In 1379 New College built a cesspit of such epic proportions that it took 300 years worth of students’ waste to fill it. Yet since then the history of Oxford’s sewage has been less… well, just less. Despite the eminent men and women who have frequented Oxford’s facilities over the years, the toilet has not even a footnote in the twisted and tangled history of the town.

Oxford’s toilets have served as humble thrones, not only for the cream of British academia, but also for royalty. Yet many a blue plaque adorns the places where Charles I must have relieved himself or where Queen Victoria was probably unamused. Indeed, the toilet which was most recently marked out for royal buttocks, a nice little cubicle done up by Univ in 2004 in preparation for a visit from the Queen and labeled the ‘Queen’s toilet’ (apparently we don’t go in for subtlety much round here), is a rather unassuming specimen. It now serves as the vomiting hole for victims of that ever salubrious game, Edward Ciderhands. It seems that, as the most accessible from the quad, it is also the one easiest to stumble into. Certainly a proud legacy.

Perhaps it is unsurprising that Oxford’s toilets are so unsung. What have they really got to recommend them? They’re not old and charming like the buildings, since, let’s be honest, wood panelled plumbing to go along with your wood panelled room would seriously damage its retail value. So what we are stuck with is the bog standard. No-one has to muck out 300 years’ worth of waste anymore, but no-one’s writing home about it either. Has the flush stopped our toilets from leaving their mark in the history books? Or maybe it’s just that there’s no academic eccentric enough to dedicate their life to researching latrines when, let’s face it, bar the odd over-proportioned one, they’re all pretty much the same.

But hang on a moment. Why on earth should toilets have any recognition? They’re not exactly novel, they serve a universal and timeless purpose. In fact, they’re not all that interesting; they have a prescribed function and appearance and aside from the odd death from dysentery, illicit and tawdry meeting, or accidental drug overdose, what of interest could happen behind these closed doors?

But let’s not digress. This is about toilets, not sex and drugs. I’ve even managed too avoid shit jokes, so no lowering the tone now. Perhaps the odd scandal does occur in Oxford’s toilets; certainly gossip is recorded there, thanks to the all knowing bog sheet. Even this, however, is a dying trend as colleges crack down on these toilet tabloids, labelling them as anti-semitic bullying forums. No great loss for literature; indeed the reading material in Oxford’s toilets leaves a lot to be desired, however intellectual those who graffiti the walls of the English faculty loos think they are.

The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (ODNB) is launching an online exhibition to mark the 40th anniversary of the Beatles’ Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band album.

The exhibition features the lives of over 40 people who appear on the album cover. The iconic cover includes famous individuals such as Karl Marx, Marilyn Monroe and Lewis Carroll.

Run, jump, praise the Lord. Hallelujah! 

Over the years, Univ has come to boast the highest pedigree of porters, many of whom have earned themselves as much acclaim as the College’s impressive alumni. There’s Fred, whose retrospective account of his time as head porter, Fred of Oxford, is nestled among the dusty tomes of Univ library. Then there’s the legendary Douglas, who enjoyed such a close rapport with the students that he would offer them personal advice and could predict their future careers. With this in mind, I have high hopes of the current porter being a font of knowledge regarding all manner of student deeds and misdeeds. Yet, sadly for me, the lowly gossip-gleaner, his professionalism and loyalty prevent him from revealing any of the student scandals to which he’s been privy.

One story he does tell me suggests that the porters have quite a lot of fun at our expense. A few years ago, there was a porter-led campaign to "crack down on running in the quads". All those students guilty of anything beyond a brisk walk were fined two pounds. The head porter at the time calculated how many minutes it took to walk from the lodge to different buildings in the College. When a student, locked out of his room, came to the lodge to retrieve his spare key, the porter would insist that it be returned in what he knew to be half the time required. He would then amuse himself in watching that hapless student sprint back to the lodge at full speed, only to be greeted by a two-pound fine. Lest we doubt the altruistic motives of this porter, he assures me that the money was put straight in the charity box.

The Story Museum in Oxford will launch ‘Alice’s Day’ on July 7 to celebrate Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, a work of children’s literature written by Christ Church tutor Charles Dodgson under the pseudonym Lewis Carroll in 1862.

A Nobel Peace Prize Winner, former world leader, renowned advocate for peace and founder of an institution renowned for its election monitoring is receiving an honorary degree from Mansfield this week. And students are up in arms.

Jimmy Carter’s greatest accomplishment was his role in the the Camp David Accords, which secured a strong and lasting peace between Israel and Egypt, and he has continued peace work since leaving office.

Yet for the students protesting this is moot. And why? Because of ‘Palestine: Peace not Apartheid’, which Carter wrote after monitoring the 2006 Palestinian elections in which stringent Israeli regulation meant that only 2% of the registered voters in East Jerusalem managed to vote.

For the title, he is being accused of anti-Semitism. It is true that some criticisms have been levelled on the basis of the contents of the book. But they constitute a minority. After all, the book had not even been published yet when Nancy Pelosi, the US Speaker of the House, announced that Carter did not speak for Democrats.

So is Carter an anti-Semite? His central criticism is that Israel denies central human rights to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, and his final conclusion is not that the Israeli state should not exist, nor be censured, nor relinquish its land, but that peace will come “only when the Israeli government is willing to…honor its own previous commitments.”

If criticising the Israeli government is anti-Semitism, then Carter finds himself in strange company. In 2002 it was said that Israel “enthusiastically chose to become a colonial society, ignoring international treaties…[and] developed two judicial systems…in effect, [Israel] established an apartheid regime.” And who levelled this criticism, so similar to Carter’s ‘anti-Semitism’? None other that Michael Ben Yeir, the Israeli attorney general from 1993 to 1996.

In fact, earlier than that, a figure as revered as Nelson Mandela told the Palestinian Assembly in 1999, “The histories of our two peoples correspond in such painful and poignant ways that I intensely feel myself at home amongst my compatriots.” Long before President Carter included it in the title of his book, the language of apartheid was associated with Palestine.

Nor has the book been universally reviled as anti-Semitic. While 15 members of The Carter Center Advisory Board resigned, another two hundred stayed on. At the historically Jewish Brandies University, President Carter received two standing ovations when he spoke in January, and almost half the sixty peaceful protesters outside the hall held signs reading slogans such as, “Closing our eyes to injustice is not a Jewish value.”

Carter defends his title by pointing out that it has produced exactly the desired effect—provoking new debate on a subject which he feels has fallen dormant, especially in the United States. With a debate this balanced, with as many defenders of Carter as attackers, with a history behind the language Carter used, and with Carter’s own history of peacemaking, the question must arise: why on earth is the Mansfield JCR creating a petition to stop Carter’s honorary degree?

While we think he may have been judged too quickly, it hardly matters whether Carter is right or wrong. To say that a college should not give an honorary degree to Carter because it ‘surely sends out signals that they endorse his recent work’ practically cancels the ability of colleges to award honorary degrees to figures more controversial than the Queen.

STUDENTS have protested against a decision by Mansfield College to award an honorary fellowship to former US President Jimmy Carter this week, alleging that he holds anti-Semitic views.

Julian Mansfield, a second-year PPE student, has contacted JCR members urging them to sign a petition demanding that the College does not award Carter a fellowship, arguing it would imply support for the views expressed in his book ‘Palestine: Peace not Apartheid’.

"Awarding President Carter an honorary fellowship is deeply misguided," he said. "So soon after the publication of such a book, the College’s action surely sends out signals that they endorse his recent work. The University and Mansfield College should be politically neutral and should not by their own expressed goals be seen to be endorsing particular political views, especially when they are so extreme."

Mansfield’s Principal, Dr Diana Walford, has rejected any possibility of reversing the College’s decision to award the fellowship to Carter. "No action is planned concerning the petition. Criticism of Israeli Government policies does not equate to anti-Semitism, as will be evident to anyone who reads the book," she said.

She added that Carter had worked for peace for most of his life. "This honour is in recognition of a lifetime of service. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for his decades of untiring effort to find peaceful solutions to international conflicts," she said.

The book caused a public outcry following its publication in November 2006, owing to an alleged endorsement of anti-Semitic views. Fifteen members of the Carter Centre advisory board resigned, accusing Carter of "condoning violence against Israelis unless they do certain things".

One in nine members of the JCR have signed Mansfield’s petition and students have voiced concern over the College’s decision.

Carter has been invited to Oxford to receive an Honorary Doctorate in Civil Law by the University, as well as being elected to an Honorary Fellowship of Mansfield College.

Mansfield student Daniel Brodie criticised the College’s decision and warned against repercussions for the University’s reputation if they award the fellowship. "I personally was shocked when I heard that he was going to become a fellow because of his clearly anti-Semitic rhetoric. I think that there is something wrong in awarding a man a fellowship who has been denounced very strongly by the Anti-Defamation League," he said.

In his book, Carter claims that Israeli politics are to blame for continuing unrest in the Middle East, saying, "Israel’s continued control and colonization of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land".

Carter responded in an opinion-editorial published in the Los Angeles Times last December, titled ‘Speaking frankly about Israel and Palestine.’ He rejected accusations that in his book he condoned violence against Jews or any other innocent peoples. "Obviously, I condemn any acts of terrorism or violence against innocent civilians, and I present information about the terrible casualties on both sides," he said.

He added that he felt accusations of anti-Semitism came from biased and under-informed sources and that he was troubled by such claims.

We hoped to start our evening in Brasenose bar, but at 9.20pm on a Saturday evening the place was closed. Willing to give the place a second chance, we came back on Sunday only to find the doors shut again! It seemed harsh, but our thirst demanded a zero rating.

A STUDENT standing for election as Pembroke’s Sports Rep was accused of making homophobic comments as part of his manifesto during JCR hustings last Sunday.

In the concluding part of his manifesto, first-year biologist Ashley Grossmann said, "Vote for Ash ‘cos Shezz is gay." His comments caused anger among JCR members who demanded that nominations be re-opened.

Lizz Paley, a Pembroke first-year, criticised Grossmann’s comment as tactless. "It was just immature, insensitive and stupid. I don’t know how he thinks he can represent the whole college when he says stuff like that," she said.

Another first-year said he felt Grossmann’s comments implied wider intolerance of homosexuality in the College. "It showed the underlying attitudes which permeate the College. If something like that had happened at Wadham it would’ve been looked at quite abhorrently and wouldn’t have been tolerated," he said.

Grossmann has apologised to the JCR and said that his comment was not intended to be taken seriously. "I am mortified to think that anyone may have been offended by what I wrote on my manifesto. It was supposed to be a childish, light-hearted joke, which in hindsight was perhaps rather ill thought out. I hope that anyone who has been affected by this will accept my apology. I would hate to think that anyone would consider me or Pembroke prejudiced or bigoted in any way," he said.

OXFORD students have been taking a ‘dangerous’ prescription drug without medical advice to help them concentrate for exams.

Ritalin is usually prescribed for sufferers of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), but is being used by undergraduates to increase concentration during study.

A number of Oxford students have admitted to taking the drug, which in people without ADHD is said to improve productivity and focus, to help them through stressful and busy terms.

Health experts have warned that when using Ritalin without appropriate medical advice, students are exposing themselves to serious health risks associated with other amphetamines. Illegal possession carries a maximum sentence of five years’ imprisonment, while dealing can lead to penalties of up to fourteen years.

One undergraduate who has dealt Ritalin to other students said that there was a market for the drug in Oxford. "There’s a huge demand for it. When people found out that I had it, loads of people came up to me and asked me for it. You feel euphoric and have a complete dedication to what you’re doing," he said.

A second year Exeter student claimed that the drug had helped him cope with the stresses of revision in the run up to end of year exams. "I took it a few days before the exam," he said. "You take it once a day for productivity. I would personally recommend it if you have difficulty concentrating as you can sit there for five hours straight."

He reported feeling no negative side effects. "It doesn’t do anything weird, although you feel a bit tired after," he added.

A Pembroke first year also stated that the drug improved his concentration on his studies. "It was the most productive I’ve ever been. I didn’t notice anything apart from my work and I would definitely take it again if it was freely available."

Many of the students approached said that they had obtained Ritalin from other students.

Dr Chris Kenyon, a practising GP for students at 19 Beaumont Street in Oxford, warned that Ritalin has numerous potential side effects, including difficulty sleeping, stomach aches, headaches and loss of appetite. Less common side effects include palpitations, high blood pressure, pulse changes and even clinical depression.

"The use of such stimulants for exams is something we would not recommend," Dr Kenyon said.

London GP Dr Anna Lindsay said she was concerned that students using any controlled drug without a prescription could be exposing themselves to serious health risks. "This would not at all be recommended for anyone who has not been prescribed it by a specialist, since it treats very specific conditions," she said.

DrugScope, the UK’s leading charity for drugs information and policy, states on its website that the effects of Ritalin categorise it as an amphetamine, along with the class B drug, Speed. "Heavy, regular use often leads to lack of sleep and food and lowers resistance to disease. Many heavy users become very run down and alternate between periods of feeling good and energetic, then feeling depressed and low.

"Delusions, panic attacks, paranoia, a feeling of being ‘wired’ and possibly hallucinations may also follow. Some users experience violent mood swings and can become very aggressive."

The Chief Executive of the ADHD charity Addiss, Andrea Bilbow, believes that the risks associated with taking Ritalin outweigh the potential benefits to students in high pressure situations, such as exam periods. "I cannot stress strongly enough that unless you have a formal diagnosis and Ritalin has been prescribed by a doctor, you should not be taking it," she said. "You don’t know what dosages to take. If you had any complications you wouldn’t know what they were without safeguards".

OUSU President Alan Strickland sought to reassure students that exams are not so important that they should resort to drugs. "Oxford exams can be uniquely stressful and it’s important that the University and colleges ensure proper support is available," he said. "Students can only do their best and fulfilling their potential will not be helped by taking drugs like Ritalin. Why risk long-term health problems to achieve a little more concentration?"

A GROUP of Oxford academics has condemned the Government’s energy policy and warned of serious consequences for the environment unless urgent changes are made.

Their criticisms were outlined in a report entitled ‘Energy, Politics and Poverty’, which questioned the government’s failure to meet targets on carbon dioxide emissions and described the current policy as "a hotch-potch of measures unlikely to deliver the government’s vision."

The taskforce, chaired by the Chancellor of Oxford University, Lord Patten, was composed of experts in various environmental issues and was set up by Ngaire Woods, Director of Oxford’s Global Economic Governance Programme and Christopher Allsopp, Director of Oxford’s Institute of Energy Studies.

Dr Woods emphasised the importance of the report as a non-governmental initiative. "This is a chance to take an outsider’s view of what’s happening in government. The report is completely independent and was not part of a Westminster initiative," she said.

The report also provides recommendations for avoiding what it calls the "serious risks" of not altering the government’s approach to energy.

Chris Turner, a spokesperson for the Department of Trade and Industry, said that the claims made by the report were "disingenuous".

He defended government policy, saying "Work is being done on these matters. The government’s White Paper on energy published last month sets out specific targets and plans for the future regarding reductions in CO2 emissions and the expansion of nuclear resources."

The White Paper pledges to cut CO2 emissions by 50 per cent by around 2050. It also aims to secure the UK’s energy supplies and ensure that homes are heated adequately.

Turner continued, "The report claims investment is needed in carbon-capture technology, but the White Paper has set out explicit measures by which this should be accomplished. Regarding the gas-storage infrastructure, the White Paper makes clear the possibility of using old coal and salt caverns to store gas while new terminals are already being built to store liquid and natural gas."

The Oxford report stressed attention to Africa and other developing countries that are put at risk by climate change.