Romany DNA - what would you expect to see?

[richarde1979]

Hello SteveG. Interesting also that Bob has a slightly older sighting of the family, as 1593 was the earliest I've been able to identify. The family were certainly part of the Lambourne site in Epping Forest, Essex before it was forcibly broken up in the early 20th century. I will be publishing my own research on the Thompson family very shortly, early July, with info on all those sources I have been able to identify, there is a link to it here for anyone who is interested:

https://www.richedmunds.co.uk/early-gypsy-families-1

Bucky, yes H1a1 is connected, this is what Wikipedia has to say on it:

The primary branch H1 (H-M69) and its subclades are the predominant haplogroups amongst some populations in South Asia, particularly its descendant H1a1 (M52). A primary branch of H-M52, H1a1a (H-M82), is found commonly among the Romani people, who originated in South Asia and migrated into the Middle East and Europe, around the beginning of the 2nd millennium CE

Donald Locke, an American descendant of the British Romany Locke family is doing some great work on this at the moment, just this past couple of months by taking the 'BIG Y' test Family Tree DNA has been able to place him and three other Romany descendants further downstream on the H1a1a-M82 tree, into a newly identified deeper SNP group H-PH124. This is particularly significant as of the three so far tested and falling in this group, one is of Scottish Romani ancestry [Bailey], one is of English Romani ancestry [Locke], one is of Moldovan Romani ancestry [Grigoras]. Despite their geographic distance the fact all three share the same paternal ancestor is strong evidence for the common origin of all European Roms, a fact sometimes disputed. The various theories of different waves of immigration from India over hundreds of years become less likely. It backs up several of the more recent bigger DNA studies which also indicate the origins in a very small group leaving together.

It is a shame you are not on a direct paternal line. I have been monitering Donald Locke's progress from afar, as my Romany family lines and DNA Haplogroup are both maternal, so I am of no use to his study in that respect either. Fascinating stuff all the same. I believe one of the Romany Boswell family, with whom I do share my maternal DNA Haplogroup, will also take the BIG Y test later this year, so that should be interesting.

[sallyyorks]

Hi all, I don't know if this is the correct forum for me but an unexplained 5% South Asian ethnicity in my Ancestry results has brought me here.

Any trace region result, below 15%, should probably be ignored, as these low numbers are unreliable. This is from Ancestry's FAQ page
https://www.ancestry.com.au/dna/legal/faq#interpret-4

4. What does it mean when my ethnicity results identify 'Trace Regions'?
Most people may have a percentage identified with 'Trace Regions' in their genetic ethnicity results. Trace Regions are regions where the estimated range includes zero and does not go above 15%, or where the predicted percentage is less than 4.5%. Since there is only a small amount of evidence that you have genetic ethnicity from these regions, it is possible that you may not have genetic ethnicity from them at all. This is not uncommon, and as more genetic signatures are discovered with a higher confidence level, we may be able to update these Trace Regions over time.

The main candidate in my paper trail is my unconfirmed GGG Grandfather John Thompson, a labourer, born in Bath, Somerset, UK in 1777. His son Joseph Thompson (confirmed GG Grandfather) was also born in Bath in 1815. "A Negro"  is noted on Joseph's baptismal records at St James, presumable relating to his father John.


Should I pursue the possibility that John Thompson, or perhaps some other ancestor, may have had some Roma blood, or am I barking up the wrong tree?

Thanks
Rod

If it says 'negro' at his son's baptism, then he will most likely be of African/part African heritage.

[buckyb]

Thanks Sally
Ancestry show the 5% Asia South ethnicity under the Asia heading and not under trace regions. You state "Trace Regions are regions where the estimated range includes zero and does not go above 15%, or where the predicted percentage is less than 4.5%." Ancestry obviously predicts the percentage as over 5%. That said, I take your point. However why don't I show any African ethnicity?
Perhaps I have the wrong John Thompson.
A little more information I have found on the UK freereg site has what appears to be three siblings of Joseph Thompson, all born at different addresses around Bath,ie  Swinford, Stall St, Holloway and Widcombe. The occupation of John is shown as labourer for the first two including Joseph, then copper roller and lastly coppersmith. There is no mention of "negro" on the other registrations.
I don't profess to be an expert on the Roma community, I'm exactly the opposite. However given the South Asia ethnicity, the name Thompson, an apparent dark complexion and occupations akin to the Romani people, I would think there is sufficient reason to look further into finding a connection. I realise that the dna evidence is insufficient so I guess the only other course of action is to see if I have any dna connection to proven current  Roma persons.
Richarde thanks for your input I would like to obtain a copy of your research on the Thompson family when published.
Rod (buckyb)

[richarde1979]

Rod, whilst I would agree with Sally that 'negro' most usually signifies African or part African heritage in 18th century parish registers, I would just reiterate that I do have isolated examples of other Romany men described as such in parish records, with the same individuals later confirmed elsewhere, in other sources, court documents, newspaper reports, etc, as in fact being Romanies. So though it was by no means common, it DID happen, and is at least a credible possibilty for you, especially as the surname Thompson does have long standing Romany ties in the same general region, and your DNA does not show any significant African traces.

[sallyyorks]

Thanks Sally
Ancestry show the 5% Asia South ethnicity under the Asia heading and not under trace regions. You state "Trace Regions are regions where the estimated range includes zero and does not go above 15%, or where the predicted percentage is less than 4.5%." Ancestry obviously predicts the percentage as over 5%. That said, I take your point. However why don't I show any African ethnicity?
Perhaps I have the wrong John Thompson.

Even if you had African ancestry, it would not necessarily show because the ancestor is so far back in your tree.
These kind of ethnicity tests are unreliable, especially below results of 15%.  They should not be taken too seriously, as posters  davidft and DevonCruwys explain here in a link to a rootschat DNA topic
Topic : Just received my DNA results from ancestry
http://www.rootschat.com/forum/index.php?topic=720079.msg5638447#msg5638447

A little more information I have found on the UK freereg site has what appears to be three siblings of Joseph Thompson, all born at different addresses around Bath,ie  Swinford, Stall St, Holloway and Widcombe. The occupation of John is shown as labourer for the first two including Joseph, then copper roller and lastly coppersmith. There is no mention of "negro" on the other registrations.

There would not be any mention of African heritage in records, eg the census, because there was no ethnic classification to fill in on the form and there was no compulsion to record it any UK records. You are lucky to have found such an interesting notation. I have African heritage ancestors (more recent than yours, but before Windrush) and there is no mention of their ethnicity in any of the (UK) records we have seen so far

I don't profess to be an expert on the Roma community, I'm exactly the opposite. However given the South Asia ethnicity, the name Thompson, an apparent dark complexion and occupations akin to the Romani people, I would think there is sufficient reason to look further into finding a connection. I realise that the dna evidence is insufficient so I guess the only other course of action is to see if I have any dna connection to proven current  Roma persons.
Richarde thanks for your input I would like to obtain a copy of your research on the Thompson family when published.
Rod (buckyb)

Yes it's always worth looking into, but the very small % of South Asian ethnicity result is also common in most people who take the test and who have no Romani connection, and Thompson is quite a common non-Romani name. 
What you could do is google the 'surnames' in your tree alongside 'family tree DNA' and see what comes up for Y haplo results in DNA surname projects/charts. It doesn't necessarily mean you would be  related to anyone in the projects but it's worth checking on the off chance for any male line link to yours (I found a very unusual surname in my tree in the Romani DNA project but if I am honest, on its own and without the paper records I found, that wouldn't have been enough).
The Y haplo tests are much more reliable than the 'ethnicity' or 'MTdna tests', which are just too vague or unreliable. But even then, Y haplo is only one male line and so only a fraction of your tree. So a man taking the test could have plenty of male Romani ancestors, but if the direct line isn't Romani, his test result would not show a Romani 'H' Y haplo result.
Good luck though because sometimes a hunch or a feeling does turn out to be correct after all

[sallyyorks]

...I would just reiterate that I do have isolated examples of other Romany men described as such in parish records, with the same individuals later confirmed elsewhere, in other sources, court documents, newspaper reports, etc, as in fact being Romanies...

Hi again Richarde, could you possibly post these examples, as i'm interested in both Romani and African UK ancestry

[panished]

 Hello Sally
I hope you are well

this is me michael . its up to you if you believe me, no bother either way, i have been all over the world, most likely traveled more than anyone you ever new, been to South Africa and evan in Mandela's prison cell, been to Cuba and been where Che Guevara is interned, i have evan been to the Artic Circle, Greenland, been in their old tents and Listoned to their Shay-women, i have traveled all over the West Indian Islands and true i have seen Gipsy People in Turkey and Spain and France and Greece and Austria, Germany plus Italy to, most are far darker than the English Romany today, but some are darker than the Indians of today, i think the original Gipsies was well black, real dark, i have seen with my own eyes some who are near black like Africans, i think thats how they were in the beginning, those were the real ones, everyone now is diluted, mixed, there is no hiding behind Old Names, no hiding behind d.n.a, people in this Country are well mixed, there is no hiding behind to just slagging off people who are more mixed, this is just the way it is, but everyone who knows the truth are their relatives, it does not matter about d.n.a or color or names, if you believe in the truth you know the truth, this is but one of the records i have found below, is it true i do not know but i have seen near black Gipsies from over the lands, just read this, and its only an extract, i have found several more such story's but i have also been real close up in several Country's with Gipsy People who have never been in this Land.

Saturday 8 October 1853 Illustrated London News

The Gipsy Slaves of Wallachia

The physical constitution of this unhappy people is strongly marked. The men are generally of a lofty stature, robust and sinewy; Their skins black or copper-colored; their hair thick and woolly; their lips are negro heaviness,and their teeth are white as peals..........
 

[buckyb]

Thank you all for your inputs. I have found this exercise most enlightening and I have learnt things about a heritage I would have never considered.

I think if I put to the forum that I had Negro heritage based solely on an entry on a baptismal record it would be dismissed. So on the balance of probabilities I would have to go with the South Asia ethnicity.

This could well turn out to be an unsolvable part of my heritage. However I will keep an open mind on both the Romani and Negro potential.

Once again thanks to all concerned, I hope I haven't taken up too much of your valuable time. Hopefully my situation might help others in the same boat as myself and warrants a place in this forum.

Rod

[richarde1979]

"The Y haplo tests are much more reliable than the 'ethnicity' or 'MTdna tests', which are just too vague or unreliable"

I tend to agree with you on the ethnicity tests in general Sally, though I tested with LivingDNA, and it was about 85% acccurate compared to my paper research. It was very accurate with English counties, but not so great identifying regions outside those (Ireland, Scotland, France etc) so I think the companies are slowly getting better in that respect, as more people test, and their databases expand.

That said I would not agree with that analysis of mtDNA. mtDNA is not vague or unreliable, it gives very precise and accurate ancestry results:

"mtDNA is passed down exclusively from your mother. Because mtDNA does not include a combination of DNA from both parents, it does not change with every generation.In fact, mtDNA changes extremely slowly – it might remain exactly the same for dozens of generations!
mtDNA testing ignores the main DNA in a cell, and looks just at the DNA of the mitochondria instead. Among other things, that means the test only has to examine about 16,500 genetic base pairs, instead of the 3.2 billion base pairs found in our DNA."

In tracing links to ancient populations, it is of far more value than Y Haplogroups,  because mtDNA is present in higher numbers than nuclear DNA, and it is more likely to survive intact in ancient remains.

Despite the very ancient results it typically gives, in terms of Romany people in Europe, or Romany descended people, it is still of clear use and interest, as there are a few haplogroups, including my own, which are almost exclusively seen in the Romany population, but otherwise virtually absent in the wider general European population. In my own case it was crucial in backing up the paper evidence and family lore, and is much more reliable as evidence than trace South Asian autosomal ethnicity results, which as you rightly point out may not always be very reliable and are frequently seen in many tested people.

There are some examples of Romanies noted as 'Black men' or 'Negroes' in relation to prominent UK Romany families, Hearns, Lovells, etc, in my book 'The Early Romany Boswells: A Family History 1650-1810 Part 2', which was published by the Romany and Traveller Family History Society, in February this year, and is still available:

https://www.richedmunds.co.uk/earlyboswells2

There are also several further examples I have identified in relationship to the Romany Smiths, which I will be publishing in my forthcoming work on that family, available January next year. Thanks for the interest Sally.