Jump to content

Recommended Posts

In 1901 family sizes tended to be much larger (and in addition there would have been resident servants), and many houses would have had (in the poorer areas) multiple families living in them. Most middle-class families in 1901 would have had at least one resident domestic servant, upper-middle class houses perhaps two or three. The number of new houses in the area (outwith individual houses which replaced bomb-damaged houses) are mainly the big blocks of flats, which themselves replaced exisiting tenements, which would tend to be highly occuied.


Considering that by 1901 ED was already pretty built-up, 20% population growth doesn't seem unreasonable. Compare those resident in the City of London in 1901 and now, where there has been (I believe) a population collapse.


Edited to say - I hadn't noticed that the original figures may not both have been 'ward' based - if 'Dulwich' is being compared with ED ward then, whilst my general comments probably still hold, the growth rate I suggest is rubbish.

The overall population of London is up about 30% in that period, so a 20% increase is respectable in an area which was largely built by then. My suspicion is that it's rocketed/recovered recently too as 15 years ago - none of them flats in Goose Green, flats/houses at the Top of Henslowe Road, the Wood yard, all those by Sainsbury's and opposite the station existed there's a fair few properties in that lot alone...plus several other new developments

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The overall population of London is up about 30%

> in that period, so a 20% increase is respectable

> in an area which was largely built by then. My

> suspicion is that it's rocketed/recovered recently

> too as 15 years ago - none of them flats in Goose

> Green, flats/houses at the Top of Henslowe Road,

> the Wood yard, all those by Sainsbury's and

> opposite the station existed there's a fair few

> properties in that lot alone...plus several other

> new developments


I don't think though the estates on Dog Kennel Hill and Champion Hill or the Lordship Lane Estate had been built in 1901 which must have increased the population of ED significantly. The population could possibly have been higher in the intervening years than the figure of just over 12,000 quoted in the 2011 census. To balance this, as P68 says, families were larger and some houses had multi family occupancy whereas today there are many dwellings occupied by just single people or couples.

kford Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> According to the Census, in 1901 there were three

> families - eight people - crammed into our

> Victorian three-bed terrace in ED. No bathroom,

> and an outside loo. God knows how they managed.



Luckily there is an inside loo & bathroom these days but couples with 2 kids are expected to manage in a one bedroom flat so times haven't really changed at all.

When I was born I lived in a old house in East Surrey Grove Peckham

with

my Mum & Dad

my Nan & Granddad

My Uncle

a Lodger.


Mice.


There was no Electricity. Just gas light.


No Bathroom. Just a single cold tap.


An outside toilet.


Lucky B******s we were.


That's how things were in the 50's


DulwichFox

My father-in-law grew up in what he considered a large 4 bed Victorian house in North London in the 50s and 60s. Out of curiosity, we looked it up on Rightmove, under sold houses and its now configured as a two bed.


When his family lived there, the 2nd downstairs reception room was his parents' room. The dining room was in the narrow k!tchen and the only bathroom was downstairs behind the k!tchen. There was a loo (no sink) upstairs along with 3 bedrooms. His 3 sisters shared the biggest room by choice and he had his own room which meant there was a spare bedroom.


The current owners knocked through the two reception rooms into a through lounge. The k!tchen was extended into the old bathroom. They moved the bathroom upstairs and lost the back bedroom as a result, so now it?s a 2 bed house.


He couldn?t believe it!

London's population grew from the 19th century peaking in 1939. It then declined to a low in the 90's but has increased since, particularly in the last 10 years, but still not quite back to its 39 peak. People are still leaving in large numbers, but are being replaced by large amounts of immigration mostly from within the EU. Although inner London has seen a huge rise in percentage terms in the last 20 years it's still below the 1861 census figures.

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

    • These have reduced over the years, are "perfect" lives Round Robins being replaced by "perfect" lives Instagram posts where we see all year round how people portray their perfect lives ?    The point of this thread is that for the last few years, due to issues at the mail offices, we had delays to post over Christmas. Not really been flagged as an issue this year but I am still betting on the odd card, posted well before Christmas, arriving late January. 
    • Two subjects here.  Xmas cards,  We receive and send less of them.  One reason is that the cost of postage - although interestingly not as much as I thought say compared to 10 years ago (a little more than inflation).  Fun fact when inflation was double digits in the 70s cost of postage almost doubled in one year.  Postage is not a good indication of general inflation fluctuating a fair bit.  The huge rise in international postage that for a 20g Christmas card to Europe (no longer a 20g price, now have to do up to 100g), or a cheapskate 10g card to the 'States (again have to go up to the 100g price) , both around a quid in 2015, and now has more than doubled in real terms.  Cards exchanged with the US last year were arriving in the New Year.  Funnily enough they came much quicker this year.  So all my cards abroad were by email this year. The other reason we send less cards is that it was once a good opportunity to keep in touch with news.  I still personalise many cards with a news and for some a letter, and am a bit grumpy when I get a single line back,  Or worse a round robin about their perfect lives and families.  But most of us now communicate I expect primarily by WhatApp, email, FB etc.  No need for lightweight airmail envelope and paper in one.    The other subject is the mail as a whole. Privitisation appears to have done it no favours and the opening up of competition with restrictions on competing for parcel post with the new entrants.  Clearly unless you do special delivery there is a good chance that first class will not be delivered in a day as was expected in the past.   Should we have kept a public owned service subsidised by the tax payer?  You could also question how much lead on innovation was lost following the hiving off of the national telecommunications and mail network.
    • Why have I got a feeling there was also a connection with the beehive in Brixton on that road next to the gym
    • Ah, thanks,  it all comes flooding back. I've actually been to the Hastings shop, I'd forgotten all about it, along with her name! Didn't she (in between?)  take over what  was then The Magnolia, previously The Magdala, now The Lordship, with her then partner? Or is that some figment of my imagination?  In fact, didn't they transform it from The Magdala (much missed) to The Magnolia? With flowery wallpaper covering the front of the bar? Which reminds me of the pub's brief period after The Magnolia  as the ill-conceived and ill-fated The Patch.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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