The Student Rows of Oxford. promptly sued the Town for fifteen hun dred marks. The citizens answered that the observance "was meant literally in the bond of Masses" for the dead, and that Masses were then against the law. But the Queen's Council obligingly set at rest their religious scruples by changing1 the Mass into a "ser mon or communion." at which the usual offertory should be taken. As late as i^oo the Town was again sued by the University for omitting the observance, and the citizens were obliged to pay their penance money. In 1825 the Town humbly petitioned the University for absolution, and the gown was pleased graciously to substitute for the ser vice and payment an annual oath from the Town corporation that they would observe the privileges of the University. This was continued down to 1854, when the citizens ceased to do penance for the sins of their forefathers—in which no doubt the scholars were equally guilty—some five hundred years before.1 What really concerns us, however, is the immediate result of the riot of 1354, com monly known as "the great slaughter," or as "the massacre of St. Scholasticas' Day." It appears that no punishment was meted out to the actual criminals, and no attempt was made to bring them to justice. In deed, any personal responsibility is not con sidered. The Town and the Gown stand as corporations to be fined or reimbursed. The Gown was pardoned at once, perhaps be cause the students had fled to the four winds, and no other course than pardon was possible; but pardon was not enough to bring the students together again. Some thing further was needed. So the King lav ished praise on the University, more prec ious to the Court than gold and jewels, and, together with the Archbishop of Canter bury, he sought in every way to bring the 'Hulton, n. 78. Rashdall. II., 2, p. 408.
743
scattered scholars back to Oxford. Mean while the Town possessed property and privileges within the reach of the Court, and in a new Charter the King took away their ancient liberties and passed them over to the University. "Though the Clerks or Scholars were worsted by the Townsmen" in the battle itself, says Anthony Wood, "yet it proved at length a glorious day, for the privileges of the Townsmen were laid at stake, and worthily forfeited to the King, and by him bestowed for the most part on the University." With this change of authority ended the long conflict between Town and Gown. It is true that discord showed itself in unim portant brawls from time to time. In 1364 "there was some controversy between Clerks and Laics," and in 1380 there were "great disorders -in University and Town, burning of divers houses, committing of thefts, robbing and killing of men in streets and public places, great excess in apparel," and the like. There were faction fights and "national" rows among the students, con tentions between the lawyers and physi cians within the University and conten tions between the University and the Town Corporation over the rights in the Market, already referred to: there were struggles on the part of certain "godless folk" to gain possession of college lands and struggles on the part of the colleges to get all they could and keep all they had; there were commis sions and royal visitations and frequent pes tilences which scattered the students to all parts of the three Kingdoms, leaving Ox ford desolate for months together; but the rival bells of St. Mary's and St. Martin's n:> longer called Gown and Town to battle, for the contention was over, and the Gown had won.
- Wood, I., p. 456.
