The Surrey Thread

[zenie]

Are you from Surrey then Teejay?

I already listed some of those fact

 

[TeeJay]

Yes, I currently I live in Surrey (not too far from Guildford) and have on and off since around 1977-ish (including a 5 year period in Herne Hill). I was born in the US, so I am an immigrant with my first UK place of residence being Tooting, aged 2. Is that good enough?

*checks Surrey identification papers*

 

[zenie]

Well I would congratulate you on being from Surrey - but I dont think it's anything to write home about really.

So when people ask you where you're from do you say Surrey?

(and do they ask you again and think it's fuckin funny? )

 

[Hollis]

* In June 1497 the county was overrun by as many as 15,000 Cornish rebels heading for London who managed to march through Wallington and Brixton Hundreds and as far as Blackheath in Kent where they eventually ran out of scrumpy and returned home.

I should like to point a factual inaccuracy at this point.. A high proportion of the so-called "Cornish" rebels were in fact folk from the county of Somerset..

Specific details to follow.

 

[zenie]

I should like to point a factual inaccuracy at this point.. A high proportion of the so-called "Cornish" rebels were in fact folk from the county of Somerset..

Specific details to follow.

What the fuck were they rebelling against though?

 

[Hollis]

"Along with Flamank, they led an army of some 3,000 soldiers from Bodmin over the River Tamar into England.

Flamank persuaded the rebels that they should march peacefully to carry their grievances to the English king, Henry VII. They had only bows and arrows and simple country tools, and they marched without violence receiving support along the way. Their numbers increased daily and so did their fervour. In Somerset their numbers swelled to over 5,000 and included James Touchet, Lord Audley. They clearly intended to fight for what they saw as justice."

The horrible Normans, 'cause the Normans were taxing them. innit.

http://www.fantompowa.net/Flame/cornish_rebels_1497.html

 

[tim]

They fucking are X a squillion.

How can Sunbury & Ashford be in Middlesex, when Middlesex doesn't exist?

It exists, but under imperial occupation, rather like Gaza and the West Bank. Poland was occupied by the Russians Prusssians and Austrians between the eighteenth and twentieth centuries - that didn't stop it from existing or regaining its independence.


The railway companies also still think their stations are in Middlesex. Mind you, they are also under the impression that Ashford is in Greater London

Station Facilities: Ashford (Middlesex) (AFS)
Managed by South West Trains
Station Approach
Ashford
Greater London
TW15 2QN

 

[butterfly child]

So you're basing your arguement on SW Trains?

*falls off chair*

 

[tim]

So you're basing your arguement on SW Trains?

*falls off chair*

No better place for an argument than a SouthWest train. One of my students got trapped in one of their high tech tiolets today -we were on one of the regal Windsor line.

"Guard, Guard we have a young lady locked in the lavatory" I bellowed down the platform. She was there from Richmond to Puteney, fortunately everyone knew she was there. Can't help thinking though there are trains all over South East England with the putrefying corpses of less fortunate commuters behind immured at either end of those fancy new carriages. A bit like that creeepy Spanish phone-box film.

 

[netbob]

Anyone else have glamourous Chertsey as their place of birth on their passport? It's always pissed me off for some reason.

 

[Dan U]

* In June 1497 the county was overrun by as many as 15,000 Cornish rebels heading for London who managed to march through Wallington and Brixton Hundreds and as far as Blackheath in Kent where they eventually ran out of scrumpy and returned home.

i used to live in wallington

i had a history book of the area and from wallington to mitcham was pretty much lavender fields until just before WW2 iirc. anyone who knows the area would prolly wish it still was. mitcham

 

[Groucho]

Who??

Cliff's just moved out?

I know he has just moved out (or is about to) cos you told me. That's why I said "St George's Hill has recently been home to a scumboid of the highest order."

He's a mate of Blair's you know - that doesn't surprise me, I bet he's urging Blair on to stoke the fires of war. One day it'll all come to light how he had Jill Dando killed and Princess Diana too, and how he is supplier to the Royals (Queen Mum loved her cocaine, Di and Dodi did the lot, the Queen apparently just settles for a joint at bedtime.) This knowledge is hard to carry with me, I have to constantly look over my shoulder, and dare not tell anyone. Or the Cliff maffia will get me.

 

[zenie]

Anyone else have glamourous Chertsey as their place of birth on their passport? It's always pissed me off for some reason.

How old are you by the way?

*small world*

 

[netbob]

How old are you by the way?

*small world*

It is! it's all thown me a bit to be honest

28. Born at St Peters (the one with the orange busses) on 1st May (always been quite chuffed with that B'day) 1978

 

[zenie]

It is, it's all thown me a bit to be honest

28. Born at St Peters (the one wiht the orange busses) on 1st May (always been quite chuffed with that B'day) 1978

hahaha!!

Too young to know people you might know or actually I might not be!!

I wont mention real names on the internet but had I known all this in the pub the other night I'd have probably had your ear off for a while!!

 

[lang rabbie]

I've always seen Dulwich as "in Southwark", Brixton as "in Lambeth" and Streatham "in Wandsworth". And you know what?

They are.

Ahem...

Streatham (and Clapham) have been in the London Borough of Lambeth since 1965. Uniquely in London local government, the modern borough of Wandsworth only got the north-western half of the old Metropolitan Borough of the same name. In compensation Wandsworth annexed the former MB of Battersea.

 

[gaijingirl]

Surrey originally simply meant "south of the river".

In my Brixton history book it says:

"Once the whole region was under unified control as Surrey (literally the Southern Region of the kingdom of Middlesex)."

So actually it looks like we all live in Middlesex after all.

Who'da thunk it eh?

 

[BadlyDrawnGirl]

You wait - you'll upset acid priest and he'll come after you all screaming
CROYDON AINT IN SURREY

<sharpens pitchfork>

 

[BadlyDrawnGirl]

none of this is true, of course. all those places are in gtr London, and middlesex does not exist, and nor should it.

Old bean, you make perfect sense.

And I agree, Croydon isn't in London at all. Croydon is in Greater London.

And what a superb place it is, too.



<Dies>

 

[nick]

The town of Dorking is named after a type of chicken (it has an extra spur or something)

Dante had Leatherhead in mind when writing about his inferno

 

[Guineveretoo]

Rather surprised today to discover that Croydon has a Palace. If your excited by the idea, £6.00 will buy you a two hour guided tour, with a cup of tea and a scone included in the price. It appears that Addington (not that I know where Addington is) also has a palace

Yeah, but one of these palaces is a school, so is not open terribly often, and the other is the former Bishop's Palace and is not much to look at.

But yeah, I knew.

Addington is south of Croydon Proper and has a horrible housing estate, but also some dead posh houses. And a palace. Which is also a golf course and hotel and popular venue for marriages.

 

[Chz]

The Surrey/London argument is a bit silly. I'm sure that people living in Dulwich and Greenwich in 1889 maintained that they were still part of Surrey and Kent, too. But as the people who remembered that state of affairs died off, they became unarguably a part of the London conurbation. The same will happen with Kingston, Croydon, Wallington, etc.

In other words, *get with the times*!

 

[xenon]

Think I might bring up the Croydon, Surrey thing again.

If one accepts that Croydon is a distinct and independent town and is not comparable to somewhere like Streatham (i.e. it takes more than a high street) then it makes little sense to talk of Croydon being "in London". In Greater London, yes, because London has subsumed it and there's no gap between the two - but not in London. Didn't Croydon make a bid for city status last time round? Before anyone brings up the London/Westminster thing this is not a valid analogy but you can't really have one city within another city. Therefore Croydon is not in London.

Equally:

Ilford is not in London
Bromley is not in London and Orpington is even less in London
Kingston is not in London.

London is only W,WC, E, EC, N, NW, SE and SW postcodes. Because I say so and it's final.

Thornton Heath for example is in the burrugh of Croydon. That's the London burrugh. Where I grew up it was a CR post code. 2 minutes up the road it's SE. Have I crossed some imagineary line from the home county of Surrey into London.

All just greater London innit. Although it's not actually greater.

 

[TeeJay]

The Surrey/London argument is a bit silly. I'm sure that people living in Dulwich and Greenwich in 1889 maintained that they were still part of Surrey and Kent, too. But as the people who remembered that state of affairs died off, they became unarguably a part of the London conurbation. The same will happen with Kingston, Croydon, Wallington, etc.

In other words, *get with the times*!

Get with the times? Er... Kingston and Croydon are already part of the "London conurbation" mate

Numbers 16 and 19 on this map:

However there are two ways of looking at this:

You can either accept whatever the bureacrats and the government tell you - these places are de facto "in London" simply because they have been designated as such.

On the other hand you can have your own concepts and sense of place, your own definitions and identities, you can in other words make your own mind up.

There is no denying that Greater Surrey existed for centuries within its ancient and historic boundaries and this only changed for practical reasons - to accomodate the massively expanding population of London.

While London took part of Surrey at the same time you need to recognise that a massive part of South London owns its character to that which it inherited from Surrey, a county which has its own identity just like many other parts of England and one which hasn't changed simply because bureaucrats have redrawn some lines on the map.

To be able to understand the history and culture of much of South London you need to understand that it was a part of Surrey in is still in a real sense part of 'Greater Surrey'. These kind of layers of identity build up over time and merge and combine to give place their own flavour and character.

 

[zenie]

Kingston will never be a London Borough though. It will always be royal.

That's why kingston station is only a branch and not on a mainline, it's all to do with the locals being too posh and not wanting a mainline (apparantley)

 

[lang rabbie]

Kingston will never be a London Borough though. It will always be royal.

That's why kingston station is only a branch and not on a mainline, it's all to do with the locals being too posh and not wanting a mainline (apparantley)

Surbiton was apparently once called "Kingston-on-Railway"

 

[zenie]

Surbiton was apparently once called "Kingston-on-Railway"

Source?

 

[tim]

Kingston will never be a London Borough though. It will always be royal.

That's why kingston station is only a branch and not on a mainline, it's all to do with the locals being too posh and not wanting a mainline (apparantley)

Except that the council are/were quite keen on getting city status, which means they would then lose the Royal bit. As to the station thing, it's true that's why the main trains all stop at Surbiton. Hounslow too was anti-rail in the mid-nineteenth century, scared that trains would take the stage-coach trade away, that's why the Great Western goes through Southall. We still lost the stage-coaches though and also ended up with a poxy Southern Railway loop-line.

 

[lang rabbie]

Source?

You question my omniscience?

Surbiton, although not mentioned in Domesday, existed as a farming hamlet from as early as the 12th century. But by the early 1700s its seclusion and closeness to town brought it a new role as a ‘Private Place, long mark’d to entertain / Kept Mistresses e’er since great William’s Reign’. It never had the
cachet of the lower river, and a spa at Seething Wells appears to have failed fairly swiftly.

The earliest house in Surbiton seems to have been Berrylands Farm on Surbiton Hill, but by the early 19th century a number of villas such as Surbiton House and Surbiton Lodge had been built around the hamlet, and maps show them in extensive landscaped grounds. However, with the arrival of the London and South Western Railway in 1836 after the councillors of Kingston declined a station in the town, modern Surbiton or Kingston-on-Railway as it was then known, was born. The 1808 Enclosure Act enabled the common and farm land to be comprehensively parcelled up for development, and this proceeded apace following the opening of the station in 1838. After the Surbiton Improvement Act of 1855, development was overseen and controlled by the Surbiton Improvement Commissioners. This led to a high quality of development, much of which survives, and helped to give Surbiton the title ‘Queen of the Suburbs’, a name later appropriated by Ealing.

Source

 

[TeeJay]

Kingston will never be a London Borough though. It will always be royal.

It is called "The Royal Borough..." and has a special status, just like the City of London and the City of Westminster, but it is still a London Borough in the sense that it shares more-or-less identical features to the other 31 London boroughs, is part of Greater London Authority and also the Association of London Government. In fact the only one which is not officially a London Borough is the City of London. Kensington and Chelsea also has the title "Royal Borough of...". Having this title is not mutually exclusive with being a London Borough.