Page:Notes on the churches in the counties of Kent, Sussex, and Surrey.djvu/321

Rh and it had been held formerly in the same manner, namely, from the king. It is however not stated, as of Lolinminstre, that Nonneminstre had paid no tax, "numquam geldavit;" but neither is that said of Totintone and Warnecham. From the mention of it in K. Alfred's will Leominster was evidently a considerable place at an early period, therefore may well have possessed a church in two divisions of the manor. In fact this Nonneminstre church may have been identical with that named as at Warningcamp in (A.D. 1291), though not in that portion of the manor, which is noticed in (D.B) under the title of Warnecham. It is declared of Nonneminstre, that the whole manor comprised thirteen hides, including a wood feeding twenty hogs, and the valuation of three separate holdings is given. "Ibi æcclesia et iv servi et ii salinæ de xxx denariis, silva de xx porcis. T. R. E. valebat xx libras, et post xvi libras; modo xxv libras.—There is a church, and four serfs, and two saltpans of thirty pence, a wood of twenty hogs. In the time of K. Edward it was worth £20, and afterwards £16; now £25." (D.B.) The question may arise, whether it is possible, that the name, we are now trying to identify, may signify merely "The Nuns' Minster." As already remarked in the Note on Meopham, Kent, in very early times the term "Minster" seems to have been applied not to a church generally, but to one connected with a monastic establishment of some kind. The above supposition is perhaps not altogether unlikely, because, first, it is clear that, as above stated, the two places, Lolinminstre and Nonneminstre, if separate, could not be far apart; and secondly, (D.B.) declares that Nonneminstre was held by the abbey of Almanesches, and reference to the account of Leominster will show, that the priory there is considered to have been a cell to the very same Norman abbey. 183. .—Was a portion of Petworth parish till severed by act of parliament, A.D. 1693. (Cartwright's Dallaway.) The church "has lately been much enlarged and improved." (Horsfield's Suss. II, 183.)

184. .—Of this church the chancel was rebuilt about A.D. 1835 much larger, with another addition on the northern side; when it is to be regretted, that three sedilia with canopies (mentioned in Horsfield's Suss.) were not preserved. The old part of the building consists of nave with north and south aisles, south porch, and square west tower with battlements, stair-turret, and a small stone spire, which last is unique in the district. More than half the tower is Norm., and deserving