Soon after the Norman invasion, and shortly before 1069, the newly appointed Sheriff of Worcestershire, Urse d’Abitot, built a motte and bailey castle in the area south of the Cathedral, probably incorporating, if not replacing, the earlier defensive ditches which had ringed this end of the river terrace. The castle, initially probably of timber although later rebuilt in stone, annexed a large part of the monk’s cemetery to form its outer bailey, something which prompted Archbishop Aldred of York to curse ‘Hightest thou Urse? Have thou Godes kurs’.

This land was finally returned to the monks in 1217, although the dispute between castle and Priory was not ended until Henry III confirmed the Priory’s holding in 1232. While this was not the only property in the town and countryside acquired by the new Norman sheriff at the expense of the church, the impact of the Norman take-over on the town was significantly mitigated by the then bishop, Wulstan (later St. Wulfstan), who was held in the highest respect by both Saxon and Norman.

Wulfstan, who was appointed Bishop of Worcester in 1062, was the longest living Saxon bishop to stay in office following the Norman Conquest (he died in 1095), and having sworn allegiance to William the Conqueror he helped defend the castle and bridge at Worcester for William II during the rebellion of the Lords of the Marches (in favour of Duke Robert of Normandy). Florence of Worcester records that the rebels ‘burst into the province of Worcester, declaring that they would burn the city of Worcester, plunder the church of God and St. Mary.....Meanwhile the Normans, taking counsel, entreated the bishop to remove from the church to the castle, saying that his presence would give them more security if they should be in greater peril: for they loved him much’. Of course the church stood as much to loose from this rebellion as did the Norman sheriff, and this incident serves to highlight both Worcester’s strategic importance and the extent of Wulfstan’s political influence. While the city’s later commercial success might have been guaranteed by its strategic position, there is little doubt that the prestige accruing to the Cathedral and city through Wulfstan’s life and works helped Worcester become the most important ecclesiastical centre in the West Midlands during the medieval period.

Between 1084-89 Wulfstan rebuilt the Cathedral, on the site of St Marys, noting ‘We miserable people have destroyed the work of saints, pompously thinking we can do better; how much more eminent than us was St Oswald who built this church; how many holy men of religion have served God in it’. Wulfstan’s grand Romanesque cathedral was constructed in a mixture of pale Cotswold Limestone and green Highley sandstone, and was probably whitewashed inside and out (some fragments of this building still survive within the present Cathedral, including part of the crypt). This building would have made an imposing sight in its strategic position on the east bank promontory, its Close bounded on the north by Bishops Street (now part of Deansway) and Lich Street (now beneath the Lychgate centre, the name referring to one of the main medieval gateways into the Close), to the east by Sidbury (now Friar Street), and with the Norman castle as uneasy neighbours on the south side. As part of this project Wulstan increased the monastic community from 12 to 50 (in 1104 this number had reached 61), most of whom would have held property (messuages) within the town to support the monastic community. Wulfstan, who was the first Bishop of Worcester to live outside the Priory, may have lived within a building whose surviving pre-13th century elements are still visible in the hall built by Bishop Giffard (1268-1302), in the north-western part of the close, which became the Bishop’s Palace. This building was later extended in the 15th century, and survives today within the shell of an early 18th century building constructed by Bishop Hough.

While the Domesday Book records only 141 holdings in the city (of which 5 belonged to Evesham Abbey), indicating a lay population of c.700, this is almost certainly an inaccurate summary - Droitwich had 150 holdings registered - and other documentary evidence suggests a more likely figure of c.2000. At this time only the King, the Bishop, tenants-in-chief (for example marcher lords like Ralph de Toeni and Earl Roger of Shrewsbury), or important sub-tenants of rural estates, would have owned land in the city, with the Bishop being the most influential landowner. The most valuable land would have been along the High Street market area, with rental values for land generally in the city varying from 4d. to 2s.(the annual rent for one group of 88 houses being just over 2s. 1d.). By 1170 rental incomes had increased substantially, with a holding of 12 houses netting 4s. 6d at this time.

While the city boundaries had still to be defined by a city wall during this early post-Conquest period, there is some evidence to suggest that settlement spread outside the northern line of the old Saxon defences (which were probably levelled at this time) into the area of the present Cornmarket, and northwards along Foregate Street (the northerly continuation of the High Street). By the late 12th century the churches of St Martin (Trinity Street) and St Nicholas (The Cross) had certainly become established in these areas, suggesting that their suburban parishes had already started to form at this time. A further suburb developed between Newport Street and Dolday down towards the river bridge, with the church of St Clement (founded c.1164) on the waterfront on the north side of this (the church was demolished in 1823, its present namesake now on the west bank of the river on Henwick Road). By 1268 the church of St Michael in Bedwardine had been established in the north-eastern part of the Close as a cemetery chapel to the Cathedral, indicating that by this time a relatively large lay community were living within it - until the 19th century, however, subject to the authority of the church not the civic administration - although the church never took root in the town and was later demolished (the fate also of a Victorian successor, built in 1842, whose existence is now marked only by the gravestones of its churchyard).