11 ms·

> No one’s family name was changed, altered, shortened, butchered, or “written down wrong” at Ellis Island or any American port So there were no errors, commun

> No one’s family name was changed, altered, shortened, butchered, or “written down wrong” at Ellis Island or any American port So there were no errors, communication issues, or smudges in 60 years with 12 million peoples details? That seems very hard to believe

mattmaroon 3y ago
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hyperbole https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hyperbole
riffic 3y ago
well having done a bit of genealogy the last couple years yes a lot of people have had names either incorrectly written down on a passenger manifest or incorrectly indexed by someone reading it, often decades later from microfilmed documents of varying quality. I haven't read the article yet but the field is a bit less black and white than stated in the headline here. The practice will teach you to get good at making wildcard searches or just looking at a document holistically for context. Edit: there's an aside here about how a lot of amateur family historians are quite lazy and trust what an index / record extract will say without actually reading the source record itself. The widespread availability of record access these days has made it a bit harder to determine who has actually done correct research and who is just going with what a "hint" will reveal (garbage in-garbage out).
basch 3y ago
or latinizations? (or whatever you would call a latin sound being reduced to the 26 character alphabet) baš -> basch
snakeyjake 3y ago
There were likely thousands of misakes. None by Ellis Island personnel. I don't know what your understanding of what happened there is, but it seems wrong. Ellis Island personnel did not ask for and then reissue names to people. They checked pre-existing lists, and then those lists were filed away never to be looked again, except for by historians debunking the Ellis Island name change myth. Even if a clerk said "your name's Joe Sch'mozle now" it didn't change anything. Ellis Island personnel didn't issue a single scrap of paper to the immigrants and did not write down the name of anyone passing through. All they did was look at a list of names the ships arriving into port had, and make sure nobody not on the list came through (sans bribe).
WillPostForFood 3y ago
Curious if you read the article? The point that it is making is that immigration didn't write down people's names at all, they were just checking them off a list, so there was no opportunity to alter, change, or butcher the names. It surely happened, but either before or after; don't blame the immigration official. In reality, immigration officials did not write names down—they checked them off on a list in front of them. In other words, the names were already written down. The officials were not working with blank sheets of paper on which they created lists of newly arrived passengers, but with ship manifests, official lists of passengers who had disembarked. These manifests were required by US federal law as of March 2, 1819. Beginning on that date (i.e., when the federal government assumed control over immigration), ship captains were required to report a list of all passengers brought to US shores from foreign countries; information required included name, sex, age, and occupation
- sottol 3y ago
  Would later official documents reference the Ellis Island records or how were the official names determined eg when an immigrant was naturalized?
  - riffic 3y ago
    it varies but after 1906, yes (I think this is what you're asking, apologies if it isn't) https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/United_States_Naturalization_and_Citizenship#Naturalization_After_1906 https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/United_States_Naturaliz... > After 1906 an immigrant was required to submit a certificate of arrival when he petitioned for citizenship in order to prove the length of his residency. This document gives the place of entry, manner of arrival, and date of arrival. This was kept in the file with the petition.
- helsinkiandrew 3y ago
  > immigration didn't write down people's names at all Technically no, but the immigration system accepted names that must have contained mistakes and were presumably used as part of the naturalisation/documentation process later

mattmaroon 3y ago

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hyperbole https://www.dictionary.com/browse/hyperbole

riffic 3y ago

well having done a bit of genealogy the last couple years yes a lot of people have had names either incorrectly written down on a passenger manifest or incorrectly indexed by someone reading it, often decades later from microfilmed documents of varying quality. I haven't read the article yet but the field is a bit less black and white than stated in the headline here. The practice will teach you to get good at making wildcard searches or just looking at a document holistically for context. Edit: there's an aside here about how a lot of amateur family historians are quite lazy and trust what an index / record extract will say without actually reading the source record itself. The widespread availability of record access these days has made it a bit harder to determine who has actually done correct research and who is just going with what a "hint" will reveal (garbage in-garbage out).

basch 3y ago

or latinizations? (or whatever you would call a latin sound being reduced to the 26 character alphabet) baš -> basch

snakeyjake 3y ago

There were likely thousands of misakes. None by Ellis Island personnel. I don't know what your understanding of what happened there is, but it seems wrong. Ellis Island personnel did not ask for and then reissue names to people. They checked pre-existing lists, and then those lists were filed away never to be looked again, except for by historians debunking the Ellis Island name change myth. Even if a clerk said "your name's Joe Sch'mozle now" it didn't change anything. Ellis Island personnel didn't issue a single scrap of paper to the immigrants and did not write down the name of anyone passing through. All they did was look at a list of names the ships arriving into port had, and make sure nobody not on the list came through (sans bribe).

WillPostForFood 3y ago

Curious if you read the article? The point that it is making is that immigration didn't write down people's names at all, they were just checking them off a list, so there was no opportunity to alter, change, or butcher the names. It surely happened, but either before or after; don't blame the immigration official. In reality, immigration officials did not write names down—they checked them off on a list in front of them. In other words, the names were already written down. The officials were not working with blank sheets of paper on which they created lists of newly arrived passengers, but with ship manifests, official lists of passengers who had disembarked. These manifests were required by US federal law as of March 2, 1819. Beginning on that date (i.e., when the federal government assumed control over immigration), ship captains were required to report a list of all passengers brought to US shores from foreign countries; information required included name, sex, age, and occupation

sottol 3y ago
Would later official documents reference the Ellis Island records or how were the official names determined eg when an immigrant was naturalized?
- riffic 3y ago
  it varies but after 1906, yes (I think this is what you're asking, apologies if it isn't) https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/United_States_Naturalization_and_Citizenship#Naturalization_After_1906 https://www.familysearch.org/en/wiki/United_States_Naturaliz... > After 1906 an immigrant was required to submit a certificate of arrival when he petitioned for citizenship in order to prove the length of his residency. This document gives the place of entry, manner of arrival, and date of arrival. This was kept in the file with the petition.
helsinkiandrew 3y ago
> immigration didn't write down people's names at all Technically no, but the immigration system accepted names that must have contained mistakes and were presumably used as part of the naturalisation/documentation process later