Skip to main content

Dethroning historical reputations: Preface

Dethroning historical reputations
Preface
    • Notifications
    • Privacy
  • Project HomeDethroning historical reputations
  • Projects
  • Learn more about Manifold

Notes

Show the following:

  • Annotations
  • Resources
Search within:

Adjust appearance:

  • font
    Font style
  • color scheme
  • Margins
table of contents
  1. Cover
  2. Title Page
  3. Copyright
  4. Contents
  5. List of illustrations
  6. Preface
  7. Notes on contributors
  8. 1. Introduction
  9. 2. Commentary on universities, museums and the commemoration of benefactors
  10. 3. The English civic universities: endowments and the commemoration of benefactors
  11. 4. Donors to an imperial project: Randlords as benefactors to the Royal School of Mines, Imperial College of Science and Technology
  12. 5. The expectations of benefactors and a responsibility to endow
  13. 6. The funder’s perspective
  14. 7. Calibrating relevance at the Pitt Rivers Museum
  15. 8. From objects of enlightenment to objects of apology: why you can’t make amends for the past by plundering the present
  16. 9. British universities and Caribbean slavery
  17. 10. Risk and reputation: the London blue plaques scheme
  18. 11. ‘A dreary record of wickedness’: moral judgement in history
  19. 12. We have been here before: ‘Rhodes Must Fall’ in historical context
  20. Bibliography
  21. Index

Preface

Early in 2016 it seemed timely for the Institute of Historical Research to engage with the public discussion of fundamental issues connected with the history of universities and the commemoration of their benefactors. Part of the Institute’s remit is to examine the historical context of activities that are key to the functioning of modern society; and specific historical issues relating to the wealth of past university benefactors have been increasingly in the forefront of public debate.

The immediate imperative was the recent ‘Rhodes Must Fall’ movement at Oxford. In addition, historians were becoming increasingly aware of deep concerns on certain American campuses about the source of much of their early wealth. In the case of Cecil Rhodes, a substantial benefactor to Oriel College, Oxford, objections to his racist views and his driving imperialism, led to demands for the toppling of his statue (as had been successfully achieved at Cape Town University). In the United States, universities (including Brown, Rhode Island and Georgetown, Washington, D.C.) were investigating their institutions’ past benefits from slavery with a view to making restitution to descendants of those who suffered. These debates raised broad historical issues about the relationship of the present to the past.

The resulting conference, taking place at the I.H.R. over two days in March 2017, was aimed at historians of universities and institutions that have depended on benefaction; those involved in fundraising for universities; curators of museums which face their own legacy issues and many of which are departments of universities; and others involved in visible aspects of commemoration. The event was entitled ‘History, Heritage and Ideology: universities and the commemoration of benefactors’.

The conference opened on the evening of 23 March with a lecture in the Chancellor’s Hall, University of London, Senate House by Professor Sir David Cannadine, distinguished historian not least of philanthropy and benefaction. His title was ‘Disinterested philanthropy or tainted gifts: how should historians respond to past legacies from benefactors with different social and moral values?’.

The following day discussion was focused in four sessions. First, the changing nature of benefactions to English universities and their commemoration over several centuries; second, the possible conflicts of interest between an institution’s duty to uphold its reputation and its duty towards its benefactors; third, problems arising for museums through the origins of collections and their display; and fourth, broader historical issues for historians viewing the past from the perspective of the present. Each session, chaired by a facilitator, had three or four panelists as speakers to introduce discussion that was then thrown open to audience participants.

Our thanks go to our speakers: Professor Richard Rex, University of Cambridge; Professor Stuart Jones, University of Manchester; John Shakeshaft, Cambridge University Council; Victoria Harrison, former chief executive of the Wolfson Foundation; Bill Abraham, director of development, University of London; Professor William Whyte, University of Oxford; Dr. Laura Van Broekhoven, Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford; Dr. Tiffany Jenkins, sociologist and cultural commentator; Dr. Nicholas Draper, Centre for the Study of Legacies of British Slave-ownership, University College London; and Professor Brian Young, University of Oxford. Thanks also go to the facilitators of these sessions: Daniel Snowman, I.H.R. senior research fellow and Kathrin Pieren, Jewish Museum, London. Finally, we would like to thank our I.H.R. support team, in particular, Gemma Dormer.

This publication includes contributions from the great majority of our participants to whom we are particularly grateful for their time spent transforming their speaking notes into articles.

Professor Lawrence Goldman, former director, I.H.R.
Dr. Jill Pellew, senior research fellow, I.H.R.
July 2018

Image

Students campaign against the decision of Oriel College, Oxford not to remove the statue of Cecil Rhodes from its High Street facade, 9 March 2016.

Photograph: Chris Ratcliffe © Getty Images

Annotate

Next Chapter
Notes on contributors
PreviousNext
Copyright © the Authors 2018
Powered by Manifold Scholarship. Learn more at
Opens in new tab or windowmanifoldapp.org