Talk Morgan Forums Community The Malvern Arms Ancestry

I was.

I had mine done a couple of years ago 62% English - mainly Northern, , 22% Norwegian, 11% Scottish/Irish and 1% Indigenous Amazonian!!! - Not sure where that last bit came from - but I always felt "at home" whenever I visit Norway and love to holiday in the Celtic fringes.

I can recommend reading Masterclass: what to do with your DNA results on the excellent (and free!) LostCousins.com.

Quote:
Before you begin - forget those ethnicity estimates.
Ethnicity estimates are for amusement only; even if they were correct, and it’s very unlikely they are, the areas are often large and ill-defined, and the timescale is usually 1000-2000 years, well outside of the period for which records exist.

The "DNA Story" on Ancestry changes over time as they collect more data. A year or so ago just about everybody, including me, suddenly found a 20% shift towards Scottish heritage. I have no evidence of roots in Scotland any more than I have in Iceland, but Ancestry tells me I'm 5% Icelandic too.

Far more use of the DNA test is finding connections with other users. I've turned up several links that way and corresponded with relatives I didn't know I had.

It's worth knowing, by the way, that once you have your Ancestry DNA results you can upload them to most of the other DNA sites. I have mine on LivingDNA (who partner with FindMyPast) and MyHeritage. This increases the chances of making connections with other relatives, if that's your goal.

I would be intrigued to see what happened if a larger family were to submit their DNA tests in isolation of each other. It would be interesting to see how spread the results came back.

BTW, have you read the terms and conditions on those things and who owns your data now ?

Ive often thought about doing this and how accurate it is ??


I come from a small family and was an only child on my mothers side. 'Dad' sodded off when I was a baby ( He must have known what Id be like, lol ) and hes Spanish. The DNA and family tree would be interesting, if accurate.

The only way that the companies can make the business viable is to test for very very limited parts of your DNA - way insufficient for criminal identification for example. The feedback they give is almost useless. Marginally better than the tea leaves.

You will get more info from your close relative the tomato.

Bonesie, I'm not sure what your expectations are. Just having a DNA test doesn't produce a genealogy.

The only accurate way of constructing a family tree is to research it from primary sources: birth, marriage and death registrations, parish registers, censuses etc. It's a time-consuming business, although these days with so much online it's considerably easier than it used to be.

Doing a DNA test and then uploading it to a site like Ancestry will match you with other users with comparable DNA; if you're lucky they may be related and have already done some of the hard work. It can also confirm details on your tree where you have previously made assumptions, which is just as useful. Even so, you need to confirm information for yourself.

I discovered the identity of my biological father, an American serviceman stationed in the UK, through Ancestry DNA. For me it wasn't one of those dramatic revelations you see on TV, more like ​something I'd always wondered about being resolved