In several local history books about Penge, "Barnard's Farm" is assumed to be an old name for Penge Place; however, Penge Place was formerly known as Swingate Farm, and there were two other buildings located a little to the south on the same patch of illegally enclosed common land. Like nearly all pre-enclosure buildings that stood in the heart of the hamlet, these two buildings on higher ground have simply been ignored. The only source for the name Barnard's Farm that I'm aware of comes from the 1745 Rocque map, but which group of buildings does it refer to? Left of the name (two unknown buildings) or right (Penge Place)?
Another thing: where do you suspect the elusive lodge to Penge Place was located? Could Rockhills have been the lodge before Paxton moved in and extended it? There also seems to have been a building opposite. Also, there were two more buildings halfway down Old Cople Lane at junction with the footpath leading to Sydenham.
Ken Kiss, who is very knowledgeable on maps, believes that the caption refers to the southern group of buildings. What's more, Ken has generously given me a gorgeous painting (colour-tinted by his own hand) showing this corner of Penge Common (including land in Norwood Common) with the farmhouse seen in the distance. It's referred to in the book, "The Phoenix Suburb", as Fox's Farm. As always, more research still needs to be done.
I follow your posts with intrest - as to the site of penge place unless I missed it, where is it or is it a secret between you and ken - keep up the good work, but please dont keep us in suspense.
The location of Penge Place itself is the easy part; see [this] topic.
There is no secrets between Ken and I. It's just that Ken is the only person whose been discussing pre-enclosure Penge with me. As you can see from all the unanswered topics I've posted on this forum, all my work on neighbouring Penge has generated no interest from anyone else. It's quite disappointing really. There's been some excellent finds lately in the form of early unseen illustrations depicting medieval buildings in Penge. It's almost up there with Terry's walk around the Nave, which has had an equally disappointing lack of interest, feedback and discussion.
Well Falkor, if the people who could give the interest you require and who are interested in the subject and hold info on the subject get removed from the site for expressing an opinion thats just a loss to the site isnt it?
Sorry to all the authors of the forum, for not recognising your efforts and making a response - I assure you, if the information was not as good as it is, then it is certain that members would respond.
To all the authours of the forum, with their postings and arguments. It is this that make our forum the best local forum on the net - well done to all and I will make more effort to aknowledge posts in future
Well Falkor, if the people who could give the interest you require and who are interested in the subject and hold info on the subject get removed from the site for expressing an opinion thats just a loss to the site isnt it?
Yes, I agree. If somebody could show interest and share their knowledge on a subject yet be removed from the forum for expressing an opinion then that is indeed a loss to our community.
So where's it all gone wrong? What lessons can be learnt?
Falkor wrote:If somebody could show interest and share their knowledge on a subject yet be removed from the forum for expressing an opinion then that is indeed a loss to our community.
