The Derehaugh arms – a note from the College of Arms

  1. Home
  2. History
  3. The Derehaugh family
  4. The Derehaugh arms –...

I treated myself to a second-hand copy of The Visitations of Suffolk 1561, 1577 and 1612. It was published in 1882 by the editor, Walter C Metcalfe, so it’s now nearly 140 years old. I found some amendments added to it in ink, and some notes on pieces of paper. It turns out that many years ago, someone owned this book who was researching similar families to me.

Their first amendment appears with the 1612 visitation for the Bacons of Hessett. The printed book says that Elizabeth, daughter Edward Bacon and Elizabeth Cornwallys married Kalabet Wauton of Holton, Norfolk. A note has been entered: “Calibut Walpole of Houghton; see W. Rye’s “Norfolk Families” vol II, 977.” And Calibut has been added in the index at the back, the “Wautons” crossed out.

The next amendment appears in the additional Suffolk pedigrees, for Carew of Bury St Edmunds. The book names the second husband of Margery Carew as “Gervis of Boyland, co. Norf.”, and a note has been added to say “”Gervis” should be Garnis.”

There’s other things added in the margin, which I haven’t yet deciphered. Under the entry for “Mannoke” of Stoke by Nayland in the 1612 visitation, the date of death of Ann Wentworth, second wife of Francis Mannock, has a question mark added against it, with a note XIV 410. I have no idea what that means! Such marks and numbers appear by other families in the book – beside Hovell alias Smith, there’s IX.66.402. Hunt of Bradley – X 232 b. Jermyn of Gifford’s – X 244b. Kempe of Beccles – X 157. Kene of North Cove – XVII.36. And those are only some of them. Whether these numbers are to do with the College of Arms, or the book’s previous owner’s own filing system, I have no idea.

A piece of paper is tucked in by the visitations for Sulyard, Thurston, etc on pages 168 and 169 listing several surnames:

Beckham, Bosam, Carsey, Dix, Hopton, Hartstinge

Southeman must be Richman & appears to be Nicholas

But onto the Derehaughs, where there’s some emendations made on the page and several small pieces of paper tucked in. Firstly, someone added the word “argent” to the description of the arms, which are described in the book (which you can see at as:

Quarterly, 1 and 4, Sable three martlets in bend between two bendlets [argent added in later] (Derhaugh); 2 and 3, Sable a chevron between three fleurs de lis Argent on a chief Or as many spearheads Azure (Wright).

The Visitations of Suffolk, 1882, p189.

One and four shows the arms seen on William Derehaugh’s grave in Orford. Here’s a graphics version:

Then at the foot of the tree, where it shows Thomas Derehaugh’s granddaughter Mary marrying Robert Walpole of Houghton, Norfolk, the date of the marriage has been added: “25 Apl 1672 at Rougham, Suffolk.” It seems to me that they were researching the Walpoles too – given that we have a Walpole in the Derehaugh tree, and the same person made an amendment referring to Calibut Walpole in the Bacon visitation.

The end of the Derehaugh tree in the book shows Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Derehaugh and Mary Sheppard marrying Sir Jeffery Burwell, knight, and a line descending from them shows their son was Robert Walpole of Houghton marrying… erm… “Mary, only child”, without a surname given. It seems that the couple’s names were accidentally swapped, and this is one of the errors picked up on by one of the pieces of paper:

“Visitation of Suffolk edited by Metcalfe, page 189 says that Thomas Derehaugh of Colston Hall in Badingham, Suffolk, “Died at Kirby Bedon in Norfolk 25 April 1619, and was there buried,” but there is no such entry of burial in the Registers of either St James’ or St Mary’s there. Rougham burials shew a “Mrs Mary Derough, widow, buried 21 Feb 1669/70” who is probably his widow (née Sheppard). The MI at Houghton (Farrer II, 286) says Mary Burwell was only daughter which is probably correct (and the Visitation wrong) in view of the burial at Rougham of a Mr Edmond Burwell 16 May 1674. The figure “1609” in relation to Eliz. Derhaugh’s being aged 5 years must be either a scribe’s error or a misprint since it clearly is conditioned by the date 1619 when her father died and her baptism is clearly 26 Dec 1613 in the Kirby Bedon Register.

I enjoyed finding this note because it’s just the sort of thing I would write too! For anyone wondering, Thomas was buried at Badingham on 26 April 1619, but the Norfolk Record Office have an inventory for him giving his abode as Kirby – so he died there but was brought back to Suffolk for his burial. He didn’t leave a will, as far as I can see.

Farrer II I think refers to a book by William Farrer (1861-1924), historian and genealogist. Mary Burwell and her husband Robert Walpole were the parents of another Robert Walpole – the 1st Earl of Orford (1676-1745), seen as the first prime minister of Great Britain, and was the father of Horace Walpole, who built Strawberry Hill House and became one of the first British authors of Gothic fiction. Which suddenly elevates the Derehaughs from an extinct surname curiosity to something rather more important.

The next piece of paper is extremely interesting because it shows that whoever was doing this research contacted the College of Arms. It’s dated 11 May, but the year is unclear – it could be 1915 or 1955. The note reads:

College of Arms Report 11 May 19_5. “There is no evidence in our Records of Derhaugh Arms being confirmed by Cook as stated in your 16th or early 17th century MS, nor is there any entry of a Derhaugh pedigree among the official Visitations of the Counties. The Arms used by this family and given by W C Metcalfe in the his edition of the 1561 & 1577 Visitation of Suffolk have never been registered or officially recognised (this is one of the Additional Pedigrees not included in Cook’s official Visitation). John Philpot, Somerset Herald, who died in 1645, however, shews the Arms in one of his MSs as ‘Sable, three martlets in Bend between two bendlets Argent’ but there is no evidence of authoritative recognition of such Arms.” It will be noticed that Metcalfe omits the word “Argent”. This may be his error or it may be omitted in the MS from which he took this pedigree.

The note is initialled, but I can’t make the letters out. It could be AH, and at the front of my copy of this book, someone wrote in pencil “Additional notes by Anthony Ha…” Hammond? Haward? I can’t quite make it out.

What’s very interesting about this is that, not only do we hear from the College of Arms, but we also hear that whoever it was who got in touch with them had in their possession a very old manuscript – what on earth was it? Perhaps a deed? Or was it a very old family tree? It suggest that the additional pedigree included in the book by Metcalfe was added from John Philpot’s manuscript.

And it tells us that the Derehaugh’s arms had never been properly registered. However, they definitely used them, as can be seen from the memorial to William Derehaugh at the church in Orford, Suffolk. It’s this which shows that the Gedgrave and Badingham Derehaughs were related – beside the fact that they have such a rare surname.

The next note says:

Query whether Robert Diearowe, Citizen & grocer of London was not a Derehaugh; see his will which was proved 1586 PCC “Windsor” 28.

See also under “Deraughe” (Edward & Margt) in the PCC Calendars

I don’t know if Anthony ever worked out that Edward, who he mentions here, was the father of William, buried under the Derehaugh arms. And that Margaret was his stepmother. I’ve looked at the will of Robert Diearowe and it is very tempting to think that he was a Derehaugh, but no names appear in it that crop up among the Essex and Suffolk wills that we see for the Derehaughs. That’s not to say it’s impossible, though, and he might appear in the wills which are at the Suffolk and Norfolk record offices that I haven’t been able to see yet.

The last note provides us with a very helpful clue indeed – a clue that ties the Derehaughs to the Cardinalls.

Will of John Clippesby of Oby, esq, dated 17 March 36 Eliz; to be buried in Clippesby Church – mentions also “cozen Edward Coke esq & his bro:-in-law Edward Derehaugh, supervisors – uncle George Knightley esq – said Edward Coke now a sojourner in my house – nephew Wm, son of Edwd Derehaw esq”

Proved 24 June 1598 (PCC “Lewyn” 51)

John Clippesby was the son Lettice Knightley and her first husband William Clippesby. He left a cup to the Derehaughs, which he said bore their arms, but it seems quite odd that he would own such a thing, unless it had been given to him as a gift by the Derehaughs. He also mentions his brother Charles Cardinall, who was one of Lettice’s children by her second husband, William Cardinall (1509-1568). The Essex Visitation for Cardinall, 1558, shows a daughter of William Cardinall and Lettice called Julian marrying Robert, son of Thomas Deranger. The evidence of John’s will suggest that it should in fact be Edward Derehaugh who Julian married, father of William. And in the Great Bromley register, where the Cardinalls were living at the time, we see a baptism on 28 June 1561 – William Deero, son of Edward Deero.

The Derehaugh of Badingham pedigree shows a Thomas Derehaugh at the top, with his children William and Julian. William was married in about 1578 and died in 1610, and his sister Julian lost her husband John Chapman alias Barker in about 1583. So it seems that Thomas’ children are contemporaneous with the Gedgrave Derehaughs; William, Edward and Robert. Rather than siblings, they are probably first cousins. Although the Essex visitation got the name of Julian’s husband wrong, it’s interesting that it should have used the names Thomas and Robert when these names crop up elsewhere in the Derehaugh family.