Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Waugh: home

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Marius Hancu

unread,
Jan 7, 2010, 5:34:33 AM1/7/10
to
Hello:

Does this mean the scouts/servants at Oxford did _not_ live on the
premises? I remember from other novels that at least some of them
did.

-----
[Lunt is Ryder's scout at Oxford. Sebastian sends Ryder's flowers to
his room.]

Lunt was secreting the last of them in brown paper preparatory to
taking them home.

Evelyn Waugh, Brideshead Revisited, p. 683
----
--
Thanks.
Marius Hancu

Derek Turner

unread,
Jan 7, 2010, 5:50:06 AM1/7/10
to
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 02:34:33 -0800, Marius Hancu wrote:

> Hello:
>
> Does this mean the scouts/servants at Oxford did _not_ live on the
> premises? I remember from other novels that at least some of them did.
>

Most lived in Jericho - now so gentrified that none can afford to!

Marius Hancu

unread,
Jan 7, 2010, 5:55:49 AM1/7/10
to
On Jan 7, 5:50 am, Derek Turner <frde...@cesmail.net> wrote:
:
>
> > Does this mean the scouts/servants at Oxford did _not_ live on the
> > premises? I remember from other novels that at least some of them did.
>
> Most lived in Jericho - now so gentrified that none can afford to!

Thanks.

Have the numbers of students at Oxford considerably increased during
the last 80 years?

Marius Hancu

John Dean

unread,
Jan 7, 2010, 9:49:02 AM1/7/10
to

I don't think so. The number of colleges hasn't increased much and the
amount of accommodation isn't much greater. Not for undergraduates, anyway.
Post-graduate numbers may have gone up.
Of course, we've grown another University as a spare in case the first one
is sold off, dismantled, transported brick by brick and re-erected in
Arizona.
--
John Dean
Oxford


Peter Duncanson (BrE)

unread,
Jan 7, 2010, 11:27:42 AM1/7/10
to
On Thu, 7 Jan 2010 14:49:02 -0000, "John Dean"
<john...@fraglineone.net> wrote:

>Marius Hancu wrote:
>> On Jan 7, 5:50 am, Derek Turner <frde...@cesmail.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Does this mean the scouts/servants at Oxford did _not_ live on the
>>>> premises? I remember from other novels that at least some of them
>>>> did.
>>>
>>> Most lived in Jericho - now so gentrified that none can afford to!
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Have the numbers of students at Oxford considerably increased during
>> the last 80 years?
>>
>> Marius Hancu
>
>I don't think so. The number of colleges hasn't increased much and the
>amount of accommodation isn't much greater. Not for undergraduates, anyway.
>Post-graduate numbers may have gone up.

I hope I'm looking at the right information.

Student Numbers 1991
Table I STUDENTS IN RESIDENCE (as at the last day of Michaelmas Term)
Undergraduates
http://www.ox.ac.uk/gazette/univstats/nos/table%20i-1991.pdf

It tabulates numbers per year from 1951-2 to 1990-1
The total number of undergraduates in residence is, for example:

1951-2 6,034
1988-9 10,005
1990-1 10,367

And then at 1st December 2008
http://www.ox.ac.uk/gazette/2008-9/supps/2_4875.pdf

Total undergraduates 11,332

Is it possible that between the beginning of the 1950s and 1988 the
proportion of undergraduates physically resident in colleges has
decreased? Might this, in part, have resulted from the reduction of the
age of majority from 21 to 18 in 1969?


>Of course, we've grown another University as a spare in case the first one
>is sold off, dismantled, transported brick by brick and re-erected in
>Arizona.

--
Peter Duncanson, UK
(in alt.usage.english)

the Omrud

unread,
Jan 7, 2010, 11:51:14 AM1/7/10
to

Is that what "In Residence" means? It could be Oxford-speak for
"registered at the University".

See the note at the bottom of the data: "Note: non-resident students. In
addition there are 465 non-resident undergraduates: of these 309 are
linguists, most of whom are spending a year abroad."

--
David

Derek Turner

unread,
Jan 7, 2010, 1:03:14 PM1/7/10
to
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 14:49:02 +0000, John Dean wrote:


> I don't think so. The number of colleges hasn't increased much and the
> amount of accommodation isn't much greater. Not for undergraduates,
> anyway. Post-graduate numbers may have gone up. Of course, we've grown
> another University as a spare in case the first one is sold off,
> dismantled, transported brick by brick and re-erected in Arizona.

I hope I don't speak out-of-turn here, my own degrees are both from
Bangor but I once held a Baliol living.

I get the impression that undergraduate accommodation suddenly doubled by
the simple device of turning each 'set' (of two rooms) into two 'rooms'
thus doubling the number of young gentlemen who could live on each
staircase. This was certainly the case at Ridley Hall (at the 'other
place').

Marius Hancu

unread,
Jan 7, 2010, 1:20:35 PM1/7/10
to

That was one of the questions I had about the book. EW was making
reference to the "roomS" of a single student ... How many were there
in 1920s? 1Bedroom + 1living-room?

Marius Hancu

Derek Turner

unread,
Jan 7, 2010, 1:30:48 PM1/7/10
to
On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 10:20:35 -0800, Marius Hancu wrote:

>
> That was one of the questions I had about the book. EW was making
> reference to the "roomS" of a single student ... How many were there in
> 1920s? 1Bedroom + 1living-room?
>
> Marius Hancu

Just that. It was called a 'set'.

0 new messages