Anger at plans to sell Bishop of Durham's castle and treasures
Four of the 12 Zurbaran paintings displayed at Auckland Castle. Their sale could raise £20m.
It's been the seat of the bishops of Durham for 800 years, but Auckland Castle and some of its most precious contents could be put up for sale.
First came the news that the Castle's 12 famous Zurbaran paintings were going to be sold by the Church of England.
And this week it emerged that the Castle could also be on the market.
The Church Commissioners say they have to look at ways of raising funds in tough times.
They say the sale of the paintings alone (potentially £20m) will raise enough to employ ten clergy for their entire working lives.
Some commissioners also believe it's no longer appropriate or affordable to maintain Auckland Castle as a Bishop's residence in the 21st Century.
The sale of that, potentially as a hotel or flats, could raise many millions.
Sounds like sensible business, but some have accused the Church Commissioners of cultural vandalism, and of destroying County Durham's heritage.
Durham County Council has already acted to try and stop the sale of the paintings by claiming the Church would need planning permission to remove them from a Grade I listed building.
And the Bishop Auckland MP, Helen Goodman, was forthright on the Politics Show today about her opposition to the sale of both paintings and castle.
Many locals have been upset by what they see as an underhand approach by the Church.
The seat of the Bishops of Durham for 800 years, but Auckland Castle could become a hotel.
The Castle is currently unoccupied as a replacement Bishop of Durham has yet to be appointed following the retirement of the previous incumbent the Rt Rev Tom Wright.
The Church's critics accuse them of taking advantage of that to sell them before the public had a chance to protest.
The former Bishop is certainly not somebody who would have kept quiet about plans to sell the artworks had he still been in office.
I can remember him being particularly keen to be interviewed with a Zurbaran in the background because he was so proud of the pictures.
And he has said he's dismayed by the plans.
Of course, spectacular as the pictures are, are the Spanish artist's portraits of Jacob and his sons some will question whether they are really an integral part of the North East's heritage?
They've been hung in the Castle for 250 years, and can be seen by the public, but the Commissioners argue that it's not up to the Church to maintain them.
They could of course be bought for the nation, but they could also be snapped up by a private collector, or end up overseas, and disappear from view.
What of the sale of the Castle though?
It will be controversial if it goes ahead, and it will anger many in County Durham.
But it's not the first property to be put up for sale by the Church.
Rose Castle, the historic residence of the Bishops of Carlisle, is already on the market.
But it is an important part of County Durham's history. Would it feel quite so special as a hotel?
Nevertheless, it seems any building has to pay its way in the 21st Century, so some plan will have to be hatched to find a way of maintaining it.
That may be doubly difficult at a time when councils and public bodies like English Heritage are also short of money.
But at least now these plans have gone public, that debate can take place before anything is sold.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~30~RS~)
I'm Richard Moss, the BBC's Political Editor for the North East and Cumbria. Welcome to my irreverent - but hopefully insightful - northern take on reporting politics for Look North and the Politics Show.
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Good news, it's about time the C of E sold it's massive store of wealth and stopped using the church collections to insure and maintain palaces and art wealth. Christianity is not about accumulating wealth it's about reaching out into the community with love and practical help.
Complain about this comment
Betweem this lot and the Tories, there'll be nothing left for our children. Shameful.
Complain about this comment
How about the leting building for cultural, educational or privat use? Nobody want to use it?
Complain about this comment
What the article doesn't reflect is that there is also a strong push from the art establishment to have these paintings kept in this country...but shipped down to London. Richard Moss questions whether "the Spanish artist's portraits of Jacob and his sons...are really an integral part of the North East's heritage". Well, they're as integral as the work of the Italian artist Titian which the country paid £50 million to keep in the UK just two years ago.
Complain about this comment
I tell you what, why not just sell off all the UK's family jewels and not leave anything at all for future generations? I don't understand why people have become so unaware of heritage, culture, national pride. Most people understand the need to safeguard the environment for the future - historical heritage is no different - other countries treasure this and let's be honest it's a huge source of income to this country. Even if we as a nation don't value these things, other nations who visit us certainly appreciate it.
Could it be that we no longer teach history and heritage properly and younger generations just don't get it any more?
And to RatMan - the C of E is certainly not as wealthy as some religions - this is not a religious argument - it's about heritage and pride in how this country was built - maybe if that was appreciated more, people would be more protective of it - once it's lost, there's no going back.
Complain about this comment
Why should the regular congregations of the Church of England act as Museum Funders when there is far more important work to be done. By all means let there be heritage, but let those who want Heritage pay for it.
Complain about this comment
Thanks for all your comments so far. Clearly an issue that divides people.
Fair point on the Titian, Teessidemag. We don't though have anyone like the Scottish government to campaign on the Zurbarans. I suppose what I was saying is that unlike the Lindisfarne Chronicles, there's no local significance to the Zurbarans other than they've been here for 250 years.
Gaiusgrossus, the local MP Helen Goodman wants the Church to find ways of making the paintings and castle pay its way, but how feasible that is I'm not sure. Could the Castle be run as purely a visitor attraction and pay its way? Possibly, but I'm guessing it would need major investment to stand a chance.
Anyone else out there with any ideas, please post.
Complain about this comment
Not ancient treasures.
More like almost up to date technology.
Why oh why are people not leading a song and dance about the way that the Redcar steelworks AKA Teesside Cast Products - TCP, is about to be sold off to the Thais?
It does not matter that the technology is getting on a bit.
What matters is the way that it is operated.
Tata bought Corus but did not really need TCP. When the TCP market disappeared they closed them down. A year later SSI come on the scene wanting to buy TCP. One has to question their motives. Do they really want TCP merely to produce steel that has to be shipped to the other side of the world?
I rather doubt that existing European steel producers would like a new grant aided competitor gaining access to their market. So will the grants depend on the Thais only selling steel into the Thai marketplace?
If so then we will have the strange situation where iron ore, coal and perhaps limestone is shipped into Redcar to be processed into iron and then steel and then shipped out to Thailand. All the time competing against Indian companies doing the exact same thing except their furnaces are in cheap labour areas like India. So the Thais want the UK government to give training grants. So that who exactly can be trained up? The existing, recently laid off, workforce? A cheaper new workforce on minimum wage? How about bringing in SSI managers that will sit in with the new workforce and be trained up at the same time? All grant aided.
And what will the Thais do with their newly acquired knowledge?
Open a steel works in Thailand perhaps?
They will have had the opportunity to measure everything, get the drawings, find out how it works, get trained up on running it. Grant aided no less.
One thing amazes me however: why is Indian owned Tata allowing it?
The UK government giving away the Redcar family jewels does not surprise me.
Puts a few pictures into perspective however...
The steel and heavy industry sales have been going on for years.
Funny isn't it how Americans are used to facilitate the sell offs?
Complain about this comment
Thanks prudeboy,
I take your point, although it does have to be pointed out that the Thai company is about to buy the steelworks from an Indian company!
Richard
Complain about this comment
Richard,
Indeed SSI is a Thai company and Tata is Indian.
Corus was a merger between Hoogovens a Dutch company and British Steel which had been privatized in 1988 by Thatcher.
Look closer however.
Now it seems that Corus was carrying a fair amount of debt when it was bought by Tata in 2007. And surprise surprise Tata took on $12.9 billion debt when it bought Corus.
And guess what? Tata was busy restructuring this debt when SSI came along wanting to buy TCP in August 2010. Pushing on an open door.
Now this is where it gets mildly interesting. SSI is going to have to borrow money, get into debt, in order to buy TCP from Corus.
And who is advising SSI? Our old friends the Royal Bank of Scotland. RBS.
So just who actually owns TCP at the moment? Presumably some anonymous bank.
But RBS is busy advising SSI how best to purchase TCP.
Yes the very bank that has just got stuffed in Ireland.
And it only gets better. Who owns RBS? Yep you got it - we do - the UK taxpayers have bailed out RBS.
Puts a different gloss on who is actually about to own TCP.
Has the UK taxpayer owned TCP all along?
Look upon the UK steel industry as a big football club. People come in and leverage a buy out. They borrow money that the industry has to pay back.
When everything goes wrong the bank ends up with the equity. And then the bank fails. You and me the UK taxpayer then owns the bank and its debts.
The question I have to ask is would it not have been better to keep the industry nationalized? That way inefficiencies would have been transparent and far far less than allowing the bankers to run amok. How far would the banker bailout monies have gone if they were simply spent on the UK steel industry?
But no. The bankers want a new owner. What the banker wants the banker gets..
Who is it that is running the country?
Complain about this comment
As regards Auckland Castle and its ancient possessions, the Church Commissioners should look more to the better economy of the church.
In past years this has been grossly mishandled and much wealth has been lost through poor investment.
The "Dioceses Commission" should then look to the present number of Bishops and revert to the number in 1818 when 21 was quite adequate to deal with all the little heads coming forward for confirmation. Later in the century there were more and more and new Bishopricks had to be created.
They are now no longer needed.
Then go back to 1818 and 21 Bishops.
The newer churches are not well attended so sell them off or lease them out. That's what they do with empty cinemas.
Shrink the parishes to one church covering a larger area, as existed 200 years ago.
Auckland Castle cannot be a hotel. Few people come to stay in Bishop Auckland anyway so it would be a waste of someone's money.
Before making any further remarks from far away, interested parties should go and look at Auckland Castle and see why we in Durham, the ancient Palatinate County of Durham, wish to keep our heritage and ancient buildings. They were built after all for the protection of the rest of the country from the frequently invading Scots.
That is why Durham was a "Palatinate Bishop" since William the Conqueror created him an Earl and as the Prince Bishop had the Palatinate powers (of the Palace)with his own Army, Navy, own Laws and Law Courts, to keep the frontier secure for centuries without bothering the King.
Auckland Palace is the 900 year old home of the Bishops of Durham and should remain so.
Durham was always important and deserves special respect.
But DON'T flog off the family silver!
Those Zurbaran paintings belong to Durham.
No money? Eric Pickles says Durham has 92.9 million pounds saved. And all in all the North-east Councils have 10 Billion pounds in savings. It should be used before it depreciates further. "Money should make money" so let some of this be invested in both sensible worthwhile Capital projects and in Works of Art which will always retain their value.
Complain about this comment
The paintings were commissioned by the Catholic Church. They were stolen (by pirates) and the stolen goods were bought by the then Bishop for less than £200. At the end of the day there was a dealing in stolen goods. Perhaps they should be returned to the rightful owners free of charge?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS