It was thought to be Penge station before being identified as Lordship Lane. One point of interest is that it contains no people but somehow the Courtauld Institute know there was originally someone cutting grass on the right but Pissarro painted the grass-cutter out.
I’m liking Michael’s first photo from above and the rationale of the track direction - it’s likely west. What idiot would ever have thought east? Only a fool, obviously!
Best regards
The Adlibber
3 Likes
Fascinating. How do they know that? Did he keep a diary?
Regrettably that wasn’t explained but the Courtauld have the painting so maybe also a diary or notes or perhaps x-rays. It was mentioned in only a very short article I read here:
https://sites.courtauld.ac.uk/aah/camille-pissarro-lordship-lane-station-dulwich-1871/
Reference is made here to the painting being of Penge station in a Norwood Society article from 1963:
https://www.norwoodsociety.co.uk/articles/73-pissarro-an-additional-piece.html
If you’re interested, there’s a 12 minute talk (podcast) at the Courtauld about the painting and the artist you might enjoy that can be found here:
Best regards
The Adlibber
1 Like
Great links.
In the days of steam railway cuttings and embankments were always kept free of vegetation to prevent fires so highly likely there was someone scything away and spoiling the composition.
this pic appeared on Twitter recently, the original wooden bridge from which Pissarro painted Lordship Lane station. Don’t know the date - guessing around 1900 from the dress of the two children pictured?
3 Likes
What a lot of work went into that bridge, look at the balustrade.
The present bridge has been closed for years. I believe this is because the western brick abutment has been damaged by tree roots and then two tree preservation orders were placed on the trees causing the damage under pressure from tree enthusiasts. Am I right in this?
If so perhaps the Ramblers Association should be contacted as they are hot on keeping rights of way open and they could counterbalance the tree lobby!
I think the trees should come down, there are plenty more in the wood.
The original bridge was rather fine wasnt it. This would be down to the Dulwich Estate which, when agreeing to the new railway line on their land, set high design values on the bridges to be used in their area. You can see that in the remaining ornate rail bridges in the Dulwich/ Herne Hill area. And also the lost Lordship Lane bridge shown in this thread. I don’t know of any other footbridges like the one in Sydenham Woods though.
https://www.facebook.com/106986070934851/posts/443196633980458/?d=n
There are updates here. Sounds as though Southwark Council are well aware of their obligations, but v slow to take action, and the bridge remains closed.
The footbridge has now been closed for two years. This is not because of cracks in the wall, but the timber superstructure (only about 20 years old) had been allowed to rot and huge chunks were falling off.
The oak trees have not caused the damage to the wall but they are very close to it, which means more care would be needed to repair the abutment with them in place. This is what Southwark is supposed to be working out how to do, but the last update from them was March 2021. Hopefully they will produce a report and consult on it over the summer in time for the work to be done autumn/winter 2022. The official bird breeding season starts on Tuesday, so no work could be done now until the autumn.
1 Like