BW
(p0Mi^
THE
EARLY HISTORY OF OXFORD
727-1 100
I
THE
EARLY HISTORY
OXFORD
727- I lOO
PRECEDED BY A SKETCH OF THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN
OF THE CITY AND UNIVERSITY
JAMES PARKER, Hon. M.A. Oxon.
PRINTED FOR THE OXFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
18S5
\_All rights reserved']
THE
EARLY HISTORY
OXFORD
727- I lOO
PRECEDED BY A SKETCH OF THE MYTHICAL ORIGIN
OF THE CITY AND UNIVERSITY
JAMES PARKER, Hon. M.A. Oxon.
PRINTED FOR THE OXFORD HISTORICAL SOCIETY
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
18S5
\^All rights re served 'Y
^'
PRINTED BY HOEACE HART, PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
PREFACE.
An apology is due to the subscribers to the Oxford Historical
Society for the somewhat tardy appearance of this volume. In
acceding to the request of my friend Mr. Madan to compile a sum-
mary of the historical material on which the Early History of Oxford
was based, I did not at the moment quite realise what I had under-
taken. In 1 87 1 I had printed a series of notes on the Early History
of Oxford, which had been arranged for a lecture delivered before the
Oxford Architectural and Historical Society, Feb. 28 in that year.
A few copies only were printed, and presented to such members of
the Society and friends as seemed to be interested in the subject ; but
it was not published, because I felt that the notes were imperfect,
and hoped at some future time to revise them, and fill in certain
details which were wanting.
For instance, I gave but a few lines to the mythical history of
Oxford, intending on some other occasion to work out the 'Greek-
lade,' the 'Mempric' and 'Alfred' myths, all of which seemed to be-
long to the same category, and to have been made the basis of most
of what had then been written on the early history of Oxford ; and I
dismissed the story of S. Frideswide also, in a page or so, but knew that
I had not done justice to a subject which was so intimately connected
with that early history. My notes began practically with the year 912,
and although the true history of Oxford, in the full acceptance of the
term, does not begin till that date, still I felt that the commencement
at this period was somewhat abrupt, and that some preliminary notes
were wanted upon the part which the district of Oxford had played in
earlier history. Lastly, I felt that in so briefly chronicling the passages
in which the name of Oxford occurred or which referred in any way
to Oxford, I had treated them too narrowly, and that I ought to have
shown their bearing upon the general history of the country.
The purport, however, of my pamphlet of 1871 was to bring into
prominence not only what we knew of the early history, but how we
knew it, in contradistinction to the mythical stories which had grown
up around recorded facts ; and such digressions would have been far
vi PREFACE.
beyond the limits of the seventy-eight pages which that pamphlet
occupied, and these in themselves were already an undue expansion
of the notes of the hour's lecture.
But when the compliment was paid to me by the Committee of the
new Oxford Historical Society in asking me to contribute some notes
upon the early history of my native city, and when it was suggested
that practically what was required of me was an expansion of the
notes of 187 1, I accepted, somewhat rashly, the task, being glad of
the opportunity which would thus be afforded of carrying out my
previous intention, but not anticipating either the labour, or the
amount of time it would involve. I found, however, that after the
lapse of fourteen years much which was in my mind then had been
forgotten, and further, that when I began to build on what had been
then somewhat hastily put together, I could not work satisfactorily
without going down to the foundations, and in most parts without
building de novo. Besides this, I found the digression upon the mythical
history involved a larger amount of new reading and research than
I had anticipated: not that the results would lead the reader to suppose
this, but such was the fact, since in choosing what seemed to be the
salient points much had to be read and sifted which was productive
of nothing worth recording. Although there was little to alter in the
conclusions expressed in a few short paragraphs in the pamphlet of
1 87 1, the exposition of the evidence in detail, and in such a way as to
bring the points clearly before the reader, and yet not to be guilty of
injustice to the work of those who had followed different lines of
research from my own, involved a considerable expenditure of time
in searching for passages and verifying references,
Again, although I thought it would be a comparatively easy matter
to treat the passages which were quoted as touching upon Oxford in
connection with the general history of the country, I found myself
constandy obliged to enter upon controverted matters. It is one thing
to put on paper one's own views, but another to give fairly and fully
the chapter and verse for the evidence on which those views are
based. This again occupied more of the limited time at my disposal
than was anticipated. Hence the delay in the issue of the volume ; and
I venture to plead the above circumstances as an excuse for the
non-fulfilment of my pledge to the Committee as to time, not as a
justification.
It is true, that as regards the later chapters. Professor Freeman's
grand historical work on the Norman Conquest, which had been com-
pleted since my notes were published in 187 1, affords a rich quarry
from which to obtain material, but the system I had adopted, namely
of relying upon the original authorities independently of what use had
been made of them by later historians, prevented my availing myself so
much of this valuable work as I should otherwise have done. I have,
however, in consulting that work often found occasion to add to my
notes, and in one or two cases to modify my original conclusions.
At the same time I have to confess that upon some of the contro-
verted points treated in the following pages, I have allowed the con-
clusions at which I had atrived, independently of Professor Freeman's
work, to remain as written. I hold for instance, that the evidence
points strongly in favour of Oxford being the scene of Eadmund's
death in 1016; but I am not convinced that the evidence which he
has adduced for William's march through Wallingford and Berkhamp-
stead, and -for connecting the Oxford district with that march, is suffi-
cient to support his conclusions. Again, as to the supposed siege of
Oxford, I have by no means followed his work as my guide ; in laying
considerable stress upon the temporising policy of Harold at the
important Gemot at Oxford in 1065, and upon the traitorous character
of Eadwin and IMorkere's conduct on that occasion ; upon the rebel
character of the mob which they led, and upon Harold's unwise
sacrifice of Tostig in the hope of appeasing them, I find that I have
followed a different line of argument from that adopted by Professor
Freeman ; but the circumstances, here given in detail, and on which
. I have relied so much, seemed to me to bring out the importance of
the part which the decision of the Oxford Gemot played in the history
of the Norman Conquest, as well as to account for that great destruc-
tion of houses at Oxford which had taken place at some time before
the Domesday Survey, and which has been accepted as the chief
evidence of a siege of Oxford being one of the incidents of William's
march either before his coronation or afterwards.
Although in this expansion of the material given in the little
brochure of 1871, I have now treated it much more from an historical
point of view, and attempted to show the place which Oxford seems to
have held in the general history of the country, I have not lost sight
of one of the purposes with which the original treatise was compiled,
namely, to point out clearly the sources of the history. I have, as far
as possible, given the chapter and verse for all the statements, and
searched, as a rule, for the earliest form in which the statement
occurs, and, where necessary, shown the evidence of the expansion of it
by later historians. In detailing the character and date of the his-
torian followed, and the nature of the MSS. on which reliance is
viii PREFACE.
placed, I am conscious of having inserted details which must be tedious
to the reader, as this part of the work has been oftentimes tedious
to myself: but if one of the chief objects of the Oxford Historical
Society be to provide ready access to the material on which the
history of Oxford rests, then a full description of the references, so
that every quotation can be readily verified as well as read in connec-
tion with its context and its value determined, will not be out of place.
There was one difficulty, and this was in deciding whether the
passages quoted should be given in the original or in a translation.
For my own part I would, of course, have preferred to have been
relieved of the task of turning medieval Latin into English, but on the
other hand, it was thought that the work would be useful to a larger
class of readers if, in the course of the book itself, the chief passages
were given in English, and if the originals were printed in an appendix,
so that scholars would not be deprived of a ready opportunity of
reference. I have felt a satisfaction in this latter part of the plan,
inasmuch as, though my blunders are thus exposed, no future writer
can, or, at least, should be misled by them, when he has the original
before him by which to correct them. In translating, I may add, I
have as far as possible attempted to follow closely the original, at the
expense sometimes perhaps of even intelligible English. In respect
of the rendering of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle I have followed,
I believe, almost uniformly the late Mr. Thorpe's translation, and as
regards one or two charters I will here take the opportunity of
acknowledging the kind assistance of Professor Earle in revising my
translation.
In giving the originals, where they have been already printed, I have
followed the best texts available, and in some few cases I have com-
pared them with the I\ISS. : with those issued in the Rolls Series, this
of course was not needed. In certain cases I have supplied various
readings, especially of proper names; and though such will not be
found to be of much value in themselves, they may help sometimes to
show the source whence the chronicler or the transcriber derived his
material.
I may here too say that I have retained the name of ' Anglo-Saxon
Chronicle,' or ' Chronicles,' using sometimes one form, sometimes the
other, as occasion required. If it is recognised that there was a series
of chronicles, though as regards the early parts of all based on a
common original, it has seemed to me that it was best to retain the
old and generally received name, and less likely to mislead than the
terms Abingdon Chronicle, Peterborough Chronicle, &c., which
PREFACE. ix
names, to say the least, rest on no very satisfactory basis, while they
are open to the objection of creating confusion between them and
chronicles which bear commonly the same or at least very similar
names.
Some exception may perhaps be taken to the titles and to the
division of some of the chapters, but the following circumstances must
be borne in mind. The foundation of S. Frideswide's in 727 seemed
to require a chapter to itself, and therefore left the period before and
afterwards, which otherwise should have been treated as one, to be
divided into two parts, and it was difficult to make any real distinction
in the titles of the two chapters IV. and VI. It was thought, how-
ever, that while speaking of the site of Oxford in one, it was only right
to speak of the town of Oxford in the other, the recorded foundation of
S. Frideswide providing the line of demarcation. Again; it was thought
that the event described under the year 912, and the circumstances
which appeared to surround it, such as the formation of the county,
and the general history of the fortification of the town against the
Danes, would justify separating the period of the Danish incursions
(and giving that title to Chapter VII.) from the period of the Danish
invasions, leaving that title for Chapter VIII. It seemed, also, con-
venient to embrace in this one chapter the latter part of the reign of
^thelred the Unready, beginning, as far as Oxford was concerned,
with the massacre there in 1002 as a detail in the unhappy policy
of that unwise monarch, which culminated in the accession of Cnut
to the English throne; and with his agreement made at the Oxford
Gemot of 1018 the chapter practically closes.
As it has been thought useful to refer to the ecclesiastical history of
the district as well as the political, I have grouped, as far as possible,
such events as belong to the tenth, or to the early part of the eleventh
century, respectively under the two chapters above named.
After the accession of Cnut, it seemed impossible to group the
events which followed under any very definite title, and thus the
general one of ' Forty years before the Norman Conquest' was
adopted for Chapter IX. At the same time, since this chapter
practically closes with the account of the Oxford Gemot in 1065, the
decision of which is shown to have played an important part in hasten-
ing that Conquest, the title is not without some meaning. Taking the
Norman Conquest in the limited sense — that is, including the events of
the three months between the battle near Hastings and the coronation
at Christmas, 1066, and viewing the battles fought afterwards in the
light of the suppression of rebellion — the division is a convenient one.
X PREFACE.
The twenty years which succeed this event give an opportunity of
explaining "the reasons why the theory of a siege of Oxford is re-
jected, and of recording the advent of Robert D'Oilgi and what he
did for Oxford. This Chapter X. practically includes William the
Conqueror's reign.
At the very close of his reign, however, came the Domesday Survey.
This was thought to be worthy of a chapter to itself, and it is treated
somewhat fully, as it provides the data upon which it has been
attempted to base a description of Oxford at this time. Advantage
has also been taken of this separate chapter to refer to such details
respecting ihe plan and condition of the town or existing remains of
buildings which did not fall so readily under the historical narrative
in the previous chapter ; and also, since the Survey introduces many
names of note amongst the holders of mansions in Oxford, it has not
been thought out of place to introduce here and there such remarks as
tend to show in what way the data, afforded in the Oxford Domesday,
illustrate the general history of the confiscation and distribution of
the land throughout the country by William the Conqueror.
This then forms Chapter XI, and with that chapter it has been
thought well to bring to a close this contribution to the Early History
of Oxford. The reign of William Rufus is a blank as regards Oxford,
and all the light which is thrown upon it comes from the Domesday
Survey, or from documents which have been introduced in illustration
of it ; so that this chapter may be said to bring down the history of
Oxford to the close of the eleventh century.
Here and there, for the sake of illustrations to the descriptive
portion, I have trenched somewhat upon the charters and other
material belonging to the next century ; but I have avoided as far as
possible entering upon any of the historical questions which distinctly
belong to it.
Throughout the treatise I have attempted to deal fairly with the
facts before me. I have not thought it my duty to magnify the
importance of Oxford — a duty which the majority of local historians
seem to consider as devolving upon them. If in places I have dismissed
popular and interesting traditions as untenable, I trust by bringing
together a fuller summary than has yet been done of records which
exist, I have built up, so to speak, as much as I have pulled down ;
and if I have not surrounded Oxford with a mysterious halo of glory,
and contended for an antiquity which there is no reason to suppose
it possessed, I still hope I may have done something lo show the posi-
tion which Oxford really occupied in the early history of the country.
PREFACE. XI
A tolerably full alphabetical index of places and persons named in
the course of the book has been given. An alphabetical index of
subjects I have, as a rule, found k) be practically useless, since on the
one hand it is impossible to know for certain under what word the
subject should be indexed, and on the other hand, there cannot be many
historical subjects, if indeed there be any, which are not associated
with some known place or person, and which cannot therefore be far
more readily found in the index under such a reference ; consequently
but a few technical words, and others under which it has been thought
useful to group several references have been introduced. Moreover
the somewhat full ' Table of Contents ' will, it is anticipated, supply
a ready means of reference to the various subjects treated in the work.
But I have kept distinct an index to the books and MSS. from
which the data given in my work have been extracted, or which for
various reasons may have been quoted ; and my reason for doing
this is because I have laid so great a stress upon the importance of
knowing whence we derive the facts on which we depend for our
history. Scattered throughout the pages of a somewhat long index
of names and places, the list of authorities would scarcely fulfil its
purpose ; but arranged as it is, besides exhibiting the sources whence
that which has been stated is deduced, it exhibits also in a measure
what has not been explored or made use of. By turning to this index
the student or any historian of Oxford who may make use of the material
here brought together, can see at once what new ground he will have
to explore or how far the ground already explored has been properly
dealt with. I am aware that this conspectus may expose my short-
comings, just as the printing of the originals exposes my errors in
transladon; but if it advances in any way the true study of the history
of Oxford I shall be only too pleased that both are exposed.
Besides the Appendix of Documents (A), already referred to, it has
been thought worth while to add a few pages upon the name of
Oxford (B), upon the disputed question of Alfred's coins (C), a brief
description of the plates (D) which the courtesy of the Committee
have permitted me to add to the book ; and finally, as a last appendix
(E), such minor additions, and one or two corrections, which have
suggested themselves to me in reading the work through after it was
printed for the purpose of making the index.
1 cannot conclude these remarks without tendering my acknowledg-
ments to the Committee of the Oxford Historical Society — first, for the
honour which they did me in asking me to contribute such a treatise to
their undertaking, and next for the patience and courtesy with which
xii PREFACE.
they have treated my delay in completing the work, a delay however
which, with my many engagements, I found to be unavoidable. To
Mr. Madan also my thanks are especially due for the kind manner
in which he has met so many of my suggestions, though his patience
must have been tried by my slow progress, and for the assistance
which in several matters he has afforded me during the revision of the
proofs. I am also requested to tender the thanks of the Committee,
with which I would join my own, to Col. Taylor and Mr. Basevi
Sanders, of the Ordnance Survey, Southampton, for the facilities
afforded in reproducing the facsimile of the page of the Domesday
Survey relating to Oxford, which appears as the frontispiece.
The Turl, Oxford,
October, 1885.
Apage igitur illos Cantabrigiensium Libros Nigros, necnon Higdeni,
Bruntonii, Rudburni, Rossii, et aliorum recentiorum deliria ; credamus
tantum eis quae fidem merentur; nee cum Pueris delectemur fabulis
Antiquis novisse^
If I should lose time to reckon up the vaine allegations produced for the
Antiquity of Oxford by Twyne, and of Cambridge by Caius, I should but
repeat Deliria senum ; for I account the most of that they have published
in print to be no better ^
* From the preface to Smith's Annals of University College, ed. 1728, p. x.
* Speech of Sir Simon D'Ewes, Knight, in the Long Parliament, Jan. 2,
1640-1641.
ANALYTICAL TABLE OF CONTENTS.
CHAPTER I. Introductory.
PAGE
The question at what dale the History of Oxford begins . . . . i
(i) The 'mythical' history ascribes the origin of the town to Mempric,
\ B.C. 1009 ; of the University to the arrival of Greek philosophers
at Greeklade, at an uncertain date, or to the supposed foundation
by King Alfred in A. D. 873 i /
(2) The ' theoretical ' origin of the town would be the arrival of certain
settlers, their names and date of settlement being unknown . 2
(3) The ' legendary' history ascribes the foundation of a nunnery here
by S. Frideswide to a.d. 727 ....... 2
(4) The ' actual' recorded history begins with A. D. 912, when King
Eadward the Elder took possession of Oxford . . . .2
The proposed plan of dealing with these different views of history . . 3
CHAPTER n. The Mythical Origin of Oxford.
John Rous at the close of i'ht fifteenth century the first historian to combine
the myths about Oxford into a connected series ..... 5
His story of the foundation by Mempric, B. c. 1009 ; the successive names of
Oxford ; the transference from Greeklade to Beaumont ; and thence
to within the walls of Oxford ........ 5
Illustration of Rous's critical faculty in weighing evidence ; e. g. his reference
to the Noachian Deluge ......... 6
Geoffrey of Monmouth's fiction oi ihe twelfth century as to a certain Mempric
expanded and connected with Oxford by Rous ..... 7
Examples of Geoffrey and Rous's habit of inventing names of persons to fit
different places ........... 8
Rous fits the mythical history of Cambridge on to a passage from Geoffrey's
romance in the same way he does that of Oxford ..... 9
, The Oxford Historiola, which ascribes the foundation of the University to
Greek philosophers arriving at Greeklade 10
Greeklade is but a perversion of Cricklade, of which the history is fairly
well known .... ........ \\ .
Nor is there any difficulty as to the origin of the name 12/
Rous obtained part of his story from this ' Historiola,' since he was in his
youth a scholar at Oxford 12
xiv CONTENTS.
PAGE
The origin of his story of Oxford being once situated at Beaumont derived
from the erroneous passage in the Hyde Abbey Chronicle of the close
of ihs faurteenth century 13
The Chrotiicon Jornallense, also late in the fourteetith caitury, has the story
of Bade and of Bishop Felix founding Cambridge ; also the story of a
school at Greeklade for Greek scholars and at Lechlade for Latin
scholars ............ 14
Notes adduced to prove that Leland believed in these myths . . .16
Of the other myths raised on an etymological basis ; origin of the name
Bellesitum ............ 17
The names of Caer-bossa, oi Ridohen, Boso Devadobouin, Boso Ridocencis, &c.
all attributable to Geoffrey's invention of names in his Romance, when
he comes to the story of King Arthur 17
The Cambridge controversy as to the relative antiquity of the two Univer-
sities, in which the above myths are marshalled as history . . .20
The literature of the subject: — (i) A book by John Caius of Cambridge,
styling himself ' Londinensis,' entitled ^De Antiquitate Catitab. Acad-
emiae, libri duo,' together with (2) a treatise (to which it was supposed
to be an answer) by Thomas Caius of Oxford, entitled ' Assertio Anti-
guitatis Oxoniensis Academiae,'' both printed by John Caius in 1568 . 20
A reprint after the death of John Caius of the two books, together with (3)
/ a general history of the University of Cambridge, entitled Historia Canta-
brigiensis Academiae, in 1574 (the whole probably edited by Archbishop
Parker) ' 22
The treatises (i) and (2), together with (4), a MS. treatise in reply to the
first by Thomas Caius of Oxford, entitled,' Animadversiones,' printed by
Hearne under the title of ' Vindiciac Antiquitatis Academiae Oxoniensis^
1730 23
The speech of the Cambridge Orator (William Masters) in 1564 on Queen
Elizabeth's visit to Cambridge, the origin of the controversy ... 24