Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Content

This is a map of plurality largest ancestries in the USA. The map runs into issues with how most white and black Americans have plurality ancestries. For example, I have 6 different ancestries and that's not uncommon for Americans. Also, data is pretty scarce since census data normally isn't very representative since people will identify more with recent ancestries rather than their plurality largest ancestries. Census data will vary wildly decade to decade as people pick a different ancestry to identify with each time. 

Here are some interesting points

1)Most Hispanic-Americans are of majority or plurality European ancestry. Migration to the US pulls disproportionately from North Mexico, which has mostly European ancestry. It's kind of amusing that so many racists are talking about the de-whitening of America due to Mexican immigration. 

2)Black-American ancestry is pulled mostly from Angola and the Congo, in the case of the Carolinas and Nigeria in the case of Virginia. Black-American ancestry is so that drawing a dividing line between the two is quite difficult. The Western part of the Deep South likely has quite a bit of Virginian/Nigerian ancestry due to migration of slaves from Virginia to settle the cotton belt but I'm guessing not enough to displace the Angolan plurality. 

3) English Americans are the silent plurality in America. Everything points to English Americans being by far the largest group but this isn't widely thought about since most Englishmen came over to the New World in the 17th century, over 300 years ago, and Anglo-Saxon culture is the baseline in America and thus people primarily think of how their ancestry deviates from it.  This map likely also overestimates English blood, because in most regions that are majority white, English ancestry is most common but closely followed by German, Irish and Scottish. Part of the reason that English ancestry is so underestimated is that most English Americans also share German ancestry and choose to identify with that since it is a more recent migration.

4)There was a huge migration from Northern Ireland to the Appalachian mountains in the early 18th century. These people then migrated west and settled a huge region of the Center-South. This migration was forgotten in large part since the migrants spoke English as a native language and were Protestant but this migration has had a profound effect on American culture with things such as Country Music, Cowboy culture, whiskey etc... I'm also overstating Northern Ireland's influence in this migration since large portions also came from Southern Scotland and Northern England but Northern Ireland was likely the plurality everywhere. 

5)The railroad companies encouraged migration from Scandinavia in the late 19th century to settle the regions that were too inhospitable for Anglos. This worked and resulted in a Scandinavian diaspora in those regions. 

Files

Previews only

Comments

Anonymous

Didn't Swedes settle in Minnesota in large numbers just like Norwegians?

whatifalthist

Yes, but the Norwegians were a slight plurality and they settled in the same regions. This is why drawing ethnic maps of the US is hard.

Anonymous

Apart from the german belt, that on your map cover the upper midwest, you have painted some splashes of german plurality ancestry across the united states. That makes me curious about: Why is western ohio, including, Toledo, Columbus and Cincinatti of predominantly german ancestry, while all of michigan, most of Pennsylvania including metro Pittsburg, as well as the metropolitan area of Cleveland is not. The german splashes in the center of the country, is it the metropolitan areas of St.louis, Kansas city and Wichita. And why are these places plurality german(or at least not plurality english), but not northern Illionis(including Chicago), as well as Milwaukee. Do you assume that the mentioned areas and other areas are majority german, because claimed german ancestry in these areas are simply so high, that they most have a german plurality, or are your estimates assumptions based on immigration history/the settlement pattern of different immigrant groups in the united states. Or something in between. The same goes for the areas where you estimate that fx irish or italian ancestry is the largest ancestry.

whatifalthist

So, I have no pretentions of this map being perfect but it took years of study to get the information I used to make it and I used a variety of methods. The US gov doesn't even have great data on US ethnic groups. However, something we do know from every source we have whether, genetic, historical records, last names etc..is that English Americans are severely undercounted. Some people made an estimation using census data on actual ancestry using last names and found English ancestry to be by far the largest group. My difficulty was figuring out degree.

whatifalthist

For the east, I used historic patterns that I knew from studying. I knew which areas the Germans settled heavily in and outnumbered other groups since those areas had pretty strong identities. In general, the areas where I knew there was a major migration of British-Americans from the Eastern US I marked as English American. Michigan and the northern tier around the Great Lakes had relatively little German migration since the land was already taken by people of the New England diaspora, similarly to Northern Illinois. The lands west of Chicago had both Quaker and Yankee migrants, so I assumed it would be plurality English, however, I could be wrong. Everything north of Illinois on the Western side of lake Michigan has British ancestry just petering out. Nebraska and Illinois had around 40 percent foreign born ancestry in 1900, Wisconsin, Minnesota and the Dakotas had between 70-90 percent. I honestly don't know the Great Plain's history as well as the Eastern states and so I just looked at the areas that identified as over 30 or 40 percent German ancestry since I thought there was no way they couldn't be the largest group under those circumstances.

whatifalthist

Also, a lot is made of the German Pennsylvanians, but they were only 1/3 of the total population, with people of English and Scots Irish ancestry forming the rest and so figuring out the Pennsylvania diaspora to the Western states was difficult and I likely made some errors.

whatifalthist

The majority of Italians settled in Greater New York. Meanwhile, the Irish are the largest group in Boston and settled mostly in the North-Eastern cities. The Irish were capable of spreading along the Hudson river into Upstate New York and to Buffalo since their labor was used for railroad and canal construction.

Anonymous

Pennsylvania was 1/3 German. But the other 2/3 wasn’t all English. They were also, Scotch-Irish, Irish, Scottish and French Huguenot, not more than a third where English (Welsh included in that category). Thereby making German Americans an as large an ethnic group as the English. Though the German category included Swiss Germans, which where around 1/4 of the German population. Meaning that English ancestry anyway might have been slightly larger than German ancestry in colonial Pennsylvania. Later when post-colonial immigrants arrived, the largest groups where Irish and Germans, larger than the number of English immigrants. Meaning that Pennsylvania today likely have a German plurality, though it could be close. Interamerican migration can have resulted in an English plurality, though I doubt that.

Anonymous

Yes us censuses calculating the ethnic ancestry of white Americans are very inaccurate, but they were not always as inaccurate, as they are today. A lot of the undercalculation of British ancestries, has happened after the option of identifying as of American ancestry, has ben made available. Before the option of choosing American ancestry as your ancestry was added, English ancestry was the largest reported ancestry in USA, and Scottish where almost double as reported as today. That was in the 1980 census. Though reported German ancestry was only 0,2% less of the white US population than English was. Identifying with more than one ancestry is an option. Making it possible for someone of English and non English ancestry (fx the very common English and German), to identify with both, increasing the likelihood, that many people would do so. Though of course someone of very distant colonial English ancestry plus, some more recent ancestry, might identify with the more recent ancestry, instead of English. It to is plausible that many people of more then 2 ancestries, one of them English, might identify with the other two instead of English, because other ancestries than English typically will be more recent, and because people as you call it, think of how their ancestries deviate from the baseline of American culture, which is Anglo-Saxon/English. An example would be someone of, Norwegian, Italian and English ancestry, who chooses to identify with the Norwegian and the Italian ancestry and not the English, even if that is their largest ancestry. Meaning that even the 1980 census probably isn't accurate, though not useless either. The 1980 census: https://www.census.gov/population/www/censusdata/files/pc80-s1-10/tab03.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0Gtr3dzuDGHlztIZvQmx9_SqedtcJ86XO81C38ZwQZeKJhuQhTfLdsjbI

Anonymous

Last names certainly tell you something, but when using last names to make estimates of the size of ancestral groups in United States, there are certain issues one must be aware of. The first thing to be aware of, is that some last names are shared by different nations and different ethnic groups. An example is that English last names are not exclusive to the English. You will also find English last names in the Ireland, from the Anglo-Irish, of whom a lot emigrated to America, including in colonial days, of whom the majority identify as of Irish ancestry. English last names also exist amongst Scotch-Irish, in wales and to some degree in southern Scotland. Ethnic groups who are not classified as English in the US census. Further complicating the picture is that you will also find welsh last names in England. It too will be different to impossible to distinguish Germans, Austrians and Swiss Germans. Other though minor issues will be migrants from the Netherlands being classified as French do to the presence of French (from the Huguenots) last names in Netherlands. As well as Danes being classified as Germans, do to of the presence of German last names in Denmark. 2. The second issue to be aware of is that many non- English Americans anglicized their last name. A group that especially anglicized their last names where German Americans. And not just from last names such as Steingassner, to the easily distinguishable: Stonestreet, from Eisenhauer, to Eisenhower, or from Schumacher to Shoemaker. But too from last names such as, from Müller to Miller and from Schmidt to Smith. Last names also common in England and amongst English Americans. There were even examples of German Americans who changed their surname from something distinctly German to something very different and very English, like from Schneider to Taylor. Making calculating an accurate ethnic ancestry, amongst white Americans based of surnames difficult.

Anonymous

Though the estimate made using census data and last names, that you mentioned sounds interesting. I would like to read it.