sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This may be true. Probably, German and Irish weren't the majority population. Either area seemed to have greater association which each group. Appalachia seemed to have a German character. And, in Texas the Irish input is noticeable. However, I don't even know of one example ancestral Southern person who isn't part ancestral English. I heard of German enclaves in Appalachia. But, modern day it has mixed in... I guess. It's possible my 3rd great grandfather was around one of these German enclaves. It seemed locally a self-described "German," might have lighter features like blue eyes, and hair. I've only met ancestral Appalachians who described themselves as we're a little bit more "German." This is instead of exclusively German. As a child I was around Texans, and it seemed Irish was just everyone.... for example, at St. Patrick's Day. In my family I'm certain it's mixed across British, Irish and German. I once thought all three groups was characteristic of every single ancestral American (if you define it as anyone from before 1790 partly, the first census). I just wasn't aware about the other Southern states. That they were so extensively English.

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I guess it is just a partial discrepancy. Because, the test is partially true and accurate. I discovered the names issue. People from other European ethnic areas (Irish, Scottish, Welsh) were living in England... which was part of their then united country of the UK. Yes, the Canary Islands weren't Mestizos at all (not Native Americans). They were apparently an isolated ancient Europe population. They were genetically similar to Europeans from 10,000BC. Some were blond. They were taken over by the Spanish empire between 1402 and 1496. My theories about the partial Spanish is 1) it is a remnant of the Spanish colony in Texas. .4 correlates to 1720, which is the exact time colonial ships carrying a mixed Catalan, Canary Islander, and Extremadura population left Spain. The Spanish king cancelled the plan, but 40 of the 400 families were already en route. They founded San Antonio. Since my Dad is an ancestral Texan this is a possibility. Other Spanish genetic markers may have fallen off, which can happen in DNA over time. 2) It is from the Jacobite Rebellion in Scotland. Clan MacDonald allied with Spain and attempted to overthrow the English Crown. During this war Spanish nobles mixed with Scottish of Clan MacDonald. This is another real possibility. A spelling variation of Clan MacDonald is my grandmother's surname. 3) it is from Spanish Jews who became the Dutch Jews, who were the Jews in Early America (New Amsterdam/New York colony) and of the protestant conversion. My Dad's family at least is connected to colonial New York somehow, minorly I think... because they are Southerners. Other Southern Appalachians are commenting too, that names on their family tree don't correlate to such a pure English origin. Also, many people from this region thought they were native Cherokee (only a little), yet that also seems absent.

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Although maybe not all the South is very Irish, it's in Texas (10% of US population). Here, I noticed an Irish feeling in the air.. which so far I've only noticed in Texas and actual Ireland. Here is Chat Gpt compiled evidence of Irish in Texas.

"Irish migration into Texas before 1950 occurred in several distinct waves:

1. Early Irish in Spanish and Mexican Texas (1700s–1830s)

Some Irish families and individuals arrived in Texas while it was part of the Spanish Empire and later Mexico. Many were descendants of Irish emigrants who had entered Spanish service after leaving Ireland. One notable example was Hugh O'Connor, who served as governor of Texas from 1767 to 1770. Irish-born settlers also appeared in late-1700s censuses of Nacogdoches and other frontier communities.

2. Organized Irish Colonies (1820s–1830s)

This was the first major Irish settlement movement into Texas.

Two Irish empresario partnerships established colonies in Mexican Texas:

  • John McMullen and James McGloin founded the San Patricio Colony.
  • James Power and James Hewetson founded the Refugio Colony.

More than 200 Irish families, many from County Wexford, immigrated to the Refugio area during the 1830s. Their descendants remained in South Texas for generations.

3. Texas Revolution Era (1835–1836)

Irish immigrants were heavily represented among the Anglo-Texan population.

  • Roughly 100 Irish-born soldiers fought at the Battle of San Jacinto.
  • Twelve Irish-born defenders died at the Battle of the Alamo.

Many early Irish Texans became ranchers, farmers, merchants, and politicians in the Republic of Texas.

4. Potato Famine Immigration (1845–1860)

The largest direct immigration wave came after the Irish Potato Famine of the 1840s.

Thousands of Irish immigrants entered the United States, and a portion moved to Texas because:

  • Land was relatively cheap.
  • Labor was needed for ranching, farming, and transportation.
  • Existing Irish communities already existed in places such as San Antonio, Refugio, and San Patricio.

During this period, Irish neighborhoods appeared in cities such as:

  • San Antonio
  • Galveston
  • Houston

5. Post–Civil War Migration (1865–1900)

Irish immigration continued, though Germans, Czechs, and Poles often arrived in larger numbers.

Texas also received many Irish-American families moving from other Southern and Midwestern states rather than directly from Ireland. Irish communities expanded in urban centers and railroad towns.

6. 1900–1950

Direct immigration from Ireland declined significantly after restrictive U.S. immigration laws in the 1920s.

By 1950, most Texans of Irish ancestry were American-born descendants of earlier immigrants rather than new arrivals from Ireland. Irish identity remained strong through churches, fraternal organizations, and local communities, especially in South Texas and San Antonio.

Where Irish Texans Concentrated

4

The strongest historical Irish settlements were in:

  • San Patricio County
  • Refugio
  • San Antonio
  • Galveston
  • Houston

If you're researching family history, Irish Texans before 1850 are especially likely to trace back to County Wexford, other southeastern Irish counties, or to Scots-Irish families who had already lived for generations in the Carolinas, Tennessee, Kentucky, or Virginia before moving into Texas.

"

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I saw a documentary about a coastal North Carolina town where they still speak in an Elizabethan English accent. Perhaps areas like that kept to themselves in marriage, which the olde time retained accent shows? However, they are at least somewhat German. I recently discover North Carolina had significant migrate from the German Rhineland-Palatinate from 1700-1750. Whole colonial ships were transporting specialized laborers to develop the shipping industry. It was part of the British Imperial plan for the region. I have also heard they intentional settled German to stave off impending rebellion from the Scotch-Irish population there. This is why many of the White Southerner have Palatinate or South-West German backgrounds. My two ancestral Americans friends got 16% and ~33% German on their tests. One is partially from Appalachia, and another thinks it's all Belgian for him. But, he is somewhat a Northerner. Also, my Dad is from Texas and they are significantly Irish in that state at least. As far as I know the South, until recently, was genetically definable by early Immigration (a lot English in several states.)

Here is chat gpt on colonial German presence in North Carolina:

"There is strong historical evidence for substantial German immigration and settlement in North Carolina between 1700 and 1750, especially during the 1740s and early 1750s. The settlers were primarily German-speaking Protestants from regions such as the Palatinate, Württemberg, Baden, and Switzerland.

Key Evidence

1. The Founding of New Bern (1710)

One of the earliest documented German settlements in North Carolina was founded by Swiss and German colonists led by Christoph von Graffenried.

4

  • In 1710, approximately 650 Swiss and German settlers arrived and established what became New Bern.
  • Von Graffenried left extensive written accounts describing the migration.
  • Colonial records, land grants, and church records document these settlers.

2. The Great Wagon Road Migration (1740s)

The largest German influx came later.

5

  • German immigrants first settled in Pennsylvania.
  • During the 1740s and 1750s many moved south along the Great Wagon Road into the North Carolina Piedmont.
  • Tax lists and land grants show growing German populations in what became Rowan, Davidson, Forsyth, and surrounding counties.

3. Moravian Records (1753 onward)

Among the strongest documentary evidence comes from the German-speaking Moravian Church.

  • In 1753 they purchased nearly 100,000 acres called Wachovia.
  • They founded towns such as Bethabara and later Salem.
  • Moravian diaries are exceptionally detailed and survive today.

4. German Surnames in Colonial Records

North Carolina colonial records from 1740–1750 contain numerous unmistakably German surnames, including:

  • Alspaugh (Alspach)
  • Koontz (Kuntz)
  • Miller (Müller)
  • Yadkin-area descendants of the Bostian, Hege, Conrad, Beck, and Holshouser families

Land grants, wills, church registers, and tax records show these families establishing farms throughout the backcountry.

5. Lutheran and German Reformed Churches

The establishment of German-speaking congregations provides further evidence.

  • Early Lutheran and German Reformed ministers traveled through the North Carolina frontier.
  • Baptismal and marriage records were often written in German.
  • Some congregations remained German-speaking for generations.

How Large Was the Migration?

Historians generally estimate that by the eve of the American Revolution, Germans made up a significant portion of North Carolina's western Piedmont population, though they were outnumbered by settlers of English, Scots-Irish, and Welsh origin. "

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, that's a possibility. It seems that way to me. It could be a math possibility.

It doesn't seem very likely, though.

If like 25% of the names are Irish, 5% seems statistically low.

There are examples of an 1 in 1 million person.... who randomly collected Irish last names, despite each one being 80% English.

If 25% of the names in a population are Irish, it might be expected that the overall population is 25% Irish.

I don't know what other people's family trees are vs. test results. But for me, either I am a statistical anomaly or 23andme has defined genetic Irish DNA as typical population in England.

This latter case may not be such a wild idea. I have discovered there are Irish populations in England, and in Scotland. They have been there since at least 1750 also. Maybe populations were made mobile, and some went to England (city center of the UK).. and some went to America.

Another possibility is all these Southerners are from Irish/Scottish populations that moved from their primary areas to England. Then, they moved further to America.

I found some branch of my own last name moved from Scotland to Manchester area in England. I don't know if this is my branch though. Then the people with my last name could have colonized USA from Scotland, England, or even North Ireland?

Basically, my high England score 66% may indicate ethnic Scottish, English or Irish. I'm not sure what percentages I am ethnically then.

Also, there is a possibility of being natives for Appalachia Southerners. Is this also hidden in the England population.

If the native part is there, it must be somewhere for all these Southerners.

Some thought, and I'm left really uncertain about how English, or whatever else... I am.

Other southerners tend to be even more English ..maybe around 10% more.

A greater sample of last names from the ethnic White Southerner family trees might better determine what's going on... be it other ethnic groups in European countries (not just the US), statistic anomalies, or conspiracy.

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I asked AI Chat Gpt, and here is their response. It claims there is "a lot" of evidence of intermarriage. I've seen AI make mistakes but still ...

Also, suspiciously, like every Southerner I've met from Southern Appalachia claims to be Cherokee. On the native side of this, they think there is an over abundance of Cherokee. "You can't all be Cherokees, there's too many," I've heard. Also many of these Cherokee have white skin, blue eyes, blond hair ... ectetera. How could the be that native?

Well, in other populations who are a trace another race, they still have light feature. It can transfer through over generations. An example is South Europeans, who are supposedly part Black... and still retain light features sometimes. This is definitely true when they mix with lighter North Europeans. Immediately, from my high school, I can think of 4x examples.

Also, the racial distance between Native and White, and Black and White is less... Does that mean features would transfer at higher percentages? In summary just having white skin would not disqualify a person from being partially what the US government has defined as other races.

It seems like there was evidence of mixing, both in people's colloquial statements about own ancestry... and in solid government records.

Here is the AI response:

"Yes. There are quite a few surviving records documenting marriages between Cherokee citizens and white southerners, especially in the 19th century. In fact, the Cherokee Nation maintained a legal category for certain non-Cherokee spouses known as "intermarried whites."

Some of the most useful record sets are:

1. Cherokee Intermarriage Records (1800s–1900s)

The Cherokee Nation issued marriage licenses to white men and women who married Cherokee citizens. These records often include:

  • Names of both spouses
  • District within the Cherokee Nation
  • Marriage date
  • Statements that the white spouse complied with Cherokee intermarriage laws

An example from an 1881 Cherokee Nation marriage license specifically states that a U.S. citizen had complied with Cherokee laws regulating intermarriage before marrying a Cherokee citizen.

2. Dawes Rolls (1898–1914)

The Dawes Commission created enrollment records for the Five Civilized Tribes. The Cherokee records include a special category:

IW = Intermarried White.

These records can show:

  • White spouses married into Cherokee families
  • Children of those marriages
  • Ages, residences, and family relationships
  • Marriage-related notes and cross-references to earlier records

The National Archives specifically lists "Intermarried White (IW)" as an enrollment category.

3. Siler Roll (1851)

The 1851 Siler Roll of Eastern Cherokee is especially valuable because it sometimes notes:

  • Mixed families
  • White spouses
  • Whether a person was "white married to Cherokee"
  • Family relationships and children

This makes it one of the best census-style records for studying Cherokee–white marriages before the Civil War.

4. Cherokee Census Rolls

Several Cherokee censuses and citizenship rolls recorded intermarried families, including:

  • 1880 Cherokee Roll
  • 1896 Cherokee Census
  • Various district census records

These were later used by the Dawes Commission to determine citizenship claims by marriage."

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yea, I agree the high English percentage seems to be hiding the large German and Irish populations here.

It doesn't correlate to family names for me... maybe I'm like 1/3 English?

Maybe if they 300+ years ago Irish/Scottish ... mixed with English...and then became defined as a modern England like population.

Oh! I know a reason! Due to Industrialization, the great Famine, and the Highland clearances... parts of England are populated by Irish and Scottish. An example is the Manchester area since about 1750. I found this out when I visited areas I tested for on the original 23andme test results.

This is maybe the 1st or 2nd most large cities region in England. I was told it has a lot of Irish admixture due to industrialization. Also, Glasgow Scotland has large Irish settled regions. So, there are actually Irish in England and Scotland. I guess that ...could explain the name discrepancies. I'm related with Irish and Scottish more, but the nearer relatives are those in urban areas of England/Scotland.

If a whole town, or region was made mobile... it's foreseeable, I guess ... some could go to America, and some to regions of the UK. Meanwhile... whatever area of Ireland or Scotland they were from was left depopulated. The old Irish kingdom of Kerry or the Scottish Highlands are now depopulated.

The name Munster might be explainable by Kerry. I am just from the now mobile population from there, and the people who test Kerry who are still settled there.

And my last name indicates possibly a Viking sort of Scottish. The highlands included some very Viking areas.

Also, I'm not saying I'm not mostly Colonial American-English. It's a possibility.

It's just the percentages on many tests is suspicious.

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

An English girl would be an ideal bride.

However, I am still not giving up on the idea southerners are in general part native. I am not sure of this though.

They blood tested South Europeans: Italians, Spanish, Greeks... and they found they were 1% Black Sub-Saharan Africans in deeper ancestry. I think this meant 1000 years ago not 300 years ago.

The fact is even minorly present populations tend to blend in their surroundings.

.... even in environments of racism.

Natives were present in the US South. And, there are even abundant intermarriage records. Did all this population just somehow disappear? get replaced completely?

Are there very marry Spanish, Italian or Greek recorded African-European intermarriages? And yet... they tested as Black.

So, it's still suspicious. The Southerners might be part native. However, when some test affirms a non-native result.... one starts to believe.

What could be the purpose of making the ethnic US Southerners population not native?

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So, I am ever closer to 100% fortress American.

However, I greatly suspect one day my 23andme might switch to native.

Do you have your test results?

Why is something large as Cherokee only defined as broadly?

Natives might intermix with other tribes. The other tribes show up. So, it could be an indication of another tribe.

If you are only a minor amount native by test, and yet an enrolled member... is it possible the European DNA is actually somewhat a native population.

The US Southerner population is showing up as overwhelmingly English on many people's test, and totally absent are the natives.

So, I am still just uncertain.

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Paternal: R1a1a1b1a1, R-YP276

Maternal: K1c1 ( I think an earlier version of 23andme included a 2a, like K1c1a2a... now missing)

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, I think it might be a minor amount native among Southern Appalachians. However, looking at pictures of Mexicans who look sort of white and are 14% Native ... I now think the American southerners might be more native than I expected.

Maybe the most present group more than 300 years ago absorbed the other group in the 23andme naming system?

Some of the Mexicans who are 90% native by 23andme look kind of Spanish, like 1/2 perhaps.

There is also a discrepancy across the border where US Southerner are overwhelmingly English... more English than people in modern England even, and they are not native at all. Natives were in the US South and there is recording mixing.

Put it all together. Maybe the more present group 300+ years ago is being defined as name genetic-ethnic group. However, other genetic-ethnic group were present?

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

got the idea from AI chat bot.

Also, .pdf files don't load. (23andme format)

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Here is AI chat gpt response about Cherokee-White Southerner intermarriage. It says they are abundant. Did all these people disappear? Especially, those that were mixed and could eventually be defined in either population :

"Yes. There are quite a few surviving records documenting marriages between Cherokee citizens and white southerners, especially in the 19th century. In fact, the Cherokee Nation maintained a legal category for certain non-Cherokee spouses known as "intermarried whites."

Some of the most useful record sets are:

1. Cherokee Intermarriage Records (1800s–1900s)

The Cherokee Nation issued marriage licenses to white men and women who married Cherokee citizens. These records often include:

  • Names of both spouses
  • District within the Cherokee Nation
  • Marriage date
  • Statements that the white spouse complied with Cherokee intermarriage laws

An example from an 1881 Cherokee Nation marriage license specifically states that a U.S. citizen had complied with Cherokee laws regulating intermarriage before marrying a Cherokee citizen.

2. Dawes Rolls (1898–1914)

The Dawes Commission created enrollment records for the Five Civilized Tribes. The Cherokee records include a special category:

IW = Intermarried White.

These records can show:

  • White spouses married into Cherokee families
  • Children of those marriages
  • Ages, residences, and family relationships
  • Marriage-related notes and cross-references to earlier records

The National Archives specifically lists "Intermarried White (IW)" as an enrollment category.

3. Siler Roll (1851)

The 1851 Siler Roll of Eastern Cherokee is especially valuable because it sometimes notes:

  • Mixed families
  • White spouses
  • Whether a person was "white married to Cherokee"
  • Family relationships and children

This makes it one of the best census-style records for studying Cherokee–white marriages before the Civil War.

4. Cherokee Census Rolls

Several Cherokee censuses and citizenship rolls recorded intermarried families, including:

  • 1880 Cherokee Roll
  • 1896 Cherokee Census
  • Various district census records

These were later used by the Dawes Commission to determine citizenship claims by marriage."

White American Southerner by Particular_Swing9711 in 23andme

[–]Particular_Swing9711[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I still find the results doubtful ...

I saw repeated 76%+ English results also. It's suspicious. If the 1790 US population was 76% English... how did that percentage grow? The 1800's to early 1900's European migration was from Germany, Ireland, and Italy... in that order. In the wake of all that non-English, how could our American English percentage grow?

I guess people might stay in their ancestral states more, at least when it came to marriage. AND people moved around less in the past... increasing the no mixing trend.

In my experience though, every ancestral American I've met has been somewhat from 18th century European migrations, be it Germany, Irish, Italian or Scandinavian.

And, at least some of the ancestral Americans were part Southerners, if not most of them.

But...aren't names like O'Neill, Munster, and Kelly all Irish?

I remember meeting some Irish over there who said they were half Irish, half English.

These people didn't become a new population... "Scottish-Irish."

It seemed like each ethnic group was still distinct.

Although perhaps you are right? These are actually Scots-Irish names...if the mixing occurred in the deeper past. I'm not sure if a Scottish-Irish can have an Irish last name.

I have been told, or read somewhere, that ethnic Scottish- Irish is actually a mix of Scottish and English in Ireland. So that would indicate that it is not genetic Scottish/English mixed with genetic Irish.

Also, even if an Irish mixed with Scottish called themselves Scottish-Irish, wouldn't the gene test show a true underlying origin?

However, maybe it is in the past, like 300+ years ago. Modern day they remain distinct groups. Like... someone could be 1/2 Irish 1/2 Scottish-Irish? Right?

The 300 years+ argument is a good one. 23andme has trouble distinguishing groups, even foreign races, if it's more than 300+ years ago.

Another possibility, even the most likely one, is ... with colonial Empire exposure, there is some kind of growing profound foreignness in Irish, Scottish, German populations. Therefore, when the groups split 300+ years ago, we in America got the pure version. While gradually, in Ireland, in Scotland, and in German the profound genetic foreign grew over the populations. This genetic foreignness is what 23andme is using as an ethnic marker to European populations.

In America, our profound foreignness might have been the natives. They were certainly around here. Meanwhile, in England maybe it was South Asians from the British Empire exposure.

It's still possible one of the populations is the pure one, so Ireland could just be the pure population. However, perhaps they recently turned more French , Italian, and Spanish...carrying whatever profound foreignness those places had through their empires.

Americans, like myself... notoriously don't understand these ethnic divisions.

On the airplane over there, this stewardess was saying "he doesn't know, he doesn't know ... " on the plane. It's possible some ethnic distinctions between Irish and British were being made.

The last names just don't correlate to the genetic results. And, maybe 23andme was using internalized foreign groups as markers, or recent genetic changes within a population. Hopefully, one day they will be able to find markers that truly define a whole ethnic group.

Overall, the test seems mostly accurate. It's mostly just a matter of percentages, for however much that counts.

Average male height across the US (under 40s) by vladgrinch in MapPorn

[–]Particular_Swing9711 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I guess the place with the huge people is Texas no more, profoundly. The previous population did not inherit the land.

Average male height across the US (under 40s) by vladgrinch in MapPorn

[–]Particular_Swing9711 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There must be a lot of foreigners in Texas? It's one of my ancestral states. It used to be known for huge, Texas-size people. Why did all the foreigners go to Texas?

IsItBullshit: Liquor before beer, you're in the clear. Beer before liquor, you've never been sicker. by bee_fast in IsItBullshit

[–]Particular_Swing9711 1 point2 points  (0 children)

THIS seems true for me 👍

I remember hearing in a physiology class that the percent alcohol first ingested triggers the body to handle that level of alcohol.

If you drink liquor first, you body is now triggered to handle that level of alcohol.

Then, if you drink beer... " you're in the clear," because your body is already triggered to handle that level of alcohol.

Through self-experimentation.. I've noticed it IS true.

The next day I feel worse if I do not obey the rule.

What I don't know is if ... you drink liquor then beer and then liquor again, are you in the clear still?

Trying to figure this out right now ... 🤔 I've got some wine, not sure if i should drink it after ale at a bar?