Borley Rectory
A quiet country lane in the Essex village of Borley leads to a modest churchyard — and to the site of what was once called the most haunted house in England. The house itself is long gone, burned and demolished decades ago, but the reputation it built between the 1860s and 1940s has never really faded. If anything, the story of Borley Rectory has grown stranger the more closely people have looked at it.
The rectory was built in 1862 by the Reverend Henry Dawson Ellis Bull, replacing an earlier building on the same site that had burned down in 1841. Bull needed the space — he had fourteen children — so a substantial wing was added not long after the original build. The house served as the parish rectory for the next several decades, passing through three clerical families: the Bulls, the Smiths, and finally the Foysters.
It was during the Bull years that the first serious reports surfaced. In 1900, four of Reverend Bull’s daughters said they saw a nun-like figure drifting across the grounds near the house. The sighting became one of the most frequently cited incidents in the case — though it was reported years after the fact, and the daughters’ accounts weren’t entirely consistent with each other. A local legend about a medieval monastery and a walled-up nun had circulated in the area for some time, which may or may not have influenced what they believed they saw.
Things escalated considerably when the Reverend Eric Smith and his wife moved in during 1928. Almost immediately they began reporting strange sounds, unexplained lights, and a human skull discovered inside a wall cavity. Rattled, Mrs. Smith contacted the Daily Mirror, which in turn put her in touch with paranormal investigator Harry Price. That decision would shape the Borley story for the next century.
The Smiths left within a year. Their replacements, the Reverend Lionel Foyster and his much younger wife Marianne, stayed from 1930 to 1935 and experienced what became the most dramatic chapter of the haunting. Reported incidents during this period included shattering windows, bottles thrown across rooms, bells ringing without cause, and alleged attacks on Marianne herself. Cryptic messages also appeared on the walls — brief, scrawled pleas that seemed to be directed at her. Later investigators raised serious questions about Marianne’s role in these events.
After the Foysters departed, Harry Price rented the property in 1937 and recruited a team of 48 volunteer observers to document whatever they could. Their reports added further layers to the legend: temperature fluctuations, unexplained sounds, objects moving without apparent cause. Price published two books on Borley and it became nationally famous. Then, in February 1939, a fire broke out in the empty house. Witnesses reportedly saw figures moving in the upstairs windows during the blaze. The gutted shell was demolished in 1944.
What remained was a mass of testimony, contested evidence, and a reputation that attracted investigators and sceptics in equal measure. The Society for Psychical Research conducted a thorough review published in 1956, concluding that much of the evidence was unreliable, fabricated, or explainable by ordinary causes. Price himself came under significant scrutiny, with accusations that he had staged or embellished some of the phenomena. The debate between his defenders and his critics has never fully been resolved. Today the site is private land; Borley Church nearby is the only part of the location accessible to visitors. The full story of Borley Rectory goes considerably deeper than this entry can cover.
Details
Investigators’ Notes
Harry Price’s investigations between 1929 and 1938 brought Borley to national attention, and the Society for Psychical Research later conducted a formal review. The location has also featured in several documentary films and TV productions across the decades, including a 1975 BBC programme. Ghost hunt events have been held at the churchyard by arrangement.
The SPR’s 1956 review is widely considered the most rigorous examination of the evidence — and its conclusions were damaging. Many of the most dramatic claims don’t hold up under scrutiny. That said, some witnesses had no obvious motive to fabricate, and a small number of incidents have never been fully explained away.
