Two Centuries of U.S. Immigration
May 19, 2016 1:49 AM Subscribe
A data visualization of Two Centuries of U.S. Immigration by MeFi member, Max Galka. His latest project foiamapper (freedom of information act mapper). You can "Search for government information by keyword or see what other people and news organizations are requesting." Or you can "Browse by Government Agency: FOIA logs, record systems, and contact information for making a Freedom of Information request." foiamapper faq. Previously from mgalka, MeFi Projects 1 & 2.
What does "lawful permanent resident status" mean in this context? Is it people who filed their first papers declaring intent to become citizens, or just anyone who entered the country legally? If it's the former, that's going to skew the data, because some people were more likely to file papers than others. (Women, for instance, had less incentive to file than men, which means you would undercount the Irish.) It would be really helpful to see more discussion of the data.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 2:14 AM on May 19, 2016
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 2:14 AM on May 19, 2016
> "... it doesn't look like the Atlantic slave trade was included. Am I missing something , or was this a conscious choice?"
I am not mefi member Max Gelka, but the site notes that the Office of Immigration Statistics data used for the map did not include either forced immigration or illegal immigration.
It perhaps should also be noted that the visualization goes back only to 1820 (I assume that is the earliest reliable statistics were obtainable?), and the importation of slaves to the U.S. was actually banned by Congress starting January 1, 1808. However, while I believe this greatly reduced the numbers, an illegal transatlantic slave trade did continue until just before the Civil War, so a visualization that showed forced immigration would still have had shown this, it's true.
posted by kyrademon at 2:36 AM on May 19, 2016 [2 favorites]
I am not mefi member Max Gelka, but the site notes that the Office of Immigration Statistics data used for the map did not include either forced immigration or illegal immigration.
It perhaps should also be noted that the visualization goes back only to 1820 (I assume that is the earliest reliable statistics were obtainable?), and the importation of slaves to the U.S. was actually banned by Congress starting January 1, 1808. However, while I believe this greatly reduced the numbers, an illegal transatlantic slave trade did continue until just before the Civil War, so a visualization that showed forced immigration would still have had shown this, it's true.
posted by kyrademon at 2:36 AM on May 19, 2016 [2 favorites]
Legal immigration is a weird category in 1820: there were very few restrictions on migration until the late 19th century. Also, permanent verses temporary was a moving target: lots of permanent immigrants thought of themselves as temporary but never managed to return home. One of the big insights of the past 40 years of immigration history is how much return and repeat migration there was. And "lawful permanent resident status" isn't really a category that existed in the 19th century.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 2:48 AM on May 19, 2016
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 2:48 AM on May 19, 2016
Here is the 2013 Yearbook of Immigration Statistics pdf (Office of Immigration Statistics/Homeland Security) used for the visualization. At the bottom of pg 11 there is this note:
Note: Official recording of immigration to the United States began in 1820 after the passage of the Act of March 2, 1819. From 1820 to 1867, figures represent alien passenger arrivals at seaports; from 1868 to 1891 and 1895 to 1897, immigrant alien arrivals; from 1892 to 1894 and 1898 to 2013, immigrant aliens admitted for permanent
residence; from 1892 to 1903, aliens entering by cabin class were not counted as immigrants. Land arrivals were not completely enumerated until 1908. For this table, Fiscal Year 1843 covers 9 months ending September 30, 1843; Fiscal Years 1832 and 1850 cover 15 months ending December 31 of the respective years; and Fiscal Year 1868 covers 6 months ending June 30, 1868; and Fiscal Year 1976 covers 15 months ending September 30, 1976.
The yearbook consists of over 100 pgs. I just skimmed through it and used the above note as an example of some info that might be found in the yearbook. I don't have time to investigate more thoroughly this morning. I hope this doesn't confuse things.
The link to the yearbook pdf (the data is also available in Excel format) is in the credit section of the first link of my post.
I'm not Max Galka, by the way.
posted by cwest at 3:26 AM on May 19, 2016
Note: Official recording of immigration to the United States began in 1820 after the passage of the Act of March 2, 1819. From 1820 to 1867, figures represent alien passenger arrivals at seaports; from 1868 to 1891 and 1895 to 1897, immigrant alien arrivals; from 1892 to 1894 and 1898 to 2013, immigrant aliens admitted for permanent
residence; from 1892 to 1903, aliens entering by cabin class were not counted as immigrants. Land arrivals were not completely enumerated until 1908. For this table, Fiscal Year 1843 covers 9 months ending September 30, 1843; Fiscal Years 1832 and 1850 cover 15 months ending December 31 of the respective years; and Fiscal Year 1868 covers 6 months ending June 30, 1868; and Fiscal Year 1976 covers 15 months ending September 30, 1976.
The yearbook consists of over 100 pgs. I just skimmed through it and used the above note as an example of some info that might be found in the yearbook. I don't have time to investigate more thoroughly this morning. I hope this doesn't confuse things.
The link to the yearbook pdf (the data is also available in Excel format) is in the credit section of the first link of my post.
I'm not Max Galka, by the way.
posted by cwest at 3:26 AM on May 19, 2016
It perhaps should also be noted that the visualization goes back only to 1820 (I assume that is the earliest reliable statistics were obtainable?), and the importation of slaves to the U.S. was actually banned by Congress starting January 1, 1808. However, while I believe this greatly reduced the numbers, an illegal transatlantic slave trade did continue until just before the Civil War, so a visualization that showed forced immigration would still have had shown this, it's true.
I was remembering history dates poorly. My mistake.
Though I just failed in a brief search to find actual numbers of the Africa>USA slave trade after 1820. I thought it would be an easy number to look up. I'll have to leave that to people with more energy. Or at least, people in a better time zone.
posted by kanewai at 3:26 AM on May 19, 2016
I was remembering history dates poorly. My mistake.
Though I just failed in a brief search to find actual numbers of the Africa>USA slave trade after 1820. I thought it would be an easy number to look up. I'll have to leave that to people with more energy. Or at least, people in a better time zone.
posted by kanewai at 3:26 AM on May 19, 2016
The Atlantic Slave Trade in Two Minutes.
posted by Pendragon at 4:38 AM on May 19, 2016 [3 favorites]
posted by Pendragon at 4:38 AM on May 19, 2016 [3 favorites]
> "The Atlantic Slave Trade in Two Minutes."
Ugh, and you can see a jump in the ships bound to North America for about the 5 years just before the 1808 law passes. You can see it in the inset cumulative chart as a discontinuous uptick before the line levels out, right at the beginning of the 19th century.
posted by kyrademon at 5:38 AM on May 19, 2016
Ugh, and you can see a jump in the ships bound to North America for about the 5 years just before the 1808 law passes. You can see it in the inset cumulative chart as a discontinuous uptick before the line levels out, right at the beginning of the 19th century.
posted by kyrademon at 5:38 AM on May 19, 2016
I'm surprised that Germany was #3 for the years 1941-1945
posted by MtDewd at 5:42 AM on May 19, 2016
posted by MtDewd at 5:42 AM on May 19, 2016
Informative and entertaining! (There should be a word for that.)
posted by Atom Eyes at 8:07 AM on May 19, 2016
posted by Atom Eyes at 8:07 AM on May 19, 2016
Back in 1910, the United States peaked with 34.7% of Americans either born in another country or the children of immigrants.
Then the KKK came storming back, Commie fears and the Palmer Raids.
(The link has some other nice visualizations)
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:26 AM on May 19, 2016
Then the KKK came storming back, Commie fears and the Palmer Raids.
(The link has some other nice visualizations)
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 8:26 AM on May 19, 2016
This is really great! There is something really beautiful about how almost the whole world lights up near the end!
It would be really fantastic to see something similar though, where country borders changed over time as well. Many of those emigrating from the Austro-Hungarian Empire were actually members of other nations. Immigrants arriving from the late 19th century up to the First World War were quite likely to be labelled simply as "Austrian" or "Hungarian" even if they were Poles, Czechs, Slovenes, Croatians, Serbs, Slovaks, Romanians, Ruthenians, etc. For example, there were hundreds of thousands of "Galicians" from Western Ukraine that moved to the US early in the 20th c. prior to WWI. I realize the map highlights country of origin*, rather than ethnicity, but it's still a bit weird to see certain Central and Eastern European countries remain "dark" throughout the visualization. Shifting borders over time according to the ebb and flow of national/imperial borders would at least make the geographical areas of origin clearer and more accurate.
*This is of course due to the nature of the source data. From the Office of Immigration report: "From 1906 to 2013 refers to country of last residence. Because of changes in country boundaries, data for a particular country may not necessarily refer to the same geographic area over time."
posted by Kabanos at 8:45 AM on May 19, 2016
It would be really fantastic to see something similar though, where country borders changed over time as well. Many of those emigrating from the Austro-Hungarian Empire were actually members of other nations. Immigrants arriving from the late 19th century up to the First World War were quite likely to be labelled simply as "Austrian" or "Hungarian" even if they were Poles, Czechs, Slovenes, Croatians, Serbs, Slovaks, Romanians, Ruthenians, etc. For example, there were hundreds of thousands of "Galicians" from Western Ukraine that moved to the US early in the 20th c. prior to WWI. I realize the map highlights country of origin*, rather than ethnicity, but it's still a bit weird to see certain Central and Eastern European countries remain "dark" throughout the visualization. Shifting borders over time according to the ebb and flow of national/imperial borders would at least make the geographical areas of origin clearer and more accurate.
*This is of course due to the nature of the source data. From the Office of Immigration report: "From 1906 to 2013 refers to country of last residence. Because of changes in country boundaries, data for a particular country may not necessarily refer to the same geographic area over time."
posted by Kabanos at 8:45 AM on May 19, 2016
"prior country of residence"
Many of those emigrating from the UK after, say, 1880 had left Russia in the near past. The same may be true in the 1840s and 50s for Irish people.
posted by Emma May Smith at 9:14 AM on May 19, 2016 [1 favorite]
Many of those emigrating from the UK after, say, 1880 had left Russia in the near past. The same may be true in the 1840s and 50s for Irish people.
posted by Emma May Smith at 9:14 AM on May 19, 2016 [1 favorite]
I was going to say that's true for Canada, too: lots of Irish people originally went to Canada because the fares were cheaper and then made their way to the US. But they wouldn't be counted at all until the stats started counting people who arrived by land. More problematically, the data makes Mexican immigration look like a recent phenomenon, which it's not.
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 9:23 AM on May 19, 2016
posted by ArbitraryAndCapricious at 9:23 AM on May 19, 2016
Yeah, that report contains a lot of additional footnotes:
1 Prior to 1906 refers to country of origin; from 1906 to 2013 refers to country of last residence. Because of changes in country boundaries, data for a particular country may not necessarily refer to the same geographic area over time.posted by Kabanos at 9:27 AM on May 19, 2016
2 Austria and Hungary not reported separately for all years during 1860 to 1869, 1890 to 1899, and 1900 to 1909.
3 Poland included in Austria, Germany, Hungary, and Russia from 1899 to 1919.
4 Bulgaria included Serbia and Montenegro from 1899 to 1919.
5 Includes Czech Republic, Czechoslovakia (former), and Slovakia.
6 Finland included in Russia from 1899 to 1919.
7 Northern Ireland included in Ireland prior to 1925.
8 Norway and Sweden not reported separately until 1861.
9 Cape Verde included in Portugal from 1892 to 1952.
10 Refers to the Russian Empire from 1820 to 1920. Between 1920 and 1990 refers to the Soviet Union. From 1991 to 1999, refers to Russia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus,
Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan. Beginning in 2000, refers to Russia only.
11 United Kingdom refers to England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland since 1925.
12 Includes Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Serbia and Montenegro, and Slovenia.
13 Includes both North and South Korea.
14 Syria included in Turkey from 1886 to 1923.
15 Includes British North America and Canadian provinces.
16 Land arrivals not completely enumerated until 1908.
17 No data available for Canada or Mexico from 1886 to 1893.
18 Jamaica included in British West Indies from 1892 to 1952.
19 Panama Canal Zone included in Panama from 1932 to 1972.
20 New Zealand included in Australia from 1892 to 1924.
21 Includes 32,897 persons returning in 1906 to their homes in the United States.
I was going to say that's true for Canada, too
One of my grandfathers came from western Ukraine (then under Austria-Hungary) to Canada by way of Argentina. A bit strange to look at his old passport and see "Miguel" as the first name!
posted by Kabanos at 9:34 AM on May 19, 2016
One of my grandfathers came from western Ukraine (then under Austria-Hungary) to Canada by way of Argentina. A bit strange to look at his old passport and see "Miguel" as the first name!
posted by Kabanos at 9:34 AM on May 19, 2016
Back in 1910, the United States peaked with 34.7% of Americans either born in another country or the children of immigrants.
Then the KKK came storming back, Commie fears and the Palmer Raids.
Isn't that chronology a bit backwards? If it peaked in 1910, then the reduction in the rate of immigration must have started much earlier since we're counting both first and second generation immigrants. The effects of an immigration policy on the percentage should trail the introduction of the policy by decades, since it takes time for immigrants admitted under previous rules to die off.
I mean, we basically started really restricting immigration after the 1870s, right? Look at all the new restrictions introduced between 1875 and 1910.
posted by hyperbolic at 10:48 AM on May 19, 2016
Then the KKK came storming back, Commie fears and the Palmer Raids.
Isn't that chronology a bit backwards? If it peaked in 1910, then the reduction in the rate of immigration must have started much earlier since we're counting both first and second generation immigrants. The effects of an immigration policy on the percentage should trail the introduction of the policy by decades, since it takes time for immigrants admitted under previous rules to die off.
I mean, we basically started really restricting immigration after the 1870s, right? Look at all the new restrictions introduced between 1875 and 1910.
posted by hyperbolic at 10:48 AM on May 19, 2016
Max Galka here (mefi member and creator of the map). Very cool to see it posted here, and thanks for all the great comments and feedback!!
There are indeed many footnotes to the data regarding changing borders and record keeping. And many countries are not broken out separately (included only as "other Europe," "other Asia," etc). So the map does not capture all migrations, but as government data goes, I thought it does a pretty good job considering the long time period it covers.
Of my 4 grandparents, one is of Asian descent, two from Europe, and one is Native American, so demographics, migration patterns, and genealogy have always been fascinations of mine. For anyone who is interested, I wrote a related post last year covering the changing demographics of New York City, which goes into some of the events that caused the migrations.
Another very cool one on the topic is this map from the New York Times, which lets you see how different groups settled across the U.S.
posted by mgalka at 1:49 PM on May 19, 2016 [3 favorites]
There are indeed many footnotes to the data regarding changing borders and record keeping. And many countries are not broken out separately (included only as "other Europe," "other Asia," etc). So the map does not capture all migrations, but as government data goes, I thought it does a pretty good job considering the long time period it covers.
Of my 4 grandparents, one is of Asian descent, two from Europe, and one is Native American, so demographics, migration patterns, and genealogy have always been fascinations of mine. For anyone who is interested, I wrote a related post last year covering the changing demographics of New York City, which goes into some of the events that caused the migrations.
Another very cool one on the topic is this map from the New York Times, which lets you see how different groups settled across the U.S.
posted by mgalka at 1:49 PM on May 19, 2016 [3 favorites]
Fantastic work Max, I've seen this on a number of blogs and watch it every time.
posted by perrouno at 7:23 PM on May 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by perrouno at 7:23 PM on May 22, 2016 [1 favorite]
« Older Girl Power | The preferred term is "flotation" bed Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
On the other hand, mefi member Max Gelka, it doesn't look like the Atlantic slave trade was included. Am I missing something , or was this a conscious choice?
(and this is, in all honesty, a straight-up question and not an attempt to start a fight. As noted, I think this map is awesome)
posted by kanewai at 2:08 AM on May 19, 2016