• 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

Hampton Street/ Little Hampton Street

Vivienne14

Vivienne14

Kentish Brummie Moderator
Staff member
Could a kind soul out there tell me if Little Hampton St and Hampton St are/were the same street? I know there was a Little Hampton St in 1841. Did it become just Hampton St after 1841? Also, I'm interested to know if Hampton St house numbering changed between 1851 and 1871. Help much appreciated. Viv.
 
hi viv...what a lot of hamptons we have lol..well there is a hampton st...gt hampton st and gt hampton row...whether the little hampton st of 1841 became hampton st at a later date im afraid i dont know but its quite possible.. but if mike or one of the others members sees this post they maybe able to help...dont know if you have got this map but i find it very useful...if you click on it 3 times it will enlarge very well

lyn
 
Viv
the answer to your question seems to be that there was a Great Hsampton St and a little Hampton St, and around the 1840s the "Little" was dropped. this made it a bit complicated, in that . in th e1845 PO directory there is no Little Hampton St, but is a Hampton St listed in the list of streets at the beginning. However If you look at James Horton in the street directory , then he is at 171 Hampton St. However, if you look form him by name in the names directory, he is listed as at 171 Little Hampton St ! Obviously the change must have just occurred.
mike
 
Thanks Lyn. That map's really helpful as it gives me a clear view of the area where many of my ancestors lived - around the bottom of Snow Hill and the B'ham canal area.

Thanks also Mike. That makes sense on the name change. I have relations living in Little H St in 1841, then subsequent Census records show them at Hampton St, but at a different house number on each census record for 1851, 1861 and 1871. Seems odd that they'd move house that often and within the same street. Or maybe they were just restless!! Viv.
 
your welcome viv...and although it may seem odd that our ancestors moved a lot and often in the same street it was usually to dodge the rent man.. lol...

lyn
 
Hadn't thought of that Lyn. Judging by some of their shenanigans that's quite possible.:rolleyes: Been having a good look at your map. Nice clear map which I actually understand! Will come in very useful. Thanks. Viv
 
i bet my lot dodged the rent man viv...lol....glad you like the map im always referring to it as my sense of direction is pretty hopeless...
 
Hi Viv,
Recently at a starters day at the BMSGH, we were told that the numbers on the census returns are actual house numbers. The enumetors had a set list of addresses and they started at the their first address as 1, following in sequence. The numbers are the sequential number on the list, which mayu well have started in the middle or on a street corner, especially on big long roads, where enumerators only had a section each. You could very well find hal a dozen '1's on a long road - i per persons allotment!

Brian
 
i'm a bit dubious about that Brian. Certainly the number in the first column (not 1841, which just listed a street) was a schedule number, and likely started from number one with each enumerator (in which case there might be several schedule number ones in the same street), and sometimes, particul;arly in 1851, 1861 many streets' houses had no numbers and so the schedule number was the only distinguishing mark. However most houses in birmingham, other than these cases , also had a house number in the street column , which would be different, and would correspond to the number in the directories.
 
I'm not a genealogist myself, which is why I went to the BMSGH starters day, having recently got Ancestry with Family Tree Maker, and it appeared to make sense at the time.
Have you families on Census's that stay at the same number, or could it be the enumerators lists remain the same?

There must be some BMSDGH members on here, can they confirm?

Brian
 
Found on a publication forming part of the Gutenbeg Project:

"Patrick O'Donoghue was kicked and killed at the 'Flying Horse', Little Hampton Street, August 7. 1875. Moran and Caulfield, the kickers, were sent to penal servitude for ten years".

Full publication available as a download here.
 
thanks for that info bernie...most interesting....will download the the full publication...

cheers

lyn
 
Put my original reply to Jackie Cotterill, Secretary of the BMSGH - I am partly correct - here is here reply

Hi Brian,
Yes and no is the answer to your question, it depends on which column on the census record they are looking at.
If you look at the first column on census records, the 1841 states place, the 1851-1901 first columns are the no in the schedule, which many people mistakenly believe is the house number. The second column should state the number and name of the road/street. In many of the early censuses there were no house numbers and in later censuses, if more houses were built or knocked down in the street, the numbering could change. Even if the road was long and covered by various enumerators, the schedule numbers should be sequential, so you could follow the numbering down a street. The whole schedule would have been worked out before the sheets were given to the enumerator, so they would know which schedules are missing without looking at the road names, similar to how it is done now.
The other thing to think of is that most people would have rented their house, so if the landlord came up with a better house down the street, families would move. Equally if times were hard, they could move to a cheaper house.
Hope this helps.

So, depneding upon what info is in the census, it could house numbers and perpetully moving home, or could be actua; house numbers not shown, just enumerators numbers


Clear as mud........

Brian
 
Many thanks Brian and Mike. Seems it's a bit of a minefield. But I think I get the gist of it. Looking at my census records I think it most likely the family actually moved up and down Hampton Street as the house numbers in the census records are very variable. Been interesting finding out a bit more about the info on census records. Looks like it's a whole specialist subject area on its own. Viv

Viv.
 
Bernie D'Boult said:
Found on a publication forming part of the Gutenbeg Project:

"Patrick O'Donoghue was kicked and killed at the 'Flying Horse', Little Hampton Street, August 7. 1875. Moran and Caulfield, the kickers, were sent to penal servitude for ten years".

Full publication available as ahere.
Click to expand...

Last night I spent a riveting hour or so reading through your link Bernie. Great stuff, many thanks for that. Shall be returning to it later today. Plenty of useful and interesting facts in there. Funny that Little Hampton Street pops up again in 1875 after disappearing in the 1840s. Another lovely mystery! Viv.
 
hi viv..i agree with you...thats a brilliant link bernie pointed out to us...ive had quick look but hope to spend more time on it soon...

lyn
 
A bit of a bump for this thread but I came across this information from the British Museum website - apparently they have a brass tavern token made in Little Hampton Street in their collection and it says that the street name dropped the 'Little' around the 1840s and became just Hampton Street.

Link for the item here

tavern token | British Museum

Brass tavern token.
www.britishmuseum.org www.britishmuseum.org
 
Thanks for that A Sparks. I was a relative newcomer when I posted the original query. But afraid it’s still a mystery. I’ve since branched out into other sources of info and found many newspaper reports mentioning Little Hampton Street into, at least, the 1870s. At the same time I’d be surprised if the British Museum had got it wrong. A mystery. Viv.
 
this is the info on the token from the british museum....maybe our pub expert keiron could add to this...the pub was the plough and harrow cant say as i have heard of this pub

tavern token
Object Typetavern token
Museum number1870,0507.16677
Denominationpenny
DescriptionBrass tavern token.
AuthorityIssuer: Plough & Harrow
Production date19thC
Production placeMade in: Little Hampton Street(131)
Europe: British Isles: England: West Midlands: Birmingham (West Midlands): Hampton Street: Little Hampton Street
Materialsbrass
DimensionsWeight: 4.060 grammes
LocationNot on display
Acquisition date1870
DepartmentCoins and Medals
Registration number1870,0507.16677
 
Plough & Harrow, 225 Bacchus road, BirminghamNoYes
Plough & Harrow, Genners lane, Bartley green, Quinton, BirminghamNoYes
Plough & Harrow, 759 Bristol road, BirminghamNoYes
Plough & Harrow, 1000 Coventry road, Hay Mills, Yardley, BirminghamNoYes
Plough & Harrow hotel, 135 Hagley road, BirminghamNoYes
Plough & Harrow, 131 Hampton road, BirminghamNoYes
Plough & Harrow, High street, Selly Oak, BirminghamNoYes
Plough & Harrow hotel, 81 Jamaica row, BirminghamNoYes
Plough & Harrow, 195 Moseley road, BirminghamNoYes
Plough & Harrow hotel, 44 Webster street, Aston, Birmingham

I note a P&H in Hampton ROAD listed.
 
thanks alan..wonder if hampton road is an error...will ask keiron to take a look
 
A Sparks said:
A bit of a bump for this thread but I came across this information from the British Museum website - apparently they have a brass tavern token made in Little Hampton Street in their collection and it says that the street name dropped the 'Little' around the 1840s and became just Hampton Street.

Link for the item here

tavern token | British Museum

Brass tavern token.
www.britishmuseum.org www.britishmuseum.org
Click to expand...

I see that the tavern check was issued by the Plough and Harrow but this would have been one of the pubs with this inn sign. The reference to Hampton Street is for the manufacturer. There were a number of die-sinkers in Birmingham that manufactured coins, checks and medals. Hampton Street had a couple of sites. There was, of course, the famous H. B. Sale on the corner of Hampton Street, a firm that produced such items.
 
www.midlandspubs.co.uk said:
I see that the tavern check was issued by the Plough and Harrow but this would have been one of the pubs with this inn sign. The reference to Hampton Street is for the manufacturer. There were a number of die-sinkers in Birmingham that manufactured coins, checks and medals. Hampton Street had a couple of sites. There was, of course, the famous H. B. Sale on the corner of Hampton Street, a firm that produced such items.
Click to expand...

Having said that, there was a Plough and Harrow on Hampton Street in the past - it was at No.131 between Buckingham Street and Mott Street.
 
www.midlandspubs.co.uk said:
Having said that, there was a Plough and Harrow on Hampton Street in the past - it was at No.131 between Buckingham Street and Mott Street.
Click to expand...
Well yes i it does clear it up and it it seems that the one with ROAD in the address is the same one but a mistake and should read STREET. Interesting that there are ten places with the name, all within the city, but suggesting a more rural area. But, it was probably not that long ago when the areas they are in were relatively rural. :)
 
yes alan..here is a 1824 map of the area very rural then... you can see that little hampton st had just started being cut and built on and then it eventually carried on further..
st george in the fields1824.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top