University of Oxford History.

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

It is built (or at least the first Higher Education Teachings took place) in 1096. Rightly placed within the scope of classic Sid Meier's Civilization series' 'Education Tech'. which it is of High Middle Ages. And in general, a tech that enables University building in all Civ games.

University of Oxford - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

As a Wonder however, it is always associated with Industrial Revolutions of 18th Century. as per gameplay of Civ 5-7. You can only build University of Oxford at the very beginning of Industrial Era (or Modern Age in Civ7).

Oxford University

Oxford University is a wonder in the Civilization games. Oxford University is not present in (or the article has not been created for) the following games : It has been confirmed that Oxford University is not present in the following games :

civilization.fandom.com

What is the reasons why Oxford is permanently matched with The Enlightenment and Eve of Industrial Revolution as per Firaxis's understandings? while the actual univ itself is seven or eight centuries older. even older than Sir Isaac Newton himself. (Before Civ4 the wonder was called Sir Isaac Newton's University. and it can be built with 'Theory of Gravity' advancements (itself no longer a tech name).

 

[Marla_Singer]

In Europe, universities in the academic sense only took shape between the 13th and 15th centuries with the Italian Renaissance. Earlier, the Islamic world had centres of higher learning like Baghdad, Cairo and Córdoba, preserving and expanding scientific and philosophical knowledge. The real inspiration for later universities lies there.

Universities in Civ games relate more to the Scientific Revolution of the 17th century (Galileo, Descartes, Leibniz, Newton...). As for “founded in 1096” about Oxford, that’s marketing. It wasn’t a major academic centre until centuries later.

 

[Plotinus]

It is built (or at least the first Higher Education Teachings took place) in 1096. Rightly placed within the scope of classic Sid Meier's Civilization series' 'Education Tech'. which it is of High Middle Ages. And in general, a tech that enables University building in all Civ games.

University of Oxford - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

As a Wonder however, it is always associated with Industrial Revolutions of 18th Century. as per gameplay of Civ 5-7. You can only build University of Oxford at the very beginning of Industrial Era (or Modern Age in Civ7).

Oxford University

Oxford University is a wonder in the Civilization games. Oxford University is not present in (or the article has not been created for) the following games : It has been confirmed that Oxford University is not present in the following games :

civilization.fandom.com

What is the reasons why Oxford is permanently matched with The Enlightenment and Eve of Industrial Revolution as per Firaxis's understandings? while the actual univ itself is seven or eight centuries older. even older than Sir Isaac Newton himself. (Before Civ4 the wonder was called Sir Isaac Newton's University. and it can be built with 'Theory of Gravity' advancements (itself no longer a tech name).

Newton wasn't at Oxford. He was at some kind of inferior establishment to the east whose name escapes me.

But more seriously, I would guess it's because the scientific discoveries made at Oxford (and indeed anywhere else) came in the seventeenth century and later, and those are what the game considers significant.

Universities in Civ games relate more to the Scientific Revolution of the 17th century (Galileo, Descartes, Leibniz, Newton...). As for “founded in 1096” about Oxford, that’s marketing. It wasn’t a major academic centre until centuries later.

It certainly was an important academic centre in the Middle Ages! It was a centre of philosophical and theological learning in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, for example. But it was eclipsed by Paris, undoubtedly.

I don't think that the university claims to have been "founded" in 1096, in any case. That would be anachronistic, as medieval universities weren't "founded" in the way that modern ones are. As the university's own website states: "There is no clear date of foundation but teaching existed at Oxford in some form in 1096." And that's perfectly accurate.

Also note that although Galileo and Newton were based in universities, Descartes and Leibniz (and indeed most of the philosophers of the time now considered important) were not. Professionally speaking, Descartes was a soldier and Leibniz a court librarian.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Newton wasn't at Oxford. He was at some kind of inferior establishment to the east whose name escapes me.

But more seriously, I would guess it's because the scientific discoveries made at Oxford (and indeed anywhere else) came in the seventeenth century and later, and those are what the game considers significant.


It certainly was an important academic centre in the Middle Ages! It was a centre of philosophical and theological learning in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, for example. But it was eclipsed by Paris, undoubtedly.

I don't think that the university claims to have been "founded" in 1096, in any case. That would be anachronistic, as medieval universities weren't "founded" in the way that modern ones are. As the university's own website states: "There is no clear date of foundation but teaching existed at Oxford in some form in 1096." And that's perfectly accurate.

Also note that although Galileo and Newton were based in universities, Descartes and Leibniz (and indeed most of the philosophers of the time now considered important) were not. Professionally speaking, Descartes was a soldier and Leibniz a court librarian.

So saying that the first Higher Learning Institute that was referred to as 'University' was first founded in Paris? (the Sorbonne?) which is actually after the first date that higher educational teachings were first too place at Oxford town / city in 1096?

 

[Plotinus]

These things are very vague, because medieval universities developed gradually. They emerged from cathedral schools and independent scholars who, over time, tended to congregate in the same cities, and start to coordinate their teaching until they were effectively a single institution. Later on some of them received royal charters or other "official" permission or instruction to teach, and that's often considered the point at which the university was officially "founded", but really it's just one point in a long process without a clear beginning or end. So if you go by date of charter, Bologna is the oldest European university, followed by Paris and then Oxford. But all of them (and the others) had already had teaching going on for long before those charters were granted - just in a less coordinated way, and we don't know when any of them actually started.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The medieval European universities were late-comers.

al-Qarawiyyin University (madrasah) in Morocco, founded around 956 CE and still functioning as a university, is the oldest continuously-operating such institution in the world.

Note that it predates the University of Bologna ('founded' around 1088 CE) Europe's oldest, by over a century.

And a note on the Islamic 'madrasah' - the word simply means "place where teaching takes place', and the first one was started while Mohammed was still alive. This school, and others like it at the time, was simply for basic education: reading the Koran, martial arts, horsemanship. The madrasah as university-equivalent came later, with Nizam al-Mulk, who added mathematics, astronomy/astrology, geography, alchemy and philosophy to the cirriculum and attached a library to many of them. The first one so started was at Lashkar Gah in (modern) Afghanistan, suspicuously close to a great Buddhist vihara: Naw Bahar. Since many viharas also had libraries attached and were centers for teaching philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, etc - this has led some scholars to believe that the madrasah derived from the earlier Buddhist central Asian vihara.

And since Jocius of London started his "College of 18 Scholars", the basis for the University of Paris, around 1180 CE based on madrasahs he had seen in Palestine, the vihara might also be the basis for the European University as well. Among the elements that Jocius copied from the madrasah (which in turn may have copied them from the vihara) were endowments to pay expenses for students and scholar/professors, a courtyard architectural plan, and an attached library.

As for Oxford, there are several dates that could be used as a 'foundation'. Aside from the vague "teaching taking place" in 1096 CE, the head of the school was not designated as a Chancellor until 1201 CE, and the faculty not incorporated as a Universitas or corporate body until 1231 CE. It didn't receive a Royal Charter until 1248 CE (AFTER Cambridge, which got its charter in 1231 CE!), and taught almost nothing but classics until the 1850s, when it finally added Natural Sciences, Law and Modern History to its cirriculum. Unless you include regurgitating the ancient 'scientific' authors like Aristotle, Ptolemy, Galen, Dioscorides, etc as science, not exactly a pioneer in scientific research . . .

 

[Plotinus]

...taught almost nothing but classics until the 1850s, when it finally added Natural Sciences, Law and Modern History to its cirriculum. Unless you include regurgitating the ancient 'scientific' authors like Aristotle, Ptolemy, Galen, Dioscorides, etc as science, not exactly a pioneer in scientific research . . .

That's not quite right! Lectureships in geometry, astronomy, anatomy, and natural philosophy were all established at Oxford in the seventeenth century. Cartesianism was taught there later in the seventeenth century, without the attempts to suppress it seen in some universities on the continent. But you can't assess the scientific research that was done there by focusing just on what was taught to students, because in early modern times these were quite distinct. There was a chemical laboratory at the Ashmolean, and people like Robert Boyle, John Wilkins, William Petty, and Thomas Willis were all researching in Oxford in ways that weren't linked to student teaching. So it was quite a hub of early modern scientific research.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

That's not quite right! Lectureships in geometry, astronomy, anatomy, and natural philosophy were all established at Oxford in the seventeenth century. Cartesianism was taught there later in the seventeenth century, without the attempts to suppress it seen in some universities on the continent. But you can't assess the scientific research that was done there by focusing just on what was taught to students, because in early modern times these were quite distinct. There was a chemical laboratory at the Ashmolean, and people like Robert Boyle, John Wilkins, William Petty, and Thomas Willis were all researching in Oxford in ways that weren't linked to student teaching. So it was quite a hub of early modern scientific research.

Lectures and individuals working in the sciences certainly were there - and in other campuses across Europe - but Oxford did not offer a systematic course of study and a Degree in anything but the classics or religion until the 19th century. - And that only after considerable debate amongst the faculty and administration.

I'm just finishing Ada Palmer's new book Inventing the Renaissance. a fascinating summary of the 'humanism' studies and activities of the Italian Renaissance in the 15th - 17th centuries. Among many other threads, she has several chapters on the very 'informal' communications and spread of ideas and concepts amongst the umanistii scholars and writers utterly outside of any formal educational institutions. There was great debate within the institutions (including the 'new' Universities) as to the merits of medieval Scholasticism and the new 'Classicism' of the umanistii, but the spread of 'humanist' philosophies (and practices) was largely outside the educational realm entirely.

Early Oxford is an example of the same thing. Medieval 'science' was almost entirely based on the monastic tradition: Walcher of Malvern/Lorraine pioneered observational astronomy and astronomical mathematics at Great Malvern Priory, even though Oxford was already a going concern before he was born. Richard of Wallingford produced complex mechanical devices for astronomical calculations by the 14th century, but was Abbot of St Alban's Abbey and not associated with any university, even though Oxford and Cambridge both were over a century old by his time.

There are exceptions to every historical 'rule' of course, but I would argue that early European universities were far more concerned with bettering the soul and character* than improving factual knowledge, so that the empirical 'scientists' like Bacon or Grosseteste in England were exceptions to the usual run of academics and academic activity at the universities.

* = and Palmer argues that Machiavelli is the great modifier of everything in that he used the classical studies not to provide moral lessons in ethical behavior, but as examples of what worked or didn't work to be avoided or copied by a leader with no attempt to be ethical or moral, and thus 'invented' modern attitudes towards historical study.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

The medieval European universities were late-comers.

al-Qarawiyyin University (madrasah) in Morocco, founded around 956 CE and still functioning as a university, is the oldest continuously-operating such institution in the world.

Note that it predates the University of Bologna ('founded' around 1088 CE) Europe's oldest, by over a century.

And a note on the Islamic 'madrasah' - the word simply means "place where teaching takes place', and the first one was started while Mohammed was still alive. This school, and others like it at the time, was simply for basic education: reading the Koran, martial arts, horsemanship. The madrasah as university-equivalent came later, with Nizam al-Mulk, who added mathematics, astronomy/astrology, geography, alchemy and philosophy to the cirriculum and attached a library to many of them. The first one so started was at Lashkar Gah in (modern) Afghanistan, suspicuously close to a great Buddhist vihara: Naw Bahar. Since many viharas also had libraries attached and were centers for teaching philosophy, mathematics, astronomy, etc - this has led some scholars to believe that the madrasah derived from the earlier Buddhist central Asian vihara.

And since Jocius of London started his "College of 18 Scholars", the basis for the University of Paris, around 1180 CE based on madrasahs he had seen in Palestine, the vihara might also be the basis for the European University as well. Among the elements that Jocius copied from the madrasah (which in turn may have copied them from the vihara) were endowments to pay expenses for students and scholar/professors, a courtyard architectural plan, and an attached library.

As for Oxford, there are several dates that could be used as a 'foundation'. Aside from the vague "teaching taking place" in 1096 CE, the head of the school was not designated as a Chancellor until 1201 CE, and the faculty not incorporated as a Universitas or corporate body until 1231 CE. It didn't receive a Royal Charter until 1248 CE (AFTER Cambridge, which got its charter in 1231 CE!), and taught almost nothing but classics until the 1850s, when it finally added Natural Sciences, Law and Modern History to its cirriculum. Unless you include regurgitating the ancient 'scientific' authors like Aristotle, Ptolemy, Galen, Dioscorides, etc as science, not exactly a pioneer in scientific research . . .

And it comes with 'Education' Tech since Civ 5.

too bad when Buddhism came to Southeast Asia (Particularly Siam). the term 'Wiharn' shifted the meanings into 'Place of Worships' (and usually referred to the large hall of sacraments, conveniently the largest building in the same compound). though before modern education systems came here in 19th-20th Centuries. Higher learnings did also take place there. however a different term 'Wat' is coined and referred to the entire compound that can be 'Holy Sites' districts in Civ 6.