A History of the County of Surrey: Volume 3. Originally published by Victoria County History, London, 1911.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
Puttenham is a village on the south side of the Hog's Back, 4½ miles west of Guildford, 5½ miles east of Farnham. The parish is roughly triangular. The base from north-east to south-west is nearly 3 miles long; the line from the apex to the middle of the base, north-west to south-east, is under 2 miles. The west side is longer than the northern side. It contains 1,931 acres of land and 29 acres of water. The village lies in the north-east angle of the parish. The northern part of the parish is on the chalk of the Hog's Back ridge, though, as is almost invariably the case, the village is not on the chalk. The rest of the parish is Upper Green Sand, Gault, and Lower Green Sand, which is the predominating soil.
The views from the upper ground are extremely picturesque, embracing the Hindhead and Blackdown ranges, and extending over Sussex to the South Downs, while the foreground is broken and diversified with woods and heaths. Puttenham Heath, however, to the east of the parish, is mostly covered with turf, and a nine-hole golf course has been made on it, with a club-house opened in 1897. Puttenham Common, to the south-west, is a true heath, covered with heather, fern, and furze, and rising to over 300 ft. above the sea, with a deep depression between it and the chalk to the northward.
The parish is purely agricultural. Chalk was dug on the Hog's Back. The district of the famous Farnham hops extends into Puttenham. The northern boundary of the parish is the road along the ridge of the Hog's Back. One sign of the antiquity of the road is the frequency with which it forms the old parish boundaries. Captain James, R.E., traced the so-called Pilgrims' Way through the parish below the chalk. It went on as a lane to Seale, and has been converted since 1903 into a good road.
On Puttenham Heath is a fairly large tumulus called Frowsbury, which has never been explored. Neolithic flints are not uncommon near it. On Puttenham Common is a considerable entrenchment, with one bank and ditch. It is of about 530 ft. on the south, east, and west sides, but the north-east angle is slightly obtuse, the south-west angle slightly acute, so that the east and west sides are not parallel, and the north side is shorter than the other. On the west there is no distinct bank, and no ditch, but the hill falls sharply to a stream in the grounds of Hampton Lodge, and has been perhaps artificially scarped. The water below is within missile range of the entrenchment. Romano-British pottery and a rude pavement were found near this, to the north-east, in 1870. Many neolithic flints have been found on the borders of the parish, near Shoelands, a little further north.
The main manor of PUTTENHAM was a member of the manor of Bramley in Blackheath Hundred. (fn. 1) It is uncertain whether it was included with Rodsell in 1086 or whether the 'two manors' of Wanborough recorded in Domesday were Wanborough and Puttenham, or whether it was included in Bramley. It seems to have followed the history of Bramley, for it was in the king's hands in the 12th century, since, c. 1199, Geoffrey Bocumton exchanged 15 librates of land, which he had had in Puttenham by the king's gift, for 12 librates of land in Stoke by Guildford. (fn. 2) The lands of Ralph de Fay, lord of Bramley under Henry II, were in 1203 granted to Robert de Barevill. (fn. 3) Robert was sued for land in Puttenham by Geoffrey de Roinges before the time of this grant, (fn. 4) and evidently established his rights, for in 1221 the king gave Robert de Barevill ten oaks towards the mending and rebuilding of his houses in Puttenham. (fn. 5) Ralph de Fay's lands were restored and descended to his son Ralph, (fn. 6) who was succeeded by John de Fay, his son, in 1223. (fn. 7) At John's death his lands were divided between his two sisters, Maud wife of Roger de Clere and Philippa Neville. (fn. 8) Puttenham, however, had been assigned to Ralph de Fay's widow Beatrice, in dower. It was seized in 1241 owing to her excommunication, but restored in 1242. It was again taken into the king's hands in 1246. (fn. 9) Puttenham was then divided between the two sisters, Philippa and Maud. Philippa's moiety was afterwards called Puttenham Bury, while her sister's portion became the manor of Puttenham Priory.
Philippa Neville gave PUTTENHAM BURY with Bramley in free marriage with her daughter Beatrice to William of Wintershull. (fn. 10) For the next 300 years Puttenham Bury and Bramley followed the descent which is given under Bramley. (fn. 11) In 1541 Edmund Pope, a lineal descendant of William of Wintershull and his wife Beatrice, sold both manors. (fn. 12) Bury was purchased in 1541 by Robert Lusher of Cheam and his wife Elizabeth, who also bought Puttenham Priory in 1544. (fn. 13) His father Thomas was holding Shoelands, but Robert predeceased him, dying in 1545. (fn. 14) His widow Elizabeth, aunt of Sir Olliph Leigh (see below), married George Beaumont, (fn. 15) and retained for life an allowance out of Puttenham Bury Manor, (fn. 16) and the whole of Puttenham Priory, (fn. 17) which she leased to her son Thomas Beaumont in 1587. (fn. 18) Robert's son, Nicholas Lusher, died 26 May 1566, leaving an infant son Nicholas. (fn. 19) His lands were therefore taken into the queen's hands during the minority of the heir. She leased the demesne lands of Puttenham Bury and Shoelands to Mary, Nicholas Lusher's widow. (fn. 20) In 1610 Nicholas, son and heir of Nicholas Lusher, and his son Richard sold the two manors of Puttenham and the manor of Shoelands to Sir Olliph Leigh of Addington and his brother Sir John Leigh. (fn. 21) Sir Olliph died 1612. His son Sir Francis and the latter's uncle Sir John held the estates in coparceny, and demised a part of Shoelands to one Nicholas Harding. They then divided them, Sir John taking the two Puttenhams, and Sir Francis Shoelands. On Sir John's death in 1624, Sir Francis took the whole. (fn. 22) Sir Francis Leigh, having married Elizabeth daughter and heir of William Minterne of Thorpe, conveyed the manor of Puttenham Bury in 1625 to his father-in-law for life, with reversion to his younger son Francis Leigh, and failing his male issue to his elder son Wolley Leigh, later an ardent Royalist. William Minterne died in 1627, and bequeathed all his lands, with the exception of one-half of Shoelands, to Wolley Leigh. (fn. 23) Francis Leigh having died without children in 1637, (fn. 24) Wolley should have succeeded to all the manors. But some rearrangement of trusts must have been made. Sir Francis Leigh the father was still alive, and it is he who held a court in 1643. (fn. 25) Sir Francis died 1645, and Wolley Leigh very soon after him. In 1645 the estate was conveyed by Thomas Leigh, Wolley's half-brother, or son, to William Leigh, another half-brother, (fn. 26) whose widow, Lydia Leigh, was lady of the manor as early as 1661, and held courts up to 1711, when she was buried at Puttenham.
In 1728 Jasper Jones and his wife Frances were in possession of the two manors. (fn. 27) Frances was only daughter and heir of Francis Leigh of the Middle Temple, son of the said William and Lydia. She and her husband sold the manors in 1744 with Bury Farm to Brigadier-General James Edward Oglethorpe, founder of the colony of Georgia. (fn. 28) He sold the manors in 1761 to Thomas Parker, (fn. 29) who rebuilt the Manor House, since called the Priory; but parts of an older house of Elizabethan or Jacobean date, including a shaped gable of Bargate stone and brick, remain at the back. In 1775 he sold the whole property. Admiral Cornish bought the Manor House and some other property, and after his death in 1816 it was sold to his wife's nephew Richard Sumner, who died in 1870. His son Mr. Morton Cornish Sumner owned it, and died before 1880. His widow died recently, and the owner now is Mr. Ferdinand F. Smallpeice. The manors were bought by Mr. Nathaniel Snell, from whom they were bought by Mr. E. B. Long with Hampton Lodge in 1799. He was succeeded by Mr. H. L. Long and by Mr. Mowbray Howard of Hampton Lodge, vide infra. Mr. F. F. Smallpeice has since bought the manors.
PUTTENHAM PRIORY or PRIOR
PUTTENHAM PRIORY or PRIOR was the moiety of the original manor of Puttenham which Maud de Fay, one of the sisters of John de Fay, inherited. She granted it in 1248 to the Priory of Newark by Guildford. (fn. 30) In 1279 the prior claimed assize of bread and ale and view of frankpledge in his manor of Puttenham. (fn. 31)
At the time of the surrender of the priory in 1538 the farm of the manor of Puttenham was £6. (fn. 32) The king thus being in possession of the manor as part of the lands late of Newark Priory, granted it to Edward Elrington and Humphrey Metcalfe in exchange for other lands in various counties. (fn. 33) On the sites of Puttenham and other manors granted at the same time there grew two hundred oaks and elms, 'part timber and most part usually croppyd and shrude of sixty and eighty years growthe,' of which a great many were reserved 'by custome of olde tyme' to the farmer for the repair of the houses on the manors (fn. 34) (for which compare the grant by Henry III to Robert de Barevill, above). In 1544 Edward Elrington and Humphrey Metcalfe sold the manor to Robert and Elizabeth Lusher, then owners of Puttenham Bury. Thenceforward the two manors generally follow the same descent.
The lords of Puttenham Priory seem to have had view of frankpledge and assize of bread and ale in their manor. (fn. 35) William of Wintershull and his wife Beatrice also had view of frankpledge in Puttenham. (fn. 36) Both Puttenham Bury and Priory had courts baron. (fn. 37)
RODSELL lies to the south of the parish between Shackleford in Godalming and Cut Mill. Under Edward the Confessor Tovi held it. Bishop Odo of Bayeux held it in demesne after the Conquest, (fn. 38) and added it to the land which he held out in farm at Bramley. (fn. 39) The bishop's lands fell to the Crown at his final exile, and with them Bramley. The history of the holding from this time is obscure. In 1273 William Palmer of Rodsell obtained from John son of William a lease for life of a messuage and half a virgate of land in Puttenham. (fn. 40) In 1508 William Lusher held the manor of 'Redsale' (evidently Rodsell by the context). (fn. 41) In 1568 William Lusher, son and heir of George Lusher, had a rent-charge on lands in Rodsell and Puttenham. (fn. 42) Richard Wyatt purchased lands in Puttenham from Sir John and Sir Francis Leigh, who were connected by marriage with the Lushers, (fn. 43) and Richard's son Francis Wyatt died in 1634 holding the manor and farm of Rodsell, (fn. 44) which he had settled on his wife Timothea in April 1621. (fn. 45) He also held the wood called Prior's Wood in Puttenham and Compton. His son Richard entered upon the manor after his mother's death. (fn. 46) He died in June 1645, leaving a younger brother Francis, who was his heir. (fn. 47) Francis died in 1673. His son Francis died in 1723, having survived his son, also Francis, who died in 1713, aged twenty-six. The latter's elder son Richard married Susan daughter of Sir Thomas Molyneux of Loseley, and died s.p. in 1753. His younger brother William died in 1775, and his son Richard in 1784. Richard son of Richard died unmarried in 1816. His heir, another Richard, of Horsted Keynes, sold Rodsell in 1819 to Edward Beeston Long, who was followed by his son Henry Lawes Long of Hampton Lodge. (fn. 48) It is now the property of Mr. Mowbray Howard of Hampton Lodge.
SHOELANDS (Sholaund, xiii cent.; Sheweland, xvi cent.; Sholand and Shoeland, xvii and xviii cents.) was probably a sub-manor of Burgham, for its tenants paid rent to the lord of Burgham. (fn. 49) In 1235 Ralph Attewood granted to John de Fay land in Shoelands. (fn. 50) The lords of Burgham in 1251 were William of Wintershull and Beatrice his wife, (fn. 51) and when, at that date, Peter de Ryvall granted a carucate of land and 5s. rent in Shoelands and Puttenham to the Prior and church of Selborne, co. Hants, for ever, William of Wintershull and his wife confirmed the land to the priory to be held of them and their heirs by rent of a gilded spur yearly within a week of the Nativity of John the Baptist (June 24). (fn. 52) The rent of the gilded spur is mentioned in an extent of the Wintershulls' lands dated 1287. The men of the priory in Shoelands and Puttenham were to be free from view of frankpledge. At the same time William and Beatrice released to the prior all their claim to the road which led from a certain close (bega) at 'Otteford,' before the prior's gate at Shoelands as far as the house of Ralph Du Bois. (fn. 53) This was probably a right of way to the main road in the Down, up the existing steep and certainly ancient lane.
For some time the priory remained in possession of Shoelands, paying an annual rent of 6d., (fn. 54) probably in lieu of the gilded spurs. In 1338 Ralph Poynaunt incurred the greater excommunication for stealing an ox from the manor of the Prior and convent of Selborne at 'Schoulonde.' (fn. 55) The priory was suppressed owing to its poverty, and by Waynflete's influence added to the foundation of Magdalen College in 1484. (fn. 56) Thomas Lusher was tenant of some Hampshire lands under the priory, 1462, and just before the foundation of Magdalen Shoelands had been granted for life to Richard Lusher. (fn. 57) Apparently it was somehow retained, for it never belonged to Magdalen, and William Lusher was seised of it late in the 15th century. From him it descended to his son Thomas. Thomas's son Robert, the purchaser of the Puttenham manors, predeceased his father in 1545, leaving a son Nicholas aged ten. (fn. 58) After Thomas's death his grandson Nicholas entered upon the manor, and in 1561 was sued by his uncle William for a rent from the manor, which he claimed as bequeathed him by Robert. (fn. 59) After the death of Nicholas Lusher in 1566 Shoelands was taken into the queen's hands, the demesne lands being leased with those of Puttenham Bury to Mary Lusher, (fn. 60) Nicholas's widow. Their son Nicholas was knighted after 1580, and his son Richard Lusher of Shoelands was admitted as a student at the Inner Temple in 1602. Shoelands seems to have been sold with Puttenham Bury and Priory to Sir Olliph and Sir John Leigh. Sir Francis, the son of the former (see Puttenham Bury), conveyed a moiety of it in February 1615–16 to William Minterne to the use of his wife Bridget Minterne, with remainder to Francis Leigh and contingent remainder to Wolley Leigh. (fn. 61) Wolley Leigh died seised of the reversion of this portion of the manor, (fn. 62) his grandmother Bridget Minterne and his father Sir Francis Leigh being still alive, and of the other half on his father's death.
Sir Thomas Leigh, Wolley Leigh's son apparently, dealt with one moiety only in 1661, (fn. 63) and again in 1665. (fn. 64) Sir Thomas Leigh died in 1677, leaving a son Sir John Leigh, bart. He was succeeded about 1692 by his son Sir John Leigh, born 1681, married 1700, and in 1703 a recovery was suffered by Sir John to Sir Stephen Lennard, father of his son's wife. (fn. 65) He died in 1737. The recovery probably barred the entail, and Shoelands is not specifically mentioned in the last Sir John's will.
The other moiety was apparently sold to John Caryll of Tangley, whose son-in-law Henry Ludlow was in possession in 1695. (fn. 66) It descended in his family till 1767, when the whole manor apparently was part of the property assigned to Giles Strangways. (fn. 67) He sold it to the tenant, Francis Simmonds, whose grandson Thomas, a yeoman farmer, was the owner in 1806. (fn. 68) In 1823 he sold to Mr. E. H. Long, and the property has passed, as Puttenham, to Mr. Mowbray Howard. Thomas Packington, who has been described as an owner, was merely a tenant about 1623. (fn. 69)
Shoelands House bears the date 1616 or 1618 over the porch. The date has been replaced after removal. The house was therefore partly built by William Minterne or his son-in-law Sir Francis Leigh, or by Thomas Packington (of Shoelands in Visitation of 1623). It has a fine mullioned window, blocked now, to the south, an old chimney-stack on the same side, and a Jacobean staircase with good carving of about the same date. This work probably marks a rebuilding of an older house, when the staircase was put in to reach rooms built over an old high hall the rafters of which are visible in one place in the wall of an upper room.
There are no mills given in the survey of Rodsell (fn. 70) in 1086, though there are five given under Bramley. (fn. 71) In 1587 there were no fewer than four mills in Puttenham Priory, (fn. 72) and about the same time there was one water-mill in Puttenham Bury Manor. (fn. 73) This may have been Cutt Mill, which was afterwards in the possession of Francis and Richard Wyatt. (fn. 74)
The family of Frollebury seems to have been of some importance in Puttenham during the 13th and 14th centuries. In 1296 William Frollebury and his wife Joan had two messuages and land there, which they held of Thomas son of William Frollebury. (fn. 75) Stephen Frollebury and his wife Katharine held the same land in 1340. (fn. 76) Frollesbury is an existing house in Puttenham.
The church of ST. JOHN THE BAPTIST stands high above the road, the ground rising in steep banks round it on the south and east. The churchyard, which is bordered on the south by a low wall and the grounds of the manor-house (commonly called Puttenham Priory) has some fine trees and shrubs, and is carefully kept.
The building is of local sandstone rubble with dressings of hard chalk, mostly replaced on the outside by Bath stone; parts of the north aisle and the chancel are plastered, and the roofs are tiled. In plan the church consists of a long and very narrow nave 52 ft. 3 in. by 16 ft. 9 in., and chancel 29 ft. 2 in. by 12 ft. 6 in.; these probably represent the extent of the early church. (fn. 77) On the north of the nave is an aisle about 7 ft. wide, opening to the nave by an arcade of four arches, representing the first extension in the latter part of the 12th century: and on the north of the chancel is a chapel 29 ft. 7 in. by 13 ft. 6 in., partly opened to the chancel by a pair of small arches—an addition of about 1200.
At the eastern end of the south side of the nave is a transeptal chapel, 12 ft. square, added about 1330; and the west tower, very large and massive in proportion to the church, dates from the early part of the 15th century. The south porch in its present form is modern, dating from the general restoration of the building in 1861. The north chapel seems to have been largely rebuilt at the beginning of the 19th century.
Judging by the different levels of the arcade bases, which increase in height from west to east, the ancient floor of the nave must have been laid on an inclined plane, following the natural slope of the ground, and there is reason to believe that this sloping floor remained till 1861.
The church is entered from the south by a roundheaded doorway built of clunch, very much retooled. It is of two moulded orders, the outer standing upon a shaft with square abacus and scalloped capital of unusual design. The abacus is continued as an impost moulding across the inner order of jamb and arch, which are plain except for a quirked bead on the angle. A round-headed window to the west appears to be modern, but may be a copy of one found at the restoration; and the traceried windows to the east of the porch are quite modern. The north arcade, in chalk or clunch, is of four semicircular arches of a single square order without a label, an unusual number, necessitated by the lowness of the wall through which they were pierced: a diminutive arch has been pierced through the east respond at the restoration. The piers are circular and their bases have square sub-bases with angle spurs and chamfered plinths. The capitals are square, with chamfered abaci and somewhat irregular scalloping of the common pattern, the capital of the west respond only differing from the others in having the scalloping concave with a small round-topped cresting just above the necking. (fn. 78) The modern plastering is cut with scalloped edging round the arches — an ancient feature found at Compton, but here probably only borrowed. There are no ancient windows in the aisle, which is lit by dormers of modern date, and the door in the north wall is modern.
The west tower wears a somewhat battered appearance from the friable nature of the sandstone of which it is built, and most of the windows and other dressings inside and out, including the lofty arch to the nave, have been renewed in Bath stone. It has a large square stair-turret on the south side, and is finished by a plain parapet of modern date.
The transept chapel, which is shown in Cracklow's view (c. 1824) as having a large square window with a wooden frame in its south wall, now has a poor three-light traceried opening of discordant character in its place; but the three-light window in its east wall and the small single-light opening to the west are original early 14th-century features, though a good deal touched up. The last-named seems to have been rebated for a shutter. The thinness of the transept walls (1 ft. 10 in.) is exceptional.
The date of the chancel arch is if anything some-what earlier than that of the chancel, which may be placed at about 1200. It is pointed, of two orders chamfered like the jambs, which have no shafts, but only an impost moulding at the springing. Its setting out on plan shows some irregularity. A string-course of a round section remains within the chancel, and on the north side are the two arches to the chapel. These are of one pointed order, with narrow chamfers, and the central column has a circular moulded capital and base. The east window and the buttresses flanking it are modern, but the two castern windows in the south wall are apparently restorations, and follow the lines of the east window of the transept. An 18th-century engraving shows three-light windows in the east walls of the chancel and north chapel, both apparently of early 14th-century character. The two eastern windows in the south wall of the chancel, now restored in stone, are shown as plain wooden frames in this old view. The piscina is also restored. The window in the western part of the south wall of the chancel is ancient, built of chalk, and dates from about 1400. It is of three lights with six small lights over, under a square hood-moulding, which terminates on one side in the bust of an angel and on the other in that of a mitred bishop or abbot. The westernmost of the three lights has its sill lowered in a very peculiar manner to serve as a low side window—a feature very noticeable in Cracklow's view. This light alone retains the original iron stanchions and cross-bars, and the lower part has the mullions rebated for a shutter.
The windows in the north wall and the door in the east wall of the north chapel are insertions of the early part of the 19th century, the former probably replacing lancets. A blocked recess with an oak lintel in its west wall seems to have been a door of communication between the chapel and the aisle. The floor of the chapel is raised above that of the chancel, and there is a platform or altar-pace at the east end. The roof is ceiled.
Both the nave and the chancel roofs are ancient and of massive oak timbers. The chancel roof, of rafters, collars and struts, has large moulded plates and tiebeams excessively cambered, and is perhaps of 14th-century date.
The font, seating, quire stalls, and other fittings are all modern, and a very large organ, bracketed out overhead, blocks up the narrow chancel. (fn. 79) The altar is well raised, as, owing to the site, there are four steps between the sacrarium and the nave.
In the chancel is the small brass of a priest in mass vestments inscribed: 'Hic jacet d[ominus] Edward' Cranford' quonda' Rector isti' Eccl[esiae]. qui obijt viijo die mens' Augusti Anno d[omini] Millõ. cccco. xxxjo cui' a[nimae] p'piciet' deus. Amen.'
In the north chapel is a small stone with indents of man and wife and the brass inscription below; the date may be about 1504 (fn. 80):—'Hic jacent Ricardus Lussher et Etheldreda uxor ejus quorum animabus propicietur Deus.'
Also a large slab of Sussex marble bearing in Roman capitals the inscription: 'Hic jacet sepultū corpus dominæ Dorotheae unius filiarum Joh[annis]; Hunt de lindon in Co[mitatu] Rutland armigeri nup' uxoris charissimae Nicholai Lussher militis cui quatuor pēp'it filios totidemque puellas nempe Ricardū, Gulielmū Nichos laū, Mariam et Annā adhuc superstites Joha[nn]em Janām et Johānam, in cunabilis defunctos, et de hac vita decessit 18 Feb: 1604 orans ut ignoscat ei peccata sua Omnipotens et Misericors Dominus.'
There is also a small brass, with the arms of Wyatt impaling Burrell, to Francis Wyatt, 1634, now set in a marble slab on the chancel wall; it came from a stone in the middle of the north chapel, which formed the burial spot of the Wyatts of Rodsell.
Fixed to the sill of the westernmost window of the chancel is an oblong brass plate, with an inscription to the memory of Henry Beedell and his son Henry, both rectors of Puttenham, who died respectively in 1636 and 1692. Besides these there are one or two ledgers bearing heraldry and some marble tablets of more recent dates.
The only ancient pieces of church plate—a silver cup and paten, dated respectively 1636 and 1674, are of interest from their association with the Beedells, father and son. The paten is known to have been given by the son, 'who gave back to the church the alienated or chantry lands which his father, the preceding rector, had purchased. Perhaps he also gave the cup.' (fn. 81)
There was no church here at the time of the Domesday Survey so far as is known. The advowson probably belonged subsequently to the lord of the manor. The king seems to have possessed it before 1305, when he granted it with Shalford, Wonersh, and Dunsfold churches to the Hospital of St. Mary without Bishopsgate. (fn. 82) In 1342 the prior and brethren of the hospital had licence to appropriate the churches of Puttenham and Dunsfold, (fn. 83) but apparently the appropriation was never carried out, for the living was a rectory in 1535. The annual pension due from the rectory at this time was 20s. (fn. 84) In 1537 Thomas Elliott obtained a lease of this pension together with Shalford rectory for ninety-nine years. (fn. 85) St. Mary without Bishopsgate was taken into the king's hand at the time of the Dissolution, but when Queen Elizabeth granted Shalford Rectory to John Wolley (fn. 86) she retained the advowson of Puttenham, which has ever since belonged to the Crown. In 1694 Thomas Swift, Jonathan Swift's 'little parson cousin,' became rector.
Richard Lusher presented the parsonage to the church. His gift consisted of a house, garden, and croft lying on 'Gildowne,' and half an acre of land at Rodsmill (Rodsell) in a field called the 'Pece.' They were given to the parson on condition that he should sing or say thirty masses yearly in the parish church, and also a Placebo and Dirige on Thursday before the Nativity of the Virgin Mary (September 8). (fn. 87) After the suppression of chantries by Edward VI these premises were leased by the king to Henry Polsted and William More. No provision seems to have been made for the parsonage till Henry Beedell, rector early in the 17th century, bought back the parsonage, which his son Henry, who succeeded his father as rector, gave to the parish, (fn. 88) confirming the gift in his will. (fn. 89) The two Henry Beedells, father and son, held the living from 1598 to 1692.
Manning and Bray quote a will in the Archdeacon's office, by which a certain Stephen Burdon, an innkeeper of Southwark in 1503, directed 6s. 8d. to be paid for an image of St. Roke to be given to Puttenham Church. (fn. 90)
In 1725 the return was that there was no chapel, no lecturer, no curate, no Papist, one Quaker, no gentleman, 'nor any school but what teaches children to read and write.' (fn. 91)