Harlington: Manors

Pages 261-267

A History of the County of Middlesex: Volume 3, Shepperton, Staines, Stanwell, Sunbury, Teddington, Heston and Isleworth, Twickenham, Cowley, Cranford, West Drayton, Greenford, Hanwell, Harefield and Harlington. Originally published by Victoria County History, London, 1962.

This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.


In this section


The medieval manor of HARLINGTON was generally known from the 16th century as the manor of HARLINGTON OR HARDINGTON. (fn. 1) Herdintone' was the most usual from of the name in the Middle Ages, (fn. 2) and the apparently unnecessary retention of the alternative forms in the title was no doubt intended to distinguish this estate from the later manor of Harlington with Shepiston. (fn. 3) The names 'Lovell's' (fn. 4) or 'Byrd's', (fn. 5) derived from earlier lords, were also used occasionally from the late 16th century, though apparently only as additional alternatives and not standing alone.

In 1086 the manor presumably comprised the whole of the parish except for such land, mostly in the north of the parish, as lay in the manor of Dawley. (fn. 6) By the 17th century the waste-land in the parish seems to have belonged to the manor of Harlington with Shepiston, which had originated as a subordinate estate of Harlington or Hardington. (fn. 7) A presentment in the court roll of 1587 suggests that the parent manor was then contesting the jurisdiction of the newer manor, and another presentment in 1593 shows that the parent manor then exercised or claimed rights over the waste of Berry Green. (fn. 8) From the 16th century Harlington with Shepiston had extensive copyhold lands, while Harlington or Hardington, at least by 1818, had only a few acres of copyhold. (fn. 9) While Harlington or Hardington's copyhold may have been reduced by enfranchisement and by the extension of the lord's own estate, it is hard to resist the conclusion that much of it may have been transferred to the newer manor when that was formed. It was the parent manor, however, which until at least 1722 regulated the open fields. (fn. 10)

In 1086 the manor of Harlington (i.e. the later Harlington or Hardington) was held of Roger, Earl of Shrewsbury, by two under-tenants. (fn. 11) It had formerly belonged to Wigot, who may be identified with Wigot of Wallingford, a considerable landowner in the time of Edward the Confessor. (fn. 12) At some time after 1086, probably as a result of the forfeiture of Earl Roger's son, Robert de Bellême, in 1102, (fn. 13) Harlington passed with the rest of Roger's Middlesex estates to the honor of Wallingford. (fn. 14) It continued to be held of Wallingford until the rights of the honor were transferred to the new honor of Ewelme in 1540. (fn. 15) The honor court at Uxbridge continued to exercise jurisdiction in Harlington until the 18th century. (fn. 16)

In the time of Edward the Confessor two sokemen held two of the 10 hides in the manor. They could not sell their land without permission of Wigot, who held the rest himself, and by 1086 their estates seem to have been absorbed in the manor. This was held of Earl Roger by two men, Alfred and Olaf, apparently as one manor. (fn. 17) Harpsden manor (Oxon.), which had belonged to Wigot of Wallingford and later became part of the honor of Wallingford, was also held by one Alfred. He may well be identifiable with Alfred of Harlington since the same lords held both manors later on. (fn. 18) Three knight's fees were held of the honor of Wallingford by Roger son of Alfred in the 12th century, by Ralph of Harpsden in 1196, and by Robert of Harpsden in 1201 and 1211. (fn. 19) In 1211 one of these fees was certainly in Harlington. (fn. 20) Roger of Harpsden held one knight's fee in Harlington in 1235. (fn. 21) In 1241 Agnes, widow of Robert of Harpsden, Roger's father, held part of the estate as dower. (fn. 22) William of Harpsden was in possession in 1279, (fn. 23) and in 1302 he or a successor of the same name received a grant of free warren in his demesnes at Harlington and in Oxfordshire. (fn. 24) William of Harpsden was the name of the lord of Harlington at several dates between then and 1353. (fn. 25) In 1340 William of Harpsden settled the manor on himself for life and then on his son Gilbert and Gilbert's wife Maud. (fn. 26) In 1374 Maud, who was then a widow, granted the manor for her life to Robert de Anesty and Elizabeth his wife. (fn. 27) It is possible that Gilbert had died by 1364 and that Maud had married again, for presentations to the rectory were made then and in the following year by Maud Mirymanth: (fn. 28) no second husband is mentioned in the deed of 1374.

According to a rough note about the descent of the manor which was made in 1534 or thereabouts, (fn. 29) Gilbert and Maud left a daughter who married one Lovell and was succeeded by her son Thomas Lovell. John Lovell of Dawley, mentioned in 1349 and later, (fn. 30) is known to have owned land in Harlington, though at least part of it came into his hands before he can have held Harlington manor. In 1357 rents which had belonged to him in Harlington were in the king's hands because he had been convicted of felony; he was then said to be a clerk. (fn. 31) He was succeeded by his son Thomas, and may therefore have been Elizabeth's husband, though in 1353 his wife was called Joan. (fn. 32) Thomas seems to have been in possession about 1385, (fn. 33) and was concerned in conveyances of both manors in 1415. (fn. 34) In 1412 they had been said to belong to John Warbynton, (fn. 35) who may have been a trustee or tenant, since according to the early-16thcentury note already mentioned Harlington seems to have descended from father to son in the Lovell family until the date the document was written. (fn. 36) Despite this, however, the effect of the conveyances of 1415 on Harlington seems to have been to transfer it to one John Brown of Lincolnshire. Richard Brown was said to be lord in 1428, (fn. 37) and in 1456 John Lovell and his wife quitclaimed land in Harlington to Richard Brown and his wife. (fn. 38) In 1459 Richard Brown and his wife granted the manor and advowson to William Olyff of Farnham (Surr.). The terms of the grant are not clear, but it seems that the grantors were to receive an annual rent and the use of a house in Harlington for their lives. (fn. 39) According to the 16th-century note of the descent of the manor, Thomas, son of John Lovell and Elizabeth Harpsden, was followed by his son John and he by another John. One of these was presumably the John Lovell of 1456, and the Lovell's apparent supersession by the Browns and others may have been the result of some family arrangement. On the other hand it may be that the note, which is very roughly drawn up, testifies to the genealogy of the Lovell family rather than to their continuous possession of the manor. In any case Thomas Lovell held the advowson, and hence no doubt the manor as well, in or before 1474 and in 1476. (fn. 40) He was probably the Thomas who, according to the 16th-century note, was the son and heir of the second John and was himself succeeded by another Thomas. The elder Thomas had settled the manor on his son Thomas by 1493. (fn. 41) By 1503 it was in the hands of Gregory Lovell, son of the second Thomas. (fn. 42) According to the note, Gregory seems to have been in possession until it was written, but in 1510 the guardian of George Lovell, a minor, presented to the rectory. (fn. 43) Three years later Gregory Lovell presented. (fn. 44) Gregory died in 1545 (fn. 45) and his widow Anne, who held for life, died between 1557 and 1559. (fn. 46) They left no children and the reversion after Anne's death belonged to Gregory's two aunts. (fn. 47) It was sold to William Roper in 1552, so that he took possession when Anne Lovell died. (fn. 48)

By 1580 William Roper had been succeeded by Anthony Roper, in whose name the courts were held until 1583. From 1584 until 1593 they were held on behalf of Christopher Byrd, son of William Byrd the composer. (fn. 49) William Byrd had been living in Harlington since about 1577 (fn. 50) and it is possible that Christopher held on behalf of his father. After William Byrd's death, his son-in-law's widow, with whom he had had disputes at different times, alleged that he had settled Harlington on her marriage but that his extravagance had made it necessary to sell it. (fn. 51) The sale took place in 1595, and was made to Ambrose Copinger, (fn. 52) who also acquired Dawley at the same time. The two manors then continued to be held together until 1772. (fn. 53)

Ambrose Copinger, by then a knight, died in 1604. (fn. 54) His widow, who held for life, married Sir John Morris of Ongar (Essex) in 1605, (fn. 55) and they joined with Ambrose Copinger's nephew, to whom the reversion belonged, in selling the manors in 1607 to Sir John Bennet (d. 1627), chancellor to Queen Anne. (fn. 56) He was succeeded by his son, Sir John Bennet (d. 1658), and he by his son John (d. 1695), who was created Lord Ossulston in 1682. (fn. 57) The second son of Sir John Bennet (d. 1658) was Henry Bennet, Charles II's secretary of state, who never owned Harlington himself though he took his title of Arlington from it. (fn. 58) John, Lord Ossulston, was followed by his son who was created Earl of Tankerville in 1714 and died in 1722. (fn. 59) His son sold Harlington and Dawley in 1725 to Henry St. John, Viscount Bolingbroke, the statesman. (fn. 60) Bolingbroke's alterations to Dawley House are discussed below, with the history of the property and manor-houses of Dawley manor. He sold Dawley and Harlington in 1739 to Edward Stephenson, (fn. 61) who in 1755 sold them to Henry, Earl of Uxbridge (d. 1769), the owner of considerable estates in west Middlesex, including West Drayton and Harmondsworth manors. (fn. 62) Uxbridge's heir was his cousin, Henry Bayly, Lord Paget, who sold Dawley in 1772 and Harlington in 1773. Harlington went to Frederick, Earl of Berkeley (d. 1810), (fn. 63) and thereafter descended with his neighbouring manor and seat of Cranford, and with the manor of Harlington with Shepiston, which he also owned. (fn. 64) Courts were still held on behalf of Lord Berkeley in 1914 but by 1942 the manor appears to have lapsed. (fn. 65)

In 1086 the demesne of Harlington contained two plough-lands. (fn. 66) In the early 16th century there was a manor-house and some inclosed and open-field land, most of which was let. (fn. 67) Ambrose Copinger and the Bennet family acquired lands in Harlington beyond those which had formerly belonged to either Harlington or Dawley manors, but since most of these lay in the north of the parish they are discussed below with the property of Dawley manor. In 1841, after the separation of the two manors, the Countess of Berkeley held 123 acres in the parish, (fn. 68) and most of this is probably to be associated with Harlington or Hardington manor, (fn. 69) but whether it represents in any sense the ancient lands of the lords is very doubtful. By 1942 all the Berkeley lands in the parish had been sold. (fn. 70) Harlington manor-house is last mentioned in 1615, when Sir John Bennet settled it on his son. (fn. 71) After that it disappears from the records, no doubt because the Bennets and their successors made Dawley their chief residence. William Byrd, however, may be presumed to have occupied it, and in 1593 the court-yard and hop-yard of Mr. Byrd were on one side of Berry Green. (fn. 72) In 1821 Berry Green was a very small bit of waste-land in Dawley Road a little north of Dawley Manor Farm. (fn. 73) This suggests that the manor-house was either at Dawley Manor Farm or at the moated site across the road from it. (fn. 74) The moat indicates the presence of a medieval house of some importance, which may, possibly, have been replaced later by Dawley Manor Farm, the structure of which is thought to be partly of the 16th century. (fn. 75) There is no particular reason to assume that Dawley Manor Farm was anciently the property of Dawley manor rather than Harlington, though it belonged to the owners of Dawley after the two manors were separated. There seems to be no evidence whatever that William Byrd lived in the house now called the Lilacs in Manor Parade, which is popularly associated with him, (fn. 76) or that this could have been the manor-house. Manor Parade takes its name from Manor Farm, which stood to the north-west of it: Manor Farm did not belong to the owner of any manor in 1821, and it is not known why it was later given this name. (fn. 77)

In 1086 the manor of DAWLEY probably comprised such part of the parish, probably about a third of its area, as was not included in Harlington manor. (fn. 78) Most of Dawley may be assumed to have lain to the north of Harlington, but Dawley manor had tenants in Sipson in the 15th century, (fn. 79) and in 1821 there were six copyhold cottages and some 12 acres of copyhold land belonging to it in Harlington village street: (fn. 80) evidently the two manors had never been geographically quite separate. Lands in Ickenham were also alleged to be held of Dawley in the early 17th century. (fn. 81) By the 18th century the lord of the manor had inclosed in his park the area where most of the manor lands had probably lain, so that in 1821 the only copyholds, apart from the houses in Harlington which have been mentioned, were a few small allotments in the new inclosures elsewhere in the parish. The manor-house and estate of the lords of the manor are described below.

Before the Conquest Dawley manor was held by Godwin Alfit, who was described in Domesday Book as the man of Wigot (i.e. Wigot of Wallingford). Godwin could dispose of his land as he wished, but by 1086 the manor 'belonged' to Colham, the chief manor in the neighbourhood of Roger, Earl of Shrewsbury, and was held of him. Dawley does not afterwards appear to have been connected with Colham otherwise than by being, with it, a part of the honor of Wallingford. Its overlordship descended after 1086 with that of Harlington. (fn. 82)

In 1086 the manor was held of Earl Roger by Alnod. It later belonged to the Corbet family of Shropshire, who were no doubt enfeoffed by Earl Roger or one of his sons before their earldom of Shrewsbury was forfeited in 1102. William Corbet held a knight's fee of the honor of Wallingford in 1166, (fn. 83) and Robert Corbet of Caus (Salop) held Dawley as one fee in 1212. (fn. 84) William son of Ranulf of Whitchurch (Salop) was Robert Corbet's attorney in litigation about woodland in Dawley in 1199, (fn. 85) and in 1235 Maud of Whitchurch (de Albo Mona sterio, or de Blancmuster) held the fee in Dawley. (fn. 86) In 1253 William, lord of Whitchurch, was summoned to do service to the honor of Wallingford, and called Robert Corbet's son Thomas to acquit him. (fn. 87) Whitchurch passed in 1260 to coheirs, one of whom was Joan, wife of William de Barentyn. (fn. 88) She held Dawley in 1300, according to one list of tenants of Wallingford, (fn. 89) while according to another, she and Robert Corbet held it together. (fn. 90) The Corbet interest, which may have been a mesne tenancy, is not referred to again. By an arrangement made in 1307, Joan, widow of William Barentyn, was to hold the whole manor for her life, and it was then to revert to William's son, Gilbert de Barentyn. (fn. 91) He was lord in 1316, (fn. 92) but by c. 1335 his lands had passed to his heirs. (fn. 93) John Lovell of Dawley is mentioned in 1349, and in 1353 he acquired a house and 70 acres of land in Harlington. (fn. 94) In the same year the fee in Dawley which had belonged to the Whitchurch family was said to belong to John Lovell, William Lovell, and their parceners. (fn. 95) How they, or John, had acquired the manor is not known, but in 1367 John Lovell of Harlington held lands in Jersey which had belonged to various persons of the family of Barentyn. (fn. 96) One of these was named Gilbert, but he does not seem to be identifiable with the Gilbert de Barentyn who had earlier been lord of Dawley. (fn. 97) It is possible that John Lovell's interest in the estates of the Jersey Barentyns was coincidental, and that his Middlesex rights were derived from the Oxfordshire family of the same name. (fn. 98)

Dawley manor descended along with Harlington, which John Lovell is also thought to have acquired, to his son Thomas. (fn. 99) As a result of conveyances in 1465, in which Reynold Barentyn of Oxfordshire was also concerned, (fn. 100) Dawley apparently passed to Robert Oliver, who was said to be lord in 1428. (fn. 101) He and his wife held the manor for life in 1448, (fn. 102) but John son of Thomas Lovell quitclaimed it to Robert Aubrey in 1450, and similar quitclaims were made by Richard Brown, who seems to have held Lovell's interest in Harlington manor. (fn. 103) Robert Aubrey of Dawley was collector of a subsidy in 1453 and died in 1488, leaving several sons. (fn. 104) By 1515 Dawley belonged to Richard Aubrey. (fn. 105) Thomas Aubrey held it in 1540 and William Aubrey in 1547. (fn. 106) John Aubrey died in possession in 1557 and was succeeded by his son William. (fn. 107) William Aubrey appears to have conveyed Dawley to William Roper, lord of Harlington, in 1564, (fn. 108) but he was still living at Dawley in 1571, when he secured a lease of Harlington rectory. (fn. 109) The manor seems to have belonged in 1590 to Richard Reynolds, (fn. 110) and in 1595 William Hitchcock conveyed it to Ambrose Copinger. (fn. 111) It then descended with Harlington to the Bennet family and so to Lord Bolingbroke and eventually, in 1769, to Lord Paget. (fn. 112) Paget sold the manor in 1772 to Peter, Count de Salis, the descendant of a Swiss family who settled in England in the early 18th century. Paget sold the site of Dawley House separately, but it was also acquired by de Salis in 1797, so that the estate became reunited. (fn. 113) De Salis died in 1807 and was succeeded by his son Jerome (d. 1836), who took the additional name of Fane in 1835. In 1841 part of the estate was held by Jerome de Salis's widow and part by his eldest son by an earlier marriage, Peter John, Count de Salis. (fn. 114) Some of the land was sold later in the century and the remainder passed eventually to Sir Cecil Fane de Salis (d. 1948), (fn. 115) who was descended from the dowager countess of 1841. His Dawley estate was dispersed gradually both during and after his lifetime, the last small portion being sold in 1959. (fn. 116)

The demesne of Dawley comprised one ploughland in 1086. (fn. 117) About 1532 the 'farm-lands' belonging to the lord of the manor, all of which were let, comprised probably over 250 acres. (fn. 118) By the early 17th century some of the demesne had been sold, (fn. 119) but Ambrose Copinger bought 74 acres to add to his estates of Harlington and Dawley. (fn. 120) His successors also enlarged their property, (fn. 121) and in 1649 Sir John Bennet probably owned some 600 acres in the parish, together with Dawley House and four farm-houses. (fn. 122) In 1692 the family's estates were estimated at some 540 acres, and in the 18th century at 602 acres. (fn. 123) In 1841 the two members of the de Salis family owned together 533 acres in the parish. Most of this lay in the north, in or near the former park, but it also included Dawley Manor Farm, in the High Street: (fn. 124) whether this house had always belonged to the manor is not known. (fn. 125)

The first Sir John Bennet lived at Uxbridge (fn. 126) but his successors occupied Dawley House, (fn. 127) which stood on the site used in 1959 as a car-park in the E.M.I. factory grounds on the west of Dawley Road. (fn. 128) It may be assumed to have always been the manorhouse. Sir John Bennet, 1st Lord Ossulston, probably rebuilt the house or made large alterations to it: he was assessed for sixteen hearths in the parish in 1664 and for 27 some years later. (fn. 129) A print of 1695-1714 (see plate facing p. 259) shows an imposing house built round a court-yard in two stories, with attics in a steeply pitched roof, and with nine bays on the south front. There were extensive out-buildings on the east by the road, and formal gardens to the south and west. (fn. 130) The 18th-century park was also formed by the Bennets. Robert Corbet had 36 acres of wood in Dawley in 1200, (fn. 131) and in 1515 Richard Aubrey of Dawley converted 100 acres to pasture. (fn. 132) In 1657 there seem to have been some 200 acres attached to the house apart from farm-lands. (fn. 133) In 1690 John, Lord Ossulston, received licence to impark 300 acres (fn. 134) and the print of 1695-1714 shows a great double avenue stretching away to the north. Dawley Road, however, seems from the print to have curved round the north side of the house so that the avenue lay beyond. (fn. 135) In 1707 Charles, Lord Ossulston, apparently contemplated inclosing part of a road from Hillingdon Common to Harlington, (fn. 136) and he may in fact have moved the road away from the house to the boundary of his land and of the parish. (fn. 137) Certainly Dawley Road followed its later line along the boundary by the time a map of the park was drawn between 1714 and 1722. This shows extensive formal gardens and plantations, with avenues radiating in all directions over the park, which comprised the whole of the parish north of the approximate line of Bourne Avenue. (fn. 138) This area seems to have comprised about 245 acres, (fn. 139) though the park was said at some date in the 18th century to cover 373 acres. It was then stocked with 750 head of deer. (fn. 140)

Despite Bolingbroke's insistence that to him Dawley was simply 'an agreeable sepulchre', (fn. 141) he 'new modelled' the house to the designs of James Gibbs. (fn. 142) The result was a two-storied house of brick with round-headed windows below a rather flat roof. (fn. 143) Bolingbroke called Dawley a farm, and for a time lived there ostentatiously engrossed in rustic pursuits. (fn. 144) In 1728 he had the hall painted with farm implements in monochrome: (fn. 145)

. . . what he built a palace, calls a Farm Here the proud trophies, and the spoils of war Yield to the scythe, the harrow and the car.

In other rooms there were more ambitious, though still rustic, decorations:

Young winged Cupids smiling guide the plough, And peasants elegantly reap and sow.

In 1735 Bolingbroke left England and by 1737 he was trying to sell Dawley. (fn. 146) The eventual purchaser, Edward Stephenson, seems to have lived there for a while, (fn. 147) but by the time Lord Uxbridge bought the property, Stephenson had a tenant, named Abraham Hume. (fn. 148) Uxbridge used the house himself, and his successor, Lord Paget, had work done on it during his short tenure: until this time much of Bolingbroke's decorations and furniture had apparently remained unchanged. (fn. 149) The house was demolished soon after Paget sold it in 1772. (fn. 150) The much smaller though still considerable house on the site in the 19th century was said to have been formerly part of the out-offices. (fn. 151) It was not used by the de Salis family, who never lived in Harlington parish, though from about 1835 to about 1929 they occupied the house called Dawley Court (since demolished) in Corwell Lane, just outside the north boundary of the parish. (fn. 152) They leased their Dawley property, and for some decades around 1800 Tattersall's may have been occupying it as a stud-farm. (fn. 153) In 1816 the house which had been made from the remains of the Dawley House buildings was said to be a farm-house (fn. 154) and it is later known to have been occupied by the tenant of the surrounding land. (fn. 155) Another and less pretentious farm-house was later built to the south of it. In 1929 Cecil Fane de Salis sold both houses with 23 acres of land to what was then the Gramophone Co. of Hayes. (fn. 156) The farm-house was demolished and Dawley House was allowed to fall into decay. It was finally demolished several years before 1959. (fn. 157) The only visible relic of the house and park is now the brick wall which runs, with gaps, north from the E.M.I. factory to the end of the old parish and estate boundary. This appears to be substantially of 18thcentury brickwork.

The manor of HARLINGTON WITH SHEPISTON, as it became generally known, derived the second part of its name from the hamlet of Sipson, (fn. 158) though there is no evidence that its lands were particularly concentrated in the west of the parish, near the hamlet, (fn. 159) and it seems fairly certain that the manor did not extend into Harmondsworth parish. (fn. 160) Its origin is obscure: (fn. 161) the first reference to the estate occurs about 1335, when the Minister of Hounslow Friary held lands in Harlington and Dawley worth 40s. (fn. 162) In 1338 William of Odiham received licence to grant lands in Stanwell, East Bedfont, and Harlington to the friary, and part of this property may have been connected with the later manor. (fn. 163) In the early 16th century the Minister of Hounslow was said to hold half a knight's fee of Harlington or Hardington manor at 2s. 8d. and a pepper-corn rent. (fn. 164) He also held land of Dawley manor, (fn. 165) and leased other lands in the parish from the priory of Ankerwyke (Bucks.). (fn. 166) The friary's main Harlington estate is first referred to as a manor in 1540, when it was in the hands of the Crown following the Dissolution. No demesne lands are mentioned, but there were a good many free and copyhold tenants, including the lord of Harlington or Hardington manor. (fn. 167) In 1599 the Crown granted the manor, again with tenants but apparently without demesne, to Michael Stanhope, groom of the privy chamber. (fn. 168) He received East Bedfont manor, which had also belonged to Hounslow, at the same time, and later acquired another and larger estate nearby at Osterley. (fn. 169) Stanhope's Harlington estate passed to his son-in-law George, Lord Berkeley, (fn. 170) and remained in the possession of his descendants until the 20th century. Courts were still held in 1914, but the manorial rights had lapsed by 1942, no doubt as a result of the abolition of copyhold in 1925. (fn. 171)

In 1657 the lord of the manor exercised apparently exclusive jurisdiction over the waste land of the parish, and in 1821 this was the only manor to receive an allotment for waste. At that date its copyhold tenants held some 34 acres of old inclosed land, including houses in Harlington village and in West End, and they received correspondingly large allotments of new inclosures. (fn. 172) In the 17th century the Berkeleys held some 28 acres in the parish, (fn. 173) but this is to be associated with their Cranford estate rather than regarded as anything which could be called demesne lands of Harlington with Shepiston. (fn. 174) In 1671 the estate seems to have consisted only of copyhold, but was reckoned a valuable one, since the fines at succession or alienation were arbitrary and there were also restrictions of various sorts on the tenants. (fn. 175)


In 1249 Thame Abbey acquired a house and 12 acres in Harlington. (fn. 176) This is the first reference to the abbey's property here, which is later known to have been part of its manor of Cranford le Mote, most of which lay over the eastern boundary of the parish. (fn. 177) In 1291 Thame's property in Harlington was worth a third of that which lay in Cranford itself. (fn. 178) In the 15th and 16th centuries the abbey owed suit to Dawley manor. (fn. 179) Several cottages in Harlington village street and some 24 acres of new inclosures were copyhold of Cranford in 1821, (fn. 180) while the 28 acres in the parish which belonged to the earls of Berkeley in the 17th century may represent old demesne lands of the manor. (fn. 181)

Other religious houses which held land in Harlington in the Middle Ages were Ankerwyke Priory (Bucks.) and Winchester College. Ankerwyke's estate, which passed to Henry VIII's new foundation of Bisham, was leased to Hounslow Friary at the time of the Dissolution. (fn. 182) The only evidence of Winchester's holding which has been found is that the warden owed suit to Dawley manor in 1455-6. (fn. 183) Such property as he had in Harlington was doubtless appurtenant to his adjoining manor of Harmondsworth. (fn. 184)

Too little is known of Harlington in the Middle Ages to show whether there were many large holdings within or apart from the three manors. One estate of a hide of land is mentioned in 1207 and 1235, (fn. 185) and others of 3 virgates and 40 acres in 1214 and 1233 respectively. (fn. 186) A few conveyances of over 20 acres in the 14th century and later are also recorded. (fn. 187) In 1649, apart from the estates of Sir John Bennet (482 a.) and of two men who may have been his feoffees (128 a.), (fn. 188) there were two holdings of between 50 and 100 acres, and 12 of 20-50. (fn. 189) In 1692 the corresponding figures were five and three, with one holding of over 100 acres. (fn. 190) With the separation of Harlington or Hardington and Dawley manors in the 18th century two considerable manorial estates replaced the single one. In 1841, apart from these, there was one holding of 123 acres, two of 50- 100, and nine of 20-50. Three of these (77 a., 31 a., 26 a.) belonged to the Newman family, (fn. 191) who had been farmers and auctioneers in the area at least since the beginning of the century. (fn. 192) By 1907 Robert Newman (d. 1924) owned Dawley Manor Farm (154 a.), which in 1841 had belonged to the de Salis estate, (fn. 193) and the Bourne farm estate, lying between the railway and Pinkwell Lane. His property was dispersed after his death. (fn. 194) In 1937 Kelly's Directory named John Heyward Ltd. and William Philp, both market-gardeners, as the chief landowners along with the de Salis family. In 1959 Ebenezer Heyward Ltd. had market-gardens of about 300 acres, and this was probably the largest holding in the parish. (fn. 195)


  • 1. See, e.g. court rolls: M.R.O., Acc. 530/11-17.
  • 2. See Place Names of Mdx. (E.P.N.S.), 37.
  • 3. See p. 266.
  • 4. e.g. M.R.O., Acc. 530/11 (1584); C 142/286/176.
  • 5. M.R.O., Acc. 446/M 132.
  • 6. See p. 263.
  • 7. See p. 266.
  • 8. M.R.O., Acc. 530/11.
  • 9. M.R.O., Harlington Incl. Award.
  • 10. M.R.O., Acc. 530/12, 15: though see also orders made by Harlington with Shepiston in 1608: Acc. 530/19.
  • 11. Dom. Bk. (Rec. Com.), i. 129a.
  • 12. V.C.H. Oxon. i. 382-3; V.C.H. Beds. i. 202; V.C.H. Berks. i; 290, 355; the identification is suggested by the similar subsequent history of Wigot's estates in Mdx. and elsewhere.
  • 13. Complete Peerage, xi. 693.
  • 14. Red. Bk. Exch. (Rec. Com.), 543; Boarstall Cart. (Oxf. Hist. Soc. lxxxviii), 323.
  • 15. V.C.H. Berks. iii. 528; it was said to be held of Wallingford in 1607: C 142/286/176.
  • 16. See p. 269.
  • 17. Dom. Bk. (Rec. Com.), i. 129a.
  • 18. Boarstall Cart. 323.
  • 19. Ibid.
  • 20. Red Bk. Exch. (Rec. Com.), 543, where the tenant is given as Roger of Harpsden.
  • 21. Bk. of Fees, i. 473.
  • 22. J.I. 1/37, m. 22; C.P. 25(1)/146/12/177, 193.
  • 23. S.C. 5/Mdx. Tower ser. 1, m. 1.
  • 24. Cal. Chart. R. iii. 26.
  • 25. Feudal Aids, iii. 373, 375; M.R.O., F. 37.
  • 26. C.P. 25(1)/150/58/129.
  • 27. Cal. Close, 1374-7, 68.
  • 28. Hennessy, Novum Repertorium, 199.
  • 29. M.R.O., Acc. 446/M. 137; the date is suggested by the description of Gregory Lovell as modo quer': cf. C.P. 25(2)/51/370/23.
  • 30. See p. 264.
  • 31. Cal. Pat. 1354-8, 569; Cal. Close, 1364-8, 397, 399.
  • 32. C.P. 25(1)/150/65/306.
  • 33. Cal. Close, 1381-5, 212-13, 430, 637.
  • 34. C.P. 25(1)/152/86/12, 13.
  • 35. Feudal Aids, vi. 491.
  • 36. M.R.O., Acc. 446/M. 137.
  • 37. Feudal Aids, iii. 381.
  • 38. C.P. 25(1)/152/94/173.
  • 39. Cal. Close, 1454-61, 423-4.
  • 40. Hennessy, Novum Repertorium, 199.
  • 41. Cal. Close, 1485-1500, no. 706.
  • 42. M.R.O., Acc. 530/10 (ct. roll, 1503); C 1/334/56.
  • 43. Guildhall MS. 9531/9, f. 23b; for his guardian, cf. C 1/334/56.
  • 44. Guildhall MS. 9531/9, f. 48: Hennessy wrongly gives 'George'.
  • 45. Brass in Harlington church.
  • 46. M.R.O., Acc. 530/11.
  • 47. Ibid. 10.
  • 48. C 142/96/28; C.P. 25(2)/61/475/2, 47.
  • 49. M.R.O., Acc. 530/11; for Byrd and his family, see E. H. Fellowes, Wm. Byrd (1948 edn.), 11, 31, 249.
  • 50. See p. 273.
  • 51. C 3/334/3.
  • 52. C 142/286/176.
  • 53. See below.
  • 54. C 142/286/176; P.C.C. 42 Harte (A. Copinger).
  • 55. Harlington Par. Reg. printed in Mdx. Par. Ref. ed. Phillimore and Gurney, i. 141.
  • 56. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.D. 196-203. For Bennet, see D.N.B. ii. 233.
  • 57. M.R.O., Acc. 530/12-14; Complete Peerage, x. 189.
  • 58. Clarendon (Hist. of Gt. Rebellion and Life (1843 edn.), 1133) wrongly assumed it had belonged to him. Arlington once considered buying Harlington with Shepiston: S.P. 29/290, no. 168.
  • 59. Complete Peerage, xii. 633.
  • 60. M.R.O., Acc. 278; Acc. 446/E.D. 205. St. John had in fact been deprived of his title by this time (Complete Peerage, ii. 205) but he continued generally to be called by it.
  • 61. Correspondence of Pope, ed. Sherborn, iv. 136, 177; cf. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.D. 236.
  • 62. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.D. 237.
  • 63. M.R.O., list of Berkeley docs. penes Boodle, Hatfield & Co., solicitors.
  • 64. See below, and p. 180.
  • 65. M.R.O., Acc. 180/609; Ex inf. Boodle, Hatfield & Co., solicitors.
  • 66. Dom. Bk. (Rec. Com.), 1. 129a.
  • 67. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.M. 5; /M. 138/3.
  • 68. M.R.O., Harlington Tithe Award.
  • 69. Cf. p. 266, for the other Berkeley lands in the parish.
  • 70. Ex inf. Boodle, Hatfield & Co.
  • 71. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.D. 204.
  • 72. Ibid. 530/10.
  • 73. M.R.O., Harlington Incl. Award.
  • 74. Most of the moats marked in the Incl. Award are now filled in but they are partly marked by lines of trees.
  • 75. See p. 259.
  • 76. Fellowes, Wm. Byrd (1948 edn.), 11. For this house, see p. 259.
  • 77. M.R.O., Harlington Incl. Award. The name appears in 1865 in O.S. Map 1/2,500 Mdx. xx. 1 (1st edn.).
  • 78. Cf. the hides and plough-lands of Harlington and Dawley: Dom. Bk. (Rec. Com.), i. 129a; and see later maps, e.g. M.R.O., Harlington Incl. Award map.
  • 79. Cal. Close, 1429-35, 51; S.C. 11/446.
  • 80. Harlington Incl. Award.
  • 81. C 3/260/2.
  • 82. Dom. Bk. (Rec. Com.), i. 129a; for the overlordship, see pp. 261-2.
  • 83. Red. Bk. Exch. (Rec. Com.), 309. The date may in fact have been a little earlier: see Boarstall Cart. (Oxf. Hist. Soc. lxxxviii), 302.
  • 84. Bk. of Fees, i. 119: for the Corbets, see Eyton, Shropshire, vii. 10-38.
  • 85. Cur. Reg. R. i. 89, 173; cf. Eyton, op. cit. vii. 14n; x. 16-17, though there seems to be no direct evidence that William held Dawley himself.
  • 86. Bk. of Fees, i. 474.
  • 87. Eyton, op. cit. vii. 14n.
  • 88. Ibid. x. 19.
  • 89. Cal. Inq. p.m. iii, p. 480.
  • 90. Boarstall Cart. (Oxf. Hist. Soc. lxxxviii), 299: the name 'Robert' seems to be a mistake: Eyton, Shropshire, vii. 37.
  • 91. C.P. 25(1)/148/38/361: this Joan may have been daughter-in-law of the earlier Joan, since the transaction suggests that she did not hold in her own right.
  • 92. Feudal Aids, iii. 373.
  • 93. M.R.O., F. 37.
  • 94. Cal. Pat. 1349-54, 98; C.P. 25(1)/150/65/306.
  • 95. Feudal Aids, iii. 373: it is possible that parceners (participes) has a wider meaning here than it carries later.
  • 96. Cal. Close, 1364-8, 397.
  • 97. See J. A. Masservy, 'Ancienne Généalogie des families de Barentin &c.', Soc. Jersiaise, v (27e Bulletin Annual), 83.
  • 98. C.P. 25(1)/152/86/12, 13.
  • 99. See p. 262.
  • 100. C.P. 25(1)/152/86/12, 13.
  • 101. Feudal Aids, iii. 381.
  • 102. C.P. 25(1)/293/71/334.
  • 103. Cal. Close, 1447-54, 180; 1454-61, 337.
  • 104. Cal. Fine R. 1452-61, 52; P.C.C. Milles, ff. 113-14.
  • 105. C 47/7/2/2, m. 14.
  • 106. S.C. 6/Hen. VIII 109, m. 68d; M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.M. 3.
  • 107. C 142/112/112.
  • 108. P.R.O., Index 17221, f. 76: this was perhaps connected with Roper's sale of the advowson to him in the same year: see p. 270.
  • 109. Guildhall MS. 9531/13, ff. 75-77; see p. 270.
  • 110. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.M. 3.
  • 111. C 142/286/176.
  • 112. See pp. 262-3. Numerous conveyances in the mid17th cent. (B.M. Add. Ch. 18976, 19003-9; M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.D. 258-62) all seem to concern mortgages.
  • 113. Lysons, Mdx. Pars. 128-9.
  • 114. M.R.O., Harlington Tithe Award. See pedigree in H. Wilson, 800 years of Harlington par. ch. (1909 edn.), after p. 38.
  • 115. Who was who (1941-50).
  • 116. M.L.R. 1920-37, passim; ex inf. Robt. Newman & Son (auctioneers and estate agents), Hayes.
  • 117. Dom. Bk. (Rec. Com.), i. 129a.
  • 118. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.M. 3; cf. ibid. (rental of 1590).
  • 119. C 142/428/72; /746/119.
  • 120. P.C.C. 42 Harte (A. Copinger): this land was not apparently freehold; cf. C 142/286/176.
  • 121. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.D. 243-7, 265-6.
  • 122. Ibid. 249/1253: this includes 128 a. owned by Thos. Bennet and Benjamin Baron, of which he may have been beneficial owner: cf. Ibid. 446/E.D. 258-62; B.M. Add. Ch. 18976, 19003-9.
  • 123. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.M. 45, 47.
  • 124. M.R.O., Harlington Tithe Award.
  • 125. Cf. p. 263.
  • 126. D.N.B. ii. 233-5.
  • 127. See, e.g. a reference to their pew in Harlington ch.: BM. Add. Ch. 19004.
  • 128. M.P.H. 246 (map of estate, 1714-22).
  • 129. M.R.O., H.T. 6, m. 6; H.T. 55.
  • 130. B.M. Maps K. 30, 27: reproduced in Wilson, 800 years of Harlington ch. (1926 edn.), facing p. 66.
  • 131. Curia Regis R. i. 89, 173.
  • 132. C 47/7/2/2, m. 14.
  • 133. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.D. 258.
  • 134. C 66/3339, no. 16.
  • 135. See n. 6. above.
  • 136. Mdx. Cty. Recs.: Sess. Bks. 1689-1709, 309.
  • 137. Cf. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.D. 236 (12 a. lying north of Ossulston's house and west of 'the lane', leased to him from 1708).
  • 138. M.P.H. 246.
  • 139. Cf. O.S. Maps 1/2,500 Mdx. xiv. 12, 16; xv. 9, 13 (first edn.), and Bk. of Reference thereto.
  • 140. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.M. 47.
  • 141. Correspondence of Alexander Pope, ed. Sherburn, ii. 403.
  • 142. Colvin, Dict. Eng. Architects, 1660-1840, 233. Bolingbroke's sister refers to her brother as having 'built' the house: Letters of Lady Luxborough (1775), 22-23.
  • 143. Gent. Mag. 1802 (2), lxxii. 725.
  • 144. D.N.B. xvii. 628.
  • 145. Correspondence of Pope, ii. 503; cf. Letters of Lady Luxborough, 22-23, and the remainder of the following poem in Gent. Mag. 1731, i. 262.
  • 146. D.N.B. xvii. 629-30.
  • 147. Mdx. Par. Reg. ed. Phillimore and Gurney, i. 146.
  • 148. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.D. 237.
  • 149. Gent. Mag. 1802 (2), lxxii. 725, and see Mdx. Par. Reg. i. 147; cf. M.R.O., Acc. 446/H. 22.
  • 150. Lysons implies it was demolished before the sale (Mdx. Pars. 128), but cf. Gent. Mag. 1802 (2), lxxii. 725.
  • 151. Brewer (Beauties of Eng. and Wales, x (5), 619) seems to be the first to say this. For the house, see water-colour drawing at Guildhall Libr.
  • 152. Rachel de Salis, Hillingdon through eleven centuries [1926], 96-97 and pedigree (also printed in H. Wilson, 800 years of Harlington ch. (1909 edn.)). Mdx. Advertiser and Cty. Gazette, 10 Nov. 1933, p. 15. Several writers confuse this house with the then surviving part of Dawley House: e.g. Walford, Greater Lond. i. 201, 227.
  • 153. D.N.B. xix. 387: no other reference to this has been found.
  • 154. Brewer, Beauties of Eng. and Wales, x (5), 619.
  • 155. M.R.O., Harlington Tithe Award; Kelly's Dir. Mdx. (1845).
  • 156. M.L.R. 1929/31/269; for the Gramophone Co. see p. 268.
  • 157. Ex inf. gate-keeper, E.M.I.; cf. Maxwell, Highwaymen's Heath, 363.
  • 158. See Place Names of Mdx. (E.P.N.S.), 39.
  • 159. M.R.O., Harlington Incl. Award.
  • 160. See M.R.O., Harmondsworth Incl. Award; S.C. 11/443, 446.
  • 161. For its relationship with Harlington or Hardington manor, see p. 261.
  • 162. M.R.O., F. 37.
  • 163. Cal. Pat. 1338-40, 159.
  • 164. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.M. 5.
  • 165. Ibid. 3, 29 (rentals, 34 Hen. VI and 1737).
  • 166. S.C. 6/Hen. VIII 234, m. 10d.: see below.
  • 167. Ibid. 109, mm. 66d, 68.
  • 168. C 66/1509, m. 16.
  • 169. V.C.H. Mdx. ii. 311, and see p. 109.
  • 170. See V.C.H. Mdx. ii. 311.
  • 171. M.R.O., Acc. 180/609; ex inf. Boodle, Hatfield & Co., solicitors.
  • 172. M.R.O., Harlington Incl. Award.
  • 173. M.R.O., Acc. 249/1253; Acc. 446/E.M. 45.
  • 174. See p. 180. For their later estates in Harlington, see p. 263.
  • 175. S.P. 29/290, no. 168.
  • 176. C.P. 25(1)/147/16/293.
  • 177. See p. 179.
  • 178. Tax Eccl. (Rec. Com.), 14.
  • 179. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.M. 3 (rentals, 34 Hen. VI, 26 Hen. VIII).
  • 180. M.R.O., Harlington Incl. Award. The copyholds of Cranford St. John and Cranford le Mote are not distinguished.
  • 181. Though see above.
  • 182. S.C. 6/Hen. VIII 109, m. 75d; 234, m. 10d.
  • 183. M.R.O., Acc. 446/E.M. 3 (rental 34 Hen. VI).
  • 184. Lysons. Mdx. Pars. 138-9.
  • 185. Curia Regis R. v. 16; C.P. 25(1)/146/10/137.
  • 186. Curia Regis R. vii. 165; Bracton's Note Bk. 792.
  • 187. e.g. C.P. 25(1)/149/42/76; /150/54/40; /151/84/57; /152/94/168.
  • 188. See p. 264.
  • 189. M.R.O., Acc. 249/1253.
  • 190. Ibid. 446/E.M. 45.
  • 191. M.R.O., Harlington Tithe Award.
  • 192. Ex inf. Robt. Newman & Son. (auctioneers and estate agents), Hayes.
  • 193. M.L.R. 1907/8/508.
  • 194. Ex inf. Robt. Newman & Son.
  • 195. Ex inf. Robt. Newman & Son.