Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 December 2009
page vii note 1 Cf. Ernle, , The Land and Its People, 1925, p. 76.Google Scholar
page x note 1 Visitation of Berkshire, 1665–6, Harleian Soc., Vol. LVI (1907), p. 241.Google Scholar
page x note 2 Ashmole, Elias, The Antiquities of Berkshire, III (1719), p. 405.Google Scholar
page xi note 1 Cf. The Oxinden Letters, 1607–1642, ed. by Dorothy Gardiner (1933). Intro., pp. xviii ff.Google Scholar
page xi note 2 Cf. Tawney, R. H., Religion and the Rise of Capitalism.Google Scholar
page xiii note 1 Five Hundred Points of Good Husbandry, Mayor's ed. of 1812, p. 36.Google Scholar
page xiii note 2 See the writer's “Farming Methods in Early Stuart England,” Jour. Mod. Hist., VII (1935), pp. 1 ff.Google Scholar
page xvi note 1 cf. Jour. Mod. Hist., VII (1935), pp. 1 ff.Google Scholar
page xxi note 1 I am indebted to Dr. H. E. Woodman of the School of Agriculture, Cambridge, for the whole of the running commentary on Loder's feeding systems.
page xxi note 2 Cf. Min. of Agric. Bull., No. 48, Rations for Livestock (1933), p. 38.Google Scholar
page xxii note 1 Boutflour, Robert, “The Need for a Sincere Standard of Excellence in Dairy Cattle,” Jour. Farmer's Club (04 1934), p. 42.Google Scholar
page xxiii note 1 Hay, A., “Management of a Grass Flock during the Winter Months,” Essex Farmer's Jour. (11 1933), PP. 426–7.Google Scholar
page xxiv note 1 The importance of this has required quite recent emphasis, see Long, W. H. and Daniel, C., “The Value of Farm Produce consumed in the Farmhouse,” Jour. Min. Agric., XLI (04 1934), PP. 29 ff.Google Scholar
page xxiv note 2 The English Improver Improved, 1652.Google Scholar
page xxv note 1 Farewell to Husbandry, 1653 (1st ed., 1620), p. 61.Google Scholar
page xxvii note 1 Hewett, William, The History and Antiquities of the Hundred of Campton, Berks. (1844), p. 46.Google Scholar
page xxviii note 1 Cf. William Marshall. The Rural Economy of the West of England, 1796.
page xxxi note 1 See his article, “The Dawn of Modern Farming,” in the Quarterly Review, 01, 1931.Google Scholar