EMMINGTON
The ancient parish covered only 740 acres before
1932, (fn. 1) when it was united with Chinnor for civil purposes. (fn. 2) The combined parishes now cover 3,450
acres. Emmington lies in the plain on the north side
of the Chilterns; it was bounded in the north by the
county boundary between Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire and on the west a small stream, running
parallel with the main road from Thame to Chinnor,
was its only natural boundary.
The ancient parish lay in the Clay belt and was
mostly about 270 feet above sea level, but in the
centre and south the land rose slightly to about 325
feet. (fn. 3) Since 1877 at least the village has been approached by a road branching off the Thame-Chinnor road at the point where the 'Plough and Harrow'
stands, but this road is not marked on Sir Henry
Ashhurst's map of 1697 or on Davis's map of 1797. (fn. 4)
The main approach used to be by the old TowerseyChinnor road, called Burgidge Way at the Chinnor
end, which ran to the east of the village. Both this
way and the way to Henton, shown on the maps of
1697 and 1797, disappeared when Chinnor fields
were inclosed. (fn. 5)
The village stands on a slight eminence at about
315 feet up and is T-shaped. (fn. 6) Village Farm and a
few cottages lie along the arms of the T, and Manor
Farm and the one-time Rectory lie in the main
street. The church which lies to the south can only be
reached by a grass path. The manor-house no longer
exists. In the Middle Ages it belonged to the Sackville family, and deeds were often witnessed by them
at Emmington. (fn. 7) There is a record in 1275 and 1316,
in the time of Jordan and Andrew de Sackville,
of the house's court or close, its garden and dovecot. (fn. 8)
In the 15th century the family was allied by marriage
with the Malyns family, their neighbours at Henton,
in Chinnor. (fn. 9) In the 16th and 17th centuries the
house was the home of the Hampden family,
notably of Richard Hampden, the cousin of the
parliamentarian John Hampden, (fn. 10) and the tradition
that the house was blown up by gunpowder in the
Civil War is likely to be correct. Opposing troops
were frequently in the neighbourhood; the house
does not appear in the hearth-tax lists of the 1660s,
and Sir Henry Ashhurst's map of 1697 shows only
what appear to be a part of its foundations in the
large Court Close, lying to the south of the church. (fn. 11)
The cartographer seems to have drawn the stonepaved fish-pond and a part of the moat, of which
traces can still be seen today.
Manor Farm was by far the largest house in the
village in 1665, when Jeremiah White returned eight
hearths for the hearth tax, and the map of 1697 shows
it as a large L-shaped house with four bays in the
main wing and one bay in the other wing. (fn. 12) A part
of the old building still remains: the main wing was
refronted in the 18th century with chequer brick and
given some sash windows, but its original timber
construction can be seen at the back. The other wing
has been pulled down. What may have been a brewhouse, judging from the name Bruehouse Close
adjoining it, (fn. 13) which was standing in front of Manor
Farm in 1697, has also been pulled down. The
Rectory, a private house since 1908, was largely
rebuilt in 1874 by the architect, E. G. Bruton,
although its Jacobean wing of brick with a massive
chimney-stack was retained; the builders were
Messrs. Holland of Thame. (fn. 14) In 1818, after a long
period of non-resident rectors, the old house was
said to be only a cottage and unfit for a clergyman's
residence; in 1852 it was described as a 'very old
neglected building'. (fn. 15) Village Farm, occupied by
Thomas Howlett in 1697, is still substantially a
17th-century house, although like Manor Farm it
has been refronted at a later date with chequer
brick. Some of the 17th-century smaller houses have
also survived as cottages. What is now called the Old
Gamekeeper's Cottage was the house of Joseph Cox,
a carpenter. (fn. 16)
In the past the village was always a compact one.
In 1738 and 1759 there were said to be thirteen
houses and the rector stated that the 'furthest was
not a furlong from the church'. (fn. 17) Waterlands Farm,
the only dwelling outside the village until modern
times, was built in the early 19th century. (fn. 18) In the
20th century new cottages were built along the road
connecting the village with the Thame road.
Emmington has always been entirely concerned
with agriculture, and has no claims to any special
distinction.
Manor.
In 1086 William Peverel held the 10
hides in EMMINGTON (fn. 19) which a certain Alwin
had held before the Conquest. (fn. 20) Together with
Mollington, this estate formed the Oxfordshire part
of the honor of Peverel until 1235–6. (fn. 21) In 1242–3
Mollington was still in the honor, but Emmington
was said to be held of the king. (fn. 22) It did suit at the
hundred court of Lewknor, (fn. 23) to which the lord of
the manor owed certain dues. In 1273 these were
said to be 8s. hidage and 2½d. wardsilver. (fn. 24) As the
hundred was attached to Wallingford honor from
1244 onwards (fn. 25) the manor could be described in
1394 as held of the king 'as of his honor of Wallingford.' (fn. 26) It formed part of the honor (fn. 27) and of its
successor, the honor of Ewelme until the mid-19th
century. (fn. 28)
Emmington, which was rated as 1 knight's fee,
was unusual in being held for nearly 400 years by one
family, the Sackvilles, a family of Norman origin,
which played a prominent part in the history of
Sussex and often served as knights of the shire and
sheriffs for the county. The first known member of
the family at Emmington was Geoffrey de Sackville,
the son of Jordan, a landholder in Essex, who
married Ela de Dene, a Sussex heiress, and died in
1175 or 1176. (fn. 29) Geoffrey was of age and a knight by
about 1190. (fn. 30) He probably did not acquire Emmington until after 1200, for between 1199 and 1203 the
manor was in the sheriff's hands and 4 marks
scutage were paid on the 2 fees of Emmington and
Mollington. (fn. 31) Soon after 1200 Geoffrey de Sackville held a 2½-fee in Oxfordshire; (fn. 32) this must have
represented Emmington, which he held in 1212,
although it was then rated as 1 fee. (fn. 33) He was still
alive in 1228, (fn. 34) but may have been dead by 1230
when his son Jordan had letters of protection on
accompanying the king to France. (fn. 35) Jordan died in
1232 or 1233, and the lands which he held of
Peverel honor and the wardship of his heir were
given in custody to Ralph FitzNicholas, (fn. 36) a steward
of the king's household, who was returned as holding
the Emmington fee in 1235. (fn. 37) In 1242–3 the manor
was in the custody of Nicholas Moles. (fn. 38) Jordan's
heir was another Jordan, probably his son, and the
Jordan son of Jordan who confirmed his ancestors'
grants to Colchester Abbey. (fn. 39) By 1255 he was in
possession of Emmington. (fn. 40) The younger Jordan
appears to have been an adherent of De Montfort and
consequently some of his manors were confiscated in
1265. (fn. 41) He died in 1273 and was succeeded by his
son Andrew, aged about 21, who held Emmington
in 1279. (fn. 42) Andrew died probably in 1290 for in
January 1291 his widow Ermentrude had custody of
his lands and of his heir Andrew II, who came of age
in about 1300. (fn. 43) In 1304 Andrew II had free warren
for himself and his heirs in his demesne lands in
Emmington, because of his good service in Scotland. (fn. 44) He was returned as holding the manor in
1316, (fn. 45) but died in the same year, leaving as his heir
a son Andrew III, aged about nine. (fn. 46) His widow
Joan was granted one-third of the manor as dower,
and custody of the other two-thirds during the
minority was granted to Robert de Sapey of Chinnor
and Crowell in part payment of his expenses incurred in the Scottish wars. (fn. 47) In 1327 Andrew had
delivery of his lands on coming of age (fn. 48) and in 1347
the grant of free warren in Emmington and his
other lands was renewed. (fn. 49)
Sir Andrew de Sackville had two wives. By the
first, Joan de la Beche, he had a son, Sir Andrew, who
died before his father; (fn. 50) by his second wife Maud he
had no children. But Andrew had two other children,
Thomas and Alice, the children of Joan Burgess,
and they were apparently illegitimate. He died in
1369, (fn. 51) and Emmington was then held for life by his
widow Maud, who married as her second husband,
Sir Edmund de la Pole, the younger brother of
Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk. (fn. 52) On her death
in 1393, the succession to Emmington was disputed.
According to the entail, it was to go to the right
heirs of Andrew de Sackville, with remainder to
Thomas de Sackville (or Burgess). (fn. 53) Thomas, by this
time a prominent Sussex knight, who had inherited
his father's other property, (fn. 54) was given possession,
but his right to the manor was questioned by another
Sir Thomas de Sackville, lord of Fawley (Bucks.), a
distant cousin, who claimed to be Sir Andrew de
Sackville's right heir. (fn. 55)
Thomas de Sackville of Buckhurst (Suss.) was in
possession of Emmington in 1407, when he presented to the church, but the presentation of 1411
was by a group of trustees, including the Recorder of
London, on whom he had settled both manor and
advowson. (fn. 56) In 1426 he entailed Emmington on his
son Edward, (fn. 57) who in 1432 succeeded his father (fn. 58)
and died in 1450. (fn. 59) Edward's son Humphrey, for
whom he had placed the manor in trust, lived until
1488. (fn. 60) In the meantime the Sackvilles of Fawley
had again been attempting to get possession of
Emmington, tracing their ancestry back to the 13thcentury Sackvilles of Emmington. There appears to
have been no foundation for their claim: the two
families probably descended from two sons of Herbrand, the Domesday tenant of Fawley, and since at
least the early 12th century had been quite separate. (fn. 61)
Nevertheless, in a case in 1437, in which Edward
Sackville sued Sir Thomas Sackville of Fawley for
cutting down trees at Emmington the latter unsuccessfully claimed to be the right heir of Andrew
de Sackville, as Andrew's son Thomas had been
illegitimate. (fn. 62) On a later occasion, in the 1470s,
Thomas Rookes, the husband of Margery Sackville,
the heiress of Fawley, again put forward a claim. He
was in possession of the advowson (fn. 63) and, when sued
for it by Humphrey Sackville, claimed that it should
belong to the Sackvilles of Fawley and gave a pedigree going back ten generations to a Jordan de Sackville. (fn. 64) The dispute was brought to an end in 1482,
when Rookes publicly quitclaimed Emmington
manor to Sackville, in front of ten Emmington
tenants. (fn. 65)
Humphrey Sackville was succeeded by his son
Richard, (fn. 66) who was knighted and died in 1524,
being succeeded by his eldest son John. His second
son Richard was to have an annuity of 20 marks a
year from Emmington manor. (fn. 67) John married Margaret Boleyn, the aunt of Queen Anne Boleyn, and
died in 1557; in his will he left £ 1 to his Emmington
tenants. (fn. 68) He was succeeded by his son Sir Richard
Sackville, Chancellor of the Court of Augmentations
and for many years an M.P., who on his death in
1566 left Emmington for life to his widow Winifred,
daughter of Sir John Bruges, Mayor of London,
who married as her second husband John Paulet,
Marquess of Winchester. (fn. 69) Sir Richard's son Sir
Thomas Sackville, who in 1567 was created Lord
Buckhurst and in 1604 Marquess of Dorset, in 1577
sold to Sir George Peckham of Dinton (Bucks.) the
reversion of Emmington, excluding the advowson,
and reserving to himself hunting rights and an
annual rent of £30 from the manor. (fn. 70) Peckham
granted Emmington to his younger son George, who
in 1586, the year of Lady Winchester's death, sold it
for £2,200 to William Hampden. (fn. 71)
Hampden, who lived at Emmington, was a cousin
of the Hampdens of Great Hampden, (fn. 72) and on his
death in 1613 was buried in Great Hampden
church. (fn. 73) Emmington was inherited by his eldest son
Richard, (fn. 74) who was probably the Richard Hampden
mentioned in the will of John Hampden, who was
mortally wounded at Chalgrove, (fn. 75) and may have
been the Richard Hampden, lord of Emmington, who
was buried in Great Hampden church early in 1660. (fn. 76)
After his death Emmington was held by Elizabeth
Hampden, widow, under the terms of the will of her
second son Richard, and she granted it to her grandson, another Richard, (fn. 77) who at once took steps to
raise money on the manor. In 1665 he and his wife
Lettice sold it for about £5,000 to Henry Ashhurst,
a Merchant Taylor of London. (fn. 78) Ashhurst died in
1680, and Emmington was inherited by his eldest
son Sir Henry, who in 1691 bought Waterstock
manor. Emmington belonged to the Ashhursts and
followed the same descent as Waterstock (fn. 79) until
about 1805, when it was acquired by Philip T. Wykeham of Tythrop House (Bucks.). (fn. 80) He was succeeded in 1832 by his son, Philip Thomas Herbert
Wykeham, who in 1870 inherited Thame Park. (fn. 81)
On his death in 1879 his heirs were the sons of
his brother, Aubrey Wenman Wykeham-Musgrave.
Tythrop and Emmington were inherited by the
younger, Philip James Digby Wykeham, who
married a daughter of Joseph John Henley of
Waterperry. (fn. 82) He was succeeded in 1924 by his son
Aubrey Augustus Henry Wykeham, who in 1929 sold
Emmington to Magdalen College, the present lord
of the manor.
Agrarian and Social History.
A small
number of Roman coins have been found in the
parish, some at Down Covert north of the village
on the county boundary and others near the Sydenham boundary. (fn. 83) The record of continuous occupation begins, however, in the Anglo-Saxon period.
Emmington may have been settled in the 6th century
or earlier: the name means 'Eama's farm' and placenames with the ending 'ingtun' are likely to be of
early date. (fn. 84) Both before and after the Conquest it
was held with Crowell by one man, first by the
Saxon Alwin and then by the Norman William
Peverel. Emmington was said to have land for 5
ploughs, but 7 ploughs were at work, 2 on the demesne where there were 6 serfs, and 5 that were shared
by 10 villeins and 4 bordars. Twelve acres of meadow
are recorded. The value of the estate had risen since
the Conquest from £6 to £7. (fn. 85) By 1255 it was said to
be worth £10 (fn. 86) and twenty years later it was valued
at £20. The manor included 20 acres of meadow
valued at 3s. an acre, 130½ acres and 1 piece of
arable, valued at 10d. an acre and amounting in all
to £9 8s. 7½d., and 10½ acres of pasture, valued at 1s.
an acre. (fn. 87) Assized rents were also included, but were
more fully described in the 1279 hundred rolls. The
meadow was valued highly, and the arable exceptionally highly, but it is not surprising in view of the
great reputation for fertility that the Thame valley
has always had.
In 1279 there were 16 virgates in demesne with
meadow and pasture, and 19½ virgates were held by
18 virgaters and 4 half-virgaters and there were 4
free virgates. The virgater paid 3s. 6d. rent a year
and owed works at the lord's pleasure from Midsummer (24 June) to Lammas (1 Aug.) each week
for 3 days with one man at his own cost, and from
Lammas to Michaelmas (29 Sept.) each week for
5 days with one man. He also owed 2 bedreaps with
one man at his own cost, and was then released from
payment of 10½d. of his rent for the Michaelmas term.
His daughters could not marry without licence. Two
half-virgaters paid 2s. 3d. rent and owed similar
works; another paid 2s. rent and if the lord wished
had to hold the lord's plough. If he did this work he
was quit of rent. The fourth half-virgater, the smith,
made the ploughshares of two of the lord's ploughs
and apparently owed no works or rent. A Nicholas
Clement held 2 free virgates for 13s. 4d. and paid
suit at the lord's court and at the hundred court.
Nicholas Franklin with 1 free virgate paid 5s. and
had to ride on the lord's business; he had to come
with one man to the reaping and haymaking, but the
lord gave him food on these occasions. A third
virgater held freely for 2s. on a life lease. (fn. 88) After
another 40 years, judging from another extent, the
manor may have declined in value, but it is impossible to make any certain comparisons between
extents of different dates. There was a messuage with
a close and garden in demesne, valued at 6s. 8d.; 185
acres of arable were valued at only 4d. an acre, much
less than in 1275; 9½ acres of meadow were valued at
1s. 3d. an acre and 18 acres of pasture at 6d. an acre;
customary labour was apparently utilized as much as
possible. There were 20 customary tenants paying the
same rent as in 1279 and performing works; as
before, they obtained a reduction in their rent if they
worked, a day's work being valued at ¼d.; they were
also allowed 1¼d. a day over the harvest period and
1d. a day when mowing: this may reflect some new
arrangement about works since 1279. Nine tenants
were described as cottars; their total rent came to
£1 12s. 6d. and they had to help at haymaking for 2
days and at reaping for another 2 days. In addition to
his duty of repairing the lord's plough, the smith had
to pay 3s. 4d. rent. Court profits were valued at 2s.
a year and the whole estate was said to be worth
£11 9s. 11½d. (fn. 89)
This extent recorded 29 tenants of the manor and
in the same year there were 15 contributors to the
tax of a 16th, when £1 13s. 1d. was raised. Ten years
earlier 20 or more inhabitants had contributed when
£1 16s. 9d. was raised for the 30th, and in 1327 24
contributed £2 3s. 9d. for the 20th. Emmington's inhabitants were only moderately prosperous; in 1316
they mostly paid under 2s. compared with the 12s. 3d.
paid by the lady of the manor, Joan de Sackville;
in 1327 over half the contributors again paid less
than 2s. After 1334 the village's contribution was
fixed at £2 16s. 3d., a medium-size assessment for
the hundred and almost twice that of Crowell's. (fn. 90)
Almost nothing is known of the village's economic
life in the 15th century. (fn. 91) In the 16th century it was
moderately prosperous with a number of husbandmenor small yeoman farmers, but with no one of outstanding wealth. Eight inhabitants contributed to
the 1525 subsidy, and the total sum paid was only
21s. In 1577 again eight inhabitants contributed to
the subsidy and were assessed on comparatively small
amounts in goods, between £3 to £5. (fn. 92)
In the 17th century such evidence as there is indicates that Emmington may have been a smaller
village than it was in the 13th and 14th centuries.
Only 11 persons were considered eligible for the
hearth tax of 1662, the Compton Census recorded 36
adults in 1676, and there appear to be no more than
II houses and cottages on an estate map of 1697. (fn. 93)
The inclosure of the common fields, which was
completed before the end of the century, must have
contributed to this depopulation. The map of 1697
shows the old arable open fields divided into several
large holdings and the common pasture divided into
closes. The survival of furlong names in the north and
south-east of the parish for about 335 acres out of the
total of 675 acres under cultivation roughly indicates the position of the former open fields. The
largest holdings of 47 and 27 acres were occupied by
John and Thomas Howlett respectively and another
Howlett held two fields of 23 acres and 20 acres.
There were a number of smaller closes near the
village and various large pasture-closes. Town End
pasture (14 a.), for instance, lay at the end of the
village street, three pasture inclosures (49 a. in all)
lay to the east of Thameway, and there were two
others of 15 and 16 acres respectively. Eighty-seven
acres of meadow are shown: of these 40 acres divided
into 3-acre strips lay in the south along the Chinnor
boundary by a road called Burgidge Way, which has
long been disused; 24 acres in 1-and 2-acre lost lay
west of the 'road from London to Thame' (the
present Thame-Chinnor road); and the rest lay in
Grove Mead (14 a.) and Down Mead (9 a.) in the
north-east of the parish. (fn. 94)
In the 18th century the Whites at the Manor farm
were the principal farmers. It is noteworthy that in
1712 William White employed four 'servants' and
that three of the other farmers were each employing two. (fn. 95) As the land was inclosed nine out of the
thirteen houses recorded in 1759 were inhabited by
'labourers'. (fn. 96) The good grazing land, however, and
the proximity of the Oxford and Thame markets with
their constant demand for butcher's meat ensured a
fair livelihood to the villagers, and there was less
poverty than in more populous uninclosed villages.
The poor-rate at the end of the 18th century was
among the lowest in the county, being only 2s. 4d.,
whereas the county average was 4s. 6d. and the
hundred average 6s. 2d. (fn. 97) Nevertheless, by the end
of the Napoleonic wars there were twelve paupers in
Emmington out of a population of about seventy. (fn. 98)
Another consequence of inclosure was the absence
of the smallholder. From 1786 to 1804 Sir William
Ashhurst's four tenants farmed land assessed for the
land tax at £22, £6, £6, and £2 respectively. From
1805 to 1832 two tenant farmers farmed all four
farms. (fn. 99) By 1841, when the tithe award was made,
three of the farms were in the hands of the North
family. Field farm (later Waterlands) does not appear
to have existed before the second half of the 18th
century, since its homestead was built some time after
1759. The other farms were Emmington farm (later
Village farm) of 216 acres, Manor farm (194 a.) and
Grove farm (125 a.). Half this land was arable (336 a.)
and half meadow and pasture (335 a.). The map
shows that all the fields were hedged and that there
had been practically no change in field boundaries
since 1697. But as a consequence of single ownership
there had been a good deal of tree planting. No woodland appears on the 1697 map, but in 1841 there were
43 acres, mostly described as 'plantations'. These included Down Covert and part of Great Covert and
twenty small clumps and shelter belts of an acre or
less. (fn. 100)
The general tendency towards the amalgamation
of farms is seen at Emmington in the late 19th century and after. By 1895 P. J. D. Wykeham at Village
farm farmed 259 acres, having taken over 43 acres
from Grove farm; by 1925 Grange farm (or Grove)
and Waterlands had combined. (fn. 101) Some light is thrown
on the conditions of farming in this period by a series
of leases: in 1906 the tenant was to find wheat straw
for thatching and to cultivate the arable land on the
regular four-course system, he was not to crop with
more than two white-straw crops in any four years
and then not with the same kind of grain, nor was he
to plant more than ¼-acre with potatoes. Vetches
saved for seed were to count as a white-straw crop.
He was not to mow more than half the grass-land in
any year and no part twice in a year. He was to consume on the farm all the hay, straw, roots, and green
crops produced, but he might sell his first crop of
clover hay and his meadow hay and wheat straw
provided he brought back cake or other artificial
food to the manurial value of 25s. for each ton so sold.
Thistles were to be cut twice yearly, ditches cleansed,
and hedges made and plashed annually. Permanent
grass was not to be ploughed. Beans and other pulse
were to be hoed at least twice and weeded. Turnip,
rape, flax, hemp, and other unusual or exhausting
crops were forbidden. (fn. 102)
There were no shopkeepers or other traders
recorded in the 19th-century directories for Emmington. In 1851 there was one shepherd and two gamekeepers, but most Emmington men worked on the
land as agricultural labourers while their wives were
lacemakers as in neighbouring villages. (fn. 103) Like many
other Oxfordshire parishes, Emmington reached
its peak in population by the mid-19th century:
there were between 70 and 80 inhabitants in 1801 to
1831, but 104 by 1851. The population then declined
to 75 in 1881 and 44 in 1901 and remained at that
level until 1932, when the parish was merged with
Chinnor. (fn. 104) In 1951 the population of the ecclesiastical
parish was 39. (fn. 105)
Church.
A priest at Emmington is mentioned in
about 1190, and from the first recorded presentation
in 1224, when Sir Geoffrey de Sackville was patron,
the advowson in the Middle Ages descended with the
manor. (fn. 106) In 1317 and 1319, during the minority of
Andrew de Sackville, the king presented. (fn. 107) In the
1470s the advowson was the subject of litigation
between Humphrey Sackville, lord of the manor, and
Thomas Rookes of Fawley (Bucks.), who had long
been claiming Emmington manor. Rookes presented
to Emmington church in 1474, and when in 1476 he
was sued by Humphrey Sackville for the advowson,
he apparently claimed that after the death of Andrew
de Sackville in 1369 without legitimate heirs, it
should have been inherited by Thomas de Sackville
of Fawley. (fn. 108) He seems to have won his case, for he
presented again in 1480. In 1482 he gave up his
claim to Emmington manor, and the advowson then
returned to the Sackvilles. On the death of Sir
Richard Sackville in 1524, the manor was inherited
by his eldest son John; the Richard Sackville who
sold the presentation of 1537 may have been either
John's younger brother (fn. 109) or John's son and heir,
Sir Richard Sackville.
On the latter's death in 1566 he left the advowson
with the manor for life to his wife, who married as
her second husband the Marquess of Winchester. (fn. 110)
Although the queen presented by lapse in 1584,
Lady Winchester sold the presentation of 1585 to
Thomas Whitfield, a Sussex gentleman, who presented William Whitfield, no doubt a relative. (fn. 111) In
1577, when Sir Thomas Sackville sold the reversion
of the manor, the advowson was excluded from the
sale; but by a separate transaction he sold the next
three presentations to Sir George Peckham, who had
also bought the manor and gave them with the
manor to his younger son George. George Peckham
sold them to William Hampden, who also became
lord of the manor. (fn. 112) Hampden presented in 1605 and
Richard Hampden did so in 1638, when Barton
Holiday became rector, (fn. 113) and he probably also presented again later on.
The advowson, however, belonged to the Sackville
family until Richard, the 3rd marquess, sold it. It
was the subject of several legal transactions, and in
1639 it was bought by John Coulding of Hill Court
in Longdon (Worcs.). In 1676 his son Edward sold it
for £100, and later the same year it was bought for
£110 by Henry Ashhurst, (fn. 114) and thus became reunited
with the manor, the descent of which it followed
until Magdalen College in 1948 sold it to the Diocesan Board of Patronage.
Emmington, being such a small parish, has never
been rich. In 1254 it was valued at £2, in 1291 at
£4 6s. 8d., and in 1535 at £11 os. 2¼d. (fn. 115) By the
early 18th century its value was said to be not more
than £80. (fn. 116) The income of the rector came from the
tithes, which were commuted in 1848 for £196 10s. (fn. 117)
The parish was unusual in having hardly any
glebe. None is mentioned in a terrier of 1676, and
in the 19th century only an acre of pasture was
recorded. (fn. 118)
In the Middle Ages the poverty of the living
probably made it a difficult one to fill. In the 13th
century two subdeacons were instituted and although
Hugh de Chausey (1317–19) was a university graduate, he was a pluralist. Another 14th-century
parson, Simon John, left his parish in 1371 to go
overseas. (fn. 119) Two graduates held the living in the 15th
century, but as both died soon after being instituted
they were probably old men when they came to
Emmington. (fn. 120) In about 1520 the Rectory was let, and
the rector was non-resident. (fn. 121) This was not the case
in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, when
William Whitfield (1585–1605) had nine children
and Richard Rastell (1605–38) had thirteen baptized in the church. (fn. 122) The next rector, however,
was non-resident, for he was Barton Holiday (1638–c. 1646), Archdeacon of Oxford and a royalist, who
was chaplain to Charles I and was sequestered from
Emmington. (fn. 123) A later 17th-century rector, John
Hammatt (1685–95), earned Anthony Wood's scorn,
being described as a 'sniveling non-conforming, conforming vicar,' and the writer of a 'pitiful, canting and
silly discourse' for a sermon. (fn. 124)
In the 18th century Sir Henry Ashhurst, a low
churchman, instructed his trustees to appoint separate rectors for Emmington and Waterstock, who
should preach 'Calvinistical' doctrines. Emmington,
however, probably on account of the smallness of the
parish, was held with Waterstock from 1726. (fn. 125)
Nevertheless, it was not neglected. Although Edward
Lewis (rector 1725–85) lived at Waterstock he always
conducted the two Sunday services at Emmington
and preached the sermon; the catechism was taught
at Easter according to the 18th-century custom, but
it was said in 1781 that the classes were ill attended,
the children being unwilling to come because they
were so poorly clothed; from 10 to 22 communicants
were recorded at the quarterly administrations of
the Sacrament. (fn. 126) If anything happened on a weekday
which required the parson's attention, someone had
orders to let Lewis know at once. (fn. 127) Towards the end
of the century, when he was very old, and in the
early 19th century, when one curate served Emmington, Chinnor, and Crowell, the number of communicants dropped and services were less frequent, (fn. 128)
but a Sunday school was started in 1820.
During much of the 19th century the rector was
Sir William Augustus Musgrave (rector 1827–72),
also Rector of Chinnor and a landowner there. Few
attended the one service: according to Bishop
Wilberforce sometimes only the rector and his
clerk were present. (fn. 129) The churchwardens' accounts
for 1837 contain the entry: 'No service Sunday after
Christmas. Snow blown into the church. Sacrament
not administered and wine reserved for Sunday after
Easter.' (fn. 130) With the return of a resident rector,
Greville Henry Lambert (1872–1908), the son of
Sir Henry Lambert, Bt., of Aston House, there was
a revival of church life. (fn. 131) He restored the church
and rebuilt the Rectory, which had long been unsuitable for a rector's residence and had been let
first to the parish clerk and then to a labourer. (fn. 132)
In the 20th century the living has usually been held
with Chinnor, where the rector lives, and the
Rectory has again been let.
The church of ST. NICHOLAS is a small stone
building dating mainly from the 19th century. It
comprises a chancel, nave, and 14th-century tower.
Before they were rebuilt in 1873–4 the have and
chancel appear also to have been substantially of the
14th century, (fn. 133) but in the course of demolition the
architect found what he believed to be 'relics of
Norman masonry worked in the walls', thus suggesting 'that an earlier church stood on the same spot'. (fn. 134)
Buckler's drawing of 1822 from the south-east shows
that the east window of three lights had early Decorated tracery and that there were two windows of the
same date in the south wall of the chancel. The
tower of two stages had a steeply pitched saddle-back
roof. The nave roof was of a slightly lower level than
that of the chancel. (fn. 135) The round font on a moulded
circular base appears to date from the 13th century. (fn. 136)
The windows were once filled with stained glass.
At the herald's visitation of 1574 Lee recorded sixteen shields in five windows, bearing the arms of
Malyns, Sackville, De la Beche, Hampden, and
others. (fn. 137) Neither Wood nor Rawlinson has left any
description, and the archdeacon's orders of 1759 are
the only surviving record of the church in the 18th
century. A new reading-desk and pulpit were to be
made partly out of the old material, the king's arms
were to be painted over the door into the belfry and
of a smaller compass, and the Creed, Lord's Prayer,
Commandments, and texts were also to be painted. (fn. 138)
Repairs to the church and chancel were carried
out in 1802–3 and 1841, but their state in 1852 was
nevertheless described as 'very dilapidated'. (fn. 139)
In 1873–4 the church was rebuilt on the old
foundation except for the north wall of the nave and
the exterior of the tower. It has an open timber roof
and tiled floor. The architect of the chancel was
Charles Buckeridge of Oxford and London and the
builder was Giles Holland of Thame. (fn. 140) The cost,
including that of the interior fittings, was £952.
Herbert Wykeham of Tythrop House bore the cost
of rebuilding the nave and the rector mainly paid for
the chancel. The new woodwork to the interior of the
tower and the rehanging of the bells was paid for by
the three farmers of the parish, all of the North family. (fn. 141) When completed the church seated 120, as it
had done before its restoration. It is still (1958) lit
by lamps and candles.
The armorial glass had evidently been removed
before Parker's visit in about 1850, and no other
ancient monuments or church fittings remain. A
carved reredos of the Ascension in memory of the
Revd. Greville H. Lambert was dedicated in 1908.
There are memorial tablets to Thomas D. Crowdy,
who died in the First World War, and to the Revd.
Leonard Baldwyn (d. 1935). An oak reading-desk
was installed as a memorial to four parishioners who
died in the First World War.
In 1553 the only church plate was a chalice without a cover. In 1958 there were a silver chalice,
without a paten cover, of 1575, and a silver paten of
1873. (fn. 142) In 1553 there were three bells and in 1958
there were still three bells: the second of about 1550
by one of the Appowells of Buckingham, the tenor of
1584, and the treble of 1664. There was also a sanctus
bell of 1723. (fn. 143)
The registers date from 1539, but there is a gap
between about 1640 and 1715. (fn. 144) There are churchwardens' accounts for 1818–70 and 1874.
Nonconformity.
The only Roman Catholic
ever recorded in the parish was Isabel Franklin, the
wife of Henry Franklin, in 1641. (fn. 145)
As Sir Henry Ashhurst in the 18th century wished
to have a 'Calvinistical' rector it is possible that the
presentation of low-church rectors prevented the
growth of nonconformity in the parish. There is no
record of any Protestant nonconformist until 1759,
when one servant was returned as an Anabaptist. (fn. 146)
In 1781 the rector reported that a family of Anabaptists was newly come into the parish; in 1801 the
numbers of Anabaptists were given as two or three
and in 1808 there were four but no teacher. (fn. 147) In 1834
there was one dissenting family. (fn. 148) In 1840 the house
of William Wade was licensed as a meeting-house, (fn. 149)
but it did not long survive, although dissent became
stronger. In 1854 the rector belived dissent to be the
cause of his small congregations, and in 1866 he
estimated that there were 80 dissenters, who went to
the chapels at Sydenham or Chinnor. (fn. 150)
Schools.
In 1778 the rector reported that the
people were 'very ignorant', and in 1781 that few
children in the parish could read and that they were
so ill clothed that they were unwilling to come to be
catechized. (fn. 151) No kind of education existed for the
village children until 1820 when a Sunday school was
started. In 1833 the rector and P.T.H. Wykeham,
the lord of the manor, supported it and there were 26
boys and girls. (fn. 152) This was still flourishing in 1834 and
in 1854, when there were 28 children. (fn. 153) There is no
record of any day-school. The children went to Chinnor school in 1871 and to Sydenham in 1878. (fn. 154) They
still attended Sydenham school in 1920, (fn. 155) but were
later transferred to Chinnor where they attended in
1956. (fn. 156)
Charity.
By 1676 the church owned 3 'lands',
known as Church Lands, in Chinnor common
field. (fn. 157) These had been given at a time and by a person unknown for the repair of the church and during
the 18th century they were let for £1 a year. (fn. 158) This is
the charity which was reported upon in about 1822
by the Charity Commissioners, who found that a
rent of the same value, arising from two 'lands' in
'the open field', was being applied to the relief of the
poor. This land, the commissioners were told, had
been given by an old woman to buy Communion
wine, but as the cost of the wine exceeded the income from the land the rent was paid into the general
parish account, and the cost of the wine like other
church expenses was met out of the poor rate. (fn. 159) In
1931 Emmington Church land was let for £3. (fn. 160) No
later information about the charity has been discovered.