|
08-13-2014, 03:31 AM
|
|
|
|
147 posts, read 196,182 times
Reputation: 47
|
|
|
Supposedly German is the largest ancestry group in the US, but those with some British (English and Scottish) ancestry might be unreported. Most of those who identify as just 'American' likely have British and Irish ancestry. Still, I wonder why the US isn't as dominated by people of British ancestry like Australia, NZ and a lesser extent Canada, since it began as a British colony or colonies. Those 3 nations also received a lot of Irish, especially since Ireland was until British rule until 1916, although the US did too. How come cities like New York, Boston, Philly are more known for Italians, Irish or even Jews than British/English/Scottish Americans? Weirdly, someone with the last name 'Smith' in NYC is most likely black.
Not that Australia didn't receive a ton of other immigrants, but it seems English Americans especially seem either unreported or strangely underrepresented in the States.
|
|
08-13-2014, 03:44 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: Sydney, Australia
11,145 posts, read 9,479,086 times
Reputation: 5852
|
|
|
Maybe being a British American isn't a big deal there? Like you said, English Americans probably would identify themselves as 'American' with no strings attached. So maybe that's why they're left unreported. I mean, the majority of Americans seem to have English, Irish and Scottish surnames. It seems like the 'default' there. I'm pretty sure many Americans with Anglo surnames (Cooper, Williams, Smith, Stevens) would have English ancestry. I think it's when these people realize they have non-English speaking ancestries like Italian, Spanish or German they'd be eager to report it, otherwise they'd just put 'American' in the census data.
Just my thoughts...
|
|
08-13-2014, 03:51 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
11,261 posts, read 14,243,096 times
Reputation: 13486
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravelli
Supposedly German is the largest ancestry group in the US, but those with some British (English and Scottish) ancestry might be unreported. Most of those who identify as just 'American' likely have British and Irish ancestry. Still, I wonder why the US isn't as dominated by people of British ancestry like Australia, NZ and a lesser extent Canada, since it began as a British colony or colonies. Those 3 nations also received a lot of Irish, especially since Ireland was until British rule until 1916, although the US did too. How come cities like New York, Boston, Philly are more known for Italians, Irish or even Jews than British/English/Scottish Americans? Weirdly, someone with the last name 'Smith' in NYC is most likely black.
Not that Australia didn't receive a ton of other immigrants, but it seems English Americans especially seem either unreported or strangely underrepresented in the States.
|
I doubt many African Americans who became "free men", even had a last name.....that they knew of anyway.
My great grand parents were Lebanese. When they came over, our last name had to be changed way back when just so they could get an interview, much less the job. Either way, I can guarantee you, my last name is in no way Lebanese. |
|
08-13-2014, 03:54 AM
|
|
|
|
147 posts, read 196,182 times
Reputation: 47
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by theropod
Maybe being a British American isn't a big deal there? Like you said, English Americans probably would identify themselves as 'American' with no strings attached. So maybe that's why they're left unreported. I mean, the majority of Americans seem to have English, Irish and Scottish surnames. It seems like the 'default' there. I'm pretty sure many Americans with Anglo surnames (Cooper, Williams, Smith, Stevens) would have English ancestry. I think it's when these people realize they have non-English speaking ancestries like Italian, Spanish or German they'd be eager to report it, otherwise they'd just put 'American' in the census data.
Just my thoughts...
|
Yeah, I noticed that too. It still seem Anglo-sounding names seem really common. I know a lot of Germans Anglicised their names, and many with the name Smith, Brown or Jones might only be say 1/4 or 1/8 English. |
|
08-13-2014, 03:55 AM
|
|
|
|
147 posts, read 196,182 times
Reputation: 47
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Magnatomicflux
I doubt many African Americans who became "free men", even had a last name.....that they knew of anyway.
My great grand parents were Lebanese. When they came over, our last name had to be changed way back when just so they could get an interview, much less the job. Either way, I can guarantee you, my last name is in no way Lebanese.
|
Most took on their master's name, if I'm not mistaken. Of course they had surnames, many of whom were British (English and Scottish and Scots-Irish, some Irish mostly) that's why blacks today have surnames of mostly British origin. |
|
08-13-2014, 04:26 AM
|
|
|
|
2,253 posts, read 3,070,647 times
Reputation: 972
|
|
|
Lots of British immigrants went to the US in the 19th century as well, but they were a smaller proportion of immigrants and of the general population.
|
|
08-13-2014, 04:50 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: Windsor, Ontario, Canada
11,261 posts, read 14,243,096 times
Reputation: 13486
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravelli
Most took on their master's name, if I'm not mistaken. Of course they had surnames, many of whom were British (English and Scottish and Scots-Irish, some Irish mostly) that's why blacks today have surnames of mostly British origin.
|
Nope. You're quite right.
Sorry about that. |
|
08-13-2014, 04:53 AM
|
|
|
|
1,100 posts, read 1,479,395 times
Reputation: 504
|
|
What time period are you talking about though?
Australia was essentially settled by the British in the late 1700s due to the loss of their North American colonies. So in the 1840s and 1850s immigrants from the UK and Ireland made up about 75% of the total, but that has reduced over time to today's comparatively small proportion.
Same immigration and settlement pattern and long term trends, just the US is a lot older than Australia, as is Canada.  |
|
08-13-2014, 08:19 AM
|
|
|
|
147 posts, read 196,182 times
Reputation: 47
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard1098
What time period are you talking about though?
Australia was essentially settled by the British in the late 1700s due to the loss of their North American colonies. So in the 1840s and 1850s immigrants from the UK and Ireland made up about 75% of the total, but that has reduced over time to today's comparatively small proportion.
Same immigration and settlement pattern and long term trends, just the US is a lot older than Australia, as is Canada. |
Nope the UK was the biggest migrant source until recently. It was by far the dominant group well into the 20th century, while I think by the early 1800s Britain had ceased to be the primary source of immigration to the United States. Huge difference demographically. |
|
08-13-2014, 10:10 AM
|
|
|
|
Location: Castlederp
9,268 posts, read 6,302,887 times
Reputation: 2950
|
|
|
English Americans probably don't always report it.. they just see themselves as American is my guess
|
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
|
|
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
