1583 Edition | Book 8 | Page 1050 
CloseWife of Richard; charged in 1528, imprisoned 1534 at Fulham, starved; sent to Colchester, escaped [Fines]
Richard Johnson and Alice his wife had been persecuted for a long time in Salisbury. They were charged before John Stokesley in 1531 with possessing Wyclif's Wicket. 1570, p. 1190; 1576, p. 1019; 1583, p. 1047.
Richard Johnson and his wife were imprisoned at Fulham with Edward Freese. 1563, p. 494; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1026.
Closeof Horkesley, Essex; wife of John, senior [Fines]; charged in 1532 with her husband, sons and their wives; in prison at Fulham 1534
John Wily, his wife, sons and daughters-in-law abjured in 1532. 1570, p. 1191; 1576, p. 1019; 1583, p. 1048.
John Wily and his wife and son were imprisoned at Fulham with Edward Freese. 1563, p. 494; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1026.
Closeof York. [Fines]
Apprenticed to a painter, but the abbot of Bermondsey bought him out and made him a monk; became a painter and married; imprisoned and went mad; brother of Valentine
Edward Freese ran away from the abbey to Colchester and became a painter. He painted in passages from the scriptures and so was revealed as a heretic. He was taken to London and imprisoned in Fulham in the bishop's house, where he was starved. He was moved to Lollards' Tower. 1563, p. 494; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1026.
[Back to Top]Edward's wife died after being kicked while visiting him. His brother Valentine secured his release. He was examined, but could give no answer because of the treatment he had received, and his mind never recovered. 1563, p. 495; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1027.
Closeof Horkesley, Essex [Fines]; charged in 1532 with his parents, wife, brother and his wife; in prison at Fulham in 1534
John Wily junior, his wife, parents, brother and sister-in-law abjured in 1532. 1570, p. 1191; 1576, p. 1019; 1583, p. 1048.
John Wily junior and his parents were imprisoned at Fulham with Edward Freese. 1563, p. 494; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1026.
CloseWeaver of Horkesley, Essex [Fines]; charged in 1532 with his wife, sons and their wives; in prison at Fulham in 1534
John Wily, his wife, sons and daughters-in-law abjured in 1532. He was charged with eating meat during forbidden periods, teaching his young daughter scripture and of possessing illicit books. 1563, p. 419; 1570, p. 1191; 1576, p. 1019; 1583, p. 1048.
John Wily and his wife and son were imprisoned at Fulham with Edward Freese. 1563, p. 494; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1026.
Close(d. c. 1534) wife of Edward [Fines sub Edward Freese]
When pregnant and visiting her husband in prison, Mrs Freese was kicked; the child died immediately and she later died. 1563, pp. 494-95; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1026.
Close(d. 1531) [ODNB]
born Hadleigh; Benedictine monk of Bury St Edmund's and protestant martyr
Robert Barnes, Lawrence Maxwell and John Stacy visited Bury Abbey and during the course of their visit converted Richard Bayfield. Bayfield was imprisoned in the abbey, whipped and stocked. Barnes and Edmund eventually secured his release, and he went with Barnes to Cambridge. When Barnes was arrested, Bayfield went to London, where Maxwell and Stacy kept him secretly and helped him leave the country. 1563, p. 484; 1570, p. 1161; 1576, p. 993; 1583, p. 1021.
[Back to Top]While abroad, Bayfield met William Tyndale and John Frith and sold their books and those of the German reformers in France and in England. He returned to England, was arrested, tried by Cuthbert Tunstall and abjured. He was told to return to Bury and wear his monk's habit, but fled abroad again. 1563, p. 484; 1570, p. 1161; 1576, p. 993; 1583, p. 1021.
[Back to Top]Upon his return to England, he stayed at the house of Mr Smith, where he was betrayed and arrested. He was imprisoned in Lollards' Tower, but was moved to the Coalhouse to keep him away from another imprisoned suspect, Thomas Patmore. He was severely shackled in an attempt to make him reveal the buyers of his books, but he refused. He was tried before John Stokesley, assisted by Stephen Gardiner and others. 1563, pp. 484-88; 1570, pp. 1161-64; 1576, pp. 993-995; 1583, pp. 1021-1023.
[Back to Top]Edmund Peerson presented a list of charges against Richard Bayfield, especially concerning Bayfield's praise for Thomas Arthur and Thomas Bilney. 1570, p. 1191; 1576, p. 1020; 1583, p. 1048.
William Smith was charged in London in 1531 with harbouring Richard Bayfield and other good men in his house and reading illicit books. 1570, p. 1189; 1576, p. 1017; 1583, p. 1046.
About four days before Bayfield was arrested, a boy of Colchester was charged in London with bringing books to him. The boy was imprisoned by Sir Thomas More and died there. 1570, p. 1189; 1576, p. 1017; 1583, p. 1046.
Bayfield was condemned as a heretic and suffered a lengthy burning. 1563, pp. 488-89; 1570, pp. 1164-65; 1576, pp. 995-96; 1583, pp. 1023-24.
The example of Bayfield inspired John Tewkesbury after he had abjured. 1570, p. 1167; 1576, p. 998; 1583, p. 1026.
CloseWeaver originally of Salisbury diocese, but moved to Colchester; charged in 1528, imprisoned 1534 at Fulham, starved; sent to Colchester, escaped [Fines]
Richard Johnson and Alice his wife had been persecuted for a long time in Salisbury. They were charged before John Stokesley in 1531 with possessing Wyclif's Wicket. 1570, p. 1190; 1576, p. 1019; 1583, p. 1047.
Richard Johnson and his wife were imprisoned at Fulham with Edward Freese. 1563, p. 494; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1026.
Close(d. c. 1531) [Fines]
of Rowhedge or Donyland, nr Colchester
Robert Bate was imprisoned at Fulham with Edward Freese. 1563, p. 494; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1026.
Robert's wife Rose made supplications to the king on behalf of her husband. She was directed to get a letter from Mr Selyard to the bishop on her husband's behalf, but the letter asked for information against him. He escaped from prison but died shortly after. 1563, p. 495; 1570, p. 1168; 1576, p. 999; 1583, p. 1027.
[Back to Top]
Close
Close[Chelsey; Chelsith]
west London
OS grid ref: TQ 275 775
CloseA borough, having separate jurisdiction, locally in the Colchester division of the hundred of Lexden, county of Essex. 22 miles north-east by east from Chelmsford. The town comprises the parishes of All Saints, St. James, St. Martin, St. Mary at the Walls, St. Nicholas, St. Peter, St. Rumwald and Holy Trinity within the walls; and St. Botolph, St. Giles, St. Leonard and St. Mary Magdalene without the walls; all in the archdeaconry of Colchester and Diocese of London
[Back to Top]English information from Samuel Lewis, A Topographical Dictionary of England (S. Lewis & Co: London, 1831)
Scottish information from Samuel Lewis, A Topographical Dictionary of Scotland (S. Lewis & Co: London, 1846)
Welsh information taken from Samuel Lewis, A Topographical Dictionary of Wales(Lewis & Co: London, 1840)
The reason for the use of these works of reference is that they present the jurisdictional and ecclesiastical position as it was before the major Victorian changes. The descriptions therefore approximate to those applying in the sixteenth century, after the major changes of 1535-42. Except for the physical locations, which have not changed, the reader should not therefore take these references as being accurate in the twenty-first century.
[Back to Top]
Close[Bearsy, Bersie]
North Yorkshire
OS grid ref: NZ 183 002
Closewest London
OS grid ref: TQ 241 761
CloseEssex
OS grid ref: TM 025 215
CloseA city and county of itself, having exclusive jurisdiction; locally in the East Riding of the county of York, of which it is the capital. 198 miles north-north-west from London. The city is the seat of the Archbishop, and comprised originally 33 parishes, reduced by amalgamation to 22; of which 33, 17 were discharged rectories, 10 discharged vicarages, and 6 perpetual curacies; all within the diocese of York.
[Back to Top]English information from Samuel Lewis, A Topographical Dictionary of England (S. Lewis & Co: London, 1831)
Welsh information taken from Samuel Lewis, A Topographical Dictionary of Wales(Lewis & Co: London, 1840)
The reason for the use of these works of reference is that they present the jurisdictional and ecclesiastical position as it was before the major Victorian changes. The descriptions therefore approximate to those applying in the sixteenth century, after the major changes of 1535-42. Except for the physical locations, which have not changed, the reader should not therefore take these references as being accurate in the twenty-first century.
[Back to Top]Item, so God is honored on all sides, in that we coūt him righteous in all his lawes and ordinaunces. And to worship him otherwise then so, it is Idolatory. To that he answered, that it pleaseth him well.
The examination of these Articles being done, the Bishop of London did exhort the sayd Iohn Tewkesbery to recant his errors abouesayde: and after some other cõmunication had by the Bishop with him, the sayd Bishop did exhort him again to recant his errors, and appoynted him to determine with himselfe against the next Session, what he would do.
[Back to Top]MarginaliaIohn Tewkesbery submitteth himselfe.IN this next Session he submitted himselfe and abiured his opinions, and was enioyned penaunce, as foloweth, which was the 8. of May.
In primis, that he should keepe well his abiuration vnder payne of relaps.
Secondly, that the next Sonday folowing in Paules Church in the open procession, he should cary a Fagot, and stand at Paules Crosse with the same.
That the Wednesday folowing he should cary the same Fagot about Newgate market and Chepeside.
That on Friday after, he should take the same fagot agayne at S. Peters church in Cornehill, and cary it about the market of Ledenhall.
That he should haue 2. signes of Fagots embrothered, one on his left sleue, & the other on his right sleue, which he should weare all his life time, vnles he were otherwise dispensed withall.
That on Whitsonday euē he should enter into the Monastery of S. Bartholomew in Smithfield, and there toabide, and not to come out vnles he were released by the bishop of London.
That he should not depart out of þe city or dioces of London, without the speciall licence of the B. or his successors. Which penance he entred into the 8 day of May. an. 1229.
And thus much concerning his first examinatiõ, which was in the yeare. 1529. at what time he was inforced thorow infirmitye as is before expressed to retract and abiure his doctrine. MarginaliaTewkesbery returned againe to the truth.Notwithstãding, the same Iohn Tewkesbery, afterward cõfirmed by the grace of God, and moued by þe example of Bayfild aforesayd that was burned in smithfield, did returne and constantly abide in the testimonye of the truth and suffered for the same. Who recouering more grace, & better strength at the hand of the Lord, two yeares after being apprehended agayne, was brought before Syr Thomas More, and the Bishop of Londõ
CloseTewkesbury was, in fact, tried at More's house at Chelsea, which was unusual, but not illegal. This provided fuel for lurid rumours that More tortured accused heretics at his house.
CloseFoxe's sudden desire for brevity is a little suspicious, especially since it contrasts with his diligence in printing documents from Tewkesbury's first heresy trial. Foxe clearly had access to the records of Tewkesbury's second trial, so why didn't he print those? Thomas More, who was present, claimed that Tewkesbury, at his second trial, denied that he had ever held the opinions that he had abjured at his first trial (Thomas More, The Confutation of Tyndale's Answer, ed. Louis A. Schuster, Richard C. Marius, James P. Lusardi and Richard J. Schoeck, CWTM 8 (3 vols, New Haven, CT, 1973), I, p. 21). If Tewkesbury had appeared to be disingenuous, evasive or even deceptive at his trial, then Foxe would have wanted to conceal this.
[Back to Top]MarginaliaArticles agayne obiected to Tewkesbery.In primis, that he confesseth that he was baptised, and intendeth to keepe the Catholicke fayth.
Secondly that he affirmeth that the abiuration, othe, & subscription that he made before Cutbert late Byshop of London, was done by compulsion.
CloseThis is an indication that More was correct and that Tewkesbury had attempted to deny that he had held the beliefs he abjured at his first trial (see preceding comment). Tewkesbury's answer to this article, had Foxe printed it, would have been interesting.
Thirdlye, that he had the bookes of the obedience of a Christian man
CloseThis is a work by William Tyndale.
Fourthly, that he affirmeth that he suffered the two fagots that were embrothered vpon his sleue, to be taken frõ him for that he deserued not to weare them.
Fiftly, he sayth that fayth onely iustifieth, which lacketh not charity.
Sixtly, he sayth that Christ is a sufficient Mediator for vs, & therfore no prayer is to be made vnto any Sayntes. Wherupon they layd vnto him this verse of the Antheme. Salue Regina, aduocata nostra. &c. To the which he aunswered, that he knew no other Aduocate but Christ alone.
Seuenthly, he affirmeth that there is no Purgatory after this life, MarginaliaChrist is our Purgatorye.but that Christ our Sauior is a sufficient purgation for vs.
Eightly, he affirmeth that the soules of the faythful departing this life, rest with Christ.
Ninthly, he affirmeth þt a priest by receiuing of orders, receiueth more grace, if his fayth be increased, or els not.
Tenthly, and last of all, he beleueth that the sacrament, of the flesh & bloud of Christ, is not the very body of Christ, in flesh & bloud as it was borne of þe virgin Mary. Wher-vpon the Byshops Chauncellor asked the sayd Tewkesbery, if he could shew any cause why he should not be takē for an hereticke falling into his heresy agayne, and receiue the punishment of an hereticke. Wherunto he aunswered, that he had wrong before, and if he be condemned now, he reckoneth that he hath wrong agayne.
[Back to Top]Then the Chaūcellor caused the articles to be read opēly, with the aunsweres vnto the same, the which the sayde Tewkesbery confessed, & therupon the Bishop pronounced sentence agaynst him, & deliuered him vnto the Shyriffes of Londõ for þe time being, who were Rich. Greshã, & Edward Altam, who burned him in Smithfield vpõ S.Thomas euen, being the 20. of Decēber, in the yeare aforesayd, the tenor of whose sentence pronounced agaynst hym by the Bishop, doth here ensue word for word.
[Back to Top]IN the name of God, Amen.
This document must have come from a now lost court book of Bishop John Stokesley of London.
Close
This foresayd sentence definitiue agaynst Iohn Tewkesbery was read and pronounced by the Bishop of London, the 16, day of the month of December, the yeare aforesayd, in the house of Syr Thomas More high Chauncellor of England, in the Parish of Chelsey. MarginaliaThe death and martir dome of Iohn Tewksbery.After the whych sentence, the Sheriffes receiued the foresayd Tewkesbery into theyr custody, and caried him away with them, and afterwardes burned him in Smithfield, as is aforesayd, hauing no writ of the king for theyr warrant.
CloseAccording to English law, a heretic could only be burned after Chancery sent a writ authorizing the execution. Foxe claims that this did not happen in this case and, as a matter of fact, there is no surviving copy of the signification of excommunication for Tewkesbury. This is hardly conclusive. If, however, the dates Foxe gives for Tewkesbury's trial and execution are correct, then the authorities were certainly in a hurry to execute Tewkesbury; he was burned four days after he was condemned.
[Back to Top]
CloseIt appears that Foxe's account of Edward Freeze and 'father' Bate is based on material sent to Foxe by an informant; very probably an informant in Colchester (this account contains quite a bit of detail on people from Essex and Colchester). But there is quite a bit of corroboration for Foxe's account. First of all, A. G. Dickens uncovered information on Edward Freese's family. Edward's father Frederick was a Dutch immigrant (the family name was probably Vries or de Vries), who settled in York and made a living as a bookbinder and stationer (A. G. Dickens, Lollards and Protestants in the diocese of York 1509-1558 [Oxford, 1959], p. 30). This Dutch background may explain the pronounced evangelical convictions of Valentine and Edward Freese. Another major piece of corroboration is a letter, almost certainly sent to Thomas Cromwell, which is now in the TNA. Although the signature has been cut off of the letter, the biographical details related in it fit Edward Freese so closely that is virtually certain that he wrote it. The author of the letter, detained in London for religious offences, admits that he had been a monk since the age of 13, but claims that he was 'sold' by his master to the abbot of Jervaulx (see next comment). The author of the letter declared that he attempted to flee the abbey several times but was recaptured. Finally he fled to Colchester and he got married (TNA SP 1/73, fos. 175r-176r).
[Back to Top]MarginaliaThe story Edward Freese.EDward Freese was borne in Yorke, and was Prentise to a Paynter in the same Citty, and by the reason of working for his maister in Bearsy Abbay
CloseA. G. Dickens guessed that 'Bearsie Abbey' was Bermondsey (A.G. Dickens, Lollards and Protestants in the diocese of York 1509-1558 [Oxford, 1959], p, 30). But a letter, almost certainly by Edward Freese, refers to himself as having been 'sold' to Jervaulx Abbey by his master, when he was an apprentice. And on 30 July 1532, the abbot of Jervaulx wrote to Cromwell, regarding an 'Edw. Payntter' (remember that Freese was a painter) who had been arrested for heresy and was in the custody of London. In this letter, the abbot said that 'Edw. Payntter' had fled the abbey of Jervaulx but that Jervaulx did not him returned (L&P V, p. 527).
[Back to Top]
CloseIt appears that Foxe's account of Edward Freeze and 'father' Bate is based on material sent to Foxe by an informant; very probably an informant in Colchester (this account contains quite a bit of detail on people from Essex and Colchester). But there is quite a bit of corroboration for Foxe's account.
[Back to Top]
CloseUnsurprisingly, there was probably more behind Freese's arrest than this. In a letter that he sent to Cromwell, he admitted having previously arrested for heresy, but released upon receipt of a royal pardon. Freese also denied the charge the he had led conventicles that met secretly at night (TNA SP 1/73, fo. 175r-v).
[Back to Top]MarginaliaThe cause of the takyng of Edward Freese.And on a time he being at his worke in the same Inne they of the Towne, when they had sene his work, went about to take him, & he hauing some incling therof, thought to shift for himselfe, but yet was taken forceably in þe yarde of the same Inne, & after this he was brought to London, and so to Fulham to the bishops house, where he was cruelly imprisoned, with certein others of Essex, that is to wit one Iohnson and his wife, Wylye, his wife and his sonne, & father Bate of Rowshedge.MarginaliaIohnson & his wyfe, Wylye, his sonne. Father Bate. They were fedde with fyne manchet
CloseManchet was the finest kind of wheat bread [OED].
After the Painter had bene there a long space, by much sute he was remoued to Lollardes tower. His wife in the time of her sute, whiles he was yet at Fulham, being desirous to see her husband, & preasing to come in at the gate,