In a complicated three-cornered case that ran over more than a year, two men, John Jenyn and John Grose, each claimed to be married to Alice Seton. Jenyn’s claim was that he and Seton had married in May 1489, exchanging consent in the George tavern on Fleet Street before a number of witnesses. Several who were present there offered testimony, including Jenyn’s apprentice master (likely a tailor), who was also his brother-in-law, and a woman who worked at the tavern. Later witnesses challenged that testimony, suggesting that Jenyn’s brother-in-law was biased in his favour and that the tavern servant had lied in court. Jenyn was forced to bring the case because subsequent to his claimed tavern contract, Alice Seton had married someone else, a man named John Grose, in an August 1489 church wedding in Maldon, Essex. Oddly enough for an event so public only one witness was produced who was present at that wedding, the others able only to testify that they acted as if they were married (with some interesting evidence about what meant). Legally it would seem that Jenyn’s three witnesses would trump Seton and Grose’s one witness, but we do not know the outcome of this case.
LMA, MS DL/C/A/001/MS09065, fols. 60rv, 46r, 66v, 71rv, 78v-79r
Testimony of William Avenyll, 21 Oct. 1489
On behalf of John Jenyn c. Alice Seton
21 October, in the Consistory place of London, in the presence of Spencer, by the lord Official of London
William Avenyll1 of the parish of St. Dunstan in Fleet Street, London, where he has lived for the most part for twenty years, illiterate, of free condition, sixty years old, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he has known John Jenyn for twelve years, and Alice Seton he first saw and knew on the Sunday about which he will depose below. To the first and second articles of the libel, he says that on a Sunday just before the last feast of St. Dunstan [17 May 1489], John Jenyn first intimated to this witness’s wife and then on the same day to this witness himself that he had previously contracted marriage with Alice Seton, and he asked this witness that for greater security he should come to the sign of the George in the parish of St. Dunstan, bringing with him some of his neighbours, to hear a new marriage contract between them before whomever should happen to be present. So at John’s request, first John himself and then soon after this witness and a man named Gaston went to the place, where they found John and Alice sitting in a certain parlour talking together. When John saw this witness and Gaston, he said to Alice, “these friends have come here to witness a contract of marriage between us,” and she responded, “Well, in the name of Jesus, what needith it, it is made already.” And he said, “for greater safety, I would like them to hear the contract.” And immediately he took Alice by her right hand and said to her, “I John take thee Alice to my wedded wife, and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And after they unclasped and rejoined their hands together, Alice said to John, “I Alice take thee John to my wedded husband, and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And they kissed one another and drank […]. This witness deposes these things from his own sight and hearing, as he says. To the third article of the libel, he says that he knows nothing concerning its contents, other than what he said above. To the fourth article, he says that the things he said above are true and that public voice and fame concerning them circulated and circulate in Baddow, Maldon,2 and in the parishes of St. Dunstan of the city of London and other neighbouring parishes. To the first interrogatory, he says as he said above. To the second interrogatory, he says that he married John’s sister and that John was this witness’s apprentice for seven years. And he responds negatively to its other contents. To the third interrogatory, he says as he said above. And he says that the contract was made about seven p.m., and that day was not rainy. John sat and Alice stood to his left, in the middle of the parlour. John wore a russet gown and Alice a gown of blue medley,3 and they drank ale after the contract. To the fourth interrogatory, he says as he said above and otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the fifth and sixth interrogatory, he says as he said above, and otherwise he knows nothing concerning their contents. To the seventh interrogatory, he says as he said above, and he says that the fame is the common voice of the people and that it had its origin from what the parties said and did. And otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents.
Testimony of John Gaston, 21 Oct. 1489
John Gaston of the parish of St. Clement without Temple Bar, London, where he has lived for sixteen years, illiterate, of free condition, thirty-three years old as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he has known John Jenyn for five years and he first saw Alice Seton on the day about which he will depose below, as he recalls. To the first and second articles of the libel, as far as the marriage contract between John and Alice and the words of the contract and the place and time, this witness agrees with the first witness examined above. And he says that he was asked by William Avenyll to come with him to the place of the contract, and before the contract John said to Alice, “Here, I have brought my friends to hear a contract to be made between us two.” And she answered, “What needeth that? It is done before.” And he said, “There was no one there at that contract except us two and therefore for greater safety I would that these friends of mine hear a new contract of marriage between us.” And immediately he took her hand and he spoke to Alice and conversely she spoke to him the words of marriage about which William deposed above, with which this witness agrees in this part. To the third article, he says that he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the fifth article, he says that the things he said above are true, and concerning the fame he knows nothing. To the first interrogatory, he says as he said above. To the second interrogatory, he responds negatively to all its contents. To the third interrogatory, he says as he said above, and he says that around seven p.m., the parties contracted, standing, and John wore a russet gown and Alice a gown of Blue or Musterdevillers,4 and whether the day was clear or cloudy he cannot recall, but he says that it was in the evening, between night and day, that they contracted, and they drank ale. And otherwise he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the fourth interrogatory, he says as he said above. To the fifth, sixth, and seventh interrogatories, he says as he said above. And otherwise he has nothing to depose concerning their contents.
Testimony of Alice Holton, 24 Oct. 1489
Further on behalf of John Jenyn c. Seton
24 October
Alice Holton, servant of John Lucas at the sign of the George in Fleet Street, London, where she has lived for a year and a half, twenty-five years old, of free condition. She says that she has known John Jenyn for a year and more, and Alice Seton for a year or thereabouts. To the first and second articles of the libel, she says that on the Sunday before the last feast of St. Dunstan [17 May 1489], this witness was present in a certain parlour in the house of her master situated at the sign of the George, together with the parties, and the man who married John Jenyn’s sister and another sherman, whose names she does not know. There and then, after dinner and between six and seven p.m., John and Alice contracted marriage by these words, John taking Alice by the right hand and saying to her, “I John take thee Alice to my wedded wife, and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And then Alice said to John, “I Alice take thee John to my wedded husband, and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And then the other men responded, “God give you joy and worship together.” And within three days after the contract, John gave Alice in the presence of this witness a certain gilt or gold ring, and on the morning after the contract he gave Alice money but she does not know how much. To the third article, she says that the same night Alice confessed to this witness that she would have John as her husband before all others, and even if she had in goods from her uncle only her underwear. And otherwise she knows nothing concerning its contents. To the fourth article, she agrees with the previous witness examined above.
Response of Alice Seton, 28 Nov. 1489
Personal responses made by Alice Seton, 28 November, in the house of the lord Official, before him, in my, Spencer’s, presence
Alice Seton sworn etc. on the positions etc. To the first, second, and third positions, she does not believe them nor that their contents are true. To the fourth position, she does not believe what is not believed and does not believe the fame.
Testimony of John Lucas, 2 Mar. 1490
On behalf of Seton c. Jenyns, on the exceptions, 2 March [1489], in the cathedral church of St. Paul, by the said official, in the presence of Master Richard Spencer
John Lucas of the parish of St. Dunstan in the West, city of London, tailor, where he has lived for forty years, literate, of free condition, fifty-seven years old, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc., he says that he has known Alice Seton for four or five years, John Jenyns for ten years, William Avenell for twenty, and Alice Holton for two years. John Gaston he does not know. To the first, second, and third parts of the said exceptions, he says that William Avenell took John Jenyns’s sister as his wife, and otherwise he has nothing to depose except what he will say below. To the fourth part, he says that he knows nothing concerning its contents. To the fifth part, he says that on a certain day falling between the feasts of Michael the Archangel [29 Sept.] and All Hallows [1 Nov.] last past (whether, however, before Alice’s examination or after he does not know, and otherwise concerning the day he cannot further specify), this witness in his dwelling-house asked Alice [Holton] whether she knew of any marriage contract between John Jenyn and Alice [Seton], and she said, no, by her faith. And then this witness asked her what she was doing in the court of the Consistory of London, and she said that she was present there three times, and no one examined her concerning these matters. There were present there at that time this witness’s wife and Richard Lemman, and no one else. And otherwise he knows nothing concerning the contents of the exceptions, but he says that what he deposed above is true, and he knows nothing about the fame. To the first interrogatory, he says as he said above. To the second interrogatory, he says that when Alice [Holton] was in this witness’s service, he hit her, calling her “false harlot,” and he did this because she was sent before noon to buy food for a meal for this witness and his household, and finally about three in the afternoon she came with the food, and not for any other reason. And he responds negatively to the other contents. To the third interrogatory, he responds negatively to each of its contents. To the fifth [sic] interrogatory, he says that he does not favour one party more than the other, and that he was not present at the solemnization of marriage between the said Alice [Seton] and Grose, and he knows nothing concerning the other contents.
Testimony of Richard Lemman, 24 Mar. 1490
14895
Further on behalf of Seton c. Jenyns, 24 March, by Master Thomas Shynkwyn, commissary, in the house of the said commissary, in the presence of Master Richard Spencer
Richard Lemman of the parish of St. Dunstan in the West, London, where he has lived for nineteen years or thereabouts, illiterate, of free condition, forty-six years old, as he says. Inducted as a witness etc. concerning the exceptions etc., he says that he has known Alice Seton for ten years, John Jenyns for the same time, William Avenell for nine years, Alice Holton from the time and for the period in which she worked as a servant for John Lucas, and John Gaston he does not know. To the first, second, and third parts of the said exceptions, he agrees with John Lucas examined above. And he says that on a certain day falling as he recalls between the feasts of the nativity of St. John the Baptist [24 June] and St. Bartholomew [24 Aug.] last past, which day he cannot otherwise certainly specify, Thomas Asshby, Alice Seton’s uncle, said to this witness that he had heard that Alice had previously contracted marriage with John Jenyn, and that the said John said to him that Alice Holton, servant of John* Lucas, would testify concerning this contract. Therefore he [asked?] this witness to go to John* Lucas’s house and ask and examine Alice, his servant, what she knew to testify about any contract of marriage between them. At this request, this witness went to John* Lucas’s house, where Alice, in the presence of this witness and John Lucas, when questioned by John** Lucas’s wife whether she knew of any contract of marriage between them, and required by her to speak the truth in this matter, said and swore thus, “So help me God and holy doom, I know of no such matter, if I do I forsake God and betake me to the devil. When they were here I filled the cup and set it before them and came again to you,” referring to her mistress. And this witness testifies to these things from his own hearing and knowledge. To the fourth part, he knows nothing to depose concerning its contents. To the fifth part, he says as he said above, and what he testified above is true, and he knows nothing about the fame. To the first interrogatory, he says as he said above. To the second and third interrogatory, he responds negatively to all its contents. To the fourth interrogatory, he agrees with John Lucas examined above.
[*At these instances, the MS says “William” instead of “John.” Where marked **, the scribe crossed out “William” and corrected to “John.”]
Testimony of William Geffrey, 29 Nov. 1490
On behalf of John Jenyns c. Alice Seton and John Grose
Penultimate day of November, in the house of Master Thomas Ian, in my, Richard Spencer’s, presence
William Geffrey of Maldon [Essex], London diocese, where he was born and has lived from the time of his birth, illiterate, of free condition, thirty years old or thereabouts, as he says. Inducted as a witness, etc., he says that he does not know John Jenyns, he has known Alice Seton for two years and more, and he has known John Grose for sixteen years and more. Questioned further on the contents of the libel, this witness says that on Sunday following the feast of the Assumption a year ago [16 August 1489], this witness was present in the nave of the parish church of All Hallows, Maldon, and there he heard when Alice and John contracted marriage in the face of the church, before the vicar of Maldon, by these words, that is, John took Alice by her right hand and at the instruction of the vicar he said to her, “I John take Alice to my wife, for better, for worse,” etc., “and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And Alice said to him, “I, Alice, take thee, John, to my husband, for better, for worse,” etc., “and thereto I plight thee my troth.” And after that day, they lived together in the town of Maldon for eight weeks and more, and were said, taken, had, named, and reputed as such and for such [husband and wife] by this witness’s knowledge. And afterwards as he heard, they lived together as husband and wife in Old Fish Street, London, and he heard that Alice was made pregnant by John. And he says that what he has said above is true, and that public voice and fame circulated and circulate concerning it in the parish of Maldon and other surrounding places.
Testimony of Thomas Gyrseby, 30 Nov. 1490
Thomas Gyrseby of Maldon [Essex], where he has lived for almost two years, illiterate, of free condition, thirty-three years old, as he says. Inducted as a witness, he says that he does not know John Jenyn, he first knew Alice Seton on the day about which he will depose below, and he has known John Grose for sixteen years. Questioned further, he says that on a Sunday falling around one of the feasts of the blessed Mary in the autumn last year, this witness saw Alice sitting in wifely apparel6 in the said church, together with John Grose’s mother, at the time of high mass, and she was commonly said, taken, and reputed for his wife. And after that day John had access to Alice as if to his wife, and as such they were commonly said, taken, had, and reputed, by this witness’s knowledge. And otherwise he has nothing to depose concerning the contents in the libel. And on that Sunday, Alice was married, as a certain William Pye told this witness, saying to him, “Why risest not, thou mightest come to John Grose’s marriage as we have done,” etc.
Testimony of Robert Mathew, 30 Nov. 1490
Robert Mathew of Maldon [Essex], where he has lived for six year, illiterate, of free condition, thirty years old, as he says. Inducted as a witness, etc., he says that he has known Alice Seton for three years, John Grose for five years, and John Jenyns he does not know. Questioned further, he says that on the day about which the first witness above deposed, marriage was solemnized between John Grose and Alice Seton in the church of All Hallows in Maldon, and on that same day this witness was present at the nuptial feast, and saw Alice sitting at the table in the home of Thomas Grose, John’s father. He was not present, however, at the solemnization of marriage between them. But he says that for eight weeks and more immediately afterwards they lived there as husband and wife, and as such they were and still are commonly said, held, had, named, and reputed, by this witness’s knowledge.
1. Possibly the tailor by the same name; Davies, ed., Merchant Taylors’ Company, 89, 171, 223, 269.
2. Great or Little Baddow and Maldon, Essex (the latter about five miles from Baddow).
3. Medley was cloth made from wools dyed, usually in different shades or colours, and mixed before being spun (OED, s.v. medley, n., II.2).
4. A kind of mixed grey woollen cloth much used in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (OED, s.v.).
5. Up until the mid-18th century, the calendar year changed on 25 March rather than 1 January; the dates here in the headings are converted to modern style.
6. MS: uxorali apparitu. The translation is uncertain: according to Latham, apparitus could mean “apparel,” indicating that Alice was now dressed as a wife rather than a maiden (headdreses, for instance, differed); or it could also mean “furnishing” – and thus here could refer to the “wives’ pews” in churches, where congregants were separated in the early introduction of seating into churches by sex and by marital status. Normally the word for pew, however, was sedes, or seat. Thanks to Katherine French for discussing this translation with me.
Consistory 