View Full Version : Elizabeth Warren and Indian heritage, checking off boxes
I saw yesterday that someone running against Elizabeth Warren is using the campaign slogan, vote for a real and not a fake Indian. He is mocking her claim to Native American heritage.
I have been doing lots of genealogy this year on my mom's family and have found that I have Native American ancestors . Unlike the senator, I have names and birthdates that identify folks. So along with mostly English, Scottish, Irish, and some German and Swiss, I now have some native American ancestors, who were Cherokee, Mohawk, Choctaw, and Pamunkey.
I've always hated those boxes that they have you check when you apply for a job, as to your heritage. Can I switch boxes, or is that silly? I think identify politics is stupid, and I have ancestors who were English and killed Indians and I have English ancestors who were killed by Indians, and I have ancestors who were Cherokee Indians who were killed by other Indians, who were Catawbas.
Do any of you wonder which box to check? Do you think Elizabeth Warren pulled a fast one to get that job? Or do you think she was right to claim Native American heritage?
I always want a box that simply says "human".
Wouldn't that be great, Tammy.
Some people of mixed heritage check "other."
Until I delved into it, my siblings and I thought we had Native American antecedents (because my grandfather 1) had a profile like the guy who was featured on the nickel and 2) was a kidder. Both my tracing of his bloodline and my DNA results proved that canard wrong. But I don't fault Elizabeth Warren for believing family lore.
I never saw an "other" box, but maybe I just did not see it!
It depends on the form, I guess. I'm sure they are adding new classifications all the time, though.
I was always told I was part Cherokee, as was Elizabeth Warren, but I didn't use it to benefit from affirmative action. 1) It was not proven, and when I spent several years intensively tracing my roots - travel to genealogical libraries, the national archives, hiring professional genealogists, etc. - I concluded it was a myth. 2) Even if I had found a distant ancestor, for Cherokees that person has to be on the Dawes Roll for you to claim tribal membership. 3) I was not disadvantaged by a heritage that no one associated me with.
Ian Frazier wrote in "On the Rez" about the appeal of Native American culture, but without trying to appropriate it, whereas Elizabeth Warren has not been particularly responsive to the concerns of others of this supposed heritage of hers, nor as a public figure has she done the work I would have expected to verify her claims.
Having travelled to several reservations in the West and seen real poverty amongst people who cannot pass, it's ironic that highly assimilated Eastern tribes like the Pequots are the ones cashing in on their ethnic heritage. And it's definitely surprising that Warren listed herself that way when she was a privileged professor.
Overall I think Warren has done a good job as my Senator, but Trump did get a good zinger in calling her Pocahontas. She should acknowledge her advantages instead of trying to create or claim disadvantages that need to be remedied via the affirmative action directory she listed herself in.
I agree that Warren hardly distinguished herself with that fiction or belief.
I never identified with Native American heritage, so finding I had none didn't faze me. Some of my siblings undoubtedly feel let down.
Williamsmith
7-6-17, 8:30pm
Looks a little like Elizabeth........I'd say it's still a possibility.
The Atlantic wrote an article saying she could clear everything up with a DNA test, but she hasn't taken one.
I am not sure that is right about the DNA test--I have documented ancestors, with birth records showing descent, like my 9th great grandfather, Amadohiyi Pigeon of Tellico Moytoy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moytoy_of_Tellico
that is authenticated by legal records, as well as family lore--
but my DNA test did not show this, although it showed the area of the country that was the Cherokee nation as "genetic communities". It also identified cousins that have the same Cherokee ancestors as genetic matches.
So I am not sure how precise those tests are, so far?
I was always told I was part Cherokee, as was Elizabeth Warren, but I didn't use it to benefit from affirmative action. 1) It was not proven, and when I spent several years intensively tracing my roots - travel to genealogical libraries, the national archives, hiring professional genealogists, etc. - I concluded it was a myth. 2) Even if I had found a distant ancestor, for Cherokees that person has to be on the Dawes Roll for you to claim tribal membership. 3) I was not disadvantaged by a heritage that no one associated me with.
Ian Frazier wrote in "On the Rez" about the appeal of Native American culture, but without trying to appropriate it, whereas Elizabeth Warren has not been particularly responsive to the concerns of others of this supposed heritage of hers, nor as a public figure has she done the work I would have expected to verify her claims.
Having travelled to several reservations in the West and seen real poverty amongst people who cannot pass, it's ironic that highly assimilated Eastern tribes like the Pequots are the ones cashing in on their ethnic heritage. And it's definitely surprising that Warren listed herself that way when she was a privileged professor. .
Good points, although there were certainly wealthy Native Americans in the day. I was creeped out to find that some of my Cherokee ancestors were also slaveholders. I think what you say is quite true, that the racism in our society guarantees a hard time for those who "cannot pass." At some point in the mid 19th century, things shifted and whiteness seemed to take on a new force as the primary social organizer in the country.
I thought that Warren had actually used the designation to try to gain an advantage getting the professorship, will have to look into that.
Okay, found this wiki, for what it is worth:
http://elizabethwarrenwiki.org/elizabeth-warren-native-american-cherokee-controversy/
some interesting stuff, including the material in the Crimson.
iris lilies
7-7-17, 11:41am
I am not sure that is right about the DNA test--I have documented ancestors, with birth records showing descent, like my 9th great grandfather, Amadohiyi Pigeon of Tellico Moytoy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moytoy_of_Tellico
that is authenticated by legal records, as well as family lore--
but my DNA test did not show this, although it showed the area of the country that was the Cherokee nation as "genetic communities". It also identified cousins that have the same Cherokee ancestors as genetic matches.
So I am not sure how precise those tests are, so far?
There is an internet clickbait article about three young women, genetic clones, who had their ancestry analyzed by one of the standard services.
Their results were not the same. For instance, one of them had a percentage of something like 22%, another had a percentage of 16%.
So no it is not entirely scientific, it is only approximate. Keep in mind that again these girls are genetic clones, they have exactly the same DNA.
iris lilies
7-7-17, 11:55am
Thanks for,posting that web link about Elizabeth Warren and the controversy of her Native American heritage.
I was ready to wade through an objective article about that.
From my reading I think her idea that she has Cherokee heritage is sincerely held by her family and her since her siblings also have the same idea. I accept that it was family lore handed down in her immediate family, but yeah it's not real. I give her a pass on that. Besides, back then there was no internet and it wasnt easy to verify things (although I have to wonder just how far back was the Cherokee ancestor on her mother's side, that should have been made clear in her family.)
I do not give her a pass on using that information multiple times to further her career because that's what she is doing. it is one thing to grab onto an ethnic background and play at sharing in it. It is another thing to use it for professional advancement when there are strict legal definitions.
I embrace my Scottish heritage but honestly we cannot verify that the original immigrant came from Scotland, it is only family lore. For all we know he might actually be Irish! We know that he got married in Ireland, we have that record. So, I play Scottish but it's just play, it's not official.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/07/us/dolezal-activist-identifies-as-black-african-name.html
If gender is no more than a malleable social construct, why can't race be as well? If Academia is foolish enough to grant preferences to people who check the right ethnic box, let's all sign up for whichever category serves our interest.
But this has been going on for a long time, LDAHL, and it's not Academia that is to blame. If you go in and read some of the original files from the Dawes rolls, there were people going to court to defend their rights to tribal citizenship; the Bureau of INdian affairs was saying families had to pick between Choctaw and Cherokee tribal membership in some of the files I was reading; these Dawes rolls were set up to limit people getting what was rightfully theirs in terms of property, and it's not the Cherokee people who were determining who were Cherokees. Race is a malleable social and sometimes legal construct.
I wonder why were are forced into checking boxes? And it is certainly not limited to academic jobs.
If gender is no more than a malleable social construct, why can't race be as well? If Academia is foolish enough to grant preferences to people who check the right ethnic box, let's all sign up for whichever category serves our interest.
We usually check "Pacific Islander" in this household.
We usually check "Pacific Islander" in this household.
If you can write one in, I'll say "mongrel". Otherwise I check "other".
Ultralight
7-12-17, 8:23am
When people ask me of my last name (DaSilva), "What kind of name is that?", they often expect me to say Portuguese or Brazilian. But I always say: "American."
When people ask me of my last name (DaSilva), "What kind of name is that?", they often expect me to say Portuguese or Brazilian. But I always say: "American."
I think that's the right way to think about it.
We do seem race-ethnicity-mad in this country. Why should I feel proud or ashamed that my ancestors came from Ireland or Norway, or if they were heroes or halfwits? If the best you can do for an identity is a pedigree, I feel sorry for you.
More than most places, I think America is more idea than folk group or group of folk groups. Perhaps a lot of our tensions stem from people who feel otherwise, and think they can demand an accounting from history.
To be fair to Elizabeth Warren, counsellors encourage applicants to tick as many boxes as possible. If you can claim multiple ethnicities, you add to the school's diversity ratings - even if you're blonde and blue-eyed - So you're more likely to be accepted and funded. It would make no difference if Ms. Warren now took a DNA test, all these years later. If she believed, 20 or so years ago, that she had Native American heritage, she was making an honest application, even if a test today showed no Native American DNA. If today's test reveals Native American DNA, it still wouldn't make her a Native American. Culturally, she's a white US American.
To be fair to Elizabeth Warren, counsellors encourage applicants to tick as many boxes as possible. If you can claim multiple ethnicities, you add to the school's diversity ratings - even if you're blonde and blue-eyed - So you're more likely to be accepted and funded. It would make no difference if Ms. Warren now took a DNA test, all these years later. If she believed, 20 or so years ago, that she had Native American heritage, she was making an honest application, even if a test today showed no Native American DNA. If today's test reveals Native American DNA, it still wouldn't make her a Native American. Culturally, she's a white US American.
She actually was not applying to the school for admission. It was an employment thing, and I am sure if she actually checked any boxes--she was asserting Native American identity for employment reasons, and calling herself "a woman of color."
And yes, there are blonde and blue eyed Cherokees, as with my ancestors--there was much intermarriage between Scots and Cherokee peoples.
I don't think one's coloring should be a cultural determinant. But I do think that human beings naturally seek family and clan identity--I know it is pleasing to me to know where my people came from,how they related to the land, and it is satisfying to have cousins contact me on Ancestry and we share stories of ancestors and family. I guess you either have that or you don't, and if you don't, you probably don't understand the satisfaction of finding family, and feeling connected to your ancestors.
She actually was not applying to the school for admission. It was an employment thing, and I am sure if she actually checked any boxes--she was asserting Native American identity for employment reasons, and calling herself "a woman of color."
And yes, there are blonde and blue eyed Cherokees, as with my ancestors--there was much intermarriage between Scots and Cherokee peoples.
I don't think one's coloring should be a cultural determinant. But I do think that human beings naturally seek family and clan identity--I know it is pleasing to me to know where my people came from,how they related to the land, and it is satisfying to have cousins contact me on Ancestry and we share stories of ancestors and family. I guess you either have that or you don't, and if you don't, you probably don't understand the satisfaction of finding family, and feeling connected to your ancestors.
Genealogy as a hobby is harmless.
Genealogy as a policy tool is harmful.
Genealogy as a policy tool is harmful.
+1
I think that's the right way to think about it.
We do seem race-ethnicity-mad in this country. Why should I feel proud or ashamed that my ancestors came from Ireland or Norway, or if they were heroes or halfwits? If the best you can do for an identity is a pedigree, I feel sorry for you.
Agreed. I remember being puzzled years ago by some office mates cheering because a white guy won a college free throw contest. Seriously? Maybe if you are cheering Frederick Douglas on back in the day because of all the obstacles he won, but hoops?
I supposedly have Native American ancestors up my father's mother's side of the family, but I'd need DNA testing to validate it at this point.
About Warren, I find it interesting how people can perseverate on a single item, while ignoring so many others - and make it stick. Especially in politics. It's like watching a bunch of hoarders going on and on about how this other person had a sink with some dirty dishes in it.
And more breaking news on this today. With a big media push.
Ultralight
10-15-18, 4:35pm
Warren 2020!
And more breaking news on this today. With a big media push.
I wonder what took so long to put this to rest? Now we know that she is somewhere between 1/32 and 1/1024 Native American, which does not meet the minimum requirements for enrollment in either of the Native American Nations from which she believes herself to be descended. I guess the law school directories from her academic days were a little less strict as they allowed her to list herself as a minority even though her DNA suggests she's something like 99% European.
Personally, I'd go with the official individual Native American Nation's guidelines since they are the authority on the subject. In my recent DNA test I discovered I'm <2% Scandinavian, but I'd be embarrassed to call myself a Viking.
I'm apparently, from the DNA analysis, more North African than Warren is American Indian. And more Asian too.
And yet I'm about 100% Celtic/Scandinavian/Germanic.
For God's sake--Warren's family lore had it that her heritage included Native American ancestors. She's proved it, and if she were so inclined, she could probably narrow it down via research. It's likely that it's three or four generations removed, unless some Native American visited Europe to impregnate an ancestor farther back :laff:. Trump made her an object of derision, she pushed back. He told the world he would give a million to the charity of her choice; then, predictably, he reneged--as he has done on so many issues. He just loves denigrating women, doesn't he?
For the record, word was in my family that we had native ancestors (a romantic notion for most Americans, apparently), and DNA testing proves we absolutely do not.
I wonder what took so long to put this to rest? Now we know that she is somewhere between 1/32 and 1/1024 Native American, which does not meet the minimum requirements for enrollment in either of the Native American Nations from which she believes herself to be descended. I guess the law school directories from her academic days were a little less strict as they allowed her to list herself as a minority even though her DNA suggests she's something like 99% European.
Personally, I'd go with the official individual Native American Nation's guidelines since they are the authority on the subject. In my recent DNA test I discovered I'm <2% Scandinavian, but I'd be embarrassed to call myself a Viking.
I'm apparently 3% Norwegian. That was a shocker!
It's likely that it's three or four generations removed, unless some Native American visited Europe to impregnate an ancestor farther back
That must be the case then because it is reported to be six to ten generations removed.
For the record, word was in my family that we had native ancestors (a romantic notion for most Americans, apparently), and DNA testing proves we absolutely do not.
Same here. All my life we were told that my great grandfather was 50% Native American and yet DNA tests on myself and several first cousins show none.
Interestingly enough, I just went to the AncestryDNA site and they updated my analysis based upon an increase in reference samples. My Scandinavian, Caucasus, Iberian Peninsula and European Jewish estimates have gone away. My total makeup is now:
England, Wales & Northwestern Europe 80%
Increased by 13%
Ireland and Scotland 15%
Increased by 4%
Germanic Europe 5%
Refined from:
Europe West 9%
Yes, Alan, both of the main two ancestry databases just got a bunch of new data dropped into them, which is when my previously-unknown North African and Asian data popped up.
The information seems to be getting more precise and interesting as they throw more raw data into the input side of things.
https://i.imgur.com/JzOjPUu.jpg
Yes, Alan, both of the main two ancestry databases just got a bunch of new data dropped into them, which is when my previously-unknown North African and Asian data popped up.
The information seems to be getting more precise and interesting as they throw more raw data into the input side of things.
Apparently so! Good thing I never claimed that Viking thing. ;)
My mother got less than 1% North African or Arab. It also came out of the blue.
The Cherokee issued a statement.
https://www.cherokee.org/News/Stories/20181015_Cherokee-Nation-responds-to-Senator-Warrens-DNA-test
She's not laying claim to tribal membership, she's just proving that she wasn't lying (or mistaken) when she said she had native heritage. It's clear she's nothing more than a convenient target.
Rachel Dolezal isn't black and Elizabeth Warren isn't Cherokee. Due to the one drop rule there is a lot of leeway in how people self-identify in the US, but there are limits. Listing herself as a minority in a directory was a mistake for Warren. But her mistakes are nothing compared to Trump's.
She's not laying claim to tribal membership, she's just proving that she wasn't lying (or mistaken) when she said she had native heritage. It's clear she's nothing more than a convenient target.
A convenient target. For the Cherokee. Whose opinion perhaps should have some more weight than a bunch of white folks'.
"A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person’s ancestors were indigenous to North or South America," Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. said. "Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong. It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage."
It would be interesting to know when her ancestors came here. Figuring 25 years per generation 6 generations ago would be 150 years, or roughly 1870. 8 generations would be more like 1820. It seems entirely conceivable that her family lore did know of someone in the family that long ago had a native american spouse. That's the only thing she's ever claimed. Yes, it was perhaps wrong of her to use that to list herself as being in any way a minority, depending on one's opinion on the "one drop" rule. But the bigger point she has successfully made is that she wasn't lying when she said her family had native american blood and trump is a racist for calling her Pocahontas.
At the end of the day it's kind of sad that this even matters. Or that there are people grumbling about her (factually accurate) claims but not flipping out over the much much bigger, and much more voluminous in quantity, lies that Trump has told. But it does matter if she intends to run for president in a couple of years.
flowerseverywhere
10-15-18, 9:56pm
My sibs and I are doing Geneology research and did our DNA. We were starting from scratch as we know none of our relatives save our parents and one grandfather. Interesting journey. We thought we were 50% French Canadian and 50% African American. Ding dong, we are wrong.
More like 30% African American, 30% French Canadian, 20% British and the rest Portuguese and Native American. Which is why we are pretty dark skinned.
Every day one one of us finds a new surprise, an unknown relative. Like a several thousand piece puzzle. Who knows what we will find. Family stories just kind of evolve.
Unfortunately this is all a distraction. Immigration, the deficit, health care and several other pressing and very important issues are being ignored but this stupidity is the headlines. But, but Hillary’s emails....
ApatheticNoMore
10-15-18, 10:15pm
Unfortunately this is all a distraction. Immigration, the deficit, health care and several other pressing and very important issues are being ignored but this stupidity is the headlines.
yes, individual minor cheating are such a joke against the problems we face.
I guess if she really wanted to make right, she could take up native American issues. Of course these are going to vary some, a few tribes are doing well economically, and many are doing very badly. But you have to admit it would be kind of cool, and stemming all criticism at the pass, if she took up a bunch of native American advisors to her campaign and gave them serious input on issues.
catherine
10-16-18, 7:18am
What was the best political move for her? To defend herself and make a 5 minutes video to prove there's some truth to her claims, or just "consider the source" and move on? I'm not sure her video/DNA test are going to accomplish what she hopes.
People who stand in the path of Donald Trump while he's at work making cartoon Garbage Pail kids out of them have tough choices--defend or deflect or ignore. Unfortunately, he's a master marketer, and his 2-3 word zingers work. Ask any advertiser who's ever written a jingle.
If you could defend yourself using his tactics, fighting fire with fire, that would be fine. Not exactly the civil thing to do and most of us don't want to go down to his level. But long intellectual responses won't work--maybe with some people, but probably only the "friendlies" who have the patience to sit through a long-winded explanation.
Did Marco Rubio survive "little Marco"? Did Cruz survive "Lyin' Ted"? Did Hillary survive "Crooked Hillary"?
Will Warren survive Donald Trump if she runs in 2020? I doubt it.
What should we call Donald, if we were to go by his playbook?
How about Demented Donnie?
What should we call Donald, if we were to go by his playbook?
The Whopper King?
From what I've seen of Warren, I think she could go head to head with Don without loosing her dignity. I noticed in the news today she called him "creepy". That could be a catchy nickname.
If you like Warren, you’ll see this as vindication. If you don’t, you’ll see it as hilarious.
She does deserve credit for a creative and original political stunt.
dado potato
10-16-18, 8:47am
Elizabeth Warren's "DNA Test" does not prove anything, except maybe that she is under attack, and she needs to defend herself.
Regardless of her merits as a politician, I gather that in 1986 she began listing herself in a legal directory as "minority". She ceased doing so in the mid-1990s. Around 2012 this bit of deceptive information was publicized. It has been used by her political opponents to attack her ever since.
I believe that truth and reconciliation would be served if Elizabeth Warren would admit that she lied, and would make amends to Cherokee and other people for whatever harm her deception may have caused them.
In the context of the current election campaign and all the mud-slinging that goes with it, Elizabeth Warren is not the biggest liar or the dirtiest liar in the USA.
I think the best political move for her is to state that she took the DNA test to verify her grandmother's claim that she had Cherokee ancestors.
She should then state that she understands this does not make her a member of the Cherokee tribe, and she was working with her best understanding at the time as to what it meant to be Cherokee.
She is giving great offense to the people of the Cherokee nation and other tribes at this point in the way she is handling this. So she needs to explain that she was ignorant of what it meant to be Cherokee, and that she should not have claimed it.
When I found my Cherokee ancestors, I had to educate myself about what that meant to the Cherokee tribe, that they did not consider me "Cherokee" just because I could name ancestors like Moytoy of Tellico and John Trader Vann who were my grandfathers.
It is about identity and how the tribe defines itself, which is obviously different than how I thought about it or Elizabeth Warren. I think the cookbook thing can be forgiven as an honest mistake. The Harvard Law identification as "a woman of color" not so much.
So I think she should start apologizing to people whose experiences she has appropriated inappropriately.
I have to say, “appropriated inappropriately” is a great turn of phrase.
Less clever will be the various attention grabbing stunts by the twenty or so contenders we will see leading to the Democratic Convention. Strange and wonderful bills will be proposed. The middle school lexicon will be scoured for insults. Investigators will investigate and investigators will investigate the investigators. It will be like Game of Thrones with a less attractive cast.
Float On
10-16-18, 10:57am
I am a bit Osage, enough to say that I am but not enough to make any claims or throw it around. My great grandfather was full or a little less, I forget, but I know his name was Cloud. They were a tall, beautiful but fierce people which explains my boy's heights and my don't mess with me attitude.
JaneV2.0
10-16-18, 11:07am
The lesson here is that, if you're a woman, any small misstep--no matter how harmless, inconsequential, or even false--will follow you forever and provide endless fodder for angry rants and calls for apologies or imprisonment.
Like Hillary Clinton's emails--when countless people in the Bush and Trump administrations have used private servers and go unchallenged, and Representative Kevin McCarthy's family claiming native ancestry they don't have to secure government contracts. Males in the government can lie, cheat, and steal on a daily basis and go unchallenged. The double standard is thriving in our toxic political climate.
The lesson here is that, if you're a woman, any small misstep--no matter how harmless, inconsequential, or even false--will follow you forever and provide endless fodder for angry rants and calls for apologies or imprisonment.
Like Hillary Clinton's emails--when countless people in the Bush and Trump administrations have used private servers and go unchallenged, and Representative Kevin McCarthy's family claiming native ancestry they don't have to secure government contracts. Males in the government can lie, cheat, and steal on a daily basis and go unchallenged. The double standard is thriving in our toxic political climate.
Oh I don’t know. Ward Churchill was pretty well mocked back in his day.
The good thing about this may be that if the one drop of blood (or six genetic markers) standard is generally accepted, than so few of us are a single breed that identity politics pretty much loses any validity it may have had. The only purebred I know is my dog, and even there I only have his word for it.
Many people find value in identity politics as it has become a valuable means to gain advantage, although that advantage sometimes must be hidden as well. Mrs. Warren used her family lore to her advantage when she could, just as I'm certain Barack Obama did. At least she made an effort to publicly prove her small slice of heritage while Mr. Obama's school records (which undoubtedly show him to be a favored foreign student) remain sealed.
Many people find value in identity politics as it has become a valuable means to gain advantage, although that advantage sometimes must be hidden as well. Mrs. Warren used her family lore to her advantage when she could, just as I'm certain Barack Obama did. At least she made an effort to publicly prove her small slice of heritage while Mr. Obama's school records (which undoubtedly show him to be a favored foreign student) remain sealed.
If President Obama was a favored foreign student (how does one get that status with an American mother and a valid Hawaii birth certificate, one wonders), he certainly fulfilled his promise many times over.
Many people find value in identity politics as it has become a valuable means to gain advantage, although that advantage sometimes must be hidden as well. Mrs. Warren used her family lore to her advantage when she could, just as I'm certain Barack Obama did. At least she made an effort to publicly prove her small slice of heritage while Mr. Obama's school records (which undoubtedly show him to be a favored foreign student) remain sealed.
I suspect some truth to that. Let's not leave out the image created by Donald of the self made successful business man. Although it looks more like his heritage, including possibly hundreds of millions of hidden gifts from Dad and evidence he was a millionaire by the age of eight may have helped (although his tax records remain sealed). Heritage beyond genetics. Marketing.
My dad's DNA test results are in and as I believed the stories of Native American heritage are false. Talking to relatives it turns out one ancestor was a captive in North Carolina, so maybe that is where the idea came from. But he is 100% European and to my surprise he is 12% Scandinavian, he thinks because Pommerania was at one time ruled by Sweden and because Normans who were part Norse conquered England. The pot started melting long before the family got to the New World.
mschrisgo2
11-24-18, 9:30pm
I keep hearing that a couple of the DNA services don't report the native American ancestry. One of my cousins has used two and got the same results, minus the native American info on one of them.
I discovered in the recent update I had North African and West Asian relatives. Which fits with the family lore of Vikings Down The Volga.
Also, just passed my Norse a-levels so I can move back :-)
Very cool, Bae. The new update deemed me 3% Norwegian, so would this help me expatriate?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.