TITCHFIELD
Ticefelle (xi cent.); Tichefelde (xiii and xiv cent.).
The parish of Titchfield, containing 4,826 acres,
of which 45 are covered by water, is situated to the
south-west of the county, about 2 miles from the
Solent. There are 1,491 acres of arable land, 1,239
of pasture, and 811 of woodland. (fn. 1) The ancient parish
was of wide extent, its foreshore stretching 7 miles
from the River Hamble to Stokes Bay, while it included
Swanwick, Crofton, Lee, Stubbington, Hook, Funtley,
Chark, Posbrook, Bromwich, Segenworth, and Meon.
Of these, Crofton, with Stubbington and Lee-on-theSolent. Hook with Warsash, and Sarisbury with
Swanwick were formed into civil parishes under the
Local Government Act of 1894; Sarisbury with
Swanwick, Crofton, and Hook with Warsash having
been previously constituted ecclesiastical parishes in
1837, 1871, and 1872, respectively.
Place House, Titchfield (from an Ancient Map)
The parish stretches about seven miles up the Meon
valley, and has one mile of foreshore called Titchfield
Haven on the Solent. The town itself is grouped round
a central market-place, with streets leading from it on
the north, south, and east. There are no buildings of
any particular architectural merit, but the square is
picturesque, and the Bugle Inn, with its bay windows,
gives character to it. The stocks once stood here in
front of the inn, and the market-house and cage, once
in the square, are now set up in Barry's Charity Yard
to the north-west. The market-house is a wooden
building with an open lower story, part of which,
inclosed with brickwork and lined with oak, was the
cage. The fire engine used to be kept behind it.
The church stands a short distance to the south-west
of the square, and the rectory is close to it on the
south. To the north the town extends along the
Fareham road, and at the north-west the houses
follow the road which runs northward to the ruins of
Place House. The River Meon forms the eastern
limit of the town, and though now a small stream,
was formerly a tidal harbour, for in the beginning
of the seventeenth century Titchfield was a port, and
the site of the wharves can still be traced in the tanyard close to the church. The third earl of Southampton, however, wished to reclaim the large
stretch of sea-marsh lying between the town and
the haven, and for that purpose built a sea-wall across
the river mouth, which was completed in June, 1611.
In the parish registers this is noted as the 'shutting
out of Titchfield haven by one Richard Talbottes
industrie under God's permissione.' The main road
from Southampton to Fareham passes through the
town, and the London and South-Western Railway
crosses the parish from east to west, the nearest station
being Fareham, about two miles distant. To the north
are the ruins of Place House, being the buildings of
the Premonstratensian Abbey converted into a mansion
by Thomas Wriothesley, first earl of Southampton,
and where his son Henry entertained both Edward VI
and Elizabeth. In 1625 Charles I brought his bride
to Titchfield immediately after their marriage, (fn. 2) while
the State Papers for 1675 contain many allusions to
the king's visit to Titchfield in that year, where he
dined with Edward Noel, afterwards lord-lieutenant
of Hampshire. (fn. 3) In November, 1688, when the
Dutch invasion was imminent, 'Lord Gainsborough's
house Titchfield' was taken for the queen presumably
as a convenient point from which to escape to France. (fn. 4)
A bridge over the Meon close to Place House bears
the date 1625. West Hill, a large house on rising
ground west of the town, belongs to the executors of
James Dredge, C.M.S., late owner of Engineering.
St. Margaret's is a large red-brick house on high
ground to the west of the town: a long range of
building with picturesque chimneys and a tower at
the south end. It appears to be entirely of early
seventeenth-century date, with much of its original
wooden framings, and stands in a pretty garden surrounded by a belt of trees. Several industries formerly of importance have now almost entirely disappeared, amongst them brick-making, of which the only
remaining trace is a field called 'Clay-pits.' A garden
called Skin House Piece marks the site of a building
where parchment-dressing was formerly carried on.
Gravel was worked at Meon in former days, and salt
was obtained by evaporation from Hook and Warsash,
where the name 'salterns' still survives. At Funtley
in the north of the parish are the ruins of an old mill
—the iron mill where ore was smelted, local ironstone
being used. Early in the seventeenth century the
third earl of Southampton, alarmed at the decay of
trade caused by the suppression of the monastery,
started a woollen industry, and men were brought
from Alton 'to teach the poor the art of weaving.'
The experiment was not altogether successful, although
the older inhabitants can still remember the time
when blankets were manufactured in the parish.
The chief local industry to-day is strawberry growing;
Titchfield Common, formerly called Swanwick Heath,
and until comparatively recent times a stretch of waste
heather land, being now cut up into small allotments
generally consisting of a few acres of strawberry fields
round a cottage. In the strawberry season every
available person is employed in picking the fruit, the
schools are closed, and all the children go to work in
the strawberry fields. Swanwick is the chief station
for this trade, a special staff and special trains being
provided by the railway company during the busy
season. Market gardening on a large scale is carried
on in the parish, Titchfield supplying most of the
cabbages for the Royal Navy, while turnip greens are
largely grown for the London market, 'green cutting'
being a recognized industry among the girls of the
locality. There is a large tannery in the town on
the site of the old wharves, and a jam factory on the
common belonging to the Army and Navy Stores.
Titchfield mill, probably the one mentioned in
Domesday and later as being worth 20s., (fn. 5) is in the
town on the Meon, and there is a windmill on Peel
Common at Crofton. Though no traces of any
dovecots remain, there is a field called the 'Dovecot'
near Place House.
St. Margaret's, Titchfield
Crofton and Stubbington consist of a few dozen
cottages and farms scattered over a tract of flat
country, and only round the green in Crofton is
there anything in the nature of a village. Crofton
House, south-east of Titchfield, belongs to Col. Boyd,
and Stubbington House, which stands at the corner of
the green, is used as a naval school. Its bell is said
to have come from Place House at Titchfield.
Whiteleys, in the north of the parish, is an interesting
old house formerly standing within the park of Place
House, and now, from its isolated position, used as a
smallpox hospital. In late years old land drains have
been discovered near the house filled in with deer's
horns. Lee-on-the-Solent is a modern watering
place, there being very little more than the site to
mark its ancient history.
Sarisbury, Locks Heath, Swanwick and Lower Swanwick form a modern parish on the east bank of the River
Hamble. At Sarisbury there are two or three inns,
a church, a schoolhouse, and a few cottages standing
round a stretch of village green, along the north side
of which runs the Southampton road. Swanwick is
merely a collection of modern red-brick cottages
straggling up the stretch of hill which leads from the
railway station to the Southampton road. Lower
Swanwick is a picturesque village lying on low ground
along the east bank of the Hamble. Brooklands, a large
house on the Hamble River, is the residence of Lt.-Col.
Babington, J.P., and Cold East, south of the main
road, belongs to Mr. Claude Montefiore. Sarisbury
Court is the residence of Mr. W. Sarton. Curbridge
is a tiny hamlet in the north of the parish.
Hill Head consisted, till lately, of a few cottages and
fishermen's sheds at Titchfield Haven, but is now
developing into a seaside resort with rows of houses
along the shore. Chillinge is a desolate-looking
house of Elizabethan date, now cut up into two
cottages, standing alone by the seashore a little to the
east of Hook. Hook House Park, east of the
parish of Hook with Warsash, is well wooded, but a
large tract of bare heather land stretches from there to
Warsash. A great part of it is now being brought
under cultivation as strawberry ground. Hook House,
built by Mr. William Hornby, governor of Bombay,
at the end of the eighteenth century, which was
a reproduction of Government House, Bombay, was
burnt down a few years ago. From Warsash House,
the property of G. A. Shinley, the road descends a sharp
hill to the shore where, by the Crab and Lobster inn,
the crab tank of the well-known local industry is built.
The village of Warsash is small, and its inhabitants
are chiefly employed in the crab and lobster trade,
which occupies them through the late autumn, winter,
and spring, many of them in the summer working as
sailors on the many yachts which make their head
quarters in the Solent and Southampton Water.
The remains of the buildings of the Premonstratensian abbey of St. Mary, Titchfield, stand at a little
distance to the north of the town. Founded in 1222
for a colony of White Canons from Halesowen, the
ruins show that the church and claustral buildings
were completed within a few years of the foundation,
and, as far as can be judged, survived without material
alteration till the suppression. The note in the
register of the abbey (Harl. 6602, fol. 140–3) mentioning that John bishop of Elphin, eighteenth abbot,
c. 1535, rebuilt the ruinous church, may refer to
work done in the now destroyed east end. The
church had an aisleless nave, a central tower, transepts
with eastern chapels, and a presbytery, the whole
being vaulted in stone. The cloister lay on the north
of the church, the parlour, chapter-house, and warming house being on the east, and the dorter over them,
extending with its subvault a considerable distance
northwards; the frater with its subvault on the north,
having the kitchen at its west end, and the cellarer's
building and great guest hall on the west. The site
of the infirmary is uncertain. The only parts of the
church now standing are the nave walls and the
lower part of the west wall of the south transept.
The nave was vaulted in six bays, each bay being
lighted by a pair of tall lancets, below the sills of
which ran a moulded string at which the vaulting shafts
stopped. The pulpitum seems to have stood in the
west arch of the tower, with the east doorway from
the cloister immediately to the west of it. Part of
the west cloister door is also preserved, and in the
western bay of the nave on the south is a third doorway, built up, but retaining a consecration cross on
its east jamb. There was also a west doorway, and
in the western angles of the nave were vices entered
from within the church, their blocked doorways being
yet to be seen. The church was entirely faced with
wrought stone, and had a battering plinth, the bays
being marked off by projecting buttresses. In the
west wall were probably three tall lancets, the outer
jambs of the northern and southern of which still
remain. The arrangement of the eastern part of
the church as shown on the separate plate was deduced from excavations undertaken by the Rev. G.
W. Minns, with the help of Mr. W. H. St. J. Hope.
The chapter-house, which was separated from the
north transept by the inner parlour, was vaulted in
two bays, with a vestibule of two bays opening to the
cloister by a central doorway with clustered Purbeck
marble shafts, and flanked by double openings with
marble shafts and sills, parts of which yet remain
blocked up in the wall. The doorway to a passage
east of the frater remains, with a little of the frater
wall, but beyond this nothing is left to show the
details of the monastic buildings, except the traces of
a barrel vault which covered the outer parlour in the
western range against the north wall of the church.
The abbey was granted at the suppression to
Thomas Wriothesley, who converted the buildings
into a house for himself, a good deal of which still
remains. The process of conversion is illustrated by
a very interesting series of letters among the State
Papers, which have been printed by Mr. Hope in the
Archaeological Journal for Dec. 1906. After several
schemes of adaptation had been proposed and abandoned, the monastic frater became the hall, and the
chapter-house the chapel; the cloister being treated
as the courtyard of a four-square house. The south
side of the church became the main front, and a large
gateway with octagonal angle turrets was planted
across the nave, while the central tower was taken
down to the roof level and the south transept
destroyed, for the sake of symmetry. The remaining
parts of the church lost their vaults and were divided
into two stories, the porter's lodge being on the
ground floor to the west of the gateway, its door,
window, and fireplace being still to be seen. The
thirteenth-century windows were blocked up and
square-headed mullioned windows cut through the
wall, while large brick arched fireplaces were set in
the west wall of the nave, the south wall near the
crossing, the gatehouse walls, and elsewhere, some of
the cut brick chimney shafts still remaining. Wriothesley's work, where not made of the old material
reused, is of Caen stone, and of excellent workmanship, without a trace of Renaissance feeling. His
kitchen occupied the site of the monastic kitchen, and
parts of walls of his date stand here, with two windows on the west, and part of a lamp niche in the
north-west angle of the cloister. Till the latter part
of the eighteenth century the whole house stood with
little alteration, but it was then dismantled, part of
its materials going to Cams Hall near Fareham, and
has since then gradually decayed under the influences
of weather, ivy, and general neglect. A still inhabited
cottage on the north, adjoining the north-west angle
of the monastic dorter, is probably in part of
Wriothesley's time, and has a good four-centred stone
fireplace in one of the ground-story rooms. A large
walled garden incloses the church and monastic
buildings, extending beyond them to east and west,
and at some distance further to the west are the
remains of a sixteenth-century building of Wriothesley's date, whose original use cannot be determined.
On the north-west are the banks of large fish-ponds,
and on them till lately stood a very large oak tree,
now fallen. In a letter to Wriothesley reference is
made to these ponds. The writer reports that he
has viewed the fish-ponds, four of them being a mile
in length—and that the bailiff will give Wriothesley
500 carp to stock them, so that in three or four years'
time he may sell £20 or £30 worth of fish every
year. (fn. 6) A general view by Grose of the buildings
from the north-west, showing the north side of
the frater and the west side of the dorter range, is
preserved in Titchfield, and is here reproduced from
a copy published in the Hants Field Club Proceedings, by permission of the Rev. G. W. Minns. A
projecting chimney breast on the north of the frater
is doubtless an addition of Wriothesley's time, and a
rectangular block of masonry still existing on the
south side of the frater seems to be the substructure
of the bay window of the hall. A doorway with the
arms of Southampton in the head, masking the western
entrance to the inner parlour, may also have had a
projecting window over it, lighting a stair which
Wriothesley seems to have put here to lead to the
first-floor rooms in the north transept and dorter
range. The whole of Wriothesley's alterations were
probably completed by 1542, in which year he
received pardon for having fortified his manor house
of Titchfield without licence, and in the same year,
or a little earlier, Leland visited the house, and remarked on the fine conduit-house or fountain in the
middle of the cloister, of which no trace now remains.
The Gateway, Place House, Titchfield
North Aspect of Titchfield House
From a drawing by Grose, 1782, in the possession of J. R. Fielder, Esq.
Old place-names are:—Byttenfeld, (fn. 7) Newe Court,
Parva Mirabyll, Warishassefield, (fn. 8) and Chilling. (fn. 9) The
parish was inclosed in 1859. The subsoil is gravel
and clay and the surface loam.
MANORS
In Domesday Book, TITCHFIELD is
described as a berewick belonging to
Meonstoke, and held by the king as it
had been held by Edward the Confessor. (fn. 10) It is possible that part of the manor was in the hundred of
Meonstoke and part in that of Titchfield, as it is certain that the hundred of Titchfield was in existence at
the time of the Domesday Survey. (fn. 11) An account of
the descent of the manor given by the abbot of Titchfield, in a dispute in the reign of Henry III, shows
that William I held it by conquest, that it was given
by his son William Rufus to Payn, ancestor of John
de Gisors, (fn. 12) and that the latter forfeited it by his adherence to the king of France. (fn. 13) King John then
granted from it £15 of rent to his supporter Robert
de Vipont, and £5 worth to Oliver de Beauchamp, (fn. 14)
but Robert died in 1227. Henry III in 1228
granted the manor to Hubert de Burgh, earl of Kent
and justiciar, 'to hold as freely as John de Gisors held
it until the king shall restore it to the heirs of John of
his free will or by a peace.' (fn. 15) However, during the
next year, Hubert de Burgh gave back Titchfield to
Henry in exchange for the manors of Eylesham
(Norfolk), and Westhall (Suffolk), (fn. 16) and the sheriff of
Southampton was ordered to free the men holding in
that part of Titchfield formerly granted to Hubert de
Burgh, but now retained in the king's hands, from
suit at shire and hundred courts. (fn. 17) In 1232 Henry
granted the manor to Peter des Roches, bishop of
Winchester, for the part endowment of the Premonstratensian abbey which he was about to found there, (fn. 18)
and from this date until the Dissolution the manor
remained with the abbot and convent of Titchfield.
Free warren in their demesne lands of Titchfield
was granted to the abbey by Edward I in 1294 (fn. 19)
and afterwards confirmed by Henry VI, (fn. 20) who also
granted many liberties and immunities to the abbey
and convent in consideration of the many services
rendered by them to himself and his queen on the
occasion of their marriage in the abbey of St. Mary,
Titchfield. One of the most important of these
liberties was the right to hold an annual fair to last
for five days. (fn. 21) John Sampson, bishop of Thetford,
the last abbot of Titchfield, surrendered the possessions
of the abbey to the king in 1537, (fn. 22) and in the same
year the estates were granted to Thomas Wriothesley (fn. 23)
(created earl of Southampton
in 1547), for the services
which he had rendered at the
dissolution of the monasteries,
subject to a pension of £20 to
the late abbot. (fn. 24) Shortly afterwards he was knighted by the
king, and on his death in 1550
he was succeeded by his son
Henry, (fn. 25) who during his lifetime entertained both Edward VI and Elizabeth at
Titchfield. Henry his son,
third earl of Southampton,
attainted in 1601 for his
complicity in the plots of the earl of Essex, was
condemned to imprisonment for life (fn. 26) and the confiscation of his estates; but on the accession of
James I he was released, restored to his possessions and the earldom of Southampton. (fn. 27) He
died abroad in 1624, and the property passed to
his son Thomas, who, leaving no heirs male, was
succeeded by his eldest daughter Elizabeth, who
married Edward Noel, first earl of Gainsborough. (fn. 28)
Their only son died without issue, and the Titchfield
estate ultimately passed to their two granddaughters
and co-heiresses Elizabeth, who married William Henry
Bentinck first duke of Portland, and Rachel wife of
the second duke of Beaufort. The third duke of
Beaufort acquired both moieties of the property in
1711, (fn. 29) and the fifth duke sold the manor to Peter
Delme in 1741. (fn. 30) On the failure of male heirs to the
Delmé family in 1894 the estate passed to the descendants of two co-heiresses: Elizabeth wife of the
Rev. C. Delmé Radcliffe, and Julia married to Captain
James Arthur Murray, R.N., the present joint-owners
being their respective sons, Colonel Emilius Charles
Delmé Radcliffe, and George Delmé Murray. (fn. 31)
Wriothesley, Earl of Southampton. Azure a cross or between four falcons close argent.
Mention is made in Domesday of one mill in Titchfield worth 20s., (fn. 32) but it does not appear to have been
included in the grant of Titchfield to the abbot, as in
1307 Simon and John Whorstede received licence to
alienate in mortmain to the chapel of St. Elizabeth,
Winchester, a rent of 20s. issuing out of the mill of
Titchfield. (fn. 33) In 1272 two mills and certain lands in
Titchfield were granted to Henry, abbot of Titchfield,
by Philip de Molyns for a rent of 33s. 4d. (fn. 34) However, before 1330, John de Molyns released this rent,
since his release was confirmed by letters patent in that
year. (fn. 35)
Radcliffe. Argent a crosslet gules between three bends engrailed sable a label and a quarter sable with a crosslet or in the quarter.
Delme. Or an anchor sable between two lions passant gules.
There was a market at Titchfield in 1086, and
though it was said to be injurious to a neighbouring
market it was still existing in 1535, when Richard
Towris reports to Lord Lisle that the clerk of the
market was keeping his court at Titchfield and had
commanded that no man should sell wheat above 8s.
a quarter on pain of imprisonment and forfeiture.
There is no record of its history after this date. (fn. 36) In
1424 the abbot received permission by charter to inclose and make a park of 60 acres of land, 10 acres of
pasture, and 50 acres of wood in Titchfield. There
is an interesting reference to this park in the State
Papers for the year 1635, when notification was made
to the Lords of the Admiralty that the officers of the
Navy had contracted for timber from the wood of
the earl of Southampton at the rate of 22s. the load,
and that 'they had had assurance the whole kingdom
could not better 1,000 trees agreed for there.' They
also added that the ministers of the earl 'had acquainted them with the prejudice sustained by the
Earl in having his timber so long restrained from sale,
since ready money for the disengagement of his debts
was the principle motive occasioning his felling thereof.' That the timber grown in this park was highly
valued is shown by a letter of Capt. Anthony Deane
to the Naval Commissioners in 1668, in which he
writes: 'Mr. Eastwood gave you notice of the
timber felled in Titchfield Park and bought by
private men, and all the best trees docked for buckets,
which would grieve anyone to behold such strange
destruction to such rare goods and indeed jewels.'
He adds that he had treated about 500 loads at 38s.
the load. He knew of no timber like it except in
the New Forest. (fn. 37)
Apart from the manor of Titchfield proper, there
appears to have been an estate in Titchfield called the
manor of Titchfield in the sixteenth century, probably
owing its origin to the purchase by Thomas de Overton
from John de Masseworth of 1 carucate and 6 acres
of land in Chark and Titchfield in the fourteenth
century. (fn. 38) The estate subsequently passed to his
daughter Isabel and her husband Thomas le Warrener, (fn. 39)
who held it until 1407. (fn. 40) From them it appears to
have descended in a direct line through five generations to Joan Tawke, who married firstly Robert
Ryman and secondly Edmund Bartlett, who both
predeceased her. (fn. 41) She held the manor at her death
in 1561, (fn. 42) when it passed to her son William Ryman
for life with reversion to his brother Humphrey. The
latter appears to have died during his brother's lifetime, (fn. 43) and from this date all assumed status of manor
was lost, and the estate evidently merged in Titchfield
proper.
At the time of the Domesday Survey BROMWICH
(Burnewick xi cent.; Bromwych, Brunewych, xiv
cent.; Bromwiche, xviii cent.) was held by Walkelin
bishop of Winchester of the king, though not as a part
of his bishopric. Angot held it under him, and it
had been held by Edric in the time of Edward the
Confessor. (fn. 44) At what date it came into the possession
of the Bromwich family does not appear, but in the
fourteenth century it was held by Lucas Bromwich
and John Bromwich successively. (fn. 45) By 1428 it had
passed to the Uvedale family, John Uvedale, son of
Sybil de Scures, having acquired the property probably
by purchase from Thomas Bromwych. (fn. 46)
In 1434 it was granted or sublet to Reginald West,
Lord De La Warr, who was probably connected with
the Uvedale family, for in the time of Henry III a
certain Thomas Uvedale married Margaret daughter
of Roger De La Warr. (fn. 47) On the death of Lord De La
Warr in 1451 the manor again reverted to the
Uvedales, and was held for a time by William son
of John Uvedale. (fn. 48) By a deed dated 1480–1 it was
granted by Thomas son of William Uvedale to his
father's brother Sir Thomas, to hold jointly with
Agnes Paulet his wife, (fn. 49) and shortly afterwards it was
leased to a certain John Estuy for twelve years at a
rent of 16 marks and 2 pence. The lessor granted
to the tenant annually one robe of the suit of a
groom, and the latter was to pay the fifteenth to the
king when payable and all the church dues. (fn. 50) Before
his death, in 1513, Henry Uvedale settled the manor
on his wife Mary, (fn. 51) but in 1530–1 the presumptive
heirs to the manor all sold their interest in the reversion to Sir Henry Wyatt. (fn. 52) Mary Uvedale survived
him, however, and his son, Sir Thomas Wyatt, sold
the reversion in 1538 to Sir Thomas Wriothesley. (fn. 53)
Two years previously Mary Uvedale had given up her
life interest, (fn. 54) and later Sir Thomas Wyatt made a
fresh conveyance in confirmation of the Wriothesley
title. (fn. 55) The same year the manor was granted to
Sir Thomas Wriothesley's sister Anne Knight and
her husband for their lives and that of the survivor
at a rent of 6d. a year, but it was regranted to the
donor almost immediately 'in consideration of the
many benefits received from him.' (fn. 56) Ten years later
the manor was granted to Roger Polstin and his wife,
servants of Thomas Wriothesley (now earl of Southampton), with the explanation that it was for services to
be rendered as well as for those already received. They
were to hold it for three lives at a rent of £10, but
the grant did not include the right of fishing in the
pond by the manor house. (fn. 57) Henry Wriothesley
succeeded to his father's estates in 1550, and thence
they passed to his son Henry, who in 1617 leased the
'messuage and farm called Bromwich Farm' to
Philip Gifford at a rent of £10 16s.—the tenant was
to make all payments and duties 'for the King's
Majesty, the Church, the Parish and the poore of
the same.' Also twice in every year he was to
provide for the officers of the earl when they came to
hold courts there 'sufficient meat and drink and other
provision befitting their officers and servants, and
sufficient room hay litter and provender for their
beasts.' (fn. 58) On the expiration of this lease another for
twenty-one years at a rent of £10 16s. was granted
to Sir Henry Wallop, (fn. 59) who had married the sister of
the third earl of Southampton. Bromwich followed
the descent of Titchfield until 1734, when on the
sale shortly afterwards of a considerable part of the
Titchfield property to the duke of Beaufort it was
retained by the duke of Portland, in whose possession
it was in 1762. From him it was purchased by
Mr. William Hornby, governor of Bombay at the
end of the eighteenth century, in whose family the
property remained until the death of Mrs. Hood,
the last survivor of the family, whose husband, the
Hon. Albert Hood, is the present owner. (fn. 60)
There is no mention of the manor of CHARK
in the Domesday Survey, but it is probable that it
was included at this date in that part of Titchfield
which was held by the king. Some time in the
twelfth century the overlordship was granted to John
de Gisors, who was certainly holding lands in Hampshire as early as 1161. (fn. 61) He never held Chark, however, in demesne, but received a rent of 50s. from the
sub-tenants, 40s. of which he granted in alms to the
priory of Hamble. On the forfeiture of the estates
of de Gisors the remaining 10s. rent escheated to the
crown, and King John granted it to Oliver de Beauchamp as part of 100s. of land and rent which he had
licence to acquire in Chark and Titchfield in exchange
for the manor of Melbourne in Derbyshire (fn. 62)
The rent was still paid to the De Beauchamp family
in 1302, but eight years later Richard de Beauchamp
granted it, together with a messuage and a carucate of
land in Titchfield and Chark, to William son of John
de Masseworth. (fn. 63) From John de Masseworth (son of
John) it passed in 1356 to Thomas de Overton, (fn. 64)
who died in 1361, and two years later it was conveyed to his niece Isabel and her husband, Thomas
de Warrener. (fn. 65)
The under-tenants of this manor in the twelfth
century were members of the family of Bruton—
probably the Hamo Brito and Gilbertus le Bret who
alienated lands in Chark to Quarr Abbey. (fn. 66) In 1292
William Bruton died seised of nine virgates of land in
Chark held in socage paying 10s. rent to Richard de
Beauchamp. (fn. 67) About the middle of the thirteenth
century Richard Bruton was holding a moiety of
Chark, while in 1316 William Bruton was returned
as holding the vill of Chark, (fn. 68) which, however, from
this date disappears from the assessments of the Feudal
Aids. It was probably included in the one-third of
a knight's fee in Warde held by him in 1346, (fn. 69) and
mentioned below in the descent of Lee Bruton, and
it may be suggested, therefore, that it passed at some
time before the year 1428 to Thomas Wayte. (fn. 70) It
was certainly settled on John Wayte and his heirs in
1453. (fn. 71) The subsequent history of the manor is the
same as that of Lee (q.v.).
At the time of the Dissolution the abbey of Quarr
held a farm in Chark valued at £12 2s. 6d., (fn. 72) which
was probably part of the grant made to the abbey by
the Bruton family about the thirteenth century, when
the monks received permission to have their boat free
of toll along the seaboard of Chark or Lee, and to
send their men to grind their corn at Chark. (fn. 73)
At the time of the Domesday Survey CROFTON
was held by Count Alan of Brittany as it had been by
Ulward, 'who could betake himself where he would
with this land.' (fn. 74) It is probable that Crofton formed
part of the possessions of Edwin earl of Mercia, the
whole of which were granted to Alan of Brittany for
his services at the Conquest, and afterwards formed
the honor of Richmond, of which Crofton was held
certainly as late as 1355. (fn. 75) Some time during the
twelfth century the manor seems to have been granted
to the Furneaux family, with whom it remained until
1331, (fn. 76) but shortly after that date it apparently passed,
probably through some family connexion, to Maurice
le Brune, who died seised of the manor then termed
'a liberty called Crofton,' belonging to the manor of
Rowner, in 1355–6, leaving a son and heir William,
who was holding the same in 1358–9. (fn. 77)
Of the subtenants of the Furneaux Geoffrey Talbot
was seised of the manor in the reign of John, (fn. 78) and
was succeeded by his son Lawrence, (fn. 79) who married a
certain Benedicta, and their daughter Alice became
the wife of Henry of Glastonbury, who was in
possession of the property in 1316. (fn. 80) After the
death of Henry the manor was settled on Alice with
reversion to her son Henry, on whose death without
heirs it passed to John son of John le Venour, as son
and heir of Eva sister of Geoffrey Talbot. He released his right to Benedicta widow of Lawrence and
Elias de Cherleton, her second husband. (fn. 81) In May,
1331, licence was granted to Elias and Benedicta to
alienate the manor in mortmain to the abbot and
convent of Titchfield on condition that they should
find a chaplain to celebrate divine service daily in
the chapel of St. Edmund, Crofton, for the soul of
Edward II and for the souls of Elias and Benedicta
after their deaths; the abbot undertook to regrant
the manor to the grantors for life. (fn. 82) By a charter
given four years later the abbot received a grant of
free warren in his demesne lands in Crofton. (fn. 83) In
1537 the last abbot of Titchfield surrendered the
manor with his other possessions to the king, and it
was granted the same year to Thomas Wriothesley. (fn. 84)
From this date Crofton follows the descent of the
manor of Titchfield (q.v.).
Mention is made in Domesday of a mill at Crofton
worth 12s. 6d., but there is no further trace of its
history.
There were two manors in FUNTLEY (Funtelei,
xi cent.; Funceley, xiii cent.; Funtelegh, xiv cent.)
at the time of the Domesday Survey. Of these, one (fn. 85)
held before the Conquest by Ulward under Earl
Godwin had passed in 1086 into the hands of
Count Alan of Brittany, (fn. 86) whose descendants, except
for one short period, held the overlordship until
1279, when the honor of Richmond was in the
hands of Peter of Savoy. (fn. 87) The history of the overlordship for the next two centuries is obscure, but in
1305 a dispute arose between the king and Henry
of Glastonbury as to the custody of the heir. (fn. 88) The
matter was settled in favour of the king, who granted
the lordship to his daughter Mary, nun of Ambresbury. (fn. 89) On her death the overlordship was possibly
granted or restored to Henry of Glastonbury, and
given by him with the manor of Crofton to the abbot
and convent of Titchfield, as in 1338 the manor of
Funtley was granted to the latter to be held as of their
manor of Crofton. (fn. 90)
The first undertenant of the manor of Funtley
Parva of whom there is record was Nicholas Fostebire,
who held one messuage and half a hide of land
there (fn. 91) in 1269–70. The manor appears to have
been granted to the family of St. Martin later in the
century, as in 1303–4 William de Pageham was
holding it by gift of his father-in-law, Hugh de
St. Martin. (fn. 92) It then consisted 'of a hall built
with tiles, a grange and ox-house built with straw
… 90 acres of arable land … 20 acres of
pasture worth an acre per annum 2d., 4 acres of
meadow worth an acre per annum 2s., one water
mill worth per annum 10s., 3 acres of large wood
and 3 acres of underwood worth an acre per
annum 6d., and eight customary tenants who paid
rent per annum 21s. 9d.' (fn. 93) From William it passed
to his son John, whose daughter Mary granted it in
1338 to the abbot and convent of Titchfield, (fn. 94) in whose
possession it remained until the Dissolution, when it
passed with the other Titchfield property to Thomas
Wriothesley, earl of Southampton, and followed the
descent of Titchfield (q.v.).
The second manor in Funtley was held at the time
of Edward the Confessor by a certain Turi under
Earl Godwin. In 1086 it was in the possession of
Ranulf Flamme, (fn. 95) and being confiscated with the rest
of his estates in 1100, passed into the king's hands, (fn. 96)
and was granted some time prior to the year 1241 to
the Arundel family, (fn. 97) in whose possession it remained
until 1615, (fn. 98) after which the rights of overlordship
probably lapsed.
Of the subtenants Hugh de Hoyvill was holding
one-fourth of a fee in Funtley in 1241, which he had
inherited from Richard de Hoyvill his father, which
passed to Philip de Hoyvill, probably his son, who in
1294 was granted free warren in his demesne lands
there. (fn. 99) Seventy years later William de Hoyvill, probably a grandson, was assessed in the Feudal Aids as part
owner of the vill. (fn. 100) In 1346 it was held by William
de Hoyvill, (fn. 101) probably son of the former one, but before 1428 it had passed to the Uvedale family, John
Uvedale being then in possession. (fn. 102) It then followed
the descent of Wickham until 1721, when it was
held by Sir Richard Corbett, from whom it was
purchased by Jonathan Rashleigh, M.P. for Fowey,
Cornwall, in 1724. (fn. 103) It apparently passed out of the
hands of the Rashleigh family at the end of the eighteenth century, and since then the property appears
to have been broken up. (fn. 104)
At the time of the Domesday Survey HOOK
(Houch, xi cent.; Hoke, xiii cent.; Houke, xiv cent.;
Hooke, xv cent. onwards) was held by Hugh de
Port, (fn. 105) and the overlordship probably followed the
descent of the St. John barony (see Wickham),
though it is difficult to be certain of this after the
fourteenth century. (fn. 106) In 1086 one German was
holding Hook of Hugh de Port, but for the next two
centuries its history is unknown. At the beginning
of the fourteenth century the vill of Hook was held
jointly by Aymer de Valence, Roger Mortimer, John
Pageham, and Richard of Winchester, (fn. 107) but of these
holdings the two former only appear to have had any
manorial history. On the death of Aymer de
Valence without issue in 1324, (fn. 108) his property in
Hook, afterwards known as Hook Valence, probably
passed to John de Hastings, one of his heirs, and
through him in a direct line to John earl of Pembroke, whose widow Philippa, daughter of Edward
Mortimer, was holding it in 1389. (fn. 109) She married as
her third husband, between 1393 and 1400, Thomas
Poynings lord St. John of Basing (fn. 110) —a connexion
which, assuming that the St. Johns were still the
overlords of Hook, might explain the possession of
Hook by the Wests, also connexions of the Mortimers in the sixteenth century. In 1488 Elizabeth
Uvedale was holding 16 messuages and 132 acres of
land in Hook of Thomas West, Lord De La Warr, (fn. 111)
and this property was held until his death in 1501
by her son Robert. (fn. 112) Sixty years later Thomas
West sold the manor of Hook Valence to Sir Richard
Lyster, son-in-law of Thomas Wriothesley, (fn. 113) and as
the latter died possessed of the manor in 1550, (fn. 114) it
probably passed to him by some family settlement.
From this date until 1762 it follows the descent of
Swanwick (q.v.).
The manor of HOOK MORTIMER held by
Robert Mortimer in 1316 probably escheated to the
king on his attainder in 1330, but apparently was
restored with the earldom to
Roger his grandson in 1355,
as Roger's son Edmund was
holding rents in Hook Mortimer in 1381, 'from divers
tenants there who hold according to the custom of the
manor, as of the ancient demesne of the crown.' (fn. 115) Edmund Mortimer died without
issue in 1425, and the Mortimer estates went to his nephew Richard duke of York, (fn. 116)
whose eldest son Edward afterwards became Edward IV, and
in this way the estate again came
into the king's hands. In 1540 Henry VIII granted
Hook Mortimer to Anne of Cleves, (fn. 117) and in the
following year to Queen Catherine as her jointure; (fn. 118)
in 1543 it was leased for thirty years to Edmund
Clerke, (fn. 119) and if, as seems probable, (fn. 120) the manor of
East Hook can be identified with Hook Mortimer,
it passed before 1550 to Thomas Wriothesley earl
of Southampton, who also possessed the manor
of Hook Valence. (fn. 121) From this date the descent
of both is identical with that of Titchfield until
1734, after which it is the same as that of Bromwich (q.v.). (fn. 122)
Mortimer. Barry azure and or a chief or with two pales azure between two gyrons azure therein and a scutcheon argent over all.
A chapel appears to have been opened in Hook
in the fourteenth century, without the authority
of the bishop, and the archdeacon was therefore sent
to admonish those responsible. As, however, services continued to be held, the offenders were summoned to appear before the bishop in Winchester
Cathedral. They did not appear, and sentence of
excommunication was passed upon them in 1379. (fn. 123)
In what way the dispute was finally settled does not
appear, but the chapel was still existing at West
Hook in 1570–1. (fn. 124)
LEE-ON-THE-SOLENT
LEE-ON-THE-SOLENT (Ly, La Lige, xiii cent.;
Lye xv cent.) is not mentioned by name in the
Domesday Survey, but was probably included at that
date in the fee held by Count Alan of Brittany in
Funtley and Crofton, which subsequently became part
of the honour of Richmond. (fn. 125) In 1302 Richard Bruton
died seised of land in Lee held of Isolda le Brun as of
the honour of Richmond 'in manu ipsius Isolde existent
ibidem.' (fn. 126) The overlordship had probably passed to
her husband William with the liberty of Crofton, 'by
commission' of John of Brittany. (fn. 127) There seems to
be no further documentary evidence as to the descent
of the overlordship, but it was probably for some time
at least included in Crofton liberty.
Of the subtenants Roger Markes seems to have
held one carucate of land, subsequently known as the
manor of LEE MARKES, about the middle of the
thirteenth century, (fn. 128) and in 1327 Edmund Markes,
probably son of Roger, paid 2s. subsidy, presumably
assessed on the same estate. (fn. 129) Thirty years later
William Markes was holding land in Lee of Thomas
Warrener, which was to pass to the abbot and
convent of Titchfield on the death of William, and
in this way it came into the hands of Thomas
Wriothesley at the Dissolution.
In 1236 Gilbert de Bret (alias Brut) died seised of
the manor of 'Ly' (which subsequently became known
as Lee Britten or Bruton), being 1 carucate, by the
service of a third of a knight's fee of the honour of
Richmond, and some years later this was held by the
guardian of the heir of John le Bret from Peter of
Savoy as of the honour of Richmond. (fn. 130) The manor
seems to have passed from John to Richard Bruton,
who held a moiety of Lee and Chark as one-third of
a knight's fee by the serjeanty of crossing the sea with
the king, and who was succeeded by his son Richard.
The latter died in 1302, leaving a son William, a
minor, who was holding in 1327 and probably in
1346 if, as seems likely, Warde was a local name for
the Bruton estates in Lee and Chark. (fn. 131) From William
the manor passed to his son John, and from Alice
daughter of John to her son Thomas, who died without heirs at the end of the fourteenth century. He
appears to have alienated it to Thomas Wayte, as in
1310 the latter was sued by John Wallop, who claimed
the manor as descendant of Alice sister of William
Bruton. John's claim was allowed, (fn. 132) but the reversion was apparently granted to Thomas Wayte, as in
1428 he was holding one-third of a knight's fee in
Warde jointly with the abbot of Titchfield. (fn. 133) The
history of the manor for the next hundred years is
obscure, but in 1528 John Wayte, a descendant
of Thomas, leased the manor of Lee to Arthur
Plantagenet. (fn. 134) In 1530 John Wayte conveyed
the manor to Sir Richard Lyster, from whom it
probably passed to his father-in-law, Sir Thomas
Wriothesley, some time within the next ten years,
for in 1540 a dispute was tried before the Privy
Council between Wriothesley and one Walter Chandler, Walter having complained that Sir Thomas
had withheld the manor of Lee from him without
paying for it. The council, however, decided that
the charge was wholly unfounded, and Chandler was
ordered to make apology and restitution. (fn. 135) From
this date the descent of both manors is the same as
that of Titchfield (q.v.).
At the time of Domesday MEON belonged to the
bishop of Winchester, having been held previously by
a certain Toui who rented one-half of the king and
held the other by grant from the earl of Hereford, (fn. 136)
on whose death the whole appears to have been
granted by the king to the bishop. No further
mention of Meon is found until 1510, when Thomas
Uvedale granted to Henry Uvedale his heir lands
and rent in Meon. (fn. 137) The property then follows the
history of Bromwich (q.v.) until 1550, when Thomas
Wriothesley earl of Southampton died seised of the
same, then for the first time called the manor of
Meon. (fn. 138) After this date there is no further reference
to the so-called manor, which probably became
merged in that of Bromwich.
POSBROOK
POSBROOK (Passebroc or Postbrook xiii cent.)
is not mentioned in Domesday Book, and very little
is known of its early history. It appears to have been
held by members of the Passebroc family in the early
part of the thirteenth century, (fn. 139) and in 1243–4 it
was acquired either by purchase or grant from a
certain William de Setteville by Isaac abbot of Titchfield. (fn. 140) A grant of free warren in Posbrook was
made to the abbey in the reign of Edward I, (fn. 141) and
the manor remained in the possession of the monastery
until the Dissolution in 1538, (fn. 142) when it was granted
to Thomas Wriothesley as part of the abbey estates,
and from this date the descent of the manor is the
same as that of Titchfield (q.v.).
Though the name of QUOB (Quabbe, xiii-xvii
cents.) now survives only in Quob Farm and Copse,
there were formerly two separate estates of that name,
one of which belonged to the lords of the manor of
North Fareham in the thirteenth century, and of
which the following mention is made. In the reign
of Edward I Emma de Roches granted her son Hugh
'the land of Quabbe in the parish of Titchfield.' (fn. 143)
In 1571 Sir Richard Pexall, descendant of Hugh, died
seised of land and tenements in 'Quabbe' (fn. 144) and his
grandson Sir Pexall Brocas was holding the same in
1610. (fn. 145) In 1635 the property, then called for the
first time a manor, was in the possession of Thomas
Brocas, (fn. 146) and certainly as late as 1762 the lords of
North Fareham received £1 yearly as lords' rent from
'Quabbe' Farm, (fn. 147) which had evidently become merged
in the manor of North Fareham.
The second holding that bore the name was first
mentioned in 1311, when Richard de Beauchamp
held one tenement called 'La Quabbe' with two
gardens, 6 acres of arable land, 5 acres of meadow,
3 acres of wood, 20 acres of pasture, and an assize
rent of 39s. 2d.—property which Oliver de Beauchamp
his ancestor had licence to acquire in Titchfield in
exchange for the manor of Melbourne in Derby,
granted to King John. It was held by the service of
doing suit at the court of the king at Titchfield and
by a rent of 16d. yearly. Richard apparently held it
only for the life of William de Masseworth, but his
co-heiresses put in a claim for the property, which
was disallowed, and the escheator was ordered to
deliver up the land to William, (fn. 148) and on his death,
in 1335, the estate passed to his brother Walter, who
held it by the service of doing guard at Portchester for
30 days. (fn. 149) In 1361 Thomas de Overton died seised
of the manor of 'Quabbe,' (fn. 150) which had probably (like
the second Titchfield manor) been included in the
carucate of land, 6 acres of meadow, 12 acres of
wood and rent in Titchfield and Chark acquired by
him in 1356 by purchase from John de Masseworth. (fn. 151)
William, brother and heir of Thomas, appears to have
died shortly after his brother, and the estate passed in
1363 to his daughter Isabel and her husband Thomas
le Warrener, (fn. 152) who three years later acquired the onethird part of the manor which Agnes, widow of William,
was holding in dower. (fn. 153) During the next seventy years
the estate appears to have been broken up, since there
is no further mention of the manor as such, while in
1426 Thomas Warrener was possessed of only one
toft and 2 virgates of land called Quabland in the vill
of Titchfield—'which he held jointly with Isabel
Overton, formerly his wife.' (fn. 154) It is probable that
this property as well as the rest of the Overton estate
gradually became merged in Titchfield proper.
SEGENWORTH
SEGENWORTH (Sugion, xi cent.; Suggenwerch,
xiii cent.; Sokyngworth, xiv cent.; Sechingworth,
Siginworth, xvi cent.) was one of the lordships granted
to Hugh de Port by William I, and at the time of
Domesday Herebald held it from him as Ulric had
held it under King Edward. (fn. 155) At the end of the
thirteenth century William
de Stratton was holding one
knight's fee of Robert de
St. John, (fn. 156) descendant of the
De Ports; but by the middle
of the fourteenth century it
had passed to the family of
Wayte, and was then in the
hands of William Wayte. (fn. 157)
In the fifteenth century it was
held by Margaret Wayte, wife
of another William Wayte, (fn. 158)
and through her it descended
to John Wayte, probably a
grandson, who leased the manor in 1528–9 to Arthur
Plantagenet Viscount Lisle, his kinsman. (fn. 159) From
this date the descent of the manor is the same as
that of Lee Britten (q.v.).
Wayte. Argent a cheveron gules between three hunting horns sable.
At the time of Domesday STUBBINGTON
(Stulbinton, Stubynton, Stobington, xiii cent.),
which under King Edward formed part of
the possessions of Earl Godwin, was held by the
De Port family, (fn. 160) from whom it passed to the
St. Johns, descendants of the De Ports, early in the
thirteenth century, and in whose possession the overlordship remained until 1309, when it was granted by
John de St. John, lord of Basing, to the abbot and
convent of Titchfield. (fn. 161)
From an early date Stubbington was held under
the St. Johns by Reginald de Mohun and his successors, who before the end of the thirteenth century
had granted it to John de Rayny, (fn. 162) whose grandson,
William de Rayny, about 1293 granted all his lands
in Stubbington to the abbey of Titchfield, (fn. 163) which,
during the following century, acquired other lands in
Stubbington by various grants. (fn. 164) This grant was
confirmed by royal charter in 1320, and mention is
made in the same deed that the abbot was freed from
all suits and services due to him from such land. (fn. 165) A
grant of free warren was made to the abbot in 1293. (fn. 166)
It continued to be noted separately among the possessions of the abbey until 1428, (fn. 167) from which date it
disappears from the Titchfield records, and was
probably included in Titchfield itself.
There is no mention of SWANWICK (Swanewik, xv cent.) in Domesday Book, and the first
record relating to it is in 1231, when Henry III
confirmed to Peter des Roches, bishop of Winchester,
the gift made to him by Humphrey de Millers of all
the land and rent in Swanwick, which Humphrey
had acquired by grant of William, bishop of
Avranches. (fn. 168) This land became part of the possessions
of the newly founded abbey of Titchfield, and was
held of the bishop of Avranches. (fn. 169) A grant of free
warren was made to the abbot by Edward I in
1294. (fn. 170) Swanwick was held by the abbey (fn. 171) until
surrendered to the king with the other possessions of
Titchfield Abbey in 1537, and in the same year it
was granted to Thomas Wriothesley, (fn. 172) and from this
date follows the descent of Titchfield until the first
half of the eighteenth century, when it was retained
by the duke of Portland on the sale of a considerable
part of the Titchfield estate to the duke of Beaufort
between 1734 and 1741. (fn. 173) Its descent is then the
same as that of Bromwich (q.v.).
Titchfield Church
CHURCHES
The church of ST. PETER, TITCHFIELD, has a chancel with south chapel,
nave with aisles and south-west vestry,
and west tower, and is a fine and interesting building,
with a long architectural history, the lower part of
its tower and the west end of the nave being probably
the oldest piece of ecclesiastical architecture now
standing in Hampshire. The church to which they
belonged had an aisleless nave probably of the same
dimensions as the present, a chancel and a western
porch, the latter probably of two stories. The feature is an early one, and as there are none of the
characteristics of the latest style of pre-Conquest
architecture to be seen, it is possible that this building may have its origin in the ninth century, or
even earlier. Its subsequent history was that a south
aisle was added to the nave in the twelfth century,
a new west doorway made, and probably towards the
end of the century a new chancel arch. The tower
seems to have been raised to its present height about
the same time, and about 1220 the chancel was rebuilt round the older one, becoming of the full width
of the nave, and the chancel arch was now, or perhaps
later, widened, the old responds being reused. About
1320 the south chapel was built, and in the fifteenth
century the present north aisle of the nave was built,
probably superseding an older one, of which nothing
remains, the south and east walls of the chancel being
remodelled to harmonize with the new work. In
1867 the twelfth-century south arcade of the nave gave
place to a modern one, the whole of the south aisle
being rebuilt, and a few years since a vestry was
added at its south-west angle.
The chancel has a fifteenth-century east window of
five lights, and three three-light windows of the same
date on the north. On either side of the east window
are two tall canopied niches for images of the patron
and other saints, one over the other, also of the fifteenth century. At the south-east are three thirteenthcentury sedilia under moulded arches, the eastern
seat being higher than the other two; to the east is a
trefoiled piscina with a modern projecting bowl, and at
the west a thirteenth-century priest's door. The rest
of the south wall is taken up by an arcade of two
bays, c. 1320, with clustered shafts and foliate capitals,
that of the central shaft having four winged beasts
among the foliage. The arches are of two orders
with wave-moulds, and the bases rest on a dwarf
wall, not coming down to the floor level.
The chancel arch is pointed, of one order with
chamfered angles, springing from half-round responds,
the southern capital having plain foliage, while that
on the north has been mutilated and repaired without
ornament. The chancel has a fifteenth-century roof
with arched principals and trussed rafters, its other
woodwork being entirely modern.
The south chapel, which is of the same length as
the chancel, and slightly wider, has an original east
window of three trefoiled ogee lights, and three twolight south windows of a similar type, a later fourcentred doorway having been inserted under the
second window from the east. At the south-east are
three trefoiled sedilia, also original, the eastern of
which is higher than the rest, and has a rounded
back, and to the east is a trefoiled piscina of the
same date. At a little distance from the east wall are
large corbels in the north and south wall, 7 ft. from
the floor, to carry a beam at the back of the altar; a
moulded string over the piscina stops at this line, and
this space at the east was evidently screened off to
serve as a vestry. The centre of the chapel is occupied
by the splendid Wriothesley monument described
below.
The south arcade of the nave, of three bays, and
the south aisle, are modern, in fourteenth-century
style; but the north arcade, of four bays, with tall
and slender clustered piers, moulded arches, and
octagonal moulded capitals and bases, is a pretty piece
of fifteenth-century detail. The east window of the
north aisle, of five lights under a segmental head, is
flanked by elaborate contemporary canopied niches,
and there is a third niche set against the north face of
the east respond of the arcade. There are in this
aisle four three-light windows on the north and one
on the west, all contemporary with the arcade, and
the roof is probably plain work of the same date.
The nave roof is old, with trussed rafters, but the
tie-beams are modern, and at the east end is a rood
beam set up in 1889 with a wall painting of the
Crucifixion over it. On the west wall of the nave is
a large wall painting of the miraculous draught of
fishes, and above it, high in the wall, a blocked roundheaded window, now opening to the top stage of the
tower, but, before its building, to the open air, above
the roof of the early porch.
The west doorway is a fine specimen of the latter
part of the twelfth century, of three ornamented orders
with nook shafts. It opens to the west porch or
ground story of the tower, whose walls are only 2 ft.
3 in. thick. The western arch of the tower is plain
and roundheaded, in large blocks of Binstead and
iron stone, like those used in the Roman east gate of
Portchester Castle. The angle quoins are of the
same character, the walls being of rubble, and above
the arch a bonding course of Roman bricks, three deep,
runs round the tower, and is continued across the
west end of the nave. At a late repair it was found
to go right through the wall. The belfry stage of the
tower has single lights, probably c. 1200, and the
tower is finished with a rather heavy wooden spire.
Its upper stages are reached by an external stair on
the north, leading to a doorway in its north-east
angle.
The font at the north-west of the nave is modern,
and the only monument of much interest, except that
of the Wriothesleys, is a small tablet on the north
wall of the chancel to William Chamberlaine of
Beaulieu, 1608, showing a man and his wife kneeling
under a cornice with heraldry, and two sons and two
daughters below.
The Wriothesley monument, commemorating the
first earl and countess of Southampton, and their son
the second earl, was set up in accordance with the
will of the latter, proved 7 February, 1582, by which
the enormous sum of £1,000 was left for the making
of 'two faire monuments' in the 'chapel of the
parish church of Tichell, co. Southampton.' The
directions for two monuments were however ignored,
and one only was made, on which the three alabaster
effigies rest. It is a raised rectangular tomb, with
projecting pilasters at the angles, which carry tall
obelisks; the central part of the tomb is raised some
feet above the rest, and on it lies the effigy of Jane
countess of Southampton, 1574, that of her husband
the first earl, 1551, lying at a lower level on the
north, and that of her son the second earl, 1582, in
like manner on the south. The whole is of alabaster
and marble most elaborately and beautifully worked,
carved, and panelled, the inscriptions being on black
marble panels at the feet of the three effigies. In the
vault beneath are also buried Henry third earl of
Southampton and his son James Wriothesley, 1624, and
the fourth and last earl, Thomas, 1667.
In the north-east angle of the south aisle is an
inlaid wood panel with the Wriothesley arms, with
a pediment supported by caryatides, and below it the
motto VNG PARTOUT. It was formerly in the Bugle
Inn.
There are six bells, the first two of which were
added and the rest recast in 1866. The fifth was a
Salisbury bell, c. 1400, inscribed AVE MARIA PLENA;
the fourth of 1628, inscribed IN GOD IS MY HOPE I. I.;
the third by Francis Foster of Salisbury, 1675, and
the tenor by Wells of Aldbourne, 1769. There is
also a small bell uninscribed of some antiquity
The plate is a very fine silver-gilt set, consisting of
two cups with cover patens, inscribed THE GIFT OF
THO CORDEROY GENT AħO DOĨ 1673, with the arms
of Corderoy—a cheveron between two molets and in
base a lion, all with a border—the crest being a
crowned heart (cæur de roi); in spite of the inscription, the date letter on the cups is that of 1675;
two flagons of the same date and gift; two alms
dishes of 1670 of the same gift; and a standing
salver of 1679, given by William Orton.
The first book of the registers contains entries from
1589 to 1634, and is of paper; the second covers
the years 1634–78, and the third 1678–1762. The
fourth, fifth, seventh, and eighth books contain the
marriages from 1754 to 1812, and the sixth the
baptisms and burials, 1762–1812. In these registers
there are twelve entries of burials of soldiers between
27 November and 16 December, 1627, probably men
wounded in the disastrous expedition to La Rochelle.
In August, 1628, the duke of Buckingham's murder
is very fully chronicled: 'The Lorde Duke of Buckinghame was slayne at Portesmouth the 23 day of
August being Satterday, Generall of all ye fleete by
sea and land, whose name was George Villers Ryght
Honorable.'
The church of the HOLY ROOD, CROFTON, has
a chancel with south chapel, a north transept with
north vestry, a large south transept, and a nave with
south porch and west bell-turret.
The plan is irregular, the chancel not being on the
same axis as the nave, and owing to modern alterations there is little guide to the earlier history of the
building. The chancel and north transept seem to
be early fourteenth-century work, their walls being
unusually thin, nowhere more than 2 ft.
The south transept is a modern addition in poor
Gothic style, of much larger area than the north transept, and contains nothing of note beyond the large
white marble monument of Thomas Missing, 1733,
with his arms, gules a cheveron between three molets
argent and a chief or.
The chancel, 15 ft. 8 in. by 13 ft., has a modern
two-light east window, on the north a repaired squareheaded window of two trefoiled lights, c. 1320, and
on the south a single uncusped light. To the west
of this a pointed arch of two orders opens to the
south chapel, which has a two-light east window cinquefoiled, and a modern south doorway. To the north
of the window is a plain corbel for an image. The
chancel arch, which seems to be of fourteenth-century
work, dies out at the springing, and on the same line
at the west of the south chapel is a half arch with a
moulded string at the springing, which looks like
early thirteenth-century detail.
The north transept, 12 ft. 9 in. by 8 ft. 6 in., which
opens to the nave by an arch like the chancel arch,
has a three-light north window with net tracery, and
a square-headed east window of two lights, both
c. 1320–30. In the north wall is a narrow doorway,
and west of it a blocked low side window with an
internal rebate for a wooden frame. The doorway
now opens to a modern vestry built against the north
wall of the transept. In the west wall of the transept is a single trefoiled fourteenth-century light.
The nave, 51 ft. 3 in. by 19 ft., has three squareheaded north windows, each of two trefoiled lights,
one south window of the same type, and a four-centred
south doorway, all of fifteenth-century style, but
mostly of modern masonry. There is a three-light
west window with a circular window over it, both
modern.
The roofs of the chancel, nave, and north transept
are old, but without detail by which their approximate
date may be deduced; all other woodwork in the
church is modern, except the pulpit, which is of
eighteenth-century date.
Externally the roofs are red-tiled, and at the west
end of the nave is a boarded turret containing one
bell by Clement Tosier, 1710.
The church of ST. MARY, HOOK, built in 1871,
is of stone in Early English style, and consists of
chancel, nave of four bays, aisles, transepts, north and
south porches, and a western turret containing one
bell. The register dates from 1871.
The church of ST. PAUL, SARISBURY, built in
1836, and partly rebuilt and enlarged in 1888, is of
brick and stone in Early English style, and consists of
chancel, with organ chamber and vestry, nave, transepts, and western tower containing a clock and one
bell. The register dates from 1837.
The font, near the south door, has an octagonal bowl
on a short stem, and may be of fifteenth-century
date. This church is now used only as a mortuary
chapel, a new building of the same name having been
erected in 1871 to serve as the parish church.
ADVOWSONS
The first mention of the advowson of Titchfield appears to
be in 1231, when the right of
presentation was granted with the manor to the
abbot and convent of Titchfield. (fn. 174) The abbey
presented from 1302 to 1539, and from that time the
descent of both the manor and advowson are identical till 1856, when the patronage passed to the
dean and chapter of Winchester. (fn. 175)
There was a church at Crofton in 1086 which is
probably identical with the chapel of St. Edmund
mentioned in the fourteenth century in connexion with
the grant of the manor to the abbot and convent of
Titchfield. (fn. 176) As it was never assessed separately in
any ecclesiastical valuation, and there is no evidence
to show that it has ever been a separate ecclesiastical
unit, it was probably a chapel of ease to Titchfield
and was served by the same incumbent. The ecclesiastical parish of Crofton was formed from Titchfield
in 1871.
The living of St. Mary's, Hook, is a vicarage in the
gift of the bishop of Winchester, and that of St. Paul's
Sarisbury, also a vicarage, is in the gift of the vicar of
Titchfield. There is an iron church at Lee-on-theSolent, Congregational chapels at Sarisbury and Warsash, a Baptist chapel at Sarisbury, and a Wesleyan
chapel at Lee-on-the-Solent.
CHARITIES
The charities of Robert Godfrey,
of Henry earl of Southampton, and
Richard Godwin, are now dispensed
under a scheme issued by the Charity Commissioners,
dated 17 December, 1897, and 9 December, 1902,
under the title of 'The Charities of the Earl of
Southampton and Others.' Robert Godfrey's charity
founded by deed 1597, consists of land, cottages, and
stable, let at £28 a year. Richard Godwin's charity
is a rent-charge of £4 issuing out of Pressmoore's
estate at Glastonbury, Somerset. The trust estates of
the earl of Southampton's charity consist of about
twenty-seven acres of land, tenements, and gardengrounds, producing a gross income of £115 a year.
By the schemes above referred to the annuity of £4
is directed to be applied in the advancement of the
education of children in a public elementary school,
by way of prizes, together with a further sum of
£10 out of the general income, and subject thereto
the residue of the yearly income for the benefit of
poor persons resident in the civil parish, and in
default in the ancient parish of Titchfield. In 1905
£24 was paid to pensioners, £5 in tools for apprentices,
and subscriptions were made to provident clubs.
Mrs. Charlotte Hornby, by her will proved 1890,
bequeathed a legacy represented by £1,865 5s. 8d.
consols, the income from which, amounting to £46, is
applied equally in subscriptions to clothing clubs and
in the distribution of blankets at Christmas.
Seymour Robert Delmé in 1894 bequeathed
£1,000 to the vicar and churchwardens of Titchfield
church, which is invested in consols to the amount of
£910 12s., the income from which, amounting to
£22 15s., to be distributed among the poor. He
also left £500 invested in consols to the amount of
£455 5s. 8d., producing an income of £11 7s. for the
repair of the church.
A recreation ground, 4 acres in extent, was by an
award in 1866 dedicated to the use of the parishioners,
to which an additional 5 acres was given by deed in
1897.
Seymour Robert Delmé, by his will proved in
1894, left £1,383 7s. 5d. India stock, producing an
income of £41 10s., one-third of which is to be
applied in the advancement of the children of Crofton, and two-thirds for the benefit of the poor. In
1867 4 acres and 22 poles of land were awarded to
Crofton as a recreation ground, any profits from the
pasturage, averaging £3 a year, to be applied for
public uses.
In 1885 E. J. Sartoris gave a site, and building
thereon, to be used as a reading room for Hook with
Warsash.
In 1866 a recreation ground of 6 acres and
22 poles was awarded for the use of the inhabitants
of Sarisbury, and by deed dated 1892 Mrs. L.
Seymour gave a parish room, which was vested
in 'The Official Trustee of Charity Lands,' by
an order of the Charity Commissioners, dated
5 July, 1892.