ABSTRACT

A particular problem surrounding the issue of university education in London is that for most of its existence during the nineteenth century the remit of the University of London was not coextensive with the provision of university education in the capital. The attempts to try to bring the two into closer alignment constitute the central theme of this chapter. For our purposes, higher-level education in London began with the foundation of an institution calling itself the university of London, better known afterwards as University College, London, which was non-denominational, and the establishment soon afterwards of King’s College, which was determinedly Anglican. The University of London was created by the state as a compromise to try to overcome the impasse occasioned by the rival colleges.1 Essentially, the University was a body of examiners, which set and marked the examinations for which students could be taught at either of the colleges, thus giving precedence to neither. Logically, however, there was no reason why a candidate should not study for a University of London examination at any other college and, soon, institutions across the country prepared students on the prescribed syllabuses. When the examinations were opened to those who had not necessarily studied at any college, there was nothing to bind the University to London at all, other than the location of its headquarters. Whatever the merits of a purely examining agency, and despite its undoubted influence, there were many who criticised such a notion of the university, not least the providers of university education in London. By the late nineteenth century, the question of the role, organisation and scope of the University, particularly its relationships with higher education in the capital, had become a matter of increasing concern.