• Welcome to this forum . We are a worldwide group with a common interest in Birmingham and its history. While here, please follow a few simple rules. We ask that you respect other members, thank those who have helped you and please keep your contributions on-topic with the thread.

    We do hope you enjoy your visit. BHF Admin Team

A B row Aston-Birmingham

dek carr

dek carr

gone but not forgotten
:)A.B.Row whats in a name?When i as a nipper i was told at school that A.B. Row was a victorian quirk with the meeting of Ashted Row coming up from Duddeston and Belmont Row coming up from Vauxhall, both meeting Prospect Row. As i remember it 50 odd years ago there was a wedge of land with a horse trough in the middle surrounded by Plane trees. There are other ideas i know but i wonder.:D
 
I think you will find that Aston didn't belong to Birmingham many many years ago, and it was where the two borders were, hence A.B.Row.

trebor
 
Trebor this is what i was referring to (when i said there were other ideas)but it still gives food for thought with both ashted and belmont rows ending at a.b.row dont you think. dek.
 
One theory I have read in an 1800s book, Dek, is that AB Row got its name from being on the border of Aston & Bordesley.
 
BordesleyExile said:
One theory I have read in an 1800s book, Dek, is that AB Row got its name from being on the border of Aston & Bordesley.
Click to expand...

yes thats on other good theory .To me it always seemed a bit strange that a street no more than 30 yards long would be named as the border between Aston and B,ham when the border must be miles and miles long. Dek
 
I have asked this question before, and got more or less the same answers. I also asked about the the stone? with the date and the letters A&B.

These houses were obviously built a long time after 1764, and the stone is not actually a stone is it? If you look there is no depth to it. Its more like a tile.

If it was was it purports to be it would in fact be something of a sturdier construction. It would be good if someone could come up with the definitive answer.

Phil
 
I always thought that it was moved from it's old position when the houses were built and set in the wall,then. I also thought that I had read somewhere that it marked the boundary of Aston and Birmingham. Aston was quite a large size at one time.
 
Have a look at this link ,

Birmingham in the Middle Ages (click here)
In 1086 Birmingham was one of the poorest and least peopled manors in the area.
... Gosta Green, A-B Row (Aston - B'ham Parish Bound), Curzon Street, Rea. ...

I feel this chap knew what he was talking about as he spent years studying and compiling the History of Birmingham and it's surrounding areas.
After reading the page noted press 'Index' at the bottom of the page and read more... I've used that site for a number of years now for information.
 
Last edited:
pmc1947 said:
I have asked this question before, and got more or less the same answers. I also asked about the the stone? with the date and the letters A&B.

These houses were obviously built a long time after 1764, and the stone is not actually a stone is it? If you look there is no depth to it. Its more like a tile.

If it was was it purports to be it would in fact be something of a sturdier construction. It would be good if someone could come up with the definitive answer.

Phil
Click to expand...

Does this help Phil
https://realcycling.blogspot.com/2009/03/long-and-short-of-london-street-names.html
 
Thanks Alf, I was reading it because I was interested with the Lea Hall bit, as I have been after a photo of it but still haven't come across one, when I logged in and saw A B Row I thought what a coincidence I was only reading about that on Saturday.
 
Hi Mariew,

Yes I have read Carl's explanation before, but even he says that Aston extended to Deritend until 1838. So what is a boundary stone dated 1764 doing set into a house in what then was part of Gosta Green, Aston. I don't think these houses were built until at least the mid 1800's. Its only a theory that Carl is putting forward.

Phil
 
Thanks Alf I have seen that one, but theres still not a picture of the mansion Lea Hall, I'll keep searching.
 
Mariew

I'm sure I won't, if Carl cant come up with more than mere supposition with all his resources then what chance have we mere mortals.

You would something like this would be easy to explain, but in all the years since I lived locally I have thought about this often and I have to admit that the Aston-Birmingham border theory is the most plausible. But there are just the couple of things that I have mentioned against it.

Phil
 
Phil
Looking in wrightsons directories, there is an entry for a Stonemason, William Allen in AB Row in 1833, but a search of the 1829 edition shows no mention of AB Row. Yet Belmont row is mentioned in 1829, and Coleshill St. So was the area of AB Row an open field , not named, or was it just that no occupant warranted mention
Mike
 
Nechells A B Row.jpg

This is a photo of one side of AB Row the whole street wasn't a lot bigger. I remember walking past this clock many hundreds of times.

Phil
 
Last edited:
I read the piece about A+B Row by Carl Chin in last Saturdays Birmingham Mail. As he said at the end the stone from A+B Row was saved after the house demolition and Gabriel and Son the factory built on the site put the stone in their entrance. Maybe this was the case with the stone dated 1784 was it put on a later property. Just an idea. Interesting about the stonemason William Allen do you think he carved the stone A.B. Row?
 
Wendy
I think thats very likely that it came from another building. but i think possibly on a different site. Looking at maps, there's not much evidence that any buildings were her in the 1760s. The row got its name from the stone. the stone , after all, doesn't say AB row, but A+B. Unless its a false date, ki don't think it could have been carved by that stonemason, as he is listed as being there about 70 years after the date. It could be his father though, trades tended to go in families, and i would think masons would follow that .
Mike
 
I've followed this discussion with interest, as I do remember the area quite well from, yes, 60 years ago, when I regularly went on the 10 tram to St Mark's Church, Washwood Heath, where my dad was organist.
I don't see any problem with accepting that the picture is of an original stone carved in 1767. Hanson's map of 1778 shows a building on that corner, and I'm satisfied that the stone was built into the new property in the year stated. Like most buildings in those days, it wasn't of the highest quality, but it lasted the best part of 200 years.
The excellent map of 1838 by the Society for the Promotion of Useful Knowledge shows the parish boundary running down that edge of Duke Street, which could mean that the historic boundary line ran a few inches into the corner of the building. Infringements were common, as the Birmingham Street Commissioners had just about been formed, but didn't do much until around 1800.
I wouldn't recommend a wager against my theory, although I have no positive proof.
Peter
 
Peter
That seems very reasonable, but am not quite clear exactly where the stone was. Was it on the west corner of of the end of Duke St , marked PH on the 1890 map ( https://www.british-history.ac.uk/m...tid=10098&ox=3485&oy=377&zm=1&czm=1&x=176&y=1 ) because, surely that isn't actually in AB Row , or am I mistaking where AB row ends ? Usually where roads join the end is on the same side of the junction as the road, or am i getting mixed up?
mike
 
It seems that as part of the Eastside redevelopment "A B Row" will disappear (as will a few other roads in the area).

I have been taking quite a few panorama photographs of the Eastside area recently, and here is one featuring
"A B Row". (If you have not been to Eastside for a while you may be shocked at how it has changed)

https://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=49271351&postcount=13

You can see a dozen or so panoramas covering the whole of the Eastside area here

https://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1024483
.
 
Hi Peter

Interesting theory, but can you tell me why a stone carved in 1764 would be placed into a building in or around 1838 proclaiming it the boundary between Aston & Birmingham, when according to Carl Chinn this boundary was until around that date in Digbeth.

I would agree that there was a distinct possibility it was moved from a building in Digbeth to the site on the building depicted in the photo and placed there sometime in the mid 1800's but it would make no sense it being there before that date.

Mike

AB Row originally ran from Coleshill St to Belmont Row as far as I am aware.

Phil
 
Mike, yes you have pinpointed the location exactly.
Phil, why do you say the stone was placed into the building about 1838? The building was erected in the later 1700's, certainly before 1778. And where would the stone have been before 1838?.
The boundary between Aston and Brum ran along Hockley Brook from Hockley to past Newtown Row, then south to Gosta Green and via Duke Street to AB Row, where it continued in roughly the same direction across the old Curx]zon Street Station, wher id veered left until it reached the River Rea, which it followed upstream past Deritend to a point just north of what used to be called Belgrave Road (now Belgrave Middleway). The old Aston Parish extended over Little Bromwich, Castle Bromwich and even Water Orton, I believe.
Peter
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top