A HISTORY OF DURHAM 



years that followed 1349 were in the Durham diocese given to repair and 

 restoration. Hatfield seems to have been solicitous for the spiritual welfare 

 of his flock. In 1353 he issued licence to Carmelite Friars, somewhat against 

 the custom of the diocese/^" to preach, and gave as his reason the wish ' that 

 there should be more preaching that the souls of the people might be fed.' 

 Frequent licences were given to friars and others to hear confessions."' In 

 1353 he served the rectors and vicars of churches with a monition respecting 

 the observance of festivals."* Six years later the condition of the cathedral 

 fabric engaged his attention, and in consequence of its dilapidated state 

 representatives were sent round to places more or less distant in order to 

 solicit contributions towards restoration."^ Soon after this the Neville 

 ornaments were added to the cathedral. But despite the general impoverish- 

 ment bishop and pope taxed the Palatinate unmercifully, until in 1378 the 

 king wrote to Hatfield forbidding him to extort further sums on behalf of 

 the pope."° 



Plague and defeat did not stop the Scottish incursions. They recur in 

 1377 and in 1380."^ In the former year the bishop was ordered to live 

 near the Scottish marches, and in the latter laymen were bidden to remain 

 on their lands where these were worth 100 marks. Traces of money-raising 

 on these occasions survive in the reo-isters."' Yet Hatfield and his officials 

 found time in these troublous years to foster the growth of Durham College, 

 which in one shape or other had existed in the University of Oxford since 

 1290, and under Hatfield received a more stable foundation."^ 



The comparatively peaceful years that fell between the battle of 

 Neville's Cross and the Scottish incursion just alluded to, were troubled by 

 a fresh outburst of the slumbering feud between York and Durham. In 

 1349 two of Hatfield's chaplains went to York Minster and made a dis- 

 graceful exhibition of themselves with some suspicion of Hatfield's conni- 

 vance."" There was further cause of affront in an attack upon the bishop of 

 Chrysopolis, suffragan to the archbishop, which was thought to have been 

 suggested by Hatfield."' In neither case was Hatfield's personal guilt estab- 

 lished, but the tales serve to show the jealousy that was never far off in the 

 relations of the archbishop of York and the bishop of Durham in the palmy 

 days of the Palatinate. Archbishop Neville who had family reasons for 

 desiring to depress the bishop asserted his right to visit, and this reappearance 

 of the old claim already described "^ was only dissipated by a repeated pro- 

 hibition from the king in 1376 and 1377. 



The prior and convent seem to have gained much in general prestige 

 and influence by the middle of the fourteenth century. Perhaps in part 

 from a dislike of too close proximity to the monks, the bishop, when in the 

 diocese, resided less and less in Durham. Auckland, Stockton, Middleham 



"^ Dur. Epis. Register, Hatfield. '"" Ibid. '" Ibid. 



'^^ Mention is made of application to Carlisle in Hist. MSS. Com. Rep. ix, App. i, 191. 



"^ Lapsley, op. cit. 298; cf. 274. The action of the bishop is all the more capricious in view of a com- 

 mission issued by him in 1358 to inquire concerning all oppressions, extortions, etc., committed by his own 

 officers. 



'" cf Cal. Pat. 1377-81, pp. 308, 606. "' Dur. Epis. Reg. Hatfield. 



"' An excellent sketch in Dean Kitchin's Ruskin at Oxford, and other Studies. 



"" The story is told in Northern Registers, 397-9. Can this outburst of blasphemy be due to the 

 general depression succeeding the pLigue ? 



'" Rymer, Foedera, iii (i), 389. "* Diet. Nat. Biog. 'Hatfield,' i^Sa. 



20 



