ASTON Oxford's Medieval Alumni

The Past and Present Society
Oxford's Medieval Alumni

Author(s): T. H. Aston
Source: Past & Present, No. 74 (Feb., 1977), pp. 3-40
Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/650213
Accessed: 18-06-2015 08:36 UTC
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Oxford University Press and The Past and Present Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to Past & Present.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.206.30.200 on Thu, 18 Jun 2015 08:36:30 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
OXFORD'S MEDIEVAL ALUMNI *
THE CAREERS
OF INDIVIDUALALUMNIOF THE MEDIEVALUNIVERSITY
OF
Oxfordhavebeen studieda good deal. But theyhaveall been more
or less famousor outstandingmen, and the generality of members
has hardly been studied at all. Indeed such a systematicand
generalizedstudy would have been quite impossible until the
publicationof Dr. Emden's magisterial volumeson the University's
alumnitotheyear15oo.0 Dr. Emden'sworkprovidedtherawmaterial,
in alphabeticalform, butitwasaltogether outofthequestiontoanalyse
itmanually. For anything in thewayofsophisticated treatment
com-
puterizationwasneeded. This wasundertaken in connection
withthe
Projectfora new and multi-volumed Historyof the Universityof
Oxford.Forthemostpartwhatfollowsderivesfromthiscomputeriza-
tion,thoughit has beenaugmentedhereand therebystraightforward
manualinquiriessuchas couldhavebeen,but werenot,incorporated
in the computerization programme. As this pointmakes clear, it
would have been possibleto examinethe careersof Oxford'salumni
far more completelybut shortageof time and for the most part
considerations ofutilitymadethisseemunnecessary. It has,however,
to be admittedthat in some particularsthe computerization was
undesirably limited: forinstanceit did not deal withthegeographical
originsof Oxford'salumniwithinEngland- a verydifficult and
hazardoustask in any case - so that nothingcan be said of the
distribution of recruitment even as betweenthe two greatdivisions
ofnortherners and southerners.On theotherhandthecomputeriza-
tion did provide,for instance,a detailed breakdownof alumni
by date of residence into twenty-yeargenerationsso that a
"generationalprofile"is readily obtainable,and all information
handledwithina fairlyprecisechronological grid. Naturallymany
scholarsfallintomorethanone generation. In suchcases,statistics
in this article,unless otherwisestated,referto the firstgeneration
* I am gratefulto ProfessorRobertBrowning,Dr. Jeremy Catto,Professor
R. H. Hilton,Sir RichardSouthernand Mr. David Vaiseyforreadingand
commenting on thisarticle. WithoutMiss EvelynMullally'scomputerization
ofthedatathearticlecouldnothavebeenwritten at all,and morerecentlyMr.
Ralph Evans has giveninvaluable
help bothon thecomputerization side and
in otherregards.
1 A. B. Emden, A
Biographical Register of the Universityof Oxford to
A.D. 1500oo,3 vols. (Oxford, 1957-9) togetherwiththe manuscriptaddenda etc. to
which Dr. Emden has generouslygiven access. A copy of the volumes
annotatedwiththe addenda is in the BodleianLibrary,Oxford. In what
followsI have reckonedas Oxfordalumniall thosegraduatesof uncertain
originlistedin theAppendixin volumeiii ofEmden'swork.
university
4 PASTANDPRESENT NUMBER74
onlyin whicha personis recordedor can be presumedto have been

in residence. Similarlyin the case of personswithmorethan one
higherfaculty, it is thefirstrecordedfacultythatis used forpurposes
of classification;
and similarly also wherea scholarhas morethanone
religiousorderor morethan one country. The only exceptionto
such methodsof classification is wherea scholarhas morethanone
college or hall, when all his membershipsare taken into the
reckoning.
Any remarkson Oxford'ssocial role and compositionmust be
prefacedby one overriding and important caveat. This is thatour
knowledge of the University's medieval alumni is very defective
due to the extremelyinadequate,uneven and to a varyingbut
considerabledegreebiased natureof the sources. It was not until
the later sixteenthcenturythat provisionwas made for what we
know as matriculation(that is Universityregistration on entry)2
and not for a good time afterthat beforeit became well-nigh
universal. In the middleages a thirteenth-century statuterequired
thateveryscholarshouldenterhis nameon theroll,thematricula, of
a master. So far as is known,however,no single example of
such a roll survives,and it maybe reckonedas mostlikelythatthe
systemwas seldomifeverproperly operative,and thatit wasprobably
out of use at least by the fifteenth century.3 The collegeskeptno
officialrecordsof admissionwith the exceptionof New College,
wherethis was a statutoryrequirementthoughnot effective until
theinceptionofthe"Liber Albus" in 1400.4 Whenc. 1422Thomas
Robertcompiledthe "Catalogus Vetus",5his list of the fellowsof
Merton (a veryrecord-conscious society:witness,for instance,its
fineMunimentRoom of c. 1288), he had onlythe (well-preserved)
accountrollsofthecollegeon whichto draw,and bursarialaccounts
by no meansalwaysrecordedall residentfellows. But in anycase,
throughoutthe middle ages only a verysmall proportion(though
obviouslya growingone as timewenton) ofresidentmembersofthe
2
Statvta Antiqva VniversitatisOxoniensis,ed. Strickland Gibson (Oxford,
1931), pp. lxxxii-lxxxiiiand 391-5.
3
Ibid., p. lxxxii,pp. 6o-i, 82 and 107. Gibson(p. 107) datesthe statute
"before1231",butMr. GrahamPollardpointsoutthat"theearliestauthority
thatI can findforthisis about1275",citingGibson,op. cit.,p. 641: Graham
Pollard,App. III, "Epilogueto the MedievalArchivesof the University of
Oxford", in The Registerof Congregation1448-1463, ed. W. A. Pantin and
W. T. Mitchell (Oxford Hist. Soc., new ser., xxii, 1972), p. 413 n. For the
century,see Pantin and
probabledisuse of the practiceby the fifteenth
Mitchell,ibid.,p. xxx.
' "The Registrum Primumalias The WhiteBook",New CollegeArchives,
9654: The Archivesof New College, Oxford. A Catalogue Compiledby Francis
W. Steer(Londonand Chichester,1974),p. 47 and reference.Cf. Magdalen
CollegeMuniments,RegistrumA forelectionsoffellowsand scholars1480-92,
thoughthefirstAdmissionsRegisteronlybeginsin 1538.
6 MertonCollegeMuniments,416.
OXFORD'S MEDIEVAL ALUMNI 5
University weremembersof colleges.The majorityresidedin halls,

and some(perhapsa goodlynumber)in privatelodgingsat leastuntil
theearlyfifteenth century," and virtually no recordsof hallssurvive.
Or, to turnto anotheraspectwe mighttakeforgranted,therecording
ofdegrees,bythemid-fourteenth century degreeswereto be recorded
bythe proctors in a registerormoreprobablyon rolls. But nothing
survivesby way of degreelists until those in the isolated extant
Registerof Congregation for 1448-1463;and then,because various
leaveshave been lost,we onlyhavelistsforsomeyears." Or finally,
to take a ratherdifferent kind of example,thereare 31 recorded
Carmelitealumniin the period 1360-79and 46 in the succeeding
twenty-year period,thatis a totalof 77 forthe fortyyears1360-99.
This is at firstsighta not unrespectable figure,untilone recallsthat
otherevidenceshows that therewere 57 Carmelitesin Oxfordin
1376-7.9 Even if we assumethatall thesewerereadingTheology,
thatis werein residencefora prolongedperiod,we wouldstillhavea
verysubstantialunder-recording (unlessa considerablenumberwere
not scholarsat all).
In otherwordsthe 15,oooor so recordedalumni- 14,922to be
exact- listedin Dr. Emden'sbiographical registerconstituteonlya
fractionof actual alumni,and what is more an unknownfraction,
though it may at least be said that it can hardlybe less than
about 15 per cent and is more likelyto be about 2o or even 25
per cent. That would not perhapsmatterovermuch- except
obviouslyforcomputing thesize oftheUniversity at variousdates-
if it were a randomsample. But thatit emphatically is not. For
instanceit is progressivelylargeras timegoeson and recordsimprove.
It is heavilyweightedtowardsthecollegesand probablymoregeneral-
lytowardsthereligiousordersand ofcoursethosewhohad a moreor
lessprominent subsequentcareer,towardsthosestudying inthehigher
facultiesand so on. All thismeansthatit is extremely hazardousto
use our biographicalinformation or overall,and thatone
statistically
must hedge any observationsaround with suitable and severe
qualifications.In whatfollowssuch qualifications mustbe takenfor
6 at
W. A. Pantin,"The Halls and SchoolsofMedievalOxford:an Attempt
Reconstruction", in Oxford Studies Presentedto Daniel Callus (Oxford Hist.
Soc., newser.,xvi,1964),at pp. 33-4forprivatelodgings. FortheUniversity's
prohibitionin 14Io and i42o of such practices,see ibid.,loc. cit., citingStatvta
Antiqva, pp. 208 and 226 ff.
7 Pollard,op. cit., pp. 413-14 forthe registrationof degrees.
s The Registerof Congregation1448-1463, pp.
xii-xiv for the contentsof the
Register.
' JosiahCox Russell, "The Clerical Populationof Medieval England",
Traditio,ii (I944), p. 207. See further in
below,note17. Thereis a misprint
Dom David Knowles'scitationof Russell'sfiguresin The ReligiousOrdersin
England, ii (Cambridge, I96I), p. 259 n., where the figurescited as for 1377
are in factthosefor1317.
6 PASTANDPRESENT NUMBER74
grantedeven wheretheyare not specifically stated,thoughI hope I

haveavoidedputtingforward any conclusionsthat couldbe invalidated
by reasonof the skewingof the data, inaccurate(in regardto total
alumni)as particularpercentages and even morenumbersmaybe.
For all the difficulties
and uncertainties,
it is to some moreor less
generalquestions concerning the alumni of medievalOxfordthat I
am goingto addressmyself. In generalthe natureof the evidence
makesit most meaningful if presentedin percentagetermsrather
thanin actualnumbersrecorded,but I shallgive theseon occasion
and, save fora veryfewexceptions,alwayswherethe sampleis less
thanSo.
And I supposethefirstquestionthatanyonewouldask - and the
questionhas indeed been asked before1" - mustbe how largewas
the medievalUniversity and whattrendsweretherein its totalsize?
That it was much largerthanCambridgeis undoubted- probably
abouttwiceas largetakingthemiddleages as a wholethoughthesize
of the universitiesconvergedas time went on."1 That it was
much smallerthan its own alma materof Paris also admitsof no
doubt.12 So far so good. To go significantly furtherthan that is,
however,an exceptionally difficultand complexproblemthatwould
requireforits adequatediscussiona fullarticleto itselfand whichI
willtherefore deferto anotheroccasion.Here I willmerelynotethat
I am by no means convincedabout currently acceptedestimatesof
Oxford'ssize, eitherthatis to say by whatis allegedto be its high
pointofaboutI,5oo studentssomewhere aroundtheyear1300 or still
less by the figureof I,ooo forthe mid-fifteenth century.13 I take
simply the latterestimate in regard to the firsthalfof the century.
The majority oftheUniversity, as alreadyremarked, livedinacademical
halls, and on the evidenceavailableit seems not unreasonableto
10 For the size of Oxfordand Europeanuniversities see Hastings

generally,
Rashdall,The Universities ofEuropein theMiddleAges,new edn. by F. M.
Powicke and A. B. Emden, 3 vols. (Oxford, 1936), iii, pp. 325-36; and for
Oxfordalone,H. E. Salter,MedievalOxford(OxfordHist. Soc., c, 1936),pp.
107-IO.
11 A. B. Emden,A Biographical of the University
Register to
of Cambridge
S5oo(Cambridge, 1963) gives 7,143 as the total number of alumni recorded
(p. xii); aftermerginga numberof entriesthatDr. Emdennotespossiblyor
probablyrelateto the same scholarand includingthemanuscript addendain
Dr. Emden'spersonalcopytowhichhe hasgenerously givenaccess,butexclud-
ing10o4scholarsofuncertain I makethetotal7,o06, by comparison
university,
with the correspondingtotal of 14,922 for Oxford.
12 Rashdall, loc. cit.
13Rashdallestimated Oxford'shighestnumber,whichhe seemsto place in

and earlyfourteenthcenturies,as between I,500ooand 3,000 whereas
the thirteenth
"by about1438thenumbershadfallentounderI,ooo": op.cit.,iii,pp. 328and
331-3, with the quotationat p. 335. Salter put the largestnumbersat
c. 13oo00and as I,5oo fallingto about i,2oo in 14oo and to 1,ooo by the mid-
fifteenthcentury:op. cit., pp.
107-Io.
estimatethem at around seventyin numberon average.14 The
best availablematerialbearingon the capacityof halls,if theywere
full and more or less equally denselyoccupied,would pointto an
averageof studentsper hall,15thoughwe mightreduce this
somewhatto, I8"5 16 to allow, for
say, example,forthe possibilitythat
the halls in questionwere above averagein size or forthe further
possibility- it is no more,and hardlyeven that- that inmates
studyingin the higherfacultiesmighthave had more space and
been less closelypacked than ordinaryundergraduates.",At
I8-5
per hall we wouldhavea totalof 1,295, say I,3oo, and at 16 of 1,120.
We mightperhapsestimatethefriars,drawingon Professor Russell's
figures for the early and late fourteenth century, at around 255,
say 250.17 As forthe secularcolleges,a figureof 2oo would not
be too wideof the mark,thoughto be on the safeside we willadopt
15o. This givesa roundgrandtotalof 1,520to 1,700,say1,6oo,plus
those in the monastic colleges and some in private lodgings
and the like. And it may be said in generaltermsthat the bio-
graphicaldata at our disposalis altogetherconsistentwitha figure
moreorless ofthissize. The repercussions ofsucha reconsideration
of the evidence and use of our biographicaldata will, if this
particularcalculationis anywherenear correct,be verysignificant,
and could extendto considerablechangesin our views ofthe trends
in numbersfromthe earlyfourteenth centuryonwards.
14
See Appendix,"The Number and Capacityof Oxford'sAcademical
Halls in the FirstHalf of the Fifteenth
Century",below,pp. 36-4o.
15 See ibid.
6 See ibid.
17
Russell, "The Clerical Populationof Medieval England", p. 207.
SimilarlySalter,MedievalOxford, p. og9forthelaterfigures. Neitherauthor
citesany sourceforthe 1377 figures, but it mustbe New CollegeArchives,
7711 (Steer,op. cit.,p. 16), a collegeaccountfor1376-7. This recordsthe
distribution "de elemosinadomini" (i.e. of Williamof Wykeham)of one
shillingto everyfriarin Oxford. The relevant entrywas publishedbyRobert
Lowth,TheLifeof Williamof Wykeham, 2nd edn. (London,1759),p. 302 n.
(The distribution has nothingto do withWykeham's willor anyactionby his
executors as incorrectly
statedby Salter.) The amountsso disbursedshowthe
following numbersof friars:70 Dominicans,103 Franciscans,57 Carmelites
and 49 Austins(not45 as in Russell),thatis a totalof279. Salterconcludes,
without givinganyreasonwhatever, that"ofthisnumberprobably notmorethan
80owerestudentsoftheUniversity". Such a figurenotonlyhas no basis,but
is totallyat odds withthebiographical data we nowhave. For if,generously
on Salter'sreckoning of the trendsin the size of medievalOxford,we were
totake8o as theaveragenumberofstudent-friars forthewholeperiod126o-1500
and allowedfora twelve-year periodof residencein viewof the pronounced
incidenceofhigherstudyamongthem,we wouldfindourselveswitha totalof
onlyI,6oo student-friars forthe240 years;and yetwe alreadyhaverecordedin
our veryincompletebiographicaldata no less than 1,556. By contrast,an
averageof 250 would be quite credibleon the basis of the same data,forit
wouldimplysomething like5,ooofriarsforthesameperiod,thatis somewhat
overthreetimesthenumberrecorded, whichis in no wayunacceptable.
8 PASTAND PRESENT NUMBER74
But, as I have said, space forcesme to deferthe matteras a whole
to a laterarticle.
I turnratherto graduatestudies.
Withsome exceptions,notablythoseproceedingto studyin Law
forwhomArtswas optional,"sall scholarswereobligedto studyfirst
in the Facultyof Arts,fouryearsfortheirB.A. and a further three
yearsfortheirM.A. Oxfordtherefore, like forexampleParis,was,
as is verywell known,an Arts Universityand its powerstructure
fullyreflected in thehigherfacultiesofTheology,
this. It is therefore
Canon Law, Civil Law, Medicine and Music that its intellectual
profileis more properlyto be found. Taken togetherwe have a
totalof4,614 scholarsstudyingin thehigherfaculties.This is a very
formidablefigureindeed, representing 31 per cent of the 14,922
recordedalumniof the University. On the otherhand,and casting
backto myearlierobservations abouttheincompleteness and bias of
our data, thereis no doubt whateverthatthose who proceededto
studyin a higherfacultyweredistinctly morelikelyto leave a trace
in the recordsthanthosewho completedtheirstudieswiththe Arts
courseor aftera less prolongedstayat the University. The actual
percentage ofgraduatestudentswouldtherefore havebeenlowerthan
the figureI have just quoted. Still,if someonewereto say on the
basis of our evidence that somethinglike 20 per cent of the
University wereengagedon higherstudy,I do not thinkit obvious
he wouldbe talkingnonsense:in factI wouldbe disposedto go along
with him. But whateverthe precise percentage,one fact is
absolutelycertain,and that is the great contrastbetween the
proportionof regularsand secularswho proceededto higherstudy.
Takingthe recordedalumni,no less than5o per cent(1,287) of the
regularsstudiedin the higherfaculties,by contrastwith27 per cent
(3,327) - stillan impressivefigureof course- amongthe seculars.
And if, as is probable,regularsas a whole were morelikelyto be
recorded,thenthecontrastmaywellhavebeengreatersinceso many
secularArtistsin particulardisappearedwithouttrace.
We ourselveswould, of course,have foundthe overallbalance
betweenundergraduate and graduatestudiesacceptableenoughand
quiteunsurprising: we would havebeen to thatextentquiteat home
in themedievalUniversity, ifthatis we had had a college(whichfew
did and where,evenso, lifewas bleakenough- thoughless so than
in ParisianColleges"'). But in view of the smallpartthatgraduate
fewLawyersarerecorded
18 In factvery as havingreadArtsfirst. Takingall
Lawyers(whether or notLaw was theirfirsthigherdegree)only91 out of938
Civilians,79 out of 743 Canonistsand 97 out of 721 studentsof bothLaws
(includinga smallnumberdescribedmerelyas Lawyers)are so recorded:that
is a total of 267 out of 2,402, or II %. Nonetheless I naturallyreckonthe two
and thosestudying
Laws as higherfaculties, in themas graduatestudents.
1' Rashdall, op. cit., iii, pp. 216-17.
OXFORD'SMEDIEVALALUMNI 9
studiescame to play duringthe modernperiod" (and indeed up to
livingmemory)and despitethe existenceof more (and more com-
fortable)fellowshipsin secular colleges,the medievalfigurespose
the importantquestion of why the decline in graduate studies
occurred. This is too largea matterto be discussedfullyhere,but
one observationmayperhapsbe made. Of coursegraduatestudies
took a very hard knock at the HenricianReformationwith the
slaughterof Canon Law and of thereligiousorderswith,as we have
seen, theirabove-averagegraduateelementespeciallyin Theology.
But I wonderifthatis a sufficient explanation. Is it perhapspossible
thatthenow-familiar educationalrevolution
oftheEnglishuniversities
in thelatersixteenth and firsthalfoftheseventeenth when
centuries,
sons ofthearistocracy, gentryand clergywithmostmodestacademic
swelledoverallnumbersenormously
interests andultimately droveout
the sons of those of lower standingwho had been at one or other
universitytogaina goodeducationas thebasisforsocialadvancement,
whenin ProfessorStone'sperhapsoverenthusiastic estimateEngland
was bettereducated than at any time again until comparatively
is it possiblethatthiswas a revolution
recently":21 boughtat theprice
of a really severe decline in higherlearning,with both Oxford
and Cambridgebecomingsomethingmorelike finishing schoolsor
preparatory schoolsforthe Inns of Courtthan centresof advanced
study? If so and if we reckon also with the reductionin the
effectivelengthof the Artscourse,22we may understandthe better
proposalsforandin somecasestheestablishment ofotherinstitutions
such as the ElizabethanSocietyof Antiquariesor laterthe Royal
Society. ProfessorStoneshouldhave recognizedthefamiliaradage
of nowadays,that more means worse (whateverthe social class).
His educationalrevolution,to whichhe has givensuch a colourful
blazon,may well turnout to have been an academicdisaster.
Then whatofthedistribution ofstudybetweenthehigherfaculties ?
FirstI shouldmakethe importantpointthat,apartfromthe quite
significantnumberswhostudiedbothLaws (and thosefewdesignated
merelyas Lawyers), 716 or I6 per cent of the total recorded
in thehigherfaculties, studyin morethanone higherfaculty, though
not unknown,was rare: only 91 cases in all out of 4,614 graduate
2o Mark H. Curtis, Oxfordand Cambridgein Transition1558-1642 (Oxford,

1959), PP. 149-64, esp. pp. 149-5I and I64.
21 LawrenceStone,"The Size and Composition oftheOxfordStudentBody
158o-I9Io", in LawrenceStone(ed.), The University in Society,
2 vols.(Prince-
tonand London,1975),i, Oxfordand Cambridge fromthe14th totheEarly19th
Century, pp. 3-IIo; LawrenceStone,"The EducationalRevolution in England,
156o-I640",Past and Present, no. 28 (July1964); Curtis,op. cit.
2" Curtis,op.cit.,p. 97,andhiscitation
ofRegisteroftheUniversity ofOxford,
ed. AndrewClark,ii, 1571-1622, parti (OxfordHist. Soc., x, 1887),p. 7o;
see also Clark,ibid.,pp. 67-73. More generally,see OxfordUniv. Archives,
Registersof Congregation, passim.
IO0 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 74
students- notsurprisingly so,giventhelengthoftimeforthevarious

courses."3 It is, however,foundscatteredacrossthe facultieswith
something ofa concentration in Medicine,and studyin threefaculties
occurstwice. Of theselattertwo,one was JohnTalbot who rented
a roomin Canterbury Collegein thelatefifteenth and earlysixteenth
centuries,and, havingread Arts(at leastto the B.A.), wenton to be
a D.M. by 1498, a D.C.L. by 1507 and finallya D.Th. by 1518:
a worthyas wellas an excellently educatedman,despitehis dubious
birthas an illegitimate memberof the Talbot family,whose career
in modestecclesiasticalpreferments was probablyless than he had
been hoping for and whose only enduringmemorialwas his
foundation of Whitchurch GrammarSchool.
That said we can at oncemoreor less dismissMusic sincewe have
only 13 recordedalumnistudyingit (whetheras theirfirsthigher
faculty or otherwise),of whom 3 also read Theology. And
Medicinetoo is poorlyrepresented: a mere157 (as theirfirsthigher
facultyor otherwise)occurringunevenlyoverthe generations, that
is onlyfractionally over I per centof our total- and of these25
also readforanotherhigherdegree(18 Theology,7 one or bothofthe
Laws - of whom2 read Artsbeforehand) and 2 read fortwo other
higherdegrees,viz. Theologyand Canon Law, and Theologyand
Civil Law. This leaves us with the threefacultiesof Theology,
Canon Law and Civil Law. It wouldbe naturalto suppose,and it
has I thinkgenerallybeen so supposed,thatthe highlyecclesiastical
toneof the University, its place as a greatbastionof the church,its
role in supplying clerics of all grades, the predominanceof
ecclesiasticalopportunities in the careerstructure, the presenceof
significantnumbersof regularsamongits scholarsand so on would
have meantthatTheologywas the largestarea of studyand perhaps
Canon Law the second largest;and the fifteenth-century Divinity
School,absolutelyhuge by comparisonwithordinaryschoolswhich
had a capacityofsay30 or so, wouldalso pointin thesamedirection,
howevermuch one mightthinkit was one of those monumentally
megalomaniacprojectsin which almosteveryuniversityindulges
fromtimeto time.
Now it is indeedtrue thatTheologywas thelargestsinglehigher
faculty. But it was notthelargestgeneralarea ofstudy;nor,taking
the different Laws separately,was Canon Law the second largest.
RecordedTheologianstotal 2,Io4, as against2,359 Lawyersof all
kinds,and this despitethe factthattheywereprobablyon average
morelikelyto be recorded:whichis to saythatthe predominance of
Law overTheologywas almostcertainly greater
significantly than the
23
For details of the courses of study,see Rashdall, The Universities
ofEurope,
ed. Powicke and Emden, iii, pp. 156-6o; and more authoritativelyStatvta
Antiqva, ed. Gibson, passim, and The Registerof Congregation1448-.463, ed.
Pantin and Mitchell, pp. xxix-xxxviii.
OXFORD'S MEDIEVAL ALUMNI II
figureof 12 per cent I have just given suggests.24 Then again,as

betweenthetwoLaws and leavingaside the716 recordedas studying
both, Civil LawyersoutnumberedCanon Lawyersby 932 to 711,
thatis by 31 percent,figures whichmayprobablybe takenas a more
or less accuratereflection of the relativenumericalstrengths of the
twofacultiessinceneitherhad anyparticularreasonto be thebetter
recorded.
These global figures,however,obscurea deep and fundamental
contrastwithintheUniversity thatwe havealreadyobservedin regard
to theincidenceofhigherstudyas a whole,thatbetweentheregulars
and the seculars. Amongthe regularsTheologywas indeed un-
questionablydominantin higherstudy,totallingI,I69 oftheir1,287
recordedgraduatestudents,thatis 91 per cent,witha mere I 3 or
9 per cent of Lawyers. Of these 9 per cent,only 85 (7 per cent)
studiedCanon Law so thatif,as Rashdallsaid, partof the objectin
sending monks to the Universitywas to ensure "the supply of
canonistscompetentto transactits [the house's] legal businessand
to representit in theecclesiastical
courts",25 littlewas doneto achieve
the purpose - though it should be noted that among the
Benedictinesand the Austin Canons the numberof Canonists,as
we willsee, was distinctlyhigher. Amongthesecularsthepictureis
very different. Theologywas stillthelargestsinglefaculty, butonly
by an extremely narrowmargin,exceeding(at 935) those studying
Civil Law (920) by a mere 2 per cent. Taking secular Lawyers
as a wholewe havetheimpressive totalof 2,246 out of a grandtotal
ofrecordedgraduatestudentsof3,327,thatis 68 percentofthewhole.
Among the different Laws, and again omittingthose (700) who
studied both, CiviliansoutnumberedCanonistsby 920 to 626 or
by 47 per cent. Giventhe factthatthe careeroutletsforregulars
were obviouslycomparatively limited,it is these figuresfor the
secularsthatwe shouldtakeintoaccountwhenconsidering theinter-
relationbetweenstudiesat the University and theneedsof theworld
outside. It shouldalso be mentionedthat,smallthoughtheMedical
Facultywas, all but 2 of its I40 recordedscholarsweresecularsand
that 8 of the I recordedMusicianswerealso seculars.
Whatthenof the incidenceof higherstudiesbetweenthe various
institutionsoforintimately connectedwiththeUniversity: itscolleges
and halls,its conventsand thelike? I shallleave aside theconvents
since withinthemTheologywas overwhelming, and concentrate on
the collegesand halls.
21 See Gascoigne'sdeploring ofthetrendto Legal studiesin fifteenth-century

Oxford:ThomasGascoigne,Loci e LibroVeritatum, ed. withan introduction
byJ.E. ThoroldRogers(Oxford,188I), p. 202, andPollard'scomments on this
in TheRegister ofCongregation 1448-1463,p. 413.
25 Rashdall,op. cit.,iii, p. 19o.
I2 PASTANDPRESENT NUMBER74
In respectof recordedalumni,the collegesdo not scoreas well as
one mighthave expectedin regardto theirencouragement of higher
study. In the case of Balliol,withits unusualstatutory position,26
thiswouldbe understandable enoughthoughin factit performed well
aboveaveragewith44 percentofits alumniin thethirteenth century
(a small sample,however,only 8 out of I8), 39 per cent in the
fourteenth and 34 percentin thefifteenth recordedunderthehigher
faculties. But withotherfoundations, wherestatutory provisionis
frequently made for studybeyond the Arts course, is certainly
it
noteworthy.In all, and takingthe wholeof our period,onlysome
26 per centof recordedmembersof secularcollegesproceededon to
or beganin one ofthehigherfaculties, wellbelowtherecordedfigure
of 31 per centforthe University as a wholeand also belowthatfor
the secularsalone of 27 per cent. Nor do the figuresvaryvery
significantly from one centuryto anotherthough they show a
gradualincrease:22 per centforthe thirteenth, 24 per centforthe
fourteenth and 27 percentforthefifteenth, thisfinalupswingpossibly
reflectingthe newerfoundations of Lincolnand All Souls. On the
otherhand thereare considerablevariationsbetweenthe different
colleges. All Souls, as just indicated, had an unusually high
proportionof membersproceedingto the higherfaculties,no less
than5I percent;and onlyslightly lowerwasthenexthighest,Lincoln,
with43 percent. Butlestitbe thought thatthelatemedievalfounda-
tionsall placeda greateremphasison graduatestudiesthanhad their
predecessors, thereareNew Collegewith26 percentonlyin boththe
fourteenth and thefifteenthcenturies, and Magdalenwitha mere18
per cent to show thatthis wasnotthe case. As forearlierfoundations,
Balliol (with44 per cent,39 per cent and 34 per centforits three
centuries), University College(with75 percent- an extremely small
sample,however,only3 out of 4 - and 38 per centforits firsttwo
centuriesbut only25 per centforthe last), Oriel (with38 per cent
and 33 percentforthefourteenth and fifteenth centuriesrespectively)
and Queen's (39 per centand 31 per centforthe same) wereabove
average,withMertonand Exeterbelow.
26 For the statutesof Balliol College,up to and including thosegivenby
BishopFox in 1507,as also forthestatutes tointhis
ofall othercollegesreferred
article,see Statutesof the Collegesof Oxford; withRoyal Patentsof Foundation,
Injunctionsof Visitors,and Catalogues of DocumentsRelating to the University,
Preservedin thePublic Record Office,printedby Her Majesty's Commissioners
forInquiringintotheStateoftheUniversity ofOxford,3 vols.(London,1853).
Balliol's statutesare at i, no. I, pp. i-xxiiand 1-22; and for Somervyle's
statutes(134o), see also the textin The OxfordDeeds ofBalliol College,ed. H. E.
Salter (OxfordHist. Soc., lxiv, 1913), pp. 286-99. For the commentsof
H. W. C. Davis on theoriginalpositionandtheoutcomeofthedisputeof1325
whichreasserted theprinciplethatmemberswereto studyonlyArts,see his
A History of Balliol College, rev. edn. by R. H. C. Davis and Richard Hunt
(Oxford, 1963), pp. 11-13, 22-3. For the changed position under Somervyle's
statutes, see Statutes of the Colleges of Oxford; and for comments on Fox's
statutes,Davis, op. cit., p. 59.
OXFORD'SMEDIEVAL ALUMNI 13
It has to be remembered, however,thatthis picturemaywell be
seriouslydistorted by thebias ofour evidence. For it is certainthat
Artsmen weremuchmorelikelyto be recordedin collegesthanin
halls and the like, so that the percentageformedby the higher
study contingentwould be correspondingly depressed. By how
much it is obviouslyquite impossibleto say, but I thinkwe may
perhapsconcludethatthecollegesarelikelyto haveplayedcollectively
at least as prominenta part in higherstudiesas did othersecular
institutions in the University, with some at least being noticeably
moreprominent.
In regardto the distribution of the different higherstudiesin the
secularcolleges,apartfromMusic whichwas so small in numbers
thatit can hardlybe said to havehad a distribution at all,theposition
was not onlyvariedbut moreimportantly extremely unrepresenta-
tive of the generalpositionin a way that has not usually been
recognized. We have already observedthe dominanceof Legal
studiesamongseculars,but this was in no way reflectedin overall
collegiatemembership. In the thirteenthcenturyno less than
8I percentoftheadmittedly smallnumber(37) ofmembersofsecular
collegesengagedon higherstudywere Theologiansby comparison
withonly19 percentLawyers;in thefourteenth century theposition
evenedout somewhatto 57 percentand 39 percentrespectively; and
in thefifteenth century,due to special factorsto which we will come
in a moment,the Theologianswereactuallyin a minority of 44 per
cent comparedto the Lawyersat 52 per cent. But these global
figuresconsiderablyobscure the extent to which Theologians
dominatedin most colleges. In all but two of the ten medieval
secularcolleges,Theologianswerethroughout in a majority, varying
in dimensionbut alwayssubstantial. At Merton,Balliol, Queen's
and Lincoln the percentageof Theologiansneverfell below 70 in
anycentury;at University College(67 percentin thefifteenth century
but otherwise over8o per cent),Exeter(51 per centin thefourteenth
centurybut 70 per centin thefifteenth) and Oriel(70 per centin the
fourteenth century,butmarginally lowerat 69 percentinthefifteenth)
the situationwas only slightlydifferent; and even Magdalen with
63 per cent was still very well above the percentageof secular
Theologiansin the Universityat large. Nor was this numerical
dominanceof Theologiansin the eightcollegesI have mentionedin
any way alien to the intentions of theirfounders;on the contrary it
was, generallyspeaking,thoroughly in accord with their wishes not
to say commandsas oftenembodiedin theirstatutes."27
There were,however,twomajorand mostconspicuousexceptions
tothecollegiatedominanceofTheologians. These wereNew College
"7 See Statutesof the Collegesof Oxford,passim.
14 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 74
and All Souls wherethe prominenceof Lawyersof one kind and

anotherwas as pronouncedas that of Theologianselsewhere. At
New College,thatgreatecclesiasticalstatesmanand educationalist,
Williamof Wykeham,had providedin his statutesthat Io fellows
wereto studyCanon Law, Io Civil Law and the remainderof those
proceedingto higher study, having completedthe Arts course,
Theology with the possibilityof 2 studyingMedicine and 2
astronomy. Since Wykeham stipulated for a warden and 70
members- matchingthe 70 scholars at his co-foundationof
Winchester and, ofcourse,includingundergraduates readingArts-
we mightexpectand thefounderclearlyintended(as shownnotleast
in his extremelycareful insistenceon the 20 Law fellows) a
societywitha muchmoredistinctemphasison Legal studiesthanin
the othercollegesI have mentionedthoughstillnot too unbalanced
a higherstudiesfellowship;and JohnRous did indeed categorize
it as forTheologyand Law.28 This is not,however,quite whatwe
find. In thefourteenth century a mere29 percentofthoserecorded
in higherstudy were Theologiansby contrastwith no less than
70 per cent Lawyers; and in the fifteenth centurythe imbalance
increasedslightlyto 24 per centand 73 per centrespectively.Nor,
as we will see, did the Canonistsequal the Civiliansas the founder
intended,the latterfaroutnumbering the former. At All Souls we
mightbe preparedfora strongdominanceof Lawyerssinceit was
thefirstOxfordcollegeto be foundedby a greatecclesiastical lawyer,
and a Wykehamist at that. ArchbishopHenryChichelehad been
maintainedat school at Winchesterby Wykehambefore the
foundation of Winchester Collegeand thenat Hart Hall pendingthe
building of New College whichhe becamea fellowin June1387-
of
He took his B.C.L. two years laterand his D.C.L. around 1396.
Even so, his statutesfor the College providedfor a fairlywell-
roundedcommunity offellowsthoughone witha muchlargerLegal
elementthan elsewhere:24 were to read Theologyand I6 Law.29
The late Sir Edmund Crasterconcludedon the basis of this that
"It is ... probablethatthe majorityof the College,aftergraduating
as mastersof arts,wenton to read fora theologicaldoctorate" ;3
and Rous describedit as forTheology,Artsand Law. It is therefore
most strikingthat only a triflingii per cent of those recordedin
higherstudy were Theologiansby comparisonwith 85 per cent
Lawyers:froma facultypointof view by farthe mostunbalanced
college of all (if we omit Balliol and UniversityColleges in the
28 Ibid., i, no. 5, rubric I, pp. 3-4; see also rubric 8, pp. 20-3. For John
Rous's list of colleges and halls, see Appendix, below.
29 Statutes
of the Colleges of Oxford,i, no. 7, cap. I, pp. 12-19.
so Sir Edmund Craster, The History of All Souls College Library, ed.
E. F. Jacob (All Souls Studies, vi, London, 1971), P. 21.
thirteenth centurywith theirsmall recordedsamplesin which all
werereadingTheology).
Not surprisingly All Souls had a librarymoreor less suitedto its
needs: 49 Canon Law and 40 Civil Law manuscripts in its chained
libraryand a hundredlegalvolumesoutofthe16o or so in itslending
library,givingit the best legal libraryin later medieval Oxford
followed,naturallyenough,by New College.81 The precisedistri-
butionof books,however,with Canon Law outnumbering, if only
slightly,Civil Law, is perhapssomewhatunexpectedwhenone looks
at the numericalbalance withinthe threebranchesof Legal study.
Admittedly almosthalf(49 percent)ofthe131 Lawyerswerereading
bothLaws, but of theremaindermost (84 per cent,thatis 43 per
cent of the total) were studyingCivil Law - and, of course, the
relativelyfewCanonists(8 per centof the total)wouldall have had
to do theirstatutory threeyearson Civil Law. This distribution,
if somewhatat odds with the College's library,is howeverfairly
representative of collegesin general. Taking the middleages as a
whole,of membersof secularcollegesrecordedas studyingLaw, no
less than5I per centwereengagedon Civil Law, and 38 percenton
bothLaws, withonlya meagrei i percenton Canon Law; and these
figuresshowno significant variationswhenbrokendownby century
unlessit be thatin thefourteenth centuryCivil Law (6o per centby
comparisonwith33 percentforbothLaws and a mere7 per centfor
Canon Law) was evenmoreprominent.
There were, of course,collegiatedifferences withinthis general
distribution.Takingtheperiodas a wholetheCanonistswerenever
the largestLegal groupin anycollege.But theymightapproachone
of the othertwo groups,as at Queen's wheretheynearlyequalled
those studyingboth Laws; or even exceed one or the other,as at
Universitywheretheyexceptionally outnumberedthe Civiliansby
a largepercentage in, however,a verysmallsample,or at Exeterand
Lincoln wheretheyoutnumberedthe studentsin both Laws. On
theotherhand,at thetwoLegal colleges,All Souls and New College,
theyformed a farsmallerpercentage ofthewholeLegal contingent than
theydidatlarge,andsincethesetwocollegesbetweenthemhad no less
than437 ofthe611 recordedsecularcollegiateLawyers,thisis a point
of someimportance. I have alreadygiventhefiguresforAll Souls.
Those forNew Collegeareevenmoreremarkable. Ofits3oo Lawyers
only16 (5 per cent)wereCanonists- noneat all beingrecordedfor
the fourteenth centurydespitethe statutory provisionfor Io at any
one time- bycontrast with103 (34 percent,verycloseto theoverall
percentage) studentsofbothLaws and 181(60opercent)CivilLawyers.
Still these differences, manyof whichare not consistentwhenthe
31 Ibid.,pp. 22-3. See also N. R. Ker, Records
ofAll SoulsCollegeLibrary
1437-i6oo(OxfordBibliog.Soc., new ser.,xvi, 1971).
16 PASTANDPRESENT NUMBER 74
figuresare brokendown by generation,are very much withina
powerfuloverriding theme. Castingback to my earlierfiguresfor
the totalnumberof studentsof Canon Law in the University, the
secularcollegesrepresentedthe relativeimportanceof Canon Law
even worsethandid theeightnon-Legalsecularcollegesthatof Law
as a whole. This is perhapsthemorenoteworthy in that,on theface
of thingsat least,Canon Law and Theologywerereasonablyclosely
relatedif not in contentat leastin ethos. On the otherhand,when
we cometo theevidencebearingon careeropportunities we maysee
someglimmerings oftherealitiesbehindtheseand someofourother
figures.
As to the remainingfaculty,Medicine,it was so small that one
hesitatesto drawanyconclusionsas to distribution fromtheavailable
figures. We find Medicalstudents in all thesecularcollegesthoughin
varyingnumbers. Merton,from13oo00 onwards,neverhad less than
2 who may have been in residence,and usually 3 or 4, so
thatin total6 per centof thoserecordedas engagedon higherstudy
werein the Facultyof Medicine. Balliol had a littlegroupin the
firsthalfof the fourteenth centurybut only I recordedthereafter.
UniversityCollege had I or 2 in each generationfrom 1340
to 1459 but nonefortheremainderof the period. By contrastwith
thisfallingawayin thelaterfifteenth century, All Souls had between
2 and 4 from its foundationonwards; New College 2 or 3
in each fifteenth-century generation;Exeter, which had only 2
recorded in the fourteenthcentury(1320-59), had I or 2 in
each generationfrom i42o onwards; while Magdalen and Oriel
(which had usually had I in each generationin the fourteenth
century)also finishedwell so to say with respectively2 and 3
in the last twentyyearsof the fifteenth century. Queen's on the
otherhand had virtuallynone. Despite the poor showingof this
last college, those who studied Medicine, whetherwith another
graduatesubject or alone, had of all graduatestudentsthe best
chanceof securinga place in a secularcollege,38 per centbeingso
recorded,apartfromthetinyFacultyof Music, half(6 out of 13) of
whosescholarsweremembersof colleges.
Turningnow to theregularelement,it willbe convenient to treat
it moreor less as a whole. In all,fiveordersofmonks,twoofcanons
and thefourmajorordersoffriarsare recordedin thedata as having
sentmembersto Oxford. But theydid so in verydiffering numbers.
The small order of the Bonshommessent only I, the Cluniacs
5, the Carthusians 6 and the Premonstratensians 13.32 The
remainingregulars were all much greater in number. The
32 For the
presence at (or rather,more or less absence from) universitiesof
Premonstratensians,see H. M. Colvin, The WhiteCanons in England (Oxford,
1951), pp. 320-I. Though the Trinitarians had a house in Oxford, none is
recorded in our data.
AustinCanons werewell represented with128. But easilyheading
the list, and well above the Cistercianswith their 178, were the
Benedictineswith681 and afterthemthe fourordersof friars:the
Carmeliteswith244, theAustinFriarswith283 and markedly ahead,
as is not surprising,the Franciscanswith487 and the Dominicans
with 542. Thus in all there were 871 monks, 141 regular canons
and I,556 friars, 34 percent,5 percentand 61 percentof
respectively
totalregulars. As thesefiguressuggest,theregularelement,at least
fromthe adventof the friars,alwaysconstituteda veryimportant
groupnumerically, and one distinctin manywaysin additionto its
own avocation. Takingour periodas a whole,as alreadyindicated,
the regularsnumbered2,568 or 17 per cent of the total recorded
alumni. The numbersand percentagesdid, however,show some
interestingchangesovertheyears.
In thethirteenthcenturythepercentage ofregularsfluctuated
a good
deal witha highpointin thegeneration until
1220-39,declining 1279
and averaging14 per cent forthesefirsteightyyears. Then in the
generation I280-99thepercentage wentup sharplyto21 andremained
consistentlyhighif variable,witha peak in 1360-79of 24 per cent,
until1400-I9. By thislatterdatetherehad, however,been a down-
ward trendforfortyyears,and this continuedmore sharplyuntil
1460-79 (II per cent) with a finalrecoveryto 17 per cent in the last
twentyyearsof thefifteenth century. The fifteenth-centurydecline
continuedinto the nextcenturywhenregularsformedonly 14 per
centof thetotalrecordedUniversity population. Even so we can at
least see thatBishop Fox's originalscheme fora monasticcollege
was in no senselookingto a dyingcause,themoreso sincethelower
percentagesin the fifteenth and early sixteenthcenturiesalmost
certainly in partarisefromthe betterrecordingof otherelementsin
the University and not necessarily
fromany seriousdeclinein actual
numbers- indeedthe numberof regularsrecordedincreasesmore
or less consistentlyfrom 1280 to 1499.33
Fox's scheme,had it cometo fruition,
wouldhave broughtto four
the numberof Benedictinecolleges in Oxford,the othersbeing
Gloucester College, founded 1283-91 (for the generalityof
Benedictines),Durham College,foundedc. 1289 (forthe monksof
33 For the sixteenth-centuryfigures, see A. B. Emden, A Biographical
Registerof the Universityof OxfordA.D. 1So5 to 154o (Oxford, 1974). Emden
gives the total of the regulars as 748 out of total recorded alumni of about
5,240: ibid., pp. xviii and xxi. For Fox's draftscheme for a monastic college,
dated 1513, see Corpus Christi College, Oxford, Archives,Oxon. AI, caps. I,
euid. I, fasc. I (Twyne Transcripts,i, pp. 7 ff.); Thomas Fowler, The Historyof
Corpus ChristiCollege (Oxford Hist. Soc., xxv, 1893), p. 21, and J. G. Milne,
The Early HistoryofCorpusChristiCollege,Oxford(Oxford,1946), pp. 2-3. Both
Fowler and Milne record,withoutany apparentscepticism,the laterand perhaps
apocryphal storythat Fox was dissuaded fromhis monastic scheme by Hugh
Oldham, bishop of Exeter, on the grounds that there might soon be no more
monks.
Durham),and Canterbury College,founded1361 (forthemonksof

Canterbury, thoughtheyhad some otherprovisionby at least 1331).
London College (alias Burnell'sInn) was occupied by Benedictines
forpartof theearlierfifteenthcentury,but no Benedictine alumniare
recorded.Therewere,besides,twomorecollegesforregulars recorded
in ourdata: St. Mary'sCollege,foundedin 1435,forAustinCanons,
and St. Bernard'sCollege,foundedin 1437, forCistercians, though
they also had Rewley Abbey as a place of resortfrom about
1280. In additiontherewere,of course,the houses of the friars.
By contrastnone of the orderswith verysmall representation in
medieval Oxfordestablishedstudia there. In Rashdall's opinion
"thesemonasticcollegespossessverylittleimportance in the history
eitherof learningor of education".3" Such a view has little to
commendit, and mightwell be thoughtdisprovedby the simple
factthatgreatstatesmen suchas Chicheleand Fox ratedthemonastic
colleges so highly. At the very least the colleges provided
accommodation and a havenfroma bustlingand at timesdisorderly
townin a regularenvironment forthoseprofessing such a life.
The Benedictinecollegeswerenot,of course,solelyformonksof
that Order. Even Gloucester College, the only Benedictine
institutionopen to the Order as a whole,thoughits 78 recorded
membersuntil i419 were all Benedictines,had 7 recordedalumni
who were secularsout of its total of 77 for the remainderof the
fifteenthcentury. Durham College, from the changesinitiated
by Bishop Hatfield,and CanterburyCollege at its foundation
by ArchbishopIslip were both intendedto have a mixed body
of monksfromtheirparentcathedralsand seculars.35 Through-
out Canterbury College had a significant
numberof seculars,47 by
comparisonwith II Benedictinealumni. But it was in Durham
College, the largestof the monasticcollegesby some considerable
amount,thatthe non-Benedictines weremostprominent. Already
we find5 beforethereorganization ofc. 138I; and fromthatdateuntil
theendofthefifteenth century82 bycomparison with91 Benedictines.
This admissionof substantialnumbersof secular scholarsto
two of the Benedictinecolleges is the more noteworthy in that
therewere not wantingBenedictinestudentswithouta collegeat
all. In the period 1360 to 1499, that is the period duringwhich
therewerethreeBenedictinecolleges,only61 percentofall recorded
Benedictinesweremembersof colleges,332 out of a totalof 542, or
of2Io. Even so theBenedictines
a shortfall weremuchbetterplaced
than the othertwo orderswithcollegesin Oxford. St. Bernard's
34Rashdall, The Universitiesof Europe, ed. Powicke and Emden, iii, p. 190.
35Ibid., pp. 187 and 211-13. In CanterburyCollege, however,the position
was radically changed in favour of the monastic element ten years after the
foundation.
College, whichtook solelyCistercians,could still providefor only

40 per cent of the residentmembersof its Order,RewleyAbbey
doubtlesstakingothers. And the Austin Canons did even worse
withSt. Mary'sCollegewhichtooka mere18 percentoftheresident
membersof its Order- thoughhere, of course,it has to be re-
memberedthatthe Austinsalso had theirown housesin Oxfordat
whichtheymightstaywhilepursuingtheiruniversity studies.
Whatof the studiesof theregulars?I have alreadypointedto the
extremely largenumber(50oper cent)of regularswho proceededto
studyin a higherfaculty,and to the dominanceof Theologyamong
these. In fact 91 per cent of regular graduate studentswere
Theologians,amountingto 46 per cent of all recordedregulars
(2,568). For monksof all ordersthe corresponding figuresare 82
per cent and 39 per cent; for the regularcanons (Austins and
Premonstratensians) 45 per centand 19 per cent; and forthe friars
no less than99 per centand 52 per cent. These figuresshowRash-
dall's statementthat "monksneverapplied themselvescordiallyto
... theology"'36 to be quite wide of the mark,unless we make the
wildlyimprobableassumptionthat most of those who studied it
were dragoonedinto the subjectforyearsand neveracquired any
likingforits rigoursand relevanceto theirlives. For therestthere
are some not uninteresting contrastsbetweenregulars. Amongthe
friars,as alreadyindicated,higherstudyexcept in Theologywas
virtuallyunknown(12 studentsout of a total of 814). Similarly,
to take only orderswith graduatestudentsin double figures,the
Cistercianshad 5 out of 54. But amongthe Benedictinestherewas
a reasonablecontingent of Canon Lawyers,55 of the 354 graduate
studentsor 16 per cent,and a total of 66 Lawyersof all kindsor
19 per cent. The AustinCanons also showeda definitelikingfor
the Law: 17 Canon Lawyersout of a totalof 5I graduatestudentsor
33 per cent,and 25 Lawyersof all kindsor 49 per cent. Finally
the Premonstratensians, thoughso small in number(13) that the
figuresmay be unrepresentative, had 7 Canonistsout of 9 graduate
studentsand 8 Lawyersofall kindsout ofthe same number,figures
morein line withthe secularsthanthe regulars.37
Returning to themorespecificquestionofthedistribution ofhigher
studybetweenthe majorinstitutions of the University,
whatof the
halls? Here we are fortunate in havingthelistofJohnRous drawn
c.
up 1440-50detailing the hallsthenoccupied. Besides6 Grammar
halls and 4 halls withno designationRous names25 forArtists,2
36
Rashdall, op. cit., iii, p. 90o.
37 Colvin, The WhiteCanons in England,p. 321, notes that "several members
of the order in the fifteenthand early sixteenthcenturies are known to have
been bachelors of law, and one, who rose to high officein the Church, was a
doctor in the same faculty".
forTheologians(includingthe one assignedto "T. Morale") and no

less than34 forLawyers(of whichone was also forArtists).38 As to
theselatter,3 cannotbe identifiedwithcertainty in our data and one
has only2 recordedmembersin the fifteenth century. Of the re-
maining30, the data forRous's time (whichforthis purposeI am
takingas 1420-59)moreor less bear out his classification thoughthe
recordedLegal membershipof 3 fallsbelow 25 per cent and of 13
below 50oper cent. (Here, as in all cases of percentages relatingto
halls,theactualnumbersare,of course,small.) But at theleast,and
lookingback to what I have alreadysaid about graduatestudiesin
collegesand theplaceofLegal studiesin theUniversity as a whole,we
can be fairly
surethatitwasprimarily in hallsthatLawyershad to find
theirhomeand thatthehallsreflected muchmoreaccurately thandid
thegenerality ofthecollegestheLegal bias in thesecularelementof
the higherfacultiesin theUniversity. Quiteas interesting, and less
wellknown,is the situationregarding the Theologians. It has been
assumedthat,generallyspeaking,theydid not have theirown halls
but,aftergraduationin Arts,continuedto live alongsidetheirArtist
colleaguesin essentiallyArtisthalls.39 This mayindeed have been
true of most Theologiansin halls, but there seem to have been
more predominantlyTheological halls than Rous allowed for.
Taking our period as a whole but omittingthose halls with less
than 5 recordedmembersof higherfaculties,there are Io halls
whereTheologiansformat least75 percentofthosewitha recorded
higherfaculty,and of these thereare 3 wheretheymake up the
entirehigher-facultymembership.
I thinkwe mayreasonably concludefromthecollegiateand aularian
evidencethattherewas a quitepronouncedconcentration ofthemajor
higherfacultiesin different
institutions, and not just in certainhalls
as has previouslybeen supposed. In all but 2 of the 15 secularand
monasticcolleges Theology was dominant,by contrastwith the
remaining2 whereLaw tookprideof place. In the halls- which
of coursecould and did easilychangetheircharacter- therewere
many where Lawyers predominated,but a significantnumber
where Theologianswere the chief if not the only higher-faculty
element. And we may readilyrecognizethat such specialization
was sensibleenough in view of the teachingarrangements which
an
placed increasingemphasis on instruction within the University's
collegesand halls.
I turnnow to the geographicalrangeof Oxford'srecruitment and
88My figures are forRous's main list of 65 halls and his list of 6 halls
destroyed in his time. Whenthereis a difference betweenthetwoearlycopies
of Rous's list,I am herefollowingthatofMiles Windsor. For Rous'slist,see
Appendix, below.
11 A. B. Emden, An OxfordHall in Medieval Times(Oxford, 1927), P. 42.
theextentto whichit wasin directtouchwithotheruniversities either

by exportinggraduatesto themor by importing theirs.
As is wellknown,fromprobablyits earliestdaysand untilbeyond
the period I am concernedwith,the Universitytook verycareful
note of one fundamentaldivision,that betweenthe northernand
southernnations.40 Though it neveraccordedthemany statutory
existence,itsinternalorganization was mostpowerfully influencedby
this division,as forinstancein the institution of the two proctors,
onealwaysfromthenorthern nationandonefromthesouthern. And
therewas likewisetraceofsouthernor northern bias in somecolleges
and halls: forinstanceMertonwas southern,Queen's and Lincoln
northern. I have not studiedin detailand cannothere discussthe
University's recruitment as betweenthe Englishstudentsin the two
nations. But I have lookedat all non-Englishscholarsand also at
all membersof the Universitywho are knownto have studiedat
anotheruniversity or place of higherlearning.
Now as withthe questionof the balance betweenTheologyand
Law, so here I suppose there is somethingof a long-standing
impression,thoughless pronounced,that Oxfordwas, throughout
themiddleages and despiterecurrent warsbetweenthiscountryand
notablyFrance, an international university:not as internationalas
Paris, of course,withits fournationsand much greatersize, but
international nonetheless. The biographicalevidenceclearlyshows
that this was never so. Oxfordwas overwhelmingly an English
university,with a modest recruitment from Ireland, Wales and
Scotland but a negligibleconnectionwith any countryproperly
speakingabroad. Oxford,in brief,despiteits Europeanreputation
at certaindates,was a homespunplace, as of courseit remainedfor
centuriesto come,indeeduntilquite recenttimes.
Consideringfirstthe overseasscholars,one came from Crete:
the FranciscanPeterde Candia, who latertaughtin EasternEurope
and who had a briefpontificate as AlexanderV from1409 untilhis
possible poisoningthe followingyear. Eight came fromEastern
Europe. Neitherof these figuresneed surpriseus in view of the
distanceand the plentifulavailabilityof universitiesnearerto hand.
Comingcloserto England,a mere33 camefromtheIberianpeninsula;
and even closer,to an area withwhichof coursethis countryhad
extremelystrongties, only 19 came from the Low Countries.
Germanywith 54 and France with 70 had more healthytallies,
exceeded only by the Italians (75 per cent of them friars)who
numbered74. The total of overseasscholarsis thusa mere 259,
well under2 per cent of our recordedalumni.
The totalfromIreland,Scotlandand Wales is morerespectable
4" A. B. Emden, "Northernersand Southernersin the Organization of the
Universityto i509", in Oxford Studies Presentedto Daniel Callus.
but stillquitelimited,being642 or somewhatover4 per centforthe

wholeperiod. The distribution of thesescholarsbetweenthe three
countriesis, however,interesting because distinctly uneven. Very
nearly half,315 in fact,of the 642 were from Ireland. At the other
end was Scotland,whichof coursehad its own universities in the
latermiddleages,with129 or 20oper centofthetotal. The remain-
ing 198 or 31 per centwerefromWales. It wouldobviouslybe very
instructiveto knowwhatproportionof thesescholarsfromIreland,
Scotlandand Wales weretruenativesand whatproportionEnglish
settlersmaintaining theirEnglishry. It is indeed sometimesclear
frompersonalnames in which categoryparticularscholarsshould
be placed. For instancetherewas Thomas Anglicuswho, though
we know nothingelse about him, was an Irishmanof sufficient
standingin theUniversity to be one oftheIrishpartiesto theconcord
betweenthe northernand the Irish scholarsin 1252. Or Bernard
of BristolM.A., of St. David's diocese,whoin 1331obtaineda papal
reservation of a livingin the giftof PembrokePriory. Or againwe
need be in little doubt about the WelshmenDafydd ab Owain,
David ap Howell, David ap Jevanap Howel, David ap Rees alias
Johanand so on. But unfortunately thesampleof thosewhoserace
can be deduced with some certainty is too small to allow much
in thewayofconclusions, exceptpossiblythattherewas a reasonable
admixturein each of the threegroups.
Apartfromthe understandably largernumbersof Irish, Scottish
and Welshscholarsby comparisonwithcontinentals, thereare other
pronouncedand extremely revealingdifferences between the two
groupsand to some extentwithinthem. Firstas regardsstudyin
the higherfaculties. Not surprisingly but certainlyworthyof note
as to themagnitude ofthedifference, a significantly greaterproportion
of continentals proceededto higherstudythandid scholarsfromthe
homecountriesof Ireland,Scotlandand Wales. Over 50 per cent
ofcontinentals areso recordedas against36 percentofthosefromthe
homecountries,therebeingno verymarkeddivergences fromthese
percentages in the constituent countriesexceptthat France had the
lowest,40 per cent,amongthe continentals and Italythehighest,62
per cent (most, as already remarked,being friars). Far more
striking than thesevarious percentagesof graduatestudywerethe
actual subjectsof study. The majorityof the continentals came to
studyTheology,103 out of a total
of 132, that is 78 percent, Law trail-
ingwitha mere21 percent(evenlydividedbetweenCivil,Canonand
bothLaws). On theotherhand,themajority oftheIrish,Scotsand
Welsh came to study Law, Lawyers totalling186 with only 46
Theologians,respectively 80oper centand 20 per cent. The overall
orderofpreference wasbothLaws, CanonLaw and CivilLaw, though
Civil Law was muchmorecommonamong the Welshthan among
the other two nationalities,and Canon Law among the Scots

(hardlyany, however,being Theologians). The predominanceof
Theologiansamongthe continentals in factreflectsanothercontrast
betweenthemand the home-country students. This is the much
largerpercentageof continentalswho were membersof religious
orders. In all 159 of the 259 overseasscholars,thatis 6I per cent,
were regulars, as against only 59 of the 642 home-country
scholars,thatis a mere9 per cent. Predictablythe fourordersof
friarsmade up almosttheentireoverseasregularcontingent, 151 out
of 159. Not unnaturally,the Dominicans were in the lead,
though only narrowlyso over the Austins (very prominentin
the German recruitment)with the Franciscans(due to a large
intake from Italy) not all that far behind with 35, whereas
the Carmelites had a mere 7. But it is another mark of
Oxford'sinsularitythat the numberof Dominicans,despite the
emphasistheirOrderplaced on overseasstudy,shouldhave been so
low, only 57. Among the home-country regulars also it was
the friarswho were the largestelement. In conformity with the
generalityof regulars,mostoverseasand home-country regularsin
higherfacultiesread Theology,thoughmore noticeablyso in the
case of the overseas.
Finallyoneotherconclusionandforthemostpartdifference, under-
standableenough,is worthmentioning.None of the non-English
groupsfoundit at all easyto obtainmembershipof a college,the
collegiatetallyforthegoI non-English scholarsbeingonly5o. As one
wouldexpect,thecontinentals foundit hardestofall,no morethan14
oftheir259 alumnibeingrecordedwitha collegiateconnection. The
Scots too hardlyever seem to have had a college: just a single
Scot is so recordedfromtheirtotalrecruitment of 129. And it also
looks as thoughfor them,as for the continentals, the halls were
difficultto penetratesince only I and 3 respectively are recorded
as residentsin the whole of our period. In other words, if
the evidencecan be trusted,most in both groupswere obligedto
live in lodgings apart, of course, from the friarswho would
presumablyhave residedin the conventof theirorder. The Irish
fareda littlebetterin regardto the colleges,having I recorded
membersoutoftheirtotalof315. ButreallyonlytheWelshachieved
some moderatedegree of success in breachingthe walls of the
predominantly English colleges, with 24 of their 198 recorded
scholarsas members.
Moreoverboth the Irish and the Welsh seem to have obtained
reasonablyreadyaccommodation in halls.4 JohnRous, in his list
41 In this paragraph
I have broughtintothe reckoninga fewpersonsas
Irishand moreas Welshon the basisoftheirnameseventhoughtheywerenot
so classified
in thecomputerization.Some ofthenumbersare,therefore,
not
comparableto thoseused earlier.
24 PASTANDPRESENT NUMBER 74
drawnup c. 1440-5o,recordedamonghis 34 hallsforLegists4 that
were for Irish Legists and one that was for Welsh. It has long
been supposed on the basis of this evidence that there were
some hallswhichat leastat certaindateswerereservednot onlyto
scholarsin particularfaculties(a point with whichI have already
dealtas faras concernsthe higherfaculties)but to Irishon the one
hand and Welshon the other,whileallowingthathallscould change
theircharacter and nationality(perhapsquitereadily)fromone period
to another,for instanceby changes in the inclinationsof their
principals. As for virtuallyevery other topic concerned with
the halls,our evidenceis unfortunately veryscantyon this general
point. For instance,we know the names of 7 evidentlyWelsh
or predominantly Welsh halls attackedby northerners in Lent
1389.42 One of these halls does not figurein our data at all, the
remainder haveveryfewrecordedresidents aroundthisdate and none
who was definitely Welsh,and onlyone or two possibleWelshmen
at any time. Even so, and returningto Rous's list, our data for
the mid-fifteenth century(1420-59) can fairlybe said partlyto
confirm, and partlyand moreinterestingly to modifyhis description.
For instance,Rous's one Welsh Legist hall is heavilyso, with
3I
per centofits membersbeingWelsh,therebeingonlyone Irishman.
Conversely, of the4 LegisthallsRous listedas Irishthereis onlyone
recordedIrishmanin CoventryHall, althoughAristotleHall was
certainlyveryIrish. Another,however,Vine Hall, not onlyhas no
recordedIrish members,but 2 of its 20 recordedmembersare
Welsh. One obvious possibilityis that Rous simplygot his facts
wrong; and he gave no nationalityfor another hall, Trillock's
Inn, whichon our data he should probablyhave listed as Welsh.
Alternatively someor all ofthehallsin questionwerein factofmixed
nationality. Certainlythis was the case withthe last of his Irish
halls, Heron (or Eagle) Hall, whichhas 29 per cent recordedIrish
but also 14 per centrecordedWelshmembers. Indeed,ifone takes
the evidenceas a whole,it seemsto suggestthatthe sharpcontrast
in national membershipof halls that historianshave inferred
fromRous's list was verymuch the exceptionratherthan the rule
and that a mixtureof Irish and Welsh, both southernersby
classification,was very common. At the same time the Welsh,
despite their smalleroverall numbers,appear more numerousas
membersof halls than the Irish - about 85 by comparisonwith
about36 - and morewidelydistributed, in 42 as opposedto 19 halls
of different name. So, as with collegiatemembership, the Welsh
seemthe mostsuccessfulof thethreehomecountriesin assimilating
themselvesto the institutions of medievalOxford.
1
Emden, "Northernersand Southerners", pp. 14-15 and references.
If Oxfordwas veryinsularin its recruitment, to whatextent,one
maygo on to ask,was thisinsularity in anywaymodifiedor lessened
by directcontactswithotheruniversities and thelikeeitherbywayof
importing theirgraduates or scholars or by exportingits own? The
answer,takingthe periodcoveredby our data as a whole,is little
enoughby way of either. In all out of our 14,922recordedalumni
only735 arelistedas havingstudiedelsewhere,and thismayin some
cases have been onlyto give a lectureor two or somethingsimilar.
In factone maybe fairlyconfident in sayingthatless than700, less
than 5 per cent and perhapsquite a fewless than this ever really
studiedat anotheruniversity or thelike. It is hardto knowwhatto
make of the distributionof these scholarsover the twenty-year
generations. If we simplytake the figuresas theystand,thenthe
peak of the externalconnectionsof the University was in the period
before1200, fromwhichdate until near the mid-fifteenth century
therewas a moreor less steadyand verymarkeddecline,followedby
a distinctrise in the later fifteenth centuryto a level comparable
withthatof the mid-thirteenth century. Simplifiedintothe three
centuriesin question,afterthe twelfth,those with some recorded
associationwithanotherplace of higherlearningconstituted7 per
centof recordedalumniin the thirteenth century,4 per centin the
fourteenth and nearly5 per centin the fifteenth.
Lookingat the positionin moredetailbut forlimitedperiods,I
haveanalysedthedatarelatingto all thealumniwithotheruniversity
connectionsin three generationalperiods: 1300-19, a period of
relativepeace betweenEngland and France; 1340-59,a period of
more or less continuoushostilitiesbetweenthe two countriesand
also,ofcourse,oftheBlackDeath; and finally1480-99,againa period
of generaloverseaspeace but one in whichwe wouldbe preparedto
findchangesfromthe earlierperiods. In the firsttwo periodsthe
totalsof those knownto have studiedelsewhereare verymodest:
outoffullgenerational totalsof 1,II2 and I,o86 only51 and 35. The
numberwithinthesetotalsof those whose university originin the
case of importsand universitydestinyin the case of exportsis
definitelyknownis smallerstill. However,as one would expect,
the main connectionin the firstof the three periods was with
Paris,and afterthat- thougha good way so - withCambridge.
Otheruniversities had onlythe slightestcontact,and it is perhaps
noteworthy thatnot a singleLawyeris knownto havegoneto or come
fromBologna. Exportswell exceededimports:in the case of Paris,
forinstance,15 as against6 definitecases. Most of thosegoingto
Paris or to CambridgewereTheologians. And finallymembersof
religiousordersweremuchmorelikelyto haveanotheruniversity than
weretheseculars,therebeinga totalof 19 regularsoutofthe5I in our
firstperiod,thatis 37 per cent,and all but one of themfriars. The
picturein theperiod1340-59is not,interestingly enough, especially

differentin mostregards, thoughtherewas one exportin Law to
Bolognaand one exportand one importin respectof thenewly-
foundedUniversity of Prague. The religious are, however, even
moreprominent, 21 outof35,thatis 6o percent,all but2 ofthem
friars.Bythethirdselected period,1480-99, therehavebeenradical
changesin thesituation.The increase in recorded numbers to 211
may notbe ofanygreatconsequence due tobetter but
recording, the
make-upis. Exportsstillexceedimports, butfarmorestrikingly.
Thus 137 scholarsproceededfromOxfordto anotheruniversity,
whereas at most16 cameto it fromelsewhere (58 beinguncertain).
Thentheseseconduniversities are,forthemostpart,notcontinental;
andsuchas arecontinental areverydifferently distributedfrom those
in thefirsttwosampleperiods. It wouldnotbe trueto saythatno
onewenttoParisinthelasttwenty yearsofthefifteenth century, but
veryfewdid,6 outofourknown exportsof137;similarly noonecame
thenceto Oxforddirectly, thoughone scholardid via Padua. By
contrasta significant
numberofOxonianswasresorting to Bologna
- 14aresorecorded, allbut2 ofthemtoreadoneoftheLawsormore
oftenboth- andalsototheItalianuniversities thathadproliferated
sincetheearlierperiods:5 to Ferrara, 4 to Turin,anda totalof15
elsewhere,making a grandtotalof38 to Italianuniversities.But
farandawaythemostimportant difference fromtheearlierperiods
is theadvanceofCambridge.Thiswasnotparticularly as a placeof
import sinceonlyIo scholars arerecorded as coming thence, butas
a place of export,no less than98 of thoseforwhomwe have
information, 137, thatis 72 per cent.43And thischangein the
migration outwards of Oxford'salumniis matchedby two other
interrelatedchangesofalmostequal dimension.Firsttheregulars
areno longerdominant amongeitherexports or imports.Only36
of our totalsample of 2II, thatis 17 per cent,were regulars,and
thoughthefourordersoffriars
formthemajority,
themostlargely
single
represented orderis nowtheBenedictines.
This,secondly,
is reflectedin the balance of higherstudyrepresentedin the list.
Only71 out of the 167 in higherfaculties,thatis 43 per cent,were
Theologians,while88 or 53 per cent were Lawyersof one kind or
another.
I wouldnot,ofcourse,
fora moment suchas I
thatfigures
suggest
and for study at
have been quotingfor non-Englishrecruitment
otheruniversities
arethewholestoryofOxford's relations.
external
4" For a brief discussion of the position in the early sixteenth century
regarding migrations between Oxford and Cambridge and also regarding
continentaluniversities,see James Kelsey McConica, English Humanistsand
ReformationPoliticsunderHenry VIII and Edward VI (Oxford, 1965), pp. 85-6.
Clearlywe have to lookat thebooksreadand writtenat the Univer-
sity,at lecturesand disputationsso faras we knowthemand so on.
But the figurescannotbe ignored,the more so since theycan to
someextentat leastbe understood. To takeone pointonly,thesize
and reputationof Cambridgehad increased by the end of the
fifteenthcentury, perhapsto thepointwhereit was nearingOxfordif
not in numbersat least in regardand in opportunities.In both
respectsit wouldtendto attract- and our figuresshowthatit did
attract- Oxonians,ifonlyin orderto findemployment ofonekindor
another. On theotherhand,Oxford,muchmoreof a closed shop,
seems to have offeredfew attractionsor outlets for aspiring
graduatesfromCambridge.
What then of the career opportunitiesof Oxford's alumni?
These maybe roughlydivided intoecclesiasticalpreferment, royal,
episcopal, noble and papal service or administration, and lastly
practiceas a notarypublic.
In regardto ecclesiasticalpreferment, in which of course large
numbersofOxford'salumnisharedto someextent,we mayreasonably
concentrate ourattentionon thehighestonly:on episcopaland decanal
appointments in thesecularchurchand on headshipsofhousesamong
theregulars. It is a familiarenoughfact- it has beenfora genera-
tionat least- thatincreasingly as themiddleages wenton graduates
wereappointedto bishoprics;44 and aftertheirpromotion, of course,
severaloftheseacademicsshowedtheirrecognition oftheiruniversity
trainingby the foundationof colleges at Oxfordand Cambridge.
The figuresI have assembledfullybear out this view.45 Taking
the whole period fromthe accession of Henry III in 1216 to
1499, 57 per cent of English bishops were Oxford men, while
44 Marion Gibbs and Jane Lang, Bishops and Reform1215-1272 (London,
K. Edwards, "Bishops and Learning in the Reign of Edward
1934), PP. 25-50;
II", ChurchQuarterlyRev., cxxxviii(1944); K. Edwards, "The Political Import-
ance of theEnglishBishopsduringtheReignofEdwardII", Eng.Hist.Rev.,
lix (1944); W. E. L. Smith, Episcopal Appointments
and Patronagein theReign
ofEdwardII (Chicago,1938); J. R. L. Highfield,"The EnglishHierarchy in
theReignof EdwardIII", Trans.Roy.Hist. Soc., 5thser.,vi (1956); andGuy
Fitch Lytle,"PatronagePatternsand OxfordCollegesc. 13oo-c. 1530", in
Stone (ed.), The Universityin Society,i, p. 134.
4 For listsof archbishops and bishops,see Handbook of BritishChronology,
2nd edn.,ed. F. M. Powickeand E. B. Fryde(London,1961). Unsuccessful
contenders (e.g. in disputedelections)have not been counted. Archbishops
and bishopshave been reckonedonlyundertheirhighestdegree(or study)at
theirfirstuniversity otherthanOxfordand Cambridgehave not
(universities
beentakenintoaccount):fordetailsofstudyseeEmden,Biographical of
Register
the Universityof Oxfordto A.D. iSoo and Emden, Biographical Registerof the
Universityof Cambridgeto S5oo. Names listed by Emden as possible alumni
of Oxfordor of Cambridgehave been included under their respective
universities;
similarlythoselistedby Emden in the Appendixto Biog. Reg.
Univ. Oxfordto 5Ioo as probablyof eitherOxfordor Cambridgehave been
countedunderOxford. Finallypersonswho held twoor moredifferent sees
in successionhave been countedundereach see.
Cambridge'sshare was Io per cent, that is 67 per cent in all.

Oxford,therefore, was dominantoverall. But it came to have a
real grip on the episcopatein the fifteenth century,duringwhich
72 per cent of all episcopal appointmentswere of its alumni
comparedwithonly19 per centfromCambridge,the non-Oxbridge
elementhavingfallenaway to a mere9 per cent. In this century
onlyYork had less than50 per centof Oxonians(2 Oxfordalumni,
3 Cambridgealumniand one other),whereasCanterbury(5) and
Hereford(9) had nothingelse. Moreover,lookingto the university
studiesof the Oxoniansappointedto the episcopatefrom1216 to
1499,it was the Lawyerswho wentoffwithmostof the prizes,45
per centof all Oxoniansappointedbeingfromthatbranchof study
as opposed to 28 per cent fromTheology, Arts trailingwith a
mere8 percent,and otherswhosestudiesare notknown19 per cent.
And withinthe Law the Civil Lawyerswerein the lead with23 per
cent,followedby Canon Lawyerswith12 per centand studentsin
bothLaws withio per cent- a farmorepronouncedprominence of
Civil Lawyers,of course,thaneven in the University at large.
The figuresfor appointments to deanshipsin the nine English
secular cathedrals are very similar.46 Taking here the figures
fromtheaccessionofEdwardII in 1307to 1499,60 percentofall deans
wereOxfordalumni,theonlycathedralfallingsignificantly belowthis
level being Lichfieldwith25 per cent (4 out of 16), it being also
the secularcathedralwiththe smallestnumberof Oxonianbishops
(7 out of 18 or 39 per centin all and stillonly4 out of 8 or 50 per
centin the fifteenth century). As withthe bishops,Oxford'sshare
in the preferments increasedas the middleages wenton. Whereas
in thefourteenth century(from1307) only51 per centof deanswere
Oxfordmenwhile44 percentwerenotrecordedas Oxbridgealumni,
in the fifteenthcenturya formidable70 per cent of deans
appointedwere Oxfordalumni as against the 15 per cent from
Cambridge,the remainderhavingshrunkto 15 per cent. In regard
to subjects of universitystudy, however, there is a clear
difference betweenthe deans and the bishops. Amongthe deans
Theologiansmakeup just 19 per cent. Lawyerson theotherhand,
somewhatunderhalfin the case of the bishops,are in a majority,
forming no less than65 per centof all Oxoniansappointed. Again
the Civiliansare theleadinggroupamongthe Lawyers,butfarmore
conspicuouslyso in thattheyprovided37 per centof all Oxonians
appointedwithstudentsof bothLaws (16 per cent)well behindand
Canonistsas withthe bishopsprovidingonly 12 per cent.
For a memberof the religiousordersthe equivalentto episcopal
4 For lists of deans, see JohnLe Neve, Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae1300oo-54,
new edn., 12 vols. (London, 1962-7). Deans have been counted in the same
way as bishops (see above, note 45).
promotionby thisperiodwas in practiceheadshipof a house,almost

invariablyhis own. Here also the University'salumnidid notably
well. Takingall graduatestogether, thatis Artistsand studentsin the
higherfaculties,and leavingaside the twelfth centurybecauseof the
smallnessof the sample,28 per centof all regularsbecameheads of
housesin the thirteenth century,21 in the fourteenth and 25 in the
fifteenth.Withinthesetotalfigures, as wouldbe expected,theArtists
did verymarkedlyless well thanthosein higherfaculties. For the
threecenturies in questionthepercentage forArtists
figures were22, IO
and 12, comparedwiththe much higherfiguresforgraduatesin the
higherfacultiesof 35, 31 and 38. And these percentagesresult
from high absolute numbers. In the fourteenthcentury45
Artistsand 156 graduatesfromthe higherfacultiesobtainedhead-
ships; in the fifteenth the corresponding figuresare 76 and 242.
Whetherit was onlythe most giftedregularswho came to Oxford
and of these onlythose in the top flightwho went on to a higher
faculty,or whetherthe intellectualrigoursof a university training
especiallyin thehigherfacultiesreallydid developtheskillsnecessary
to gainpromotion one obviouslycannotbe sure. But whatis certain
is that Oxford made a very substantial contributionindeed
to the leadershipof the major regularordersduringthe medieval
period. And thisis clearlyof vitalimportancetoo if viewed from
the receivingend which,so to say,was gettinga good returnon its
investment in universityeducation. If we take into account also
thecontribution ofCambridgewhichthereis everyreasonto suppose
was similarthoughnumerically smaller,it musthave been the case
thattheheadsofEngland'sreligioushouseswerea verywell-educated
groupof men,and perhapsfroman earlierdate thanwerethoseof
the secularchurchwhich,possiblybecauseit was undercloserroyal
control,respondedsomewhatless rapidlyto the benefitsbestowed
by a university training.
Turningnow to the fourgroupsof employment in or association
withroyal,episcopal,nobleand papal servicebroadlyconstrued, one
would not expectthe regularsto have anyverylargerepresentation.
In fact their numbersare quite high. In the thirteenth century
15 per cent of all regularswent into one or other such formof
service; and the correspondingfiguresfor the fourteenthand
fifteenthcenturiesare II per cent and 7 per cent. As with
promotionsto headshipsand as is in no way remarkable, scholars
in the higherfacultiesperformed much betterthanthe remainder,
thepercentages fortheformer being23, 17 and II bycomparison with
only8, 5 and 2 fortheremainder, theselatterpercentages representing
verysmall actual numbers,an averageof only 18 forthe last two
centuries.
For the secularsthese fourgroupsof advancementconstituted,
along with canonries,prebends,parochialcures and the like, the

major careeropportunities, and had theyfailedto make headway
hereone mightwell wonderwhattheyweredoingat Oxfordat all.
In factthe figuresas a whole are not all thatimpressive. In the
thirteenth century26 per cent found a place in one or more of
thesefouravenuesofadvancement, butin thefourteenth thepercent-
age is down to 16 and in the fifteenthto 8. To a veryconsiderable
extent,however,thisis due to the poor performance of the Artists.
Those fromthe higherfacultiesfaredmuch better,thoughtheir
percentagerates of achievementalso declinedverymarkedlyfrom
48 per centin thethirteenth centuryto 41 per centand 20 per cent
in the succeedingcenturies. As one would suppose,in the case of
graduatesin each of the higherfacultiesas also with the Artists,
employmentin royal or (exceptforgraduatesin Medicine where
noble servicetook second place) episcopal servicewas the most
common,thoughthereis no particularconsistencyas betweenthe
two. Then the Theologiansdid distinctly poorly. If we takeonly
royal and episcopal servicefor each of thethree centuriesin question
only I5 per cent, 18 per cent and II per cent of theirnumbers
obtainedsomeformof royalassociation,thecorresponding figuresfor
episcopalassociationbeinglowerstillat I6, 1o and 6. On theother
hand the Lawyersdid verywell, thus helpingfurthertowardsan
understanding of theirnumericalstrengthamong secularsin the
University. Takingall Lawyerstogether, 62 percentachievedsome
formof associationin thethirteenth century, 47 percentin thefour-
teenthand 20 per cent in the fifteenth.Looking, as with the
Theologians, only to royal and episcopal association,the per-
centagesare 38, 28 and then droppingsharplyto 9 in the case of
theformer;and 37, 24 and 12 in the case of thelatter. As between
thedifferent branchesofLegal study,thereis thenowfamiliar pattern
of the Civilians and the studentsin both Laws normallydoing
best in all typesof association,withthe Canonistsperforming not
poorly (better than the Theologians except, marginally,in the
fifteenth century)but certainlyless well. And finallythereis the
equallyfamiliar factofthelow performance ofthosewithno recorded
higherfaculty. They were least unsuccessfulin royalservice,but
even therethe successrate was extremely low: 13 per centforthe
thirteenth century,fallingto 5 per cent and 2 per cent for the
remaining centuries.
The final categoryof employmentfor seculars I intend to
discuss is that of notarypublic. Here the numbers(260 seculars
and 2 regularsin the whole period) and percentageswere never
large, and indeed none at all is recorded before the last two
decades of the thirteenthcentury. Naturallyenough almost no
Theologians enteredthis profession. For the most part it was
MEDIEVAL
OXFORD'S ALUMNI 31
a career- a humbleand usuallynota particularly rewarding one -
intowhichCanon and Civil Lawyersor studentsin bothLaws went
in fairlyreasonablenumbers. For instanceio percentofall students
in bothLaws becamenotariespublicin boththe fourteenth and the
fifteenth centuries,this being the highestentrancerate,the Civil
Lawyerscomingnext and the Canonistsas usual last with only 2
and 4 per cent in the same two centuries. In additiona limited
numberofthosewithno higherfacultyalso enteredon the careerof
notarypublic,thoughin percentagetermsthefiguresare almostas
low as thoseforthe Theologians.
Leaving aside the notariespublic,the pronounceddeclinein the
success rate of Oxford's secular alumni in the four avenues of
advancementI discussedpreviouslyof royal,episcopal,noble and
papal association,comparedto theirrisingand veryhigh success
ratesforepiscopaland decanalappointments to whichI have already
drawn attention,certainlyposes a problemand presentsa picture
thatmightbe thoughtinherently improbable. The figuresand the
contrastshould in additionbe takenalongsidethose presentedby
ProfessorGuy Lytlein his essayon "PatronagePatternsand Oxford
Colleges c. I3oo-c. 1530". According to Professor Lytle, writing
(as I understandhim) solelyof appointmentsto canonries,prebends
and parochialcuresin a sectionentitled"The Crisisof Patronage,
c. 1340-c.1430": "At some pointin the second quarterof the 14th
century,thepercentage ofgraduatesreceivingpositionsturneddown-
ward. This trendwas accentuatedin thelatterhalfofthatcentury,
and recoverywas slow untilthe 1430swhenthe crisisended."47
On firstsightthe figuresI have quotedforadvancement in royal
and otherservicewould seem to lend generalsupportforProfessor
Lytle's thesis. But, to start with, their chronologyis quite
different.If we takeall secularsfrom1340,thereis in effect
a steady
decline(withof coursesome slightdeviations)fromthatdate right
throughto the end of the fifteenth century;and broadlyspeaking
the same is true if we differentiatebetweenthose with a higher
facultyand thosewithout. So the "crisis"wouldthenextendto the
end ofthemiddleagesin thisbroadrangeofemployment.Moreover
on the figuresavailable, it began before 134o: in 1320 if not in 1300,
beforewhich date the statisticsare so incompletethat the higher
(but even then falling) percentage of achievement in the
thirteenthcenturyis hard to evaluateand may not be particularly
significant.There are, furthermore, importantconsiderationsthat
makeit hard to assess accuratelythe figuresI have quoted. Better
recordingof a widerrangeof the University'smembershipin the
latermiddleages bringsintothestatisticsmanymoreor less obscure
personswho would not have been therebefore. This musthave a
7 Lytle, op. cit., pp. 122-34: the quotation is at pp. 123-4.
depressingeffecton the percentagesof those who achieved the

advancement of whichwe are talking,who wouldhavestooda fairly
good chanceof beingrecordedin the fourteenth no less thanin the
fifteenthcentury. Then againwe musthave regardto the inherent
likelihoodofthings. Is it probablethatan episcopalbenchthatwas,
as we have seen,increasingly graduateand indeedOxfordby origin,
or a royaladministration in whichgraduatesweremore and more
prominent wouldhaveemployedin whatevercapacityso manyfewer
ofthealumnioftheirownalmamater? It is hardlythewayOxford
men have generallybehaved,and one would certainly have thought
the reverse. Nor indeed,if we could take thefiguresmoreor less
as theystandand not as percentagesof totalrecordedalumnior of
totals of those with or without higher faculties, would the
evidenceshowthattheydid. In thefourteenth century 346 members
of higherfacultiesare recordedas enteringthe variousoccupations
in questionby comparisonwith431 in the fifteenth.The figures
forthosewithno recordedhigherfacultydo indeedshow a decline,
from214 to 161, but if we aggregatethe two categorieswe have
560 forthe fourteenthcenturyand 592 for the fifteenth.Even
though,of course,we cannotreasonablytake the figureswithout
many qualifications, theyare at least a furtherreminderthat the
actual declinein the rateof achievement amongOxford'salumniin
thesefouravenuesofadvancement may not havebeen as greatas the
percentagefigureson theirown suggest. Still,at the momentand
by way of a provisionalconclusion,it looks not improbablethat
Oxford'salumnidid findthegoingharderin thesefourareasand also
(thoughthis too will need more research)in sub-decanalcapitular
and parochialpreferment.If so we may finda situationnot alto-
getherdissimilarfromthat of the alienatedintellectualsdiscussed
forthe earlierseventeenth centuryby ProfessorCurtis48 - relieved,
however,by the availabilityof moreof the real plumsat the top of
the ecclesiasticaltree. But thistoo,like the questionof the size of
the University to whichindeedit is closelyrelated,mustwaituntil
anotheroccasionforits moreconclusivediscussion.
What finallyof writing,of the academicvocationin the proper
sense,and theownership ofbooks? Takingtheregularsand seculars
together,theTheologiansoutstripped all othergroupsin thisrespect,
21 per centof thembeingrecordedas havingwrittensomething and
22 per cent as havingowned books. By contrastthe Lawyersof
variouskindsare onlyabout5 percentauthorsand about 12 percent
ownersof books. Given the large numberof Theologiansamong
authors(53 percent)and givenalso theprominence ofregularsamong
Theologians to which I have alreadydrawn it is no surprise
attention,
4" Mark H. Curtis, "The Alienated Intellectuals of Early Stuart England",
Past and Present,no. 23 (Nov. I962), passim.
that the incidenceof authorshipwas noticeablyhigherwith the
regularsthanthe seculars. Similarlyit is altogether to be expected
thatauthorship was in generalfarmorewidespreadamongstudentsin
higherfacultiesas a wholethanamongthosewithno recordedhigher
faculty,thatis forthe mostpart the Artists. Taking the regulars
as a group,an impressiveI5 per centare recordedas authors,while
of thosewho proceededto a higherfacultythe percentageis 24 as
against6 forthe remainder. The equivalentfigures forthe seculars
are merely4, 8 and 2.
Lookedat in moredetailtherearesomeotherinteresting differences
betweentheregularsand seculars. With the regulars,Theologians
necessarily(in view of theirtotal numbers)constitutedalmostthe
entire body of authorsin higherfaculties,some 97 per cent,and
79 per cent of all recorded regular authors. By contrastthe
Theologianswerefarless dominantamongthe seculars,beingonly
51 per cent of authorsin higherfacultiesand 31 per cent of all
recordedsecularauthors. Moreoverthepercentage ofsecularauthors
with no recordedhigherfacultywas over twice as great as the
corresponding figureforthe regulars,40 per centas against19 per
cent of all recorded authors. Further,whereas only the most
insignificant number of regular authors were Lawyers, quite a
large proportionof secular authorscame fromthis area of study:
28 Canonists(6 per cent),44 Civilians(io per cent)and 38 students
of both Laws (9 per cent) - a total of IIo or 25 per cent of all
recordedsecularauthors.
There are, too, clear distinctionsbetween the regulars,not
in the dominance of Theology - with the exception of the
Premonstratensians whose only 2 authors(out of a total member-
ship of 13) wereCanonists- but in the occurrenceof authorship of
any kind. Monks ranked lowest, with only Io per cent of their
scholars recorded as authors, though the largest group, the
Benedictines,were marginally above this with i i per cent. Then
camethecanons,farsmallerin overallnumbers,but with16 percent
of their membersrecorded as authors. Their authors are also
interesting since those with no recordedhigherfacultyexceeded
thosewithone,being64 percentoftotalauthorsamongthecanonsas
opposed to 36 per cent, the only instance of this particular
phenomenon. Then, moreproductivethan any othergroup,were
the friars,I8 per cent of whose membersare recordedas authors.
Of these therewere few withouta higherfaculty,but those with
one madeup an imposing30 per centof all recordedfriarsin higher
faculties. Amongthe friarsit was the Carmeliteswho achievedthe
highestpercentageby some long way, no less than 34 per cent
(52 per centof all membersof higherfacultiesand 8 per centofthe
remainder), followedby the Franciscans(21 per centof all recorded
alumni),withthe othertwo ordersonlyio-II per centor aboutthe

level of the monks.
The incidenceof ownershipof books,whichmustbe admittedto
be mostincompletely recordedin our sources,followsa somewhat
different patternfromthat of authorship. In all Io per cent of
alumniare recordedas owningbooks, the figuresbeing the same
for both regulars and seculars. The regulars,however,show
some considerable variations between the orders. The friars
were by a large marginthe least commonownersof books, only
5 per cent of theirmembersbeing so recorded. Afterthemcame
the canons of whom 9 per cent are recordedas owners- solely
the Austins,since no Premonstratensians are recordedas owning
books. And then, easily and predictablytoppingthe list, were
the monks with 19 per cent of their membersowning books,
predominantly the Benedictinesof whom 22 per cent are re-
corded as owners. As one would imagine,the incidenceof book
ownership, likethatof authorship,was generallyhighamongregular
Theologians,being 14 per cent overall,but variable:5 per cent of
the friars,15 per cent (a small sample, 4 out of 27) of the
canons and no less than 28 per cent of the monks,thoughhere
thereare markedcontrastswithinthe group between,takingthe
major orders,the Cistercianswith only 4 per cent (anothersmall
sample,2 out of 49) and the Benedictineswith 32 per cent. The
percentagesin the other higherfaculties,as total numbersare
so low, are veryapt to be misleadingsince a smallnumberof book
ownerscan easilydistortthe figure,but in generalit may be said
that the frequency of book ownershipin these otherfacultieswas
similarto thatin Theology.
Among the seculars as a whole ownershipof books was, as
alreadystated,approximately thesameas amongtheregulars. The
prominenceof scholarsin the higherfacultieswas, however,some-
what greater,I8 per cent as against7 per cent of those with no
recorded higher faculty,compared to the relevant figures of
14 per cent and 6 per cent for the regulars. But, as with the
regulars,Theologianswereverycommonlybook owners,the figure
being a notable33 per cent,higherthanthatforthe regularsas a
whole or for any significant group withinthem. The small con-
tingentofMedicalstudents(138) also frequently (30 percent)owned
books. The Lawyerstoo, takentogether,score quite well, with
I per cent,thoughthisconcealsfairlywide variationsbetweenthe
different branchesof Legal study: 9 per cent of the Canonists,
Io per cent of the Civiliansand 16 per cent of the studentsof
bothLaws. Onlythetinygroupof Musicians(a mere8) did badly,
havingno recordedbookownerseventhough3 ofthemwereauthors.
What,we maywellask,does thisevidenceaboutcareersand book
authorship,along with what I have almost entirelyomitted,

preferment to parochialcures,to cathedralchaptersbelow the rank
of dean and the like amountto? First we should rememberthat,
save for a very few, there was no such thing as an academic
profession as we understand it, whichis largelya creationof thelast
hundredand fifty or so years. There werefinescholars,as fineas
those of today- modernphilosophers, forinstance,go back with
some admirationto the works of medieval Oxford logicians -
but theydid not normallyspend theirlives at the game. For the
mostpartOxfordwas a preparation forthe world,forthelifeactive
and politicalin theAristotelian sense,and farmorethan nowadays
whenso manyof its alumnidriftintoa lifetimeof arcaneacademic
pursuits or, which is in a sense worse as a commenton the
University,into careersfor which their universitystudies,often
themselves archaic, have in no direct way prepared them.
Historiansare notsupposedto have,stillless to express,viewson the
goodnessor badness of the past, let alone the present. I am not
myselfof that austere and other-worldly persuasion. Rather I
think- indeed I am firmlyof the opinion- that we studythe
past,thatwe can onlyjustifyour studyof the past,because of the
added insightit givesus and othersintothe presentand the future:
in a phrase of that most neglectednineteenth-century intellect
Carlylethatis embeddedin thetitleofthisjournal,it is all a question
of past and present. By thattokenI thinkmedievalOxfordhas a
good deal to tell us. One sometimeshearsit said, in a mixtureof
jest and seriousness,that Oxfordis still medieval. That it retains
certainof its medievalfeaturesis, of course,trueenough. But in
a deepersensemodernOxforddepartsverygreatlyfromitsmedieval
precursor. Where now is that close symbiosis between the
Universityand the worldthat once was Oxford'shallmark? For
it could hardlybe claimedforits present-dayalumni,as it could
forso manyof its medievalgraduates,thattheywere meetingthe
requirementsof the societythat the Universityexists and solely
existsto serve. The difference is clear,and one does nothaveto be a
functionalistto see it. It is patentin the wholemedievalscenario:
in the ample confidencethat the episcopal bench, the University
GrantsCommitteeoftheday,so to say,showedin theUniversity by
its foundationof colleges;or in the equallyampleconfidenceshown
by successivemonarchsin theever-growing privilegestheyshowered
on the University or forthatmatterin the awardof the papal legate
in 1214. If, by contrast,OxfordUniversityand othersare now
gettingsuch rough and different treatmentat the hands of the
government, partoftheanswer- at leastpartofthepointthatshould
be put in tryingto get at the answer- maybe thattheyare only
gettingwhattheydeserve.
CorpusChristiCollege,Oxford T. H. Aston
APPENDIX
THE NUMBER AND CAPACITY OF OXFORD'S ACADEMICAL HALLS IN THE
FIRST HALF OF THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY*
As is well known,there are two main sourcesfor estimating
the numbersof academicalhalls in the fifteenth century.Firstthe
Chancellor's Register for 1434-14694"which contains sixteen
caution lists (one hardlya properlist, and at least two probably
or certainlyincomplete)rangingin date from1436 to 1469 and in
numbersof hallslisted(whethera cautionis enteredornot)from43/4
in 1468 to 70 in 1444 (excludingthe incompletelists).50 Secondly
thereis thefamiliarlist of collegesand halls"Ex tabellaJo(h)annis
Rowse". The originalis not extant,but various copies survive.
The one generallyreckonedas the best was carefullyedited by
AndrewClarkin "Surveyof theAntiquities of the Cityof Oxford"
composed in 1661-6byAnthony Wood,volumei, TheCityand Suburbs
(OxfordHistoricalSociety,xv, 1889) at pages 638-41. It was prob-
ablywrittenby Miles Windsor,who was admittedto CorpusChristi
College,Oxford,in 1557and died in 1624.51 Almostcertainly of at
least equal authorityin view of its date is the only other (but
neglected) early copy, that by John Leland, edited somewhat
casuallyby Lucy Toulmin Smithin The Itinerary ofJohnLelandin
or abouttheyears1535-1543, Parts IV and V, withan Appendixof
Extractsfrom Leland's Collectanea(London, 19o8), Appendix,at
pages 154-6. Of the few significant differencesbetweenthe two
texts three may be mentionedhere: the Leland copy attributes
LawrenceHall to Artistsin place of Legistsin the Windsorcopy;
omitsWindsor'sattribution of Egle Hall in PennyfarthingStreetto
Legists; and also omits one Legist Hall, BroadgatesHall in St.
Aldate's,whichI includein my figures.
The importanceof Rous's compilationhas long been recognized.
Followinga list of the ten secularand six monasticcollegestogether
with the house of the Trinitariansand the four ordersof friars,
comesa listof65 halls(or 63 iftwodoubtfulentriesare disregarded)
carefullygroupedaccordingto theirlocationplus a finalentryfor
* I am additionallygratefulto Mr. G. D. Duncan for assistance with the
firstpart of this Appendix.
49 Published as Registrum Cancellarii Oxoniensis1434-1469, ed. H. E. Salter,
2 vols. (Oxford Hist. Soc., xciii and xciv, 1932).
o0The number of halls in each list is given in tabular formby A. B. Emden,
"Oxford Academical Halls in the Later Middle Ages", in J. J. G. Alexanderand
M. T. Gibson (eds.), Medieval Learning and Literature. Essays Presentedto
Richard William Hunt (Oxford, 1976), p. 355. My figuresfor 1468 and
I444
are, however, based on a recounting of the lists and differslightly from
.Emden's figures(47 and 69 respectively). I omit the incompletelist for I499
in the next extantregister:Oxford Univ. Archives,Registrum I.
"5 It is attributedto Windsor by Emden, op. cit., p. 354.
"ScholasticiEleemosinarij(de Osney)in castro"; and lastlyare the
lists of the 6 "Halls destroyedbeforemy time" and the 6 "Halls
destroyedin my time in Cat Streetfor[All] Souls College". The
variouslists,especiallyof halls,are themselvesof verygreatvalue,
and the moreso since againstall the secularcollegesand almostall
the halls are enteredthe subject or subjects of study (with one
case of a changeof study)and occasionallythatthe hall was Welsh
or Irish. It is thereforefrustratingthatthe documentas a wholeis
so veryhard to date withconfidence. This is not the place fora
detailedexaminationof the evidenceas to its date whichI hope to
present elsewhere. Here I will merelyrecord brieflyprevious
viewsand my own.
In the past Rous's compilationhas been datedto about 1440-50.2
Recently,however,Emden has suggestedmuchwiderdate limitsof
between1438 (the foundationof All Souls College) and about 1476,
thislatterderivingfromtheassertionin thedocumentthatTrillock's
Inn was now"called New Inn because newlybuilt", "presumably",
Emden observes,"afterits reconstruction c. 1476-9".5
Close correlationof the hallsin Rous's mainlistwiththosein the
cautionlistsclearlysuggestsa date for theformerof c. 1444-6,and
verypossibly1444, Rous's last or penultimateyear of residencein
Oxford. 54 Examinationofthelistitselfrevealsvariousentriesprob-
ably or certainlypointingin the same direction,whileone omission
suggests1446 as the terminaldate. We are then leftwith two
problementries. First MagdalenCollege,not foundeduntil1458,
is includedin its appropriateplace as last of the secularcolleges,
butthiscouldbe a simpleenoughaddition,perhapsby Rous himself.
The other is the entryto which Emden has drawn attention.
Here too we are dealing with an addition,possiblyby Leland. 5
The factthatTrillock'sInn was stillso calledin 1491and seemsonly
to have becomeNew Inn slightlylater5"at least provesa date after
Rous's deathin 1491fortheentryas a wholeand so makesit irrelevant
to the problemof datingthe originallist.
52 Thus Emden, An OxfordHall in Medieval Times,p. 42; Salter, Medieval

Oxford,pp. 1o3-4; Pantin,"The Halls and Schoolsof MedievalOxford",in
Oxford Studies Presentedto Daniel Callus, p. 36.
53 Emden, "OxfordAcademicalHalls", p. 354. For Trillock'sInn, see
Pantin, op. cit., pp. 71-9, esp. p. 74 and note.
6' For Rous's career, see Emden, Biog. Reg. Univ. Oxford to ISoo, iii,
pp. 1,596-7.
66 Toulmin Smithcritically
misreadthe manuscript.She printed"Ley."
(forLeylandus)in the entry,whichwould proveLeland's authorship of the
addition. The manuscript reads,in a marginalentry,"Leg." (forLegists),
as does Windsor'scopy.
5-6 Wood cites a New College account for 1490-1 which refersto rent from
"the hall called Trillock's Inne": "Survey of ... Oxford".. . byAnthonyWood,
ed. Clark, i, p. 6o8. For the nomenclature,
see OxfordUniv. Archives,
Chancellor'sRegisters,
passim.
In briefthe sum of the evidenceseemsto pointto the traditional

datingofabout1440-50,withtwolateradditions, withsomething more
thana slightpossibility
thatit maybe 1444,justbeforeRous's depar-
turefromOxfordforthe chaplaincyof the chantryof Guy's Cliffe,
Warwick, where he remained,undertakingvarious antiquarian
forthe restof his life.
pursuits,57
It is likelythat in the firsthalf of the fifteenth centurythere

were on averageabout 70 halls in academicaloccupationeach year.
This figureaccords reasonablywell with the evidence in the
firstextantChancellor'sRegisterfor 1434-1469referredto above.
The mean of the figuresin the fivelists up to 1446 is 64 but, as
Emden points out, therewas probablysome under-registration.58
Salterconcludedin his discussionofthehallsthat"it is probablethat
the numberof genuinehalls was not morethan 70 in 1435 .. - ."
This fitswell with the fact thatRous, afterhis list of 65 (or 63)
halls,himselflists6 halls that had been destroyedbeforehis time
and another6 destroyedin his time to make way for All Souls
College.
Halls, of course,variedgreatlyin size, as all the evidencesuch as
thatfromrentsand architecture readilyshows. And theinformation
beingin anycase scatteredand slight- forexamplewe do notknow
how manystudentsoccupieda normal-sized room- it is admittedly
hard to reach any conclusionsas to mean capacity. In discussing
this questionboth Emden and Salter mentionthe factthat when
Williamof Wykehamwas buildingNew Collegethefellows,over6o
in number,lodged in 5 nearbyhalls. Emden, takingthe rents
into account,estimatedthe capacities of these halls in the late
fourteenth centuryas 30, 12, 9, 4 and 1o, whilehe similarly
reckoned
thatSt. EdmundHall wouldhave held about 13 scholarsand White
Hall about 12. ? (The meancapacityofthesehallswouldthenhave
beenabout13.) Salter,notingthatthoughone ofthe5 hallsoccupied
by thefellowsof New Collegewas largethe othersweresmall,con-
cludedthat"thiswouldsuggestthatan averagehallcouldtakefifteen,
but it is not likelythatmanyhalls werepackedto theirutmost,as
"7 It maybe notedthatthemanuscripts containing theLelandand Windsor

copiesof Rous's Oxfordlistalso containa corresponding listforCambridge
(publishedbyToulminSmithbutnotbyClark). It seemsmostprobablethat
this too is by Rous, and I hope to discussit in fullin a futurearticleon
Cambridge'smedievalalumni.
58 Emden, "Oxford Academical Halls", p. 356. The figuresare mine.
S9RegistrumCancellarii 1434-1469, ii, App. iii, pp. 357-67: the quotation is
at p. 359-
0o Emden, An OxfordHall in Medieval Times,pp. 119-2o.
these were, and I do not thinkthe averagehall held so manyas
fifteen".," On the otherhand,in his earlieressay on "An Oxford
Hall in 1424", Salterconcludedthat "it is not impossiblethatthe
halls of Artistscontainedon an averagetwentymembersor more,
whilethehallsofLegistshad onlyfiveor six".82 Neitherstatement,
as pointedout below,is in any way convincing.
The best evidencenow available,and it is hard evidence,is that
assembledby W. A. Pantinin his meticulousessay,"The Halls and
Schools of Medieval Oxford: an Attemptat Reconstruction".83
Takingthe rangeof Pantin'sfiguresforthe capacitiesof the 9 non-
Grammarhalls forwhichhe gives estimates,we reachnumbersof
approximately14 to 23 (dependingon various factors,including
doubtsabout architectural features- this calculationexcludesthe
accommodation in the conjecturalstreetrangeof Urban Hall - and
in particularaboutwhethertherewere 2 or 3 scholarsto a room),
that is an overallmean of 18-5. If, however,we take only the 3
of these 9 halls that Rous attributedto Artiststhe rangefalls to
between13 and 20o,thatis a meanof (PantinstatesthatRous
attributed 16"7.
St. EdmundHall to Artists;64 in fact,thoughRous assigned
St. Edmund Hall in Schools Streetto Artists,he did not give any
descriptionfor St. Edmund Hall in the parishof St. Peter in the
East, the hall discussedby Pantin.)
Salterdiscussedthe relativecapacityof halls forLegistsand for
Artistsin "An OxfordHall in 1424",65thoughoddlyenoughwhathe
thereconcludesto be a greatcontrastbetweenthe two categories
is not mentionedin his Medieval Oxford. It has to be admitted,
however,that the discussion is far from satisfactory and very
insecurelybased - for instance he assumed that Legists were
all graduateswhereasin fact,accordingto the recordeddata, most
werenot.-8 And I findaltogether unacceptablehis conclusionthat
"the halls of Legistshad onlyfiveor six [members]".67We are on
farfirmer groundwithPantin'sessayon "The Halls and Schoolsof
MedievalOxford". Amongthehallshe discussesare 6 whichRous
(in the Windsor text) lists as halls for Legists. One of these
had a completelyunknownnumberof chambers,but the remaining
5 had on averageat least7 residential roomseach (or 8 ifUrban Hall
had Io chambers). Bearingin mind the evidencerelatingto the
conditionsof residencein colleges it is inconceivablethat there
"1 Salter, Medieval Oxford,p. 10o7.

62 H. E. Salter, "An Oxford Hall in 1424", in H. W. C. Davis (ed.), Essays
in HistoryPresentedto Reginald Lane Poole (Oxford, 1927), P. 434.
63 Op. cit.
64
Ibid., pp. 36-7.
65 Salter, "An Oxford Hall in 1424", pp. 432-4.
66 See above, n.
I8.
67 Salter, "An Oxford Hall in 1424", P. 434.
was only one Legist to a room (thoughof course even if there

were, Salter'sestimatewould need amendment),whileit is by no
meansimpossiblethattherewere3 to at leastthelargerroomsif not
to all (therewere7 largeroomsas well as 4 smallones in the large
Legist BroadgatesHall in All Saints',whichSalterincorrectly lists
as for Artists)."8 I conclude that the capacityof Legists' (and
Theologians')halls was probablynot materially different
fromthat
of Artists'halls; but my calculationsallow, as stated,"9for there
beinga modestmean difference.
p. 434 n.
68 Ibid.,
69
Above, p. 7.

ASTON Oxford&#39;s Medieval Alumni

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

ASTON Oxford&#39;s Medieval Alumni

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Past and Present Society

Oxford's Medieval Alumni

onlyin whicha personis recordedor can be presumedto have been

University weremembersof colleges.The majorityresidedin halls,

grantedeven wheretheyare not specifically stated,thoughI hope I

10 For the size of Oxfordand Europeanuniversities see Hastings

13Rashdallestimated Oxford'shighestnumber,whichhe seemsto place in

2o Mark H. Curtis, Oxfordand Cambridgein Transition1558-1642 (Oxford,

students- notsurprisingly so,giventhelengthoftimeforthevarious

figureof 12 per cent I have just given suggests.24 Then again,as

21 See Gascoigne'sdeploring ofthetrendto Legal studiesin fifteenth-century

"7 See Statutesof the Collegesof Oxford,passim.

and All Souls wherethe prominenceof Lawyersof one kind and

Durham),and Canterbury College,founded1361 (forthemonksof

College, whichtook solelyCistercians,could still providefor only

forTheologians(includingthe one assignedto "T. Morale") and no

theextentto whichit wasin directtouchwithotheruniversities either

but stillquitelimited,being642 or somewhatover4 per centforthe

the other two nationalities,and Canon Law among the Scots

picturein theperiod1340-59is not,interestingly enough, especially

Cambridge'sshare was Io per cent, that is 67 per cent in all.

promotionby thisperiodwas in practiceheadshipof a house,almost

along with canonries,prebends,parochialcures and the like, the

depressingeffecton the percentagesof those who achieved the

alumni),withthe othertwo ordersonlyio-II per centor aboutthe

authorship,along with what I have almost entirelyomitted,

52 Thus Emden, An OxfordHall in Medieval Times,p. 42; Salter, Medieval

In briefthe sum of the evidenceseemsto pointto the traditional

It is likelythat in the firsthalf of the fifteenth centurythere

"7 It maybe notedthatthemanuscripts containing theLelandand Windsor

"1 Salter, Medieval Oxford,p. 10o7.

was only one Legist to a room (thoughof course even if there

You might also like

ASTON Oxford's Medieval Alumni

ASTON Oxford's Medieval Alumni