I browsed through famous haplogroup members on this Japanese site and was amazed at the number of people that were never mentioned here or on Facebook. Here a e a few new ones to add to my list.
Haplogroup E1b1b
- Borghese family (including Pope Paulus V)
- Francis Ford Coppola
- Nicolas Cage
- Zinedine Zidane
Haplogroup N1c
- Yuri Gagarin
Haplogroup O1a1a
- Xiang Yu, a prominent warlord in the late Qin dynasty
- Chiang Kai-shek
- Yo-Yo Ma
Haplogroup O2a2a
- Taejo of Goryeo, founder of the Goryeo Dynasty, which ruled Korea from the 10th to the 14th century
- Hattori Hanzō, the famous samurai
Haplogroup O2a2b
- Qin Shi Huangdi, first emperor of China
- Taejo of Joseon, founder and the first king of the Joseon Dynasty of Korea
I did not verify the authenticity of these claims. I dismissed many other results as fantasies, as they claim to have traced back the lineage of semi-legendary figures who are not even certain to have existed, or whose lineage they surely couldn't ascertain, such as Wani, Jizi, King Wen of the Zhou dynasty, or Emperor Daowu of Northern Wei.
Descendant testing of very ancient people has often proved quite unreliable. For example, over 1000 presumed paternal descendants of Confucius had their Y-DNA tested, and were found to belong to haplogroup C2 (c-M217) (46.06%), haplogroups Q1a1a1 (Q-M120) (27.01%), haplogroups O2 (O-M122) (20.66%), and other haplogroups (6.27%). Notwithstanding, both C2 and Q1a1a are relatively rare in China (about 10% and 0.5% respectively), so such high percentages indicate that one of them could really be the right lineage, with a higher statistical probability for Q1a1a. The TMRCA of those descendants should be compared. If one lineage dates back more or less to 2500 years ago, then it might be it.
That's why it's important to take other similar claims with a pinch of salt. Gautama Buddha, belonged to R1a-Z280 according to the data obtained from a Pakistani family descending from the Shakya family. Although R1a is very likely, I don't think that a single descendant testing with a 2500 years gap can be very useful. It would be much more interesting to compare the DNA of the presumed Buddha relics around Asia, although I am pretty sure most of fakes and few matches will be found. However a few matches, especially on very early Indian sites, would be fairly conclusive.
Haplogroup E1b1b
- Borghese family (including Pope Paulus V)
- Francis Ford Coppola
- Nicolas Cage
- Zinedine Zidane
Haplogroup N1c
- Yuri Gagarin
Haplogroup O1a1a
- Xiang Yu, a prominent warlord in the late Qin dynasty
- Chiang Kai-shek
- Yo-Yo Ma
Haplogroup O2a2a
- Taejo of Goryeo, founder of the Goryeo Dynasty, which ruled Korea from the 10th to the 14th century
- Hattori Hanzō, the famous samurai
Haplogroup O2a2b
- Qin Shi Huangdi, first emperor of China
- Taejo of Joseon, founder and the first king of the Joseon Dynasty of Korea
I did not verify the authenticity of these claims. I dismissed many other results as fantasies, as they claim to have traced back the lineage of semi-legendary figures who are not even certain to have existed, or whose lineage they surely couldn't ascertain, such as Wani, Jizi, King Wen of the Zhou dynasty, or Emperor Daowu of Northern Wei.
Descendant testing of very ancient people has often proved quite unreliable. For example, over 1000 presumed paternal descendants of Confucius had their Y-DNA tested, and were found to belong to haplogroup C2 (c-M217) (46.06%), haplogroups Q1a1a1 (Q-M120) (27.01%), haplogroups O2 (O-M122) (20.66%), and other haplogroups (6.27%). Notwithstanding, both C2 and Q1a1a are relatively rare in China (about 10% and 0.5% respectively), so such high percentages indicate that one of them could really be the right lineage, with a higher statistical probability for Q1a1a. The TMRCA of those descendants should be compared. If one lineage dates back more or less to 2500 years ago, then it might be it.
That's why it's important to take other similar claims with a pinch of salt. Gautama Buddha, belonged to R1a-Z280 according to the data obtained from a Pakistani family descending from the Shakya family. Although R1a is very likely, I don't think that a single descendant testing with a 2500 years gap can be very useful. It would be much more interesting to compare the DNA of the presumed Buddha relics around Asia, although I am pretty sure most of fakes and few matches will be found. However a few matches, especially on very early Indian sites, would be fairly conclusive.
Last edited: