Ethnic Origin of Americans and Ancestry Groups in the United States

[Tryggvi]

Documentation

The data used to create these maps comes from questionnaire item 13, which asks respondents to identify the ancestry groups with which they identified most closely. All data comes from respondents who reported a single ancestry (although multiple responses were accepted for this question). Some multiple responses (such as French Canadian or Scotch-Irish) are treated as a single response, reflecting their status as a unique ancestry group.

Data Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, 1990
Maps Created by: Land Management Information Center. Datanet

[Appalachian]

Nice maps! Thanks for posting this.

I have a few comments:

In relation to this map, you'll note that the highest concentration of persons claiming "US Ancestry" is in the Southern Highlands (ie. Southern Appalachia), parts of the Coastal South, and those areas of the more westerly South into which settlers from Appalachia moved after the Western Road through the Cumberland Gap was pioneered by Kentuckians such as Daniel Boone, Simon Kenton, and Davey Crockett.

I've occasionally heard these people criticized for being "ignorant of their origins," but in actuality, they are some of the longest-term White inhabitants of the Americas, and their bloodlines are generally a thorough mixture of Scots-Irish, English, Dutch, Palatine German, and French Huguenot (clearly making us predominantly Germanic, which is why I maintain that American Preservationism is Germanic Preservationism ). When this deep and thorough admixture is taken into consideration, it's easy to see why we long ago stopped identifying ourselves with any one particular European ethnicity and established our own roots here in America.


In regards to this map showing persons claiming "Irish Ancestry", you'll notice that they are also most heavily concentrated in Southern Appalachia. It is becoming increasingly clear that the vast majority of these people, while they almost certainly have some green Irish ancestry, are also predominantly of Scots-Irish stock. Evidence has shown that these Scots-Irish immigrants to the Southland traditionally identified themselves as "Arsh" (our way of saying "Irish") in reference to their place of origin, Northern Ireland, and not necessarily to any sort of Gaelic inheritance. After all, if the green Irish were so heavily concentrated in this area, how would one explain the fact that this area of concentration roughly coincides with the "Bible Belt," America's hotbed of Protestant fervor?

Anyway, thanks again for the maps and stats. Good info.

[ulphila]

Nice maps! Thanks for posting this.

I have a few comments:

In relation to this map, you'll note that the highest concentration of persons claiming "US Ancestry" is in the Southern Highlands (ie. Southern Appalachia), parts of the Coastal South, and those areas of the more westerly South into which settlers from Appalachia moved after the Western Road through the Cumberland Gap was pioneered by Kentuckians such as Daniel Boone, Simon Kenton, and Davey Crockett.

I've occasionally heard these people criticized for being "ignorant of their origins," but in actuality, they are some of the longest-term White inhabitants of the Americas, and their bloodlines are generally a thorough mixture of Scots-Irish, English, Dutch, Palatine German, and French Huguenot (clearly making us predominantly Germanic, which is why I maintain that American Preservationism is Germanic Preservationism ). When this deep and thorough admixture is taken into consideration, it's easy to see why we long ago stopped identifying ourselves with any one particular European ethnicity and established our own roots here in America.


In regards to this map showing persons claiming "Irish Ancestry", you'll notice that they are also most heavily concentrated in Southern Appalachia. It is becoming increasingly clear that the vast majority of these people, while they almost certainly have some green Irish ancestry, are also predominantly of Scots-Irish stock. Evidence has shown that these Scots-Irish immigrants to the Southland traditionally identified themselves as "Arsh" (our way of saying "Irish") in reference to their place of origin, Northern Ireland, and not necessarily to any sort of Gaelic inheritance. After all, if the green Irish were so heavily concentrated in this area, how would one explain the fact that this area of concentration roughly coincides with the "Bible Belt," America's hotbed of Protestant fervor?
Very interesting comments. You've answered some of my questions.
Anyway, thanks again for the maps and stats. Good info.

Very interesting comments. You've answered some of my questions. What strikes me odd is the huge concentration of English in Utah. does it have to do with the mormons? was that mostly an English oriented heresy?

As to the poster of the thread - great maps, is there a link? I just found this http://www.lmic.state.mn.us/datanetw...usAncestry.php

[Appalachian]

Very interesting comments. You've answered some of my questions. What strikes me odd is the huge concentration of English in Utah. does it have to do with the mormons? was that mostly an English oriented heresy?

That's an interesting question, and one I hadn't really thought of before. I'm not too knowledgeable on the Mormons, but didn't most of the early Mormon families migrate west from rural New York and other parts of New England? If so, at that early age it would seem to indicate that they were of predominantly English stock.

Thanks for the link, BTW.

[Dr. Solar Wolff]

The Scotts and also some Irish settled America in great numbers slightly later that the Anglo-Saxons. The good land along the eastern seaboard was mostly taken. The Scotts and Irish always prided themselves as being tough and independent and so pushed westward and settled the areas indicated as the first wave of true pioneers. The Scotts-Irish did the same thing in Australia, I understand.

These maps are wonderful but a little misleading. In Utah, for instance, the Mormons came from Ohio and New York mostly. These people are mostly of English ancestry as well as Danish as the map indicates but many made the jump west in one generation--one migration. This was not the norm.

Most Ameircans moved west slowly. They drifted west and settled in one area after another and then later generations moved on westward. These maps ask for a single point of origin. For these people, that is impossible. I for instance would have to say I was of English origin since my father's side was and so I have an English name. But I also have Germans, Dutch, Irish, and other names such as "Ring" for instance which could have a number of origins. So in the Western USA, this system breaks down somewhat.

[Appalachian]

Most Ameircans moved west slowly. They drifted west and settled in one area after another and then later generations moved on westward. These maps ask for a single point of origin. For these people, that is impossible. I for instance would have to say I was of English origin since my father's side was and so I have an English name. But I also have Germans, Dutch, Irish, and other names such as "Ring" for instance which could have a number of origins. So in the Western USA, this system breaks down somewhat.

I think this is pretty much the same reason most of the long-term, Old Stock Americans of the Southern Highlands and parts of the South and Eastern Seaboard define their ancestry as being of US origin. It's also the same reason I list my meta-ethnicity as "American" in my profile. We're impossible to really pin down to one distinct European ethnicity. We long ago became Americans.

[JoeDas]

The above map is deceiving because, after seeing it, one would think that a large percentage of Americans of Danish ancestry live in Utah. In truth there are 1.7 million Americans of Danish ancestry, and less than 150,000 live in Utah. Danes are primarily concentrated where the other Scandinavians live--In the Upper Midwest--although it is true that the Danes are a bit more spread out than the Swedes and the Norwegians are.


--------------

Total Scandinavian population in America (let's see if I can do this from memory):

1.7 million Danes
4.5 million Norwegians
4.5 million Swedes
800,000 'Scandinavians' (these gave their ancestry on the Census form simply as 'Scandinavian')
Total: 11.5 million

Persons of Scandinavian ancestry represent just under 6% of the total American white population. But truth is you'd be hard pressed to find an area in which they actually represent 6%. There are areas in which there are almost no Scandinavians (The South & New England & to some extent the East Coast as a whole), and then there's the Upper Midwest, where Scandinavians represent as much as 1/3rd of the white population. I believe Scandinavians represent 10-15% of the white population in the Pacific Northwest as well, and they have significant numbers in California as a result of recent migrations (same as every other group!).

[ulphila]

Danes are primarily concentrated where the other Scandinavians live--In the Upper Midwest--although it is true that the Danes are a bit more spread out than the Swedes and the Norwegians are.

I believe Scandinavians represent 10-15% of the white population in the Pacific Northwest as well, and they have significant numbers in California as a result of recent migrations (same as every other group!).

Have you ever been to Solvang in California? That' s a beautiful Danish town. I have family not far away from there, and I visited last year. I fealt I was in Europe... I just couldn't find any RødGrød med Flød.
http://www.solvangca.com/1/photo/index.html

[Bluterbe]

[Appalachian]

We all know they cluster around New York, Hollywood, and Miami. That's one of the many reasons I have no desire to go near those places.


Hmmm... Interesting the way it coincides with the whole "Red State/Blue State" divide.

Anyway, was this a lame attempt at an insult, or did you have some kind of a point to make? If it's the former, perhaps I should remind you what we say about people who live in glass houses.