Jump to content

Talk:List of oldest universities in continuous operation/Archive 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

University of Strathclyde

The University of Strathclyde only became a university in 1964. It is true that its oldest precusor, Anderson's Institution, can be traced back to 1796, but it was not a university at that time. It claimed the title of University from 1828, but was forced to change its name in 1887 as it had no legal authority to use the name. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 12:30, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

To repeat, even if one accepts the (not widely accepted) claim that "Anderson's University" was a university even the institution itself accepted that it wasn't a university in 1887 when it changed its name. Thus the institutional continuity of the University of Strathclyde as a university can only be traced back to 1964. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 20:33, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

See for example here: [1]. Some quotes: "Strathclyde University originated as Anderson's Institution in 1796. In 1828, the institution took on the title of Anderson's University, partially fulfilling Anderson's vision of two universities in the city of Glasgow. The name was changed in 1887, to reflect the fact that there was no legal authority for the use of the title of 'university'. As a result the Glasgow and West of Scotland Technical College was formed, becoming the Royal Technical College in 1912, and the Royal College of Science and Technology in 1956.In 1964, the institution merged with the Scottish College of Commerce and received a royal charter, granting it university status under the name of the University of Strathclyde." and "Until 1964 the institution was primarily a technological institute concentrating on science and engineering teaching and research. Undergraduate students could qualify for degrees of the University of Glasgow or the equivalent Associate of the Royal College of Science and Technology (ARCST).". Clearly not a university until 1964. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 10:44, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Date of foundation

Date of foundation or establishment is the common criteria and should be used for defining. Below are some of the issues which arise if only the date of royal charter is taken into account.

KCL: "In 2003, the College was granted degree-awarding powers in its own right, as opposed to through the University of London, by the Privy Council. This power remained unexercised until 2007, when the College announced that all students starting courses from September 2007 onwards would be awarded degrees conferred by King's itself, rather than by the University of London. The new certificates however still make reference to the fact that King's is a constituent college of the University of London." Also, Lampeter was St David's "College" in 1822 ("The university was founded in 1822 as St David's College (Coleg Dewi Sant), becoming St David's University College (Coleg Prifysgol Dewi Sant) in 1971, when it became part of the federal University of Wales")("In 2010 it merged with Trinity University College (under its 1822 charter) to create the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David") and so it technically became an university in 2010!

Durham was granted Royal charter in 1837 and NOT 1832.

Bangor received RC in 1885 and NOT 1884

London School of Economics: "The London School of Economics was founded in 1895 by Beatrice and Sidney Webb, initially funded by a bequest of £20,000[24][25] from the estate of Henry Hunt Hutchinson. Hutchinson, a lawyer[24] and member of the Fabian Society, left the money in trust, to be put "towards advancing its [The Fabian Society's] objects in any way they [the trustees] deem advisable". The five trustees were Sidney Webb, Edward Pease, Constance Hutchinson, William de Mattos and William Clark. The LSE records that the proposal to establish the school was conceived during a breakfast meeting on 4 August 1894, between the Webbs, Graham Wallas and George Bernard Shaw. The proposal was accepted by the trustees in February 1895 and LSE held its first classes in October of that year, in rooms at 9 John Street, Adelphi, in the City of Westminster." It was a "School" and not an University all this time till,

"The school joined the federal University of London in 1900, becoming the university's Faculty of Economics and awarding degrees of the University from 1902.[28] Expanding rapidly over the following years, the school moved initially to the nearby 10 Adelphi Terrace, then to Clare Market and Houghton Street. The foundation stone of the Old Building, on Houghton Street, was laid by King George V in 1920; the building was opened in 1922." therefore it cannot be classified as a separate university. and it never received its Royal Charter.

Royal Holoway "Royal Holloway, University of London (RHUL) is a constituent "college" of the University of London." Again, not an "University"

Aberystwyth University has NOT received Royal charter. "Founded in 1872 as University College Wales, Aberystwyth became a founder member of the University of Wales in 1894 and changed its name to the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth. In the mid-1990s, the university again changed its name to the University of Wales, Aberystwyth. On 1 September 2007, the University of Wales ceased to be a federal university and Aberystwyth became independent again. However, students enrolled from the 2009/2010 academic year onwards, or whose first year of study was in the 2008/2009 academic year, can choose to receive their degree from the University of Wales or Aberystwyth University."

Queen Mary: this is the biggest issue. "In April 1929 the College Council decided it would take the steps towards applying to the Privy Council for a Royal Charter, but on the advice of the Drapers' Company first devised a scheme for development and expansion, which recommended amongst other things to reamalgamate the People's Palace and the College, with guaranteed provision of the Queen's Hall for recreational purposes, offering at least freedom of governance if not in space"

"Queen Mary and Westfield College was established by Act of Parliament and the granting of a Royal charter in 1989, following the merger of Queen Mary College (incorporated by charter in 1934) and Westfield College (incorporated in 1933).[1] The Charter has subsequently been revised three times: in 1995 (as a result of the merger of the College with the Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry); in 2008 (as a result of the Privy Council awarding the College Degree Awarding Powers; and in July 2010 (following a governance review)."

So this received its royal charter in 1934/1989 and NOT 1885.

So clearly all the universities are listed on dates of foundation and NOT on royal charter. So if you need, please create a page separately as mentioned above for universities based on RC. 101.212.67.232 (talk) 14:56, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Given that none of Bangor, LSE, RHUL, Aberystwyth and QMW are discussed on this page, and that most of the universities on this page are not UK universities anyway, I'm not entirely sure what your point is supposed to be. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 15:48, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
I agree. The comments above complain about universities that aren't even mentioned in the article. I can see that there's a case for clarifying when Durham and Bangor became full universities (the discrepancy is small). Only KCL is actually controversial and it has a completely different history from Strathclyde's. There's no argument here for the inclusion of Strathclyde. -Lo2u (T • C) 21:55, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Yes, Durham is a bit complex because the award of the Royal Charter in 1837 completes a process conciously begun by the Act or Parliament in 1832. Should probbaly be explained. I've been doing this on another page, but have been a bit distracted by the IP user kerfuffle. I plan to look into the Welsh universities once I have time. The London Universities are a nightmare of course, but that problem is fairly well described at Third oldest university in England debate which is linked. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 22:08, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Latin America or South America?

A recent edit changed the title of a section from "Latin America and the Caribbean" to "South America and the Caribbean." No rationale was given, but apparently it was because Mexican universities are listed under North America. The new section division, however, leaves the geographically North American universities in Guatemala and Panama in the new South America and the Caribbean section.

Latin America seems a culturally consistent unit when discussing universities, but in that framework the Mexican universities should probably be moved there. Neither division is obviously right, so before moving any of the entries I'd like to hear comments on the recent edit. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 21:00, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Lacking comment, I've BRD, restored Latin America, and moved Mexico to suit. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 14:24, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

List of the oldest schools in the world

Comments would be appreciated at Talk:List of the oldest schools in the world. Chengdu Shishi High School is on the same site as a school that is more than 2,000 years old. It has been removed and added by several editors in the past. There's a discussion about whether it deserves inclusion. --Lo2u (T • C) 12:03, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

University of Pennsylvania

The University of Pennsylvania should be included in the short list of schools for the United States. While it is not the oldest college, Penn was the first institution of higher learning in the U.S. to use the name 'university'. As well, it was the first college to found a graduate school (School of Medicine, 1756). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.227.207.123 (talk) 16:24, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

That claim is well discussed at First university in the United States which is linked immediately below the US section; it's not clear that there's a strong argument for including it here. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 21:42, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

İstanbul University

They are keep changing my edit without any claims. İt has verified sources that it was founded in 1453 and recognized as university. Please check those pages;

they are valid and updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KazekageTR (talk • contribs) 15:36, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Firstly, you can't use Wikipedia as a source. The book by Frijhoff is a potential source but you need to make clear what it actually says. Secondly the Instanbul web page is quite explicit that Istanbul was a madrasa when it was founded, not a university. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 18:38, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
  • For better understanding, Istanbul University itself say, that "Therefore, the first higher education in Istanbul, which is also the basis of our university, was started in two madrasahs, firstly at Hagia Sophia and right after that at Pantokrator Church that was turned into a masrasah, in Zeyrek." and "By the decision of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, instead of Darülfünun that was closed down on July 31, 1933, the Istanbul University was established on August 1, 1933." This is similar to Cathedral schools and as I understand these madrasahs evolved into modern university in 1933.--Yopie (talk) 20:45, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Leuven

The case of Leuven has been discussed extensively; see the talk page archives. See also Note 5 on the main page. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

University of Paris

Some elements on the permanence of higher studies in Paris.

- 1150-1793 :"old system" university of Paris : five faculties (Arts, Civil Law, Canon Law, Medicine, Theology), 10-30 residential colleges.
- 1792 : suppression of the Faculty of Theology.
- 1793 : suppression of the University (four Faculties and all remaining residential colleges.
- 1794 : creation of the Special School of Medicine (old Faculty of Medicine, with the same professors)
- 1795 : creation of three Central Schools (natural sciences, letters), employing professors of the Faculty of Arts, plus other scientists excluded from the old university.
- 1802 : the Central Schools become Lycées ; creation of the Special School of Law (old Faculty of Civil Law, with the same professors), the Special School of Natural History, Physics and Chemistry, the Special School of Mecanical and Chemical Arts (engineering), the Special School of Transcendantal Mathematics, the Special School of Geography, History and Public Economics, employing former professors of the Central Schools.
- 1808 : , the Special Schools become Faculties, creation of the Faculty of Letters (School of Geography, History and Public Economics), the Faculty of Science (Specials Schools of Natural History, Physics and Chemistry, Mecanical and Chemical Arts and Transcendantal Mathematics), and the Faculty of Catholic Theology.
- 1876 : all Faculties (Science, Letters, Law, Medicine, Theology) are unified in the (new) University of Paris.
- 1970 : split of the (new) University of Paris between 13 "newer" universities.

So, there is a higher education continuity in Paris since the Middle Ages - a six-month gap in 1793 for Medicine, a 18-month gap in 1793-1794 for Sciences and Letters, a 10-year gap for Law, a 16-year gap for Theology . 90.16.170.216 (talk) 16:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

The question of continuity of higher education of some kind in Paris is quite distinct from the question of the institutional continuity of the University of Paris, which in any event no longer exists. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 17:50, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
I understand your point, but if we use only the institutional continuity, we must exclude other universities from the list, such as Padova (two universities 1399-1813), Naples (moved to Salerno 1253-1258), Sienna, Macerata (suppressed 1808-1815), Coimbra (moved to Lisbon 1338-1354 and 1377-1537)… 90.16.170.216 (talk) 10:51, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
If you think other universities should be removed, then do so; if unsure discuss it here first. At a glance I suspect you are right about Padua, but for Naples and Sienna the interruptions are mostly minor, though there is a case for redating Naples to 1258. In the case of Coimbra it looks like there was institutional continuity during the moves, but I'm not an expert on this. In any event these are not arguments for changing the treatment of Paris. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 11:37, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
I am unsure of the pertinence of "continuous operation" as a working notion [is this expression even correct in academical english ?] in the history of higher education. We need to define precisely what "continuous" means. 6 months of teaching stop ? 6 years ? If we are to accept transfers of university, shouldn't we do the same for mergers and splits ? 78.232.54.121 (talk) 18:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
It seems slightly odd to suggest that continuous operation might not be relevant to an article entitled "List of oldest universities in continuous operation". Of course arguments have been made for deleting this list, but that's a different question. If you read the archives you will find that the question of short interruptions is discussed in some detail, as are splits. There has been much less discussion of transfers and mergers. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 21:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

This list is biased.

The main chart includes many universities that were closed for a few years by revolution or suchlike. But French universities - many ancient - are excluded because they were closed during the revolution. This is grossly unfair, and it seems that other universities eg Louvain, Belgium have been similarly tarnished. If some expert doesn't clean this up, I will do the best I can.

I suggest that a 20 year hiatus under extreme circumstances should be allowed.24.108.58.1 (talk) 04:15, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

This has been discussed in detail previously. The key concept is "institutional continuity": is the reformed institution in some meaningful sense the same institution, or does it just share the name and location? In particular, did key teaching staff return after the break? Clearly such continuity is impossible if the closure is over a century, and pretty much meaningless at 50 years, but beyond that it wasn't thought helpful to have hard limits: as the pause gets longer the burden of proof required to assert continuity gets greater.
There has been substantial trimming of the list in recent years, but it has been patchily applied. (I would respectfully suggest avoiding casual accusations of bias and gross unfairmess without direct evidence that any deficiencies are deliberate). If you can see clear cases then you should feel free either to make edits or to suggest edits here; as long as you explain what you are doing this is unlikely to generate controversy. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 07:52, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Definition Bias

There is a need for proper definition of the word "Oldest". Is it the date of formal proclamation or is it the starting date of operation? Whether an entity calls itself an university while it is not recognized by statutory agencies/institutions in that country/worldwide are to be included or excluded?

There are multitude of institutions which may not enjoy federal recognition but carry the word university. This list conveniently neglects various important factors while calling for a single line definition that all universities took form from one of the three universities. It is important to stand corrected that if such a definition is valid, in such a case it is for European universities only. This list needs to be renamed suitably to geographically centered list of Universities - Chronology

Abhijith Jayanthi — Preceding undated comment added 19:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Systemic bias

This article deliberately ignores the following issues:

"Some regard the University of Al Karaouine in Fez, Morocco, which was founded in 859, to be the world's oldest continuously operating academic degree-granting higher education institution. Others cite the University of Nalanda in Bihar, India, founded in 427, as the oldest one. The first European university to be established was Bologna in 1088, then in 1167 the University of Oxford, followed by the University of Cambridge in 1209 and the University of Paris in 1231." Burnes, Bernard (17 January 2013). "The changing face of English universities: reinventing collegiality for the twenty-first century". Studies in Higher Education: 1–22. doi:10.1080/03075079.2012.754858. {{cite journal}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |journal= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

Adding the above source would go a long way towards maintaining neutrality. Are there any objections?

-A1candidate (talk) 14:21, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

The findings and results of the discussion above and in the archive apply. Your quote mixes up about everything: Muslim madrasas with Buddhist monastery schools and Christian universities as well as continuous with discontinued institutions (Nalanda was destroyed in the 12th century, education at the madrasa of Al Karaouine was discontinued between 1958 and 1988). The key to understanding the entire issue still is that there were many types of ancient higher-learning institutions around, but only one university, the medieval university. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 16:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

No. There are may be many ancient higher-learning institutions, but only one of them granted academic degrees in the Islamic world - the Madrasa. -A1candidate (talk) 17:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

First of all, the title is stupid. There is no reason why "List of oldest universities" should be redirected to a sub-topic under it. A better way would be to name the article as "List of oldest universities" itself and provide a brief subsection regarding the ancient higher learning centres that got fully demolished. But then, University of al-Karaouine should be added as the oldest university in continuous operation (You cannot call it just a Madrasa since the astrologers, geographers, economists etc were taught there and the very short discontinuity of 30 years should be ignored in my opinion) Aravind V R (talk) 18:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

A1candidate, since you found it worthwhile to rehash a source which we have already discussed in August 13, you certainly don't mind if I repost my sources, either. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 18:49, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Comment: a source which states that Paris was founded after Oxford is highly problematic, given that Oxford was in effect founded by students leaving Paris. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 19:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

@Aravind V R - I agree that the article should be renamed, and I see no reason why there is such a strong desire to exclude all universities that happened to be briefly suspended at some point in history.

@Gun Powder Ma - Your sources do not support your claim.

@Jonathan A Jones - Could you tell me in which year was the University of Paris founded?

-A1candidate (talk) 20:42, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Paris is like Oxford: it wasn't founded, but rather came into being, in the case of Paris some time around 1150. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 21:44, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
The reason I asked is that there seems to be some ambiguity surrounding this university's colorful history. The year 1150 may be the time period in which the university first existed, but it seems that 1231 is the year in which the University of Paris was fully recognized:
"In 1231, when local diocesan officials encroached on the institutional autonomy of the university, Pope Gregory IX issued the bull Parens Scientiarum on behalf of the masters of Paris. In this document, he effectively granted the University of Paris the right to self-government, whereby it could make its own rules pertaining to courses and studies. The pope also granted the university a separate papal jurisdiction, emancipating it from diocesan interference. "With this document," writes one scholar, "the university comes of age and appears in legal history as a fully formed intellectual corporation for the advancement and training of scholars."Woods, Thomas (2005). How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization. Regnery Publishing. p. 50. ISBN 0895260387.
There is no doubt that the university had existed in one form or another around the middle of the 12th century. But it's entrance into legal history as a fully formed intellectual corporation seemed to have happened much later in 1231. Definitely had existed before 1231, but not as a fully recognized entity.
In any case, the issue I'm making over here is not related to the University of Paris, so I don't think we should sidetrack into a separate topic. I'm sure we would all agree that Studies in Higher Education is a reliable, peer-reviewed academic journal, albeit with its own share of flaws, just like any other academic source including the numerous ones cited by Gun Powder Ma.
-A1candidate (talk) 21:38, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
The date of 1231 refers to the papal bull of Gregory IX, and is one of about half a dozen dates one might choose as being "official" for Paris. But if you're going to take papal bulls seriously then Oxford was "founded" in 1254 and Cambridge (which was, of course, founded by students leaving Oxford, just as the sudden growth in Oxford is linked to students leaving Paris) was "founded" 23 years earlier in 1231. The point is not which method one chooses to assign these dates, but rather that a paper which defines dates quite so inconsistently is problematic as a source on the early history of universities, since the authors exhibit little or no understanding of the issues involved. That's not surprising of course: the paper is about the influence of the 1963 Robbins Report on UK universities, and any historical comments are passing and anciliary to the purpose of the paper and the expertise of the authors. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 22:09, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I understand, the institutional autonomy of the University of Cambridge had never been called into question even before a papal bull was issued to it, unlike the University of Paris. Look at it this way - The authors assert that the University of Oxford was established in 1167, which certainly makes sense when one looks at the history of the University of Oxford:

"Although its exact date of foundation is unclear, there is evidence of teaching as far back as 1096, making it the oldest university in the English-speaking world, and the second-oldest surviving university in the world, after the University of Bologna. It grew rapidly from 1167 when Henry II banned English students from attending the University of Paris."

In other words, it seems that for the Universities of Oxford and Paris, the authors consider the year of each university's establishment as the year in which it was recognized and accepted by higher authorities, not the year in which teaching first took place. I think it is entirely fair for them to do so, since the exact year in which the universities first existed is obviously a debatable topic, but the year of their establishment and recognition by a higher authority is more definitive and less open to loose interpretations. -A1candidate (talk) 16:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
I really don't understand what you're saying here. If we go by "recognition by a higher authority" then Cambridge was founded before Oxford which was founded at roughly the same time as Paris (I don't know the exact dates on the two bulls). This is absolute nonsense, as Cambridge was founded by scholars leaving Oxford, while the rise of Oxford was heavily influenced by scholars leaving Paris. For these very early universities there is no such thing as a definitive foundation date, and you just have to use common sense. Cambridge officially picks 1209, the year of the migration, which makes a certain sense. Oxford tends to avoid making clear statements, instead indicating that it came into being at some point between 1096 and 1167. But there was no "recognition by higher authorities" in 1167, just a switch in the relationship between Henry II of England and Louis VII of France from covert hostility to open war, leading to the eventual creation of the Angevin Empire. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 09:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
It isn't entirely constructive for us to argue over something as trivial as that - the issue is not whether the University of Paris or Oxford was the first to appear, our discussion has nothing to do with these European universities. At this point, I would suggest that you consult WP:RS/N should you have further doubts about the article's reliability.
In order to stop arguing over such peripheral issues, let's just consider another source, shall we:
"The University of Al Karaouine, in Fez, Morocco, Africa is considered the oldest continuously operating university in the world and has been a center of learning for more than 1,000 years."Gathiram, Prem (2013 Nov 27). "Medicine and medical sciences in Africa". Pathophysiology (journal). doi:10.1016/j.pathophys.2013.11.003. PMID 24290618. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |journal= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: date and year (link)
This article isn't the only one in the acadamic community making such statements, and adding it would go a long way towards maintaining neutrality. -A1candidate (talk) 18:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Once again, I have little or no idea of what you are trying to achieve. The article in Studies in Higher Education is possibly a reliable source for the impact of the 1963 Robbins Report on UK higher education, but is not a reliable source for the early history of universities. Since I am not proposing to make any edits based on the article it is hardly likely that I would take it to RS/N unless and until somebody makes such edits. The article you raise above is a potted history of the AAPS, apparently written by two medical scientists, neither of whom appear to have relevant expertise in the history of iniversities.
My own position on Al Karaouine is precisely what it has been for a long time: it does not belong in the tables, as it did not become a university until 1963, but it does deserve special mention in the supporting text, just as Paris does. I am, of course, well aware that this position does not satisfy either "side" in this dispute. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 19:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
I agree with A1. WP:VERIFIABILITY would apply here. Pass a Method talk 19:02, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
The debate has always, in reality, been about WP:UNDUE: the mere fact that one can find a small number of sources supporting a position does not mean it should be treated as a mainstream view. Rather we go by the balance of reliable sources, weighted according to their relevance and quality. My poition above reflects the fact that Al Karaouine being a university is a position supported by a significant minority of sources, but not one held by sources of the highest quality. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 20:12, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
The definition of a high-quality source is usually linked to (a) whether it has a notable publisher (b) whether the author is relialbe. the sources i checked seem to meet those criteria. Pass a Method talk 20:53, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Don't forget WP:CONTEXTMATTERS. The two sources being discussed here may be reliable sources for the impact of the Robbins Report on UK universities and the history of the AAPS respectively; this does not make them reliable sources for the early history of universities. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 21:15, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Al-Karaouine was a madrasa, not a university

What is a madrasa?

Encyclopaedia of Islam

Madrasa, in modern usage, the name of an institution of learning where the Islamic sciences are taught, i.e. a college for higher studies, as opposed to an elementary school of traditional type (kuttab); in mediaeval usage, essentially a college of law in which the other Islamic sciences, including literary and philosophical ones, were ancillary subjects only. (Pedersen, J.; Rahman, Munibur; Hillenbrand, R.: "Madrasa", in Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd edition, Brill, 2010)


Lexikon des Mittelalters

Madrasa (Medresse), im klassischen Islam gildenartige Institution der höheren Bildung, eine Weiterentwicklung der masǧid ("Moschee") und der ihr angeschlossenen Herberge (ḫān). Der Unterricht fand in der Moschee statt, während die Herberge den Studenten als Unterkunft diente...Nur eine Bildungsstätte wie die Madrasa konnte in der islamischen Welt den Doktorgrad verleihen, denn die wohltätige Stiftung (waqf) war im Islam, der im Unterschied zur christlichen Welt das Rechtskonzept der "juristischen Person" nicht kannte, die einzige Institution, die, rechtlich gesehen, von "überpersönlicher" Dauer war. Dies ist der eigentliche Grund, warum es in der muslimischen Welt bis zum 19. Jh. nicht zur Gründung von Universitäten kam. (Lexikon des Mittelalters: "Madrasa", Vol. 6, Cols 65–67, Metzler, Stuttgart, [1977]–1999)


Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia

A madrasa is a college of Islamic law. The madrasa was an educational institution in which Islamic law (fiqh) was taught according to one or more Sunni rites: Maliki, Shafi'i, Hanafi, or Hanbali. It was supported by an endowment or charitable trust (waqf) that provided for at least one chair for one professor of law, income for other faculty or staff, scholarships for students, and funds for the maintenance of the building. Madrasas contained lodgings for the professor and some of his students. Subjects other than law were frequently taught in madrasas, and even Sufi seances were held in them, but there could be no madrasa without law as technically the major subject. (Meri, Josef W. (ed.): Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, A–K, Routledge, 2006, ISBN 978-0-415-96691-7, p. 457 (entry "madrasa"))


Encyclopædia Britannica

madrasah, (Arabic: "school":) Turkish Medrese, in Muslim countries, an institution of higher education. The madrasah functioned until the 20th century as a theological seminary and law school, with a curriculum centred on the Qurʾān. In addition to Islamic theology and law, Arabic grammar and literature, mathematics, logic, and, in some cases, natural science were studied in madrasahs. (Encyclopædia Britannica: "madrasah", 2012, retrieved 31 July 2012)


Madrasas had no institutional structure, no curriculum, no regular examination and no system of degrees

Berkey, Jonathan P.

Over the course of the Islamic Middle Period (1000–1500), these madrasas became typical features of the urban landscapes of Near Eastern and central and southwest Asian cities, and their proliferation was one of the seminal features of medieval Islamic religious life. Even so, the institutions themselves seem to have had little or no impact on the character or the processes of the transmission of knowledge. For all that the transmission of knowledge might take place within an institution labeled a madrasa, and be supported by the endowments attached to that institution, the principles that guided the activities of teachers and students, and the standards by which they were judged, remained personal and informal, as they had been in earlier centuries before the appearance of the madrasa. No medieval madrasa had anything approaching a set curriculum, and no system of degrees was ever established. Indeed, medieval Muslims themselves seem to have been remarkably uninterested in where an individual studied. The only thing that mattered was with whom one had studied, a qualification certified not by an institutional degree but by a personal license (ijaza) issued by a teacher to his pupil. Whether lessons took place in a new madrasa, or in an older mosque, or for that matter in someone's living room, was a matter of supreme indifference. No institutional structure, no curriculum, no regular examinations, nothing approaching a formal hierachy of degrees: the system of transmitting knowledge, such as it was, remained throughout the medieval period fundamentally personal and informal, and consequently, in many ways, flexible and inclusive. (Berkey, Jonathan P.: Madrasas Medieval and Modern: Politics, Education, and the Problem of Muslim Identity, in Hefner, Robert W.; Qasim Zaman, Muhammad (eds.): Schooling Islam: The Culture and Politics of Modern Muslim Education, Princeton Studies in Muslim Politics, Princeton University Press, 2007, ISBN 978-0-691-12933-4, p. 43)


Al-Karaouine was founded or run as a madrasa, mosque school or mosque, not a university

Lulat, Y. G.-M

In Africa...places that came to be regarded as centers of learning with an extensive higher education system teaching both Islamic and foreign sciences were of course few; they included: Cairo (which boasts the famous al-Azhar University that was founded as a madrasah in 969); Fez in Morocco (the modern-day Qarawiyyin University in Fez began its life as a madrasah in 859);... ...As for the nature of its curriculum, it was typical of other major madrasahs such as al-Azhar and al-Qarawiyyin, though many of the texts used at the institution came from Muslim Spain...Al-Qarawiyyin began its life as a small mosque constructed in 859 C.E. by means of an endowment bequeathed by a wealthy woman of much piety, Fatima bint Muhammed al-Fahri. (Lulat, Y. G.-M.: A History Of African Higher Education From Antiquity To The Present: A Critical Synthesis, Greenwood Publishing Group, 2005, ISBN 978-0-313-32061-3, p. 69-70)


Al-Karaouine was transformed only in modern times into a university.

Shillington, Kevin

Higher education has always been an integral part of Morocco, going back to the ninth century when the Karaouine Mosque was established. The mosque school, known today as Al Qayrawaniyan University, became part of the state university system in 1947. (Shillington, Kevin: Encyclopedia of African history, Vol. 2, Fitzroy Dearborn, 2005, ISBN 978-1-57958-245-6, p. 1025)


Belhachmi, Zakia

The Adjustments of Original Institutions of the Higher Learning: the Madrasah. Significantly, the institutional adjustments of the madrasahs affected both the structure and the content of these institutions. In terms of structure, the adjustments were twofold: the reorganization of the available original madaris, and the creation of new institutions. This resulted in two different types of Islamic teaching institutions in al-Maghrib. The first type was derived from the fusion of old madaris with new universities. For example, Morocco transformed Al-Qarawiyin (859 A.D.) into a university under the supervision of the ministry of education in 1963. (Belhachmi, Zakia: "Gender, Education, and Feminist Knowledge in al-Maghrib (North Africa) – 1950–70", Journal of Middle Eastern and North African Intellectual and Cultural Studies, Vol. 2–3, 2003, pp. 55–82 (65))


Historical Dictionary of Morocco

al-qarawiyin is the oldest university in Morocco. It was founded as a mosque in Fès in the middle of the ninth century. It has been a destination for students and scholars of Islamic sciences and Arabic studies throughout the history of Morocco. There were also other religious schools like the madras of ibn yusuf and other schools in the sus. This system of basic education called al-ta'lim al-aSil was funded by the sultans of Morocco and many famous traditional families. After independence, al-qarawiyin maintained its reputation, but it seemed important to transform it into a university that would prepare graduates for a modern country while maintaining an emphasis on Islamic studies. Hence, al-qarawiyin university was founded in February 1963 and, while the dean's residence was kept in Fès, the new university initially had four colleges located in major regions of the country known for their religious influences and madrasas. These colleges were kuliyat al-shari's in Fès, kuliyat uSul al-din in Tétouan, kuliyat al-lugha al-'arabiya in Marrakech (all founded in 1963), and kuliyat al-shari'a in Ait Melloul near Agadir, which was founded in 1979. muHammad al-khamis was the first modern university in Morocco and was founded after independence in 1957 initially under the name of Rabat University. It took over many higher education institutions created during the protectorate. (Park, Thomas K.; Boum, Aomar: Historical Dictionary of Morocco, 2nd ed., Scarecrow Press, 2006, ISBN 978-0-8108-5341-6, p. 348)


Al-Karaouine was not among the first madrasas, therefore it cannot have been the first university, even if one considers a madrasa a university

Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia

The first madrasas appeared during the late tenth century in the eastern Islamic world. By the early eleventh century, there were several in Nishapur. The Seljuk vizier Nizam al-Mulk (1064–1092) greatly promoted their spread. He founded the renowned Nizamiyya Madrasa in Baghdad in 1065 for the Shafi'is and proceeded to establish similar colleges in other cities of the Seljuk Empire. His primary objective was to use this institution to strengthen Sunnism against Shi'ism and to gain influence over the religious class. Madrasas rapidly spread from east to west. (Meri, Josef W. (ed.): Medieval Islamic Civilization: An Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, A–K, Routledge, 2006, ISBN 978-0-415-96691-7, p. 457 (entry "madrasa"))


Berkey, Jonathan P.

Before the emergence of the madrasa as a distinctive educational forum in the eleventh century, the transmission of Muslim knowledge was not tied to any institutional structure. Most education probably took place in mosques, as students gathered with respected scholars in informal teaching circles to recite texts and discuss the issues which they addressed...Beginning in the eleventh century, Muslims began to establish institutions specifically created and endowed to support the transmission of religious knowledge, and over the ensuing centuries the madrasa and its cognate institutions became one of the most common features of premodern cities...A madrasa established in Baghdad in the late eleventh century by Nizam al-Mulk, the Persian vizier to the Saljuq sultans, is often today mentioned as the archetypal madrasa, although in fact the institution probably developed earlier in Khurasan in eastern Iran. (Berkey, Jonathan P.: Madrasas Medieval and Modern: Politics, Education, and the Problem of Muslim Identity, in Hefner, Robert W.; Qasim Zaman, Muhammad (eds.): Schooling Islam: The Culture and Politics of Modern Muslim Education, Princeton Studies in Muslim Politics, Princeton University Press, 2007, ISBN 978-0-691-12933-4, p. 42f.)


Your own research is nice and all, but Wikipedia is based on references. Karouine being listed as the oldest university in the world by UNESCO means something. Instead of delving into your own definition of what a madrassa is (here's a hint, its an institute of higher education), we should be relying on what is commonly accepted as the oldest university Khateeb88 (talk) 03:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Expert historians and specialized encyclopedias

The medieval Christian origin of the university

Walter Rüegg

The university is a European institution; indeed, it is the European institution par excellence. There are various reasons for this assertion. As a community of teachers and taught, accorded certain rights, such as administrative autonomy and the determination and realization of curricula (courses of study) and of the objectives of research as well as the award of publicly recognized degrees, it is a creation of medieval Europe, which was the Europe of papal Christianity...

No other European institution has spread over the entire world in the way in which the traditional form of the European university has done. The degrees awarded by European universities – the bachelor's degree, the licentiate, the master's degree, and the doctorate – have been adopted in the most diverse societies throughout the world. The four medieval faculties of artes – variously called philosophy, letters, arts, arts and sciences, and humanities –, law, medicine, and theology have survived and have been supplemented by numerous disciplines, particularly the social sciences and technological studies, but they remain none the less at the heart of universities throughout the world.

Even the name of the universitas, which in the Middle Ages was applied to corporate bodies of the most diverse sorts and was accordingly applied to the corporate organization of teachers and students, has in the course of centuries been given a more particular focus: the university, as a universitas litterarum, has since the eighteenth century been the intellectual institution which cultivates and transmits the entire corpus of methodically studied intellectual disciplines. (Rüegg, Walter: "Foreword. The University as a European Institution", in: Ridder-Symoens, Hilde de (ed.): A History of the University in Europe. Vol. I: Universities in the Middle Ages, Cambridge University Press, 1992, ISBN 0-521-36105-2, pp. XIX–XX)


Jacques Verger

No one today would dispute the fact that universities, in the sense in which the term is now generally understood, were a creation of the Middle Ages, appearing for the first time between the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. It is no doubt true that other civilizations, prior to, or wholly alien to, the medieval West, such as the Roman Empire, Byzantium, Islam, or China, were familiar with forms of higher education which a number of historians, for the sake of convenience, have sometimes described as universities.Yet a closer look makes it plain that the institutional reality was altogether different and, no matter what has been said on the subject, there is no real link such as would justify us in associating them with medieval universities in the West. Until there is definite proof to the contrary, these latter must be regarded as the sole source of the model which gradually spread through the whole of Europe and then to the whole world. We are therefore concerned with what is indisputably an original institution, which can only be defined in terms of a historical analysis of its emergence and its mode of operation in concrete circumstances. (Verger, Jacques: "Patterns", in: Ridder-Symoens, Hilde de (ed.): A History of the University in Europe. Vol. I: Universities in the Middle Ages, Cambridge University Press, 2003, ISBN 978-0-521-54113-8, pp. 35–76 (35))


The Heritage of European Universities

In many respects, if there is any institution that Europe can most justifiably claim as one of its inventions, it is the university. As proof thereof and without wishing here to recount the whole history of the birth of universities, it will suffice to describe briefly how the invention of universities took the form of a polycentric process of specifically European origin. (Sanz, Nuria; Bergan, Sjur (eds.): The Heritage of European Universities, Council of Europe, 2002, ISBN 978-92-871-4960-2, p. 119)


Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages

The university came into being in the 12th century. On a general level, it was certainly a manifestation of the great transformations that characterised European society during the centuries following the year 1000. The debate begins when we seek to fix its origin more precisely: was the university an evolution of the 11th- and 12th-c. cathedral schools or, on the contrary, of lay municipal schools (of grammar, notariate, law)? Did it have antecedents in the higher legal schools of late Roman Antiquity? Does it show analogies with the teaching institutions of the Islamic world? In reality, the university was an original creation of the central centuries of the Middle Ages, both from the point of view of its organisation and from the cultural point of view, notwithstanding what it owed, in the latter aspect, to the cathedral schools (especially for philosophy and theology). (Vauchez, André; Dobson, Richard Barrie; Lapidge, Michael (eds.): Encyclopedia of the Middle Ages, Vol. 1, Routledge, 2000, ISBN 978-1-57958-282-1, p. 1484 (entry "university"))


Thomas Bender

The origin and persistence of the university, Professor J. K. Hyde reminds us, is a remarkable fact. Within a decade of the year 1200, universities were created, apparently independently, at Bologna, Paris, and Oxford. There have been important changes in the subsequent eight centuries of the European university's history, most notably the incorporation of the research ideal and the adoption of a bureaucratic style. Yet no one can mistake the institutional continuity. No institution in the West, save the Roman Catholic church, has persisted longer. From small medieval beginnings this institution has become diffused throughout the world, assuming everywhere principal responsibility for advanced teaching and, more often than not, research. (Bender, Thomas: "Introduction", in: Bender, Thomas (ed.): The University and the City. From Medieval Origins to the Present, Oxford University Press, New York, 1988, ISBN 0-19-505273-0, pp. 3-10 (4))


John Kenneth Hyde

But I want to begin by phrasing a very extraordinary state of affairs: the university as we know it today spread to all the continents in the modern world in which the great majority of research and teaching in the higher faculties still continues. They all go back to three prototypes: Oxford, Paris, and Bologna. And they go back to a particular moment in the West, within a decade or so on either side of the year 1200. The statement that all universities are descended either directly or by migration or are descended by imitation from those three prototypes depends, of course, on one's definition of a university. And I must define a university very strictly here. A university is something more than a center of higher education and study. One must reserve the term university for—and I'm quoting Rashdall here—"a scholastic guild, whether of masters or students engaged in higher education and study," which was later defined, after the emergence of the universities, as studium generale. (Hyde, J. K.: "Universities and Cities in Medieval Italy", in: Bender, Thomas (ed.): The University and the City. From Medieval Origins to the Present, Oxford University Press, New York, 1988, ISBN 0-19-505273-0, pp. 13-21 (13f.))


The difference(s) between the university and the madrasa

George Makdisi

In studying an institution which is foreign and remote in point of time, as is the case of the medieval madrasa, one runs the double risk of attributing to it characteristics borrowed from one's own institutions and one's own times. Thus gratuitous transfers may be made from one culture to the other, and the time factor may be ignored or dismissed as being without significance. One cannot therefore be too careful in attempting a comparative study of these two institutions: the madrasa and the university. But in spite of the pitfalls inherent in such a study, albeit sketchy, the results which may be obtained are well worth the risks involved. In any case, one cannot avoid making comparisons when certain unwarranted statements have already been made and seem to be currently accepted without question. The most unwarranted of these statements is the one which makes of the "madrasa" a "university".

In the following remarks, it will be seen that the madrasa and the university were the result of two different sets of social, political and religious factors. When speaking of these two institutions, unless otherwise stated, my remarks will refer, for the most part, to the eleventh century in Baghdad and the thirteenth century in Paris. These are the centuries given for the development of these institutions in the Muslim East and the Christian West, respectively.

Universitas, the term which eventually came to be used synonymously with studium generale, and to designate what we now know as the university, originally meant nothing more than a community, guild or corporation. It was a corporation of masters, or students, or both...The madrasa, unlike the university, was a building, not a community. It was one among many such institutions in the same city, each independent of the other, each with its own endowment.

In the West the scholars of the University were ecclesiastics, people of the Church...Now, whereas the popes were the ultimate guardians of orthodoxy in the Christian hierarchy, in Islam which lacked a religious hierarchy, it was the ulama, or religious scholars, themselves, who ultimately had to see to the preservation and propagation of orthodox truth.

Centralization in medieval European cities, and decentralization in those of medieval Islam–such was the situation in the institutions of learning on both sides of the Mediterranean. Paris was a city with one university; Baghdad, on the other hand, had a great number of institutions of learning. In Paris organized faculties were brought into a single system resting on a hierarchical basis; in Baghdad, one leading scholar (and others of subordinate positions) taught in one of the many institutions, each institution independent of the other, with its own charter, and its own endowment. Here we have another essential difference between the two institutional systems: hierarchical and organized in medieval Europe, individualistic and personalized in medieval Islam.

Perhaps the most fundamental difference between the two systems is embodied in their systems of certification; namely, in medieval Europe, the licentia docendi, or license to teach; in medieval Islam, the ijaza, or authorization. In Europe, the license to teach was a license to teach a certain field of knowledge. It was conferred by the licensed masters acting as a corporation, with the consent of a Church authority, in Paris, by the Chancellor of the Cathedral Chapter...Certification in the Muslim East remained a personal matter between the master and the student. The master conferred it on an individual for a particular work, or works.

Before the advent of the licentia docendi, the conditions for teaching were much the same in medieval Europe and in the Muslim world...But Europe developed the license to teach, and with its development came the parting of the ways between East and West in institutionalized higher education...The license to teach in medieval Europe brought with it fixed curricula, fixed periods of study and examinations. Whereas the ijaza in Islam kept things on a more fluid, a more individualistic and personal basis.

There is another fundamental reason why the university, as it developed in Europe, did not develop in the Muslim East. This reason is to be found in the very nature of the corporation. Corporations, as a form of social organization, had already developed in Europe. Their legal basis was to be found in Roman Law which recognized juristic persons. Islamic law, on the other hand, does not recognize juristic persons.

Thus the university, as a form of social organization, was peculiar to medieval Europe. Later, it was exported to all parts of the world, including the Muslim East; and it has remained with us down to the present day. But back in the Middle Ages, outside of Europe, there was nothing anything quite like it anywhere. (Makdisi, George: "Madrasa and University in the Middle Ages", Studia Islamica, No. 32 (1970), pp. 255–264


The first universities all in medieval Europe

Ferruolo, Stephen C.

Given how the university came to be defined, the decisive step in its development came when masters and scholars of various subjects and with diverse professional objectives first joined together to form a single guild or community. It was in Paris that the earliest such corporation was formed. Although in other respects the city's schools developed more slowly than those of Bologna, Paris can, in this definitive sense, be regarded as the location of the first university. (Ferruolo, Stephen C.: The Origins of the University: The Schools of Paris and Their Critics, 1100–1215, Stanford University Press, 1985, ISBN 978-0-8047-1266-8, p. 5)


Encyclopædia Britannica

The modern university evolved from the medieval schools known as studia generalia; they were generally recognized places of study open to students from all parts of Europe. The earliest studia arose out of efforts to educate clerks and monks beyond the level of the cathedral and monastic schools...The earliest Western institution that can be called a university was a famous medical school that arose at Salerno, Italy, in the 9th century and drew students from all over Europe. It remained merely a medical school, however. The first true university was founded at Bologna late in the 11th century. It became a widely respected school of canon and civil law. The first university to arise in northern Europe was the University of Paris, founded between 1150 and 1170. (Encyclopædia Britannica: "University", 2012, retrieved 26 July 2012)


Catholic Encyclopedia

Although the name university is sometimes given to the celebrated schools of Athens and Alexandria, it is generally held that the universities first arose in the Middle Ages. (Pace, Edward: "Universities", The Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 15, Robert Appleton Company, New York, 1912, retrieved 27 July 2012)


Lexikon des Mittelalters

Die ältesten Universitäten waren Bologna und Paris. Sie müssen sich vor 1200 konstituiert haben, wenn auch die ältesten erhaltenen Statuten erst später erlassen wurden (Paris 1215, Bologna 1252) und beide Universitäten erst um die Mitte des 13. Jh. ihre volle institutionelle Ausprägung erfuhren. Auf ein fast ebenso hohes Alter blicken Oxford, Cambridge und Montpellier (Medizin) zurück; sie entstanden vor 1220. Im Laufe des 13. Jh. traten etwa zehn weitere Universitäten hervor, alle im südlichen Europa: Einige kleinere italienische Zentren (Reggio, Vicenza, Vercelli, Arezzo usw.), gleichsam »Sekundärgründungen« des weitausstrahlenden Bologna, blieben kurzlebig, dagegen konnten Padua (1222) und Neapel (1224) nach schwierigen Anfängen einen Aufwärtstrend verzeichnen; in Südfrankreich entwickelten sich die in Toulouse nach dem Albigenserkreuzzug von 1229 gegründeten Schulen ab 1234 zu einer echten Universität, der etwas später die Rechtsuniversität von Montpellier (1289) und die Universität Avignon (1303) zur Seite traten. Die Universitäten der Iberischen Halbinsel waren sämtlich königliche Stiftungen, die später vom Papsttum bestätigt wurden; neben einigen Fehlgründungen sind die Universitäten von Salamanca (1218), Lissabon (1288; bereits im 14. Jh. zeitweise nach Coimbra verlegt) und Lérida (1300) als gleichsam "nationale" Hochschulen der drei führenden Reiche Kastilien, Portugal und Aragón zu nennen. Diese Universitäten, bei deren Gründung das Vorhandensein einer entsprechenden Anzahl von Magistern und Studenten sowie die Intervention der kirchlichen (Toulouse) oder monarchischen (Neapel, Salamanca, Lissabon) Institutionen die entscheidendende Voraussetzung war, erlangten längst nicht die Bedeutung der Universitäten der ersten Generation. (Lexikon des Mittelalters: "Universität. Die Anfänge", Vol. 8, Cols 1249–1250, Metzler, Stuttgart, [1977]–1999)


Brill's New Pauly

The first universities appeared around 1200. They traced their own origins to ancient roots. Paris, for instance, in the 13th cent. portrayed itself as founded by Charlemagne and hence as the final station of a translatio studii founded in Athens and transmitted via Rome...In reality, the mediaeval universities as institutions enjoyed no form of continuity with the public academies of Late Antiquity...The early universities as institutions were not clearly legally defined, and had no consistent, comprehensive bureaucratic structure. They emerged from collective confraternities at a place of study. Teachers and students would join together in corporate groups (universitas magistrorum et scholarium, as at Paris before 1200, and at Oxford and Montpellier before 1220) or, indeed, students alone (universitas scholarium, as at Bologna before 1200). Sometimes universities resulted from secessions from these first foundations (as at Cambridge from the University of Oxford before 1220, at Padua from the University of Bologna in 1222). Retrospectively at least, however, the foundation and its legal privileges (protection, autonomy, financial basis, universal licence to teach – licentia ubique docendi) had to be confirmed by a universal power, either by the pope or, more rarely, the emperor. Only then did an institution attain the true status of a studium generale. (Brill's New Pauly: "University", Brill, 2012)


Dictionary of the Middle Ages

Archetypes of Universities: Paris, Bologna. The structural evolution of universities of later foundation depended on the model originally adopted following either the magisterial archetype of Paris or the student-university type of Bologna. (Dictionary of the Middle Ages: "Universities", Vol. 12, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, 1989, pp. 282–300 (283))

The Modern Home University
According to The History of Mankind: Today & Yesterday, the first University, globally, was in-fact the University of Salerno. (Barker, E. & Woodward, R.J., 1935, p.127, ll.11-12)
Barker, E. & Woodward, R.J. et allia (1935) Today & Yesterday: The History of Mankind, Odhams Press, London, p.127, ll.11-12. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anglyn (talk • contribs) 21:02, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Mexico

Should not be Mexico in North America? --83.55.105.219 (talk) 00:29, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

See Americas (terminology) for a discussion of this point. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok, I did. Latin America and the Caribbean is a cultural region rather than a geographical one. So maybe Asia should be splitted too into cultural regions. And the same for Africa.--83.55.105.242 (talk) 17:49, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Why isn't Paris (Sorbonne)in the Founded before 1500 list?

Why isn't Paris (Sorbonne)in the Founded before 1500 list? Several universities in the list say they are based upon it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.158.211.236 (talk • contribs)

Because the name of the article is "List of oldest universities in continuous operation", and the University of Paris didn't operate between 1793 and 1896, so it hasn't been in continuous operation since it was founded. Thomas.W talk 19:13, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes; this is discussed in the opening paragraph. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 20:01, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Systemic bias II

"Another key institution in the Muslim world was the Al-Karouine University at Fes in Morocco. Established in 859, this lays claim today to be the oldest surviving university in the world."

Source: Feingold, edited by Mordechai (2013). "The origins of higher learning: time for a new historiography?". History of Universities: Volume XXVII/1. Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 12. ISBN 0199685843. {{cite book}}: |first1= has generic name (help)

-A1candidate (talk) 02:27, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

As explained repeatedly this list of universities follows the definition of university found at University, and the proper place to debate changes in the definition is Talk:University not here. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 09:58, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
As explained previously, this institution granted academic degrees and meets the definition of a university. -A1candidate (talk) 10:50, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
As explained previously it does not meet the definition of a university at University and this discussion belongs there not here. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 11:58, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Read the talk page archives carefully and come back once you're done. -A1candidate (talk) 14:17, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
There's no need to go through the archives, just read the top sections of this page. Madrasahs were and are not universities. Thomas.W talk 14:24, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
As explained previously, this institution granted academic degrees according to what Lexikon des Mittelalters says at the top section of this page. -A1candidate (talk) 14:29, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
As explained previously it does not meet the definition of a university at University and this discussion belongs there not here. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 14:55, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Nobody is proposing for a change in the definition of a university, because the institution fully meets the criteria as explained previously. Read the talk page archives carefully and come back once you're done. -A1candidate (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
It doesn't become true just because you repeat it over and over again. It does not meet the full criteria. A university is a corporation with a set curriculum granting degrees to a set standard, degrees that are recognized by all other similar institutions. Nothing of which is true for Islamic institutions of higher learning, until modern times. Islamic institutions of higher learning were not corporations, had no set curriculum, and did not grant degrees to a set standard. Whatever degrees were granted were granted by an individual teacher, at his whim and to whatever standards he chose. Thomas.W talk 15:19, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
A university is an institution of higher education and that grants academic degrees. This is not the place to change its definition. -A1candidate (talk) 15:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm not changing the definition, what I wrote is still the definition of a university, as you would have known if you had bothered to read what the article (University) says. All university degrees are granted by the university, whether it's formally called a corporation or not, and not by individual professors, are to a set standard and are guaranteed by the university (which for example means that if you get a BA from one university you can then switch to another university to get an MA there). Unlike degrees from Islamic institutions of higher learning which were granted by an individual teacher, at his whim and to his standard, not guaranteed by the school, and only worth as much as the reputation of the individual teacher you got your degree from. Thomas.W talk 16:01, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
From university: "For non-related educational institutions of antiquity which did not stand in the tradition of the university and to which the term is only loosely and retrospectively applied, see ancient higher-learning institutions". Jonathan A Jones (talk) 16:02, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
And unsurprisingly, there's no mention of Madrasahs within the main body of ancient higher-learning institutions because they do not belong to that page -A1candidate (talk) 16:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Nor do they belong here. But try List of the oldest madrasahs in continuous operation in the Muslim world. Thomas.W talk 16:59, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
They are specifically mentioned in the lead: "A variety of ancient higher-learning institutions were developed in many cultures to provide institutional frameworks for scholarly activities. These ancient centres were sponsored and overseen by courts; by religious institutions, which sponsored cathedral schools, monastic schools, and madrasas; by scientific institutions, such as museums, hospitals, and observatories; and by individual scholars. They are to be distinguished from the Western-style university which is an autonomous organization of scholars that originated in medieval Europe[1] and was adopted in other world regions since the onset of modern times (see list of oldest universities in continuous operation).[2]" Jonathan A Jones (talk) 17:21, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Attempt to compromise

Since there's no consensus to include Al-Karaouine in the list, I propose the following changes as a compromise:

What the last paragraph in the lede currently says

Other institutions of higher learning, like those of ancient Greece, ancient Persia, ancient Rome, Byzantium, ancient China, ancient India and the Muslim world, are not included in this list due to their cultural, historical, structural and juristic dissimilarities from the medieval European university from which the modern university evolved.

How the last paragraph may look like

Other ancient institutions of higher learning, most notably the University of al-Qarawiyyin, are considered by some scholars to be the oldest existing universities, (Reference above) but they are not included in this list due to their cultural, historical, structural and juristic dissimilarities from the medieval European university from which the modern university evolved.

Rationale

As discussed previously, this is a very controversial issue in the academic community and the status of the University of al-Qarawiyyin, in particular, has been debated repeatedly over the course of several years. If we do not include it in the list, I think it is only fair to explicitly explain why in the lede section, just like how we do it for the universities of Paris, Salerno, and Montpellier.

I hope this compromise is acceptable and I strongly believe it will prevent a lot of unnecessary discussions and edit-wars in the future. This is obviously not a final proposal, but if we do accept a similar version of it that explicitly names the University of al-Qarawiyyin in the last paragraph without including it in the actual list, it will save a lot of our time and energy. -A1candidate (talk) 18:54, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Nope. There's no reason to mention a school by name, no matter which school, if it doesn't qualify for inclusion in the list. This list is for schools that qualify as universities by the standard definition of such, not schools that don't qualify. Thomas.W talk 19:09, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
So up to detailed discussion of a suitable text the two of us are in agreement. As you will recall the previous attempt to implement this position did not end particularly well, but I think it's worth making another attempt at obtaining consensus on something like this. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 21:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I see that the essence of that edit still survives as note 2, and has been there for some time, so the principle of it appearing in some form seems to be widely accepted. Is there any opposition to replacing this note by restoring the original form (see my edit above) to the main text? Jonathan A Jones (talk) 16:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
@A1candidate: Yes there is a logical reason to mention Paris but not mention Al-Karaouine: Paris meets the definition of a university, and was recognised as such during the 12th and 13th centuries, but Al-Karaouine doesn't, and wasn't. That's why Paris should be mentioned, but not Al-Karaouine. Thomas.W talk 16:54, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
That's not quite right. Al-Karaouine, is a university, but like Paris doesn't meet the criteria for inclusion in the main lists. In the case of Paris this is because it has not been in continuous operation, in particular (1) it was closed for a long period along with all French Universities, and (2) it has now been split up into many daughter institutions, no one of which has a good claim to be THE successor. In the case of Al-Karaouine this is because, despite the antiquity of its foundation, it only became a university in 1963. So why do we mention Paris outside the lists? Because its role in the history of universities is so central that it is discussed extensively in histories of the university, and as a conseqeunece many readers will expect to see it included. For similar reasons we should include Al-Karaouine: it is described by a small number of non-expert but widely read reliable sources as the oldest university in continuous operation, and so many readers will expect it to be included. Explaining why we don't include it is simply the obvious thing to do, and I am at a complete loss as to why this is not accepted more widely. We should not say that it is the oldest university in continuous operation, because it isn't, but we should explain why it is occasionally mistaken for the oldest university in continuous operation.
Currently we do, in fact, explain all this, but for reasons I have never understood we explain it in a note, where almost nobody will read it, rather than in the main text, where it might actually be useful. Very odd. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 19:40, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Fully agree. I was told that the oldest university in the world was founded in 800something in Marocco, which puzzled me, so I looked up this page here, just to find that Al-Karaouine not to be mentioned anywhere. Apparently I'm not the only one, as mentioning Al-Karaiouine to be the oldest university in the world seems to be somewhat common in the media (I'm not arguing here whether it actually is the oldest university or whether it isn't!).
The focus of Wikipedia work should be the reader, not the rules. Please take into account what the reader expects, and quite a number of readers would expect Al-Karaouine to be mentioned. --Wutzofant (✉✍) 00:01, 28 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2014

The Oldest University in Africa is the University established at the Cape of good hope University of Cape Town - 1829 Stellenbosch University - 1866 Witwaterstrand University - 1896 Rhodes University - 1904 University of Pretoria 1908 BuntuMajaja (talk) 15:08, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

The information on the first two universities is already included, and no reason is given to add the remainder. If you are still unhappy please specify the precise edit you want made. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 15:27, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

ordering standard

Should the Universities ordered by the date of their foundation or the date when they received royal charter? I guees it should not be ordered by the date the respective universities consider to be their anniversary since they could use different standards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Migueldvb (talk • contribs) 16:42, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

With the very old universities it is quite tricky to come up with a simple definition of foundation date, and in the end it comes down to some sort of judgement. As you suggest using dates of royal or papal charters doesn't make sense when several of these universities were founded before the concept of charters. (Indeed I believe charters were introduced mostly to regulate the growing university sector, bringing it under the control of Church and Crown.) Charters also lead to some obviously ridiculous results: for example Cambridge got a charter before Oxford, although Cambridge was founded by scholars leaving Oxford!
The "traditional" dates used on this page have varied over the years, and shouldn't be treated as absolutely fixed. Oxford started off as being founded in 1096 and then wandered around before ending up at its current date of 1167. I think Salamanca has been fixed at 1218 for a while. Cambridge is easy, as we just use the well established official date of 1209. Should Salamanca be moved forwards? Possibly, but that depends on whether it really was a university in 1134, or just a place where teaching took place, which is all Oxford was in 1096. Salamanca itself seems to use 1218 [3], which is some sort of grounds for leaving the date where it is for the moment. Padua is another case which is very complicated! Jonathan A Jones (talk) 20:33, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Inconsistent political references

The combined use of the Holy Roman Empire and the Italian city-states as contemporaneous locations is nonsense. Before 1648, all Italian city-states were part of the Empire. So either the Empire should be used as reference for all territories under the imperial crown, or the separate cities, duchies, counties etc. with imperial vassal-status should be used.

University of al-Qarawiyyin not cited?

This wikipage cites said university as the oldest existing and continuously operated uni in the world and yet it doesn't appear? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.21.218.1 (talk) 22:07, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

See the archives of this talk page for extensive discussion of this question. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 07:35, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

University of Paris not in the list?

It is mentioned in the entry for Oxford in the table, with a reference which strongly infers that it is older than Oxford! The page for the University of Paris states: "It was founded in the mid-12th century in Paris, France, officially recognized between 1160 and 1250." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eiamjw (talk • contribs) 14:12, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Probably removed on account of the completely arbitrary "continuous operation" clause in the name of this article. --Saddhiyama (talk) 15:25, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
As far as I can see it was discussed only twice in the entire history of this article, and then only briefly, the first time it was even mentioned that there should be a "List of oldest universities" article, because the arbitrary "continous operation" clause serves no purpose and actually limits the amount of relevant information sought after by many readers of this article. However it seems this alternative list has come to nothing. --Saddhiyama (talk) 17:15, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
It was indeed removed because of the "continuous operation" clause. Note that Paris does appear in the List of medieval universities where no such clause applies (so, for example, the short lived University of Northampton (13th century) appears). Jonathan A Jones (talk) 20:26, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
So you have studied in Oxford? And keep editing out older universities like Al-Azhar and Paris? Funny that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.171.4.126 (talk) 13:46, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
The US Department of Education does not retain the anglocentric outlook of this article in its current state: http://collegestats.org/2009/12/top-10-oldest-universities-in-the-world-ancient-colleges/. They list the old Muslim universities as well as Paris. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.171.4.126 (talk) 13:50, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Al-Mustansariyah University (Baghdad) missing?

Hi, this university (Al-Mustansariyah in Baghdad, Iraq) was founded in the 13th century (1277). Shouldn't it be placed near the top of this list or is there something I'm missing? -Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.181.46.21 (talk) 06:12, 2 December 2014 (UTC)

It was not a university at time of founding, and has not been in continuous operation since then. The current Al-Mustansiriya University appears to date from 1963. Regards, Jonathan A Jones (talk) 07:42, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Got it; thanks!71.181.46.21 (talk) 05:29, 2 February 2015 (UTC)


What about Al Azhar University created in the 10th century?

reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Azhar_University 124.29.207.238 (talk) 06:08, 3 February 2015 (UTC)ZohairRiz

See the extensive discussion of points of this kind in the talk page archives. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 19:01, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Prague and HRE

Charles University of Prague was founded by the King of Bohemia on his own right and by the Pope. But at the point, column in the table is for "contemporary location", not for the founder. In any way, contested universities were in Bohemia or in Italy (Italian city states).--Yopie (talk) 22:18, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Call for Expert Attention

I recently modified the call for expert attention to include experts on the Middle Ages. Since at least 2007 I have been involved in editing Wikipedia articles related to the University. As a graduate student I was trained by William Courtenay and David Lindberg in the familiar tradition that defined the university in terms of its organizational structure, but I am concerned that the definition's focus is Euroocentric. Some time ago I noted at Talk:University#Evolving_definition_of_the_University that the OEDs definition of a university had undergone change, dropping the traditional emphasis on the university as a self governing corporate body. In the ensuing discussion it was pointed out that a change to a dictionary definition wasn't sufficient to change Wikipedia's usage, and the discussion dropped.

I subsequently came across an article in the Oxford series, History of Universities, that raises the same issue in a more scholarly context:

Lowe, Roy; Yasuhara, Yoshihito (2013), "The origins of higher learning: time for a new historiography?", History of Universities, 27 (1), Oxford: Oxford University Press: 1–19.

Lowe and Yasuhara raise some important issues that should be considered here. They propose a historiographical shift that moves from the traditional "accounts which have focused on the institution of the university or on what it was that characterized a university as a functioning organization" to a historical approach that is broadened both geographically and conceptually to include both the knowledge that was developed and disseminated at institutions of higher learning and the many social, cultural, technological, and economic elements that allowed this activity to take place. As I read their essay, it seems to be very much a work in progress at the time it was written (2013) and its influence so far is limited (Google Scholar does not indicate any citations of it). However its appearance is another sign (along with the changing OED definition) that the traditional understanding of the nature of the university, which dates back to Heinrich Denifle in 1885 and Hastings Rashdall in 1893, is facing serious scholarly challenge. Questioning the established definition can no longer be ignored as fringe scholarship. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 20:40, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

I don't think that people havce been suggesting that this point of view is fringe, but simply that it is a minority point of view. The article should be structured around what is still the dominant point of view, while minor points of view sould be mentioned where appropriate. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 10:01, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
The noninstitutional definition of universities seems to be moving from fringe to minority towards mainstream. In the article on universities, we can and should discuss minor points of view, including Lowe and Yasuhara's proposal for a new historiographical interpretation.
The question remains how a list like this should deal with a changing historiographical interpretation that changes the scope of the list. At some point, we'll have to include non-European universities that meet the emerging definition. Where should we set that break point? --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 12:17, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
We already mention the broader issues in the discussion paragraphs as we should, but the list should be structured around the current dominant view. Your "break point" would only occur as and when the noninstitutional definition becomes the major view. If you want more on Lowe and Yashuara's proposal then it belongs at university, not here, and even there it doesn't merit more than a brief mention. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 13:04, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I see absolutely no reason for broadening the definition used in this list, if other forms of educational institutions are to be listed it should be in a separate list article that includes all forms of ancient and mediaeval educational institutions, from ancient greek schools and early mediaeval cathedral schools to madrasahs, and whatever else is deemed worthy of inclusion. We can't just wipe out the traditional definition of a university, which is what we do if we broaden the scope of this article. Thomas.W talk 12:33, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Sindh University (Pakistan)

Why was my edit undone about Sindh University to sub-category of 'Pakistani universities'; without citing the reason for that, either here or on my talk-page? (SarfarazLarkanian 14:44, 27 February 2016 (UTC))

This time I have included citation as well. (SarfarazLarkanian 15:48, 27 February 2016 (UTC))
  • It's not a list of 'all universities, only the oldest/older ones, and considering that there are four universities in Pakistan that were founded during the 19th century the University of Sindh, founded 1947, doesn't qualify for the list. Thomas.W talk 15:52, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
I agree, but brother, do you know that Pakistan as country did not exist in 19th century? It was British India at that time. Upon founding of Pakistan, the new Acts were promulgated to include these universities in the new country by repealing the old Acts. (SarfarazLarkanian 16:13, 27 February 2016 (UTC))
Many of the universities listed were founded before their current countries; there's nothing unusual about that. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 16:33, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
I would say that most of the universities in the list were founded before their current countries were founded, including a large number of very old universities in Europe. Thomas.W talk 16:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Most of those universities listed under 'Pakistan' come from a single province only, out of total four provinces. A balance should be made here - and inclusion of one more from other province should not give an impression of calling it all universities from a country (out of total 170+). In which case, Sindh Madressatul Islam University, Karachi (Sindh, Pakistan) founded in 1885[1] (one of the oldest in South Asia) should be paid a fair and due recognition. Thank you...!(SarfarazLarkanian 10:01, 4 March 2016 (UTC))

References

  1. ^ http://www.smiu.edu.pk/history.php

University of al-Qarawiyyin is the oldest university in the world

The University of al-Qarawiyyin or Al Quaraouiyine (Arabic: جامعة القرويين‎) is a university located in Fes, Morocco. It is the oldest existing, continually operating university in the world according to UNESCO[1] and Guinness World Records[2]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fjouti (talk • contribs) 20:46, March 21, 2016‎

This has been discussed before (here, for instance). The consensus seems to be that University of Al Quaraouiyine was a madrasa for much of its history, not a university in the commonly-accepted sense (in that it grants degrees). Of course, the definition of "university" has itself been a major topic of discussion here, as one can see from browsing the archives. clpo13(talk) 22:53, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/170
  2. ^ http://www.guinnessworldrecords.com/world-records/oldest-university

Semi-protected edit request on 27 April 2016

yoyal should read royal Jpalao1968 (talk) 16:21, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done - thanks for pointing that out

Merge

The stub article European University Foundations should be merged either here or Medieval university.--Bellerophon5685 (talk) 22:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_oldest_universities_in_continuous_operation/Archive_4&oldid=1142341927"