Rivality Vs Essay

The French Louis Pasteur (1822–1895) and German Robert Koch (1843–1910) are the two greatest figures in medical microbiology and in establishing acceptance of the germ theory of disease (germ theory).[1] In 1882, fueled by national rivalry and a language barrier, the tension between Pasteur and the younger Koch erupted into an acute conflict.[1]

Pasteur had already discovered molecular chirality, investigated fermentation, refuted spontaneous generation, inspired Lister's introduction of antisepsis, introduced pasteurization to France's wine industry, answered the silkworm diseases blighting France's silkworm industry, applied bacteriology to attenuate a Pasteurella species and introduce chicken cholera vaccine (1879), and introduced anthrax vaccine (1881).[1]

Koch had introduced pure culture and thus founded bacteriology while confirming Bacillus anthracis caused anthrax (1876), introduced solid culture plates and staining to bacteriology (1881), identified Mycobacterium tuberculosis as cause of tuberculosis (1882), posed Koch's postulates influenced by his teacher Jakob Henle, and later identified Vibrio cholerae as cause of cholera (1883).

Koch's bacteriologists regarded a bacterial species' properties as unalterable, a position shown false by Pasteur's modification of virulence to develop vaccine.[1] At an 1882 conference, a mistranslated term from French to German during Pasteur's lecture triggered Koch's indignation, whereupon Koch's two bacteriologist colleagues, Friedrich Loeffler and Georg Gaffky, published denigration of the entirety of Pasteur's research on anthrax since 1877.[1]

Tensions between France and Germany[edit]

Germany had unified by way of its victory in the Franco-Prussian War (1870–71), seizing Alsace-Lorraine from France. Pasteur was professor in the University of Strasbourg, located in Alsace, where he married the daughter of the rector. Jean Baptiste Pasteur, the only son of Louis and Marie Pasteur, was a soldier in the Franco-Prussian War. The tone set by this war contributed to the rivalry between Koch and Pasteur.[1] The "German Problem", as Germany increasingly gained scientific, technological, and industrial dominance, fed tensions among European nations.[2] Germ theory's applications were embedded in the heightening quest by France, Germany, Britain, and Italy to colonize Africa and Asia with the aid of tropical medicine,[3] a new variant of colonial medicine,[4] while medical scientists in respective nations vied to lead advances.[5]

Koch's bacteriology and anthrax[edit]

In 1863, influenced by Pasteur's research on fermentation, fellow Frenchman Casimir Davaine mostly explained the cause of anthrax, but Davaine's explanation was opposed by those who opposed the idea that infection with a microorganism could explain it. In 1840, Jakob Henle had proposed microorganism infections caused diseases, and in 1875 German botanist Ferdinand Cohn weighed in on a controversy in microbiology by declaring that the elementary unit was the cell and that each form of bacteria was constant and naturally divided from the other forms. Influenced by Henle and by Cohn, Koch developed a pure culture of the bacteria described by Davaine, traced its spore stage, inoculated it into animals, and showed it caused anthrax. Pasteur called this a "remarkable achievement".[6] In pure culture, bacteria tend to keep constant traits, and Koch reported having already observed constancy.

Pasteur undertook investigation, yet gave much credit to Davaine. Meanwhile, Pasteur's researchers always reported variation in their cultures. In 1879, Henri Toussaint identified a bacterial species involved in chicken cholera and named the genus in honor of Pasteur, Pasteurella. In Pasteur's laboratory, a culture of Pasteurella multocida was left out over a weekend exposed to air, and Pasteur and Emile Roux noticed upon return to the laboratory that its virulence to chickens was diminished. Pasteur applied the discovery to develop chicken cholera vaccine, introduced in a public experiment, an empirical challenge to the stance of Koch's bacteriologists that bacterial traits were unalterable.[1]

Pasteur's attenuation and vaccines[edit]

From 1878 to 1880, when publishing on anthrax, Pasteur referred to the bacteria by the name given it by Frenchman Davaine, but in one footnote called it "Bacillus anthracis of the Germans".[1] In July 1880 Toussaint reported developing a technique of chemical deactivation to produce anthrax vaccine that successfully protected dogs and cattle, and was praised by the Academy of Science, but Pasteur attacked the feat—chemical deactivation and not virulence attenuation to make a vaccine—as impossible.[7] Pasteur soon introduced his own anthrax vaccine in a highly successful public experiment, and entered commerce with it.[7] Pasteur was criticized by Koch and colleagues.[7][8] (Pasteur had not used attenuation, but secretly used Toussaint's technique.)[7][9][10]

Microbe hunting, cholera, and public health[edit]

In 1883, responding to a cholera epidemic in Alexandria, Egypt, both Pasteur and Koch sent missions vying to identify its cause. Koch returned victorious, whereupon Pasteur switched research direction and began development of rabies vaccine.[5] As to public health, Koch's bacteriologists feuded with Max von Pettenkofer—whose miasmatic theory claimed the bacteria was but one causal factor among at least several—but von Pettenkoffer stubbornly opposed water treatment, and the massive cholera epidemic in Hamburg, Germany, in 1892 devastated von Pettenkofer's position, and German public health was grounded on Koch's bacteriology.[11] Meanwhile, Pasteur led introduction of pasteurization in France.

Rabies vaccine and Pasteur Institute[edit]

Rabies, uncommon but excruciating and almost invariably fatal, was dreaded. Amid anthrax vaccine's success, Pasteur introduced rabies vaccine (1885), the first human vaccine since Jenner's smallpox vaccine (1796). On 6 July 1885, the vaccine was tested on 9-year old Joseph Meister who had been bitten by a rabid dog but failed to develop rabies, and Pasteur was called a hero.[12] (Even without vaccination, not everyone bitten by a rabid dog develops rabies.) After other apparently successful cases, donations poured in from across the globe, funding the establishment of the Pasteur Institute, the globe's first biomedical institute, which opened in Paris in 1888.[13]

Pasteur Institute trained military physicians in colonial medicine, although French government soon took over this role.[5] The success of Pasteur's modification of bacterial virulence inspired confidence in the universality of Pasteurian science, though Pasteur's researchers preferred the term microbiology over the term bacteriology.[5] Koch discouraged use of rabies vaccine,[1] whose production later became a premise for opening Pasteur Institutes abroad, as in Shanghai, China.[14] The first overseas Pasteur Institute was opened by Albert Calmette in Saigon in French Indochina in 1891, although Pasteur's nephew Adrien Loir was already planning to open one in Australia.[5]

Tuberculin and Robert Koch Institute[edit]

In 1882, Koch reported identification of the tubercle bacillus as the cause of tuberculosis,[15] cementing germ theory. Koch took his research into a new direction—applied research—to develop a tuberculosis treatment and use the profits to found his own research institute, autonomous from government.[16] In 1890 Koch introduced the intended drug, tuberculin, but it soon proved ineffective, and accounts of deaths followed in new press.[17] Amid Koch's reluctance to disclose tuberculin's formula, Koch's reputation sustained damage, but Koch retained lasting acclaim and received the 1905 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for his investigations and discoveries in relation to tuberculosis".[18] Koch accepted government's offer to direct the Institute for Infectious Diseases (1891), in Berlin, a prestigious position but not the kind of institute that Koch had sought.[16] It was later renamed the Robert Koch Institute, which remains a government organization.

American medicine embraces Koch[edit]

The monomorphist doctrine of Koch's bacteriologists suggested public health interventions to eliminate bacteria, whereas Pasteur's acceptance of variation suggested attenuating bacterial virulence in the laboratory to develop vaccines.[1] Although inspired by Pasteur's applications suggesting medicine's potential, American physicians traveled to Germany to learn Koch's bacteriology as basic science,[19] though Pasteur emphasized the fuzzy boundary between basic science and applied science.[1]

From 1876 to 1878, the American William Henry Welch trained in Germany pathology, and in 1879 opened America's first scientific laboratory, a pathology laboratory in Bellevue's medical school in New York.[20] While in Germany, Welch had met John Shaw Billings who had been appointed by Daniel Coit Gilman—the first president of the newly forming Johns Hopkins University—to plan Hopkins' hospital and medical school.[20] Named the medical school's first dean in 1883,[20] Welch promptly traveled for training in Koch's bacteriology, and returned to America eager to transform medicine with the "secrets of nature".[21] Hopkins medical school opened in 1894 with Welch emphasizing Koch's bacteriology,[21] which became the foundation of modern medicine.[1][22]

As "dean of American medicine", William H Welch became the first scientific director of Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research (1901), and appointed his former Hopkins student Simon Flexner the first director of pathology and bacteriology laboratories. Aided by the "Flexner report", published in 1910 while Welch was president of the American Medical Association, Welch's view of science and medicine became the national standard,[23] a transformation of American medical education completed around 1930.[24] As first dean of America's first public health school, founded in 1916 at Hopkins, Welch set the standard for public health, and with Simon Flexner exported the Hopkins model internationally.

Pasteur's image ascends[edit]

Although Pasteur died in 1895, eventually over thirty official Pasteur Institutes opened across the globe.[25] Pasteur's team had planned in 1885 to open a rabies-treatment facility in St. Louis, Missouri, and an American Pasteur Institute in New York City, but the plans were abandoned, and America has never hosted an official Pasteur Institute.[25]

A number of American copycats appeared, however, starting with "Chicago Pasteur Institute" in 1890, and "New York Pasteur Institute" in 1891.[25] In 1897 a "Pasteur Institute" opened in Baltimore, in 1900 in Pittsburgh and St. Louis, in 1903 in Ann Arbor and Austin, and in 1904 perhaps in Philadelphia.[25] In 1908, Georgia Department of Public Health opened a "Pasteur Department" in Atlanta, California State Hygienic Laboratory opened a "Pasteur Division" in Berkeley, and a "Pasteur Institute" opened in Washington, D.C.[25]

In 1900, Paul Gibier, the French medical scientist who opened "New York Pasteur Institute", accidentally died, but his nephew, George Gibier Rambaud, continued it on reduced scale until he closed it when US Medical Corps commissioned him overseas in 1918.[25] While MDs ascended in American public health, it was thought that "the greatest contribution of all, the foundation upon which modern sanitary science is built, was made by Pasteur."[26]

Nationalism flares[edit]

Koch was celebrated by the American medical community, including by Welch, when at last Koch visited America in 1908. Soon, however, America was influenced by the British and French view that although their denizens appreciated Germany's progress in science and arts, Germany was elitist and dismissive while socially and politically antiquated, so authoritarian and aggressive as to resemble medieval tyranny.[27]

In 1917, when America entered World War I (1914–18), US government seized German-owned property and assets, including Bayer AG's American trademarks and the 80% of Merck & Co's shares owned by George Merck.[28][29] Welch exhibited gratuitous anti-German bias despite the debt of his own career, thus American medicine, to Germany,[30] especially to Koch's bacteriology.[22]

After World War II (1939–45), and more of the "German Problem", Merck & Co became the global leader in vaccinology.

Two legacies[edit]

Tuberculin's main use rapidly became in determining M tuberculosis infection—a use remaining till today—but this use soon revealed that in London, 9 of 10 individuals were infected, whereas only 1 in 10 of the infected developed the disease.[31] In 1901 at the London Congress on Tuberculosis, Koch stated on theoretical grounds that M bovis, which infects cows, was not transmissible to humans.[32] British attendees disagreed, and later Theobald Smith and the English Royal Commission empirically established that M bovis was transmissible and could result in human disease.[32] Though widely considered ineffective as treatment, tuberculin might have remained in use for this purpose until the 1940s and maybe had some effectiveness.[33]

Milk pasteurization became popular in America around 1920.[25] In 1921 Albert Calmette and Camille Guérin of Pasteur Institute introduced tuberculosis vaccine, whose virulence of strains varied in the late 1920s.[34] BCG vaccine was not used in the public health of America, which virtually eliminated tuberculosis without it. BCG vaccine's effectiveness preventing tuberculosis remains uncertain,[35] but appears to confer nonspecific survival gains,[35] as perhaps by preventing leprosy, and is a cancer treatment.[36]

Pasteur had highlighted a new threat—microorganisms benign to humans passing among and multiplying in nonhuman animals while gaining new virulence for humans—that is thought to loom and to have approximately materialized with AIDS.[1] Although Koch's postulates are often inapplicable, they remain heuristic, and the authority of "fulfilling Koch's postulates" is still invoked in medical science, though often in modified form,[37] as in the identification of HIV-1 as the cause of AIDS or the identification of SARS coronavirus as the cause of SARS.[38][39][40]

Germ theory's stance that the "germ" was the disease's necessary and sufficient cause—the single factor both required and complete to result in the disease—proved false.[11] Germ theory gradually evolved to include other factors, whereupon germ theory resembled miasmatic theory, which had had to recognize bacteria as a causal factor, and so the two competing explanations merged without true, decisive victor.[11] Twentieth-century philosophy, inspired by revolutions in physics, establishment of molecular biology, and advances in epidemiology, revealed that any claim of a single causal factor both necessary (required) and sufficient (complete), the cause, is untenable.[41][42] French-born microbiologist René Dubos, a biographer of Pasteur, discussed tuberculosis to illustrate disease's social causes and to illustrate the failure of germ theory,[43][44] whose apparent successes were aided by improvements in nutrition and living conditions but sparked scientific research that brought a wealth of new understandings.[45]


  1. ^ abcdefghijklmUllmann, Agnes (2007). "Pasteur–Koch: Distinctive Ways of Thinking about Infectious Diseases". Microbe. 2 (8): 383–7. Archived from the original on 2011-07-22. 
  2. ^Lowe John, The Great Powers, Imperialism and the German Problem 1865–1925 (London: Routledge, 1994), pp. 195–9.
  3. ^Schneider, WH (2009). "Smallpox in Africa during colonial rule". Medical History. 53 (2): 193–227. doi:10.1017/s002572730000363x. PMC 2668906. PMID 19367346. 
  4. ^Davidovitch, N; Greenberg, Z (2007). "Public health, culture, and colonial medicine: Smallpox and variolation in Palestine during the British Mandate". Public Health Reports. 122 (3): 398–406. PMC 1847484. PMID 17518312. 
  5. ^ abcdeGuénel, A (1999). "The creation of the first overseas Pasteur Institute, or the beginning of Albert Calmette's Pastorian career". Medical History. 43 (1): 1–25. doi:10.1017/s0025727300064693. PMC 1044108. PMID 10885131. 
  6. ^Mollaret, HH (1996). "Contribution à la connaissance des relations entre Koch et Pasteur" [The relationship between Pasteur and Koch]. La Revue du Praticien (in French). 46 (20): 2396–400.  See Trans. E. T. Cohn; B. H. Fasciotto-Dunn; U. Kuhn; D. V. Cohn. "Contribution to the knowledge of relations between Koch and Pasteur". 
  7. ^ abcdChevallier-Jussiau, Nadine (2010). "Henry Toussaint et Louis Pasteur Une rivalité pour un vaccin" [Henry Toussaint and Louis Pasteur. Rivalry over a vaccine]. Histoire des Sciences Médicales (in French). 44 (1): 55–64. PMID 20527335. 
  8. ^Koch R & Carter KC, Essays of Robert Koch (New York: Greenwood Press, 1987).[page needed]
  9. ^Geison GL, The Private Science of Louis Pasteur (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995).[page needed]
  10. ^Pasteur, L (2002). "Summary report of the experiments conducted at Pouilly-le-Fort, near Melun, on the anthrax vaccination, 1881". The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine. 75 (1): 59–62. PMC 2588695. PMID 12074483. 
  11. ^ abcOppenheimer, G. M.; Susser, E. (2007). "Invited Commentary: The Context and Challenge of von Pettenkofer's Contributions to Epidemiology". American Journal of Epidemiology. 166 (11): 1239–41; discussion 1242–3. doi:10.1093/aje/kwm284. PMID 17934199. 
  12. ^Trueman C, "Louis Pasteur", History Learning Site, 2000–2011, Web.
  13. ^The Institut Pasteur > History. Pasteur Institute. 
  14. ^Yang, Wei; Li, Zhi-ping (2008). "The research works on Shanghai Pasteur Institute". Chinese Journal of Medical History (in Chinese). 38 (2): 92–8. PMID 19125502. 
  15. ^Koch R (1882), "Die atiologie der tuberkulose", in Schwalbe J, ed, Gesammelte Werke von Robert Koch (Leipzig: Georg Thieme, 1912, orig 1910), pp 428–45.
  16. ^ abGradmann, C (2000). "Money and microbes: Robert Koch, tuberculin and the Foundation of the Institute for Infectious Diseases in Berlin in 1891". History and philosophy of the life sciences. 22 (1): 59–79. PMID 11258101. 
  17. ^"Professor Koch's Treatment of Tuberculosis". The Lancet. 136 (3510): 1239–1241. 1890. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(01)86145-6. 
  18. ^Gradmann, C (2001). "Robert Koch and the pressures of scientific research: Tuberculosis and tuberculin". Medical History. 45 (1): 1–32. doi:10.1017/s0025727300000028. PMC 1044696. PMID 11235050. 
  19. ^Gossel, PP (2000). "Pasteur, Koch and American bacteriology". History and philosophy of the life sciences. 22 (1): 81–100. PMID 11258102. 
  20. ^ abcSilverman, BD (2011). "William Henry Welch (1850–1934): The road to Johns Hopkins". Proceedings. 24 (3): 236–42. PMC 3124910. PMID 21738298. 
  21. ^ abBenson, KR (1999). "Welch, Sedgwick, and the Hopkins model of hygiene". The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine. 72 (5): 313–20. PMC 2579023. PMID 11049162. 
  22. ^ abMaulitz, RC (1982). "Robert Koch and American medicine". Annals of Internal Medicine. 97 (5): 761–6. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-97-5-761. PMID 6753684. 
  23. ^Tauber, AI (1992). "The two faces of medical education: Flexner and Osler revisited". Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 85 (10): 598–602. PMC 1293684. PMID 1433034. 
  24. ^Beck, Andrew H. (2004). "The Flexner Report and the Standardization of American Medical Education". JAMA. 291 (17): 2139–40. doi:10.1001/jama.291.17.2139. PMID 15126445. 
  25. ^ abcdefgPasteur Foundation, "Pasteur Institutes USA: A turn-of-the-century phenomenon", Remembrance of Things Pasteur, Accessed 5 Sep 2012 on Web.
  26. ^Knowles, M (1913). "Public Health Service Not a Medical Monopoly". American Journal of Public Health. 3 (2): 111–22. doi:10.2105/ajph.3.2.111. PMC 1089532. PMID 18008793. 
  27. ^Charles Sarolea, The Anglo-German Problem, American edn (New York & London: G P Putnam's Sons, 1915), pp 33–6.
  28. ^Kirk K W Tyson, Competition in the 21st Century (Boca Raton: CRC Press LLC, 1997), p. 237.
  29. ^Ibis Sánchez-Serrano, The World's Health Care Crisis: From the Laboratory Bench to the Patient's Bedside (London: Elsevier, 2011), pp 55–7.
  30. ^Roberts, CS (2009). "Bachelors in Baltimore: Mr. Mencken and Dr. Welch". Proceedings. 22 (4): 348–50. PMC 2760171. PMID 19865510. 
  31. ^Condrau, F.; Worboys, M. (2008). "Epidemics and infections in nineteenth-century Britain". Social History of Medicine. 22: 165–71. doi:10.1093/shm/hkp002. PMC 2663978. 
  32. ^ abSchultz, Myron G. (2011). "Photo quiz". Emerging Infectious Diseases. 17 (3): 547–9. doi:10.3201/eid1703.101881. PMC 3298383. PMID 21392456. 
  33. ^Cardona, Pere J. (2006). "Robert Koch tenía razón. Hacia una nueva interpretación de la terapia con tuberculina" [Robert Koch was right. Towards a new interpretation of tuberculin therapy]. Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiología Clínica (in Spanish). 24 (6): 385–91. doi:10.1157/13089694. PMID 16792942. 
  34. ^Oettinger, T.; Jørgensen, M.; Ladefoged, A.; Hasløv, K.; Andersen, P. (1999). "Development of the Mycobacterium bovis BCG vaccine: Review of the historical and biochemical evidence for a genealogical tree". Tubercle and Lung Disease. 79 (4): 243–50. doi:10.1054/tuld.1999.0206. PMID 10692993. 
  35. ^ abRoth, AE; et al. (2006). "Beneficial non-targeted effects of BCG—ethical implications for the coming introduction of new TB vaccines". Tuberculosis. 86 (6): 397–403. doi:10.1016/j.tube.2006.02.001. PMID 16901755. 
  36. ^Brosman, SA (1991). "BCG vaccine in urinary bladder cancer". West J Med. 155 (6): 633. PMC 1003114. PMID 1812634. 
  37. ^Gradmann, Christoph (2008). "Alles eine Frage der Methode. Zur Historizität der Kochschen Postulate 1840–2000" [A matter of methods: The historicity of Koch's postulates 1840–2000]. Medizinhistorisches Journal (in German). 43 (2): 121–48. PMID 18839931. 
  38. ^Harden, VA (1992). "Koch's postulates and the etiology of AIDS: An historical perspective". History and philosophy of the life sciences. 14 (2): 249–69. PMID 1342726. 
  39. ^O'Brien, SJ; Goedert, JJ (1996). "HIV causes AIDS: Koch's postulates fulfilled". Current Opinion in Immunology. 8 (5): 613–8. doi:10.1016/S0952-7915(96)80075-6. PMID 8902385. 
  40. ^Fouchier, Ron A. M.; Kuiken, Thijs; Schutten, Martin; Van Amerongen, Geert; Van Doornum, Gerard J. J.; Van Den Hoogen, Bernadette G.; Peiris, Malik; Lim, Wilina; et al. (2003). "Aetiology: Koch's postulates fulfilled for SARS virus". Nature. 423 (6937): 240. doi:10.1038/423240a. PMID 12748632. 
  41. ^Rothman, Kenneth J.; Greenland, Sander (2005). "Causation and causal inference in epidemiology". American Journal of Public Health. 95: S144–50. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2004.059204. PMID 16030331. 
  42. ^Kundi, Michael (2006). "Causality and the interpretation of epidemiologic evidence". Environmental Health Perspectives. 114 (7): 969–74. doi:10.1289/ehp.8297. PMC 1513293. PMID 16835045. 
  43. ^Conrad P, Mirage of genes—sec "Introduction", p. 438, in Conrad P, ed, The Sociology of Health and Illness: Critical Perspectives, 8th edn (New York: Worth Publishers, 2009).
  44. ^René J Dubos, Mirage of Health: Utopia, Progress, and Biological Change (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1959 / New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1987).
  45. ^Meeting summary, "Antimicrobial Resistance: Implications for Global Health & Novel Intervention Strategies", Institute of Medicine of National Academies, Apr 2010.

Rivalry between the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge is a phenomenon going back many centuries. During most of that time, they were the only two universities in England and Wales, making the rivalry more intense than it is now.

The University of Oxford and the University of Cambridge, sometimes collectively known as Oxbridge, are the two oldest universities in the United Kingdom. Both were founded more than 800 years ago, and between them they have produced a large number of Britain's most prominent scientists, writers and politicians, as well as noted figures in many other fields. You can see Oxford University Notable Alumni[1] Competition between Oxford and Cambridge also has a long history, dating back to around 1208 when Cambridge was founded by scholars taking refuge from hostile townsmen in Oxford.[2]

Similarities between Oxford and Cambridge[edit]

Academic reputation[edit]

In 2012 the Times Higher Education World Reputation Rankings, based on a survey of 13,388 academics over 131 countries which was then the largest evaluation of academic reputation to date[3] found that both Cambridge and Oxford belonged to the elite group of six universities touted as the 'globally recognized super brands';[4][5] The other four were Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of California, Berkeley, and Stanford University.

Institutions and facilities[edit]

Oxford and Cambridge both have:

Collegiate structure[edit]

Oxford and Cambridge also share a common collegiate structure: each university has more than 30 semi-autonomous residential colleges (see Colleges of the University of Cambridge, Colleges of the University of Oxford), which provide the environments in which students live, work and sleep.

Applicants must choose a specific college when applying to Oxford or Cambridge, or allow the university to select one for them, as every undergraduate and graduate student must be a member of one of the colleges.[6][7] However, all colleges are part of the university and students studying the same subject attend the same lectures and exams, irrespective of to which college they belong. Degrees are also awarded by the central university and not by the individual colleges.

Colleges within each university regularly compete with each other in a variety of sporting and other events (e.g. rugby, rowing, athletics and chess), but will pool their talent to form university teams for inter-university contests.

Teaching method[edit]

The principal method of undergraduate teaching (other than lectures) is the "supervision" or "tutorial": terms used at Cambridge and Oxford respectively, though the meaning is the same. These are typically weekly or more frequent hour-long sessions in which small groups of students – usually between one and three – meet with a member of the university's teaching staff or a doctoral student. Students are normally required to complete an essay or assignment in advance of the supervision/tutorial, which they will discuss with the supervisor/tutor during the session, along with any concerns or difficulties they have had with the material presented in that week's lectures. Students typically receive one to four tutorials/supervisions per week.[8]

Neighbouring universities and other institutions[edit]

Within the cities of Oxford and Cambridge are campuses of other universities, respectively Oxford Brookes University and Anglia Ruskin University. In addition, various English language schools, secretarial and other non-university colleges are based in the two cities.

Production of educational materials[edit]

Both Oxford and Cambridge have lent their names to educational materials and institutions associated with the two universities. In addition to their printing houses, the Oxford English Dictionary is a prominent English-language dictionary worldwide, while Cambridge Assessment provides a number of widely recognised qualifications for students (including GCSEs, A-levels and English-language proficiency certificates such as the Certificate in Advanced English).

Differences between Oxford and Cambridge[edit]

The cities[edit]

The city of Oxford is larger (having a population about 30 per cent greater than Cambridge's in 2007)[9][10] and has historically been more urban and industrial, whilst Cambridge more closely resembles an agricultural market town. Oxford is associated with the motor industry (BMW currently produce the Mini in Oxford, and several Formula One teams are based in Oxfordshire and neighbouring counties), whereas the area surrounding Cambridge is known as Silicon Fen—one of the most important technology centres in Europe—that has presence of large companies like Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, ARM, along with many medical technology firms.

Both cities were built near rivers. However, the sole river is more prominent in Cambridge, flowing through the city centre rather than the two rivers (Thames and Cherwell) which flow around the centre of Oxford. Punting is especially popular in Cambridge along the famous stretch called 'The Backs', which features a number of bridges and 'the backs' of several colleges that abut the River Cam (punting is also popular at Oxford).

Despite many ancient buildings in both Oxford and Cambridge, there are also distinct differences in architecture. Oxford has a uniformity of building material, as a large proportion of the buildings are in the local sandstone. Cambridge, on the other hand, has little local stone, so the building material has been brought in from many different sources, resulting in a greater variety of character. The contrasts in architecture in Cambridge are more pronounced, as can be seen when comparing King's College with the neighbouring Senate House.

Oxford is featured more often in literature and the cinema; films with scenes shot in Oxford include Shadowlands and the Harry Potter movies, while Radcliffe Square was used in the filming of His Dark Materials: Northern Lights. The television series Inspector Morse and Lewis are also set in Oxford. Cambridge may be best known in film as the real-life location of the court race scene portrayed in the film Chariots of Fire (although the scene was filmed at Eton College instead), or for the television series Porterhouse Blue.


There are differences in the terminology traditionally used at the two universities. For example:

  • At Oxford, the three terms of the academic year are called Michaelmas, Hilary and Trinity,[11] whereas at Cambridge they are Michaelmas, Lent and Easter (the Easter term is sometimes called "Exam term").[12][13][14]
  • The large enclosed squares of grass found in most colleges are referred to as "courts" in Cambridge and "quadrangles" (or "quads") in Oxford.
  • College cleaners in the two Universities go by different names: in Oxford they are 'scouts' and in Cambridge they are 'bedders'.[15]
  • A Doctor of Philosophy degree is referred to as a "Ph.D." in Cambridge and a "D.Phil." at Oxford.[16]
  • The regular teaching meetings between student and tutor are called "tutorials" at Oxford and "supervisions" at Cambridge
  • College staircases in Oxford are typically numbered whereas those in Cambridge are assigned letters or double letters when there are more than 26 staircases in a given college.

It is still compulsory at Oxford to wear formal academic dress (sub fusc) for all university examinations, although this is not the case at Cambridge. During Hilary Term 2006, the students of Oxford voted 81% in favour of keeping formal academic dress at university exams.[17] In general, however, traditions and the seriousness with which they are taken tend to vary widely amongst the different colleges within each university, showing more variation than between the two universities as a whole.

Admission of women[edit]

For most of their history, only men were permitted to study at and receive degrees from Oxford and Cambridge. Starting in the late 19th century, both universities saw the establishment of residential colleges exclusively for women students: Girton College, Cambridge, was founded in 1869 and Lady Margaret Hall, Oxford, in 1878. Although Cambridge was the first to accommodate female students, women were not permitted to become full members of the university until 1947, whereas at Oxford this had occurred in 1920.[18][19]

There are still three colleges at Cambridge which only accept women: Newnham, Murray Edwards and Lucy Cavendish. In 2008, Oxford's last all-female college, St Hilda's, admitted men and became coeducational.

The "Oxford for humanities, Cambridge for sciences" myth[edit]

There is a somewhat common impression that Oxford is stronger in politics and the humanities, while Cambridge is stronger in the sciences and engineering. Despite both universities' stressing that there is no significant difference between them in either the sciences or humanities today,[20][21] this disparity in the popular imagination has existed since at least the late 1820s, when The Times newspaper reported on the appointment of Oxford and Cambridge academics to the newly established professorships of University College London: "it is known to be the intention to choose classical professors at Oxford, and mathematical at Cambridge", although in the event both the classical and mathematical professors were eventually chosen from Cambridge.[22]

In his book, The Decline of Privilege: The Modernization of Oxford University,[23] Joseph A. Soares, an American sociologist, suggests that Oxford developed a superior political and literary reputation because of its unparalleled connections to England's governing class, its status as the oldest and most traditional university in England, and the greater romantic appeal of Oxford to writers:

...in British cabinets in the twentieth century, Oxford men and women outnumbered Cambridge graduates nearly two to one ... Of eleven prime ministers counting back from Tony Blair, eight were undergraduates at Oxford, and none were at Cambridge ... Oxford has been second to none as a gatekeeper to the political elite...

Academics and novelists have viewed Oxford as the quintessential English university ... authors who portray universities in their novels, as Ian Carter's definitive study of British university fiction since 1945 demonstrated, have been attracted to Oxford by a huge majority. Of the 204 novels written between 1945 and 1988 that featured British academic life, 119 depicted Oxford; Cambridge, with 26 appearances, came in a distant second place ... Carter showed that fictional Oxford signified those values thought to epitomize English society: tolerance, civility, pluralism, and democracy ... To judge from novels on academic life, one would surmise that England's soul dwelled in Oxford.

Because of its relation to the power elite and its hold on the middle-class imagination, Oxford often provided the mental landscape for national self-examination ...

[A] major charge against Oxford was that ... it was anti-science and unconcerned with contributing to economic growth. As we shall see ... there was substance to this criticism before World War II, but there has not been since then.

Despite Oxford University having been the home of almost 60 Nobel prize winners, Cambridge has been associated with an even larger number of Nobel Prize-winning breakthroughs (ca. 90) and a greater fraction of Britain's most culturally significant scientists, including Charles Darwin and Isaac Newton. The authors of Oxford Figures[22] also suggest that Cambridge's unrivalled intellectual reputation in England, especially although not exclusively in technical fields, could be partly attributed to the emphasis it placed on mathematics for many years:

Cambridge developed, from the mid-eighteenth century onwards, a highly competitive examination culture geared towards ranking students on a mathematical examination, after prolonged coaching. Furthermore ... no student could go on to [study classics unless they had already done well in mathematics]. This system produced ... many of the best mathematicians and scientists of the nineteenth century, as well as some of the best lawyers, clergymen, and other professionals...

Although the Cambridge system in its most competitive form was dropped in the early twentieth century ... [the effect it had on the quality of Oxford applicants] can be seen in the rueful reflections in 1912 of Arthur Joliffe, Fellow and tutor at Corpus Christi College from 1891 to 1920, upon the evidence presented by candidates for Oxford entrance scholarships:

it is undeniable that the average candidate [at Oxford] is not as good as the average candidate at Cambridge. The genius from the small grammar school, the promising student from a provincial university, the ablest boy at the large public school, all are sent to Cambridge in preference to Oxford as a rule. Some of the candidates sent to Oxford from large public schools are occasionally so bad that one can only suppose that their masters think that a willingness to come to Oxford is a sufficient qualification for a Mathematical Scholarship there.

Notwithstanding the above, significant changes have occurred at both Oxford and Cambridge over the last century, including Cambridge's diversification away from intense mathematical study and Oxford's renewed emphasis on ground-breaking scientific research, such as its influential work in the development of penicillin. However, the withdrawal of equal academic dress from Oxford's scientist alumni may perhaps reflect a current institutional preference towards the arts. Oxford offers the course of Philosophy, Politics, and Economics, while Cambridge offers Human, Social and Political Sciences. Software tycoon Bill Gatesgives scholarships to Cambridge, while Oxford is home to what is the oldest and arguably the most prestigious academic award for graduates – Rhodes Scholarship – instituted by Cecil Rhodes. US News and World Report rankings support this stereotype; Cambridge tends to rank higher in the sciences, and Oxford in the humanities.

Undergraduate admissions criteria[edit]

Entrance to Oxford and Cambridge is academically competitive. According to the 2011 Universities Guide from The Guardian newspaper, the five top universities in the UK based on undergraduate students' performance in public examinations while at high school (as measured on the UCAS tariff scale) were Cambridge (546), Oxford (530), Imperial College London (500), the London School of Economics (493) and Durham University (466).[24] Depending on which subject an applicant wishes to specialise in, there are often compulsory subject-specific entrance tests as well.

After an initial screening of submitted applications, short-listed candidates at Oxford and Cambridge are invited to a series of tests and interviews with the academics who may eventually be teaching them. Oxbridge interviews have acquired something of a mythical status in the British media, becoming a source of various humorous anecdotes and urban legends due to the perception that the interviews themselves are bizarre, intimidating and/or frequently involve unusual questions and requests. Interview prompts reportedly used in the past include "Do you think you're clever?" (from a Law interview at Cambridge)[25] and "Talk about a light bulb" (from an Engineering interview at Oxford).[26] Admissions staff have said that there are no correct answers to such questions, but that applicants are assessed on their ability to approach unfamiliar, open-ended problems and discuss them articulately, incorporating new ideas and evidence as the discussion progresses. Candidates are also expected to show a willingness to challenge their own preconceptions about the topics under discussion, as well as the preconceptions adopted by their interviewers. This is essentially a test of whether the student would do well under the tutorial/supervision system at Oxford and Cambridge, and a poor performance at interview may negate an otherwise strong application.

In recent years, Cambridge has placed slightly more emphasis than Oxford on public exam results during the selection process. Cambridge routinely asks applicants who take A-level exams to report their exact scores, not just letter-grades;[27] this is partly to distinguish between high A-grades and borderline A/B grades. In contrast, disclosure of exact scores for Oxford applications is voluntary. In 2010, the new A* grade for A-level exams (an A* indicating a high A) was introduced. Cambridge started requesting that its applicants achieve at least one A* grade if they were taking A-levels, letting students earn a place through their performance in public examinations; Oxford initially stated that it relies more on its own internal aptitude tests and waited to see how effective the A* grade is at highlighting the best candidates, before deciding to implement it as a requirement for most courses starting in 2012.[28]

Due to the similarities between the two universities, and to ease the burden of interviewing so many applicants each year, secondary school students are not normally allowed to apply to both Oxford and Cambridge in the same application cycle. This restriction does not apply to potential organ scholars[29] or students who already have a degree and are applying for a second undergraduate degree or a graduate degree at Oxbridge.[30]

Direct competition between the two universities[edit]

Many annual competitions are held between Oxford and Cambridge, including the annual Boat Race. First contested in 1829, the race pits Cambridge University Boat Club against their Oxford counterparts over a four-mile (6 km) stretch of the River Thames.[31] The very first Boat Race was won by Oxford, but Cambridge lead the overall series with 81 wins to Oxford's 78,[32] with one dead heat in 1877.[33] Recent races have been closely fought, with Oxford winning by the shortest ever margin of 1-foot (0.30 m) in 2003[33] and Cambridge winning in 2004 despite Oxford's claims of a foul.[34]

The other major Oxbridge competitions are the Rugby Union and Rugby League Varsity Matches: The Varsity Match is a rugby union game played annually in December at Twickenham stadium. Cambridge currently has 60 wins, Oxford has 55 (including the most recent win in December 2014), and 14 games have ended in draws.[35] The Rugby Football Union chose to advertise the 2006 match with a campaign promoting inter-university rivalry: their advertising agency Lowe London produced posters showing the number of Prime Ministers produced by the universities (Oxford 26 – Cambridge 14), with the tagline "It's time to get even".[36]

The Rugby League Varsity Match is a rugby league game played annually in March at The Stoop. Whilst not having the history of its Union counterpart, the fixture has been contested for over 30 years, and is broadcast live on Sky Sports. Cambridge currently lead the series 16–14, with one draw in 1994.

The Boat Race and the two Varsity Matches are notable in the UK in that they are the only university sports events that have any public profile outside the universities themselves; all three are screened live on national television and are widely covered in the national media.

All other significant sports have their own varsity match at some point during the year; some of these, such as the cricket fixture, the Ice Hockey Varsity Match and the Varsity Polo Match have attracted significant attention in the past. The results of all the varsity matches in The Varsity Games are aggregated and each year one university wins the Varsity Games title. Sportsmen who have competed at a Varsity Match in the prestigious Full Blue sports are eligible for an Oxford Blue or Cambridge Blue respectively.

University rankings[edit]

Over the last few years, British universities have been subjected to the increasing popularity of national university league tables, which rank universities based on criteria such as their student-staff ratio, drop-out rates and spending on services and facilities. Oxford and Cambridge have been a constant presence at the top end of the tables, never appearing outside the overall top three and rarely not holding the first and second places, but their dominance in individual subjects has been challenged by other institutions.[37][38]

As of 2012, Cambridge has been ranked above Oxford in three out of the four major UK university league tables. Cambridge has been ranked 1st and Oxford 2nd in the tables compiled by the Guardian,[39] and The Sunday Times,[40] and 3rd behind the London School of Economics in The Complete University Guide,[41] whereas Oxford is ranked 1st and Cambridge 2nd in The Times Good University Guide.[42]

International league tables of universities across the world, which use a variety of different criteria (often research output in the sciences and reputation among peer institutions), generally ranks Cambridge and Oxford almost equally; for example the 2010 U.S. News & World Report's World's Best Universities ranking placed Cambridge as 1st in the world and Oxford the 6th[43] while in the International 2013 Times Higher Education rankings, Oxford is ranked second globally and Cambridge seventh.[44]

Oxbridge co-operation[edit]

Despite the impassioned rivalry between the two universities, there is also much cooperation when the need arises. Most Oxford colleges have a sister college in Cambridge. Some Oxford and Cambridge colleges with the same name are 'sisters': for example, Jesus College, Cambridge, and Jesus College, Oxford. However, namesakes are not always paired up: for example, St John's College, Oxford, is the sister college of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge, while St John's College, Cambridge, is the sister college of Balliol College, Oxford. Arrangements between sister colleges vary, but may include reciprocal offers of accommodation to students from the other university when they are visiting. Furthermore, a significant proportion of academic staff has at some point been a member of the "other place".

Concerns are often raised that Oxford and Cambridge do not project a socially inclusive image to potential applicants from state schools, and thus Oxbridge students are disproportionately from wealthy backgrounds.[45] The two universities have made individual and combined efforts in recent years to promote themselves to potential applicants from disadvantaged backgrounds.[46][47] Each year, the Universities spend around £8 million on access schemes and there is a designated Access Officer in every JCR and students' union.

See also[edit]


  1. ^See University of Cambridge#Notable alumni and University of Oxford#Notable alumni and academics
  2. ^"Early records | University of Cambridge". Cam.ac.uk. 2013-01-28. Retrieved 2015-07-29. 
  3. ^Sedghi, Ami (10 March 2011). "World's top 100 universities 2011: their reputations ranked by Times Higher Education". UK: Guardian. Retrieved 26 March 2011. 
  4. ^"Top Universities by Reputation 2011". UK: Times Higher Education. 10 March 2011. Retrieved 26 March 2011. 
  5. ^"Six 'super brands': their reputations precede them". UK: Times Higher Education. 10 March 2011. Retrieved 26 March 2011. 
  6. ^"Choosing a college". Oxford University. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  7. ^"The Colleges". Cambridge University. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  8. ^[1][dead link]
  9. ^[2][dead link]
  10. ^[3]Archived 12 April 2009 at the Wayback Machine.
  11. ^"Dates of Term | University of Oxford". Ox.ac.uk. 2015-06-24. Retrieved 2015-07-29. 
  12. ^Term dates, University of Cambridge
  13. ^"Tips for Help in Exam Term"(PDF). Cambridge University Students' Union. Retrieved 5 May 2010. 
  14. ^Constitution of the Churchill College Junior Common Room
  15. ^Frank Stubbings, Bedders, Bulldogs and Bedells: a Cambridge Glossary,ISBN 0-521-47978-9
  16. ^[4]Archived 24 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine.
  17. ^Foster, Patrick (4 March 2006). "21st-century students vote to keep Oxford tradition". London: The Times. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  18. ^"Educating Women – Oxbridge". Archived from the original on 26 July 2010. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  19. ^"Women at Oxford". Oxford University. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  20. ^"Oxford and Cambridge: the similarities and differences". Oxford University. Archived from the original on 28 September 2010. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  21. ^"Oxford and Cambridge: the similarities and differences". Cambridge University. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  22. ^ ab"Oxford Figures: The tradition of rivalry with Cambridge". Oxford University. 17 September 2007. Archived from the original on 9 June 2011. Retrieved 4 May 2010. 
  23. ^Soares, Joseph (1999), The Decline of Privilege: The Modernization of Oxford University, Stanford University Press, retrieved 6 May 2010 
  24. ^"University guide 2011: University league table". London: The Guardian. 8 June 2010. 
  25. ^"Top 10 strangest interview questions". Bright Knowledge. 
  26. ^"Would you rather be a novel or a poem? Oxbridge interview questions and how to answer them". School Gate – Times Online. 28 November 2008. Archived from the original on 5 May 2010. 
  27. ^"Homerton College Cambridge: Undergraduate Entry Requirements". Homerton.cam.ac.uk. Archived from the original on 2 May 2012. Retrieved 29 July 2015. 
  28. ^"Frequently Asked Questions: Will I need A* grades to get in to Oxford?". University of Oxford. Archived from the original on 30 August 2010. 
  29. ^"2.9 Applicants who have already studied at the University of Cambridge: : Undergraduate Admissions Handbook 2014-15". Admin.cam.ac.uk. 2012-09-24. Retrieved 2015-07-29. 
  30. ^"UCAS – Can I apply to both the University of Oxford and the University of Cambridge?". UCAS. 
  31. ^[5]Archived 17 October 2008 at the Wayback Machine.
  32. ^[6]Archived 26 September 2011 at the Wayback Machine.
  33. ^ ab[7]Archived 1 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine.
  34. ^[8]Archived 26 September 2011 at the Wayback Machine.
  35. ^[9]Archived 7 February 2009 at the Wayback Machine.
  36. ^Sweney, Mark (26 October 2006). "Oxbridge rugby rivalry kicks off". London: The Guardian. Retrieved 20 May 2010. 
  37. ^"Guardian university guide". London: The Guardian. 10 February 2008. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  38. ^Watson, Roland. "Times University Rankings League Table 2010". London: The Times. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  39. ^"University league table". The Guardian. London. 17 May 2011. 
  40. ^"University Guide". The Sunday Times. Retrieved 2015-07-29. 
  41. ^"Top UK University League Tables and Rankings 2016". Complete University Guide. Retrieved 2015-07-29. 
  42. ^"Good University Guide". The Times. Retrieved 2015-07-29. 
  43. ^"World's Best Universities: Top 400". US: U.S. News & World Report. 21 September 2010. Retrieved 26 March 2011. 
  44. ^"World University Rankings 2012-13". Times Higher Education. Retrieved 2015-07-29. 
  45. ^"Teachers' Oxbridge misconceptions". BBC News. 11 January 2008. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  46. ^Paton, Graeme (14 May 2008). "Cambridge drops foreign language rule for applicants". London: The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 
  47. ^Frean, Alexandra (29 May 2008). "Oxford attempts to woo state school pupils through their teachers". London: The Times. Retrieved 6 May 2010. 

External links[edit]

0 thoughts on “Rivality Vs Essay”


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *