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.’
FOOTNOTES:
[1] It is perhaps needless to observe that ‘universitas’ signifies a ‘corporation’ or guild, and implies no universality in the range of subjects taught, or Universitas Facultatum. ‘Studium Generale’ probably signifies a place of education open to all comers.
[2] See the Introduction to Anstey’s Munimenta Academica, pp. xxxv. et sqq.