From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Southwark:
  • Some sections (theatres etc.) might be better split off to Bankside
  • Demography section
  • Edit down repetition in history section; check with sources
  • Relationship with City needs special attention
  • Transport section
  • History: Manors [1]


My map shows Southwark and The Borough as separate areas. London Borough of Southwark lists them both. ( 12:36, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

It's really quite confusing, but the Borough Market's website claims this is so. Note there are three regions called Southwark. These are the original village of Southwark and its urban area, the expanded Metropolitan Borough of Southwark (including places like Walworth and Newington), and the London Borough of Southwark (including Camberwell and Bermondsey). If your map is like mine it will probably show 'Southwark' and 'The Borough' on it both, but with 'The Borough' in smaller type, indicating that the Southwark is referring to the broader area.
If you look at Southwark council's website you'll find no place named Southwark, just a Borough and Bankside community council area. If you can find out definitely that this is wrong then please change it. Morwen 12:43, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)
the use of 'the borough' for southwark has never been as specific as the use of 'the city' for the city of london. both before and after its annexation by the city in 1550, southwark has been a rather tangled web of jurisdictions. as an example, before 1550 southwark more or less referred to the area comprised of three manors (guildable, king's, and great liberty) and two liberties (paris garden--an area of direct royal control--and the clink, under the jurisdiction of the bishop of winchester). it's not clear which hundred any of those areas fell into. in 1550 the three manors became the city's 26th ward (bridge ward without), though surrey JPs still claimed some jurisdiction there, and st saviour's parish spanned the city's ward and the liberty of the clink. all of which is simply to say that calling southwark 'the borough' is historically accurate, though it doesn't by any means coincide with the modern metropolitan borough of southwark. Ptomng 15:50, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

It sounds like you have your work cut out. I'm afraid that at the moment, the first sentence is incomprehensible :( -- Tarquin 12:55, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

How is that? Morwen 13:03, 1 Nov 2003 (UTC)

better. thanks :) -- Tarquin

I think you left out the area of Southwark Cathedral. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alec - U.K. (talkcontribs) .

Sarf of the river[edit]

Has anyone actually heard anyone else say "[ˈsʌvək]"? --stochata 13:28, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Besides the people that live and/or work there? I do feel slightly uneasy about including it, however, since it's certainly non-standard. BovineBeast 11:18, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
I was under the impression that the transform of dental fricatives to labio-dental fricatives was a standard feature of the dialects (and fairly common in esturary English, too). So, I am not sure if you could call it 'non-standard' in the sense of 'uncommon', but definitely not RP :). I think that it might tend more towards unvoiced, and to my ears has sounded rather more f-ey than v-ey, although vocalisation is present (intervocalic as it is). I think that it is just to include local pronunciations, after who has more right to the name? Anonymous Coward 9:10, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
As I local I think we say ˈsʌðək - I don't think the cockney v is in that much usage locally. I may be wrong though. It certainly isn't the local standard. Secretlondon 03:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Civil administration[edit]

Hi. Thanks for adding the details of the civil administration prior to the Metropolitan Borough of Southwark. Two points, first its a bit notelike, and second I think it would be better placed in that article since that deals with prior civil administrations for the area. What do you think? cheers Kbthompson (talk) 08:18, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response Kb. Civil admin, parishes, manors vestries etc I placed it here because I wanted to address the issues and confusions made by the contributors above, the confusion as to what 'Southwark' is or was. I wanted to make clear the distinction between the historic place and the modern, ie twentieth century,local and municipal structures, which just happen to have adopted the name 'Southwark' into their titles. The other articles are about local government, not history. I made a similar contribution on the 'Bermondsey' article, which has even more confused contributions. As I point out on the talk page there, you cannot discuss this type of location name without being period specific. (talk) 01:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC) (Tony S)

Borough the same as Southwark?[edit]

I don't think locals would necessarily say that Southwark and (the) Borough are the same place. Southwark seems to me to cover a much bigger area; Borough is a section of Southwark. Whatever the official position, might this be worth mentioning in the page? It's a subject that has received some attention on the local community web site, which is Macphysto (talk) 18:50, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

horselydown lane[edit]

This is a remnant from Gropecunt Lane which I thought I'd place in this article, but to my surprise nothing is written about the prostitution therein. Anyway, I'll put it here instead. The citation is below.

  • Another street with a similar history in Southwark is Horselydown Lane. It has been suggested that this derives from "whores lie down";[1] however it is more likely to derive from "horse lea"—a lea (meadow) for grazing horses.[2]

Parrot of Doom (talk) 20:19, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Nope. The history of the name is pretty clear from contemporary records. It is to do with horse grazing and the local Fair Streeet, was the horse fair. (talk) 07:15, 7 October 2009 (UTC) Tony S.

Technical Language[edit]

"From the Norman period manorial organisation obtained through major lay and ecclesiastic magnates."

Isn't that a rather archaic use of "to obtain"? I had to read the sentence three times before I figured out which word was the verb! Sergeirichard (talk) 22:54, 27 May 2009 (UTC) Nope, standard English at a secondary educational level. (talk) 07:17, 7 October 2009 (UTC) Tony S


Can anyone add voice files for how Southwark is pronounced worldwide as well as locally? Thanks--Rosswood40 (talk) 12:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I think that all one has to remember is that it is not pronounced as it is spelled by UK English speakers, but that both parts are elided. (talk) 07:22, 7 October 2009 (UTC) Tony S

Thanks--Rosswood40 (talk) 02:32, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Ancient borough[edit]

Note from Youngs that the ancient borough comprised:

Need to work this into the prose of article. MRSC (talk) 11:27, 4 September 2010 (UTC)


As it stands, the article contradicts itself. Is it the Surrey Wark or the South Wark? Dadge (talk) 13:13, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi - it started as Surrey - 'Suth' is the 'Southern Middle Saxons' - then the 'South' meaning south of the City became the meaning. So it is both. Tony S (talk) 15:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Well, if it began as one, and then was/is the other, then it isn't both. I think it'd be better to describe the name as the south form/meaning, which seems to have been the case since Domesday, and then explain that the place previously (i.e. before Domesday) had a similar, but different, name, with a different form/meaning. (That is, unless the south form/meaning derives from the Surrey form/meaning in any way, which the article states it does not.) Dadge (talk) 10:57, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

  1. ^ Horsler 2006, p. 20.
  2. ^ Walford 1878, pp. 100–117.