The Pictorial History of Cambridge [antikvár]

THE PICTORIAL HISTORY OFThe Arms of the CityCAMBRIDGETHE UNIVERSITY CITY AND THE COLLEGESBY LOUIS T. STANLEY M.A.The Arms of the UniversitySIR ARTHUR QUILLER-COUCH used to say that Oxford and Cambridge are so amazingly alike while they play at differences, and so amazingly unlike anything else in the wide world. The latter is still true, but I am not sure that "Q" would have emphasised the similarity between the two cities had he lived today. Recent changes in the form of industrial development have so altered Oxford that, though placed first in the guide books, I rank it second as a city of fine architecture. Cambridge is now more beautiful. Its harmony has not been blighted by commercialism, modernistic shop fronts, pretentious cinemas, and outlying districts acting as dreary dormitories. This is not to say that Cambridge has escaped unscathed: Chesterton, the Milton Road area, and Ditton Fields are a net-work of semi-detached villas; the East Road, Fitzroy Street, Newmarket Road district and parts of Romsey Town give little cause for pride. Even so, there is much over which to dwell. The season as I write is spring, and Cambridge is like a garden of flowers a time of year when the visitor finds himself sharing, quite unconsciously, the local pride in the place.In so short a book as this I cannot describe in adequate detail even the obvious. Suggestion must suffice. Often it is not until Cambridge has become an experience of the past that one realises how beautiful are its weeping willows, the balustered bridges of stone over the river and the blending of college buildings in grey stone and mellow brick. Vignettes of memory recall the romantic Gothic of St. John's . . . the narrow alleys by the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and Portugal Place which hint how once these places must have looked . . . the broken roof-line along King's Parade and a glimpse of theA contemporary portrait of Henry VI. He founded King's College in 1441, and laid the foundation stone of the chapel in July 1445. In 1471 he was murdered while at prayer in the Wakefield Tower of the Tower of London.patchwork quilt of bricks - and -mortar from the Arts Theatre roof-garden . . . here and there a bow window with a delicate iron balcony an old gabled house . . . shops that preserve the dignified interiors of the Victorian era . . . the urgency of Petty Cury the bustle of the market square all form part of a familiar pattern with the core of Cambridge personified by King's College and symbolised in the chapel as it broods over the city and soars into the sky with majestic dignity. The interior is beautiful almost beyond belief: an exquisite forest of Tudor stone enriched by priceless stained glass, flickering candles, and a choir unrivalled in purity of tone.Such are a few of the surface impressions, vivid enough in them-facing page: The west front, King's College Chapel.selves but silent on the historical side. On the other hand, enquiries into the origins of Cambridge can be frustrating. Tradition would have us believe that Cambridge was founded by a Spanish king, y-clept Cantaber, in the 4321st year from the Creation and restored in a.d. 637 by Sigebert. Unfortunately proof relating to these theories put forward by Doctor Caius of Gonville and Caius College was destroyed some centuries ago when the charters granted to Cantaber's foundation by King Arthur and Cad-vvallader together with the Rules of Sergius and Honorius were lost by fire or riot. If the origin of the city is problematical, the evolution of the name of Cambridge is equally confusing. The range of choice is wide. Some scholars have tried to identify it with the Roman Camboritum, but the evidence is unconvincing. Other variations include Grantanbrycge in a.d. 875: Grantebrigge in the Domesday Book: Cantebrugescir about 1142: Cantebrigge was used by Chaucer: the Latinized form of Cantabrigia appeared in the thirteenth century, whilst during the next two hundred years there are such versions as Cauntbrigge, Cant-brigge, Cawnbrigge, and Cambrigge.Even as regards the beginning of the University there is speculation rather than certainty. We find a legendary founder in the guise of that mythical king named Cantaber. Much more likely is the theory that the inauguration of the University was preceded by instruction from religious houses or monasteries with the University of Paris as the model when the point of formal organisation was reached, for Bologna and Paris were the archetypes of all later foundations. Here it is pertinent to point out that a universitas meant a body of persons, a corporation. In time it came to mean a Continued on page 6Page 3