The Prince Bishops of Durham

Few places in England were ruled quite like medieval Durham. For the best part of 800 years the Bishop of Durham was not only a churchman but a Prince Bishop, wielding powers that elsewhere belonged only to the king. Understanding that is the key to understanding the city.

Kings in all but name

From 1075 the Bishops of Durham held the County Palatine of Durham, a jurisdiction where the bishop exercised rights normally reserved for the Crown. A Prince Bishop could raise his own army, hold his own courts, appoint his own sheriff and officers, levy taxes and even mint his own coins. Durham had its own chancery and law courts mirroring those of the king, was exempt from royal taxation, and was left out of the Domesday Book altogether.

Why Durham?

This extraordinary independence had a practical purpose: defending the northern frontier against the Scots. A powerful bishop on the spot, able to act quickly and pay for soldiers and castles, was worth more to a distant king than direct rule from London. The bishops maintained border fortresses such as Norham Castle, and Durham Castle itself was their stronghold and residence.

The men who shaped the city

Several Prince Bishops left their mark in stone. William of St Calais replaced the cathedral's clergy with Benedictine monks and began building the present cathedral in 1093. Hugh du Puiset, bishop for more than forty years in the twelfth century, added the cathedral's Galilee Chapel and built Elvet Bridge. Antony Bek, bishop from 1284, so successfully defended the palatinate's independence that its powers were formally recognised in 1293.

The end of an era

From the sixteenth century onwards the bishops' powers were steadily reduced, and they were finally abolished by the Durham (County Palatine) Act 1836, which passed their remaining rights to the Crown. The title Prince Bishop had gone, but its legacy is written across the city, in the castle, the cathedral and the very shape of County Durham.