The royal favour which had been shown towards the College during

Waynflete’s life was continued after his decease (which took place on

August 11th, 1486), by Henry VII., who visited the College in 1487 or

1488, and is still annually commemorated on May 1st as a benefactor,

on account, as it would seem, of his having secured to the College the

advowsons of Findon in Sussex, and Slymbridge in Gloucestershire, and

having directed that the latter benefice should be charged with an

annual payment for the benefit of the College.[202] Henry also extended

his patronage to the President, Richard Mayew, whom he employed in

many matters of state business, appointing him to be his almoner, and

also to be his Procurator-general at the Court of Rome. Mayew also

held during his Presidentship several ecclesiastical offices. In 1501

he was sent to Spain to conduct the Infanta Katharine, about to be

married to Arthur, Prince of Wales, to England. This marriage forms one

of the subjects depicted in some pieces of tapestry still preserved

in the President’s lodgings, which are believed to have been a gift

bestowed upon Mayew by Prince Arthur, who twice at least took up his

abode in the College, and was entertained by the President on his

visits. Mayew’s non-academical employments must have necessitated his

repeated absence from his duties as President; and at last, after his

election to the See of Hereford, a dispute seems to have arisen as to

the compatibility of his episcopal and academical functions. A party

among the Fellows, headed by Stokesley, afterwards Bishop of London,

who was then Vice-President, declared that by the fact of Mayew’s

consecration the office of President had become vacant, and at last

obtained from Bishop Fox of Winchester, the Visitor of the College,

a decision in favour of their own view. Mayew, in the meantime,

had attempted to assert his authority as President in a manner not

altogether in accordance with the statutes, and it became necessary

for the Bishop of Winchester to hold a formal visitation of the

College. This he did by a Commissary, and the records of the Visitation

contain many extraordinary charges made by the partizans on each side.

Stokesley himself was accused, among other things, of having taken

part in some magical incantations, including the baptizing of a cat,

in order to discover hidden treasure. The cat, it may be remarked, is

sometimes described as _cattus_, sometimes with more elegant Latinity

as _murilegus_. These proceedings were alleged to have taken place

in Yorkshire; concerning the more immediate affairs of the College,

it appears that the strife between the parties had run so high, that

some of the Fellows went about the cloisters with armour offensive and

defensive. The general result of the Visitation was the acquittal of

Stokesley, who cleared himself from all charges to the satisfaction

of the Commissary. Bishop Mayew retired from the Presidentship, and

was succeeded early in 1507 by John Claymond, formerly Fellow, one of

the many distinguished men who were members of the College during the

quarter of a century over which Mayew’s term of office had extended.

Among other members of the College under Mayew’s rule may be mentioned

the celebrated Grocyn, who was Praelector in Divinity, Richard Fox

(already referred to as Bishop of Winchester), John Colet, afterwards

Dean of St. Paul’s, and Thomas Wolsey--the last, perhaps, the most

celebrated man whom the College has produced. It was during Mayew’s

Presidentship that the Tower, sometimes attributed to Wolsey,[203] was

built, and that the cloister on the south side of the quadrangle was

added.

The rise of Wolsey in the King’s favour secured the College a friend

at Court whose influence was for a time more powerful than that of

either Waynflete or Mayew had been. He was appointed one of the King’s

chaplains, and employed by Henry VII. in some important missions.

Soon after the accession of Henry VIII. he became almoner, and “ruled

all under the King.” Throughout the time of his prosperity he kept up

friendly relations with the College, and frequent exchanges of presents

took place between him and its members. The first Dean of his College

in Oxford was John Hygden, who had succeeded Claymond as President of

Magdalen; and several members of Magdalen College were among the first

Canons of Cardinal College.

Another new foundation closely connected with Magdalen College was

the College of Corpus Christi, founded by Richard Fox, Bishop of

Winchester, who not only induced Claymond to become the first President

of his new society, but closely imitated Waynflete’s statutes in those

which he gave to Corpus Christi College. These statutes provided

that the students of Theology and Bachelors of Arts of Corpus Christi

College should attend lectures at Magdalen--the lectures intended being

no doubt those of the Praelectors or readers established by Waynflete,

who occupied a position not unlike that of the University Professors of

a later time. It was perhaps with a view to the advantages afforded by

these lectures that a further direction enjoined the members of Corpus

Christi College, if compelled by a visitation of the plague to move

from Oxford, to take up their quarters near the place where the members

of Magdalen College had settled for the time. The second President of

Corpus Christi College, Robert Morwent, had been Vice-President of

Magdalen, and had migrated with Claymond to take charge of Fox’s infant

foundation. These two Presidents of Corpus, with John Hygden, first

Dean of Cardinal College and of Christ Church, joined together in a

benefaction to their former society. They made provision for the yearly

distribution to its members of a sum of money, which was to be, and

still is, distributed by the bursar in the chapel during the singing of

Benedictus on the first Monday of every Lent.

The “revolution under the forms of law,” effected in the reign of Henry

VIII., of which Wolsey’s fall was the beginning, had no great direct

effect upon the College. Indirectly, however, the suppression of the

religious houses was a cause of considerable expense. The College had

permitted the Carmelites of Shoreham, whose house was much decayed,

to occupy their annexed Priory of Sele; and it was perhaps only in

accordance with the justice of the King’s proceedings that the Priory

was in consequence treated as a Carmelite house, and the College

compelled to buy back its own property from the persons to whom Henry

had granted it. A less important expenditure involved by the King’s

proceedings was incurred by the provision of new painted glass, no

doubt to replace portions of the chapel windows which had been defaced

by the King’s commissioners as containing emblems derogatory of his

Majesty’s supremacy. The “linen-fold” panelling of the hall appears

to have been placed in its present position in the year 1541; it is

said to have come from Reading Abbey, but the groups of figures, the

heraldic ornaments, and the not too flattering effigy of Henry VIII.,

which are now inserted in it, were probably designed for the decoration

of the Hall. Except for the acquisition of this wood-work, the College

seems to have received nothing from the spoil of the religious orders.

The accession of Edward VI., and the visitation of the University,

brought serious trouble upon the College. The President, Owen

Oglethorpe, was apparently prepared to accept the earlier stages of

the Reformation movement, but he was not prepared to go so far as

the party in power required. Some members of the College were of the

more advanced school of the Reformers; and much irreverence, with a

good deal of wanton destruction, was committed by them, encouraged by

letters from the Protector inciting the College to the “redress of

religion.” Oglethorpe was removed from the office of President, into

which Walter Haddon, a person not eligible according to the statutes,

was intruded, in spite of a petition from the Fellows, and the work of

reformation proceeded according to the desire of the Council. Haddon is

said to have sold many of the effects of the chapel, valued at about

£1000, for about a twentieth part of that sum, and to have “consumed

on alterations” not only the sum so received, but a larger sum of the

“public money” of the College. It was fortunate for the society that

the scheme of the Council for the total suppression of the choir, and

the alienation of a corresponding part of the College revenue, had been

promulgated while Oglethorpe was still President. Under his guidance,

with considerable difficulty, the College managed to preserve this part

of its foundation unimpaired.

Immediately on the accession of Queen Mary, Walter Haddon received,

as appears from the Vice-President’s register, leave of absence on

urgent private affairs, and his example was soon followed by those

of the Fellows who had been especially notable for their zeal in the

“redress of religion.” Laurence Humphrey, one of this party, obtained

leave for the express purpose of conveying himself _in transmarinas

partes_; and this leave of absence was continued to him at a later time

provided that he did not resort to those towns which were known to be

the refuge of heretics. He took up his abode forthwith at Zürich. As

he was absent from the College during the whole of Mary’s reign, he is

perhaps not a sufficient witness of the events of that time. He asserts

that the Roman party had great difficulty in re-establishing the old

order of things in College, and that the younger members of the society

suffered many things at their hands. Of all this, however, there is no

evidence in the Vice-President’s register, where most of the offences

and almost all the penalties recorded during this period are of an

ordinary kind.[204] Oglethorpe was restored to his Presidency, and was

succeeded on his elevation to the See of Carlisle, by Arthur Cole, a

Canon of Windsor.[205] During the tenure of Cole, and of his successor

Thomas Coveney (whom the College chose in preference to three persons

recommended by the Queen), there appear to have been differences of

opinion on religious matters within the College, and some difficulties

in enforcing the due attendance of its members at the chapel services;

but there is no sign of what might be called a tendency to persecution

on the part of the authorities. The most recalcitrant members of the

society seem to have been the Bachelor Demies and Probationer Fellows.

Coveney remained President for some time after Queen Elizabeth’s

coronation by Oglethorpe; and in the interval between that event and

the consecration of Archbishop Parker there are some indications in the

register of religious strife within the College. The end of Coveney’s

term of office was marked by a contest between himself and some of the

Fellows, concerning matters of College business, in which he seems

to have exceeded his power as President. He was deprived by Bishop

Horn at a Visitation in 1561, on the ground, it is said, that he was

a layman; but it might be at least doubtful whether the founder’s

statutes strictly required the President to be in Holy Orders; and it

is probable that the real reason for his deprivation lay in the fact

that Horn regarded him as being too much “addicted to the Popish

superstition.”

This fault at all events could not be laid to the charge of Laurence

Humphrey, who succeeded him. Horn himself had reported that the members

of the College, whom he expected to find of the same school as their

President, were willing to accept the tests he proposed to them--to

acknowledge the Queen’s supremacy, and to accept the Book of Common

Prayer, and the Advertisements. Before Humphrey had been long President

the College had ceased to be “conformable,” but its non-conformity was

of the Puritan, not of the Romanizing, type. Humphrey himself had a

strong objection to wearing a surplice, or using his proper academical

dress, and many of his Fellows followed his example in this matter.

It required more than one Visitation to induce compliance on such

matters. Abuses of another kind, however, were left uncorrected, and

even encouraged, by the Visitors. Many Fellowships were filled up by

nominations from the Queen, or from the Bishop of Winchester, and it

may be added that the persons nominated were not always model members

of a College. There were many contentions between the Fellows, and

between the President and the Fellows. The general impression given

by reading the register of the time of Humphrey and his immediate

successors is, that the College was becoming a home of disorder rather

than of learning. Nicolas Bond, Humphrey’s successor, seems, however,

in 1589 to have made some rather ineffectual efforts to provide for

more regular and systematic study among its members. During his tenure

of office the society received a visit from King James I., accompanied

by his son Henry, then Prince of Wales, who was matriculated as a

member of the College. The King was much impressed by the buildings,

and greatly enjoyed his visit. The grotesque figures or “hieroglyphics”

in the Cloister Quadrangle were painted, as it would seem, in honour of

his coming, Moses in particular being adorned _toga coerulea_.

The College, which was Puritan under Humphrey, was even more Puritan

under Bond, Harding, and Langton; with Langton’s successor, however, in

1626, the tide set in the contrary direction. Accepted Frewen, if, as

his name suggests, he was of Puritan descent, was himself a supporter

of Laud’s ecclesiastical policy, and acted with vigour both as

President in his own College and as Vice-Chancellor in the University,

for the restoration of discipline and good order. The numbers of the

College had been increased during his predecessor’s time by the influx

of a number of so-called “poor scholars,” whose connection with the

College was very slight, and who seem to have in many cases been

entered as members of the society by the mere authority of the person

to whom they had attached themselves. Frewen made regulations on this

subject, and these seem to have been re-inforced a few years later by

a letter from the Visitor. Other matters he also took in hand with

good effect, especially the restoration of the chapel, on which he

seems to have spent large sums of his own, in addition to the corporate

expenditure of the College. The windows of the ante-chapel (except the

great west window) were part of Frewen’s work, the only part which has

been left by the later restoration of 1832.

The outbreak of the Great Rebellion found the College converted from

a nest of Puritans into a nest of Royalists and High Churchmen.

The King’s demand for loans of money and plate was met with some

difficulty, but without hesitation, by a loan of £1000 in money and

by the delivery of plate to the value of about £1000 more. When the

Parliamentary forces entered Oxford in September 1642 they found at

Magdalen “certain Cavaliers in scholars’ habits,” who had “feathers and

buff-coats” in their chambers. Some of the scholars, being malignant

persons, “scoffed” at the invaders and “at the honourable Houses of

Parliament,” and were accordingly made prisoners. Other members of the

College had left Oxford a few days before with Byron’s horse, to join

the King: among them was John Nourse, Fellow and Doctor of Civil Law,

who fell at Edgehill. After that action the King entered Oxford, and

Prince Rupert took up his quarters at Magdalen. The King’s artillery

was placed in Magdalen College Grove, which served as a drill-ground

for the regiment of scholars and strangers which was raised in 1644;

batteries were erected in the Walks, and gunners exercised in the

College meadows. The timber in the Grove was probably felled for use

in the defensive works.[206] A curious contrast to this military

preparation was furnished by the imposing ceremonial of Frewen’s

consecration as Bishop of Lichfield, which took place in the chapel of

the College in April 1644.[207]

Some members of the College were as active on the side of the

Parliament as those who remained in Oxford were on the side of the

King. A Demy named Lidcott was deprived of his place for having been

in arms against the King, serving in Essex’s army as an “antient” of a

foot company. A far more celebrated member of the Parliamentary party,

John Hampden, had formerly been a member of the College which was the

head-quarters of the commander of the troops against whom he fought at

Chalgrove.

After the surrender of Oxford, considerable havoc was wrought in the

chapel of the College by the Parliamentary troops, who destroyed,

among other things, the glass of many of the windows. The organ was

appropriated by Cromwell to his own use, and removed by him to Hampton

Court, whence it was brought again after the Restoration.[208] The

Parliamentary Visitors of the University found few members of the

College willing to submit to their authority. The President, Dr.

John Oliver, and the greater part of the members were ejected, and

the bursar, who obstinately refused to give up keys or papers, was

imprisoned. The tenants of the College, however, persisted in paying

their rents to him, and special injunctions had to be given to prevent

them from doing so. The places in College rendered vacant by expulsions

were filled up by the importation of Independents and Presbyterians,

Dr. John Wilkinson, a former Fellow, being made President. He

was succeeded two years later by Goodwin, a gloomy person, whose

examination of a candidate for a Demyship has been recounted by

Addison in the _Spectator_.[209] The records of the events in College

during the Commonwealth are very scanty. One of the most remarkable

proceedings of the intruders was the appropriation and division among

themselves of a sum of money which they found in the muniment-room;

this was the fund provided by the Founder for special necessities,

which had remained untouched since 1585, and the existence of which had

perhaps been forgotten. It was for the most part in ancient coinage,

the pieces being of the kind known as “spur royals.” Of these a hundred

fell to the share of Wilkinson, who seems to have been the instigator

of the division; nine hundred more were divided among the thirty

Fellows, and the Demies and others, including the servants, received

portions of the spoil. Before the Restoration, however, some of the

recipients restored the pieces they had obtained, and the greater

part of the money was actually repaid in course of time. The fund,

under more modern financial arrangements, no longer remains in the

muniment-room, but some of the old coins are still preserved there.

On the Restoration the ejected members of the College, or those who

were left, were restored to their home. They included the President,

seventeen Fellows and eight Demies.[210] Dr. Oliver, however, did not

long survive his return; and upon his death began a time of trouble.

Charles II. recommended as his successor Dr. Thomas Pierce, a divine

who had done much service in the defence of the Church against her

assailants, but whom the Fellows, who perhaps knew him better than

the King were unwilling, as it seems, to elect. Charles however

enforced obedience by a letter as peremptory as any communication

which the College afterwards received from his brother, and Dr. Pierce

became President. The result was a long warfare between Pierce, the

Fellows, and the Visitor, Bishop Morley, whose intentions seem to have

been better than his judgment. At last the King interfered, and the

difficulty was solved by the promotion of Dr. Pierce to the Deanery

of Salisbury, where he found scope for his energies in a controversy

with his Bishop. Dr. Henry Clerk was now recommended by the King, and

elected by the Fellows, and the society was at peace for some years.

That peace was again disturbed, on Dr. Clerk’s death, by the action of

James II., who attempted to force upon the College as its President a

man unqualified by statute and disqualified by notorious immorality.

The history of the struggle which followed is too well known to need

repetition here.[211] The Fellows almost unanimously chose one of their

own number, and supported him, when duly elected, against the King’s

second nominee. In the end, after a year’s exile, they were restored to

their College, under Dr. John Hough, the President of their own choice,

by the Bishop of Winchester, acting on instructions from the King.

The Revolution brought with it new causes of disquiet, and some members

of the College were again ejected as Nonjurors. The great majority,

however, of those who had contended against the usurpation of James

were content to submit themselves to the new Sovereigns, and retained

their places. The most notable member who was thus lost to the College

was Dr. Thomas Smith, a man of much learning and ability, and a steady

and uncompromising Royalist. In 1689 occurred what was afterwards known

as the “Golden Election” of Demies, which included, besides others

less known, Hugh Boulter, afterwards Archbishop of Armagh, Smallbrook,

afterwards Bishop of St. David’s and later of Lichfield, the notorious

Henry Sacheverell, and Joseph Addison, the most celebrated member of

the College since the Revolution. The residence of Addison in College

was not prolonged beyond his year of probation as Fellow; but he has

left a memory of himself in the fact that his name has been attached to

a portion of the Walks. These it would seem in his time did not extend

beyond what is now called Addison’s Walk, but was formerly known as

“Dover Pier.”

The members of the College who remained seem to have maintained

friendly relations with those who had withdrawn from it as Nonjurors,

and even at this time, and certainly after the accession of George I.,

the sympathy of many among the Fellows was with the exiled rather than

with the reigning branch of the Royal House. During the first half of

the eighteenth century, indeed, politics flourished in the society

more than learning; and although Gibbon’s picture of the condition

of the College during his brief residence is rather highly coloured,

it cannot be doubted that the general decline of academic activity

which affected many of the Colleges in Oxford during the last century,

affected Magdalen in no slight degree. A large part of the attention of

the society seems to have been given to plans for the rearrangement or

the destruction of the College buildings, and for the re-construction

of the College on the pattern adopted in what are known as the “New

Buildings,” erected in 1735. Some amazing designs for “College

improvements” remain in the library, as a memorial of the architectural

ambitions of this period. Among the Presidents of the eighteenth

century, if we except Dr. Routh, whose lengthened tenure extended over

the last years of that century and the first half of the nineteenth,

there is but one name of mark--that of George Horne, afterwards Bishop

of Norwich, once widely-known by his Commentary on the Psalms. Nor are

there many names of mark among the other members of the College in the

same century. The learning of Dr. Routh does not seem to have been

shared in any conspicuous degree by more than a small proportion of

those who passed through the College in his long Presidentship--though

towards the end of that period Magdalen numbered among its members

several men of note in different ways--James Mozley and William Palmer

among theologians, Ferrier among philosophers, Roundell Palmer, now

Lord Selborne, among lawyers, Conington among scholars, Charles Reade

among novelists, Goldwin Smith among essayists, Charles Daubeny among

those who laboured to advance the study of natural science.

Of the changes which have been brought about in the College since the

days of Routh, of its transformation from a small society of Fellows

and Demies into one of the larger among the Colleges in Oxford, it is

hardly possible to speak as of history. They are changes of the present

day. But it is a matter of history, which ought not to be forgotten,

that the College, which has owed much to its Presidents in the past,

owes much in this matter to its last President, who governed it during

the trying times of two University Commissions, and of the changes

which resulted from them. By his own example of the loyal acceptance

of what was necessary, even when it was uncongenial to his tastes,

and by the kindly sympathy which enabled him to reconcile conflicting

interests, he did more to preserve the peace of his College, and to

promote its progress, than he would himself have thought possible, or

than those to whom he was less well known than to the members of his

own College would have been inclined to imagine.

XI.

BRASENOSE COLLEGE.

(_Aula Regia et Collegium de Brasenose, Collegium Aenei Nasi._)

BY FALCONER MADAN, M.A., FELLOW OF BRASENOSE.

I. THE KING’S HALL OF BRAZEN-NOSE.

(_Aula Regia de Brasinnose._)

The Colleges of Oxford: Their History and Traditions XXI Chapters Contributed by Members of the Colleges · 第 21 / 44 段