AYLESBURY HUNDRED 



STOKE MANDF.VILLE 



which had formerly been held by Christiana de 

 Kirkeby. The division of the two knights' fees be- 

 longing to the Bishop of Lincoln at this time suggests 

 th.it 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 pre- 

 viously 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" Alice de Burley, possibly the widow of Wil- 

 liam, held land in Stoke Mandeville. In the i;th 

 century the manor of Burleys came into the possession 

 of the elder branch of the Brudenell family. Edmund 

 Brudenell of Raans,* 6 nephew of that Henry Bru- 

 denell 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" and was succeeded by his son 

 Drew,* 7 but whether the latter ever was seised of 

 the manor is not certain. At his death ** no men- 

 tion 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," and in 1538 Thomas 

 Brudenell held a court baron for Burleys Manor. 100 

 In the next year he sold it "" to John Bosse, in whose 

 name the manorial court was held. 10 * From John 

 Bosse 1M it passed to his descendants Richard, Francis, 

 Samuel, and Thomas Bosse in turn. 104 The last- 

 named, together with his wife Elizabeth, sold the 

 manor of Burleys in 1617 to Alexander Jennings, 1 " 

 who was holding it in 1640,'* when his land was 

 assessed at the yearly value of ,o/. Lands in Stoke 

 Mandeville were conveyed by Francis Jennings of 

 Stoke Mandeville to Richard Jennings in 1653,"" 

 but the manor of Burleys is not mentioned in 

 the indenture. In 1 664 "* the land formerly 

 held by Alexander Jennings was held by Anne Jen- 

 nings, widow, and Michael Jennings. In the 1 8th 

 century the manor was held by John Smith lo * 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 Hailing during the 1 3th cen- 

 tury, and their lands were afterwards called the manor 

 of STONORS. In 1297-8 " Robert Albon and his 

 wife Alice sold some land in Stoke Hailing to Peter de 

 Leycester. Peter died about 1304'" seised of several 

 tenements there, which he held of various lords, and 

 they passed to his kinswoman Juliana de Leyccstre the 

 wife of Walter de Bernthorp. The latter was pre- 

 sented in 1305-6 '"for obstructing a common road at 



Stoke Hailing, but in I 323, after the deathof Juliana," 1 

 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 '" tene- 

 ments in Stoke Hailing 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. 1 " 

 John de Stonor died in 1354"* 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," 7 who in turn was succeeded by his 

 son John. The latter, who was a minor, died be- 

 fore he attained his majority, 1 " and his lands passed 

 to his younger brother Ralph in 1389 or 1390.'" 

 Ralph enfcoffed William Sutton and others of 

 lands and tenements in Stoke Mandeville," but 

 this was presumably merely a settlement, since he 

 died seised of tenements there in I 394. '" This, how- 

 ever, 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,"* 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 14.70"* sold the manor of Bierton- 

 Stonors in the neighbouring parish of Bierton. Thomas 

 Brudenell, however, held the manor of Stonors about 

 1539, apparently in right of his wife. She was 

 Elizabeth Fitz William," 4 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 I 540,"* to- 

 gether with Burleys Manor, to John Bosse, from which 

 time the two manors were held together. 



A mill is mentioned in Domesday Book, 1 " and was 

 then worth lot. a year, but to which moiety of Stoke 

 Mandeville it afterwards appertained does not appear. 

 In 1628'" Edmund Brudenell, who was then seised of 

 the whole manor, held a water-mill amongst the 

 appurtenances. 



The church of ST. MART is a 

 CHURCHES modern structure consisting of a 

 chancel, nave, south aisle, and south- 

 west 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 I 3th century. 



The OLD CHURCH consists of a chancel 246. by 

 1 2 ft., and a nave 40 ft. by 1 7 ft. 9 in., within the 

 western end of which is built a late brick tower, a 



' Chan. Inq. p.m. 18 Edw. Ill (lit 

 no*.), no. 58. 



* Liptcomb, Hitt. tf Bucki. ii, 447. 



Chan. Inq. p.m. 9*10 Edw. IV, 

 no. u- 



Ibid. 



Cat. lf. f.m. Hen. ril, not. 563, 

 564. 



n Ibid. no. {64 ; Collini, Pttrtgi (rd. 

 Br.dget), iii, 491. 



i" B.M. Add. Chart. 47360. 



><" Feet of F. Bucki. Mich. 31 Hen. 

 VIII. 



101 B.M. Add. Chart. 47369, m. 2. 



> Chan. Inq. p.m. (Sr. 2), cxviii, 

 no. 4. 



"* B.M. Add. Chart. 47369, m. 3 j 



Feet of F. Buck*. Bait. 27 Kliz. ; B.M. 

 Add. Chart. 47369, m. 567 ; Chan. Inq. 

 p.m. (Ser. 2), Miic. dviii, no. 21. 



1M Feet of F. Bucki. Mil. I ; Jit. I. 



(P.R.O.) Lay Subt. R. bdle. 80, no. 

 302. 



lo ? Clote, 1653, pt. 39, no. 30. 



1B (P.R.O.) Lay Subt. R. bdle. So, no. 

 336. 



" Cf. Stoke Mandeville Minor. 



110 Feet of F. Bucki. Hil. 26 Edw. I. 



111 Chan. Inq. p.m. 32 Edw. I, no. 42. 

 A bkrrv. Plat. (Rec. Com.), 298. 

 "' Ibid. 348. 



114 Feet of F. Bucki Mich. loElw. II. 

 114 Chan. Inq. p.m. 32 Edw. I, no. 42 ; 

 if id. 28 Edw. Ill (lit not.), no. 58. 



363 



Ibid. 



W Vilit. of Oxm. (Harl. Soc. T), 143 , 

 Chan. Inq. p.m. 13 Ric. II, no. 48. 



"" Chan. Inq. p.m. 13 Ric. II, no. 48. 



'" Coram Rege R. Mich. 20 Ri, . II, 

 m. 26. 



"Cloie, 14 Ric. II, m. 38d. 



In Chan. Inq. p.m. 18 Ric. II, no. 39. 



Ibid. 9 & 10 Edw. IV, no. 34. 



" Feet of F. Bucki. Eatt. 9 Edw. IV. 



< Collini, Ptertgt (ed. Bridge.), iii, 



49'- 



> Feet of F. Bucki. Mich. 31 II n. 

 VIII. 



' y.C.H. B*i. 1,233. 



"' Rccov. R. Eatt. 4 Chat. I ; Feet of 

 F. Bucki. Eatt. 4 Chat. I. 



