STOKE MANDEVILLE
Stoches, xi cent; Stoke by Aylesbury, Stoke
Maundevile, xiv cent.
The parish of Stoke Mandeville lies in the Vale of
Aylesbury and now contains over 1,499 acres of land.
Until 1885 some land at Prestwood formed a detached
portion of the parish, but in that year it was attached
for civil purposes to Great and Little Hampden
parish. (fn. 1) This estate, lying close to Great Hampden,
belonged from early times to the Hampdens, Alexander
de Hampden in the 13th century granting common
of pasture at Prestwood to the abbey of Missenden. (fn. 2)
It afterwards became famous as the particular piece of
land for which John Hampden refused to pay shipmoney. In 1863 a memorial was put up near Honor
End Farm, with the following inscription:—'For
these lands in Stoke Mandeville John Hampden was
assessed 20s. ship-money, levied by command of the
king without authority of law, 4 August 1635. By
resisting this claim of the king in legal strife, he upheld
the rights of the people under the law and became
entitled to grateful remembrance. His work on earth
ended after the conflict in Chalgrove Field, the 18 June
1643. And he rests in Great Hampden Church.'
The main part of the parish is very flat, the land lying for the most part about 300 ft. above the Ordnance
datum. (fn. 3) The greater part, particularly in the north,
is laid down in permanent grass, with about 497 acres
of arable land and no wood. (fn. 4) The subsoil is Gault
and Upper Greensand and the surface stiff wet clay.
It is well watered by a small tributary of the Thame
which runs through the parish from south-west to
north-east and flows close to the old church on the
east side, serving the ditches of a rectangular inclosure
near to the church and extending round the churchyard.
There are moats at Brook Farm and Moat Farm.
Two high roads pass through the parish, one from
Aylesbury to Wendover, and the other from Aylesbury
to Princes Risborough. The latter passes through
the village of Stoke Mandeville. The Great Western
Railway and the Metropolitan Extension Railway,
which has a station at Stoke Mandeville, cross the
parish. Stoke Mandeville parish was inclosed by
Act of Parliament, the award being given on 13
December 1798. (fn. 5)
The houses in the village are mostly of red brick,
one or two of the 18th century, and some thatched.
The old church lies on low ground three-quarters of
a mile south of the village and was for this reason
deserted, a new church being built in the village.
Stoke House, now a farm, is a pretty square 18th-century building with parts of a moat on the west and
north sides lying between the village and the old church.
Stoke Grange to the north of the village, Hall End to
the west, and Whitethorne Farm, are outlying farms.
Manors
In the time of King Edward the
Confessor the manor of STOKE
MANDEVILLE was held by Bishop
Wulfwig (fn. 6) of Dorchester, and after the Norman
Conquest William I restored it to the episcopal see,
then held by his favourite Remigius. The grant
was confirmed to Lincoln by William Rufus, (fn. 7) and the
bishops remained the overlords of the manor till the
17th century. (fn. 8) At the time of the Domesday Survey, (fn. 9)
however, the manor of Stoke Mandeville was appendant to the church of Aylesbury, a prebend of
Lincoln Cathedral.
At the close of the 12th century the manor was
held in two parts of the Bishop of Lincoln, each of
his tenants holding the fee of one knight.
One moiety was in the hands of a Kentish family,
taking their name from Eynsford. In 1166 (fn. 10) a
William de Eynsford held six knights' fees of the
Bishop of Lincoln, and his heir appears to have been
called Roger, since at the close of the 12th century a
William son of Roger held one fee in Stoke Mandeville. (fn. 11) This William may be identified with the
William de Eynsford who made a grant of one virgate
of land in Stoke in 1199. (fn. 12) At his death, which took
place before 1231, (fn. 13) he held the 'manor of Stoke,'
which was delivered by the king's escheators to the
Bishop of Lincoln during the minority of the heir,
another William de Eynsford, (fn. 14) who presumably was
seised of this part of Stoke when he came of age. He
seems to have left two daughters (fn. 15) as his heirs, one of
whom married Nicholas de Cryel and the other William
Heringaud. (fn. 16) The heiress of William Heringaud was
Christiana, the wife of William de Kirkeby, (fn. 17) and she
appears to have inherited the moiety of the manor of
Stoke Mandeville. A certain Agnes daughter of Robert
de la Lese of Eynsford had some right in it, however,
since in 1282 (fn. 18) she quitclaimed it to both Nicholas
son of Nicholas de Cryel and to William de Kirkeby
and Christiana. In 1301 or 1302, (fn. 19) William de
Kirkeby died seised of this moiety of the manor, held
in right of his wife and she held it alone in 1302–3. (fn. 20)
In 1309, (fn. 21) however, she granted her moiety of the
manor to William Inge. During her life she was to
hold it of him at the rent of £10 a year, (fn. 22) the reversion being to William and his heirs, to hold of Christiana and her heirs. William Inge granted the moiety
to his daughter Joan on her marriage with Eudo la
Zouche. (fn. 23) Eudo died in 1326, (fn. 24) and Joan claimed
the manor as part of her own inheritance. She afterwards married Sir William Moton, (fn. 25) who held half a
knight's fee in Stoke Mandeville in 1346. (fn. 26) Another
Sir William Moton, probably his grandson, died seised
in 1393 (fn. 27) of a manor in Stoke Mandeville called
OLDBURY MANOR, (fn. 28) which may probably be identified with the 'moiety of the manor of Stoke Mandeville,' leaving a son Robert as his heir, a minor at his
father's death.
Robert Moton obtained seisin of the manor, (fn. 29) but it
was claimed by (fn. 30) William la Zouche of 'Totteneys,'
the grandson of Eudo la Zouche and Joan. William
based his claim on the original grant by William Inge
which was made to Eudo and Joan (fn. 31) and the heirs of
their bodies, so that her heir by Sir William Moton
had no right in the manor. The suit was protracted
since Robert Moton was abroad on the king's service (fn. 32)
in 1402, but William la Zouche was apparently successful, as he held the manor of Stoke Mandeville in
1409. (fn. 33) In that year he granted it to Henry, Bishop
of Winchester, Hugh Mortimer, Robert Isham, and
John Neubold. From these feoffees this manor must
shortly have passed to Henry Brudenell, a younger son
of William Brudenell of Aynho. (fn. 34) By his will, dated
22 Jan. 1430–1, he left the manor of Oldbury to his
third son Robert, (fn. 35) from whom descended the Brudenells of Stoke Mandeville. (fn. 36) Robert was succeeded by
his son John Brudenell, who died in 1533, (fn. 37) but the
manor is not mentioned among the lands held at his
death. (fn. 38)
His grandson Francis, (fn. 39) however, died seised of the
manor of Oldbury, (fn. 40) and it passed to his son and
grandson, both called Edmund. Both Francis and
Edmund his son held the manor of Oldbury, (fn. 41)
and another manor in the parish called NEWBURY
(q.v.), names which had disappeared by 1813, (fn. 42)
and it seems probable that the two moieties of the
manor of Stoke Mandeville were united. In various
settlements made by the Brudenells the 'manor of
Stoke Mandeville' (fn. 43) is the name used apparently for
the same property which had been included under
Newbury and Oldbury. Edmund Brudenell the
grandson of Francis, together with Joyce his wife, quitclaimed the manor in 1628 (fn. 44) to Christopher Parkins
and his heirs, but this may only have been a settlement.
Lipscomb (fn. 45) gives 1639 as the date of the sale by
Edmund Brudenell to Thomas Harborne.
In 1712 (fn. 46) Thomas Jackson was said by the same
historian to have been in possession of Stoke Mandeville and he died there in 1723. He was possibly
succeeded by his son John, who endowed a
charity in the parish. (fn. 47) In 1745, however, John
Smith held the manor and obtained a quitclaim
from Henry Eggleton and Dorothy his wife. (fn. 48) It
seems probable that he may have been succeeded by
William Wiseman Clarke, whose grandmother Elizabeth was a daughter of another John Smith, possibly
his father. (fn. 49) William Wiseman Clarke, the greatgrandson of Elizabeth, held the manor of Stoke Mandeville in the latter part of the 18th century, (fn. 50) and in
1790, (fn. 51) he sold it to Charles Lucas of Aylesbury, who
was lord of the manor in 1813. (fn. 52) His daughter held
it in 1862, (fn. 53) and it is now the property of Mr. Edward
Lucas.
The other fee in Stoke Mandeville was held of the
Bishop of Lincoln at the close of the 13th century, by
Geoffrey de Mandeville in dower of his wife. In 1254, (fn. 54)
however, he was said to hold the whole of Stoke, but
this is probably due to an omission, since the other
moiety was held separately and directly from the
Bishop of Lincoln. Geoffrey died before 1269 (fn. 55)
leaving his son John de Mandeville as his heir. The
manor and parish seem to have taken their name from
Geoffrey de Mandeville, but his family did not hold
the fee for long, since John
held no lands in Buckinghamshire at his death. (fn. 56) In
1284–6 (fn. 57) his moiety was held
by John de Kirkeby, Bishop
of Ely, but it has not been
traced how he obtained it.
Shortly afterwards he granted
it to his brother William de
Kirkeby and his wife Christiana for their lives. (fn. 58) William
died seised in 1301 or 1302, (fn. 59)
and Christiana held it alone
in 1302–3 (fn. 60) and 1316. (fn. 61) William de Kirkeby was his
brother's heir; (fn. 62) hence on Christiana's death some
time after 1316 (fn. 63) the Bishop of Ely's moiety of Stoke
Mandeville passed to the heirs of William. He had
no children and his lands were divided amongst his
four sisters, (fn. 64) Stoke Mandeville forming part of the
share of his eldest sister Margaret. She had married
Walter Doseville, (fn. 65) but both she and her husband predeceased Christiana. Her eldest son John died without direct heirs, (fn. 66) and Hugh Doseville his brother (fn. 67)
succeeded to the moiety of the manor, which seems to
have been settled on Hugh in 1313. (fn. 68) In 1314 (fn. 69) he
enfeoffed Master John Doseville and Robert Doseville and the heirs of Robert of its reversion. Robert
was in seisin in 1332, (fn. 70) when Robert son of William
Grimbaud, the descendant of another of the heiresses
of William de Kirkeby, claimed a moiety of the manor
of Stoke Mandeville from him. Hugh Doseville was
called to give warranty, (fn. 71) but the suit was indefinitely
postponed, as one of the parties was under age.
Mandeville. Quarterly or and gules.
The Dosevilles, however, were not dispossessed, since
in 1346 (fn. 72) Nicholas Doseville had succeeded Robert.
The manor appears to have undergone a further subdivision, since three tenants appear, and the Dosevilles held only a half of a knight's fee. (fn. 73) Nicholas
Doseville seems to have been the last of that name to
hold the moiety of Stoke Mandeville manor, and possibly left two daughters as his heiresses. The moiety
seems to have been the inheritance of Joan the wife
of Robert Derwalshaw and Cecilia the wife of Sir
Robert le Straunge. (fn. 74) In 1372 the latter complained
that she had been disseised of the manor of Stoke
Mandeville by Robert Derwalshaw and Joan, but in
1374 (fn. 75) Robert le Straunge and his wife and her heirs
quitclaimed a moiety of the manor to Derwalshaw and
Joan and her heirs. These latter granted the reversion, to fall in on their deaths, to John de Kyngesfold,
who in turn sold it to Alice Perrers the celebrated
mistress of Edward III. (fn. 76) She deputed John Bernes
and others to receive her interest from Robert Derwalshaw (fn. 77) on the understanding that they should re-enfeoff Robert and Joan for their lives. This was done,
but on the attainder of Alice Perrers the moiety of
the manor was seized by the king's escheators, (fn. 78) though
she had no right in it, but only in the reversion. She,
however, also held two-thirds of a messuage in Stoke
Mandeville (fn. 79) of Robert Derwalshaw. In 1378 (fn. 80)
Robert, his wife having died, obtained restitution of
his moiety to hold for life without paying rent, on
condition that he kept it without waste. The reversion was vested in the king, (fn. 81) who, however, granted
it in 1380 in fee simple to Sir William de Windsor, (fn. 82)
who had married Alice Perrers. To whom it afterwards passed does not appear. Sir William apparently
held no lands in Buckinghamshire at his death, (fn. 83)
and the family of Brudenell seem to have obtained
possession of this moiety of Stoke Mandeville at
this time. It seems possible that it was known as
the manor of Newbury. Edmund Brudenell, the
eldest son of William Brudenell of Aynho and
Raans, (fn. 84) was a Clerk of Parliament during the reigns
of Edward III and Richard II, and is said (fn. 85) to have
held the manor, but it is not mentioned in his will,
dated 21 June 1425. His only daughter and heiress
Alice (fn. 86) became a nun, and his lands in Stoke Mandeville may have passed to his brother Henry, whose
descendant Francis Brudenell of Stoke Mandeville
died seised of the manors of Newbury and Oldbury in
1601–2. (fn. 87) The two manors were held together from
this time, and the manor of Newbury followed the
same descent as Oldbury (q.v.).
In 1254 (fn. 88) Geoffrey de Mandeville held the view
of frankpledge in Stoke Mandeville and paid 18s. a
year for the right. In 1616–17 Edmund Brudenell
obtained a grant of view of frankpledge to be held
twice a year for his tenants in Stoke Mandeville,
Ellesborough, and Little Kimble. (fn. 89) The Clarkes of
Ardington also held view of frankpledge and many
other rights. (fn. 90) William de Kirkeby (fn. 91) obtained a grant
of free warren in his demesne lands in Stoke Halling,
a hamlet in the parish, from Edward I.
The manor of BURLEYS apparently took its
name from the family of Burley who held land in
Stoke Mandeville in the early part of the 14th century. It seems to have been held at that time
of the Kirkebys, but afterwards, about 1346, of the
Bishop of Lincoln himself. In 1304 (fn. 92) Peter de
Leycestre died seised of lands in Stoke Halling, held
of Robert de Burley and his heirs, and in 1313 (fn. 93)
the same Robert obtained certain lands in Stoke
Mandeville from William Billy. In 1346 (fn. 94) William
de Burley's name appears as paying the feudal aid
due from one knight's fee in Stoke Mandeville,
which had formerly been held by Christiana de
Kirkeby. The division of the two knights' fees belonging to the Bishop of Lincoln at this time suggests
that a mistake was made in the return, since it seems
unlikely that only one fee remained to the heirs of
William and Christiana de Kirkeby respectively, while
the other fee had been alienated to the Burleys.
More probably William de Burley, who may have previously held of the Kirkebys, now held his land directly
of the Bishop of Lincoln, and so appears for the first
time as paying the feudal aid due from his land. In
1354 (fn. 95) Alice de Burley, possibly the widow of William, held land in Stoke Mandeville. In the 15th
century the manor of Burleys came into the possession
of the elder branch of the Brudenell family. Edmund
Brudenell of Raans, (fn. 96) nephew of that Henry Brudenell who first held the manor of Oldbury, granted
Burleys Manor in 1452 to Edmund Rede and
others, presumably as trustees. Edmund Brudenell
died in 1470 (fn. 97) and was succeeded by his son
Drew, (fn. 98) but whether the latter ever was seised of
the manor is not certain. At his death (fn. 99) no mention is made of it, but it afterwards came into
the possession of his nephew Thomas, who inherited
part of his lands. Drew's son and heir, Edmund,
died, leaving no children, (fn. 100) and in 1538 Thomas
Brudenell held a court baron for Burleys Manor. (fn. 101)
In the next year he sold it. (fn. 102) to John Bosse, in whose
name the manorial court was held. (fn. 103) From John
Bosse (fn. 104) it passed to his descendants Richard, Francis,
Samuel, and Thomas Bosse in turn. (fn. 105) The lastnamed, together with his wife Elizabeth, sold the
manor of Burleys in 1617 to Alexander Jennings, (fn. 106)
who was holding it in 1640, (fn. 107) when his land was
assessed at the yearly value of 50s. Lands in Stoke
Mandeville were conveyed by Francis Jennings of
Stoke Mandeville to Richard Jennings in 1653, (fn. 108)
but the manor of Burleys is not mentioned in
the indenture. In 1664 (fn. 109) the land formerly
held by Alexander Jennings was held by Anne Jennings, widow, and Michael Jennings. In the 18th
century the manor was held by John Smith (fn. 110) with
the manor of Stoke Mandeville, and afterwards passed
to the Clarkes of Ardington.
The family of Stonor acquired lands in Stoke
Mandeville and Stoke Halling during the 13th century, and their lands were afterwards called the manor
of STONORS. In 1297–8 (fn. 111) Robert Albon and his
wife Alice sold some land in Stoke Halling to Peter de
Leycester. Peter died about 1304 (fn. 112) seised of several
tenements there, which he held of various lords, and
they passed to his kinswoman Juliana de Leycestre the
wife of Walter de Bernthorp. The latter was presented in 1305–6 (fn. 113) for obstructing a common road at
Stoke Halling, but in 1323, after the death of Juliana, (fn. 114)
Robert Albon released to John de Stonor his whole
right in the land that had belonged to Peter de
Leycestre or Gilbert Poygant; Peter de Barton
and Nicholas de Leycestre also quitclaimed (fn. 115) tenements in Stoke Halling to John de Stonor. Juliana's
husband held his wife's lands for life. Thus the
Stonors seem to have succeeded Juliana de Leycester,
and both Peter de Leycestre and John de Stonor
held some of their lands in Stoke of the Burleys. (fn. 116)
John de Stonor died in 1354 (fn. 117) and was succeeded by
his son and heir, another John de Stonor. The lands
in Stoke Mandeville passed after his death to his son
Edmund Stonor, (fn. 118) who in turn was succeeded by his
son John. The latter, who was a minor, died before he attained his majority, (fn. 119) and his lands passed
to his younger brother Ralph in 1389 or 1390. (fn. 120)
Ralph enfeoffed William Sutton and others of
lands and tenements in Stoke Mandeville, (fn. 121) but
this was presumably merely a settlement, since he
died seised of tenements there in 1394. (fn. 122) This, however, seems to be the last time that the Stonors are
mentioned as holding this estate.
In the 15th century the manor of Stonors in Stoke
Mandeville apparently came into the possession of
the Brudenells. Edmund Brudenell, who had held
the manor of Burleys before 1452, (fn. 123) does not seem
to have held Stonors Manor as well, and possibly it
remained with the Stonors until the time of Thomas
Stonor, who in 1470 (fn. 124) sold the manor of BiertonStonors in the neighbouring parish of Bierton. Thomas
Brudenell, however, held the manor of Sconors about
1539, apparently in right of his wife. She was
Elizabeth Fitz William, (fn. 125) and it does not seem likely
that she can have had any right in the manor except by
a marriage settlement. They sold it in 1540, (fn. 126) together with Burleys Manor, to John Bosse, from which
time the two manors were held together.
A mill is mentioned in Domesday Book, (fn. 127) and was
then worth 10s. a year, but to which moiety of Stoke
Mandeville it afterwards appertained does not appear.
In 1628 (fn. 128) Edmund Brudenell, who was then seised of
the whole manor, held a water-mill amongst the
appurtenances.
Churches
The church of ST. MARY is a
modern structure consisting of a
chancel, nave, south aisle, and southwest tower, and is constructed of flints with brick
quoins and dressings to the windows. It was built in
1886, and is designed in a style distantly approaching
that of the 13th century.
The OLD CHURCH consists of a chancel 24 ft. by
12 ft., and a nave 40 ft. by 17 ft. 9in., within the
western end of which is built a late brick tower, a
south aisle 7 ft. 6 in. wide, and a half-timbered north
porch. The narrow chancel arch appears to be the
only remaining architectural feature of a small 12thcentury church which consisted of a nave of the
same size and a chancel somewhat shorter than the
present ones. In the first half of the 13th century
the chancel was lengthened, but the side walls were
probably not rebuilt, and the south aisle was added in
the first quarter of the 14th century, and the large
north-east window of the nave probably dates from
the middle of the same century. In the 15th century the nave walls were raised, and a low-pitched
roof put on, but the only clearstory windows appear
to be of much later date. The tower belongs to the
last half of the 17th century.
The east window of the chancel is of three cinquefoiled lights with trefoiled lights over, beneath a twocentred head, and is of 15th-century date. The
north wall is without openings, but the south contains
two windows. That to the east is a 13th-century
lancet with a wide internal splay and external rebate, and
beneath it is a 13th-century piscina with a shouldered
head, and a drain in the sill of the recess. The
other window is square-headed, of two trefoiled lights,
the jambs being of 14th-century date, but the head of
the 15th. The mullions and jambs, both external and
internal, are moulded, the latter with a pointed bowtel. Between these windows is a very narrow doorway with a chamfered three-centred head, probably of
the 15th century. The chancel arch is round-headed,
5 ft. 9 in. wide, of a single square order with a chamfered and beaded abacus, which is continued on the
west face up to the north wall of the nave. On
either side are two small roughly-cut squints, that on
the north side having a cinquefoiled head about midway in the thickness of the wall. It has been blocked
with a thin brick wall of recent date, and the southern
squint is entirely built up on the west side.
The north wall of the nave, which probably retains
in the lower part its 12th-century walling, has one
large 14th-century window near the east end, from
which the tracery has been removed and replaced by
a wooden frame. The north door is of 14th-century
date, with a continuous wave-mould in the jambs and
two-centred head. The porch is perhaps of the 15th
century, with a low-pitched roof, which cuts into the
label of the doorway. It is entirely of timber construction. The south arcade is of three bays with
octagonal piers, and moulded capitals and bases, the
latter very plain. The arches are two-centred, of two
chamfered orders, both chamfers having carefully designed stops, those in the inner order taking the form of
heads of men or beasts, and the label of ogee section
has grotesque human heads for drips. The west window of the aisle is of late 15th-century date, with
three cinquefoiled lights under a three-centred arch.
The two clearstory windows are square-headed and
perfectly plain, probably 18th-century insertions, one
at the south-east to light the pulpit, the other at the
north-west to light a west gallery. The south aisle
has a 15th-century east window of two cinquefoiled
lights with tracery under a square head; to the north
of it is a small image bracket. In the south wall the
eastern window is of two trefoiled lights with a
quatrefoil over of flowing tracery, c. 1325, and just
to the east of the south doorway is a single threecentred light of late date. West of the doorway is a
square-headed 15th-century window of two cinquefoiled
lights, and rather coarse detail. The south doorway
has a two-centred head of a single hollow-chamfered
order, and is of the date of the arcade.
The east wall of the tower is of plastered brickwork,
and is carried on a pointed arch which springs on the
north from a chamfered respond with an engaged
shaft, and on the south from a complete pier of the same
detail, set a little to the west of the second column
of the south arcade, but to the north of its line.
It stands free on all sides, the wall which it carries
butting against the north face of the arcade, the label
of which is cut away from this point. The mouldings
of arch and pier are carefully worked in plaster on a
brick core, the details of the capitals being of the
Tuscan order, and above the arch is a moulded string
breaking up over the crown. The stair is on the
north side, being carried up from the first floor in an
octagonal turret at the north-east, finished with a
domed cap of brickwork. The windows of the belfry
stage are of two pointed lights under a round head
with a pierced spandrel, and there is a similar window
in the second story on the west.
The chancel roof is underdrawn with a plaster
ceiling and covered with red tiles; the nave roof is
plain work of 15th-century date, and the aisle roof is
probably contemporary with it. In the chancel arch
are the marks of a screen, and also in the east respond
of the south arcade.
The church has been abandoned since the building
of the new church, and is now in a deplorable condition. The nave roof is rotten and full of holes, the
walls cracked and sodden with rain, and the whole
building smothered in ivy, which has pushed its way
through the roofs and unglazed windows. A few
decaying pews remain in the nave, which is open to
any chance comer, and desecrated with the scribbled
names of trippers. (fn. 129)
A few fittings taken from it are preserved in the
new church. The font is octagonal, of the 15th century, with square panels on the bowl, the alternate
panels containing a rose, a leaf pattern, a blank shield,
and what seems to be the representation of a shrine
with a gabled top, on which is a cresting of trefoiled
arches, with a cross at either end.
There is also a canopied tomb of Jacobean style to
three children of Edmund Brudenell, with a rhyming
inscription:—
Cruell death by mortal blades
Hathe slaine foure of my Tender babes
Whereof Mary Thomas and Dorothye
Within this place there bodies lie
But God which never man deceaved
Hath their souls to him receaved
This death to them is greatest gayne
Increasinge their joy freeing them from payne
O Dorathie my blessed childe
Which lovingly lyved and dyed mild
Thou wert my tenth even God's own choys
In the exceedingly I did rejoyse
Upon Good friday at night my doll depted
Adew my sweet and most true hearted
My bodye with thine I desyre should lye
When God hath appointed me to dye
Hoping through Christ he will provide
For my soul wth thyne in heaven to abide
And I your father Edmund Brudenell
Untill the resurection with the will dwell
And so adew my sweet lambs three
Untill in heaven I shall you see
Such is my hope of Richard my son
Whose body lieth buried in King's Sutton.
There are five bells, the treble and second by Ellis
Knight, 1633, the third of 1730, the fourth of 1659,
an early work of the younger Henry Knight, and
the tenor by Ellis Knight, 1636.
A plated set of communion vessels is in use;
other silver plate exists but cannot, it is alleged, be
found.
The registers are said to be lost.
Advowson
The chapel of Stoke Mandeville
was originally appendant to the prebendal church of Aylesbury, together
with the chapelries of Bierton, Buckland, and Quarrendon. (fn. 130) In 1266 (fn. 131) the four chapels were granted
by the Bishop of Lincoln to the Dean and Chapter of
Lincoln, and in 1294 (fn. 132) a vicarage was instituted of
Bierton Church, with the chapels of Stoke Mandeville,
Buckland, and Quarrendon. A separate chaplain was
to be found by the vicar of Bierton to serve the chapel
of Stoke Mandeville, (fn. 133) the altar dues being worth
7 marks a year. In 1858 the chapels of Stoke
Mandeville and Buckland (fn. 134) were separated from
Bierton, and formed separate benefices. The Dean
and Chapter of Lincoln are still patrons of the living,
which is now a vicarage. The rectorial estate has
belonged since 1294 to the dean and chapter.
It was leased by them in the 18th century to the
governors of Christ's Hospital, London, who held
it in 1813 and 1862. (fn. 135) The rectorial estate became
the property of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in
1870. (fn. 136)
A detached portion of Stoke Mandeville parish, at
Prestwood, was amalgamated in 1852 (fn. 137) with parts of
Hughenden and Great Missenden parishes, and assigned to the Consolidated Chapelry of Prestwood,
which forms a separate ecclesiastical parish. The
living is a vicarage, of which Mr. C. D. Disraeli
is the patron. The church of the Holy Trinity
was built shortly before the formation of the parish,
and was consecrated in 1849. It was enlarged
in 1885.
There is a Wesleyan chapel in Stoke Mandeville,
built in 1818.
George Shaw, (fn. 138) who was curate of Stoke Mandeville and Buckland in 1774, attained considerable fame as a naturalist in the 18th century.
He was the younger son of the Rev. Timothy Shaw,
the vicar of Bierton, and was born in 1751, and as a
boy showed his love for natural history. He was
ordained deacon in 1774, but afterwards abandoned
the Church as a profession, to study medicine at
Edinburgh. He then went to Oxford as botanical
lecturer. He took part in 1788 in the founding of
the Linnaean Society in London, where he had practised for a year, and became one of the vice-presidents
of the society. In 1791 Shaw was appointed assistantkeeper of the natural history section of the British
Museum, and was keeper from 1807 till his death in
1813. He was an indefatigable worker, and the writer
of many scientific papers and books.
Charities
In 1726 John Jackson, for carrying out the desire of his late father,
Thomas Jackson, by deed settled a
yearly rent-charge of £1 for providing 120 twopenny
loaves of good wholesome bread for the poor on
Easter Day. The rent-charge is paid out of three cottages situated near the Bull Inn.
Charity of Annabella Ligo, founded by indenture
of 15 October 1733, consists of 3 roods in this parish,
let at £2 a year. In 1907 45 poor persons received
gifts of bread in respect of these charities.
Unknown donor—In the Parliamentary returns of
1786, a yearly sum of £2 10s. was stated to be distributed to the poor of this parish, who also had a
right to forty days' thrashing of wheat, barley, and
bean straw. In respect of this charity, the sum of
£5 a year was formerly paid by the Governors of
Christ's Hospital under a lease from the Dean and
Chapter of Lincoln of the rectorial estate of this
parish, which became the property of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners in 1870.
The charge was redeemed by the Ecclesiastical
Commissioners in 1880 by the transfer to the official
trustees of £167 new 3 per cent. stock, now consols,
now producing yearly £4. 3s. 4d., which is distributed
in gifts of money.