Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It's a bit tricky if it's an image. If it's a photo on a webpage then you can do a deeplink to it by pressing the insert image url thing, you can generally find an images url by right clicking it and viewing its propoerties.


If it's your own photo then it's a bit toughter. I generally post it on flickr as a private photo so that it doesn't clutter the photostream, then deeplink to it there.




that's me showing off now ;-P

You can always set up an account with Imageshack - it takes a couple of minutes and from there you can upload photos quite easily. http://www.imageshack.us


I too feel the warmth and a sudden wave of goodwill to all men (and women!). The flutter of peace on my face has redeemed my faith in human kind.


In the spirit of our new found nirvana I thought I'd finish off my little map and add East Duwlich (outline in black) and the Village/Central area and Common (circled in blue) so that there is an overall impression of where the areas relate.


http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/9910/allofdulwichdc1.jpg

http://img525.imageshack.us/img525/9910/allofdulwichdc1.013b5d9c88.jpg


Back in ye old days the entire manor of Dulwich incorporated roughly the area highlighted (although it was slightly smaller on the East part (I believe Lordship Lane was the dividing line) and on the West (Croxted Road was more or less the dividing line) and larger on the Southern part (extending into what are now Sydenham Hill and Duwlich and Sydenham Woods and reaching right up to Crystal Palace Park).

The harvester is where Lordship Lane and Dulwich Common intersect (Red and Black lines on the right). The concrete house is located just further along Lordship Lane where it meets London Road.


Mockney - I didn't mean to leave North Dulwich out but it's so small and is really a marketing ploy by estate agents. If anything it is really Herne Hill although I know that will irk anyone who lives there. Re: South Dulwich - there are only a few hundred people living in their large detached houses/private apartments and perhaps a thousand on the estate housing the old Kingswood house (below)


http://img107.imageshack.us/img107/6522/kingswoodqy4.jpg


http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/1434/kingswood1ie0.jpg


beyond that there is more greenery (i.e. Dulwich and Sydenham Woods) than concrete. The local church St Stephens states its address as South Dulwich.


http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/9875/ststephenschurchto9.jpg



As said before it is often referred to as West Dulwich or on its extremeties as Gipsy Hill.

That's because this whole part of Dulwich was wooded and the separation of Sydenham and Dulwich far more pronounced. So the station was called Sydenham Hill to mark its location to the rest of Dulwich i.e. on the approach to Sydenham Hill in a clearing in Dulwich Woods http://www.ideal-homes.org.uk/southwark/dulwich/sydenham-hill-station.htm . But if you take Dulwich to be the land owned by the Dulwich estate it is more Dulwich than all the areas on the east of Lordship Lane which were originally part of Friern Manor Farm.

And in addition taken from St Stephens website: History


Built 1867 - 75; consecrated 1868

Architect; Banks and Barry

Listed Grade II


In 1868, only a handful of people lived in the leafy part of Surrey now known as Dulwich, on a few dairy farms and in modern gracious villas.


St. Stephen, in the woods on College Road, a beautiful neo-gothic church, was commissioned from the famous Victorian architect, Sir Charles Barry, to seat a congregation of seven hundred. The church was built by private subscription without endowments, and with the extra gift of a fresco by Sir Edward Poynter


Their website proclaims South Dulwich at the top: http://www.ststephensdulwich.org/history.html and so does a history of one house on College Road "Dunlica" (now St John's Wood house) which reads


A tall, old-looking detached house on College Rd (pleasant road which runs between Dulwich College and a park), Dulwich (the S end, this location also described as in "South Dulwich"), SC London (London SE21).


http://humphrysfamilytree.com/OMeara/dunlica.html

:))>>The harvester is where Lordship Lane and Dulwich Common intersect (Red and Black lines on the right). The concrete >>house is located just further along Lordship Lane where it meets London Road. <<


Oh yes I did realise that. I meant that from the map and according to the borders added they appear not to be in either East Dulwich or West Dulwich....so where are they?

As said this is only a rough outline - I knew I should have put a disclaimer up! Re electoral wards - they never match be they in Dulwich or Dundee. Just depends on which governing party needs the votes titled in their favour. 'Most' of the old Dulwich constituency was merged with West Norwood to form what we know today but that still leaves out Peckham Rye, South Camberwell ward and parts of The Lanes which went over to Peckham and Camberwell ward. The current Dulwich and West Norwood ward acquired parts of Thurlow Park, Herne Hill and Coldharbour from Streatham and Vauxhall ward.

Here's something over in West Dulwich - there's a family centre in Chatsworth Baptist Church, I took my little boy over to a parent and child group there today. Pretty good. Took ten minutes from my place in ED and I drove past loads of beautiful houses in the tree lined streets over that way just wishing that ED housing stock was as well-built. But however nice it is, it is not East Dulwich - it's too quiet, too...too...suburban. Is it simply because it's south of the South Circular?


citizen

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...