Kent History Forum

News:
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Brompton  (Read 7916 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline smiffy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 780
  • Appreciation 53
Re: Brompton
« Reply #31 on: March 17, 2017, 17:50:34 »
That's all that's stated - Grade II listed building, main construction periods 1745 to 1745. Wouldn't the construction date be on the deeds?

Offline bromptonboy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Appreciation 32
Re: Brompton
« Reply #30 on: March 17, 2017, 17:23:24 »
Hmmm. Has the owner taken the carved date as their evidence or do they have information from deeds?

Offline smiffy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 780
  • Appreciation 53
Re: Brompton
« Reply #29 on: March 16, 2017, 22:57:31 »
A little bit of additional information. The Listed Building designation states that the building is dated to 1745 by the owner.

Offline CAT

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 124
  • Appreciation 8
Re: Brompton
« Reply #28 on: February 27, 2017, 21:39:47 »
Not just latin, J and I were regarded as the same interchangeable letters well into the end of the eighteenth-century.

Offline davpott

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 280
  • Appreciation 43
Re: Brompton
« Reply #27 on: February 27, 2017, 21:28:59 »
On a longshot I did consult my list of 18th century Brompton Residents, but sadly there are none with the initials "L.P." but that is not surprising as I only have 400 or so names on the list at present, and many thousands of people must have lived in Brompton during the course of the 18th century as this was the period of Brompton's foundation and growth.

In latin J and I are interchangeable. so it could be J.P.

Offline smiffy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 780
  • Appreciation 53
Re: Brompton
« Reply #26 on: January 11, 2017, 17:15:07 »
Looking at the original there is some question as to whether it says " L P" or that it may be actually be "I P". By the way, looking at an old map there seems to have been an identical pair of buildings exactly opposite, also long demolished.

Offline Leofwine

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2337
  • Appreciation 349
  • Today is only yesterday's tomorrow
    • Brompton: Then & Now
Re: Brompton
« Reply #25 on: January 11, 2017, 15:50:17 »
On a longshot I did consult my list of 18th century Brompton Residents, but sadly there are none with the initials "L.P." but that is not surprising as I only have 400 or so names on the list at present, and many thousands of people must have lived in Brompton during the course of the 18th century as this was the period of Brompton's foundation and growth.

Offline Leofwine

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2337
  • Appreciation 349
  • Today is only yesterday's tomorrow
    • Brompton: Then & Now
Re: Brompton
« Reply #24 on: January 11, 2017, 15:42:14 »
This pair of buildings were a pair of four buildings forming a small terrace here, all of which were scheduled for compulsory purchase and demolition in the 50s, since they were "unfit for human habitation."  This was the fate of most of Brompton at this time. Fortunately the owner's resisted and took it to national rather than local level, and the buildings were scheduled rather than demolished. Sadly the owners of the neighbouring pair didn't so they were demolished and replaced with the ugly 1950s/60s flats that now stand in their place.

In terms of the age of the building, that part of Garden Street appears to have been built between about 1730 and 1750, so that ties in with the date on the brick. Unfortunately it doesn't help with establishing if the graffiti was done once the building was erected, or when the brick was manufactured. (Of course answering that could help date the building more closely!)

Offline CAT

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 124
  • Appreciation 8
Re: Brompton
« Reply #23 on: January 04, 2017, 18:40:40 »
Having looked at the front of 22-24 Garden Street on GSV certainly shows that the building, which despite being a very symmetrical facade, would conform to the architecture of the first half of the eighteenth-century. Despite its facade, it is two separate dwellings either side of an axial passageway aligned perpendicular with the road leading to the rear gardens. Each property should be entered from a doorway part-way along the passage providing access to the centre of the house, with one room to the front and one to the rear. Each property may have had a further small scullery room to the rear, but often not. Above each main room would be a corresponding pair of bedrooms, all in all forming a typical two up, two down. However, as the early origins to Brompton was as a proper laid out town for the better classes, this simple house design was placed behind a grander facade, maintaining a sense of opulence.

Offline smiffy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 780
  • Appreciation 53
Re: Brompton
« Reply #22 on: January 02, 2017, 23:43:00 »
I know that this building is pretty old, but I am uncertain as to the date of construction. There are some other people on the forum that are very knowledgeable regarding Brompton history that might well be able to throw a bit of light on this.

Offline CAT

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 124
  • Appreciation 8
Re: Brompton
« Reply #21 on: January 02, 2017, 22:17:39 »
Fantastic find these little treasures,  however it must be ascertained whether the date is contemporary with the brick (inscribed on the brick when it was unfired then used in a wall constructed in 1745), inscribed on the brick after it was fired and used in a wall predating the date or an inscribed earlier date on a later wall? The matter can become more confused if an earlier inscribed brick is reused in a later constructed wall? Is there any other method of confirming the wall predates the inscription?

Inscriptions are fantastic things, but can present a multitude of pitfalls.

Offline conan

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 887
  • Appreciation 64
Re: Brompton
« Reply #20 on: January 02, 2017, 19:44:29 »
1745 is the date of the Jacobite rebellion, I wonder whether LP fought against the Scots and was commemorating the fact.
To remain ignorant of what happened before you were born is to remain a child......Cicero

Offline smiffy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 780
  • Appreciation 53
Re: Brompton
« Reply #19 on: January 02, 2017, 15:10:12 »
Spotted this piece of graffiti on the front of 22 Garden Street the other day. It's in plain sight but I've never noticed it before.


Offline Leofwine

  • Established Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2337
  • Appreciation 349
  • Today is only yesterday's tomorrow
    • Brompton: Then & Now
Re: Brompton
« Reply #18 on: July 26, 2011, 13:09:21 »
In the 18th century the area where Brompton Barracks now stands was woodland known as Brompton Wood. This woodland does seem to have been gradually felled throughout the century, but I don't think it would have been called Brompton Common. The two most likely candidates to my mind are either the Great lines, or Brompton Hill across to Amherst Hill. The latter appears in many images of the period and seems to have been used for grazing livestock and social gatherings, typically features of common land.  Some of this land became Chatham Barracks, but most remained un-built on until the first half of the 19th century. The Great Lines served similar purposes, but I suspect that in a military document this area would have been named by its military name (Lines or field of fire or something similar).

Offline bromptonboy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
  • Appreciation 32
Re: Brompton
« Reply #17 on: July 26, 2011, 10:09:17 »
Brampton is another version recorded. In the publication entitled "Historical record of the Royal Sherwood Foresters, or Nottinghamshire regiment of militia" it is stated that 'In the summer of 1782, the detachments of the Nottinghamshire Militia were called together, and the whole regiment was encamped on Brampton Common, in Kent. Here, the principal duty of the regiment was to mount guard over the stores and batteries in the neighbouring garrison of Chatham.

It would be easy to assume that the 'Brampton Common' referred to is what we now call the Great Lines, but I have a thought that it might refer to the area of ground that was just north of Brompton and eventually occupied by Brompton Barracks, or, to the area of grassland now known as the Inner Lines.

 

BloQcs design by Bloc
SMF 2.0.11 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines