Recent disclosures in The Times and Daily Telegraph concerning Simon Goldhill must have come as little surprise in King’s College or the Classics Faculty at Cambridge.
His pattern of conduct extended over many years — arguably decades — and was widely recognised among colleagues. It was remarked by a Fellow of King’s that any eventual wave of accountability, such as that associated with the #MeToo movement in 2017, would inevitably result in his downfall. This did not happen and Simon continued to act with relative impunity.
During the 2000s, Simon held a leading role in overseeing research governance at King’s, notably through the election of Junior Research Fellows. At that time, decision-making did not appear to operate through a formal committee structure; instead, it involved a small group of Simon’s close associates. Prof Peter de Bolla (English) and Prof Christopher Prendergast (French) both exercised enormous influence informally. Without Simon’s enthusiastic endorsement, a Junior Research Fellow at King’s was unlikely to prosper. Those who challenged Simon were often perceived to have paid a professional price, in some cases leaving academia altogether.
Simon’s inappropriate or aggressive behaviour towards those in subordinate positions was neither subtle nor concealed. It was apparent to anyone who spent even a short time in his presence. Everyone at King’s College or the Classics Faculty knew this. In earlier years, several individuals with whom he had close relationships were subsequently elevated as academic protégés and advanced through appointments and promotions. Despite this, a culture of silence prevailed. This was sustained by the collective inaction which prevailed at King’s, ostensibly a College proud of its self-declared radicalism. Simon was just too big to challenge. Such was the security of his position that he was able to put himself forward for the Provostship — the Mastership of the college — and to attract significant support.
The recent complaint of sexual impropriety brought by a university student is therefore best understood not as an isolated incident, but as a visible fragment of a much larger and longer-standing problem at King’s and in the University more widely. The names of many sex harassers are well known, it’s just action is not taken against them.
Goldhill has also been active in the Cambridge Traditional Jewish Congregation, where he continues to hold a leadership role. Given the congregation’s substantial student membership and social setting, this raises further and legitimate concerns in light of what has now emerged.
The only surprising thing about the matter is that Simon Goldhill was exposed, after a Cambridge University investigation.
Cover up is ‘baked into’ the DNA of the University. Its desire for containment and discretion is well known, and such a public fall from grace is highly unusual. For an institution as skilled in dark arts as Cambridge, this would have been trivial to cover up. Simon is retiring at the end of this year when he reaches 69. All that was needed was to delay a little longer, then Simon is no longer employed by the University.
It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that this outcome has occurred with the backing, or at least the acceptance, of influential figures. The handling of the matter has borne the hallmarks of a coordinated and carefully managed process. Perhaps the most interesting question of all is how, and why, this has now happened? Who orchestrated this?
4 Comments
Zipser · 18 April 2026 at 09:16
In many respects, Colleges are worse than University Departments. It’s very easy for a College to become dominated by a small group, especially if the Master is poor or always absent. And grievance processes in Colleges are even more corrupt, as almost everyone knows everyone else and conflicts of interest can’t be avoided. Even the Research Fellowship competitions are not exactly models of impartiality.
TheRsearcher · 18 April 2026 at 10:03
@Zipser, I am pretty sure that many, if not all, Colleges have points like this in their Student Complaints Policy, “The Complaints Officer may reject a complaint on the grounds that it is frivolous, vexatious.” This is point 2.9 of Christ’s College’s Policy and guess what, the Master of Christ’s used this point multiple times with me. There was not a single complaint I did that was not considered “vexatious” by him, including the fact that he and the Bursar did not send me the data they have on me asked in subject access requests. For those who do not understand the implications, a claim that is considered “vexatious” is not investigated and thus the Ombudsman OIA cannot intervene because the institution is following its own policy. Obviously, I noted in my complaint he was conflicted, but he ignored. This is absolutely shameful, happens in the University too, and no one does anything about it. Unfortunately for Lord McDonald, I could care less about titles and power differences. In an email that I sent to all the Fellowship, students, porters and people from the bar, I included the following section:
“Lord McDonald used points 1.4 and 2.9 of the College Policy and labelled my complaint “vexatious” so that no investigation is done. He has this power indeed, I acknowledge it. But he does not have the power to prevent the people who read my complaint and his response below to understand his real character. That power Lord McDonald does not have. People simply need to read my complaint and his response, nothing else.”
They all now know the complaint, the evidence I submitted, and his response. Therefore, next time they see him, they may smile and pretend they do not know what is happening, but I doubt they will trust him.
21percent.org · 18 April 2026 at 09:18
OT, something for ‘TheResearcher’
“Sir Olly’s predecessor Lord Simon McDonald has defended the senior official, telling BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that “No 10 wanted a scalp and wanted it quickly”.
He continued: “I cannot see that there was any process, any fairness, any giving [Sir Olly] the chance to set out his case, and that feels, to me, wrong.”
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0kryzd8l7no
Maybe The Researcher’s problem is that he is not ‘SirNuno’
TheResearcher · 18 April 2026 at 10:16
Lord McDonald has enough problems in his own Cambridge House with me and other students (https://x.com/21percentgroup/status/2000501738617688285), and it is not clear to me that he has the character necessary to give advice on national matters. He is lucky that I did not yet contact the House of Lords and tell them my experience. This said, I wrote to him yesterday and asked him if I could change to King’s College 😉
“Dear Master of Christ’s College,
I am writing because I have a proposition for you that you may appreciate.
In the event that the University does not expel me following their “investigation”, I trust that you agree with me that my presence in your college will be unsustainable from now on. I highlighted this issue last December already, but you did not fully appreciate my personality and its implications. My personality will not change, trust me. I absolutely do not stand people who are fake regardless of their titles, and I could not care less about power differences to say what I think and stand for.
Based on recent events, I decided that a good college for me would be King’s College. Therefore, if you want to get rid of me, you just need to talk to the Provost of King’s Dr Gillian Tett, and their Senior Tutor Dr Myfanwy Hill, because there needs to be an agreement between both colleges. I am not sure how you will explain the situation, but given they have problems in their own house, I suggest you are transparent. I can proportionate a discussion and/or meeting if you want, and I am happy to explain why King’s specifically, but I am not sure if that makes any difference for both of you.
Of course, you may be lucky, and the University may decide to expel me. But if they did not expel Prof. Goldhill for sexual harassment, that decision against me will be rather striking and damaging for the University. This should not surprise you because as you told me in our first meeting, as a member of the University Council you know the state of Cambridge University better than I do. I am ccing here the Senior Tutor if you need his advice on this matter. For this issue, and this issue only, he can contact me.
Respectfully,
Nuno Oliveira”