Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

200,000 Titanic-Related Documents Published Online

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the my-papers-will-go-on dept.

Transportation 55

With the 100th anniversary of the Titanic's sinking coming up, ancestry.com has released 200,000 documents online relating to the ill-fated ship. The documents provide information about survivors and the 1,500 people who died, a number of wills, and hundreds of coroner inquests. You can look at the Titanic document collection for free until May 13. From the article: "The records include the ship's official passenger list, which shows the names, ages and occupations of those on board the ill-fated liner. It also details the nationalities, positions and addresses of the ship's crew which had more than 900 members."

cancel ×

55 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

useless trivia (2)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619585)

there were a lot of Syrian emigrants on the ill-fated oceanliner. I liked that in Cameron's movie, he actually had some Syrians on screen for 2-3 seconds in steerage, confused about directions. Nice historical touch.

double useless trivia: the movie had to be renamed for the Middle Eastern market, as "Titanic" sounds like a slang term for "let's have sex"

Re:useless trivia (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619623)

Re:useless trivia (1)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619973)

FP!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHARGARBBBLE

(how'd that happen?)

From the sounds of it I'd say Great Cthulhu was involved.

Re:useless trivia (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39629003)

(how'd that happen?)

I expect that literally no one else was interested enough in the Titanic to even read the story, never mind post a comment on it. There is absolutely no slashdot interest in this story, apart from the fact that the documents are being published online. As this is not 1994, that's hardly news.

Re:useless trivia (1)

Millennium (2451) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619627)

double useless trivia: the movie had to be renamed for the Middle Eastern market, as "Titanic" sounds like a slang term for "let's have sex"

I don't know; that still sounds like an accurate enough title for the film.

Re:useless trivia (3, Informative)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620711)

the movie had to be renamed for the Middle Eastern market, as "Titanic" sounds like a slang term for "let's have sex"

Sorry, I'm going to have to call bullshit [imdb.com] on that one.

Re:useless trivia (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#39628989)

Everything related to the Titanic comes under the heading of "useless trivia" in my book.

It's just a ship that sank, and has no historical significance at all.

I simply don't get it.

200,000? (1)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619641)

200,000?

So that's the precise definition of a boatload.

Re:200,000? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39622703)

I fail to see how releasing documents about a sinking ship from 100 years ago actually is news for nerds? I wasn't like Bill Gates grandma had a patient for MS-DOS tied up in those documents.

All of these (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39619725)

Titanic-related headlines lately, from Cameron going deep-sea exploring to this current one, would have a suspicious person thinking that a subtle publicity campaign were underway for a Titanic re-release or something... I guess this is the new way to infiltrate the net - keep publishing little bullshit quasi-related stories week after week to keep "top of mind". Just like facebook/Zuckerberg and co did months before "social network" was released, except that one started by trying to bulldoze over a bunch of bad press FB was getting for privacy and TOS change issues, and was going to culminate in the IPO but someone messed up the timing.

Ahh it must be nice to have serious piles of cash and to afford to be subtle. Fortunately not everyone is stupid.

Re:All of these (2)

bigredradio (631970) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619989)

It's the 100 year anniversary. That is why all the articles, re-releases, hype, etc.

Re:All of these (2)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620349)

It's also the 100th anniversary of MDMA, Life Savers candy, the traffic light, and the electric blanket. Guess which of those had a greater impact on modern-day life? (Hint: It's all of them.)

Re:All of these (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39621309)

Oh, really? Where are all the articles covering MDMA? Where are all the academic research springing from Life Savers? And when was that block-buster movie about traffic lights released?

Re:All of these (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39621961)

The catastrophe of the Titanic had an immediate impact on the industry regulations: after Titanic, the lifeboat requirements were made stricter, and ships were required to keep the radio on. Ship staff became more aware and demanding with respect to the safety regulations and lifeboat quality (e.g. firemen on RMS Olympic, Titanic's sister ship, went on strike to demand better lifeboat). Overall the people learned about the need to have regulations in place and how bad preparedness can lead to a tragedy.

As for the electric blanket, I don't think it helped saved lives as much as better regulations on lifeboats.

Re:All of these (2)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 2 years ago | (#39621983)

Guess which of those had a greater impact on modern-day life? (Hint: It's all of them.)

Not so certain about that one. The RMS Titanic disaster was directly responsible for:

* The FCC (because it highlighted the problems with folks stepping all over each other on a given frequency, especially when there's an emergency going on)
* The International Ice Patrol (which still exists today, and greatly impacts trans-Atlantic commerce)
* Regulation requiring enough lifeboats for all passengers and crew, on every commercial vessel. (for obvious reasons)
* Required safety drills on any commercial passenger-carrying vessel (because the disaster perfectly outlined the confusion and general fuck-uppery that occurs when you don't)
* Radical changes in vessel design and engineering
* The death of quite a few big-name people, which in turn radically altered a lot of the (at the time) big-name companies that they owned or ran.

For some odd reason, I'm not seeing LifeSavers as having that kind of immediate and radical impact on anything, let alone history.

Meanwhile (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39619755)

Pointless Titanic 3D "remake" in you nearby cinema.

Re:Meanwhile (0)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620141)

Yeah. You can watch Newt Gingrich's political career for free.

Who the hell cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39619771)

All this titanic crap is some kind of sick commercialisation of a disaster.

Soon they'll be a titanic ride at some amusement park.

Re:Who the hell cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39620053)

Soon they'll be a titanic ride at some amusement park.

i believe they recently market tested something like that...it was called the "Costa Concordia"

Re:Who the hell cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39620687)

Soon they'll be a titanic ride at some amusement park.

I've already seen ads for titanic-inspired jewelry.

Re:Who the hell cares? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39622489)

Soon they'll be a titanic ride at some amusement park.

I think we all know how that ride is going to end.

fucks given = 0 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39619779)

Do we really need this bullshit collateral advertising on slashdot?

FUCK the titanic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39619823)

who the hell cares? It was a damn ship that sunk. There have been lots of other ships that sank before and after it, with more deaths, more carnage, etc. etc.

Titanic fanbois: But it was sooo romantic!

Me: Shut the fuck up, idiot (smacks fanbois jaw with a crushing uppercut)

Re:FUCK the titanic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39620119)

If you used Falcon Punch, you would have KO'd the Fanboi and probably gotten some Karma, too bad you wasted it with a weak "crushing uppercut. -1 smarm +1 foolishness.

Re:FUCK the titanic (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620831)

mod parent up... titanic fanbois are even more annoying than Apple fanbois.

Re:FUCK the titanic (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 2 years ago | (#39622073)

Please define what kind of "fanbois"

The teenage girls who swooned to that dipshit DiCaprio in that half-assed movie? Those would be "fangirls", and yeah, romantic would be the term they use. (Not sure if landing an uppercut on a teenage girl's jaw would be all that appropriate through).

The folks who have been straight-up fascinated by the actual disaster, to the point of learning as much of it as they could, like Baseball or Basketball fans do their favorite teams? Few would call it romantic, and they usually keep it to themselves.

who cares? (2)

cellocgw (617879) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619833)

This is about as interesting as posting every document related to every person who emigrated from w00tdorf, Germany to yayoubetcha, Minnesota in 1890.

Re:who cares? (1)

hierophanta (1345511) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620271)

its another shameless Titanic plug - and its getting really dam annoying. using Google news to search 'Titanic' - I find: 23,100 results for the time span of Jan 2, 2012–Apr 9, 2012 and 9,980 for Jan 2, 2011–Jan 2, 2012.

We could probably teach the Chinese a thing or two about media control

The world doesn't revolve around you. (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620969)

This is about as interesting as posting every document related to every person who emigrated from w00tdorf, Germany to yayoubetcha, Minnesota in 1890.

Maybe it's not interesting to you... but the world doesn't revolve around you. This is going to be very interesting to genealogists and historians.
 
My niece (the family genealogist and historian) has been bouncing off of the walls since she first heard rumors of this... supposedly we have a distant relative who died onboard Titanic and now she has another shot at tracking them down. She hasn't been able to before, but she's very thorough and very persistent in making every effort to verify a story before moving it from the "legend" to the "fact" category. (My family tells lots of tall tales about it's history, some even having a grain of truth.)

Missing passenger (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39619843)

Why, oh, why couldn't have Celine Dion been on that ship, too?

Are They in 3D (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39619863)

Are they in 3D? Because I will only pay attention to something if it has "in 3D" in the title.

Kudos (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39619879)

Good job by ancestry.com. I was not even aware data this detailed even existed. It is nice to get a demographic breakdown of an event that holds such a large place in the popular imagination.

On top of that, it appears to be good marketing for the site as well. The interface seems fluid enough. They are likely to snag a whole bunch of new business with the free trial. Smart move all around.

Re:Kudos (3, Informative)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619943)

Good job by ancestry.com

yes, very good job. they conned the slash guys into taking a free advertisement fo their PAID SERVICE.

oh, and you have to give a CC to get the 'free' goodies; and of course you have to CALL THEM (long distance, no less) to cancel.

THIS IS PURE BULLSHIT.

more slash advertising (4, Informative)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619895)

from the piece-of-shit company:

14 day free trial: Only one free trial of one of our subscription options is allowed per person. Free trial requires registration with a valid credit or debit card. You will be charged the full amount of your chosen subscription price on expiry of the free trial, unless you cancel your subscription earlier by calling 0800-wont-you-blowme or visiting My Account.

save yourself the link clickage. they are selling shit and we just don't care...

Re:more slash advertising (2)

Cormacus (976625) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620405)

But you don't actually have to start the 14-day free trial to do the record search from the Titanic. Originally that's what I thought as well. However you can start entering searches without starting the trial (I guess I went through the page where I created a login but then when I got to the credit card info page I clicked back to their main page) by hitting the orange Search Now button.

I agree that the "give us your info now and we won't charge you immediately so this is FREE!" bit is sleazy.

Underwater sound (1)

Cazekiel (1417893) | more than 2 years ago | (#39619929)

When I was in college, I got myself obsessed with the Titanic disaster for whatever reason. I still find myself going back to it from time-to-time, and with the anniversary coming up, I've been listening more and more to Gavin Bryar's 60+ minute composition 'Sinking of the Titanic' [youtube.com] , (fave clip) a piece which emulates the sound of the violinists who 'played on', playing underwater. However haunting it is, I used to put it on every night to help me sleep.

Doesn't look like the data is machine browsable (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39619997)

First, they require you to register an email address. Then the documents show up in Flash (which I didn't see because I disabled Flash as it doesn't work with FF 11). There's a "print" button, but it doesn't look like you can download the actual data to do some stat hacking or the like.

If someone can figure out differently, please post how.

Coincidence? I think not... (1)

assertation (1255714) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620045)

2012 is also the 100th anniversary of the Oreo cookie and it is believed to be the end of the world by the Mayan calendar. Coincidence? I think not.......

Titanic deniers unite! (2)

CODiNE (27417) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620365)

I find this kind of blatant propaganda spreading disgusting!

The whole idea that the Titanic sank is just another media hoax perpetrated by a clandestine organization to gain sympathy for their cause.

The photo evidence? Doctored...
The survivor interviews? Professional actors playing a role.
The newspaper articles? A fraud perpetuated by media barons.

Notice how in popular movies the passengers on the Titanic are always portrayed as VICTIMS?? They throw in all this sentimental romanticism... don't fall for it! They're manipulating the public and re-writing history.

It's time we stand up against this and tell them we can't be deceived! It's time to teach our children the truth and turn students against their indoctrinating educators. Because if we don't then soon they'll take the reigns of power and change our way of life. It's time to stand up and say...

TITANIC DENIERS UNITE!!!

More and more often I wonder (2)

Lucas123 (935744) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620369)

Do you think any of those 1,517 passengers who died ever imagined how famous they'd be simply because their ocean liner struck an iceberg and sank? I recently heard a really funny comment on NPR radio during the "Wait, Wait. Don't Tell Me" segment. "Titanic, the movie that spawed a real-life shipwreck."

Re:More and more often I wonder (1)

k6mfw (1182893) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620895)

There have been other maritime disasters but Titanic was the grandest with state of art technology, an unsinkable ship that went down on her maiden voyage. It has everything for compelling documentaries and dramatic movies. Regarding maritime disasters, an interesting site with lotsa photos of freighter transport loss at http://www.cargolaw.com/gallery.html#ocean.loss [cargolaw.com]

Re:More and more often I wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39621843)

I recently heard a really funny comment on NPR radio during the "Wait, Wait. Don't Tell Me" segment. "Titanic, the movie that spawed a real-life shipwreck."

For future reference, the first clue that something really isn't very funny is that it's on NPR.

Re:More and more often I wonder (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39622011)

They got famous not because the ship sank, as many ships did, but because it was the most people died in a single sinking with evacuation efforts more or less botched, and also because they did not stand a chance with the safety regulations of the time.

It was a Chernobyl disaster of the day (except for the environmental effect): a preventable catastrophe.

Oh, one of the later ships of the class (3, Informative)

Lincolnshire Poacher (1205798) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620403)

And the people of Belfast patiently await mention of RMS Titanic's sister-ship and first of class, RMS Olympic, which made her maiden crossing to New York on 31st May 1911 and continued in service until the early 1930s.

A fine example of Harland & Wolff shipbuilding, she even survived the impact of a Royal Navy cruiser which collided with her making 19 knots.

The launch of the Titanic, second of class, was a minor event compared to the ongoing adulation lauded on the Olympic. So you see, the Titanic was neither the largest ship in the World at the time, nor the most famous or glamorous. But that doesn't sell a film very well, does it?

And now, the rest of the story... (3, Informative)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 2 years ago | (#39620907)

And the people of Belfast patiently await mention of RMS Titanic's sister-ship and first of class, RMS Olympic, which made her maiden crossing to New York on 31st May 1911 and continued in service until the early 1930s.

And they hope there's little mention of HMHS Britannic, the third sister - who also had something of an inglorious career.
 
Her completion was delayed by months when WWI broke out and efforts were shifted to higher priority wartime Admiralty contracts. When she was completed she was laid up for months because the White Star line considered it too risky to place her into service.
 
Then, after being requisitioned by the Admiralty and just a years service as a hospital ship - she struck a mine off the Grecian coast. Despite post-Titanic modifications (which prevented too many compartments from flooding), a damaged watertight door and open portholes on the lower decks lead to rapid flooding - and her Captain ordered he abandoned only twenty minutes after the explosion. Fifty five minutes after the explosion, she rolled over on her starboard side and sank.
 

So you see, the Titanic was neither the largest ship in the World at the time, nor the most famous or glamorous. But that doesn't sell a film very well, does it?

  Olympic 45,325 tons. Titanic 46,328 tons.
 
You should read the contemporary press - all of which lauded Titanic as the largest, most glamorous, most famous, etc... ship of the time. The hyperbole wasn't invented for the film and predates the sinking.

TOTAL WASTE OF TIME (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39621237)

You have to give them a credit card and open a trial membership to get access to the data. Cheeky blighters! This is all OUT OF COPYRIGHT!

You know they are authentic... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39621387)

Because of the water mark!

ok but... (1)

uncanny (954868) | more than 2 years ago | (#39621589)

will they be in 3d or will we have to wait 10 years for them to be "improved with 3d technology"?

obligatory XKCD reference (1)

poemofatic (322501) | more than 2 years ago | (#39621805)

http://xkcd.com/

Re:obligatory XKCD reference (1)

Kittenman (971447) | more than 2 years ago | (#39624667)

http://xkcd.com/

I think you mean http://xkcd.com/1040/ [xkcd.com] - or you will do next week.

I'm here for you with the Raymond Chandler sig. though. That's the stuff that dreams are made of...

Re:obligatory XKCD reference (1)

poemofatic (322501) | more than 2 years ago | (#39634453)

Yes, thanks! Cut and Paste error, and I should have done a better job of previewing. Posterity will thank you, as they do Chandler :)

I dub thee... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39622287)

TitanicLeaks

And many more to come (1)

petes_PoV (912422) | more than 2 years ago | (#39623847)

200,000 is just the tip of the ....

time for truth be told (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#39624617)

They killed all those rich people and it still isnt obvious that:

1 the boat was build to sink
2 there was no iceberg

All those rich people who had enough money to be against fractional reserve banking. Without their influence it was like taking candy from a baby. The baby is still clueless about his candy.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>