False Passengers Deliberate Hoaxes


Brian Ahern

Member
Dec 19, 2002
643
1
146
Hi Hildur - could you clarify which list you're talking about?

Some of these passengers - Helen Wilson, Victorine Chandanson (misspelled, I believe), Miss Bassette (also misspelled, I believe), Miss A. Pericault, Miss Olivia (actually Oliva) and others - were servants who, at least on the list handed round to passengers, were simply "and Maid" or "and Manservant".

Some are obvious spelling errors. "Amy Wimhormstrom" is obviously August Wennerstrom, "Margater Nevatey" probably Margaret Devaney, "Miriam Kenton" Marian Kenyon.

Others - Frederick K. Seward, H.B. Steffanson, Mrs. L.P. Smith - are names that are spelled correctly and that belong to people definitely on the ship.

Honestly, if you are familiar with Titanic's passengers and you look at most of the names on the list you supplied, it is fairly easy to link the misspellings with the real individuals intended. I'm afraid I don't have time to go through it just now, but I always think doing so is a fun game.

Regards,
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,984
221
193
This was raised on another thread.

The names that appeared in the press in 1912 were the product of a long chain of people, each of whom had the chance to make mistakes.

It starts with the clerks on Carpathia, who took down names, often from people with foreign accents or strong regional British or Irish accents. The names were collected and compiled into lists. The lists went to Harold Cottam, who transmitted them by radio. People on ships or on shore received the names and wrote them down. The names were forwarded to New York and elsewhere by radio, telegraph of telephone, creating more chances of error. Somebody wrote them down in the newspaper offices and somebody set the type. No wonder a mess was created!

As Brian said, trying to identify the people on these lists is a fun game, but it's a rather pointless game today, when the survivors have been correctly identified.
 
Nov 11, 2005
381
1
86
The book is called Titanic Conspirisy, and it was made in 1995. I just bought it yesterday, when i found the list in the back. It was carefully copied out, and any spelling mistakes are what they are.
 
Nov 11, 2005
381
1
86
Here are a few i think are right:
Foo Cheang---------Chang Foo
Charles Daly-------Charles Dahl?
Masabumi Hosono----Musabumi Hosano
Mrs. A.A.Dick-----Vera Gillespie Dick
Eames Person------Ernst Persson
Benoit Picard-------Berk Pickard
Miss Rose Pinsky----Rosa Pinsky
Axel Shine-------Ellen Shine
Anna Sofia-------Anna Sofia Turja?
Fabin Zuni-------Fahim Lenni
Anna Nyhan-------Anna Nysten?
Virma Olman------Velin Ohman
Halin Noubarek----Halim Moubarek
Mrs. Phillippe Mock----Mr. Philip E. Mock
Anna Messelmolk-------Anna De Messemaeker?
Anna McGovan---------Annie McGowan
Amina Missulmona-------Fatima Masselmany?
Miss Katey Marshall-----Mrs. Kate Marshall
Bertha Maran-------Bertha Moran
Mrs.H.A.Cassebeer---Genevieve Forsdick Cassebeer
Boyen Casem----Nassef Belmenly Cassum?
Miss E. Brown----Edith Brown
Hee Lang----Fang Lang
Krikoraen Kinorn-------Neshan Krekorian?
Miss.Roberta Maioni---On the ship with same name
Miss Mary Jermyn-----Mary Glynn?
These are just the ones that i came up with. There are also a smaller list of supposed Finns who sailed on the ship, that i got from Kalman Tanito
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
383
283
Easley South Carolina
>>The book is called Titanic Conspirisy<<

If you're talking about one of Robin Gardiner's books, you might want to look for a more reliable source. Conspiracy theories make for interesting reading but on close examination, the claims rarely hold up.

There's really nothing remarkable about the mistakes that cropped up. Some passengers were traveling under assumed names and that didn't help, but neither did the long string of communication which gauranteed that errors would just pile on to the ones already made. I think you'll find that down to the last man and woman, the real imposters who claimed to have been aboard were never anywhere near the Titanic or the Carpathia. Luis Klien anyone?
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,984
221
193
It sounds like The Titanic Conspiracy, otherwise published as The Riddle of the Titanic, by Gardiner and Van der Vat.
 
Nov 11, 2005
381
1
86
Yes, Robin Gardiner's book. But alot of it makes sense, and interesting viewpoints.
Here are more i figured out:

Alous Akelseph-----Olous Abelseth
Badmoura Aloum-----Ayout Banoura
Rinat Barlson------Einar Karlson
Masy Bockstrom-----Maria Backstrom
Mrs. D. Collett----Stuart Collett
Mrs. J. Fulwell----Mrs. J. Futrelle
Miss Jeannie Hanson----Miss Jenni Hanson
Miss Mary Jermyn-----Miss Mary Glynn
Miss Emile Koucher----Amelia Kenchen(maid)
Mrs. Gustav Lesneur--Mr. Gustav Lesneur
(manservent)
Margaret Manga------Mary Mangan
Margaret Marrigan-----Margaret Marrion
C. Anderson Osplund----Carl Asplund
John Schurbint-------Jean Sheerlinck
Julo Strinder--------Juho Stranden

This are the Finns that i got from Kalman Tanito, who did a page on the Finnish passengers aboard Titanic, and these are delibrate hoaxes and possible additional passengers:

Salomon Korkeakoski According to Vaino Yli-Havunen of Kauhajarvi

J.Lindqvist, There is a contemporary newspaper account describing his experiences

Heikki Mikkila From Toysa, according to Kimmo Kiiseli

Ida Pihlajaniemi (nee Vdeanpaa, later Seppala, living in Florida in 1982, aged 95) daughters, Tyyne Maria(later Collins, from Florida) and Vieno Ester(from Arizona), who travelled 24 or 25 days from the wrecksite to New York, as stated in an article in the Tamperelainen(Tampere, Finland)

Jalmar Vienola Who was on Titanic's maiden voyage from Halifax to New York, according to a Finnish weekly from the 1950's

Obviously, i don't believe the account of Ida Pihlajaniemi and her daughters, Tyyne and Vieno. The Titanic would not have taken 24 to 25 days to cross the Atlantic, and it sank,(duh!), and there is no mention of the Carpathia, oir any other reliable information about this woman and her daughters.

Aso os Saloman Korkeakoski, this is not the first time his name has came up. Several times over the years, i have heard rumour he died on the ship, in second class, where he was listed as a business man, heading to New York. However, other than those rumours, there is nothing more to suggest he was on the ship.


I know that alot of the Titanic conspiracies are fake, but a few often makes me wonder. I mean, we have learned alot over the years, but maybe we are learning the wrong thing, about different scnerios, in order to protect a name, and/or a class.

I think i may have spelt a few words wrong, but forgive, i am Finnish, and i just learned english a year and a half ago.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
383
283
Easley South Carolina
>>Yes, Robin Gardiner's book. But alot of it makes sense,<<

Interesting take as the book is considered something of a laughing stock among serious Titanic historians. Conspiracy theories of any kind are based on a mountain of distortions, half truths, and often blatant falsehoods along with heaping helpings of irrelevancies and this one is no different.

I'd be leery of taking anything it has to say all that seriously.
 
Nov 11, 2005
381
1
86
yes, be a joke as it many, i take all things in to consideration, because i want a damn good reason as to why so many innocents died at the hands of a man who was so good at his job. I look at all things Titanic, however real or false they are, just because you never know unless you look. I have come to believe most the book is indeed a laughing joke based off such falsehoods and misinterpretations, but a few things just have to make me wonder about it all.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
383
283
Easley South Carolina
>> because i want a damn good reason as to why so many innocents died at the hands of a man who was so good at his job.<<

There's no mystery to this at all. The reason so many innocents died is because the ship they were sailing on was sufficiently mismanaged so as to cause her to take a nose dive to the bottom of the North Atlantic before any help could arrive. This isn't rocket science and I don't need Robin Gardiner's help to figure this out.

If you really want to work things out, go to primary sources rather then the spinners of tale tales involving impossible ship switches.
 
Nov 11, 2005
381
1
86
i don't believe it wqas a ship switch, i just think it was ridiculus as to the lenght of the Captain's history at sea, and the he sank this ship. I would think he would have had more knowledge not to be speeding and such things.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
383
283
Easley South Carolina
>>i just think it was ridiculus as to the lenght of the Captain's history at sea, and the he sank this ship. I would think he would have had more knowledge not to be speeding and such things.<<

And you may be on to something with that. The one thing you have to keep in mind is that there was nothing at all unusual about how the Titanic was operated. Just about every ship on the North Atlantic run was operated in the same manner and under the same assumptions. Captain Smith was hardly unique. Just damned unlucky.
 
Nov 11, 2005
381
1
86
yes, he was unlucky was'nt he? What do you think about the lifeboats? I would imagine that the captain would have had the sensebility to make sure all his passengers could be saved in the event of a disaster, but did he not speak up as to how many lifeboats there were? I think who ever set the guidelines for the size of ship vs. amount of passengers = amount of lifeboats. Given the sheer magnitude of Ttitanic, i am suprised Captain Smith seemed to have no issue. If maybe, he did speak up about it, though i have heard he did put the collapsibles on, he could have saved many more lives. I wonder, was it his fault that he wanted to look magnificant, and because he was perfectly align with the law, that he only had twenty lifeboats, so the ship would look good?
Who would be at fault if not him? He was Captain of the ship, and could have stepped off, it just surprises me that the lack of knowledge of the amount of passengers, vs. amount of lifeboats, did'nt seem to bother him. Could the Board of Trade or the White Star Line be at fault? The lifeboats were based off much smaller ships from the late 1800's, and not of 1912.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
383
283
Easley South Carolina
>>What do you think about the lifeboats? I would imagine that the captain would have had the sensebility to make sure all his passengers could be saved in the event of a disaster, but did he not speak up as to how many lifeboats there were?<<

I think you may be assuming that Captain Smith may have had more authority and influance then he really had. Looking magnificent really had nothing to do with it. The simple fact of the matter is that he may not have been asked for his opinion at all. As far as White Star was concerned, the officers and crew were employees plain and simple, even if some were the trans-Atlantic celebrities of the day. They knew their place and stayed in it if they wanted to continue working. The debate and the decisions were made at a much higher level and they stuck. Captain Smith may well have been bothered by it, but he knew better then to make waves in public.

In other words, when it came to the design and fittings of the ship, it just wasn't his call to make. Those decisions were made at the corperate level.

The one thing you have to keep in mind was that the pervasive attitude towards lifeboats of the day. What they had in mind was building enough damage resistance into a ship so that she could act as her own lifeboat until help arrived. When it did, the idea was to use the boats to ferry the passengers and crew to a rescue vessel. It worked well enough in some comparatively recent casualties such as the RMS Republic so there was no reason to believe that it would be necessery to evacuate everybody before help arrived.

In that sense, the Titanic served as a rather nasty wake up call.
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,984
221
193
Hildur, I believe that legally Captain Smith could have refused to take the ship to sea if he considered her unseaworthy. Such a thought would never have occurred to him. The ship had been inspected by Board of Trade officers while being built. She'd been accepted by White Star after trials. She'd been inspected again in Southampton.

One of the last things Smith did before sailing was to sign the usual statement for the owners, stating that the ship was ready for sea. By the standards of 1912, she was in excellent order.

The lifeboat story is a long one. I'll just say that Titanic had sufficient boats for about one third of her maximum company, as did other British liners. The full story is in my book. It's written in Australian, but you Finns are smart enough to read it!
 

Dave Gittins

Member
Apr 11, 2001
4,984
221
193
Here's the statement signed before sailing. It's from the testimony of Harold Sanderson, but it would have been a standard letter.

"I herewith report this ship loaded and ready for sea. The engines and boilers are in good order for the voyage, and all charts and sailing directions up-to-date.
- Your obedient servant, Edward J. Smith."
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
383
283
Easley South Carolina
Realistically, Captain Smith had no reason whatever to believe the ship was unsafe because of the shortage of lifeboats. One of the dirty little secrets of the time was that very few passenger vessels carried boats for all. What Titanic was well in excess of the requirements of the day, anhd her watertight subdivision gave her a substantial margin of protection for the kind of accident that the ship was most likely to have, ipso facto collision with another vessel

There may be a twisted irony in this somewhere but the only ship out there that night with lifeboats for all was the Californian.
 
Nov 11, 2005
381
1
86
hmmm, i have your book, and i find it good.
I think that looks ruled over anything else. People wanted the rich and famous to make their ships look and seem the best, and ignored safety, as it did'nt seem like a matter. It makes more sense that the Captain could'nt do a thing really, but i don't think he would have felt the need to. The Titanic was the best ship in it's age. And as the newspapers proclaim " she is practicly unsinkable!"
Were icebergs common to sink ships in that age? I knew alot of ships sank, but they were for an array of reasons. I have only heard of a select few being sunk by icebergs in that age, including Titanic.
 
Dec 2, 2000
58,590
383
283
Easley South Carolina
Safety was hardly ignored. The problem here is that the expectations weren't entirely consistant with reality or the assumptions that they were operating under.

If you go to http://researchers.imd.nrc.ca/~hillb/icedb/ice/bergs2_01e.html you'll see that icebergs have always been a problem and remain so even to this day. Titanic wasn't the only victim. Just the most notorious. Keep in mind that this list deals only with known incidents. For obvious reasons, it can't speak to ships which simply "disappeared" and were never heard from again.
 
Nov 11, 2005
381
1
86
That is a very good site. I am suprised that people dont' seem to want to report all these recent shipwrecks in the news. Perhaps they are afraid it would damage the history of the Titanic, and how the majority of the people, today, believe she was the only ship sunk by a iceberg.
 

Similar threads