Lawrence Summers decided several days ago that he would jump, rather than risk the ignominy of being pushed out of the presidency of Harvard University.

“I looked at the extent of the rancour that has emerged in parts of the faculty of arts and sciences, and concluded very reluctantly that the agenda for the university that I cared about, as well as my own satisfaction, would be best served by stepping down,” he told reporters from his Cambridge office.

“I spoke with members of the Corporation but it was my decision,” he added, referring to the university’s seven-member governing board.

Looking back on his sometimes tumultuous five-year tenure, he admitted to “regret for the rifts and the cleavages that had emerged” between him and “certain segments” of the faculty of arts and sciences. “There were certainly moments when I could have challenged the community more respectfully.”

That remark was a tactful reference to the very public dispute that erupted last year over a speech in which Mr Summers suggested that “issues of intrinsic aptitude” might be responsible for the dearth of women in top positions in science and engineering.

The controversy became a referendum on his leadership of Harvard and his sometimes brusque management style. But other issues soon got dragged in – Mr Summers’ support for military recruitment on campus, his opposition to divestment of university funds from Israel and the suspicion that he was resented by some faculty for his popularity among undergraduates.

Certainly, Mr Summers, who teaches a freshman seminar on globalisation, had become a celebrity on campus, happily autographing students’ dollar bills and playing impromptu games of whiffle ball. On Tuesday, after his resignation was announ-ced, he spoke to a group of cheering undergraduates in Harvard Yard.

Reflecting something of a split between faculty in the hard and social sciences, and their colleagues in humanities, reaction to his resignation was mixed.

Judith Ryan, a professor of German and comparative literature who brought the second no-confidence resolution that was due to have been debated next Tuesday, said: “My reaction is relief because we’ve been in a state of turmoil.”

Mr Summers’ allies felt his forthright opinions had come as a refreshing and much needed change. “He gave us the possibility of getting away from the political correctness, grade inflation and hostility to the military that has characterised our faculty for some time now,” said Harvey Mansfield, a professor of government.

“I think he had one group of enemies that had a plan or a fixed intention of ousting him. Then he had other critics who were offended by his brusqueness, and those two forces combined.”

Ed Glaeser, professor of economics, said Mr Summers’ departure would signal an end to university presidents using their positions to speak out on critical issues. “You can either fix Harvard or you can speak freely on topics that are of interest to you. That, sadly, is the lesson in this.”

Others worry that Mr Summers’ resignation has further emboldened Harvard’s already unusually powerful faculty, and that the Corporation has essentially lost control. “He’s about expanding the frontier and I think that everyone was so used to having his own tub that some people felt threatened,” said Larry Katz, professor of economics.

Mr Summers, however, appeared anxious to put the acrimony behind him. He plans to return, after a one-year sabbatical, as a university professor.

He did not believe he was the victim of a conspiracy. “It’s a mistake ever to try to make the complex situations into caricatures. I think that the views with some of those who have disagreed most sharply are sincere and not politically motivated.”

He added: “Harvard University is a 350-year-old institution and it is very strong. While there obviously have been tensions in the last year, my hope is that history will judge my presidency on how Harvard has fared with respect to the objectives I laid out when I arrived, not on the personality [conflict.]

“I am very pleased with the progress this university has made. It is much less complacent than it was five years ago.”