The circumstances of John Fisher's death have impeded the study of his life in three ways. Firstly, his execution as a leading opponent of the Henrician ecclesiastical revolution has disposed historians of a Whiggish disposition to classify him without much more ado as a conservative medieval churchman. Accordingly they pass over his career as possessing little significance for the march of progress. The insidious influence of Whiggery largely explains the continuing marginalisation of Fisher even in the most recent accounts of the early Tudor period. Secondly, obsession with the martyrdom has introduced an extraordinary imbalance in the treatment of Fisher's career within the Catholic historiographical tradition. The near contemporary early Life set the trend, devoting two thirds of its pages to the last eight years of the bishop's career, the period of his struggle against the royal divorce and the royal ecclesiastical supremacy. That pattern has continued to characterise biographical studies of Fisher: the tail wags the dog – if the metaphor does not seem inappropriate to the circumstances. The career is passed over as quickly as may be; only the extraordinary episode at the end is treated with the scholarly respect that the whole deserves. Thirdly, the incidental association of Fisher in death with Thomas More, the most beguiling of all Catholic martyrs, has proved a distraction. From the beginning, historical interest in the two has been totally disproportionate. As is well known, a ‘More industry’ began to form in the aftermath of More's death in the circle of his highly talented humanist household. It continues to flourish. By contrast the publication of works by or about Fisher has always been desultory.