Oxford’s History: 20 Places and the Stories Behind Them

1. Oxford Castle and Prison: a royal escape and a much longer history of confinement

The mound gives me a way to get my bearings in an Oxford that was worth controlling before it was full of colleges. Under it are traces of what building a castle displaced. The oldest-looking bits of the visit take a little care, especially the crypt, where old columns survive in a rebuilt setting.

The mound also preserved evidence of what the castle displaced. Archaeologists found remains of the earlier Saxon settlement beneath it. Later roads and prison buildings have reduced the apparent extent of the stronghold, so the open space we see is an incomplete guide to its original reach. Even St George’s Tower resists an easy date. It may have belonged to a church at the western gate before the Norman castle was built. I like that uncertainty: a substantial surviving tower deserves more attention than a label confidently making every stone Norman.

The famous escape came in 1142, during the struggle between King Stephen and Empress Matilda for the English throne. Stephen besieged her here; Matilda got out and eventually reached Wallingford. The near-contemporary account by William of Malmesbury describes a small postern gate, four companions and a river crossing, followed by a walk to Abingdon and a ride onwards. He was uncertain about the precise manner of her departure. That is enough drama for me without presenting the familiar rope, window and white-clothes version as an eyewitness report.

Inside, the crypt needs similarly careful looking. Its old columns survive, but the space was moved and rebuilt in 1794. The castle’s use as a prison lasted far longer than Matilda’s siege. Among its best-known prisoners was Mary Blandy, convicted in 1752 of poisoning her father. The later buildings introduce the Victorian separate system, which sought to keep prisoners apart. Confinement here was an organised daily practice, with architecture used to enforce it.

Excavations following the prison’s closure in 1996 make that long history unusually tangible. Skeletons from the motte ditch were probably those of executed prisoners, some dissected before burial. Elsewhere, animal bones included crane and partridge associated with high-status eating in the early castle, while discarded leather shoes supplied evidence of ordinary use. These discoveries are why I would give the site more time than the escape story alone requires. Food, punishment and worn footwear bring different inhabitants into view.

The prison closed in 1996 and some of it became a hotel. I’d give the cells their own time. Matilda’s escape makes a good story to bring to a castle; the records from the prison make you think about the many people who never had her way out.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

2. St Michael at the North Gate: Oxford before the colleges

The rough stone at St Michael’s makes it easy for me to imagine an Oxford with a gate here and very little of the city visitors come to see now. The church dates the tower to about 1040. You can give the masonry a close look from the street before making any decision about the stairs.

The rough coral rag stonework belongs to the early or middle eleventh century; the church gives about 1040 as its date. The body of the building has changed repeatedly, with medieval additions and Victorian restoration, so the tower’s age should not be applied to everything attached to it. There is thirteenth-century glass inside. Domesday Book records two houses held by the priests of St Michael’s in 1086, a small reminder that a parish church also had property and an economic place in the town.

The surviving door associated with Thomas Cranmer’s confinement brings us forward to the religious persecutions of Mary I’s reign. Cranmer, formerly Archbishop of Canterbury and a leading architect of the English Reformation, was held in the Bocardo before his execution in 1556. I would resist making the door stand for a shared cell occupied by all three Oxford Protestant martyrs. Hugh Latimer and Nicholas Ridley spent much of their captivity elsewhere under house arrest. The real relationship between this object and Cranmer is sufficient.

Inside the Lady Chapel, the reredos, the decorated structure behind the altar, records a longer argument over images. It was damaged under Edward VI, restored during Mary’s Catholic reign and subsequently fell out of use. Those changes were decisions about what worshippers should look at and how a church should express belief. A damaged or reinstated carving can make the Reformation more understandable than a list of successive monarchs.

The parish’s Beating of the Bounds is documented from 1428. I like putting that alongside the tower and the surviving door associated with Cranmer. People have found very different reasons to remember exactly where they were in this part of Oxford.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

3. Carfax Tower: the crossroads where a quarrel changed the city

Four streets come together at Carfax, which is one reason I find it easier to understand Oxford’s arguments about who could tell whom what to do here. On 10 February 1355 a dispute over wine at the Swindlestock Tavern spread into days of violence. What catches me is what the university could control afterwards, right down to bread.

On 10 February 1355, St Scholastica’s Day, a dispute over wine at the Swindlestock Tavern developed into several days of violence between townspeople and scholars. The town’s own complaint says students threw wine, struck the tavern keeper with a pot and later returned with bows and arrows. It also accused the university’s chancellor of refusing to arrest them. This is a partisan account, preserved through a later transcription, and should be read as one side arguing its case. I would distrust any version that makes the whole disaster a simple matter of bad wine.

The quarrel took place within overlapping systems of authority. Scholars enjoyed privileges under the chancellor’s court; townspeople had civic officers and grievances about how university jurisdiction affected them. Once violence began, those competing claims mattered. The royal settlement favoured the university, and Oxford’s mayor and citizens were required to attend an annual penitential service at St Mary’s. A local quarrel had produced a recurring public demonstration of whose authority prevailed.

Its consequences reached into everyday shopping. A charter of June 1355 gave the university the assize of bread and ale, the power to regulate their measures and quality. Records of later enforcement include a baker whose bread was underweight and who failed to answer a summons: his banishment from the university’s precincts was proclaimed at Carfax. Spoiled food and obstructions in the streets also attracted official attention. These are the details I find most useful. University privilege could affect the loaf a resident bought, not just a scholar’s examination.

The tower outlived St Martin’s church. Its clock figures strike the quarter-hours above people doing their shopping and getting across the roads. I’d look at them from the pavement. There’s quite a lot of Oxford’s civic life to picture without going up.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

4. University Church of St Mary the Virgin: belief on trial

The twisted columns on St Mary’s south porch make me slow down on the High Street. The porch dates from 1637, a time when an elaborate church entrance could give people something serious to argue about. I’d look at it before thinking about the view from the tower.

The university used the church long before it possessed the separate buildings now associated with its business. The late-thirteenth-century tower and Congregation House, built around 1320 with a library above, recall a period when books, meetings and worship occupied neighbouring parts of the same institution. Later work produced the nave and chancel. Looking at these different phases, I find it easier to understand why theology, university government and public authority were so closely entangled.

Mary I’s accession in 1553 restored Catholic worship after the changes made under Henry VIII and Edward VI. Thomas Cranmer, Nicholas Ridley and Hugh Latimer were leading Protestant figures against whom proceedings took place at St Mary’s. Ridley and Latimer were burned in October 1555. Cranmer signed recantations, then repudiated them publicly in March 1556 before his own execution. This is a history of convictions enforced through courts and fire, with reversals that had very different consequences depending on who held power.

The executions took place in what is now Broad Street, beyond the old North Gate. The cross in the roadway marks the traditional site; the nineteenth-century Martyrs’ Memorial stands farther north and is a later act of commemoration. I would connect those places on foot after the church. Keeping the trial, execution site and memorial distinct makes the sequence clearer, and prevents the surviving monument from quietly replacing the event it remembers.

The south porch of 1637 came from another troubled reign. Archbishop William Laud supported elaborate worship that opponents considered dangerously close to Catholicism. The Virgin and Child was cited among the accusations made against him at his treason trial. The sculpture was attacked during the Civil War; the present figure is a later replacement. It is still a useful place to consider how intensely people cared about an image above a doorway. Religious disagreement was also disagreement about what everyone passing in the street should see.

John Keble preached here in 1833, and the sermon became associated with the Oxford Movement. The porch and the older church are worth time for the ways people kept using the same place to say what they thought worship ought to be.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

5. Christ Church: Wolsey’s ambition, the king’s capital and Alice’s Oxford

I think about what Wolsey had been planning when I look at the building the king eventually gave his name to. The enormous chapel reached little more than foundation level before Wolsey’s fall in 1529. Christ Church has several histories of somebody taking on rooms and plans that were meant for somebody else.

Wolsey suppressed St Frideswide’s Priory and other religious houses to support the foundation, before Henry’s general Dissolution of the Monasteries. He planned teaching in theology and scripture alongside Latin, Greek and philosophy, with the staff and buildings to sustain it. The source of the money matters. A new centre of learning was being financed through the removal of older religious institutions. I find the ambition impressive, but it becomes much more specific once we account for who lost property to make it possible.

Wolsey’s fall in 1529 left his enormous planned chapel largely at foundation level. Henry refounded the institution in 1546 as Christ Church, combining a college with Oxford’s cathedral. The late-twelfth-century priory church took on the cathedral role. Around Tom Quad, preparations for a cloister that was never completed remain legible. Those unfinished intentions are worth looking for: they show how a place now associated with continuity was assembled from an interrupted project and a change of patron.

During the Civil War, Charles I made Oxford his headquarters and lived at the Deanery from 1642. The opening of his Oxford Parliament took place in the Hall in January 1644. Simon Thurley’s study of the wartime court follows the servants as well as the king: barbers, surgeons and bakers had to be accommodated around St Aldate’s, while ambassadors and public dining sustained the visible routines of monarchy. A temporary capital required a remarkable amount of ordinary work. The Hall’s size makes more sense to me with those demands in mind.

Christ Church’s literary history begins with a household and an academic post. Alice Liddell was the daughter of Dean Henry Liddell. Charles Dodgson, who published as Lewis Carroll, taught mathematics here from 1855 to 1881. The story told on a boating outing in 1862 developed into Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland. The Alice window in the Hall remembers the connection, but the fact I particularly like comes from the book’s manufacture: the first printing of 1865 was withdrawn because John Tenniel was dissatisfied with the reproduction of his illustrations.

Charles Dodgson’s connection starts with a job and Alice Liddell’s family, and his own copy of the suppressed edition is now in Oxford’s collections. I’d leave time for the cathedral as well as the Hall. The house that produced the familiar literary story grew up around an older religious site that still has a great deal to tell.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

6. The Bodleian Library: how to rebuild a library and keep its books

The rule I like best at the Bodleian is that even Charles I could be told a book had to stay in the library. He asked to borrow one in 1645. It took somebody with very firm ideas about what the library was for to build a collection people could go on using.

The need was painfully clear. Duke Humfrey’s Library had opened in 1488 above the Divinity School, but in 1550 its collection was stripped away during the religious upheavals of Edward VI’s reign. The room survived without the scholarly purpose for which it had been created. Bodley, a former Merton fellow and diplomat, offered to restore the library in 1598. Refitted and supplied with books, it opened to scholars on 8 November 1602, with Thomas James as librarian.

Bodley’s own education had been shaped by religious displacement. His Protestant family left England during Mary I’s reign and settled in Geneva, where he studied Greek and Hebrew and heard Calvin and Beza. His autobiography follows the return under Elizabeth, his Oxford career and diplomatic service. To me, this makes the later library more interesting than a straightforward act of generosity. He had experienced how politics could change the places in which learning was possible.

The collection also needed a reliable means of growing. In 1610 Bodley reached an agreement with the Stationers’ Company for copies of works published under royal licence to come to the library. It was an early stage in the legal-deposit relationship between the Bodleian and British publishing, subsequently developed through legislation. The arrangement connected a university institution to the commercial production of books. A library could no longer depend entirely on what one benefactor happened to own or choose.

The refusal to lend books applied even at the top. When Charles I sought to borrow a volume in 1645, the request was refused; a special reading booth offered a way for him to use the library instead. That is the rule I would remember when looking at Duke Humfrey’s. Security and access had to be negotiated together, even when the applicant could describe himself as king. The surviving reading room continues to serve scholars, which gives the restrictions on visitors a present-day purpose too.

The Divinity School below has a wonderfully elaborate stone vault. I’d give it a look before the historic library tour. The room was built for teaching and examination, and the library above it needed very practical arrangements for finding, keeping and adding books.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

7. The Radcliffe Camera: the doctor, his fortune and Oxford’s most recognisable library

Five pounds of student caution money is one of the things University College can put beside John Radcliffe’s name. I like having that small transaction in mind under the dome. The doctor had a long way to go before he could leave money for a library on this scale.

University College preserves a receipt for five pounds of his student caution money in 1666. He later held a fellowship at Lincoln, developed a medical practice and moved to London, where wealthy and royal patients helped make his reputation. Accounts of his blunt manner belong to the familiar portrait of an independent doctor. What can be measured more securely is the scale of his bequest: after his death in 1714, the will provided £40,000 for a library. It eventually opened in 1749.

The financial history deserves more than a passing reference to generosity. Radcliffe held South Sea Company stock from 1711 and sold it in 1713. Recent scholarly research connects part of the library’s funding with South Sea money. The company had been created with trade in enslaved people central to its ambitions. His early investment should not be casually described as profits from later voyages, but neither should it disappear into an account in which every pound came from treating patients. I want both the public benefit and the origin of the wealth kept in view.

Religious affiliations add another complication. The architect, James Gibbs, was a Catholic Scot trained in Rome. Radcliffe had helped his former tutor Obadiah Walker after the Catholic convert lost his position following the fall of James II. In a university whose religious boundaries had been so strongly defended, these relationships are worth noticing. They make the commissioning of this confidently classical library less predictable than its place in the familiar Oxford skyline suggests.

The building changed to meet new requirements. The lower arches were originally open; glazing them and adding the northern entrance in 1863 altered how the ground floor was used. The independent Radcliffe Library became part of the Bodleian’s working accommodation. Camera means a room or chamber in Latin, a useful corrective to any assumption that the name has something to do with photography. Students inside have more immediate reasons for being there than its recognisability.

The lower arches were once open. Glazing them changed what people could do with the ground floor. A walk round the square gives you a way to see how close the Camera sits to the church and the older library. For the reading room, choose a Bodleian tour that specifically includes it.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

8. Sheldonian Theatre: the long wait for women’s degrees

Annie Mary Anne Henley Rogers had done the work for an Oxford degree many years before she could actually receive one. I’d think about her when you take in the ceiling at the Sheldonian. The room was built to make a ceremony impressive, and for a long time some of the people who had earned a place in it still had to wait outside.

The theatre was completed in 1669. Christopher Wren, then better known for his scientific work and with limited building experience, drew on the form of a Roman theatre and devised a roof spanning seventy feet without columns obstructing the audience. Archbishop Gilbert Sheldon provided the money. University ceremonies had previously taken place in St Mary’s, where their rowdier elements sat awkwardly with worship. The new building gave them their own setting.

The construction history also records Oxford mason Thomas Robinson and the clearance of seven cottages occupied by widows, with compensation paid to the charity that supported them. I find that a useful check on architectural admiration. A broad new ceremonial space required an existing use of the ground to give way. The building subsequently accommodated the university’s press as well, until printing moved to the Clarendon Building in 1713.

On 14 October 1920 Oxford first awarded degrees to women. The principals of the five women’s societies received MAs by decree, and women who had already qualified academically could at last pass through the university’s formal procedures. Even in the new arrangements, men went first in the ordinary ceremony. The change was substantial; the ordering still displayed habits that the change had not removed.

The university archive is careful about the question of a single “first woman graduate”. More than forty women graduated at the first eligible ceremony, so a solitary heroine would misrepresent what happened. Rogers matriculated and graduated on 26 October 1920, after those earlier pioneering examination results. Her dates are different from those of the first ceremony. For me, the individual story explains the cost of the institution’s delay without taking recognition away from the other women who worked for admission.

Robert Streater’s arts and sciences fill the painted ceiling. You can see them from the auditorium without going up to the cupola. Give the date, 14 October 1920, a moment in that room. The ceremony meant something quite particular to people whose work had already been examined.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

9. Magdalen College: the fellows who refused their king

I like a tradition that makes people sit down together and remember an argument. Magdalen’s Restoration Dinner recalls the fellows refusing James II’s choice of president. They had elected John Hough, and the king wanted somebody who would serve his religious policy.

The college had been founded in 1458 by William Waynflete, Bishop of Winchester and later Lord Chancellor. His provision included forty fellows, thirty scholars known as Demies and a choir. Those offices and endowments made a continuing community possible, with statutes governing how it should be run. By 1687, the right to choose a president was consequently about much more than liking one candidate better than another.

James II wanted a president who would serve his religious policy. The fellows elected John Hough instead. The king imposed Samuel Parker, and the fellows’ continuing support for Hough brought expulsions. The college archive preserves contemporary accounts and a buttery book in which the names of imposed fellows were removed. Such records interest me as much as the celebratory dinner: eating and accounting continued while rival claimants disputed who properly belonged.

In 1688 James retreated, and the fellows returned shortly before his own fall. Magdalen’s resistance formed part of a much wider crisis of royal authority; it did not single-handedly cause the revolution. The episode nevertheless makes this a particularly useful college to visit after St Mary’s. There we see the state prosecuting religious belief; here a corporate institution defended its established rights against the crown’s religious intervention. Neither story is explained adequately by describing Oxford as uniformly obedient or rebellious.

C. S. Lewis became a fellow in English in 1925 and remained until his move to Cambridge in 1954. His Oxford years included The Allegory of Love, The Screwtape Letters and the Narnia books. I would keep the medieval literary scholar in view alongside the famous storyteller. A fellowship supplied work, colleagues and an intellectual setting, rather than simply a picturesque address from which books happened to emerge.

The college has other ways of putting conversation into a place. Addison’s Walk is associated with Lewis and Tolkien talking about myth. I’d give the buildings and the walk separate time. It’s easy to picture an argument continuing somewhere more ordinary once the formal business was over.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

10. Oxford Botanic Garden: medicine, manure and the work of knowing a plant

There was an awful lot of earth to move before Oxford could start teaching medicine with plants in this garden. Henry Danvers gave £5,000 for its foundation in 1621. I like that detail when I look at the beds. A physic garden needed good ground before anybody could make a catalogue.

Henry Danvers provided £5,000 for the garden’s foundation in 1621. Its purpose was a physic garden for medical teaching, giving students and practitioners access to living plants they needed to recognise. The walls and Nicholas Stone’s monumental gate followed in the 1630s. “Physic” meant medicine; the surviving idea of a medicinal garden should not be taken as an endorsement of every remedy once associated with its contents. Correct identification was one problem, effective treatment another.

The keeper makes the early project more intelligible. Jacob Bobart the Elder, appointed in 1642, cultivated auriculas, experimented with grafting grapes and also leased the Greyhound Inn. The garden required practical horticultural skill and ways of making a living. The 1648 plant catalogue is traditionally attributed to him. I find that combination of gardening, experiment and business more useful than a vague picture of a scholar discovering plants in agreeable surroundings.

The site has an earlier history that deserves precision. The medieval Jewish cemetery occupied ground by the High Street, with the water-meadow called Paris Mead behind it. The Botanic Garden was established on the meadow. The exact relationship between the old road boundary and later buildings is uncertain; part of the Daubeny Building may overlap the cemetery. Oxford’s Jews had been displaced from an earlier burial ground on the opposite side of the road, and the expulsion of Jews from England in 1290 ended their use of the second site. I would retain that history without claiming that the whole garden lies over their graves.

The 1648 Collection grows plants listed in the early catalogue. That’s the bit I’d spend time with. A stone can sit for centuries, but somebody has to keep growing a living collection. The former Jewish cemetery nearby belongs to a much earlier history of this ground, worth taking the time to place accurately.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

11. Ashmolean Museum: the gardeners, collectors and unanswered questions behind the name

Powhatan’s Mantle is the object I’d give time to at the Ashmolean. The shells are easy to look at closely. Its path into the collection is harder to follow. The museum can put parts of the story together and there are still questions about what the mantle was for and how it travelled.

That gap matters because the museum’s name can make the collection sound as though it sprang from a single man’s enlightened curiosity. John Tradescant the elder and his son were gardeners whose collecting extended well beyond plants. The elder worked for powerful patrons, including Robert Cecil at Hatfield. At their house in South Lambeth, the Tradescants’ Ark brought natural specimens and manufactured objects together for paying visitors. Professional gardening, elite connections and a public appetite for unusual things all contributed to the collection.

Elias Ashmole acquired it through a disputed transfer and offered it to Oxford in 1677, on condition that it received a suitable home. The new museum opened on Broad Street in 1683, in the building now occupied by the History of Science Museum. I find the two addresses helpful: they show that the institution and its collections moved and divided as ideas about what a museum should contain developed.

Charles Cockerell’s University Galleries building was completed in 1845 on Beaumont Street. The Ashmolean moved into accommodation behind it in 1894, and the institutions merged in 1908. Natural history collections had already found a different home during the nineteenth century. Arthur Evans, appointed keeper in 1884, strengthened the archaeological focus. The museum we visit is the result of those decisions, as well as the seventeenth-century bequest.

Its own history acknowledges the importance of colonial power to collecting, including acquisitions from Egypt and the Middle East. I think that should sharpen our questions about individual objects. Who made this, who obtained it, under what circumstances, and what does the record actually establish? Those questions prevent both an uncomplicated celebration of collecting and a sweeping assertion about every acquisition for which the evidence may differ.

The name connects it with Wahunsenacawh, known to the English as Powhatan. The uncertainty about use and ownership is part of what I want to keep in view. The museum grew from collections people gathered in quite different circumstances. A name on the building can only take you so far into how it got them.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

12. History of Science Museum: the blackboard nobody rubbed out

I like the thought of somebody deciding to leave the chalk alone. Einstein used this board in Oxford on 16 May 1931, in the second of his lectures that year. It gives you the marks he needed to make an argument about the size, density and age of the universe.

It comes from the second of Einstein’s Oxford lectures that year. The equations concern the density, size and age of the universe, during a period when evidence of distant galaxies receding was changing cosmological models. Edwin Hubble’s observations helped force the question of expansion. The board records a stage in scientific thinking, rather than a timeless answer written down once and for all. For me, that is a better reason to preserve it than treating every chalk mark by a celebrated scientist as a relic.

The building was itself an experiment in how knowledge could be brought together. It opened in 1683 as the original Ashmolean, with space for teaching and collections and a basement used for chemical and anatomical work. Objects were to be examined and ideas demonstrated. That combination is easier to understand in this comparatively compact building than in a modern museum whose research spaces may be far removed from the visitor route.

The later museum grew from the interests of Lewis Evans, son of the archaeologist and paper manufacturer John Evans. A sundial given to Lewis by his father in the 1870s helped encourage a collecting habit. His books, annotated pages on sundials and instruments show how one interest led to another. By 1922, when he offered the collection to Oxford, it included sixty-three astrolabes. These were instruments used for astronomical calculations, timekeeping and related tasks; their significance lies in how people worked with them.

Evans’s gift was accepted in 1924. Robert Gunther campaigned for the old Ashmolean to house it, and the museum opened to the public in 1925. Einstein’s board arrived only six years later. I like the speed with which a newly established historical collection recognised the interest of something recent. “History of science” need not mean waiting until an instrument has acquired a comfortable layer of antiquity.

A sundial or astrolabe asks you to imagine somebody using it. The board lets you see somebody’s work before it was cleared away. I’d choose a few of the instruments for the same reason. A mark or setting can make their purpose click.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

13. Oxford University Museum of Natural History: the 1860 evolution debate

I’d spend time with the columns at the Natural History Museum before trying to settle what the bishop said to the scientist. They are a remarkable piece of work in a building opened just before the 1860 debate. The rock samples and carved plants give you a better sense of what the museum was there to do.

The discussion took place at the British Association meeting on 30 June 1860, soon after this museum opened and seven months after the publication of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species. About five hundred people gathered in the first-floor Radcliffe Library. Darwin was absent, receiving treatment in Surrey. Thomas Henry Huxley defended evolutionary ideas, while Samuel Wilberforce, Bishop of Oxford, opposed them. Their listeners did not leave one complete, authoritative verbatim record for later historians.

Wilberforce had a first-class mathematics degree and was a Fellow of the Royal Society. Those facts do not settle whether his objections were good, but they should discourage the easy portrayal of an ignorant cleric blundering into science. Participants claimed success for different sides, and Joseph Hooker also contributed forcefully. What interests me is a scientific argument becoming a public event, with reputations, alliances and styles of speaking affecting how it was remembered.

The setting further complicates a simple contest between religion and science. Henry Acland and Charles Daubeny wanted better provision for scientific teaching and collections that had been scattered across Oxford. The museum designed by the Irish architects Deane and Woodward gave that ambition a Gothic home. Its supporters could see the study of nature and religious belief as compatible. Calling it a cathedral of science describes something of its architectural effect; it should not be taken as proof that its builders wanted to abolish the other sort.

I would give the columns as much attention as the famous debate. John Phillips, the first keeper, planned 126 stone columns representing different British rocks. Their labels turn part of the structure into a geological collection. The botanical capitals and corbels were carved by James and John O’Shea and their nephew Edward Whelan, using living specimens from the Botanic Garden. These are carefully observed plants in stone, with individual makers and a source for their knowledge.

The iron roof supports branch above them. The building makes me think about people trying to teach a subject through the materials around them. The exchange between Wilberforce and Huxley has been retold many times. The surviving accounts leave room for care about the precise words.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

14. Pitt Rivers Museum: who gets to write the label?

I look at the labels for a little longer than usual at the Pitt Rivers. An object can have a perfectly legible name on a card and a great deal still to say about who put it there. The cases make it possible to follow how a collector once organised comparisons and how that ordering has been challenged.

The founding collection came from Augustus Henry Lane Fox, later General Pitt-Rivers, whose army career and interest in the development of firearms encouraged him to arrange objects by type. He bought through dealers and auctions and benefited from wider collecting networks; these were not all things he had personally acquired on expeditions. The gift to Oxford in 1884 required a building, a lecturer and the preservation of his system. The first visitors entered in 1887, before the museum fully opened in 1892.

That method makes comparison immediate. It can also encourage a story in which societies are placed on a single ladder of progress, with the collector deciding who belongs where. The museum’s Labelling Matters project examines the assumptions and language inherited with the displays. I think the strength of this work lies in making those decisions inspectable. An old label is evidence of somebody’s knowledge and prejudices at a particular time; age does not make it an adequate account of the object forever.

Some of the most useful contributions have come from people outside the traditional curatorial hierarchy. Working with researcher Marenka Thompson-Odlum, students from Oxford Spires Academy made podcasts about objects in the collection. Indian iron anklets prompted a discussion of family knowledge about protection against the evil eye. A carved Gabonese door figure initially assumed to be male proved to have been recorded as female. The mistaken assumption remained part of the enquiry, allowing listeners to follow how an interpretation changed.

More substantial changes followed an ethical review. In 2020 the museum removed human remains from open display, including the tsantsa, or shrunken heads, that had become among its most famous exhibits. Its visitor research had found that the display could reinforce racist ideas rather than encourage understanding of the people concerned. Care for the remains, consultation with communities and decisions about the collections continue. The removal was a particular decision about what public display was doing, not an announcement that the difficult history had been resolved.

Pick a few cases and give the changed descriptions time. I find the chance to see a correction particularly worthwhile. Somebody brought knowledge the old label couldn’t supply, and the museum can give that person a place in the account.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

15. Oxford Covered Market: who fed the city?

There’s an iron member marked “Dewer London 1839” in the Covered Market. That’s the sort of thing I like looking for among the stalls. The city wanted somewhere to put food traders, and the market has kept needing a roof, deliveries and people who know what their customers will buy.

Before the market, the street names were fairly direct about what happened in them. Fish Street became St Aldate’s; Butcher Row became Queen Street. Selling food in congested streets raised questions about passage, hygiene and regulation. The 1771 Mileways Act authorised a programme that included widening roads, removing gates and creating the market. The conservation history records a house for the beadle, the official responsible for inspection, in 1789. Moving traders under cover also made their work easier to supervise.

John Gwynn, architect of Magdalen Bridge, prepared an estimate in 1772 of £916 10s for an initial twenty butchers’ shops, with another twenty following. The market opened on 1 November 1774 and accommodated fishmongers and gardeners as well as butchers. Development of properties facing the High Street helped finance the scheme. I find those financial and administrative details useful: an attractive civic improvement had to earn enough, fit enough businesses and deal with the daily mess of food trading.

Much of the roof belongs to nineteenth-century rebuilding. Some iron members carry the mark “Dewer London 1839”, while timber and other ironwork record further phases. Looking up is worthwhile, but there is no need to describe the entire structure as an untouched survival from 1774. What remains is a market repeatedly adjusted to continue working. The differences between the roof sections are part of its history.

The Museum of Oxford’s research into Brown’s Café brings the story to a more domestic scale. Catherine Brown, born in Jericho, established the café in the 1920s. Its history includes the provision of affordable food and later Portuguese and Madeiran family ownership. I like the way that account connects a central Oxford institution to migration and the work of running a small business. The city’s social history includes the people making lunch, as well as those seated in a college hall.

Catherine Brown’s café gives you one household’s way into that history. I’d look for the mark in the roof and give a working shop the same attention. Oxford had a great deal of ordinary business going on while its colleges were making their own reputation.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

16. Oxford Town Hall and Museum of Oxford: the city at work

I like thinking about how many entrances Oxford needed for one Town Hall. City business, courts, books and performances had different users, and people needed to find the right way in. Some of those old arrangements are easier to see from the street than from a grand room.

The previous town hall was demolished in 1893, and the council conducted its business temporarily in the university’s Examination Schools. The Prince of Wales, later Edward VII, opened the new building on 12 May 1897. Describing it as Municipal Buildings gives a better sense of the programme than imagining one grand hall. Offices, a public library, police accommodation and a court were brought into the scheme, with ceremonial space alongside the machinery of local government.

The architecture and original fittings help identify those different users. Blue Boar Street had entrances serving the library and police; the police accommodation included a drill corridor. The carvings personifying Sloth and Industry expressed a civic judgment about how people should behave. I would look for those smaller distinctions before concentrating on the grand staircase. A public building can reveal its priorities in the entrance assigned to someone arriving to borrow a book or answer to an officer.

During the First World War, the building became part of the 3rd Southern General Hospital. More than two hundred beds occupied the Main Hall, Assembly Room and other spaces. Patients included men with malaria as well as wounds. Knowing that use changes how I read a large ceremonial room: its floor could carry rows of beds, and its public grandeur had to accommodate the routines of nursing and illness.

The Museum of Oxford opened here in 1975, after the public library moved to the Westgate. Early displays included a Roman pottery kiln and the interior of a nineteenth-century college barge. The choice made room for production and recreation alongside institutional history. When free admission was introduced in 1980, visits doubled within six months. That is a historical result, not the museum’s current admission policy, but it is a particularly clear example of how a decision about access can change who comes through a door.

The city museum opened here in 1975 and local volunteers helped sustain it through changes. Give the Town Hall a look on the way in. The building already contains some of the stories the museum has to tell, including a time when hospital beds took up space meant for other work.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

17. Oxford University Press: the people who made the books

A print-shop notice interests me as much as Horace Hart’s name on an editor’s rule book. There were people setting type, binding and getting work through a busy building. The press moved to Walton Street in the 1820s and put quite a lot of Jericho to work.

The press had worked in the Sheldonian and then the Clarendon Building before moving to Walton Street in the 1820s; the new complex was completed in 1830. Daniel Robertson designed the front and south ranges, Edward Blore the north and west. The Corinthian entrance screen gives the works the formal presence of an Oxford institution. Behind it, type, paper and machinery had to be organised into a business capable of producing books in quantity.

Jericho’s growth and the printing house belonged to the same local economy. Hundreds of printing-house and bindery workers lived in the surrounding streets. Thomas Combe, who became Printer in 1838, and his wife Martha were patrons of Pre-Raphaelite artists as well as supporters of local institutions. Night classes, a brass band and the endowment of St Barnabas Church, opened in 1869, connected the press’s senior figures to the neighbourhood. I would keep that mixture of opportunity and employer influence in view rather than turn it into a simple story of benevolence.

Hart modernised the bindery while reviving the use of the seventeenth-century Fell types. The combination appeals to me: an older design could still earn a place within a changing manufacturing operation. The Press museum includes Dutch type donated by John Fell and a nineteenth-century printing press. Such objects make it possible to think about a book as a sequence of material decisions, from the shape of a letter to the practicalities of reproducing it many thousands of times.

The workforce’s history extends into both world wars. More than three hundred employees served in the First, and forty-five died. During the Second, the press produced secret naval codebooks, a reminder that printing could be strategically important as well as scholarly. The account of publication dates alone would tell us very little about these changes in the purposes and pressures of the work.

Book printing here ended in 1989. I’d book the museum to see what it took to get from words on a page to a finished book. There’s a good connection to the canal nearby. It was one of the reasons a working neighbourhood could grow around a trade that needed materials and people.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

18. The Oxford Canal at Jericho: coal, boat families and a fight to stay open

Jack and Rose Skinner’s coal delivery in 1955 is the story I like to take to the canal. They were doing a job and making a point about a waterway people had begun to think might have had its day. Stand by the towpath and there’s room to picture a delivery rather than just a boat on an outing.

The Oxford Canal reached the city in 1790, after opening in stages from 1774. It brought coal south from the Coventry area and connected with the Thames for onward movement towards London. James Brindley’s original contour route followed the lie of the land, saving on expensive construction while making journeys longer. Later improvements shortened stretches in the north; the southern section retained much of its early course. I find a winding route more interesting once its turns have an economic explanation.

In Jericho, the work accumulated around the water. Henry Ward, a coal merchant and boatbuilder, established a wharf in the early nineteenth century. His family also provided land for the district’s first school and St Barnabas Church. The history of Jericho Wharf brings boatbuilding, employment and community provision into a small area. By 1927 the canal company considered these wharves adequate alternative cargo space as it withdrew from central Oxford.

After the Second World War, declining commercial traffic and insufficient dredging strengthened the argument for abandonment. A meeting at Oxford Town Hall in June 1955 drew nearly four hundred people, chaired by John Betjeman. Patrick Osborne of the Oxford School of Art designed a campaign poster using the decorative traditions of the canal. The Museum of Oxford’s account preserves Skinner and Hone’s delivery alongside that public campaign. I am glad it does: the working couple supplied evidence that an eminent supporter could not provide simply by taking the chair.

The canal survived, and leisure boating gradually supplied a new source of use and income. Jericho’s wharves supported hire boats during that transition; repair work also served people living afloat. That history explains why the fate of a boatyard can provoke such strong local feeling. Boats need somewhere to be maintained. A canal can remain attractive to walkers while losing facilities essential to the people using the water.

At Isis Lock the turnover bridge allowed the horse to change sides. I’d give that shape a moment from the public path. A small piece of iron can tell you where the rope had to go, which is the sort of thing you need to know if you want a canal to work.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

19. The Radcliffe Infirmary: Oxford’s penicillin story

Albert Alexander’s case gives me a reason to look at the former Radcliffe Infirmary. The treatment showed promise and the supply ran out. I keep coming back to that practical difficulty when I think of how much work separates a promising discovery from something a hospital can give a patient.

Albert Alexander’s case is the reason I would include the former Radcliffe Infirmary even on a relatively short Oxford visit. The Abingdon police constable began receiving penicillin here on 12 February 1941, gravely ill with bacterial infection. He improved, but there was too little of the drug to sustain treatment. After supplies ran out, he relapsed and died the following month. The scientific promise and the failure to save this patient belong in the same account.

The hospital had opened in 1770, financed from John Radcliffe’s estate. Its earlier rules show how charitable care was organised around patronage and expectations of behaviour. Governors could recommend patients; admission by a governor’s “turn” officially continued until 1884. Patients were expected to attend chapel and obey institutional rules, and those able to do so helped with cleaning, laundry and other tasks. A contributory scheme introduced in 1920 asked two pence a week, another stage in financing care before the NHS.

Alexander Fleming had identified penicillin’s antibacterial properties in 1928. At Oxford’s Sir William Dunn School of Pathology, Howard Florey’s team, including Ernst Chain and Norman Heatley, worked to extract and develop it into a usable treatment. Charles Fletcher at the Infirmary connected the laboratory research with patients. Before Alexander’s treatment, Elva Akers, who was dying of cancer, agreed to an injection to test toxicity. Keeping her in the account prevents “the first patient” from obscuring different stages of the clinical work.

When penicillin supplies dwindled, Fletcher cycled patients’ urine back to the Dunn School so that the drug could be recovered and used again. The plaque on the former Outpatients building locates this clinical part of the story. The laboratory and hospital performed different jobs, and the journeys between them are an unusually direct reminder of their dependence on one another.

Early production required around two thousand litres of culture fluid to obtain enough penicillin for one case of sepsis. The History of Science Museum preserves an original culture flask and a small vial of penicillin recovered from patients’ urine, dated 25 June 1941. That tiny surviving quantity is the object I would seek out next. Florey and Heatley travelled to the United States in 1941 to help secure production on an industrial scale that wartime Britain could not then provide.

The hospital closed in 2007. You can look at the buildings from the public routes through the Observatory Quarter. The story I’d take there is the work of moving material between wards and laboratories and trying to make enough of something a patient needed straight away.

Back to the comparison grid ↑

20. Morris’s garage in Longwall Street: where motor-making Oxford began

Number 21 Longwall Street is my favourite way to remember that Oxford also made cars. You can see the garage frontage from the pavement. William Morris had started by repairing bicycles, and the prototype assembled here in 1912 needed parts from people who knew how to make them.

Morris had begun repairing bicycles at his family’s home in James Street as a teenager. The Morris Motors Museum’s account follows his expansion into cycle making, motorcycles, repair work and hire, with partnerships that did not always last. By 1910 he was offering car hire and repairs. The later Lord Nuffield had learned a trade through customers and machines, long before his name became associated with major philanthropic gifts.

In 1912 the prototype Morris Oxford was assembled at Longwall Street, using components bought from specialist suppliers. The rounded radiator gave the car its familiar Bullnose nickname. That method interests me as much as the entrepreneur’s determination: success depended on choosing and combining other firms’ work. The garage’s modest scale also helps explain why producing one prototype and making cars in quantity required different premises.

Cowley production began in 1913 in a former military training college. The manufacturer’s centenary history dates the first production car to 28 March 1913; initial output was around twenty a week. By the early 1960s, the operation employed as many as 28,000 people. I would keep that figure beside Oxford’s college histories. The jobs supported a much larger city than the central circuit of towers and quadrangles allows us to see.

Workers came from Wales, Scotland and northern England, while outer suburbs grew. Motor manufacturing became part of the explanation for where Oxford residents lived and how their households earned a living. Cowley’s facilities also made medical iron lungs and wartime aircraft and equipment. It is reasonable to be interested in Morris’s personal achievements; I would give equal room to the many workers whose decision to move here was made around the prospect of a factory job.

The surviving building needs a careful description. A campaign prevented the frontage’s demolition in the late 1970s, and student accommodation went up behind it in 1981. The listed-building record distinguishes the surviving front and other elements from the largely rebuilt rear and remodelled interior. This is a significant industrial address, not an intact early car factory awaiting inspection.

New College’s commemorative display includes a radiator and the two-branch sign. I’d give it a look from the street. The story grew far beyond this one address into Cowley and the suburbs, with workers arriving from many parts of Britain. The front lets you put one small beginning back in place.

Back to the comparison grid ↑