A row has erupted following a unilateral decision to sell the right to name Cambridge University Library after the highest bidder.

The Library is offering what it describes as “the ultimate commemorative naming opportunity” to raise funds in exchange for external sponsorship.

But Professor Gillian Evans, a member of the University’s Regent House governing body, attacked the move, arguing that a commercial tie-up would damage the Library’s reputation and adversely influence academic activities.

Evans expressed anger that University staff had not been consulted about the renaming plans, telling a Regent House meeting, “At this rate, one might set off for the University Library one morning to find it turned into a branch of Tesco with an internet cafe, if the General Board fancied that idea. What is there to stop someone literally buying the library? What sort of message would be sent out?”

She also suggested that the Library might have breached University protocol, telling Varsity, “There is a code under which benefactions are supposed to be considered.  It was created while I was on the University Council.  Did anyone even glance at this before agreeing this ‘offer’?  We’d all like to know.”

University Librarian Anne Jarvis defended the move as a valid attempt to boost fundraising.  She stated, “it is completely normal for an institution of this calibre to explore the full range of fundraising options open to it.  The University Library is home to some of the most important collections of books and manuscripts in the world.  It continues to seek external support so that it can enhance its collections and develop the services provided to its users.

“This proposal is no different to those already undertaken by most major research libraries.

“External donations are about helping the Library maintain its global position and enhancing the services provided, not detracting from them.”

Evans, Emeritus Professor of Medieval Theology and Intellectual History, also told Varsity that she was concerned about the consequences of the rebranding plans for academic research.

She explained, “Cambridge has accepted benefactions for centuries but in recent years it has recognised that it is important to check that the money is ‘clean’ and that the benefactor does not want to attach strings to it, which could compromise the University’s proper academic activities.

“Academic research these days often depends on getting funding but it is very important that the funder can’t control the questions that are asked or suppress the results if he doesn’t like them.  If Bill Gates did want to name the Library after himself mightn’t he want to press for more IT resources and fewer books?

“I’m sure Anne Jarvis is sincere in what she says but when deals have to be done to get huge sums of money, how confident can we be that the University will stick to its guns?  It took money from GKN [a global automotive and aerospace manufacturing company] and allowed a GKN representative to join the committee that chose the new GKN professor.”

Opinion amongst students appears to be divided.  A third-year Historian supported Professor Evans’ stance, telling Varsity she thought the move was “ridiculous”.

She said, “Stunts like this just end up eroding the credibility of esteemed institutions.  Cambridge is an academic institution and shouldn’t be selling itself for commercial gain.”

A second-year Economist was less concerned, “Surely the University can stipulate restraints on the influence sponsors have in the running of the UL. It’s important that the UL receives all of the money it needs in order to continue to provide a top-class service to all students and academics. ”

In a statement on its website, it said, “Oxford has its Bodleian, Harvard has its Widener, Yale has its Beinecke, Manchester its Rylands.  In Cambridge, the University Library is one of few such institutions of equivalent stature in the Western world that remains un-named.

“This represents a unique opportunity to recognise an exceptional and transformative benefaction in perpetuity.  It is also an extraordinarily timely opportunity.  In 2009 Cambridge celebrates 800 years of the quest for understanding our world and ourselves, through scholarship.

“Its University Library has, for centuries now, been at the heart of this quest – and it remains so today.  Astonishing in the scope, significance and sheer scale of its collections, the University Library is the nerve-centre of learning and information at Cambridge, and alive to the needs of the future.”

A spokesman for the University said, “Any proposal for a major benefaction, including the recognition of a major donor through the renaming of the Library, would be subject to the normal stringent University approval processes.

“At this point in time, the University is not in discussion with any potential donors regarding a benefaction that would lead to a proposal for renaming the Cambridge University Library.”

Classics professor Mary Beard commented on her blog, ‘“The Tesco Library’ doesn’t exactly trip off my tongue very easily. ... [But] I’m sure I could get used to it -- if it came with a few million pounds to keep the library as great it has always been.”