Loggan’s picturesque view, taken in 1675, suggests a mournful

desolation, and the pathetic motto which it bears--“Quare fecit Dominus

sic domui huic?”--is eloquent of decay. Dr. Byrom Eaton, Archdeacon

of Stow, and then of Leicester, had held the Principality for thirty

years, when in 1692 he resigned it to make way for a younger and more

vigorous man. Such was found in Dr. Woodroffe, one of the Canons

of Christ Church, whose nomination to the Deanery by James II. in

1688 had been cancelled at the Revolution in favour of Dean Aldrich.

Woodroffe is described by Wood as “a man of a generous and public

spirit, who bestowed several hundred pounds in repairing (the place)

and making it a fit habitation for the Muses, which being done he by

his great interest among the gentry made it flourish with hopeful

sprouts.” The hopeful sprouts, however, do not seem to have been so

very numerous after all, since we find the entry in Wood’s _Life_ under

date Jan. 1694--“I was with Dr. Woodroffe, and he told me he had six

in Commons at Gloucester Hall, his 2 sons two.” Prideaux’s letters

to Ellis contain several references to Dr. Woodroffe, the reverse of

complimentary--ludicrous accounts of sermons, which he confesses to

be hearsay accounts, accusations of heiress hunting, of whimsical

ill-temper, of want of dignity. “Last night he had Madam Walcup at his

lodgings, and stood with her in a great window next the quadrangle,

where he was seen by Mr. Dean himself and almost all the house toying

with her most ridiculously and fanning himself with her fan for almost

all the afternoon.” But Prideaux’s gossip was probably inspired by

personal antipathies and College jealousies. Woodroffe was no doubt a

keen, bustling, pushing man.[338] He was shrewd enough, at any rate,

to marry a good fortune; but became involved in difficulties, which

led to the sequestration of his canonry. He seems to have lost no

opportunity of advertising himself and combining “public spirit” with

private advantage. Such was the man who became associated with one of

the most interesting though short-lived experiments in the history of

the University--the establishment of a Greek College. Some seventy

years had passed since Cyril Lucar, Patriarch first of Alexandria and

then of Constantinople, had sent to England a Greek youth, Metrophanes

Critopylos, whom Abp. Abbott placed at Balliol College, of which his

brother had not long before been Master. Here Critopylos remained as a

student till about 1622, when he returned to the East, and subsequently

became Patriarch of Alexandria in the room of Cyril Lucar. Nothing

more seems to have come of this particular overture, but the English

Chaplains of Constantinople, Smyrna, and Aleppo, kept open to some

extent the communications with the Eastern Church. At last, upon the

representations of Joseph Georgirenes, Metropolitan of Samos (a man

who subsequently took refuge in London, and had built for him as a

Greek church what is now St. Mary’s, Crown St. Soho), Archbishop

Sancroft and others who favoured the hope of reunion with the Eastern

Church promoted a scheme for the education of a body of Greek youths

at Oxford, and the establishment of a Greek College there. Foremost

amongst Oxford sympathizers was Dr. Woodroffe, the newly appointed

Principal of Gloucester Hall. In a letter to Callinicos, the Patriarch

of Constantinople, he suggests that twenty students, five from each of

the four patriarchates, should be sent over to the Greek College now

founded at Oxford (Gloucester Hall), which had been placed “on the same

rank footing and privilege which the other Colleges enjoy there.” He

explains the course of study to be pursued, and suggests the advantage

of a reciprocity of students, as also of books and manuscripts. He

designates the three English chaplains named above as convenient

channels of communication. The scheme contemplated an annual succession

of students, who were to be of two classes. For two years they were to

converse in Ancient Greek, and then to learn Latin and Hebrew. They

were to study Aristotle, Plato, the Greek Fathers, and Controversial

Divinity. The services were to be in Greek, and public exercises were

to be performed in Greek, as directed by the Vice-Chancellor. Their

habit was to be “the gravest worn in their country,” and finally they

were to be returned to their respective Patriarchs with a report of

the progress made. Trustees were to manage the funds of the College,

which was to be supported by voluntary contributions. This bold scheme

was but partially attempted, and before long came to a disastrous end.

Mr. Ffoulkes, who first claimed attention in the “Union Review” for

the Greek College, which, as he observes, had been strangely ignored

by Wood’s continuators, quotes from Mr. E. Stevens, a nonjuror, and

enthusiastic advocate of “Reunion,” his account of the experiment and

its breakdown. Five young Grecians were in 1698 brought from Smyrna

and placed in Gloucester Hall. Three of them were, according to Mr.

Stephens, lured away by Roman emissaries: two of these, brothers, after

various adventures, took refuge with Mr. Stephens, and were at last

sent home “with their faith unscathed.” The third was decoyed to Paris,

to the Greek College lately established there, presumably in rivalry of

the Oxford scheme. There appears too to have been another establishment

set up in friendly rivalry at Halle in Saxony. But the most fatal blow

was the mismanagement of the College itself. “Though they who came

first were well enough ordered for some time; yet afterwards they and

those who came after them were so ill-accommodated both for their

studies and other necessaries, that some of them staid not many months,

and others would have been gone if they had known how; and there are

now but two left there.”[339] Add to these drawbacks the temptations

of London, and it is not surprising that the Oxford College received

its quietus in a missive from Constantinople. “The irregular life of

certain priests and laymen of the Eastern Church, living in London, is

a matter of great concern to the Church. Wherefore the Church forbids

any to go and study at Oxford, be they ever so willing.” This was in

1705. From that moment, as Mr. Ffoulkes picturesquely says, the Greek

College “disappears like a dream.” Of its students one name only is

preserved to us. We find in _Hearne_ (March 15th, 1707)--“Francis

Prasalendius, a Græcian of the Isle of Corcyra, lately a student in the

Public Library, and of Gloucester Hall, has printed a book in the Greek

language (writ very well as I am informed by one of the Græcians of

Glouc. Hall) against Traditions, in which he falls upon Dr. Woodroffe

very smartly.”

_Worcester College, founded 1714._

But while the Greek College was still perishing of inanition, its

principal was engaged in a scheme of a more ambitious though less

interesting nature. A Worcestershire Baronet, Sir Thomas Cookes, had

made known his desire through the Bishop of Worcester of founding a

College at Oxford; £10,000 was the sum he proposed for an endowment.

There was competition for the prize. Dr. Woodroffe wanted to secure it

for Gloucester Hall, Dr. Mill for St. Edmund Hall, Dr. Lancaster for

Magdalen Hall; Balliol College was at one time the favourite object, at

another a workhouse for his county. The choice inclined to Gloucester

Hall, but was well-nigh lost; for Woodroffe had inserted in the charter

a clause providing that the King should have liberty to put in and

turn out the Fellows at his pleasure. With the recent experience of

Magdalen fresh in men’s minds, such intervention of the crown was not

likely to find favour, and Bishop Stillingfleet drily observed that

“kings have already had enough to do with our Colleges.” The hopes of

Edmund Hall rose high; for indeed the Bishop had, according to Hearne,

nominated that Hall in the first place. However Dr. Woodroffe prudently

withdrew his clause, and in 1698 a charter passed the great seal for

the incorporation of the Hall under the title of the Provost, Fellows,

and Scholars of Worcester College, with Dr. Woodroffe for the first

Provost.[340] This was followed by a Ratification dated November 18th,

naming the Bishop of Worcester as Visitor, and the Bishop of Oxford as

his assessor in difficult cases, and making elaborate provision for the

organization, conduct, and educational system of the College. There

were to be twelve Fellows, six Senior Tutors, six Junior Sub-Tutors,

and eight Scholars, chosen from the Founder’s schools of Bromsgrove and

Feckenham, or, failing them, from Worcester and Hartlebury. Each Fellow

and Scholar was to have £14 per annum, the Provost double that amount.

There were to be Lectureships, two “solemnes” in Theology and History,

three ordinary in Mathematics, Philosophy, and Philology; the Lecture

in Theology to be catechetical, on the model of that at Balliol, and

to be given in the chapel. The Prælector of History was to lecture

from seven to nine on Sundays on Biblical history. The others were to

lecture at the discretion of the Provost five or at least four times a

week. An elaborate scheme of medical and other studies was prescribed.

There was a carefully-graduated scale of payments “obeuntibus cursus

et acta,” ending with 13_s._ 4_d._ for the speech in commemoration of

the Founder. The Provost was to allot a cubiculum to one or at the

most to two occupants. In winter the afternoon chapel service was to

be at three, the morning service at seven, but in summer at six. This

was to consist of a shorter Latin form “ad usum Ecclesiæ Xti,” with a

chapter of the Bible in Greek. Private prayers and Bible-reading were

enjoined for each day, and two hours specified for Sunday. A chapter in

Greek or Latin was to be read at meal-times in Hall. Offenders against

rules were to be “gated” or sent into seclusion, “quasi minor quædam

excommunicatio,” or else to be exiled to the ante-chapel. As regards

the cook, butler, &c. the Aularian Statutes were to be observed.

After all the Charter remained a dead letter. Sir Thomas Cookes,

anxious to find excuses for putting off Dr. Woodroffe’s importunities,

claimed for his heirs the nomination to the Headship; and after two

years the Chancellor conceded this point. It was objected that the

Chancellor had not the power to make this concession without the

consent of Convocation: which was never asked; and if it had, would

not have been given. Sir Thomas found fresh reasons for hanging back.

The fact that Gloucester Hall was a leasehold and that St. John’s were

supposed to have been forbidden by their Founder to part with the fee

simple was one of these difficulties. Then there were the Statutes,

which Sir Thomas Cookes persistently refused to sign, “nor would he pay

one farthing for passing the Charter.” In 1701 he died, leaving his

£10,000 in the hands of certain Bishops, with the Vice-Chancellor and

the Heads of Houses, for the carrying out his intentions. The money was

left to accumulate for some years till it amounted to £15,000. In the

meantime Dr. Woodroffe tries to obtain an Act in 1702 for settling the

money on Gloucester Hall, the lease of which he proposed St. John’s

College should make perpetual at the then rent of £5 10_s._ The Bill,

however, was thrown out on the second reading. At Oxford, it is clear,

there was a powerful opposition to Dr. Woodroffe and his claim for

Gloucester Hall. On Nov. 22, 1707, nineteen out of the thirty Trustees

met in the Convocation House, and on the ground that “the erecting of

Buildings would make the charity of less use than endowing some Hall

in Oxford already built,” determined “to fix the Charity at Magdalen

Hall, and to endow Fellows and Scholars there.” On the other hand the

Archbishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of Worcester, the Bishop of Oxford

and others were in favour of carrying out what they believed to be in

spite of all his vacillation the final determination of Sir Thomas

Cookes in favour of Gloucester Hall. They deposed moreover[341] that

“the ground Plats of Gloucester Hall and the Gloucester Hall buildings

Quadrangles and Gardens are 3 times as much as Magdalen Hall, and the

ground on which the buildings of Gloucester Hall stand is twice as much

as that of Magdalen Hall, and there are large and capacious chambers

in Gloucester Hall to receive 20 scholars, and 9 are inhabited, and

the principal’s lodgings are in good repair and fit for a family of

12 persons, and there is a large Hall, Chapel, Buttery and Kitchen,

and a large common room lately wainscoted and sash windows, and in

laying out about £500 in repairs there will be good conveniency for 60

scholars, and the place is pleasantly situated and in a good air.” Dr.

Woodroffe dies in 1711, his ambition still unfulfilled, and a Fellow of

St. John’s, Dr. Richard Blechynden, succeeds to the Principalship of

an empty Hall. There was, according to Hearne, hardly one Scholar in

the place. At last the trustees saw their way to carrying out the will

of Sir Thomas Cookes. St. John’s College in 1713 agrees to alienate

Gloucester Hall for the sum of £200, and a quit-rent of 20_s._ per

annum. In the following year, two days only before the Queen’s death, a

Charter of Incorporation, for the second time, passes the great seal,

and Gloucester Hall or College is finally merged in Worcester College.

The foundation was now to consist of a Provost, six Fellows, and six

Scholars, whose emoluments were to be on a somewhat more liberal

scale than that of the original statutes. Fellows and Scholars were

to be allowed sixpence a day for commons, the Fellows to have £30 per

annum, the Scholars 13_s._ 8_d._ a quarter, the Provost £80 per annum,

but no allowance for commons. Among the other “ministri” was to be a

Tonsor, receiving an annual salary of 20_s._ This important official

lingered on in diminished importance till the present generation. The

Bishops of Worcester and Oxford and the Vice-Chancellor were appointed

Visitors. In other respects the provisions of the new Statutes were

much simplified. The scheme of Lectureships was omitted; so were the

elaborate directions as to studies, private devotions, &c., as well

as the scale of payments on the performance of exercises. Latin was

to be the ordinary speech, “so far as might be convenient,” except at

College meetings. Undergraduates were to “dispute” every day, and write

weekly Themes; Bachelors to “dispute” twice a week, and make a Terminal

“Declamation.” Candidates for Degrees were to oppose or respond on a

problem set by the Provost in the College Hall, while candidates for

the M.A. Degree had the option of commenting on a passage of Aristotle.

On the Degree Day a Bachelor was to give a supper, or pay 20_s._ for

the College uses. The supper given by an M.A. was not to exceed 40_s._

Of the new College Principal Blechynden was named as the first Provost;

of the six Fellows, one, Roger Bouchier, was already a member of

the Hall--“a man of great reading in various sorts of learning, the

greatest man in England for Divinity.”[342] The others were Thomas

Clymer of All Souls’, Robert Burd of St. John’s, William Bradley of New

Inn Hall, Joseph Penn of Wadham, and Samuel Creswick of Pembroke, who

was afterwards Dean of Wells.

It was not till 1720, that with the modest sum of £798 0_s._ 3_d._,

the remnant of a disputed bequest of Mrs. Margaret Alcorne, the

newly-founded College was enabled to commence the “restoration” of

its buildings. Had the designs of Dr. Clarke, illustrated by the

Oxford Almanack of 1741, which were similar in character to those of

Hawkesmoor and other architects for the reconstruction of Brasenose,

All Souls’, and Magdalen, been carried out, the picturesque history

of the place would have been entirely effaced, and a quadrangle of

“correct” and “elegant” monotony would have satisfied the taste of

Dean Aldrich and the amateurs of the day. Fortunately the means were

wanting; all that was put in hand at first were the Chapel, Hall,

and Library. By the liberality of Dr. Clarke the interior of the

Library was completed in 1736, its exterior in 1746. The Hall was at

last finished in 1784, while the Chapel still remained incompleted

in 1786, the date of Gutch’s account--nor does the College Register

give any indication on the point. But in the meantime two considerable

benefactors arose, who contributed new Foundations to the corporation.

Dr. Clarke, Fellow of All Souls’ and Member for the University, left

an endowment for six Fellowships and three Scholarships, together with

his valuable library, while Mrs. Sarah Eaton, daughter of the former

principal, bequeathed an endowment for seven Fellowships and five

Scholarships to be held by the sons of clergymen. These new Foundations

were incorporated by Charter in 1744. For lodging Dr. Clarke’s

Foundation the demolition of the old buildings on the north side of the

quadrangle was begun, and nine sets of rooms erected by his trustees,

1753-9, while in 1773 the remainder of the old north side was swept

away, and twelve sets of rooms built for Mrs. Eaton’s Foundation,

together with the present Provost’s lodgings. Meanwhile the College was

providently with such resources as it possessed enlarging its borders.

In 1741 it purchased of St. John’s College for £850 the garden ground

on the south side of the College, and in 1744 the gardens and meadows

to the north and west, “together with the house called the Cock and

Bottle.” In 1801 it bought for £1330 the “King’s Head,” opposite to

the front of the College, and in 1813 enfranchised the premises on the

east front held under lease of the City; while in 1806 it cleared away

“Woodroffe’s Folly,” a building erected by that Principal opposite

the front of the College, for which St. John’s received a valuation

of £401 16_s._ The College thus became surrounded with an open belt,

destined to be an incalculable boon in the modern days of building

extension. The garden ground on the south side was in 1813 ordered to

be kept in hand for the use of the Fellows, and it was about the year

1827 that the late Mr. Greswell signalized his Bursarship by laying

out the ornamental grounds, as they now exist. These gardens, falling

to a piece of water, together with the fortunate preservation of an

open quadrangle, a mode of construction for the merits of which Sir

Christopher Wren contended at Trinity,[343] secured to the College

the sanitary as well as the picturesque advantages of a _rus in

urbe_--a “_rus_” so rural that, the tradition runs, a tutor of the last

generation would take his gun, and slip down between his lectures to

the pool for a shot at a stray snipe.

William Gower, upon Dr. Blechynden’s death, was nominated Provost

in 1736. He had been admitted Scholar in 1715, the year after the

incorporation of the College. He rivalled Thomas Allen in the length

of his connection with the College. For 62 years he was borne upon

its foundations, as Scholar, Fellow, or Provost. Longevity has been

a characteristic of the Provosts of this College. One only, Dr.

Sheffield, held his office for so short a period as 18 years. The

other three, Gower, Landon, and Cotton, were Provosts respectively for

41, 44, and 41 years--collectively 126 years, and Dr. Cotton kept 70

years of unbroken residence. Dr. Gower was a man of great literary

attainments. He left many valuable books to the College Library. Dr.

King[344] says that he was “acquainted with three persons only who

spoke English with that eloquence and propriety that if all they said

had been immediately committed to writing, any judge of the English

language would have pronounced it an excellent and very beautiful

style.” The other two were Atterbury and Johnson. It was in his second

year’s Provostship that Samuel Foote of Worcester School claimed and

established a right to a Scholarship as Founder’s kin. His student

life was brief and stormy. In 1740 the College passes sentence that

“Samuel Foote having by a long-continued course of ill-behaviour

rendered himself obnoxious to frequent censure of the Society public

and private, and having while he was under censure for lying out of

College insolently and presumptuously withdrawn himself and refused to

answer to several heinous crimes objected to him, though duly cited

by the Provost by an instrument in form, in not appearing to the said

citation, for the above reasons his Scholarship is declared void,

and he is hereby deprived of all benefit and advantage of the said

Scholarship.” This entry gives an interest to the opening of Gower’s

Provostship; another of a different character occurs near its close. In

1775 is recorded an injunction of the Visitors of the College “as to

the use of napkins in the Common Hall.”

The Provostship of Dr. Landon, 1795-1835, witnessed the commencement

of that growth of Oxford, of which our own generation has seen so

remarkable a development. The opening up of Beaumont St., as to which

the College was in treaty with the city in 1820, materially assisted in

drawing Worcester within the comity of Colleges.[345] It was still--and

for many years to come--unrecognized upon the Proctorial rota. The

first Proctor it nominated in its own right held office in 1863. The

College could only be approached either by George St. and Stockwell

St., or more directly by the narrow alley called Friar’s Entry; and an

amusing picture is given of the stately Vice-Chancellor--“Old Glory”

was his soubriquet--preceded by his Bedels, with their gold and silver

maces, ducking beneath the fluttering household linen suspended across

the alley on washing day. This must have been a trying test of the

dignified deportment which had distinguished Dr. Landon as host of the

Allied Sovereigns, and gained for him--so it is said--from the Prince

Regent the Deanery of Exeter.

The College, thus drawn more directly within the influences of

University life, began to feel the impulse given to academical resort

by times of peace. New rooms were added; sets long vacant were fitted

up for occupants. In 1821 three additional sets were constructed “in

the space afforded by the old College chapel.” In 1822 it was ordered

that all such apartments not at present inhabited, as shall be found

capable of accommodating undergraduates, be immediately prepared

for their reception. In 1824 the roof of part of the old building

was raised, so as to give six additional sets of rooms. Finally in

1844 a new and handsome kitchen was built and seven additional sets

constructed.[346]

The most distinguished inmate of the College in Landon’s time was

Thomas de Quincey, of whom his old servant on No. 10 staircase--Common

Room man till 1865--retained many memories. He lived a somewhat recluse

life. He was always buying fresh books, and was sometimes at a loss

how to find money for them. In those days men dressed for Hall: and De

Quincey having one day parted with his one waistcoat for the purchase

of a book went into Hall hiding his loss of clothing as best he could.

But concealment was in vain, and he was promptly sconced for the

deficiency. De Quincey crowned the peculiarities of his College career

by suddenly leaving Oxford before the close of a brilliant examination.

In 1826 another member of the College--Francis William Newman--received

the unique distinction of a present of books (now in the College

Library) from his mathematical examiners. Bonamy Price, Arnold’s

favourite pupil, shed a lustre upon the next generation of

undergraduates. Both of them were subsequently Honorary Fellows of

the College, and were present at the celebration of its six hundredth

anniversary. Dr. Bloxam, a contemporary of the two, preserves some

interesting recollections of the customs of the day. The Bachelors who

resided for their M.A. Degree used to appear in Hall in full evening

dress, breeches and silk stockings. Undergraduates had left off

attending dinner in white neckcloths and evening costume. The table on

the right was occupied by the gay men of the College, and was called

the “Sinners’ Table.” These formed a class by themselves. The table on

the left was called the “Smilers’ Table,” who also formed a distinct

set between the “Sinners” and the “Saints,” the latter being the more

quiet men, who occupied the table nearest the High Table, on the left.

The Fellow Commoners, an institution retained at the present day for

the convenience of older men resorting to the University, were at that

time young men of fortune, who desired an exemption from the stricter

discipline of undergraduate life. They dined at the High Table, and

were members of the Common Room. But their affinities lay rather with

the occupants of the “Sinners’ Table,” and their existence must have

been a perpetual difficulty to a sorely-tried Dean. “Bodley” Coxe, a

member of the College in those days, subsequently one of its Honorary

Fellows, would tell of the formidable muster of “pinks” in Beaumont

St. after a champagne breakfast, and of the excuse which satisfied a

simple-minded tutor that the delinquent would not offend again during

the whole of the summer.

There has been a great change too in the habits of the Seniors. The

tutors, as elsewhere, gave their lectures or rather lessons, consisting

of translations by the class, with questions and answers, without form

or ceremony in their own rooms. After an early dinner they would retire

to an uncarpeted Common Room. There after wine long clay pipes were a

regular indulgence. An evening walk or other interlude was succeeded

by a hot supper at nine, and the evening finished with a rubber. Dr.

Cotton in his time was singular in retiring to his rooms after Common

Room without joining the whist and supper party. All these customs have

dropped away with the barbers and knee-breeches of our fathers. The

Latin form of Morning Prayers was abolished by an excess of reforming

zeal, and the Statutes of the College are no longer recited in annual

conclave. Ordinances have succeeded statutes, and statutes succeeded

ordinances. One ancient custom lingers on--the Porter still makes his

morning rounds, and hammers upon the door of each staircase with a

wooden mallet. This is a Benedictine usage, an echo of the thirteenth

century continuing to haunt the old Benedictine walls.

XX.

HERTFORD COLLEGE.[347]

BY THE REV. H. RASHDALL, M.A., FELLOW OF HERTFORD.

Although Hertford is the youngest College of the University, it

stands close to the very centre of the University’s most ancient

home, on a site which has been the scene of Academical life from the

earliest times. What the Oxford Local Board has chosen to call S.

Catherine’s Street, has been known from the earliest times onwards as

“Catte-Street” (Vicus Murilegorum). Lying just outside School Street,

the scene of the Arts lectures, Cat Street was in the twelfth century

the especial home of the Writers, Bookbinders, Parchment-makers, and

Illuminers, for whose wares the growth of the University had created a

demand. In the following century, it was partly occupied by University

Halls or Hospices. At least four were comprised within the limits of

the present College: Cat Hall, near the present Principal’s Lodgings;

Black Hall, at the corner of New College Lane; Hart Hall, and Arthur

Hall, the two latter occupying the Library corner of the Quadrangle.

Hart Hall eventually swallowed up all its neighbours as well as the

ground between them. The history of this process want of space forbids

me to trace. I must confine myself to the Hall which has given its name

to the present College.

_Hart Hall_, 1280(?)-1740.

The Colleges of Oxford: Their History and Traditions XXI Chapters Contributed by Members of the Colleges · 第 38 / 44 段