the University, (p. 101)
were so regardless of their oaths as to wear hoods not lined
throughout with fur. Penalties were prescribed for both kinds of
offenders; but though the Oxford undergraduate never succeeded in
annexing the hood, he gradually acquired the _biretta_, which his
successor of to-day is occasionally fined for not wearing. The modern
gown or toga is explained by Dr Rashdall as derived from the robe or
cassock which a medieval Master of Arts wore under his _cappa_.

The disciplinary regulations of fifteenth-and sixteenth-century Oxford
may be paralleled from other universities. At Louvain there was a kind
of proctorial walk undertaken by the University official known as the
Promotor. On receiving three or four hours' notice from the Rector,
the Promotor, with a staff of servants, perambulated the streets at
night, and he and his "bulldogs" received a fine from anyone whom they
apprehended. Offending students caught _in flagrante delicto_ he
conducted to the University prison, and others he reported to the
Rector. "Notabiles personae" might be incarcerated in a monastery
incorporated with the University. Arms found upon anyone were
forfeited. The Promotor was also the University gaoler, and was
responsible for the safe custody of prisoners, and he might place in
fetters dangerous prisoners or men accused of serious crimes. (p. 102)
Interviews with captives had to take place in his presence; male
visitors had to give up their knives or other weapons before being
admitted, and female visitors had to leave their cloaks behind them.
Students were forbidden to walk in the streets at night after the bell
of St Michael's Church had been rung at nine o'clock in winter, and
ten o'clock in summer, unless they were accompanied by a doctor or a
"gravis persona" and were bearing a torch or lantern. The list of
offences at Louvain are much the same as elsewhere, but an
eighteenth-century code of statutes specially prohibits bathing and
skating. The laws against borrowing and lending were unusually strict,
and no student under twenty-five years was allowed to sell books
without the consent of his regent, the penalty for a sixteenth-century
student in Arts being a public flogging in his own college.

At Leipsic, the University was generally responsible for the
discipline, sometimes even when the offences had been committed in the
colleges; and a record of the proceedings of the Rector's Court from
1524 to 1588,