Morton

Must pop over the Canterbury again and spit on his grave in the crypt at the Cathedral there, something I treat myself to regularly! :-)
Paul


On 12/06/2015 09:29, janmulrenan@... [] wrote:

 Morton is on the ODNB Life of the Day today. Great....

Jan.

Jan wrote :

"Morton is on the ODNB Life of the Day today. Great...."

Carol responds:

Yes, I was just going to post that. If anyone needs it, the URL is http://www.oxforddnb.com/public/lotw/2.html For those outside the UK, the article will only be online for the next six days. Haven't read it yet, but the title "Morton of the Fork, Perhaps?" suggests a somewhat unfavorable view of him. Or I can hope till I'm undeceived.

Carol

According to W E Hampton's Memorials of the Wars of the Roses the slab covering Morton's tomb cracked and the bones in their cere cloth disappeared, carried off as souvenirs, At length only the skull remained and this a Ralph Sheldon obtained from his brother, the archbishop, in1670. Sheldon left it to his niece at his death in 1684. So the odious Morton's bones are now lost...and Richard's recovered...justice well and truly served here....

Eileen wrote: According to W E Hampton's Memorials of the Wars of the Roses the slab covering Morton's tomb cracked and the bones in their cere cloth disappeared, carried off as souvenirs, At length only the skull remained and this a Ralph Sheldon obtained from his brother, the archbishop, in1670. Sheldon left it to his niece at his death in 1684. So the odious Morton's bones are now lost...and Richard's recovered...justice well and truly served here....  Karma, perhaps? Doug

Indeed Doug...Karma does have a habit of biting one on the bum...for all his fine tomb at Canterbury...its just an empty shell...he would have been really annoyed...too bad Henry's tomb hasnt caved in at Westminster Abbey..still its quite funny they shoved James l in with him! Eileen

Eileen wrote:
Indeed Doug...Karma does have a habit of biting one on the bum...for all his fine tomb at Canterbury...its just an empty shell...he would have been really annoyed... Doug here: That old phrase about whited sepulchers also comes to mind... Eileen finished: ...too bad Henry's tomb hasnt caved in at Westminster Abbey..still its quite funny they shoved James l in with him! You'll never know how close you came to owing me a new computer when I read that last phrase and remembered some of the talk about James', um, proclivities(?)! Doug who personally couldn't care less, but the thought of Henry's expression...

Doug...I think 'Enery would be very, very peeved...Little Jimmy..in there..playing gooseberry these last 300 years...well at least he wont be dribbling any more.

So why is such a large tomb left in Canterbury cathedral?
Paul


On 13/06/2015 14:14, cherryripe.eileenb@... [] wrote:
According to W E Hampton's Memorials of the Wars of the Roses the slab covering Morton's tomb cracked and the bones in their cere cloth disappeared, carried off as souvenirs,  At length only the skull remained and this a Ralph  Sheldon obtained from his brother, the archbishop, in1670.  Sheldon left it to his niece at his death in 1684.  So the odious Morton's bones are now  lost...and Richard's recovered...justice well and truly served here....

A lot of these tombs are merely cenotaphs now as the remains have disappeared over the centuries for various reasons. In some cases they are not even related to the person supposed to have been buried there such as the Edward of Middleham monument. Stillington's tomb is another example...the chapel he was buried in was demolished and the remains just chucked out like rubbish. We should be thankful Richard was hidden all these years as we now live in more enlightened times...

Thank you for that, Eileen, none of which I knew, (but then I am comparatively new to this).
I photographed the tomb last time I was in Canterbury. Rather fitting as you say, that he is no longer in it, whilst Richard was buried with all due ceremony and dignity.
I hope to get to Leicester later in the year to visit Richard's tomb. We have had to put all of our travel / holiday plans on hold as my husband's 93 year old mother is terminally ill and has now been moved from hospital to a nursing home.
We visit everyday because she is just hanging by a thread at present, and could pass away at any time.

JessFrom: cherryripe.eileenb@... []
Sent: 13/06/2015 18:28
To:
Subject: Re: Morton

A lot of these tombs are merely cenotaphs now as the remains have disappeared over the centuries for various reasons. In some cases they are not even related to the person supposed to have been buried there such as the Edward of Middleham monument. Stillington's tomb is another example...the chapel he was buried in was demolished and the remains just chucked out like rubbish. We should be thankful Richard was hidden all these years as we now live in more enlightened times...

Sorry for your troubles Jess...I too am waiting until later in the year...September maybe...to pay my respects at Richard's tomb when hopefully things will be quieter. Of course it may never be 'quieter' but I live in hope...Eileen

Indeed Doug...Karma does have a habit of biting one on the bum...for all his fine tomb at Canterbury.. .its just an empty shell...he would have been really annoyed...too bad Henry's tomb hasnt caved in at Westminster Abbey..still its quite funny they shoved James l in with him! Eileen I've always wondered about that. Why did they shove James I in there w/ him and not create his own tomb? Lack of space n Westminster? T

I hope to get to Leicester later in the year to visit Richard's tomb. We have had to put all of our travel / holiday plans on hold as my husband's 93 year old mother is terminally ill and has now been moved from hospital to a nursing home.
We visit everyday because she is just hanging by a thread at present, and could pass away at any time.

Jess
So sorry to hear that. Will keep you and yours in my prayers. T

Thank you so much Terence. You are so kind.

Jess xFrom: 'Terence Buckaloo' tandjules@... []
Sent: 16/06/2015 03:53
To:
Subject: Re: Morton

I hope to get to Leicester later in the year to visit Richard's tomb. We have had to put all of our travel / holiday plans on hold as my husband's 93 year old mother is terminally ill and has now been moved from hospital to a nursing home.
We visit everyday because she is just hanging by a thread at present, and could pass away at any time.

Jess
So sorry to hear that. Will keep you and yours in my prayers. T

My thought has always been to save money...however I may well be barking up the wrong tree and it could have been simply lack of space,,,Queen Anne's dead children..and there were quite a few...were put into Mary Queen of Scots vault..If there was room in that vault why didn't they put James in with his mother which would have been more in keeping...now...if I had been in charge...!! Eileen

ÿ Exactly, Eileen, especially since it was James's decision to move her to Westminster from her original spot in Peterborough Cathedral. On the subject of Westminster, does anyone know why Anne's burial place was unmarked? Did Richard not have time to arrange an effigy/tomb or was it started and then abandoned before it was finished? I can't believe that he wouldn't have erected something to her memory. Sharon ----- Original Message ----- From: cherryripe.eileenb@... [] To: Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 2:56 PM Subject: Re: Morton

My thought has always been to save money...however I may well be barking up the wrong tree and it could have been simply lack of space,,,Queen Anne's dead children..and there were quite a few...were put into Mary Queen of Scots vault..If there was room in that vault why didn't they put James in with his mother which would have been more in keeping...now...if I had been in charge...!! Eileen

Sharon...as Anne died in March and Richard was dead in August of the same year then clearly he did not have the time to plan a suitable monument,,,sometimes these things often didn't happen until several years after the person had been buried, EofY for example was buried elsewhere in the Abbey until the vault/tomb in the new chapel Henry had built was completed. As it was Anne was buried in a very holy place on the south side of the high altar and next to the Sedalia 'by the South dore that ledyth into Seynt Edwardys Chappell' which was a very confined space which would have made the building of a monument difficult. Whether she would have remained there had Richard lived long enough to make plans will never be known.
A leaden coffin was discovered in that area in 1866 but it was not disturbed. Eileen

ÿ Many thanks Eileen. I knew there wasn't much time between her and Richard's deaths and that monuments took time to make, but I didn't know whether one had been started or not, or at least plans drawn up that had survived, given the fact that her death wasn't exactly sudden. Effigies were often started within that person's lifetime, certainly with earlier military effigies anyway in the 13th and 14thC. I also didn't know exactly where in the abbey she had been buried either, so that makes sense. It would be nice to think that he intended for himself, Anne and Edward to all finally be together, but, as you say, we shall never know! Sharon ----- Original Message ----- From: cherryripe.eileenb@... [] To: Sent: Tuesday, June 16, 2015 10:50 PM Subject: Re: Re: Morton

Sharon...as Anne died in March and Richard was dead in August of the same year then clearly he did not have the time to plan a suitable monument,,,sometimes these things often didn't happen until several years after the person had been buried, EofY for example was buried elsewhere in the Abbey until the vault/tomb in the new chapel Henry had built was completed. As it was Anne was buried in a very holy place on the south side of the high altar and next to the Sedalia 'by the South dore that ledyth into Seynt Edwardys Chappell' which was a very confined space which would have made the building of a monument difficult. Whether she would have remained there had Richard lived long enough to make plans will never be known.
A leaden coffin was discovered in that area in 1866 but it was not disturbed. Eileen

I would like to think that too Sharon...indeed I do...it's all very sad...I can't believe it's been completely forgotten where Edward of Middleham was buried...! Eileen

Tamara says:
I managed to find it and copy the text. It's generally flattering to him, but to my mind the flattery is undercut by the mutilated face of his tomb effigy, a deliberate mutilation of great age, showing that someone in the years following his passing did not think very highly at all of the Fork:. John Morton (d. 1500), tomb effigyMorton, John (d. 1500), administrator and archbishop of Canterbury, was born in Dorset, at either Bere Regis or Milborne St Andrew, the son of Richard Morton, whose own father had migrated from Nottinghamshire to the south-west. John's uncle served as MP for Shaftesbury in 1437 and his younger brother was sheriff of Somerset and Dorset in 1483. He came, therefore, of a family of middling gentry, prominent in local affairs but with no national profile.Education and early career to 1471The first notice of Morton is in 1447, when the pope authorized the bishop of Salisbury to create him notary public. By 1448 he was BCL of Oxford, by 1451 BCn & CL, and in 1452 DCL. During this period his career centred on Oxford; it has been conjectured, but not proved, that he was a member of Balliol College. He practised as a proctor in the chancellor's court from 1448 and was the chancellor's official and commissary in 1451. In 1452 he became principal of the civil-law school and in 1453 of Peckwater Hall, of which he had previously been a fellow. The letters testimonial issued by the university in November 1454 were well deserved, and when forty years later he himself became chancellor of the university (14951500)as also of Cambridge (14991500)it was no empty honour.

In January 1453 Morton obtained his first recorded benefice, the rectory of Shellingford in Berkshire, and it is probable that from this year he was a practising lawyer in the court of arches, of which he was eventually appointed dean in 1474. As Archbishop Thomas Bourchier (d. 1486) was chancellor of England in 14556, Morton's translation to royal service was always likely. On 26 September 1456 he became chancellor to Edward, prince of Wales, and continued as such until the Yorkist victory in 1461. In the meantime he began to accumulate lucrative livings. In 1458, for example, he was appointed subdean of Lincoln and a prebendary of Salisbury.

Morton was, almost inevitably, drawn into the developing political crisis in England, and as an eminent lawyer in government service was involved in the drafting of the bill of attainder against Richard, duke of York (d. 1460), in November 1459. Gregory's chronicle relates that on the evening after the second battle of St Albans, fought on 17 February 1461, Doctor Morton brought forthe a boke that was fulle of orysons' for a ceremony in which Henry VI blessed the young prince of Wales and dubbed him knight (Gairdner, Historical Collections, 214). Such activities, and his close association with Margaret of Anjou and the Lancastrian court, led to Morton's exclusion from the pardon granted by Edward IV on 6 March 1461 after his seizure of the throne. Morton was captured after the battle of Towton while attempting to escape to Scotland, imprisoned in the Tower of London, and included in the bill of attainder of 4 November 1461. He escaped from prison and joined Queen Margaret in France, where he was appointed keeper of the privy seal to Henry VI and participated in the negotiations leading to the treaty of Tours in June 1462. He subsequently accompanied the queen on both her unsuccessful invasions of Northumberland in 1462 and 1463. Thereafter he remained with the Lancastrian government in exile, and, perhaps despairing of return to England and a meaningful administrative career, in 1469 he matriculated in theology at the University of Louvain. His property in England had been forfeited and his benefices sequestrated in September 1464.Master of the rolls and conspirator, 14711485When, following the readeption, Lancastrian hopes were finally dashed by the death of Prince Edward at the battle of Tewkesbury (4 May 1471) and by the murder of Henry VI three weeks later, Morton realistically came to terms with the Yorkist regime and on 3 July 1471 received a royal pardon. By Michaelmas he was at work as a master of chancery, and soon he became a valued member of Edward IV's government. On 16 March 1472 he was appointed master of the rolls, in which office he was succeeded in 1479 by his nephew Robert Morton (d. 1497), who in 1486 became bishop of Worcester. During John Morton's tenure of this office under three chancellors the judicial activities of the court of chancery expanded rapidly; the volume of litigation overtook that in the exchequer and approached that of king's bench. The chancery masters were now no longer mere clerks, but were recruited from the ranks of university-trained academic lawyers. That from 2 May 1475 Morton was empowered to fulfil his office by deputy is a reflection of the diplomatic activity in which he was increasingly engaged. Between 1474 and 1482 he was employed as an envoy on several occasions to the courts of France and Burgundy; in 1475 he was involved in the negotiation of the treaty of Picquigny (29 August), and he received a pension of 600 crowns from Louis XI (r. 146183). His eminence naturally brought him a plethora of ecclesiastical preferments. Between 1474 and 1478 he acquired at various dates the archdeaconries of Chester, Winchester, Huntingdon, Berkshire, Norfolk, and Leicester, prebends in St Paul's, Wells, York, and Exeter, and the mastership of St Bartholomew's Hospital at Bristol. On 30 October 1478 he was provided by the pope, at royal initiative, to the bishopric of Ely.

An Italian observer remarked how greatly Edward IV relied on Morton's counsel, and indeed the king appointed him an executor of his will. But with the assumption of power by Richard III, Morton's fortunes changed. He was arrested at the council meeting of 13 June 1483 that led to the summary execution of William, Lord Hastings, and by the end of July had been placed in the custody of the duke of Buckingham at Brecon. He was certainly involved in the planning of Buckingham's rebellion, whether or not he instigated it. After the failure of the revolt, having been attainted again in January 1484, he escaped to Flanders, where he actively engaged in the consolidation of an anti-Ricardian coalition, involving both Henry Tudor, whom he had warned of a plot to deliver him from his refuge in Brittany to Richard, and also the kindred of Queen Elizabeth, widow of Edward IV. Although he was pardoned by King Richard in December 1484, in order to win back his loyalty, Morton ignored this and went to Rome, where he arrived before 31 January 1485. His purpose, perhaps, was to secure a dispensation for the marriage of Henry Tudor and Elizabeth of York, and also to prepare the pope for the forthcoming military and political action. If so, he was eminently successful, for after the battle of Bosworth, Pope Innocent VIII (r. 148492) gave full support to Henry VII's regime. Morton probably did not mastermind the Tudor rebellion, but he was a vital intermediary who secured papal acquiescence in the enterprise.Chancellor of EnglandAfter the Tudor victory Morton returned to England, and assisted at the coronation on 30 October 1485. His attainder was reversed in parliament in November and he was appointed a member of the king's council, and chancellor on 6 March 1487. It is very difficult to evaluate his personal role and influence in the formulation of royal policy, but it is certain that he was among, if not the closest of, Henry VII's advisers; he was present at nearly every council meeting of which record survives, and was responsible for the explanation of the government's intentions to parliament. Under him the original secretarial functions of chancery changed little, but the equitable jurisdiction of its court continued the expansion that had begun while he had been master of the rolls, and statutes gave additional judicial responsibilities to the chancellor himself, so that the drive against disorder came under his general purview. The act of 3 Henry VII c. 1 (commonly known as the Star Chamber Act) set up, under the chancellor's presidency, a single court to replace the various tribunals established over the previous century to deal with abuses of the law resulting from the domination of the regions by great magnates and the maintenance of retinues; in 1495 the chancellor was given responsibility for the investigation of perjury in all the king's courts. These measures were a rationalization of piecemeal developments and gave the chancellor (and the other great officers of state) a new place in the constitution.

Morton was widely blamed for the heavy taxation which characterized the first twelve years of Henry VII's reign, and the Cornish rebels of 1497 singled him out for special hostility. At a higher level of society he had certainly been active in the collection of benevolences in 1491 for the projected French war; but that famous device Morton's fork' (by which those who entertained king or chancellor lavishly were told that they could obviously afford to contribute handsomely, while those who, to avoid this fate, were parsimonious, that they must have a great deal stored away from which they could give) was certainly an invention of the early seventeenth-century historian Francis Bacon (d. 1626) rather than of the archbishop. Although the author of the London great chronicle, who came from a group that suffered badly from government financial policy, noted that Morton attracted the hatred of the commons of the land, his own assessment of the chancellor was very complimentary; while the Italian observer Polydore Vergil (d. 1555) was probably very near to the mark when he wrote that it became obvious, after the deaths of Morton and Sir Reginald Bray (d. 1503), that they had been responsible not for initiating harsh policies, but rather for restraining them. Morton's concern for good order and sound government had been tempered by a great commitment to justice, whereas after 1500 the government embarked on a campaign of fiscal terrorism.Archbishop of Canterbury: church and stateBy papal bull of 6 October 1486 Morton was translated, at the king's request, from Ely to the vacant archbishopric of Canterbury. Subsequently, and in Henry VII's view belatedly, he was on 20 September 1493 created cardinal-priest of St Anastasia. As the crown's chief minister and primate of all England, Morton faced a delicate task. The level of clerical taxation in Henry VII's first twelve years was high, and, while any attempt to make the church pay a disproportionate amount was resisted, the convocation of Canterbury granted a clerical subsidy whenever parliament made a grant of lay taxation, and in 1489 and 1497 for the first time granted fixed sums rather than a tenth or fifteenth. There was apparently a rationalization of clerical taxation for the benefit of the crown, without an undermining of ecclesiastical liberties. Henceforth the king might not grant to individual corporations exemption from payment or the burden of collectionsuch decisions were to be made by convocation itself without interference.

Indeed, where there was royal or parliamentary intervention in ecclesiastical affairs it was neither intrusive nor unwelcome to Morton and his episcopal colleagues. Restrictions placed on benefit of clergy served to disadvantage only criminal members of the extended clerical order, and rights of sanctuary were, with papal approval, merely regulated so as to deny this refuge to traitors and to prevent sanctuaries from becoming safe houses for those seeking a base for a continued career of crime and violence. In no way was this the inevitable prelude to the post-Reformation abolition of sanctuary plotted by Thomas Cromwell (d. 1540). Far from condoning the erosion of the rights of the church in favour of the secular government of which he was a leading member, Morton did much to protect the clergy from the hostility of certain powerful elements of lay society, particularly influential lawyers, and it was only after his death in 1500 that ecclesiastics became subject to persistent legal harassment. The archbishop appears to have preserved a balance between strong government and sound finance on the one hand and the maintenance of the liberties of the church on the other.

Morton had probably been instrumental in securing the support of the papacy for the Tudor monarchy, and certainly sought ratification from Rome for the extension of his own authority within the English church. A series of bulls obtained by the archbishop do not represent, as once argued, papal aggression', but rather signify Morton's determination to obtain the sanction of the highest universal authority for measures thought necessary for reform in the context of an increasingly nationalist, albeit utterly orthodox, insular church. His strategy was remarkably similar to that of his near contemporaries in Spain and France, Francisco Ximenes and Georges d'Amboise, who sought reform through centralization of power within their own hands as leaders of national members of a universal church.

To this end, Morton fought several battles to undermine the position of religious houses whose exempt status removed them from episcopal and metropolitical control, obtaining a bull empowering him to order reform of abuses and, if this was not effected internally, to conduct visitations. The most famous instance is his attempt between 1487 and 1489 to enforce his jurisdiction over St Albans Abbey; the threat apparently was enough, and there is no evidence of visitation. Neither was the abbot of Waltham Holy Cross, similarly threatened in 1488 because of alleged financial administration, ever troubled by the arrival of the archbishop's commissaries. At the Cluniac house of St Andrew's, Northampton (over which the Burgundian abbey of La Charité-sur-Loire claimed jurisdiction), he intervened in 1488 to obtain the removal of two competing priorsalthough this took three years. Both the court of arches and the king's council intervened in the affairs of the exempt Cistercian order. In April 1498 the pope authorized Morton, with two other bishops, to visit five unreformed Franciscan houses to effect their transfer to the Observant branch, much favoured by Henry VII. This concern for the reform of the religious life was not motivated solely by a desire to extend the jurisdiction of the church of Canterbury, for there is much evidence of pastoral care for convents in cases where the archbishop had an unchallenged right to actat Folkestone in his own diocese (14914), at Reigate, Surrey (1493), and St Frideswide's, Oxford (1495), during the vacancies of sees.Defending Canterbury's primacyMorton twice became engaged in litigation at the court of Rome concerning the prerogatives of the church of Canterbury. During the vacancy of the see of Winchester in 14923, the archbishop received the revenues of two parish churches normally due to the bishop. His right so to do was disputed by the prior and convent of Winchester, to whom they had been paid in previous vacancies. The case dragged on before papal judges at Rome and in England for five years, until in 1499 a decision, not without ambiguity, was given in the archbishop's favour. In 1494 there erupted the first of two disputes between Morton and Bishop Richard Hill of London, who removed a probably unworthy prior of Holy Trinity, Aldgate, after he had appealed to the archbishop's court. Such contempt of Canterbury's jurisdiction could not be tolerated. Bishop Hill was only absolved from excommunication after the intervention of other bishops and his own complete submission, and only a few months later was the restored prior induced to resign, now that Canterbury's authority was no longer at stake. In the same year, however, Bishop Hill stood as champion of Canterbury's suffragans in his resistance to the archbishop's claim to have the right of granting probate when a testator left notable goods' in more than one diocese of the provincethe latest round of an ancient dispute which dated back to the late thirteenth century. The ensuing litigation at the papal curia, and its ramifications in England, was particularly acrimonious, and reached no definite conclusion before Bishop Hill's death in February 1496; but in essentials the prerogative testamentary jurisdiction of Canterbury was maintained by Morton, only to be challenged again later by the suffragans of Archbishop William Warham (d. 1532) in concert. They blamed Morton for the extension of Canterbury's claims, while in fact he had merely been defending rights long claimed, and long contested.

Morton, therefore, was profoundly conscious of the rights of his office and of his church of Canterbury, and because of his dominant position in the government of England was able to defend them more successfully than some of his predecessors. Yet, unlike Cardinal Wolsey a generation later, he was working within the traditional structure of the church in England, and there are no contemporary accusations against him of personal aggrandizement. His register contains evidence not only of the defence of Canterbury's rights, but also for an insistence on the collection of every penny due to the archbishop from vacant sees; but these vacancies were also the occasion of the most thorough visitations by Morton's highly competent deputies, and of the correction of faults among monks, clerks, and laity. The record of the sede vacante administration of Norwich diocese in 1499, in particular, is a model of efficient episcopal administration, and reveals the strength of the traditional church in England thirty years before the Reformation. Perhaps the best judgement on Morton's ecclesiastical policy is provided by Master John Harryngton, the proctor of the English Cistercians, who opposed his efforts to undermine their immunity, but obviously admired the archbishop: he had the qualities of a good judge, who wished to expand his jurisdiction; he was a man of learning and wisdom, devoted to the service of God and concerned for the public welfare rather than his own advantage in both ecclesiastical and secular matters; and he did not shrink from the heat and burden of the day.Cultural interestsMorton was certainly one of the great builders of the age. While bishop of Ely he rebuilt the episcopal palace at Hatfield and the castle at Wisbech, and he also had a great dyke cut through the fens from Peterborough to Wisbech, a pioneer effort in drainage. Later he apparently intended to initiate a similar project in Kent, and to construct a new haven at Thanet. At Canterbury it was certainly with his encouragement that the Angel steeple on the cathedral was completed, and fines levied for misconduct in various dioceses were earmarked for the repair of the metropolitical cathedral. In 1493 royal licence was granted for the impressing of stonecutters and bricklayers for a building programme on the manors of the church of Canterbury in Kent, Surrey, and Sussex. The most obvious results were the rebuilding of the palace at Croydon and the great brick gatehouse of Lambeth Palace. The sixteenth-century antiquary John Leland (d. 1552) also credited Morton with works at Maidstone, Allington Park, Charing, and Ford. At Oxford he repaired the canon-law school, and contributed to the rebuilding of St Mary's Church.

The few books whose ownership can be attributed to Morton reveal the range of his interestsnot only Roman, canon, and common law, but also Seneca's letters, and works on oratory and rhetoric. The humanist and papal collector Giovanni Gigli (d. 1498) dedicated to him a short tract on the canonization of saintsthis was surely connected with aborted plans to petition for the canonization of Archbishop Anselm (d. 1109) and Henry VI. In 1500 Morton financed the printing by Richard Pynson (d. 1530) of the missal according to the use of Sarum. An insight into his character is provided by Sir Thomas More (d. 1535), who as a boy had been in his household, and who was almost certainly provided by the archbishop with the details (if not a Latin text) for his History of Richard III. More describes his earliest patron as very learned, honourable in his conduct, and a man of great natural wit, as well as praising his political skills.

Morton's religious preoccupations and personal affections in his last years are reflected in his will. His accumulated estates were distributed to his nephews and to the cathedral church of Canterbury, where he was to be buried under a plain marble slab before Our Lady of the Undercroft. He made provision for masses to be celebrated for thirty years at Canterbury, Ely, and Bere Regis, and for the maintenance for the same period of thirty poor students at the universities, and he left 1000 marks for the needy sick. He also made bequests to Henry VII and to the king's mother, wife, and daughter. He died soon afterwards, at Knole, on 15 September 1500, during an outbreak of plague which also claimed four of his episcopal colleagues.

Christopher Harper-BillSources

The register of John Morton, archbishop of Canterbury, 14861500, ed. C. Harper-Bill, 12, CYS, 75, 78 (198791) · W. Campbell, ed., Materials for a history of the reign of Henry VII, 2 vols., Rolls Series, 60 (18737) · B. André, Historia regis Henrici septimi, ed. J. Gairdner, Rolls Series, 10 (1858) · Chancery records · St Thomas More, The history of King Richard III, ed. R. S. Sylvester (1963), vol. 2 of The Yale edition of the complete works of St Thomas More · The Anglica historia of Polydore Vergil, AD14851537, ed. and trans. D. Hay, CS, 3rd ser., 74 (1950) · C. Harper-Bill, Archbishop John Morton and the province of Canterbury, 14861500', Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 29 (1978), 121 · C. S. L. Davies, Bishop John Morton, the Holy See, and the accession of Henry VII', EngHR, 102 (1987), 230 · N. Pronay, The chancellor, the chancery and the council at the end of the fifteenth century', British government and administration: studies presented to S. B. Chrimes, ed. H. Hearder and H. R. Loyn (1974), 87103 · C. Harper-Bill, The familia, administrators and patronage of Archbishop John Morton', Journal of Religious History, 10 (19789), 23652 · J. Gairdner, ed., The historical collections of a citizen of London in the fifteenth century, CS, new ser., 17 (1876) [incl. Gregory's Chronicle] · C. Jenkins, Cardinal Morton's register', Tudor studies presented to A. F. Pollard, ed. R. W. Seton Watson (1924), 2674 · R. J. Knecht, The episcopate and the Wars of the Roses', University of Birmingham Historical Journal, 6/2 (1958), 10881 · Emden, Oxf. · W. F. Hook, Lives of the archbishops of Canterbury, 2nd edn, 12 vols. (186184) · C. E. Woodruff, ed., Sede vacante wills, Kent Archaeological Society Records Branch, 3 (1914), 8593 · muniments of dean and chapter, Canterbury Cathedral, register R, fol. 40

Archives

Canterbury Cathedral, archives, muniments of dean and chapter, register R, fol. 40 · LPL, register

Likenesses

line engraving (after tomb effigy), NPG · tomb effigy, Canterbury Cathedral [see illus.]

Wealth at death

see Woodruff, ed., Wills, Canterbury

© Oxford University Press 200415
All rights reserved: see legal notice

Christopher Harper-Bill, Morton, John (d. 1500)', Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004 [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/19363, accessed 16 June 2015]

John Morton (d. 1500): doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/19363

Back to top of biography

Site creditsAbout the IndexShow related linksSearch across all sources

Just a thought Eileen,as Edward died just a year before Anne would there have been time to plan and have a tomb for him by the time that Richard died? Maybe Richard did have plans for them to be buried together, but another thing that could spoil this theory would be his possible marriage to Juana and the possibility that he could have had more children We need a Tardis!!
Mary

Hallo Mary...this little Family were all dead within 18 months, son, mother and father. I do think it's very possible , certain even, that there were plans afoot to have a suitable place, mausoleum, for them to be interred together eventually as happened eventually with Richard's parents and brother Edmund. But of course these things took ages to bring to fruitition and time was the one thing that Richard run out of. After Bosworth, and Richard's hasty burial at Leicester, that was it,
As to Richard's second intended marriage.,,I don't think, possibly, that it would have had any bearing on any plans for a suitable tomb for Richard and Anne as there are quite a few examples of husbands, both noble and royal, ending up in tombs with monuments with their first wives...quickly off the top of my head Richard ll and his Anne, Wesmintster Abbey, spring to mind as does John of Gaunt and his first wife Blanche of Lancaster, old Paul's Cathedral. Some had tombs with one wife either side...there are really no hard and fast rules about tombs etc., I think they made it up as they went along...! Eileen

Mary 'We need a tardis'....What a brilliant idea...where's me dagger, stick of dynamite and bottle of poison! Eileen

I have them ready in my rucksack, Eileen! From: mailto: Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 11:11 AM To: Subject: Re: Re: Morton

Mary 'We need a tardis'....What a brilliant idea...where's me dagger, stick of dynamite and bottle of poison! Eileen

Just popping up to escape looking after 16 velvet paws (4 extra now)! It did strike me how similar were the careers of Morton and Stillington. Both were Oxford academics; Stillington was there a bit earlier than Morton (we think) but their paths could have crossed in Oxford in the mid 1440s. Both had significant connections with the West Country, both were career politicians from the 1450s onwards, as well as churchmen, and both were eminent lawyers. I really do wonder if they knew one another. One tends to forget that Stillington had been a favourite of Henry VI as well. Meant to come back on the theory that Hastings knew about the Pre-Contract (Jess, I think). It would explain a lot. Imagine Richard's reaction - intial disbelief, feeling of Hastings's betrayal of Edward and the HOY and then absolute hurt that Edward had confided in Hastings and not him. And Hastings would know that a Woodville king would be out to get him for revealing their earlier plotting, so letting the world know about the Pre-contract would save him. Had Richard behaved like Edward then he would have joyfully grasped the path to the throne. But Richard was Richard and reacted in an entirely different way and later regretted it when it proved to be the truth. Yes, it makes sense. H
From: "cherryripe.eileenb@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 17 June 2015, 11:11
Subject: Re: Re: Morton

Mary 'We need a tardis'....What a brilliant idea...where's me dagger, stick of dynamite and bottle of poison! Eileen

Hilary..velvet paws..I had eight now I have only four...heartbreak...
But back to Hastings...I have long believed that Hastings knew about the pre-contract...but I don't think that he let Richard in on it...I think others dropped him in it when they revealed the truth to Richard...obviously Stillington but I think Catesby was involved and he benefited in a big way from Hastings death..whereas I can see where Stillington was coming from I find Catesby's motives highly suspicious,,,this man was a turn coat no doubt about it...I think he turned his coat so many times he didn't know whether he was coming or going or meeting himself coming back...

re the Tardis..Excellent Sandra...who would be the first on our death list...?
I would also give Richard a motherly clip around the ear hole...what on earth were you thinking of..handing Morton over to Bucky...and MB over to her husband..Doh...of course I have the benefit of hindsight but even so? Did he really not have a clue?

Time to fill that vacancy Eileen! Ernie (he was found in a Lidl bag not a handbag) actually filled one of mine and yes, every time you lose one it's heartbreaking but if you've given them a good life ..... I've often wondered whether Catesby isn't a red herring in all this. You see although the Catesbys had obviously been confidantes of their clients for generations I don't know whether they'd risk it all with this. It wasn't the first time they'd enjoyed royal favour - they were very well in with Edward III and the Black Prince - and they must have known how fleeting it all was But - their lands were bang in the middle of the Empson/Bray/MB sheep enterprise zone So getting rid of Catesby might have been nothing to do with conspiracy and more to do with greed. In fact I don't doubt Catesby was land-greedy as well; you're right he must have rejoiced when Hastings got the chop. H
From: "cherryripe.eileenb@... []" <>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, 17 June 2015, 14:44
Subject: Re: Re: Morton

Hilary..velvet paws..I had eight now I have only four...heartbreak...
But back to Hastings...I have long believed that Hastings knew about the pre-contract...but I don't think that he let Richard in on it...I think others dropped him in it when they revealed the truth to Richard...obviously Stillington but I think Catesby was involved and he benefited in a big way from Hastings death..whereas I can see where Stillington was coming from I find Catesby's motives highly suspicious,,,this man was a turn coat no doubt about it...I think he turned his coat so many times he didn't know whether he was coming or going or meeting himself coming back...

Thanks for this Eileen, while I knew that some nobles were buried with both wives, I didn't realize that John of Gaunt was buried with Blanche. That put the dreadful Beauforts in their place!! I have just remembered that Cecily's mother, Joan Beaufort, chose to be buried with her mother Katherine Swynford and not Ralph Neville. Maybe he was buried with his first wife too.
Mary

ÿ Interesting point about Joan, as I was at Staindrop church (near Raby Castle) last week and Ralph Neville has a huge alabaster monument there with effigies of himself and two wives, namely Margaret Stafford and Joan Beaufort. Both women look exactly the same, so obviously stylised. The guide makes no mention as to whether any of them are actually buried there (I assume at least Ralph is) or if it is just an epitaph. It seems to be generally accepted that Joan was buried at Lincoln with Katherine, and I believe her wishes on this were documented? So we can safely say she is not in County Durham! Which makes the effigy at Staindrop very interesting indeed! If she's not there, why not just have Ralph and Margaret on the monument? Sharon ----- Original Message ----- From: maryfriend@... [] To: Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 8:45 PM Subject: Re: Re: Morton

Thanks for this Eileen, while I knew that some nobles were buried with both wives, I didn't realize that John of Gaunt was buried with Blanche. That put the dreadful Beauforts in their place!! I have just remembered that Cecily's mother, Joan Beaufort, chose to be buried with her mother Katherine Swynford and not Ralph Neville. Maybe he was buried with his first wife too.
Mary

ÿ It would seem that only Ralph is buried at Staindrop - Margaret Stafford was buried at nearby Brancepeth, County Durham. So the huge monument is only partly a tomb and mainly an epitaph. Cleared some of that up then! Sharon ----- Original Message ----- From: 'Sharon Feely' 43118@... [] To: Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 9:41 PM Subject: Re: Re: Morton

ÿ Interesting point about Joan, as I was at Staindrop church (near Raby Castle) last week and Ralph Neville has a huge alabaster monument there with effigies of himself and two wives, namely Margaret Stafford and Joan Beaufort. Both women look exactly the same, so obviously stylised. The guide makes no mention as to whether any of them are actually buried there (I assume at least Ralph is) or if it is just an epitaph. It seems to be generally accepted that Joan was buried at Lincoln with Katherine, and I believe her wishes on this were documented? So we can safely say she is not in County Durham! Which makes the effigy at Staindrop very interesting indeed! If she's not there, why not just have Ralph and Margaret on the monument? Sharon ----- Original Message ----- From: maryfriend@... [] To: Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2015 8:45 PM Subject: Re: [Richard III Society Forum] Re: Morton

Thanks for this Eileen, while I knew that some nobles were buried with both wives, I didn't realize that John of Gaunt was buried with Blanche. That put the dreadful Beauforts in their place!! I have just remembered that Cecily's mother, Joan Beaufort, chose to be buried with her mother Katherine Swynford and not Ralph Neville. Maybe he was buried with his first wife too.
Mary

Margaret was buried at Brancepeth, Co Durham in the chancel, with a remarkably beautiful wooden effigy, but virtually the entirety of Brancepeth Church was burnt down in 1999, and this effigy was lost. Ralph's monument in Staindrop used to be located centrally in the chancel as well, and was removed to the south-west corner of the church in the later Victorian period.