Abstract
Abstract This article argues that the conventional division of early modern rural England into ‘fielden’ and ‘forest’ regions serves well neither agrarian nor social historians. It is suggested that the ‘fielden‐forest’ model is too blunt an instrument to analyse the diversity of regional farming systems, social structures and landholding patterns. Drawing upon an alternative seven‐way classification of agricultural regions, a more open‐ended and flexible ‘continuum’ model is proposed. It is further argued that the new schema offers a more satisfactory way of examining local differences in social and cultural structures than a division into two opposing regional blocks.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
