The New Murrey and Blue blog

I am somewhat puzzled by a recent suggestion (by “Historical Discussions” here) that Banns were published for Edward IV and Elizabeth Woodville on 24th May 1465, over a year after their secret ceremony.

Banns were normally read prior to the solemnisation of a canonical wedding and on three separate occasions. It is true that from time to time people fudged the process – for example by having them read on three saints’ days over a short period – but the whole idea was to enable people to object before the marriage took place and was consummated.

It must be understood that this was an age with only minimal forms of communication and virtually no record-keeping. However, most people lived in a ‘community’ where everyone knew them. This was as true of the medieval nobility – a small clique of families – as it was of the residents of a village or the county ‘community’ of the gentry. The point was, everyone knew who you were, and your antecedents, and could come forward to object if something was wrong. For example, if one of the parties had a living wife or husband.

There was absolutely no point in reading banns after the marriage was concluded and consummated. It was too late. It would make as much sense of having a baptism after a child’s first communion.

There would equally be no point in reading banns for an irregular marriage, as no one would be in a position to attend the venue to object. This, by the way, is why marriages by the fifteenth century were normally a public ceremony, and for the common multitude, at least, normally performed at the church door. It was not – as some imagine – because marriage was ‘shameful’. Far from it, it was a sacrament. It was so that the maximum number of people could witness it (good thing) and object if appropriate (good thing.)