Where can I go from here?

[Tim]

Could this be her?

 

[Tim]

Although the only Rosanna Rudge I can find has mother's name of Corbett, in 1896.

Are you sure this Rose is actually the same family?

 

[Bob Spiers]

May have just hit pay-dirt (as we say) - did a brief search for a Joseph James Rudge death from the birth year of 1893 onwards and hit the following entry:
Rudge, Joseph: 1893 D Quarter, Dudley, 06C, Page 46, age 11

Given the errors when it comes to months and years in the death indexes, then this could very well be Joseph James Rudge, dying at the age of 11 months. Quickly checked, just to make sure, and Joseph James Rudge was born in M Quarter (Jan-Feb-Mar) of 1893, which makes this a little more likely to be him... or am I reading a touch too much into it?

I too found the same entry which I began after reading about Joseph James Rudge and made a note to advise you about it, after seeing if I could come with anything on Rose. But then I read down to your Edit Note and realised you had already found it. I know one likes to find death entries showing full names, but in practice this often is not the case, and you find them registered by their first given name. I don't think you are reading too much into it, but there is a small danger I suppose of 'wanting' to find a death registration and so accepting one that fits. I would certainly say he must be a front runner, who was born and died just under a year old in Dudley.

Now on to Hannah versus Rose and this time -so far - no Edit note. How about the marriage of a Rosanna Rudge in the 3rd qtr of 1918 to a William H Astley, in of course Dudley, Staffordshire (6B/1923). Its just a question of working out which came first...Rosanna, Rose or Hannah or how she was known to other family members.

Edit: I see Tim got there first but two heads and all that....

 

[jorghes]

Could this be her?

View attachment 1163

Although the only Rosanna Rudge I can find has mother's name of Corbett, in 1896.

Are you sure this Rose is actually the same family?

I too found the same entry which I began after reading about Joseph James Rudge and made a note to advise you about it, after seeing if I could come with anything on Rose. But then I read down to your Edit Note and realised you had already found it. I know one likes to find death entries showing full names, but in practice this often is not the case, and you find them registered by their first given name. I don't think you are reading too much into it, but there is a small danger I suppose of 'wanting' to find a death registration and so accepting one that fits. I would certainly say he must be a front runner, who was born and died just under a year old in Dudley.

Now on to Hannah versus Rose and this time -so far - no Edit note. How about the marriage of a Rosanna Rudge in the 3rd qtr of 1918 to a William H Astley, in of course Dudley, Staffordshire (6B/1923). Its just a question of working out which came first...Rosanna, Rose or Hannah or how she was known to other family members.

Edit: I see Tim got there first but two heads and all that....

This all highlights my conundrum about Rose. She's listed on the 1901 census as a daughter of the house, aged 7, along with her two half brothers, and sisters Mary, Florence, Eliza J and Edith - I've checked the image and she's definitely written in as Rose, no transcription errors and considering her two half brothers are listed as "step sons", I think an adoptive or other relationship would have been written in as well. I have a photo given to me by my cousin, which is denoted to be Rose. (and while she is similar to other family photos I have, it's a different person). Unfortunately I don't have a full family shot, to compare to as I have with previous photos (which also helps to clarify members in most cases).

When I was chatting to the same cousin about the family, she told me that Rose had married a "Mr Astley", although no more information was given. But I couldn't find the marriage, and I can't find a related birth register, and thus, since I don't know if she had gotten married, a related death register entry. I can't find her on the 1939 register either (as I presume she would have been married by that point), and while I think I found a likely candidate in the 1911 census - working as a servant in Balsall Heath, it lists her birthplace as Wolverhampton, which would match a different Rose I found in the birth index, who was indeed born in Wolverhampton, but with a different mother's maiden name.

That's why I've come around to wondering if "Rose" is a family nickname that somehow got into the census and that her age has been incorrectly entered giving her two extra years that she doesn't have - especially since she's only in the 1901 census with the family. She could very well be the Hannah born in 1894 on the birth register, which might suggest that any other entries in the official indexes might be under that name. But that doesn't solve every issue, as I still would have to find appropriate marriage and death register entries to confirm this (and possibly another 1911 census entry perhaps for "Hannah".)

Either that or Rose seemingly was a figment of someone's imagination on the 1901 census. (Also Astley could be misheard - perhaps it might be Ashley? or something else similar).


I am inclined to believe my cousin, mainly because she's old enough to have met some of her grandfather's half siblings - as well as our infamous Elizabeth of the possible 12 children, and she also was giving good information when she told me that Beatrice married a Mr Mears (since found all that information on Beatrice - affectionately known as "Auntie Beat") and that Eliza had married a Mr Hughes, which I have also clarified now with evidence - and helped me find Florence and her marriage to Titus Turner. Although I am always wary of possible errors in family stories (like when my grandmother told me one of her father's brother's died young in the War, not proven, although one of them died at the age of 29 of TB. No evidence of service, although it's possible since it's the Scottish records I was looking for).

 

[Bob Spiers]

When I was chatting to the same cousin about the family, she told me that Rose had married a "Mr Astley", although no more information was given. But I couldn't find the marriage

As a marriage has now been found for a "Rosanna" Rudge to a William H Astley in 1918 (as per Tim's and my own posting) - and if you believe likely the Rose you seek - then perhaps Ros(e)(h)anna(h) either (a) wished to be known as Rose and/or (b) her parents preferred this and/or (c) perhaps later Hannah (aka Anna) prevailed?

I have similar name variations in my own Tree which caused great confusion when researching. The one that comes to mind is Aunt Irene who believe it or not was christened Katrina. I understand to her friends she was 'Kat', but my mother always called her 'Reenee' (or as it sounded to me). To the family in general she was Aunt Irene and indeed she was registered as Irene when she died.

Remember 'Occams Razor' principle "no more assumptions should be made than are necessary" (aka simple explanations are often the best). But you do need to establish (as Tim alludes), is your Cousin's information that 'your' Rose married Mr Astley outweighs it being the other Rose (born 1892 in Wolverhampton).

 

[Bob Spiers]

Jorghes - if of interest:

A Death Registration for a Rosanna Astley born (note year) 10th May 1895 in the 4th quarter of 1985 (so aged 90) in Dudley, Staffordshire. (33/693). Did your Rose live to that age? (Could not find in the 1939 register)

A Death Registration for a Roseannah (sic) Astley born 1892 (no actual dob) died 1956 aged 64 in the 3rd qtr in Wolverhampton, Staffs. (9B/692). (Is this the other Rose/Rosanna?) (Not found in 1939 Register)

Also a Death Registration for a William Henry Astley born 17th December 1897 who died in the 2nd qtr of 1978 (aged 80) in Lichfield, Staffordshire (30/0748). I found him in the 1939 Register (right birth details) Auction Yard Foreman married to an Elsie A Astley (21 Dec 1898): no redactions. Living at 27 Church Street, Lichfield. (I doubt of interest unless the same William H & he remarried after Rosanna).

 

[PhilGee]

There is a William H Astley (b. 5 Dec 1897) married to Rosanna (b. 10 May 1894) living at 96 Clifton Street , Coseley in 1939 (note that FMP have messed up and have William as #3 for the previous household instead of #1 and don't show Rosanna). That DoB is a good fit for Hannah and for the the Rosanna "Dudley 1985" death.

Phil

 

[jorghes]

So much information, thank you all!

I bit the bullet yesterday and ordered some birth register entries, which will take a couple of weeks to make it to Australia by post (now that the PDF trial has ended). That should confirm the three I think might be part of Elizabeth's family and give us Hannah's birth date. Which of course I am hoping is the 10th May (and that is only a small transcription error to 1895) - which then matches PhilGee's wonderful discovery of the both of them in the 1939 register.

In response Bob - for my cousin to have met Rose, she had to have lived until at least the 1950s, i.e. when her mother died. It is quite possible for her to have lived to 90, since her own mother was 89 when she died.

I am starting to think you wonderful researchers have discovered Rose, as Rosanna is a neat melding of Rose and Hannah (if she is actually Hannah) - and Bob found a second death entry for the other Rosanna as discovered by Tim.

So I sincerely thank you all for your help in finding and solving the "Rose" problem! And helping me discover the possible other children to make up Elizabeth's 12 - the highly possible Violet Maud and Joseph James.

I now have only a couple left to "finalise" in Elizabeth's family, which is finding her eldest daughter's death date (fairly sure she was single until she died) and then discovering possible marriages for Mary Ann and Edith and if not, death dates for them too.

Next on my list is to resolve the "black line" on the 1939 register, which suggests that William Astley and Rosanna had a child... finding their index entry might confirm their mother's maiden name and help us see if Rosanna is actually Rose!

Thank you all again for your help - this is my first experience of someone's name (possibly) changing so much. I have a bunch of great uncles who all used their middle names for their preferred names - and other various combinations of first/middle/third names, but I've never had a possible "melding" like this.

Edit:
The only person who comes up when you search the 1916-2005 birth index whose surname is Astley and mother's maiden name was Rudge is:
Rose G Astley, born Apr/May/Jun 1920, in Dudley, Staffordshire. (6b 2174)

 

[DavidP]

I had a similar issue with the number of living and dead children in the 1911 census and even after cross-checking all the possible births in the registration area and subsequently, following the upgrade at GRO, checking the mother's maiden name I was still missing one birth and can only put it down to either a premature (dead) birth or a still birth - there is a vague family story about this. There was no death registration that tied up either, so It's one of those mysteries that will most likely never be solved.

 

[PhilGee]

Assuming Rose G married Herbert Sadler 1942Q1 Rowley Regis 6b 2391 (possibly b. Dudley 1921 - HS b. 1919 is on a Sadler tree on Ancestry), there is a Rose G Sadler listed in Wolverhampton 2002 on FMP Electoral Rolls.

Phil

 

[Bob Spiers]

The only person who comes up when you search the 1916-2005 birth index whose surname is Astley and mother's maiden name was Rudge is:
Rose G Astley, born Apr/May/Jun 1920, in Dudley, Staffordshire. (6b 2174)

Sounds good, and as you may have discovered, I believe she married a Herbert Sadler in 1942 in Rowley Regis*, Staffordshire (6B/2391) ...and a son John Sadler followed in 1943; Regd. Wolverhampton (6B/881)

*Historical note: Rowley Regis is another of those places that -from time to time- get shown in Staffordshire & Worcestershire (I have researched it before as it occurs in my own Tree). It is rightly Staffordshire, but ecclesiastically Worcestershire and way back in time, came under the feudal Barony of Dudley. "Put that in your pipe and smoke it" as my Dad used to say when explaining something too convoluted to take in.

Glad you are making progress Jorghes, and note you have sent for Certificates. Lets hope they are what you seek.

Diversion: I knew at the back of my mind there was a story in my own family about a 'Rose' and her own name variations; then it came to me. Not for the same reasons as your own, but worth recounting to explain how names can get altered from those given at baptism. She was my Great Aunt given first names: Rose Harriet Jane, who called herself Rosa from the start, but married, and about to start a confectionery business, decided to style herself: Rosa Henrietta J. An Uncle (her nephew who referred to her as Aunt Rosa) told me the upset it caused her mother (his Grandmother) HARRIET. She could accept the Rosa part but was mightily upset when her daughter changed her middle name to Henrietta. I recall saying...'a Rose by any other name'

 

[jorghes]

I had a similar issue with the number of living and dead children in the 1911 census and even after cross-checking all the possible births in the registration area and subsequently, following the upgrade at GRO, checking the mother's maiden name I was still missing one birth and can only put it down to either a premature (dead) birth or a still birth - there is a vague family story about this. There was no death registration that tied up either, so It's one of those mysteries that will most likely never be solved.

Oh I once found a family member I never knew existed when I was using the GRO indexes (with mother's maiden names) to check a list of family members that I thought was correct. While I was doing that, I discovered a child who I never knew had been there, as they had never appeared on the census data! (still not completely sure why) but the surname of the mother was rather distinctive, and there weren't any other children like there were when I was searching for Rudges this time around.
And it wasn't like this child had died young... as far as I know so far, he grew up and got married!

Your situation is a little awkward. Maybe they were accidentally in the wrong registration district or the mother's maiden name was misspelt? The situation I was talking about above, the mother's maiden name was "Artus" and it was constantly misspelt in the indexes. (and every other piece of documentation known to man)

Assuming Rose G married Herbert Sadler 1942Q1 Rowley Regis 6b 2391 (possibly b. Dudley 1921 - HS b. 1919 is on a Sadler tree on Ancestry), there is a Rose G Sadler listed in Wolverhampton 2002 on FMP Electoral Rolls.

Phil

I did see the marriage, and I thought it was likely, but I didn't see the Electoral Roll entry. It does seem rather suggestive that if it is her daughter, that she was named Rose.

Sounds good, and as you may have discovered, I believe she married a Herbert Sadler in 1942 in Rowley Regis*, Staffordshire (6B/2391) ...and a son John Sadler followed in 1943; Regd. Wolverhampton (6B/881)

*Historical note: Rowley Regis is another of those places that -from time to time- get shown in Staffordshire & Worcestershire (I have researched it before as it occurs in my own Tree). It is rightly Staffordshire, but ecclesiastically Worcestershire and way back in time, came under the feudal Barony of Dudley. "Put that in your pipe and smoke it" as my Dad used to say when explaining something too convoluted to take in.

Glad you are making progress Jorghes, and note you have sent for Certificates. Lets hope they are what you seek.

Diversion: I knew at the back of my mind there was a story in my own family about a 'Rose' and her own name variations; then it came to me. Not for the same reasons as your own, but worth recounting to explain how names can get altered from those given at baptism. She was my Great Aunt given first names: Rose Harriet Jane, who called herself Rosa from the start, but married, and about to start a confectionery business, decided to style herself: Rosa Henrietta J. An Uncle (her nephew who referred to her as Aunt Rosa) told me the upset it caused her mother (his Grandmother) HARRIET. She could accept the Rosa part but was mightily upset when her daughter changed her middle name to Henrietta. I recall saying...'a Rose by any other name'

It's so nice that the UK lets you search very recent birth indexes - Australia's are cut off currently at 1917, so it makes it incredibly difficult to search for more recent family members, and almost impossible to find possible living relatives unless you actually know them! (or they're 18 before 1980 and might appear on the electoral rolls).

It's really confusing at times - I only found a couple of Elizabeth's daughter's weddings but looking in Worcestershire, which of course I didn't know was a possibility when I first started searching considering I thought I was only looking in Staffordshire - but then I suppose it's no more confusing than having Welsh relatives who live (just) on the English side of the border, and while all their children's births are registered in England, their marriages and deaths were frequently registered in Wales. (A lot of the family also lived not far away on the Welsh side of the border)

I am definitely hoping those certificates answer my questions, which my last two orders didn't - as I was looking for confirmation about Elizabeth's eldest illegitimate son, Samuel. Unfortunately the marriage cert I ordered gives an age which is 2 years out, and filled in the father's name with a name I don't recognise - either faked or I have the wrong Samuel. It's a bit of a pain that Samuel seems to have dropped the very distinctive middle name his mother gave him (which I presume is his father's surname), unlike his younger brother, who kept his full three names and they neatly appear on all his documentation.

That is quite confusing Bob! It must have been a little bit of a hit when she refused to use the name her mother shared with her!

 

[peter]

I had a similar issue with the number of living and dead children in the 1911 census and even after cross-checking all the possible births in the registration area and subsequently, following the upgrade at GRO, checking the mother's maiden name I was still missing one birth and can only put it down to either a premature (dead) birth or a still birth - there is a vague family story about this.

The mother's maiden name in the new GRO indexes isn't always the one you are expecting.

 

[jorghes]

So the register entries have arrived and now it's official!

Joseph James Rudge (1892-1893) and Violet Maud Rudge (1897-1898) are both children of Elizabeth - neatly filled in on both their birth and death certificates - since their mother was the one who had to register their deaths, and they were added as "child of Enoch Rudge". Each also has the same address.

I also now have "Hannah"''s birth register, which also places her into Elizabeth's family (same address if any other confirmation beyond the parents names are needed) and her birthdate given is 10 May 1894.

It's so nice when the ducks line up as it were.

So I now have Elizabeth's 12 legitimate children, as listed in her 1911 census entry (and not including her two illegitimate sons), including the two who died. I have also pretty much solved the problem of "Rose" and "Hannah", since it is more than likely they are the same person, and she was simply called Rose, and then melded the two to "Rosanna".

So Elizabeth's 12 children with Enoch were:
Elizabeth (1886-1962), Mary Ann (1888-?), Florence (1890-?), Eliza Jane (1891-1961), Joseph James (1892-1893), Hannah/Rosanna (1894-1985), Edith (1896-?), Violet Maud (1897-1898), Beatrice May (1901-1987) and Enoch William (1903-1973).
Add her two illegitimate boys - Samuel Leadbetter Lowe (1880-?) and John Thomas Jones Lowe (1884-1972), and she had an impressive 14 children over 23 years and lost only 2 of them as infants.

That is quite some accomplishment for a woman who worked in the collieries and didn't know how to read or write.

I want to simply say thank you to everyone who offered ideas to help me and who helped me find my three missing children. It has been a great investigation and I have appreciated every suggestion, idea, and comment made. I still have a few spots to fill - a few too many question marks on deaths - and blanks when looking for marriages, and I would love to know what happened to Samuel (which is annoying since he seems to have dropped the "Leadbetter" in official documents in his 20s.).

But that's a search for tomorrow!

And just to finish off, here's a photo of my formidable great-great-great-grandmother Elizabeth. I think she must have been quite an impressive woman.