it seems, where each party trying their valor fell together in such a confusion with their warlike array, that in conclusion divers on both sides were slain and pitifully wounded. This bloody conflict during among them for some time, the event thereof was this, that the Northern Scholars with the Welsh, had with much ado the victory."1

The second battle, selected like the first from the records of many others, occurred in 1388, more than a century later. "On Thursday in the fourth week in Lent in the twelfth year of the reign of Richard II., Thomas Speeke, Chaplain, and John Kirby with a multitude of other malefactors, appointing captains among them, rose up against the peace of the King, and sought after all Welshmen abiding and studying in Oxford, shooting arrows before them in divers streets and lanes as they went, crying out 'War, war, war! Fle, fle, fle! The Walsh doggys and her whelyps, and ho so looketh out of his house, he shall in good soote be dead'; and certain persons they slew and others they grievously wounded, and some of the Welshmen who bowed their knees to abjure the Town, they, the Northern Scholars, led to the gates, causing them to kiss the gates in dishonorable fashion. But, being not content with that, they, while the said Welshmen knelt to kiss it, would knock their heads against the gate in such an inhuman manner that they would force blood out of the noses of some, and tears from the eyes of others."*

Nor was there any greater harmony among the older men in the University world, among the Masters and Monks, for here as between the town and gown certain principles were working themselves into clearer definition within the social consciousness. Rivalry existed between the different monastic orders. The monks and the official clergy of the University were continually at odds. Wycliff, writing at about the time of the battle just described, speaks of every friar as "a 'Quoted from Wood, in Hulton, p. 18. Wood; quoted by Hulton, p. 24.

Meanwhile the town of Oxford was no inconsiderable borough. In early days it had been the meeting place of national assemblies. In the immediate neighborhood were wealthy religious houses, such as Abingdon, Enysham, Oseney and S. Frideswyde's, and just outside the city gates were royal residences where two kings were born, Richard at Beaumont Place, and John at Woodstock. Down to 1305 tiltings and tournaments were regularly held in the town, although the picture of them which has been preserved for us is not wholly attractive. "Many sad casualties were caused by these meetings, though ordered with the best caution. Arms and legs were often broken as well as spears. Much lewd people waited upon these assemblies, light housewives as well as light horsemen repaired thereto. Yea, such was the clashing of swords, the rattling of arms, the sounding of trumpets, the neighing of horses, the shouting of men all day-time, with the roaring of riotous revellers all the night, that the scholars' studies were disturbed, safety endangered, lodging straitened, charges inlarged, all provisions being inconscionably enhanced. In a word, so many war horses were brought together hither, that Pegasus himself was likely to be shut out; for where Mars keeps his terms, there the Muses may even make their vacation."4

Over its own heterogeneous members and this mixed population within the town the infant University, fully engaged in fighting its battles as a body, could have but little con"Wood; quoted by Hulton, p. 88. 'Hulton, p. 11.

trol; and the fact that the Muses did not "make their vacation" and that Mars continued to "keep his terms" at Oxford for some centuries to come accounts for the feuds which inevitably followed from such conditions.

It should be remembered also that every riot of note in the university world brought into conflict all the elements of feudal life, town, crown and church: the town, usually with justice, seeking only its own welfare; the church and crown and university contending for larger principles, of which doubtless they were quite unconscious. A monkish doggerel tells us truly what often happened:

Chronica si penses;
Cum pugnant Oxienses,

Post paucos

Volat via per Angligenses.1
When Oxford scholars fall to fight
Mark the Chronicles aright,
Before many months expired
England will with war be fired.2

Before proceeding to the account of the actual hostilities between town and gown, it may be well to note further some of the causes for which they persistently fought, for these issues gave rise to the hatred of which the riots were only the indication. House rent and food are naturally first among them. For several generations after the founding of the university, it owned no property, if it so desired could move easily to another town. Scholars and teachers alike were poor and even the richest among them at short notice probably could have carried away with them all their worldly goods. Only the wealthiest could boast that he had

"At his beddes hed Twenty books clothed in black or red. Of Aristotle and his philosophie.”3 So if the thrifty merchant of Oxford collected his rent, he must needs have been a

'Wood, I., p. 258.

'Chaucer, Prologue, Canterbury Tales. 'Oxford Hist. Soc. Pub., XV., p. 469.

hard landlord, and that he was bent on collecting his dues is shown in the constant trouble over the lodgings. But this trouble was so divided between the owners of different halls and houses, that it does not lend itself to our study so readily as does the contention over the market.

"As concernng the first rise of the Market of Oxon and when it began, it is beyond all record to deliver," and the same may be said concerning the market contention. Nowhere else has there been such a constant struggle for the supremacy between the two rival corporations, the town and the gown. From Edward III. to George III. the dispute never ceased. There was jealousy from the earliest days, the town anxious to sell everything as dear as possible, the gown angry at the system of two prices-the cheaper price for townsfolk and the higher for the students -and no doubt unduly anxious to reduce the cost of living to the lowest possible ex

pense.

For a long time the University had no claim whatever over the market, but in 1214 the Papal Legate, in withdrawing an interdict laid on the town (for hanging three clerks of which we shall speak further on), gave it the right to be represented at the Assize. And this right gradually drew to itself more important privileges.5

In 1275 we find the King writing to the Mayor and Burghers "that they carefully observe the assize and the price of victuals, wine and other vendible things, lest the Scholars should be abused in their mercats. For now the Mayor was Clerk of the Mercat, and when any assaying was made by him of vendibles or potables the Chancellor or deputy was only present or a looker-on."

In 1290 we learn that "the Chancellor and Scholars, as well as the Mayor (who before had the sole authority), had the power granted to them of the Assize of Victuals, & also "Ogle's Oxford Market. Oxf. Hist. Soc. Pub. XVI., p. 46.

Ogle, p. 47.

the Power of determining about weights and measures."1

From this time on the town continued to lose certain of its market privileges. Five years later, in 1295, for some unstated reason the town refused to pay their fee-farm rent for the market to the Crown, and consequently "King Edw. the 1st did seize upon. the Clerkship of the Mercat to the use of the Exchequer, and let out the same sometime to the Constable of Oxford, and sometimes to others who should pay for it."2

Thus far the records seem to show the city suffering under persecution, in which the gown aided by the crown was snatching away its rights. And no doubt this is a true picture of much that was happening; but the other side of the question, the provocation for royal interference in behalf of the gown, is seen in two letters from the King addressed to the City, under the dates of 1330 and 1331. The first orders that "Wine should not be sold dearer in Oxford and the suburbs thereof than in the City of London,

The town naturally was exasperated at being deprived of the Clerkship, but a worse trouble was to come, for we learn that, "Whereas King Edw. ii. had before in a Charter of his join'd the Chancellor and Mayor together absolutely in the custody of the Assize, as aforesaid, Edw. iii, now joined them together herein: for upon the Mayor's Non-Complyance herewith the Chancellor alone was to have the custody of the said Assize."3

1Ogle, p. 48.

21b., pp. 49 and 13.

'Ayliffe, History of Oxford, I., p. 100.

unless it be a half penny in every quart"; while the second appoints a commission to inquire into and redress "the unusual and uneven selling of Wine and Victuals in Oxon by the Baillives and others."

This inquiry appears to have brought about an agreement, in 1348, between the two corporations to hold a joint assize of weights and measures, but any good results it might have had were lost after the riot of St. Scholasticas' Day, when a large number of students were killed.

'Ogle, p. 52.

The town for a time lay in disgrace under interdict and the schools were all but empty. To appease the scholars a new charter was given to the University in 1355, assigning to it the sole right to the assize of bread, beer and wine, as well as of weights and measures; and only the fines and forfeits remained to the Town, in aid of their feefarm rent to the Crown.

Seventeen years later, 1372, the King renewed his grant to the University "for the Correction of Victuals," and other evidence

How far the University had progressed during the next fifty years in claiming jurisdiction over all vendables is shown by an action of the Chancellor, who, in 1428, summoned before the University Convocation. the Mayor, Aldermen and Bailiffs, and severally censured them "for wresting from common Victuallers certain vendables to the prejudice of the King's University, damage of the public Markat, unjust detriment of the Community of Students, and against the due course of conscience." And, in 1445, the

the end of the contention so far as our purpose is concerned, for henceforth the influence of the University is dominant-is the general "inquisito," or assize of victuals, held before the Chancellor, Gilbert Kymer, in 1449, at which he summoned before him, in his own quarters in Durham College, all the butlers and manciples and investigated the condition of things. And the condition was not wholesome, for the record says that "every one of the bakers about the University made only bread that was bad in taste, color and in smell, and their loaves were underweight"; and we learn further that they "gave only twelve to the dozen to Clerks, Whereas they gave Thirteen to the dozen to townsmen." In which testimony we see a custom that still lingers among us in the familiar phrase, "baker's dozen."

The following incident shows the unfair advantage which the University had over the Town in this struggle and which enabled it to gain the mastery. In 1530, Michael Hethe, Mayor of Oxford, refused to take oath to observe the privileges of the University, the privileges in question relating principally to the market. Bedells summoned him to the Vice-Chancellor, but he refused to go, saying, "Recommend me unto your Master, and shew him I am here in this town, the King's gracious lieutenant for lack of a better, and I know no cause why I should appear before him. I know him not for my ordinary; if there be any cause between the University and the Town, I shall be glad to meet him at a place convenient.”

This courageous answer has a sound of modern independence which leads us to wish that the outcome might have been more favorable to the Mayor, but he was fighting against overwhelming odds. Again he was summoned before the Vice-Chancellor, and again he refused. Then the Vice-Chancellor, acting not as a contending official but as a priest the two offices were conveniently

'Hulton, p. 98.

"Wood, Annals, II., p. 37.

blended in those days-promptly excommunicated him, adding a curse on all who should eat or drink in his presence.

No one man in the little town of Oxford could stand against this power of the Church, and we find "forasmuch as so long as said curse lasted, he was to be deprived of several privileges, he was sorely troubled in mind and could take no rest. At length, considering the sad estate he was likely to endure, he humbly required of the Commissary and Proctors absolution, which being promised, was at length by the said Commissary and others given; but with this condition, that he should perform his corporal oath, 'de stando juri et parendo mandatis Ecclesiae.'" This power of excommunication was not infrequently used by the University in connection with the market quarrels.

For many years the struggle continued. with only slight variation. The Town occasionally gained a point, or recovered one already lost, but usually paid dear for it by some royal grant of a new privilege to the University. Nearly a century after the Chancellor held the assize in his chamber in Durham College, we find a curious record of the evil practices on both sides. In 1531, the Town complains to the King about the University. The Deputy Commissioner seized a quarter of beef from a butcher, we are told, "and then he said these words, 'Clare, thou hast forfayted thy quarter of beefe,' and so extorciously took it from him and dyd ette it in Lingcolne College, and never payd for it." The Commissioner answered that the "meat was regratid" (i. e., it had been sold twice in the same market), and that he had paid for it, "for the beefe, or the value thereof, Every Pennyworthe was Bestowid apoun pore prisoners, and other pore people, where he might have converted yt to the Common profyte of the University, according to the privilege of the sd Universitie, if it so had plesid him." The fact that the value of the