Shortly before Christmas 2015, Oriel College announced its intention to remove a plaque commemorating its controversial benefactor, Cecil Rhodes, and to stage a “listening exercise” about dismantling his statue, which overlooks Oxford’s High Street. Lobbied by the local manifestation of South Africa’s Rhodes Must Fall (rmf) movement, the college publicly repudiated Rhodes’s “colonialist” and “racist” views, claiming that they stand in “absolute contrast” to “the values of a modern university,” not least diversity and inclusion.

Seven weeks later, however, Oriel made an abrupt U-turn. In the wake of an overwhelmingly hostile reaction in the press and from alumni, together with the desertion of some donors, the college reversed its position. Instead of removing the plaque and the statue, it resolved merely to add an explanation of historical context. “The College believes,” it announced, “the recent debate has underlined that the continuing presence of these historical artifacts is an important reminder of the complexity of history and of the legacies of colonialism still felt today. By adding context, we can help draw attention to this history, do justice to the complexity of the debate, and be true to our educational mission.”

We ought to tolerate the public celebration of morally ambiguous heroes.

That was the right and reasonable stance to take, and the very good news is that Oriel College got there in the end. The bad news is that it nearly didn’t. And that fact bears some reflection. Why was