Doodlebug blasts the Manorhouse

The Dedisham Doodlebug was the only one which came down within Slinfold parish. The story goes, using Diana's own words from her book “Slinfold, The Home Front in World war 2” (Slinfold History Group, October 2008):

"The engine cut out when Roy Dumbrill saw it flying over Townhouse early one morning. It flew over Park Street Farm, where Mr Harris had just set off to call the cows in for milking. He told his daughter Peggy: If I never prayed before in my life, I prayed then. To his great relief the doodlebug kept on flying. If it had come down amongst the cows, that would have been the end of them and the cows were the love of his life. It continued over Dedisham Manor and came down in the field beyond the river. The ground there was wet, so the doodlebug penetrated the ground before exploding, which meant that the damage to the manor house was not as severe as it might have been. Roy remembered the Ingrams, who lived there, talking to his parents and saying how lucky they were that the doodlebug had gone into the ground. Nevertheless, Roy recalls that it really made a mess of the poor old manor house. Glass came out of the windows, and it damaged the roof and the chimneys, which were later pulled down. And some of the barns were twisted about a bit."

The water-filled depression in the field to the north of the manor house marks the spot where the doodlebug fell.

"One other doodlebug cut out as it was going over Lyons Farm, causing Mr Johnson to dive into the pond outside the farmhouse. It crashed beyond Wellcross, just outside the parish."

We are not yet sure exactly when the above incident occurred except that doodlebugs first started coming over on 13th June 1944 and the last one on 29th March 1945. The photo above is of the south elevation of the manor house showing some of the damage caused when the doodlebug fell.

Further Notes on the Lewknor Carpet

With reference to the last posting wherein I touched upon the Lewknor Carpet, there is an in-depth description of this carpet, detailing the hatchments of each of the coats of arms, and which records some of the Lewknor alliances written by Fane Lambarde FSA, in the Sussex Archaeological Society Collections Vol LXX (1929) pps 1-7.

In his preamble, a very clear and erudite history of the tapestry is laid out and I repeat much of it here for the reader.

At the beginning of the sixteenth century one of the largest land-owners in Sussex was Sir Roger Lewknor; amongst other of his possessions being Bodiam Castle, Cannoys’ Court, etc. The son of Sir Thomas Lewknor and his wife Katherine Pelham, he was born about 1465 (S.A.C., LXVIII., 281). The difficulties of dealing with the Lewknor pedigree were noted by Durrant Cooper in S.A.C., III., 90. But it seems that Sir Roger married three times. His first wife was Eleanor, daughter of George, Lord Audley; and by her he had one daughter only, named Jane. This Jane, marrying three times, had issue by all three husbands. The curious divorce suit, to which she was subjected, is noted in S.A.C., LXVIII., 279; and there we read that her three young step-sisters were under the guardianship of Sir Henry Knyvett, second husband of her daughter Ann in 1546, a fact which emphasises the difference in age between Sir Roger’s children by his first and third wives.

Sir Roger’s first wife Eleanor died; and for his second wife, he married Constance Hussey, daughter and co-heir of Nicholas Hussey, and widow of Henry Lovell of Brambletye. By her he had no issue, and she died in 1525.

And so Sir Roger, in or about 1532, found himself at an age approaching the allotted span of life. With no son to succeed him, his great estates must pass to the children of his only daughter Jane. Still in hope of a male heir, he decided to marry again. Elizabeth, the daughter of Thomas Messant, was chosen; and to them three children were born., viz Katherine in 1533, Mabel in 1536, and Constance in 1541. To his intense disappointment, all three were daughters. And then the youngest was born, Sir Roger must have been about 76 years old. Sir Roger died in 1543, and his widow – marrying his cousin Sir Richard Lewknor as her second husband – was the mother of at least ten more children. The Inq. P.M. of Sir Roger is recorded in Sussex Record Soc., XIV., 142. Elizabeth is called his second wife – Constance Hussey being ignored.

As noted above, his three young daughters were, in 1546, wards of Sir Henry Knyvett, the husband of their step-niece, Ann. These daughters grew up; and somewhile about 1560, the youngest, Constance, married, for her first husband, Thomas Foster of Newnham in Worcestershire. In Worcestershire she doubtless forgathered with her cousin Jane, who married Anthony Sheldon. Anthony was a nephew of William Sheldon famed for his establishment of the Tapestry Industry in Worcestershire. And it wasthrough his interest, no doubt, that the “Lewkenor Carpet” was woven. It is thus described in Archaeologia, LXXIV., 199:

“... A magnificent Armorial Tapestry at Chawton Manor, owned by Mr Montagu George Knight, measures 16ft 3 ins long by 7ft 2 ins wide. It is dated 1564, and contains shields indicative of the Lewkenor marriages in the wide border. A pair of nude figures support a shield surrounded by a wreath of leaves and flowers, and in the right and left of the hanging are two shields, each similarly encircled with a wreath. The design and execution are very fine, and if the date is correct, it would point to a very high development of tapestry weaving at an early period. The hanging must be assigned to the Sheldon Looms, as apparently Barcheston was the only English factory then at work in the country....”

By Thomas Foster, Constance had one son, Anthony, and three daughters, Elizabeth, Mary and Mabel. After his death she married, for her second husband, Edward Glemham of Chichester. He was alive in 1588; but there appears to have been no issue of this marriage. Constance was alive in 1617 (see Sussex Feet of Fines, Sussex Record Soc., XX., 446). And in the Consistory Court at Chichester, XVIII., f. 341, v. is the nuncupative will of Constance Glemham of Trotton, Sussex, widow, “being a very aged woman,” made “in or about the moneth of Aprill,” 1634, before Robert Tomlinson, Clerk, Rector of Trotton; residuary legatee, Anthony Foster, her son. Afterwards testatrix in presence of Elinor Buckland, gentlewoman, and of Mr Anthony Foster bequeathed to her grandchild, Mr Water (sic) Buckland, a piece of gold, value 33s. Or thereabouts. Testatrix often said that her son Anthony Foster should have all her goods. Witnesses: Ro. Tomlinson, El’nor Elfeck alias Buckland. Administration was granted 8 Dec., 1634, to Anthony Foster, principal legatee; Master Robert Tomlinson, Clerk, and Eleanor Elfecke alias Buckland having been sworn.

And so we have Constance dying on 26th July 1634, at the age of 93. (See Sussex Inquisitions, No. 472, Vol. XIV., p. 103). Thus the extraordinary span of one hundred and seventy years – embracing the whole of the Tudor period – separated the birth of the father and the death of the daughter.

The following is extracted from the Cannoys Peerage Case (Case of Thomas Stonor, Esq., Appendix No. II., p. 7).

“....Constance Lewknor had issue by Thomas Foster, a son Anthony, and a daughter whose name has not been ascertained; it appears, however, probable that she married a person of the name of Bateman. Anthony succeeded to Trotton, and resided there. When the Heralds Visitation of Sussex was made in 1634, he was living, as was also his wife Elizabeth (Buckland), but it does not appear that they had any child or children. In 1644 administration of the goods, etc., of Anthony Foster, late of Trotton, esquire, was granted to his sister’s daughter Constance Bateman, but of Constance or of any other member of the family, no subsequent trace has been obtained, although long and laborious searches have been made both in Sussex and in London....”

By Constance Glemham, the carpet was bequeathed to the then head of the Lewknor family, Sir John of West Dean. That he set a high value on this piece of work is shown by a document, dated 1662, in which Sir John Lewknor gives the following injunction:

“... Remember to keep safe ye Carpet of Armes now aged about 100 yeares wch in ye failure the elder house totally consuming itselfe by daughters and heires and passing into other names, was sent hither by Constance Glemham of Trotton, who was one of thoes heires, for record to the younger house and whole name...”. (See Chawton Manor and its owners, by W.A.Leigh and Montague G Knight 1911. - Note: The Lewkenor estates descended to the Knights, and following the death of Mr Montague George Knight, it passed into the possession of his nephew and heir, Major Lionel Charles Edward Knight).

The Coats of Arms, which record some of the Lewknor alliances, may be attributed as follows:

A. LEWKNOR impaling MESSANT
Lewknor – Azure three chevrons argent Impaling Messant - Quarterly Or three lozenges gules, and gules three fleurs-de-lis or

This records the marriage of Sir Roger Lewknor to his third wife Elizabeth (mother of Constance), daughter of Thomas Messant (S.A.C., III., 96). Nowhere are the Arms of Messant recorded; so that the proof that they are as above is negative; they cannot apparently belong to anyone else.

B. LEWKNOR impaling TREGOZ.
Lewknor – Azure three chevrons argent Impaling Tregoz – Azure two bars gemelles and in chief a leopard or

There is no recorded marriage of a Lewknor to a Tregoz; but Lewknor quartered the Arms of Tregoz through the marriage of Sir Thomas Lewknor to Jane, daughter and heir of Sir John Doyley. See No. 13.

C. CAMOYS impaling DE SPENCER
Camoys – Or on a chief gules three roundels or Impaling De Spencer – Quarterly argent a bend sable and gules a fret or

This records the marriage of Ralph, Lord Camoys, to the daughter of Hugh de Spencer, Earl of Winchester. This is according to the Pedigree recorded in the Visitation of Sussex, 1634, Harl. Soc., LIII., 29. This descent is not confirmed in the Complete Peerage, II., 507. Sir Roger Lewknor’s grand-father, Sir Roger, married Eleanor, daughter and co-heir of Sir Richard Camoys (Complete Peerage, II., 508). See No. 5.

1. LEWKNOR
Crest. A White greyhound with a red collar. Coat of Arms - Azure three chevrons argent

2. LEWKNOR impaling La WARR
Lewknor – Azure three chevrons argent Impaling La Warr – Quarterly of four
1 & 4 Gules crusilly fitchy a lion rampant argent; 2 & 3 Azure three leopard’s heads inverted jessant de lis or

This records the marriage of Sir Roger’s uncle, Sir Roger Lewknor, to Mary, daughter of Reginald West, Lord La Warr.

3. MOYNE impaling HOLLAND
Moyne – Argent two bars and in chief three molets sable Impaling Holland – Azure floretty a leopard rampant argent.

This is a very doubtful attribution, nor is there any record of the marriage that it records. The connection with Lewknor, as through a Camoys marriage, is shown in No. 10. It has been usual to record the impaled Coat as that of Braose (azure crusilly a lion rampant [crowned] or).But the field is charged with what appears to be fleurs-de-lis rather than crosslets; and the leopard is tricked exactly as a leopard of England up-ended. The Braose charge was a crowned lion, though often enough the crown is omitted.

4. CAMOYS
Camoys – Or on a chief gules three roundels or

Usually the chief is charged with silver roundels; but here throughout, they are gold.

5. LEWKNOR impaling CAMOYS
Lewknor – Azure three chevrons argent Impaling Camoys – Or on a chief gules, three roundels or

This records the marriage of Sir Roger Lewknor’s grand-father, Sir Roger, to Eleanor, daughter and co-heir of Sir Richard Camoys. And through this marriage came the Trotton estate, which descended to Constance Glemham.

6. CAMOYS impaling MEULX.
Camoys – Or on a chief gules three roundels or, impaling Meulx – Azure three pales or on a chief gules three crosses patty argent.

Of the marriage here, there is no record; and the attribution of the impaled shield is doubtful. The Meulx were a well-known Hampshire family. See Visitation of Hampshire., Harl.Soc., LXIV., 134, where the field is paly or and azure, and the crosses are or. See also The Oglander Memoirs, p. 90.

7. LEWKNOR impaling TREGOZ As “B.”

8. LEWKNOR impaling MESSANT As “A.”

9. LEWKNOR impaling PELHAM.
Lewknor – Azure three chevrons argent Impaling Pelham – Azure three pelicans argent.

This records the marriage of Sir Roger Lewknor’s parents, Sir Thomas and Katherine, daughter of Sir John Pelham.

10. CAMOYS impaling MOYNE
Camoys – Or on a chief gules three roundels or Impaling Moyne - Argent two bars and in chief three molets sable.

There is no record of any such marriage in the Camoys Pedigree, and the attribution to Moyne is doubtful. See No. 3.

The Moyne’s were a Dorsetshire family of long standing – see Heraldic Notes at the end of Prideaux’s Dorsetshire Manor Houses.

11. LEWKNOR impaling DALINGRIDGE
Lewknor – Azure three chevrons argent Impaling Dalingridge – Argent a cross engrailed gules.

This records the marriage of Sir Roger Lewknor’s great grandfather, Sir Thomas, to Philippa, daughter and heir of Sir Richard Dalingridge, through whom Bodiam Castle was acquired.

12. LEWKNOR impaling HUSSEY
Lewknor – Azure three chevrons argent Impaling Hussey – Barry ermine and gules.

This records the marriage of Sir Roger Lewknor to his second wife, Constance Hussey. She was the widow of Henry Lovell of Brambletye (Visitation of Sussex, Harl. Soc., LIII., 121).

13. LEWKNOR impaling DOYLEY.
Lewknor – Azure three chevrons argent Impaling Doyley – Gules three stags’ heads or.

This records the marriage of Sir Roger Lewknor’s ancestor, Sir Thomas, to Joan, daughter and heir of Sir John Doyley.

14. LEWKNOR impaling AUDLEY.
Lewknor – Azure three chevrons argent Impaling Quartely of four: Audley - 1 & 4 Gules a fret or, Touchet - 2 & 3 Ermine a chevron gules.

This records the marriage of Sir Roger Lewknor to his first wife, Eleanor, daughter of George Lord Audley.

Reader writes in with interesting genealogical information...

There exist several references which connect the Lewknors and the Blounts. One Captain James Blount is known to have settled in North Carolina in 1655, and a copy of his “Coat of Arms” is depicted herewith.

James, and his father, another James, are mentioned in several English family wills as “being overseas” and may be identified as James, the eldest son of James, the eldest son of Thomas Blount of Astley, Worcestershire.

Capt James Blount, the immigrant, impaled the Clare arms of his mother with that of the Blount family. Barry nebulee of six, or and sa. For BLOUNT; impaled with Or. Three chevronels (tinct not known) possibly for LEWKNOR (but if gules, for CLARE).

Dexter on the shield is a bizarre interpretation of Blount. It is believed that the crest is the sun in splendour, charged with a sabaton or sollaret, broader at the toe than at the heel, as was the fashion in the sixteenth century, as seen on various Blount of Kinlet tombs.

Sinister was believed to be Clare – understandable as, with the tinct being unknown, the Clare arms are also three chevronels, but the crest of the Clares is a stags head, while the crest on the sinister side of the American shield is a unicorn.

The only combination of chevrons with a unicorn crest thus far found is Lewknor, as per Burke’s The General Armory of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales1884.

Lewknor (West Dean, co. Sussex and co. Worcester) Az, three chev. Ar. (another, or.)
Crest 1: a greyhound courant ar. Collared or.
Crest 2: a unicorn’s head erazed az.bezantie, horned and maned or.
(other sources give the same information)

Upon looking for Lewknors who might be associated with the Blounts of Astley, it was found that Eleanor, daughter of Sir Christopher Brome, was married to the second of three Richard Lewknors of West Dean, while her sister, Bridget, was married to Thomas Blount of Astley, grand-father of Captain James of the “Coat of Arms”. As unreliable as the rules of heraldry can be, especially when transferred to the colonies, it can be supposed that the sinister side of the arms shows a Lewkenor marriage. Could it be, perhaps, that this was a West Dean Lewknor?

The first Richard of West Dean, Sir Richard Lewknor 1541-1616 was Chief Justice of Chester and Deputy President of the Council of Wales. He was buried originally at Ludlow, but later interred at West Dean. West Dean church was seriously damaged by fire in 1935 and the first Sir Richard’s tomb was completely destroyed. Fortunately, the coats of arms which decorated the tombs were previously recorded by M G Knight of Chawton House, Hampshire. Mr Knight recorded that the arms were topped by “the Lewknor crest”, without stating what that crest might be. There exists a portrait of Sir Richard, which shows his arms with the Greyhound crest. The whereabouts of this portrait is presently unknown, but it was photographed for the National Portrait Gallery. Sadly – one of many dead-ends, the negative has deteriorated beyond use. The greyhound crest for Sir Richard makes sense as Mr Knight recorded that the feet of his effigy rested on a greyhound.

I mentioned in one of my postings below, the four daughters of Sir Roger Lewknor d 1543 – Jane, Katherine, Mabel and Constance. Gillian drew my attention to one thread of connecting evidence lay in the Lewkenor Carpet of Arms which was bequeathed to Sir John Lewknor of West Dean (described as “head of the family” in Phillimore’s Sussex Heraldry) by Constance. Constance’s first husband was Thomas Foster of Newnam, Worcestershire which I suspect is Newnham Bridge, Lindridge, making her next-door neighbour to the Blounts of Soddington, distant cousins, but living a mere ten miles away from their fellow catholics, the Blounts of Astley. The carpet is now in the New York Metropolitan Museum of Art.

It may be noted that the bottom middle arms shows a greyhound crest .

So, from the above, one surmises that the greyhound crest would have been associated with the senior line, which died out with Constance in 1634. She bequeathed the carpet to Sir John Lewkenor of West Dean, descendant of the first Sir Richard of West Dean, second son of Edmund Lewkenor of Fyning who died in 1544, completely by-passing the descendants Edmund’s first son, Thomas Lewkenor Esq, 1538-96, of Selsey, and his sons: Sir Lewes 1565-?1626 (husband of Mary Blount of Dedisham). Richard, (will probated 1605), Samuel baptised 1571 (married Jane Hopton of Shropshire), and Thomas (who might have been married to Mary of Ludlow).
Can it be that Sir Lewes might have used the unicorn crest of the Dallingridges of Bodiam Castle, from whom both branches are descended, while Sir Richard continued to use the greyhound crest? Anybody out there got any ideas???

IS THERE A ROMAN CONNECTION?

Shortly after my last posting I received an email from a reader remarking that he saw I did not subscribe to the “Coates mansio theory.” - basically because I made no reference to it in my article.

I thought, for the record therefore, although not personally persuaded, I ought to air this interpretation of the origin of the name Dedisham, and let you decide for yourself.

This rather speculative interpretation (to put it mildly) was originally aired in:

Coates, Richard (1980-1) Review of A.L.F. Rivet and Colin Smith (1979) The place-names of Roman Britain. Journal of the English Place-Name Society 13 pp. 59-71 [at p. 67].

Basically, the article stated:

" MUTUANTONIS = R. Arun

This name appears to be in the general area of Sussex, and R & S do some gymnastic philology to relate it to the river name TRISANTONA, i.e. the ubiquitous FL (U) plus TRISANTON- . It cannot be denied that they make a fair case. It was undeniably written inland, and so it seems just as simple to see this as an example of the form MUTATIONES “posting station” which is found as a place name as appreciable number of times on the continent. (Against this proposal and for theirs is an í in the final syllable, but this is hardly clinching in Ravennas.) If this name referred to the posting station at Alfoldean, we could arrive at a neat (but risky) origin for the peculiar name Dedisham, adjacent to Alfoldean. Assume two “British” forms: MUTATIO and a more fossilised oblique form MUTATIONE or plural MUTATIONES.
MUTATIO is late British Mǖdądiǖ.
MUTATIONE(S) is late British Mǖdadįǖn with Vulgar Latin pretonic short a.
If you will allow the aphaeresis of MU- (cf. DUROBIVAE > Hrofesçeaster; later *SABRINOUIA > Vyrnwy), we will have dắdįǖ and dadįǖn, yielding probable English Doddi and Dæddi(n). Curiously enough, we find early variations between two virtually identical forms to these in history of Dedisham (PNSx p.159); the editors of PNSx take it to be from a personal name. It is just possible rather, that it is a survival of (MU)TATIO(NE(S)). Formally, this change and the parallel for DUROBRIVAE > Hrofesçeaster, with apocope and geretival composition.”


In support of this theory, it has to be said, that there is some compelling evidence (albeit circumstantial) concerning a link between the Posting Station of Alfoldean and the Manor of Dedisham upon whose lands the ruins of the former now lie. There has long been the speculation that the Present manorhouse straddles the footprint of a Roman long-house styled villa, and indeed, Samuel Winbolt reports that Roman building materials had been found in the gardens of the manor. This however, could merely be evidence that Roman materials may have been utilised in the construction of a building preceeding the present construction, but quite possibly post-dating the Roman period. Both Winbolt, and Wessex Archaeology found much evidence of robber trenches at Alfoldean and this could well indicate the source of the material in question.

However, where there to be any substance to the Villa theory, it could explain, in part, why the present manorhouse adopts the shape it is, and furthermore underlines my disbelief that it was once a much larger building with wings, that was substantially “knocked about” by Waller’s troops in 1643. I certainally found no evidence of walls or other structures when undertaking resistivity surveys last winter around the manorhouse, and although the fact that I found nothing does not necessarily say that there was nothing to be found there, such a result may well add support to the Villa theory.

A scenario, entirely conjectural, could well be that the Prefect of the cohort at the Mansio was living a reasonably comfortable life as part of the garrison to a substantial private estate. The mansio farmstead had been built on the banks of the River Trisantona and under normal circumstances that would not only have been a great honour, but would also have increased his wages quite considerably. Could it be that he ploughed his money into having a Villa built for himself nearby, so he could live a life more in accordance with his new-found status, rather than remain billeted with his troops?

Incidentally, the Celtic name for the Arun was Trisantona (i.e. Tarrant) perhaps alluding to its proneness to flooding. The name Tarrant is recorded c. 725 and c. 1270, but it wasn’t accorded its present title until the Normans had built a castle in "Hoar-hound dell", later simplified to Arundel, thus its normal medieval name was apparently the river of Arundel, Arundel river, or the high stream of Arundel. The modern name, Arun, is recorded from 1577, but the names Arundel river or great river continued to be used later. In the 20th century the Arun was said to be the second fastest flowing river in the country (after the River Severn), with a speed of up to seven knots at full flood.

Dedisham manor, Slinfold

Dedisham Manor, Slinfold, has had a long and chequered history, and a lot of digging in the archives is needed to study what exactly went on here. The building itself is a "listed" building, and has in centuries past, been also known as, or recorded in historical documents as, Dachesam or Dachesham, We know that, in 1329, Thomas Trego was granted a licence to crenellate 'Dachesam'. and some circles this site has been suggested as Great Dixter, but tenurial history suggests it is the "Mainly C18 house enclosed by a semi-circular moat which joins the River Arun to form the north side. A Medieval fishpond is present to the southeast of the house."



Dedisham was the principal manor of Slinfold Parish; It was divided between Slinfold and Rudgwick. Also known as, or recorded in historical documents as Dachesam; Dachesham, Dackesham, Dodesham, or Daddesham., and often also, the capital "D" was replaced by the letter "T", so we had taddesham, Toddesham, etc. It is situated partly in Slinfold and partly in Rudgwick; Winbolt speculates “that Dedisham, like so many medieval manors, rose near the Roman Road, and, naturally enough, in its construction were used freely the building materials found on the site of the camp” (of Alfoldean). He also observes that “Roman Brick has been turned up in its gardens” (SAC Vol LXIV., P. 84).



Where does the name Dedisham come from? To answer this, one has to break down the name into its constituent parts, and also see how this name changed over the years. “ham and hamm” are Anglo-Saxon for “homestead” and “enclosure” respectively. Sussex, Kent and Surrey form a group of counties in which ham-names are much more common than in any other part of England except in the group Norfolk, Suffolk, Cambridge, with Essex standing between the two groups both numerically and topographically. It is very difficult to distinguish between those names which have ham and those which have hamm except in these places called Ham pure and simple, where the Middle English forms always have double m. The little Old English evidence that we have makes the distinction more rather than less difficult. In Bosham, for example, we should never suspect a hamm-name were it not for the one form in Bede, nor should we in Felpham, apart from the one early form, viz., that in King Alfred’s Will. The same is true of Hankham and Ersham. None of these forms are derived from originals, but if confusion could arise as early as the Moore MS of Bede it is clear that there was no longer any distinction in the popular mind between ham “homestead” and “hamm “enclosure” It should perhaps be noted that, apart from Bosham and felpham, names other than the simple Ham-names show hardly a trace of spellings with hamm in the four western rapes. It is only in Pevensey and Hastings that they become common. It is also very doubtful if hamm is used in Sussex of land within the bend of a stream. Occasionally as here and in hamsey, it looks like it, in many others the topography is definately against it ant the probability is that it is only a chance that Dedisham is by a river bend. The great majority are low-lying, but one or two, like Ham in Burwash, are definately on high-ground. The element ham(m) is commonest in the rape of Hastings and curiously rare in that of Lewes, only seven examples out of some 200 occurring here.



We have references as follows: Doddesham, 1257 Calendar of Charter Rolls; 1401 Feet of Fines; Daddisham, 1288 Assize Rolls; Dad(d)esham 1294 Calendar of Patent Rolls; this occurrs frequently until about 1386 Inquisitions post mortem (Record Commission); Dadysham 1408 Assize Rolls; Detsum 1675 Ogilby. The variety of spellings makes the phonology of this name difficult. Possibly the o-forms are errors of transcription, though we do find similar hesitation in Todham and, at a late date, in Trotton. There may have been an Old English personal name Dæddi, a pet-form of an Old English name in Dæd. Cf. Deddington (PM O 93). “Dæddi’s ham(m).” In its Saxon origin the name Ham may well have come from 'Hamm', signifying something in the nature of a river meadow, or promontory of dry land.



Dedisham belonged to the family of Tregoz from 1271 when Henry Tregoz was the owner, with whose family it continued until the extinction of the race, and in 1530 it was in the hands of their heirs-general, the Lewknors.In 1547, Edward VI granted it to Sir Richard Blount, Lieutenant of the Tower, from whose descendants it passed about 1630 to the family of Onslow. In 1786, J. Williams Onslow sold it to Charles, Duke of Norfolk, and it now forms parcel of the hereditary estates.


According to Wace, the name of Tregoz was to be found amongst those of the warriors of William I., who accompanied that conqueror into England (SAC Vol. VI., p.22)., so it is probable that William I assigned the place to Henry Tregoz by way of reward, and it is equally likely that Henry found some settlement here on his arrival. Later on, a Sir Henry Tregoz built the existing bridge at Greatham in the days of Edward II., and three members of the same family are recorded as considerable benefactors to Boxgrove Priory. (SAC Vol. XV., P.93). In 1329, Thomas Trego was granted a licence to “fortify with a wall of stone and lime, and to krenellate his manse of 'Dachesham' in the county of Sussex.” (the license is given in length in SAC. Vol. XIII., p. 112). The arms of the family are those given in Jenyns’ “Booke of Arms” for “Monsr. Tregoz de Sussex,” namely, “Az. Two bars grennelles and in chief a lion passant guardant or.” These arme were also those of Dore Abbey, Herefordshire, a Tregoz having married “the heiress of the founder Ewyas.” (Gentleman’s Magazine, 1829., part II., p. 487).


The manor next passed into the hands of the Lewknor family and Sir Roger Lewknor died possessed of it in 1543, leaving as co-heirs his four daughters, Jane, Katharine, Mabel and Constance. Five years after Sir Roger’s death the manor with its appurtenances appears to have got into the hands of the Crown, for at that date Edward VI, granted Dedisham to Sir Richard Blount, Lieutenant of the Tower of London. It is interesting that the Lewkenors had been connected with this part of Sussex from the middle of the 15th century, and John and Richard Lewkenor were members for Horsham in 38 of Henry VI (1459). The living of Rusper was in the hands of the family, and there was an Agnes Magdalen, in 1442, and an Elizabeth Lewknore, similarly professed, was a nun there in 1478. The family was a very large and wealthy one, and a long list of the manors possessed by it is given by Mr Cooper in his account of the Lewknores (SAC vol. III), and the above mentioned Sir Roger held lands in Middlesex, and the shires of Oxford, Northampton, Leicester and Huntingdon. (SAC Vol IX., p. 293). John Lewknor, killed at Tewkesbury, May 4th 1471, held several Manors in Norfolk (see Blomfield, “History of Norfolk,” Vol. VII., p. 250). Scotgrove Manor at Ash, Kent was also one of their possessions (see Ireland’s “Kent” Vol. IV., p. 421). Also Huntingdon and Dean, two manors at Challock, in the same county (Ireland’s “Kent” vol II, p. 549). The Lewknor arms, with many quarterings and three crests can be found in SAC Vol III, p.92.


It is of further interest that included in Vincent’s Sussex Pedigrees is one for the Lewkenor family, with which there is a copy of a seal attached to a deed made between Joane the wife of Thomas Tregoz and her son Sir John Doyley, on the one part, and Sir Roger Lewknor on the othert. The deed is dated 1360 and is sealed by Sir Roger Lewknor, who seals with;- Quarterly of four. 1 and 4 gules three bars vaire (Keynes); 2 & 3 azure three chevrons argent (Lewknor); Crest: Out of a Crown, a Hawk’s lure. Thus, by placing the Keynes coat in the premier position he emphasises the territorial importance attached to the alliance with the family of Keynes. His grandfather Roger Lewknor (Sheriff of Surrey in 1284) had married Joan, daughter and heir of Richard and Alice de Keynes of Horsted Keynes, Selmeston, etc., sometime before 1276 (SRS vii, 97; Genealogist xix, 242), and now Sir Roger had negotiated a marriage between his son and heir Thomas and an heiress not only of a branch of the great family of Doyley, but that of Tregoz as well; which, with a later one to a Camoys heiress, was to eclipse the Keynes connection – a connection that was the origin of the prominent position in the County that the family occupied later. That they, in early times, placed such a value on a quartering, which seems later to have entirely dropped out of use in their achievement, is worth noting here. (Sx N&Q., Vol II., p. 151).
From 1547 the Blounts held Dedisham; Sir Richard Blount’s grandson, dying 1628, left four daughters his co-heiress – Mary (widow of Sir Lewis Lewknor), Martha (wife of Sir George Ayliff), Elizabeth (wife of Reginald Mohun), and Ann (wife of William Duke); By them it was sold in 1637 to Sir Richard Onslow. Probably the chief interest which is possessed by the Blounts arises posterior to their residence at Slinfold and centres in Charles Blount, the youngest of two sons of James, fifth Lord Mountjoy, by Catharine, daughter of Sir Thomas Leigh of St Oswald’s, Yorkshire. After having been a great favourite with Elizabeth, Charles Blount was created Earl of Devonshire by her successor, James I., on July 21, 1603, but he did not long enjoy that dignity, as he died in 1606. A portrait and life of this nobleman can be found in “Lodge’s Portraits,” Vol II., p. 37. The arms of the Blounts of Sussex are, Barry nebulée ar. and sable and were bourne by the baronets, the first of whom was Sir Walter Blount, created Baronet Oct 5th 1642.



The great park has been converted into farms, and the Manor House, situated to the north of the village, is said to have been ransacked by Sir William Waller’s soldiers in 1643, and afterwards went to decay, though a few of the offices remain as a farm-house – observation of which reveals that we have here, a building with many traces of antiquity about it. This site has been suggested as Great Dixter but tenurial history suggests it is the "Mainly C18 house enclosed by a semi-circular moat which joins the River Arun to form the north side. A Medieval fishpond is present to the southeast of the house. A long parallelogram forms the plan and the walls are half-timbered, though now partly covered with weatherboarding. There is a doorway with good mouldings framed by the constructional timber work, and in the interior is a chimney corner with an ornamental rack for the cooking spits over the mantel . Previous to a sale here in 1880 there were some interesting pieces of old furnature preserved including a settle, a massive oaken table, 11ft. 6ins. Long, with its side forms and “foined stool” at the end, a pair of fire-dogs with the peculiar fleur-de-lys of the Cantelupes, a brass domed 17th century clock, some old chests, and a few antique volumes, one being a black letter “Digest of the Laws of England,” published in 1596 (article on Slinfold by J Lewis Andre, SAC vol XL, p 50). A view of “Datsham,” by Grimm, can be found in Brit. Mus. “Additional Burrell MSS.,” 5878, fo. 19.