Any 'English' people who the populace believes are English but are actually not?

[Victor]

It does not work like this in most of countries in the World and it would be considered lunacy before 20 century. Lots of German-origin Russians whose grandpas were Germans, normally considered themselves to be Russians and fought against Germany in WWI having German surnames and heritage.

Well, you had to exclude Ukrainian from the list, every 3-4th Russian has Ukrainian roots or realtives. Russian empire normally stimulated the marriage of Russians with Christian nations who settled down in Russia for faster assimilation, so Greek, Moldovan grandmas are often for the south. Serbs and others got assimilated long ago, in 19 century.

[gixajo]

It works this way in most of Christian nations. Also the marriage attitude, people here don't have problems with Russian men marrying a non Russian girl, while some people won't enjoy their daughter marrying a non-Russian. For example there are enough of Russian-Tatar marriages in Tatarstan when bride is Tatar, but it's rarely the opposite.

The most traditionally used option does not have to be the most logical or the best.

It is simply one more option, not the only one.

If we were to extrapolate what you say to the extreme, we would arrive at Rethel's thesis that our paternal marker, our Ydna haplogroup, is the one that marks our "ethnicity".

If we did that I would be Slavic-Baltic and obviously I am not.

[Victor]

lololololTROLOLololol

100% or nothing my Russian-Greek-Ukranian-Romanian friend.

I'm not obsessed with nation and I don't consider it to be sacred, I view it in pragmatic way, people should not be obsessed with separating own ancestry in some weird clusters as it's harmful for the state. It's easier to assimilate huge groups of similar people like it was done for centuries without creating a fake ancestral tragedy in the heads of the plebs.

[Victor]

The most traditionally used option does not have to be the most logical or the best.

It is simply one more option, not the only one.

If we were to extrapolate what you say to the extreme, we would arrive at Rethel's thesis that our paternal marker, our Ydna haplogroup, is the one that marks our "ethnicity".

If we did that I would be Slavic-Baltic and obviously I am not.

You are what you are, don't create problems with no need. Imagine a Serb not counting himself as a Serb as his grandma was Hungarian or Romanian. That's weird and it harms the society.

[gixajo]

Belonging to a certain group depends on many factors, some objective and others subjective. It is a difficult question to define with a single parameter.

Among the subjective ones, it would be necessary to determine well the weight of the self-perception of belonging, as well as the perception of those already assumed as belonging to a group, they accept others as belonging to that group.

And then between the objectives, the physical appearance, the place of birth of the individual and his ancestors that are usually reflected in genetics.

And then a "middle ground" that would be the way that individual lives in their day to day life, the cultural/social sphere.

It is an improvised summary of how I see this belonging or not to an ethnic group / nation or whatever you want to call it, and although it can be specified or deepened and we could add more factors, in general I see it that way.

[gixajo]

Prince Harry’s ancestry is (approximately) 35% English, along with 29% “Royal,” 14% Scottish, 5% German, 3% Irish, 3% French, 3% Anglo-Irish, 2% Hungarian, and smaller amounts (to varying degrees) of Indian, Dutch, Danish, Welsh, Belgian, Swedish, Swiss, Bohemian/Czech, Russian, Polish, and Channel Islander [Jersey].

And Prince Harry´s childrens are about 20% Yoruba.

We cannot say how would be Prince William children just because we are not sure about who was actually his father.

[zebruh]

Why the father and not the mother?

To me its more the other way around. But tradition has it males pass the last name. To me both direct maternal last name and direct paternal father last name should be passed to the child.

[gixajo]

To me its more the other way around. But tradition has it males pass the last name. To me both direct maternal last name and direct paternal father last name should be passed to the child.

Actually we are the product of both sides.

Spaniards use both surnames, traditionally paternal surname is used in first order, but I wouldn´t give more importance to one over the other.

[Sam Ryan]

Yeah. My family carried the paternal name down from my 5th great-grandparent but my mother's side is all English names. Even my father's tree has loads of English names but we stuck with the 'original family name'. People who don't know our family still ask if we are from around here even though we've been here for hundreds of years. Considered changing the name. Maybe people don't keep old family names anymore.

[zebruh]

Actually we are the product of both sides.

Spaniards use both surnames, traditionally paternal surname is used in first order, but I wouldn´t give more importance to one over the other.

Thats true but spaniards dont pass the last name of their direct maternal ancestors. The daughters pass on the name of their fathers only.
It should be that the daughter passes the name of her mother and the father the son.
The child will have both surnames of parents but if boy will pass on the fathers. If girl will pass on the mothers ( which is her mothers , and also her mothers mother ect.)