) but I'm wary of tying my ethnicity and identity around such ancient clues, then again being from the "new world" I guess I would have a different perspective on this than native born Europeans (or others for that matter)
 
I may be off the mark here due to my unfamiliarity with the topic, but I agree with Angela on the "identity" issue. I'm an American and that's how I identify. My family has been here for 2-3 generations and these little samples are only a small part of who I am and what constitutes my family's experience over the last few generations. My grandfathers and uncles shed blood for this country. Anyways, humankind will continue to migrate and evolve and our genetic histories reflect this. It'll be interesting to see how Europe and the rest of the world will look a 1000 years from now. I think it's rather interesting to study history (my first 4 year degree) but I'm wary of tying my ethnicity and identity around such ancient clues, then again being from the "new world" I guess I would have a different perspective on this than native born Europeans (or others for that matter)

I have no more "voting juice" today, but if I did I'd give you an upvote. You couldn't be any more right.
 
Maybe the thinking about the ancient ethnic groups made them think they were pure or something. Now it is shown that within the groups or ethnic groups were also mixed that does not make them more or less Goths. We have preconceived ideas maybe about how and what the ancient ethnic groups should have been, now the genetics shows that even the ancient ethnic groups were mixed. The Iberian term is used a lot but many tribes enter there and perhaps different types of mixtures are also given. Why are the Celtiberians ignored when they are from the tribes that may have more data? The Celtiberians may also be labeled as Iberians like that.


The Visigoths of Girona are all Visigoths, it is clear, each in its different proportions. It is a new vision about the ancient ethnic groups.
 
Maybe the thinking about the ancient ethnic groups made them think they were pure or something. Now it is shown that within the groups or ethnic groups were also mixed that does not make them more or less Goths. We have preconceived ideas maybe about how and what the ancient ethnic groups should have been, now the genetics shows that even the ancient ethnic groups were mixed. The Iberian term is used a lot but many tribes enter there and perhaps different types of mixtures are also given. Why are the Celtiberians ignored when they are from the tribes that may have more data? The Celtiberians may also be labeled as Iberians like that.


The Visigoths of Girona are all Visigoths, it is clear, each in its different proportions. It is a new vision about the ancient ethnic groups.

Well, then, perhaps the "Visigoth" to whom a lot of Spaniards are pretty related should be renamed "Spanish Visigoth", because the Goths of history originated in Denmark and spoke a Germanic tongue. They were not like this person at all, nor like the Ostrogoth on the Black Sea. Clearly this particular person was basically a native Iberian who had been absorbed into the Visigothic culture. Historical accuracy is important, as is genetic accuracy. From the evidence of these samples, actual "Germanic" influx into Iberia was very small, as Ralph and Coop et al pointed out a number of years ago.

You were right when you said that mytrueancestry should provide a lot more information on these people.
 
On identity : "The tree becomes strong in the wind" (Seneca : Non est arbor solida nec fortis nisi quam frequens ventus incursat)

The tree is all the stronger as its roots run deep. Geography is destiny, but history is identity. Now what is "identiy"? Gnothi seauton - know thyself - , is the stupidest thing Socrates ever produced. How could I know myself? I am a very different person when at work, or when attending to my forests, in dirty jeans and drenched in sweat, or alone with my wife, or with my mum, or when rolling over the carpet with my grandchildren. Others cast roles upon me, impose on me images that challenge my own perceptions of myself. I am multiple, and I keep changing as I grow older. Which facet of me is the "true" one? One, none, all of them? Even looking inside, I find my own contradictions confusing. And after all, does it matter?

What matters is what I want to be, my effort to stick to virtues and values I have chosen for myself, my effort to get an inch closer to that ideal "self" I have devised. It's an uphill battle, but the only one worth fighting. So everything goes, what I have read, seen, experienced, achieved or flunked, my upbringing and my culture. The innate and the acquired. Voltaire and Descartes made me who I am. Lamartine and Sully Prudhomme made me who I am. Conrad and Golding, even Tennyson made me who I am. My dad made me who I am, every time he kicked my a-- to teach me to behave.

But also, my dreams make me who I am. What would I be without my dreams? They lift me up above the ordinary, the easy way out, the lazy options.

If genetic analyses root me deeper into what I want to be, well, I am grateful for that. The tree gets stronger, and so much the better. What truth there is in the dream is irrelevant. What matters is whether it helps. My known ancestors were farmers most of them, or blacksmiths, or cartwrights... Were they as tenacious as I like to think they were? Who cares, as long as it feeds my energy.

Leave me my dreams, my myths, my legends. They are my truest self.
 
I may be off the mark here due to my unfamiliarity with the topic, but I agree with Angela on the "identity" issue. I'm an American and that's how I identify. My family has been here for 2-3 generations and these little samples are only a small part of who I am and what constitutes my family's experience over the last few generations. My grandfathers and uncles shed blood for this country. Anyways, humankind will continue to migrate and evolve and our genetic histories reflect this. It'll be interesting to see how Europe and the rest of the world will look a 1000 years from now. I think it's rather interesting to study history (my first 4 year degree) but I'm wary of tying my ethnicity and identity around such ancient clues, then again being from the "new world" I guess I would have a different perspective on this than native born Europeans (or others for that matter)

Hi matty,
I give you the positive vote that Angela can not give you, because I yet have one.
Ethnicity does not matter. It matters the culture. For those who like history it is interesting to know where their ancestors could have transited in a remote past. But this past and this history do not belong only to you or your supposed tribal group or your country.This past and this history is shared with a good part of humanity. Are shared with billions of people. I do not want to be a Gallo-Roman, Visigoth or Illyric, much less I want to live the life they lived, or label me as one of them. I do not belong to any tribal group. I'm just a Brazilian and I'm very happy to be just that.
 
I hoped that the combination of ancient peoples in MTA who were closest to modern Iberian populations would be the one corresponding to Portugal. But in my case it ended up being Spanish Castilla La Mancha and Spanish Castilla Y Leon.
I believe I was moved to Spain in the face of the Spanish ancestry of my maternal grandmother's family.

Hxcq5vc.png



...................................................

son changed also

Gaul + Gallo-Roman (5.28)
Gaul + Illyrian (6.815)
Gaul (8.252)
Gallo-Roman (8.921)
Illyrian (9.498)

rQvjfv8.png

NgdsFqR.png

mine has finally changed from Gallo-Roman to
Roman-Illyrian .................though the picture stayed the same



...............................

Son has also changed to

Gaul + Gallo-Roman (5.28)
Gaul + Illyrian (6.815)
Gaul (8.252)
Gallo-Roman (8.921)
Illyrian (9.498)

 
Mine hasn't changed that much.

I'm too lazy to upload all the images again, so here is just a "copy and paste".

(Another time I try FTDNA data. Anyway, according to those first runs, results with FTDNA data and 23andMe data are very similar.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mine - 23andMe v4

Closest Ancient Population: Illyrian

Illyrians - Gallo-Romans - Gauls

Illyrian (3.516)
Gallo-Roman + Illyrian (4.535)
Gaul + Illyrian (4.682)
Gallo-Roman (7.505)
Gaul (9.844)

Ancient Samples

1. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1200 BC) (3.516) - [Upgrade for more details]
2. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (5.833) - [Upgrade for more details]
3. Medieval Piedmont (670 AD) (6.048) - [Upgrade for more details]
4. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (7.505) - [Upgrade for more details]
5. Iberian / Piedmont (670 AD) (8.346) - [Upgrade for more details]
6. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (9.844) - [Upgrade for more details]
7. Central Roman (670 AD) (9.868) - [Upgrade for more details]
8. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (11.12) - [Upgrade for more details]
9. Medieval Iberian Valencia (1100 AD) (11.39) - [Upgrade for more details]
10. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (11.49) - [Upgrade for more details]
11. Thracian Bulgaria (450 BC) (11.49) - [Upgrade for more details]
12. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (11.74) - [Upgrade for more details]
13. Central Roman (590 AD) (12.02) - [Upgrade for more details]
14. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (12.57) - [Upgrade for more details]
15. Medieval Iberian Valencia (1120 AD) (12.86) - [Upgrade for more details]
16. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (13.48) - [Upgrade for more details]
17. Central Roman (590 AD) (13.6) - [Upgrade for more details]
18. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (13.64) - [Upgrade for more details]
19. Roman Soldier Germany (300 BC) (13.73) - [Upgrade for more details]
20. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (14.07) - [Upgrade for more details]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Father's - 23andMe v4

Closest Ancient Population: Thracian

Thracians - Illyrians - Romans

Roman + Thracian (5.934)
Roman + Illyrian (5.934)
Thracian (7.724)
Illyrian (7.724)
Roman (8.274)

Ancient Samples

1. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1600 BC) (7.724) - [Upgrade for more details]
2. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (7.724) - [Upgrade for more details]
3. Central Roman (670 AD) (8.274) - [Upgrade for more details]
4. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (8.403) - [Upgrade for more details]
5. Gallo-Roman (590 AD) (8.418) - [Upgrade for more details]
6. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (9.483) - [Upgrade for more details]
7. Iberian / Piedmont (670 AD) (9.786) - [Upgrade for more details]
8. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (10.18) - [Upgrade for more details]
9. Scythian Moldova (270 BC) (10.32) - [Upgrade for more details]
10. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (10.32) - [Upgrade for more details]
11. Medieval Piedmont (670 AD) (10.84) - [Upgrade for more details]
12. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (10.94) - [Upgrade for more details]
13. Central Roman (590 AD) (11.1) - [Upgrade for more details]
14. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (11.83) - [Upgrade for more details]
15. Visigoth Mixed Slav Girona (550 AD) (11.89) - [Upgrade for more details]
16. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (11.9) - [Upgrade for more details]
17. Medieval Iberian Valencia (1100 AD) (12.27) - [Upgrade for more details]
18. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (12.47) - [Upgrade for more details]
19. Medieval Tyrolian (670 AD) (12.86) - [Upgrade for more details]
20. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (12.94) - [Upgrade for more details]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Mother's - 23andMe v4

Closest Ancient Population: Gaul and Thracian

Gauls - Thracians - Illyrians

Gaul + Thracian (2.773)
Gaul + Illyrian (2.773)
Gaul (6.212)
Illyrian (7.432)
Thracian (7.715)

Ancient Samples

1. Iberian / Piedmont (670 AD) (5.775) - [Upgrade for more details]
2. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (6.212) - [Upgrade for more details]
3. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1200 BC) (7.432) - [Upgrade for more details]
4. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (7.715) - [Upgrade for more details]
5. Thracian Bulgaria (450 BC) (7.715) - [Upgrade for more details]
6. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (8.45) - [Upgrade for more details]
7. Gallo-Roman (590 AD) (8.606) - [Upgrade for more details]
8. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (10.01) - [Upgrade for more details]
9. Medieval Hungary / Balkan (1244 AD) (10.02) - [Upgrade for more details]
10. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (10.31) - [Upgrade for more details]
11. Scythian Moldova (270 BC) (10.43) - [Upgrade for more details]
12. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (10.71) - [Upgrade for more details]
13. Medieval Frank (670 AD) (11.01) - [Upgrade for more details]
14. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (11.07) - [Upgrade for more details]
15. Central Roman (670 AD) (11.22) - [Upgrade for more details]
16. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (11.29) - [Upgrade for more details]
17. Swiss Germanic (670 AD) (11.4) - [Upgrade for more details]
18. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (11.52) - [Upgrade for more details]
19. Medieval Iberian Valencia (1100 AD) (12.43) - [Upgrade for more details]
20. [Hidden] - upgrade your account (12.89) - [Upgrade for more details]


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


 
my Wife's results ,
she is mtdna - K1a4o
ydna - R1a-Z282



Gaul + Thracian (4.378)
Gaul + Illyrian (4.378)
Gaul (6.716)
Thracian (8.715)
Illyrian (8.715)



Your closest Archaeogenetic matches...


1. Cisalpine Gaul (590 AD) (6.716) - [Upgrade for more details]
2. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1600 BC) (8.715) - [Upgrade for more details]
3. Thracian Bulgaria (450 BC) (8.715) - [Upgrade for more details]
4. Medieval Hungary / Balkan (1244 AD) (8.97) - [Upgrade for more details]
5. Medieval Tyrolian (590 AD) (10.04) - [Upgrade for more details]
6. Iberian / Piedmont (670 AD) (10.12) - [Upgrade for more details]
7. Gallo-Roman (590 AD) (10.26) - [Upgrade for more details]
8. Visigoth Mixed Slav Girona (550 AD) (10.41) - [Upgrade for more details]
9. Central Roman (670 AD) (10.59) - [Upgrade for more details]
10. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1200 BC) (11.23) - [Upgrade for more details]
11. Scythian Moldova (270 BC) (11.64) - [Upgrade for more details]
12. Medieval Tyrolian (670 AD) (11.66) - [Upgrade for more details]
13. Medieval Frank (670 AD) (11.83) - [Upgrade for more details]
14. Medieval Piedmont (670 AD) (11.88) - [Upgrade for more details]
15. Swiss Germanic (670 AD) (11.96) - [Upgrade for more details]
16. Central Roman (590 AD) (11.96) - [Upgrade for more details]
17. Frankish-Gaul / Lombardy Italy (670 AD) (12.19) - [Upgrade for more details]
 
I wonder if anyone here has info abt. this Iberian / Piedmont individual. He/she shows up at the top of my mother's list.

my Wife's results ,
she is mtdna - K1a4o
ydna - R1a-Z282
Gaul + Thracian (4.378)
Gaul + Illyrian (4.378)
Gaul (6.716)
Thracian (8.715)
Illyrian (8.715)
Your closest Archaeogenetic matches...
1. Cisalpine Gaul (590 AD) (6.716) - [Upgrade for more details]
2. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1600 BC) (8.715) - [Upgrade for more details]
3. Thracian Bulgaria (450 BC) (8.715) - [Upgrade for more details]
4. Medieval Hungary / Balkan (1244 AD) (8.97) - [Upgrade for more details]
5. Medieval Tyrolian (590 AD) (10.04) - [Upgrade for more details]
6. Iberian / Piedmont (670 AD) (10.12) - [Upgrade for more details]
7. Gallo-Roman (590 AD) (10.26) - [Upgrade for more details]
8. Visigoth Mixed Slav Girona (550 AD) (10.41) - [Upgrade for more details]
9. Central Roman (670 AD) (10.59) - [Upgrade for more details]
10. Illyrian / Dalmatia (1200 BC) (11.23) - [Upgrade for more details]
11. Scythian Moldova (270 BC) (11.64) - [Upgrade for more details]
12. Medieval Tyrolian (670 AD) (11.66) - [Upgrade for more details]
13. Medieval Frank (670 AD) (11.83) - [Upgrade for more details]
14. Medieval Piedmont (670 AD) (11.88) - [Upgrade for more details]
15. Swiss Germanic (670 AD) (11.96) - [Upgrade for more details]
16. Central Roman (590 AD) (11.96) - [Upgrade for more details]
17. Frankish-Gaul / Lombardy Italy (670 AD) (12.19) - [Upgrade for more details]
Her ancestry is Eastern/Northern Treviso, right? Results somewhat similar to my mother's.
 
Last edited:
Iberian / Piedmont. Who was that man?
 
Iberian / Piedmont. Who was that man?

Hello Carlos:

Iberian / Piedmont (670 AD) - CL94 - Ancient sample from Collegno, Italy from 400-800 AD - See the article below:
https://drive.google.com/open?id=1-d4aAlPxHnKWI8QzkYmc9oGU6NvpDYW0


Other discussion: Guanches - You told me quickly about them and I did not know nothing about the Guanches.


In the last revision of the calculator nMonte3 Eurogenes K36 of
yourdnaportal.com was shown the results displayed after soon, below of this my text.

I have found that the sample I3578_EMA_Andalusia is Guanche, according to the work "The genomic history of the Iberian Peninsula over the past 8000 years" by Reich et al:
* I3578 / grave 29: 400-600 CE;
* I3578 SE_Iberia - c.5-8CE - NE_Iberia - c.6-8CE_ES - Guanche.

On the Guanches, I discovered that they are indigenous to the Canaries (I have always wanted to be a descendant of indigenous peoples) and that they have the following physical characteristics:


Portuguese Wikipedia:
"The physical characteristics of the Guanches, with their complexion and clear eyes, sometimes blond hair and high stature, led some researchers to attribute to it a Germanic or Celtic origin, linking their presence to the migrations of Vandals and Visigoths in North Africa. However, more recent evidence points to the inclusion of the Guanches in the Proto-Berber peoples who colonized northern Africa, from Egypt to present-day Mauritania, in much earlier times (13,000 to 15,000 years ago)".

English Wikipedia:
"a village whose inhabitants were often fair haired with long and flaxen hair and the women of a rare beauty"

DNQcS7k.png

QNIlM1R.png

yJ1Povm.png

FbiuhL1.png

K0bR36r.png

The genomic history of the Iberian Peninsula over the past 8000 years" by Reich et al:

https://reich.hms.harvard.edu/sites..._Olalde_Science_IberiaTransect_Supplement.pdf

Big hug dear friend:)
 
Last edited:

This thread has been viewed 1253311 times.

Back
Top