CONTENTS.
| PAGE | |
| Preface | [v] |
| CHAPTER I. | |
| THE RISE OF THE UNIVERSITY. | |
| Mythical origin of the University—Early Schools of Oxford—Intellectualrevival of the twelfth century—Lectures ofVacarius, and first germs of the University—Connection ofOxford with the University of Paris—Recognition of thescholars by the Papal Legate after the riot of 1209—Officeof Chancellor—University chests, and sources of revenue inthe thirteenth century—Rise of Halls—Early Universitycharters | [1] |
| CHAPTER II. | |
| THE EARLY COLLEGES. | |
| Rise of Colleges—Foundation of University and Balliol—Foundationof Merton College—Merton College, Statutes of, 1274—Socialposition, manners, and academical life of earlystudents—‘Chamber-dekyns’—Street brawls and disorders—Superiorityof colleges in discipline and tuition | [15] |
| CHAPTER III. | |
| PROGRESS OF THE UNIVERSITY IN THE | |
| FOURTEENTH CENTURY. | |
| Europe in the fourteenth century—Social condition of the University—Intellectualvigour of the University—Foundationof Exeter, Oriel, Queen’s, and Canterbury Colleges—Foundationof New College—European influence of Oxford in thefourteenth century—Rise of Wyclif—Career of Wyclif—Feudbetween Northern and Southern ‘nations’—Earlysecessions to Cambridge and Northampton—Secession toStamford in 1333—Growth of the proctorial authority—Concessionby the Pope of freedom in the election of the Chancellor | [27] |
| CHAPTER IV. | |
| CONFLICTS BETWEEN THE UNIVERSITY AND THE CITY. | |
| Royal award of 1290—Riot of 1297 and agreement of 1298—Greatriot of 1354—Interdict and penance—New chartergranted by the King | [43] |
| CHAPTER V. | |
| THE MONKS AND FRIARS AT OXFORD. | |
| Benedictines and Augustinians—Rise of Mendicant Orders—Claustralschools—Migration from Paris and influence ofRobert Grostete—Position of the friars at Oxford, and Universitystatutes against them—Intervention of the Pope andthe King | [48] |
| CHAPTER VI. | |
| THE UNIVERSITY IN THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. | |
| Decline in numbers and studies—University delegates at theCouncils of Constance and Basle—Foundation of Lincolnand All Souls’ Colleges—Extension of University buildings;the Divinity School and the Bodleian Library—Finalorganisation of mediæval lectures and examinations—Universitycurriculum—Statute of 1431, regulating ‘inception’—Dutiesof regent masters—Residence for degrees in thehigher faculties | [55] |
| CHAPTER VII. | |
| THE RENAISSANCE, THE REFORMATION, AND | |
| THE TUDOR PERIOD. | |
| Revival of academical life at the end of the fifteenth century—Checkedby the Reformation—Pioneers of the new learningat Oxford—Erasmus, More, Colet, Grocyn, and Linacre—Foundationof Corpus Christi College by Bishop Fox—Greeksand Trojans—Cardinal Wolsey and the foundationof Christ Church—Action of the University on the questionsof the Divorce and the Royal Supremacy—Compliance ofthe University rewarded by royal favour—The first effectsof the Reformation injurious to the University—IconoclasticVisitation under Edward VI.—Leniency towards colleges—Reactionunder Mary. Martyrdom of Ridley, Latimer, andCranmer—Visitation and reforms of Cardinal Pole—Foundationof Trinity and St. John’s Colleges | [68] |
| CHAPTER VIII. | |
| REIGN OF ELIZABETH AND CHANCELLORSHIP | |
| OF LEICESTER. | |
| Visitation under Elizabeth and policy of Archbishop Parker—Chancellorshipof Leicester—Changes in the government ofthe University—Leicester’s administration of the University—Depressionof intellectual life in the University—Encouragementof study by Elizabeth, and foundation of theBodleian Library—Increasing refinement of academical life—QueenElizabeth’s two visits to Oxford—Pestilences anddisturbances in the sixteenth century | [87] |
| CHAPTER IX. | |
| THE UNIVERSITY UNDER JAMES I. | |
| The University patronised by James I.—James I.’s attitudetowards the University and the Church—Rise and influenceof Laud—Completion of the ‘Schools,’ and foundation ofWadham and Pembroke Colleges | [100] |
| CHAPTER X. | |
| THE UNIVERSITY UNDER CHARLES I. AND LAUD. | |
| Parliament at Oxford—Chancellorship of Laud—Compilation ofLaudian statutes—Main provisions of the Laudian statutes—Studiesand examinations under the Laudian statutes—Servicesof Laud to the University—Last five years ofLaud’s chancellorship—Eminent members of the Universityin the generation preceding the Civil Wars—University lifein the generation preceding the Civil Wars | [107] |
| CHAPTER XI. | |
| THE UNIVERSITY DURING THE CIVIL WARS AND THE | |
| SIEGE OF OXFORD. | |
| The University sides with the King and the Church—The Commonsissue an order for the University—Contributions forthe King’s service, and first occupation of Oxford by Parliamentarytroops—Oxford becomes the royal head-quarters—Aspectof the University during the Queen’s residence—Thelast two years of the civil war—Siege of Oxford, and proposalsof Fairfax guaranteeing University privileges—Surrenderof Oxford, and subsequent condition of the University | [122] |
| CHAPTER XII. | |
| THE PARLIAMENTARY VISITATION AND THE | |
| COMMONWEALTH. | |
| Measures preparatory to the Visitation—Appointment of theVisitors and the Standing Committee of Parliament—Earlyproceedings of the Visitors, and suppression of resistancefrom the University—Visitation of colleges. Submissionsand expulsions—Reception of Fairfax and Cromwell—SecondBoard of Visitors—Third Board of Visitors, and conclusionof the Visitation—State of the University on therecovery of its independence | [138] |
| CHAPTER XIII. | |
| THE PERIOD BETWEEN THE RESTORATION AND | |
| THE REVOLUTION. | |
| The Restoration and new Visitation of the University—Extensionof University buildings. Sheldonian Theatre—Growthof æsthetic tastes and social refinement—First visit ofCharles II.—Second visit of Charles II. Parliament assembledand dissolved at Oxford—Doctrine of passive resistanceadopted by the University. Expulsion of Locke—Conductof the University on the outbreak of Monmouth’srebellion. James II.’s treatment of Magdalen College | [151] |
| CHAPTER XIV. | |
| UNIVERSITY POLITICS BETWEEN THE REVOLUTION | |
| AND THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE III. | |
| Attitude of the University towards the Revolution. Visit ofWilliam III.—Origin of Oxford Jacobitism. Visit of QueenAnne—Popularity of Sacheverell. Position of the Whigminority—Jacobite demonstrations. A troop of horse sentto Oxford—The Constitution Club. Government scheme forreforming the University—Gradual decline of Jacobitismin Oxford during the reign of George II.—Revival of loyaltyafter the accession of George III.—His visits to Oxford | [162] |
| CHAPTER XV. | |
| UNIVERSITY STUDIES IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. | |
| Decay of University education in the eighteenth century—Contemporaryevidence—Decline in numbers and dearth ofeminence in science and literature—Counter-evidence showingthat education and learning were not wholly neglected | [174] |
| CHAPTER XVI. | |
| THE UNIVERSITY DURING THE REIGNS OF GEORGE III. | |
| AND GEORGE IV. | |
| Stagnation of University legislation in the eighteenth century—Statutesaffecting the University—Political sympathies ofthe University after the outbreak of the French Revolution—Accessionsto professoriate in the eighteenth century—Architecturalimprovements—Effects of the French warupon the University.—Opposition to reforms—Reception ofthe Allied Sovereigns.—Abolition of the Mayor’s Oath | [183] |
| CHAPTER XVII. | |
| OXFORD STUDIES AND EXAMINATIONS IN THE | |
| NINETEENTH CENTURY. | |
| Examination statute of 1800, and later amendments—Examinationstatute of 1850, and later amendments—UniversityCommission of 1850—Act of 1854 and new College Ordinances—Effectof these reforms—Abolition of Universitytests—Local examinations, and board for examination ofpublic schools—Commission of inquiry (1872) and Act of1876—Commission of 1877—Character of last reforms | [191] |
| CHAPTER XVIII. | |
| THE NEO-CATHOLIC REVIVAL, KNOWN AS THE ‘OXFORD | |
| MOVEMENT.’ | |
| Character of the ‘Oxford Movement’—A reaction against therising tide of Liberalism—Oriel the centre of the Movement—JohnHenry Newman—Origin of ‘Tracts for the Times’—Associationformed—Newman assumes the lead—Spreadand objects of the movement.—Publication of Tract XC.—Collapseof Tractarianism, and secession of Newman—The‘Hampden Controversy’—Proceedings against Pusey andWard—Effect of the ‘Oxford Movement’—Controversy onthe endowment of the Greek Professorship.—Defeat of Mr.Gladstone in 1865 | [204] |
| CHAPTER XIX. | |
| THE UNIVERSITY IN 1886. | |
| Reign of Queen Victoria—State of the University on theQueen’s accession—Influence of recent changes—Presentcharacter of the University | [217] |
| INDEX | [223] |
THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD.
CHAPTER I.
THE RISE OF THE UNIVERSITY.
Mythical origin of the University
The University of Oxford has long ceased to claim the fabulous antiquity for which its mediæval champions had contended, as for an article of faith, and which found credit with so conscientious an historian as Anthony Wood. It is now admitted that nothing is certainly known of its origin, and that its alleged foundation by Alfred the Great rests upon a tradition which cannot be traced back to a period beyond the fourteenth century. There is no evidence whatever to show that any germ of a University, much less that any college, existed at Oxford in the reign of Alfred, who was born in the neighbouring town of Wantage. The very contrary may reasonably be inferred from the negative fact that Asser, in his contemporary biography of Alfred, makes no allusion to his supposed institution of ‘schools’ at Oxford, though he amply attests his paternal zeal for English education. The early chroniclers are, without exception, equally silent on the subject, which is noticed by no extant writer before the age of Edward III. In the next reign, the primary myth—for so we must regard it—was developed into a secondary myth, attributing to Alfred the foundation of University College, and this imaginary pretension was actually advanced by that college in the course of a lawsuit. Meanwhile, the simpler tradition of Alfred’s connection with the University Schools was repeated by author after author in days when the very nature of historical proof was unknown, and was reinforced in the sixteenth century by the insertion of a spurious passage into the work of Asser. It has been reserved for the present century to recognise the plain truth that we are entirely ignorant of the first stage in the growth of the University, and that its name is never mentioned in history before the Norman Conquest.
Early schools of Oxford
The silence of Domesday Book respecting the University of Oxford must be taken as presumptive, though by no means conclusive, proof that it had no corporate existence at that date. Much learning has been spent in speculations on its origin and primitive constitution, but these speculations have little support in any facts historically known to us before the Norman Conquest. It is more than probable, however, that Oxford was already a resort of students and a place of education. Having been a residence of Edmund Ironside, Canute, and Harold I., as well as the seat of several National Councils, it was now recognised as a provincial capital by the erection of its castle, embracing within it the Collegiate Church of St. George; while the number of its monastic establishments would naturally attract poor scholars from all parts of England. The earliest schools, not in England only but throughout Europe, were attached to monasteries or cathedrals; and, in the absence of any contrary evidence, analogy almost compels us to regard the Church as the foster-mother of the University. In the ‘claustral’ schools of St. Frideswide, and the houses in Oxford belonging to abbeys, such as those of Abingdon and Eynsham, we may discern the original seminaries of academical teaching—the first rudiments of the Studium Generale, afterwards developed into the Universitas Literaria. On the other hand, it is certain that, side by side with these claustral schools, secular or lay schools were gradually opened—some boarding-schools, mainly designed for the reception of boys from the country, others mere classrooms frequented by the students who lodged either in private dwellings or in public hostels. It appears that before long the secular outnumbered the claustral schools, and became centred in a particular quarter of the city, stretching northward from the west end of St. Mary’s Church, afterwards known as School Street, and said to have existed in the year 1109. We may surmise with some confidence that in the infancy of the University its lecturers were almost exclusively clerks, but too often scholastic adventurers of mean attainments, whose lessons rose little above the barest elements of knowledge. But all theories of its rudimentary organisation are purely conjectural. ‘The Schools of Oxford’ first emerge into history in the next century, when they really attained a national celebrity, soon eclipsing those of Canterbury, Winchester, Peterborough, and others, which may have rivalled them in earlier times.
Intellectual revival of the twelfth century
The twelfth century, the golden age of feudalism and the Crusades, was also marked by a notable movement of thought and revival of speculative activity. The culture and science which had long found a home at Cordova now began to diffuse themselves over Western Europe, and the works of Avicenna introduced a curious relish for Aristotle’s ‘Natural Philosophy,’ which veiled itself in mysticism to escape ecclesiastical censure. The old scholastic Trivium of grammar, logic, and rhetoric, with the mathematical Quadrivium, comprising arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and music, still constituted the magic circle of ‘Arts’ in the mediæval sense. But the ‘sciences,’ as they were then called, of physics, Roman law, and systematic theology, if not medicine, were now claiming a place in the curriculum of education; and valuable histories, in the form of chronicles, were compiled in several English monasteries. That age cannot be called intellectually barren which produced Lanfranc, Anselm, Abelard, Bernard, Peter the Lombard, Averroes, Gratian, and Maimonides. The University of Bologna, with its School of Law, opened by Irnerius under imperial patronage, was among the first fruits of this mediæval renaissance. The cultivation of Roman jurisprudence is usually dated from the discovery of a copy of the Pandects at the capture of Amalfi in 1135, but it cannot have been wholly unknown at an earlier period, since the religious orders had been forbidden by a Papal mandate to study it. The lectures of Irnerius, however, apparently preceding the capture of Amalfi, methodised and popularised the new learning, which spread rapidly through Western Europe.
Lectures of Vacarius, and first germs of the University
There is historical evidence of Vacarius, a professor from Bologna, having commenced lectures in civil law at Oxford, under the patronage of Archbishop Theobald, about 1149, in the reign of Stephen, by whom they were prohibited for a while at the instance of teachers interested in philosophy and theology. This is the earliest well-ascertained event in the academical life of Oxford, but it may safely be inferred that if Vacarius came from Italy to lecture in the schools of Oxford, those schools had already attained something like a European reputation, and were fitted to become the germ of an University.[1] We have the positive testimony of John of Salisbury, who had studied at Paris, that Oxford, just before the accession of Henry II., was engrossed by logical controversies about the nature of Universals. Yet this concourse of eager students apparently possessed no chartered rights. There is no sufficient ground for the assertion that Henry I. was educated at Oxford, and granted some important privileges to the so-called ‘University;’ but we know that he lived much both at Oxford and at Woodstock, that he built the palace of Beaumont on the north of the city, and that he demised to its corporation the fee farm of the city for the annual rent of sixty-three pounds. Nor can it be proved, as it has been alleged, that, having sunk again to a low ebb under Stephen and Henry II., it was revived by the judicious patronage of Richard I., himself born at Beaumont. On the other hand, starting from the fact that the Oxford schools attracted a professor from Italy in the reign of Stephen, we are justified in believing that they could scarcely have escaped the notice of Henry I., who earned a name for scholarship in that unlettered era, and is said to have ‘pleased himself much with the conversation of clerks;’ or of Stephen, who twice held Councils at Oxford; or of Henry II., who, like his grandfather, constantly resided in the immediate neighbourhood. Without the encouragement of the Crown as well as of the Church, they could not have attained the position which they clearly occupied before the end of the twelfth century. By this time Oseney Abbey had been founded, and had annexed the church of St. George within the Castle. Both of these religious houses served as lodgings for young scholars, who contributed to swell the number of Oxford students. It is true that we have no trace of academical endowments, or of royal charters recognising the Oxford schools, in the twelfth century. But we are informed on good authority that Robert Pullen (or Pulleyne), author of the Sententiarum Libri Octo, and for some years a student at Paris, delivered regular courses of lectures on the Scriptures at Oxford some years before the visit of Vacarius. More than a generation later, in the year 1186 or 1187, Giraldus Cambrensis, having been despatched to Ireland by Henry II. as companion of Prince John, publicly read at Oxford his work on the Topography of Ireland. According to his own account, ‘not willing to hide his candle under a bushel, but to place it on a candlestick, that it might give light to all, he resolved to read it publicly at Oxford, where the most learned and famous of the English clergy were at that time to be found.’ These recitations lasted three successive days, and the lecturer has left it on record that he feasted not only ‘all the doctors of the different faculties and such of their pupils as were of fame and note,’ but ‘the rest of the scholars,’ with many burgesses and even the poor of the city. Whether or not the schools thus frequented at Oxford were mainly founded by the Benedictines, as has been maintained, and whether or not they were mainly conducted by teachers from Paris, they assuredly existed, and constituted an University in all but the name.
Connection of Oxford with the University of Paris
It is no longer doubtful that, in their earliest stage, the schools of Oxford owed much to those of Paris, then in a far more advanced state of development, though not formally incorporated into an ‘University’ until early in the thirteenth century. William of Champeaux had opened a school of logic at Paris so far back as 1109. His pupil, Abelard, followed him; and the fame of Abelard himself was far surpassed by that of Peter Lombard, whose text-book of ‘Sentences’ became the philosophical Bible of the Middle Ages. Students flocked in from all parts of Europe; lectures multiplied, not only in one faculty, as at Bologna or Salerno, but in every branch of mediæval study, especially in those comprised under ‘Arts;’ a system of exercises, degrees, academical discipline, and even college life, was gradually matured; and when Philip Augustus gave the new academical guild his royal approval, it was already in a condition of vigorous activity. In this sense, the growth of the University of Paris was spontaneous. Like that of Oxford, it was originally nothing but an association of teachers united by mutual interest; but, like all mediæval institutions, it grew up under Church authority. It had originally sprung from the cathedral school of Notre-Dame; the ecclesiastical chancellor of Paris claimed a paramount jurisdiction over it, which, however, was constantly resisted by the University, not without support from the Court of Rome; and the validity of its highest degrees was derived from the sanction of the Pope himself. Considering the links which bound England to France, through Normandy and her other French provinces, as well as the intellectual ascendency of Paris over Western Europe, it is natural that Oxford should have borrowed many features of her internal regulations from this source, though it cannot be affirmed with certainty that she did so. The presumption is strongly confirmed by the undoubted fact that the ‘English nation’ was one of the four ‘nations’ into which the students of Paris were divided, the Normans forming another distinct nation by themselves. Leland tells us that young Englishmen who then aspired to a high education got their schooling, as we should call it, at Oxford, but their college training at Paris, and Anthony Wood gives a list of eminent Oxonians who had studied at Paris, including the names of Giraldus Cambrensis, Robert Pulleyne, Robert Grosteste, Roger Bacon, and Stephen Langton. If this be so, it was inevitable that, on their return, they should bring home with them ideas based on their experience of Paris, which might thus gradually become a model of academical organisation for Oxford. In the year 1229, a fresh link of connection with the great French University was created by a large immigration of Parisian students. The immediate cause of this immigration was an outbreak of hostility between the scholars and citizens of Paris, like those which so constantly recurred between the same parties at Oxford. Henry III. had the foresight to seize this opportunity of reinforcing his own University, and among the many students who came from Paris to Oxford on his invitation were several of his own subjects who had gone abroad for their education.
Recognition of the scholars by the Papal Legate after the riot of 1209
At all events, at the beginning of the thirteenth century, we find at Oxford an academical body singularly like that long established at Paris, and exhibiting almost equal vitality. In one respect, indeed, its position was still more independent; for, whereas at Paris the University was overshadowed by a Royal Court with all the great dignitaries of the French Church and State, at Oxford the University authorities had no competitors but the corporation of the city. Moreover, while at Paris there was a resident chancellor of Notre-Dame, ever ready to assert his authority, there was no episcopal see of Oxford; the diocesan lived at a safe distance, and the archdeacon was the highest resident functionary of the Church. About the beginning of the thirteenth century, Edmund Rich, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, and Robert Grosteste, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, became pioneers of Aristotelian study in Oxford, and were among the earliest graduates in divinity, a faculty then in its infancy. In the year 1214 we come upon more solid ground in a documentary record preserved in the archives of the University. This record, in the shape of a letter from the Papal Legate, refers to an important incident which had occurred five years before, in 1209, when three students had been seized and hanged by a mob of townspeople, with the mayor and burgesses at their head, in revenge for the death of a woman accidentally killed by another student. In consequence of this outrage, said to have been countenanced by King John, the city was laid under an interdict by the Pope, who issued a prohibition against lecturing in Oxford, and the great body of students migrated to Cambridge, Reading, or elsewhere. The letter of the Papal Legate, reciting the submission of the burgesses to his authority, and his disposition to deal mercifully with them, proceeds to impose upon them certain penalties. One of these is the remission of half the fixed rent payable for halls tenanted by scholars, for a period of ten years. Another is the payment of fifty-two shillings yearly for the support of poor scholars, and the obligation to feast one hundred poor scholars every year on St. Nicholas’s Day. They are also to swear that, in future, they will furnish the scholars with provisions at a just and reasonable price; and that if they shall arrest a clerk they shall deliver him up, upon due requisition from the bishop of Lincoln or the archdeacon of Oxford, or his official, or the chancellor, or ‘him whom the bishop of Lincoln shall have deputed to this office.’ This oath is to be repeated yearly. All masters who continued to lecture after the retirement of scholars under Papal mandate are to be suspended from lecturing for three years. All townsmen convicted of participation in the original crime are to come, without shoes, hats, or cloaks, to the graves of the murdered ‘clerks,’ and are to give their bodies proper burial in a place to be solemnly chosen. Upon any default in the fulfilment of these conditions, the former sentence of excommunication is again to be enforced by the bishop of Lincoln.
Office of chancellor
It is to be observed that in this memorable document there is no mention of an ‘University.’ The members of the academical fraternity are called simply ‘clerks’ or ‘scholars studying at Oxford.’ It may further be inferred from the expressions respecting the chancellor, that no chancellor of the University existed distinct from the chancellor of the diocese, or, at least, that, if he existed, he was a nominee of the bishop of Lincoln. On the other hand, the scholars are recognised throughout as under the special protection of the Papal See, as well as under special jurisdiction of the bishop of Lincoln, afterwards to become ex officio Visitor of the University. It seems to follow that, while the University, as a corporation, was not yet fully constituted, such a corporation already existed in an inchoate state, and the schools of Oxford enjoyed a privileged status at the supreme court of Western Christendom. When they first became, in the legal sense, an ‘University’ under a chancellor of their own, is still a disputed question, though a seal has been engraved, supposed to be of about the year 1200, which bears the inscription, ‘Sigillum Cancellarii et Universitatis Oxoniensis.’ Much learning has been expended on the origin of the chancellorship, and it will probably never be determined with certainty whether the earliest chancellors derived their authority exclusively from the bishop of Lincoln as diocesan, or were in the nature of elective rectors of the schools (Rectores Scholarum), whose election was confirmed by the bishop of Lincoln. What is certain is that the acting head of the University was always entitled Cancellarius rather than Rector Scholarum, that from the beginning of Henry III.’s reign he is frequently mentioned under this official title, especially in the important charters of 1244 and 1255, and that by the middle of the thirteenth century he was treated as an independent representative of the University, while the official deputy of the bishop at the University was not the chancellor but the archdeacon of Oxford. At this period, then, we may regard the University as fully constituted, and the official list of chancellors begins in the year 1220, when three persons are mentioned as having filled the office, the last of whom is Robert Grosteste, afterwards the celebrated reforming bishop of Lincoln. From this epoch we may safely date the election of the chancellor by Convocation, though it long continued to be subject to confirmation by the diocesan. A century later (1322) the election was made biennial.
University chests, and sources of revenue in the thirteenth century. Rise of Halls
In the year 1219 the abbot and Convent of Eynsham took upon themselves the obligations laid upon the burgesses in 1214, so far as regarded the double provision for poor scholars. This agreement was carried out, yet the burgesses are still treated as liable in an ordinance issued, in 1240, by Robert Grosteste, then bishop of Lincoln, which provides for the regular application of the fund to its original purpose. This ordinance marks an important epoch in the growth of the University. The ‘Frideswyde Chest,’ and other chests formed on a like principle by successive benefactions for the relief of poor scholars, appear to have been the earliest form of corporate property held by the University. They continued to multiply up to the end of the fifteenth century, when they had reached the number of twenty-four at least, and are computed to have contained an aggregate sum of 2,000 marks, all of which might be in circulation on loan at the same time.[2] It is very difficult to ascertain what other sources of revenue the University may have possessed in the first stage of its existence. In the next stage, its income seems to have been largely derived from academical fines and fees on graces, as well as from duties paid by masters keeping grammar-schools and principals of halls, into which the primitive boarding-schools were first transforming themselves. It is clear that, at this period, the great mass of students, not being inmates of religious houses, were lodged and boarded in these unendowed halls, mostly hired from the citizens by clerks, who in some cases were not even graduates, but were regularly licensed by the chancellor or his commissary on September 9, and were subject to fixed rules of discipline laid down from time to time by the governing body of the University. How many of them may have been open in the middle of the thirteenth century is a question which cannot be answered. About seventy are specified by name in a list compiled nearly two centuries later, but we have no means of knowing how many ancient halls may have then become extinct, or how many new halls may have been founded. The evidence now in our possession does not enable us to identify more than about eighty as having ever existed, and it is certain that all these did not exist at any one time. Even if we suppose that several hundred students were housed in monastic buildings during the age preceding the foundation of colleges, and make a large allowance for those in private lodging-houses, we cannot estimate the whole number of University scholars at more than 2,000, or at the most 3,000. The loose statement of Richard of Armagh, so lightly repeated by Anthony Wood and others, that some 30,000 scholars were collected at Oxford in this age, not only rests upon no sure historical ground, but is utterly inconsistent with all that we know of the area covered by the city, and of the position occupied by the academical population.
Early University charters
It is well known that Henry III. frequently visited Oxford for the purpose of holding councils or otherwise, and his relations with the University were constant. Amongst the letters and charters issued by him in regard to University affairs three are specially notable. One of these letters, dated 1238, was addressed to the mayor and burghers, directing them to inquire into the circumstances of a riot at Oseney Abbey between the servants of Otho, the Papal Legate, and a body of disorderly students. This riot led to a struggle, lasting a whole year, between the Legate and the University, supported by the English bishops, and especially by Robert Grosteste. The Legate was ultimately appeased by the public submission of the University representatives in London to his authority, whereupon he withdrew the interdict which he had laid upon the Oxford clerks, some of whom had retired to Northampton, and others, it is said, to Salisbury. Meanwhile the conflicts between the students and townspeople were incessant. In 1244, after a violent attack of gownsmen on the Jewry, the chancellor of the University was given by a royal writ exclusive cognisance of all pleas arising out of contracts relating to personalty, and in 1248 the ‘mayor’s oath’ of fidelity to the privileges of the University was imposed by letters patent. By a similar charter, granted in 1255 to the city of Oxford, these privileges are incidentally confirmed, for it is there provided that if a ‘clerk’ shall injure a townsman he shall be imprisoned until the chancellor shall claim him, while, if a townsman shall injure a clerk, he shall be imprisoned until he make satisfaction according to the judgment of the chancellor. Two years later (in 1257) the liberties of the University were defended against the bishop of Lincoln himself before the king at St. Albans, on the ground that Oxford was, after Paris, ‘schola secunda ecclesiæ.’