Bishoprics directly dependent on the Holy See were usually referred to in historiography as exempt bishoprics (exemte). In Polish historical literature, this problem had practical significance, especially in relation to the legal status of the first two Polish bishoprics. Historians take two different positions on this issue. Some consider Jordan and Unger to be missionary bishops ("episcopus gentium"), others to be diocesan bishops with the privilege of dismissal. Although this problem has not been unknown to previous historiography, a serious lack of existing studies is the fact that the mentioned group of bishoprics is considered in terms of legal exemptions - this problem seems to be detached from the general process of shaping the territorial church organization in the Middle Ages. Should we talk about exempt bishoprics or rather about bishoprics directly dependent on the Holy See? The term "episcopus exemptus", very rarely used in canonists' commentaries, began to be widely used in legal literature only in the second half of the 19th century. It does not appear in papal documents at all. The papal curia has long used the name "episcopi immediate subiecti Sanctae Sedi" to designate a diocese that is unofficially called "exempt". The long tradition of the papal curia is proof that it never wanted to equate the dismissal of the monastery with the diocese's subordination directly to the pope. The latter, i.e. "immediation", was treated as a completely different legal category. The term "immediate subiecti" appeared in church terminology as early as the 8th century. It came from Roman administrative law, where it meant provinces or areas that were directly subordinated to the emperor or the highest official, without the use of intermediaries. The "immediation" of a diocese therefore meant excluding it from the jurisdiction of the appropriate metropolitan or establishing a diocese without subordinating it to the metropolis. The Pope then served as metropolitan, and the administrators of such a diocese were considered suffragans of the Roman province, obliged to participate in Roman synods. If the area of the diocese was too remote from Rome, the bishop could choose the nearest metropolis in order to fulfill his obligation to participate in metropolitan synods. The evolution of the forms of church management in the West, the change in the nature of the jurisdiction of metropolitans, restrictions on the functions of church provinces - all these were important moments that in the Middle Ages determined the creation of directly dependent bishoprics. The most important thing, however, was that the Holy See took over the management of the process of Christianization of European countries that were previously pagan. A classic example of this is the Christianization of England. Also, the apostles of Germanic tribes, such as Willibrord and Boniface, were suffragans of the Pope at the beginning of their activity. Examples of the subordination of bishops in distant countries to the direct jurisdiction of the Pope have been known since the end of the 6th century. The right of Rome and other patriarchal capitals to use such organizational solutions resulted from the council's legislation, which authorized patriarchs to exercise "management over the Churches in barbarian countries." Directly dependent bishoprics can be considered unique forms of church organization, used wherever traditional structures could not be established. According to medieval sources, the number of such dioceses ranged from 33 to 55, which constituted approximately 5.5% of all suffragan dioceses in Europe at that time.