STOUGHTON, Thomas (1521-76), of Stoughton, Surr. and West Stoke, Suss.

Published in The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1558-1603, ed. P.W. Hasler, 1981
Available from Boydell and Brewer



Mar. 1553
Oct. 1553
Apr. 1554

Family and Education

b. 25 Mar. 1521, 1st s. of Laurence Stoughton of Stoughton by Anne, ?da. of Thomas Combes of Guildford. educ. I. Temple. m. (1) Ann, da. of Francis Fleming of London, s.p.; (2) 27 Feb. 1553, Elizabeth, da. of Edmund Lewknor of Tangmere, Suss., 2s. Adrian and Laurence 2da. suc. fa. to Stoughton 1571.

Offices Held

Bencher, I. Temple; comptroller, 12th Earl of Arundel’s household; under-steward of crown lands in Suss.; j.p. Surr. from c.1559, Suss. c.1559, from 1573; commr. musters, Surr. 1560.3


The Stoughtons had lived in Surrey since the twelfth century, and it was Stoughton’s position in the household of the Earl of Arundel that enabled him to establish the Sussex branch of the family. Classified in 1564 as ‘a misliker of godly orders’ and ‘a stout scorner of godliness’, the visitation of 1569 noted

there be schoolmasters who teach without licence and be not of a sound and good religion ... as the schoolmaster in the lodge at Stanstead, who teacheth Mr. Stoughton’s children.

Stoughton was privy to Arundel’s role in the Duke of Norfolk’s plot of that year and he was further compromised in the eyes of the authorities by disputes with other Sussex gentlemen on Arundel’s behalf. Clearly it was Arundel who was behind Stoughton’s return to Parliament for Guildford and Chichester until 1572, by which time, Arundel being in prison and Stoughton having succeeded to his father’s manor nearby, he came in for Guildford through his own local influence. He died intestate 26 Mar. 1576, at Arundel House in the Strand, and was buried at St. Clement Danes. Administration was granted on 31 Mar. to John Browne of Stoke, ‘yeoman’, on behalf of Thomas’s elder son and heir, Laurence.4

Ref Volumes: 1558-1603

Author: M.R.P.


  • 1. Did not serve for the full duration of the Parliament.
  • 2. Ibid.
  • 3. VCH Surr. ii. 167; iii. 371; Add. 6174, ff. 23, 127, 128; Manning and Bray, Hist. Surr. i. 171, table; Vis. Surr. 86-7; Surr. Arch. Colls. xii. gen. table; HMC Hatfield, i. 436; Lansd. 1218, ff. 26, 76; CPR, 1563-6, pp. 26, 38, 39, 40; SP10/3/14, f. 114; 12/104.
  • 4. Manning and Bray, i. 38; I. T. Recs. i. 8, 12, 17, 19, 23, 25, 28; CPR, 1558-60, pp. 319-20; Mousley thesis, 777; CSP Dom. 1547-80, p. 153; Add. 6174, ff. 127, 128; Cam. Misc. ix(3), p. 10; VCH Suss. ii. 25; APC, vii. 189, 193, 197, 200-1; viii. 261-2, 267, 275; CP; HMC 7th Rep. 624; PCC admon. act bk. 1576, f. 96v; C142/179/81.