Sicilian DNA

[darkerhorse]

This list of reporting regions for DNA testing by Ancestry.com includes Sicily.

Has anyone had "Sicily" actually reported in their DNA test with Ancestry.com?

https://support.ancestry.com/s/article/ ... uage=en_US

[darkerhorse]

But no one from Sicily in their reference panel.

https://support.ancestry.com/s/article/ ... uage=en_US

Looks like just a parlor game.

[MarcuccioV]

But no one from Sicily in their reference panel.

https://support.ancestry.com/s/article/ ... uage=en_US

Looks like just a parlor game.

Ancestry's current reference panel leaves MUCH to be desired. It's great for building a family tree & learning about DNA matches (if you care to do so), but their algorithm for ethnicities is awful.

So far, there were 3 sites (now 2, as 1 is defunct) which separated Sicily from greater Italy/Greece (in some manner or form).

23&Me gives Italian as a whole, but then breaks it down into regions (one of which is Sicily). It doesn't give percentages in numeric form, but uses a shaded map to indicate the strength of your ancestry to that region.

GEDMATCH in many of the oracles breaks down your results by region/distance (depending on the number of regions compared, 1-4 I think) & these will vary widely. They list various Sicilian regions (not just Sicily as a whole). This is the hardest to understand, so I wouldn't recommend starting here.

The last is a defunct site called DNA.LAND, which had a region called "Mediterranean Islander" which combined Sicily and Cyprus (not certain about Malta).

On all of these my DNA linked to some extent to Sicily. It also linked through my mtDNA, which doesn't apply in your case.

All of the other matrices combined Italian, Southern Italian & Greece/Albania to include Sicily.

I think that's probably the closest you'll get unless one or more of the sites does a major reconfiguring...

[darkerhorse]

I suppose their Italian category could include some Sicilians but it seems like an oversight, or maybe they know Sicilian ancestry can be too complicated.

I guess the thing to do is to accept that Sicilian can't be separated out by percentage, and live with the percentage breakdown of Italian, Greek, Middle Eastern, North African etc. as your Sicilian ethnicity or origin.

From what I've seen my Y haplogroup has been traced back to Scotland so that won't help.

[MarcuccioV]

I suppose their Italian category could include some Sicilians but it seems like an oversight, or maybe they know Sicilian ancestry can be too complicated.

I guess the thing to do is to accept that Sicilian can't be separated out by percentage, and live with the percentage breakdown of Italian, Greek, Middle Eastern, North African etc. as your Sicilian ethnicity or origin.

From what I've seen my Y haplogroup has been traced back to Scotland so that won't help.

As far as a DNA test, I'd consider 23&Me to be best for your situation. Mainly due to the breakdown map (darker shades closest ancestry, lightest most distant). Here is the example for me based on my Italian half:

[MarcuccioV]

So in the above example, Lazio (where my grandparents were born) and Campania are strongest, closely followed by Abruzzo. Sicily is a close 4th and Puglia a bit more distant. The rest of Italy is much more removed...

If you do test, then I would advise an upload to GEDMATCH (it's free for the basic version, which is packed with features). They do have a paid "Tier 1" which unlocks even more -- I haven't done that yet. You can even do Tier 1 monthly rather than annually which is a nice budget feature. It's worth it for the oracles alone, They have video links to help you understand them, as it's complicated stuff, but very enlightening...

[darkerhorse]

If 23andme doesn't have a Sicilian reference group then how can they produce shaded maps which include Sicily?

Another concern would be when my ancestors arrived in Sicily. How can DNA help with that? The paper trail ends in the mid-1700s due to availability (church records have been destroyed over time) so i only have government records.

Being from a relatively small family, most of whom immigrated to the U.S., my recent family tree is very limited. For example, at my generation, on my surname line, there's only one family of 2nd cousins as the closest living relatives. No 1st cousins were ever born. In Sicily, the closest at my generation would be 3rd cousins (and half-2nd cousins).

[darkerhorse]

In my case, the paper trail goes back seven generations in Sicily - to the mid-1750s - on virtually all direct ancestors on both sides of my Sicilian paternal family. Almost 100% from the same tow, and all from the same province.

Of course, some or all could have arrived much further back.

In the scheme of things, is that (thoroughbred Sicilian paper trail to the mid-1700s) considered having deep Sicilian roots or recent Sicilian roots?

[MarcuccioV]

In my case, the paper trail goes back seven generations in Sicily - to the mid-1750s - on virtually all direct ancestors on both sides of my Sicilian paternal family. Almost 100% from the same tow, and all from the same province.

Of course, some or all could have arrived much further back.

In the scheme of things, is that (thoroughbred Sicilian paper trail to the mid-1700s) considered having deep Sicilian roots or recent Sicilian roots?

23&Me has to have a Sicilian reference panel (as well as the other regions) in order to produce such a map. I can only guess that they keep records on the locations of those tested, but that's conjecture on my part.

Since I also have the Greek/West Asian contingent, I have to associate that most likely with the Sicilian (and possibly to a lesser extent Puglian).

As for how recent, It's possible the GEDMATCH oracles might better show something like that, but I haven't played with those deeply enough to provide any answers.

My guess is if you did the 23&Me test & your map had other regions aside from Sicily shaded darker than the lightest color, those would be more distant ancestral locations.

For me, my paper trail (based on info found in the records beginning in the 1870's) shows almost ALL relatives were from E central Lazio since around 1800 -- therefore, there was obviously migration from the other regions (Campania, Abruzzo, Sicily and Puglia) fairly recently before that date or they wouldn't show up so strongly (at least that's what logic tells me). I also have distant DNA matches (which I can't connect) from ALL of those regions (and others, of course).

I'd assume for you if there are other regions highlighted (if you test), then based on how strong they appear you could assume how far distant they might or might not be. Of course it's all relative.

I think this is your best plan of attack for the info you are seeking, but that's only my opinion. My frustration with it all is I can't get out of the ancestral hometown (so far). So my search continues...

[darkerhorse]

That's ironic. I'm hoping for deep roots in my hometown.

This is the DNA test for a distant relative (father's 3rd cousin) who immigrated from Sicily. We share the same surname.

I guess the results are typical for a Sicilian.

It's very general, but I guess you can click on the regions and get more detail?

I wouldn't find this level of detail very satisfying.

[darkerhorse]

23andme might be the best choice, but Ancestry.com is the only place where I've seen Sicily itemized (but I haven't found anyone whose results reported it).

[MarcuccioV]

Thinking further on the depth principle, I think that's relative. I'd consider 1750's maybe moderate depth.

My father's side on many lines goes back to the 1300's, so that's my base of reference.

Keep in mind, after about 5 or 6 generations, you won't show any shared DNA as the percentages are miniscule if not zero...

[darkerhorse]

Thinking further on the depth principle, I think that's relative. I'd consider 1750's maybe moderate depth.

My father's side on many lines goes back to the 1300's, so that's my base of reference.

That's amazing. Church records?

Keep in mind, after about 5 or 6 generations, you won't show any shared DNA as the percentages are miniscule if not zero...

Would that suggest that I'd likely get 50% Italian (i.e. 100% of paternal side) with no breakdown of previous origins like Greece or Middle East, if all my ancestors have been in Sicily back 7 generations?

That is, if all my direct ancestors were born and died in Sicily back 7 generations all my present DNA would just be identified as general "Italian".

[MarcuccioV]

I did both tests (as well as uploading to FTDNA, MH & others). My latest Ancestry results (which are way off) give me the So Italian as the most precise for that region -- my current report lists it as 14%, but if you click on it, it says it could be up to 41% (quite a range). Based on my research it is WAY closer to 41 than 14. It also gives me at least 1 ethnicity that I have no paper trail for.

In the end, it's probably a crapshoot. I just don't trust the Ancestry results as I can't back them up whereas I can from the other results.

All I can say is proceed with caution but be prepared for frustration if you don't get what you're looking for...

[MarcuccioV]

Thinking further on the depth principle, I think that's relative. I'd consider 1750's maybe moderate depth.

My father's side on many lines goes back to the 1300's, so that's my base of reference.

That's amazing. Church records?

Keep in mind, after about 5 or 6 generations, you won't show any shared DNA as the percentages are miniscule if not zero...

Would that suggest that I'd likely get 50% Italian (i.e. 100% of paternal side) with no breakdown of previous origins like Greece or Middle East, if all my ancestors have been in Sicily back 7 generations?

That is, if all my direct ancestors were born and died in Sicily back 7 generations all my present DNA would just be identified as general "Italian".

Some church records, some civil records. Also family trees and written family histories (from past centuries). Mind you these are predominantly UK, Germanic & Scandinavian records which do go back that far in some cases.

Once you get too far back in generations, the older ancestry gets "overwritten" more or less by the more recent ones. It's possible there are going to be snippets of DNA through recombination that get through, but I doubt they would be significant enough to change anything.

I have some Scandinavian deep down (Swedish, Norwegian & possibly Finnish) on paper that does not show up in my DNA as an ethnicity. Many of my paternal DNA matches do, so I guess their Scandinavian lines continued into more recent generations where mine dropped off and were diluted by others.

I also have a much bigger melting pot of ethnicities on my dad's side, whereas my mom's is basically Italian/Med.