No description available.

No description available.

Master of Arts / Department of History / Marsha L. Frey / The diplomatic corps employed by Oliver Cromwell and Charles II from 1649 to 1660 differed greatly. This study will focus on the top three diplomatic ranks: ambassador, envoys and residents and will exclude agents and chargé d′affaires. The lesser ranks have been excluded for several reasons primarily because biographical information does not exist for many of them and as lesser diplomats their missions were not significant and often lasted only a matter of days. This prosopographical examination of the twenty-four diplomats employed by Charles II and Oliver Cromwell provides insight into their similarities as well as their differences. After examining the twenty-four, one from each side will be further researched. In matters of religion, Cromwell predictably sent Protestants. Charles also sent Protestants, but did send Roman Catholics, especially to Catholic courts. Despite the age difference between Cromwell and Charles II, age did not separate their diplomats. The average age of Cromwell’s and Charles’ II diplomats was both forty years. In matters of education, those who went to college had a tendency to choose the Puritan-influenced Cambridge for the Commonwealth and Protectorate and Oxford for the Royalists. The area a diplomat was from shows that the diplomats from north chose the side of the Commonwealth while those from London and south chose the Royalist side. Royalists had a higher percentage of military service and a higher percentage of Parliamentary service. Although more Commonwealth and Protectorate diplomats had a university education, the Royalists had a higher percentage of master’s degrees and the study of the law. When looking at a diplomat’s position in a family, the Commonwealth diplomats had a greater chance of being the oldest son, while the Royalists tended to be younger sons. This information is valuable because it expands the commonly held historiographical image of the typical Royalist and Commonwealth supporters and illustrates the differences between the general support and each sides diplomatic corps.

The open fields of England describes the system of agriculture that operated in medieval England before the establishment of present-day hedged farms surrounded by hedges or walls. The volume encompasses a wide range of primary data not previously assembled, to which are added the results of new research based upon a fifty-year study of open-field remains and their related documents. The whole of England is examined, describing eight different kinds of field-systems that have been identified and relating them to their associated land-use and settlement. Details of field structure are explained such as the demesne, the lord’s land, and the tenants’ holdings, as well as tenurial arrangements and farming methods. Previous explanations of open-field origins and possible antecedents to medieval fields are discussed. Various types of archaeological and historical evidence relevant to Saxon-period settlements and fields are presented, followed by the development of a new theory to explain the lay-out and planned nature of many field systems found in the central belt of England. A summary and suggestions for future research conclude the text. The numerous maps and photographs illustrate the contrasting complexities of different field systems. Of particular interest is the Gazetteer, which is organized by historic counties. Each county has a summary of its fields, including tabulated data and sources for future research, touching on the demesne, yardland size, work-service, assarts, and the physical remains of ridge and furrow. The Gazetteer acts as a national hand-list of field systems, opening the subject up to further research, and will prove essential to scholars of medieval agriculture.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.