The Understanding of Natural Environment in Early Modern British Agriculture

托马斯·戴维斯对威尔特郡农业的总体看法。（伦敦，1794年）一直很少得到关注，但我认为这是值得注意的。他准确地描述了农业区域分工的差异。在这一点上，他对自然环境的理解比亚瑟杨更敏锐。本文还从托马斯的报告中引出了与传统的当代农业观不同的其他方面，考察了洛克的财产理论与美国清教徒的土地财产理论之间的关系。我得出以下结论。(1)洛克被评价为第一个阐述劳动产权理论的政治理论家。但笔者认为，他的劳动理论受到了美国清教徒，特别是温斯洛普所阐述的土地产权理论的影响。例如，温斯洛普在他的《一般观察》中说：“在多瑟姆和所有其他地方，人们不认为自己拥有什么，而是认为他们通过自己的工业占有了什么。“（2）在《第二次世界大战》第五章的草皮段落中，詹姆斯·塔利和尼尔·伍德之间存在着关于仆人性质的争论。但我认为这场争论与洛克的意图无关。在草皮段落中，他论证了财产的劳动理论，这意味着人的财产权取决于将他的劳动与自然的原料混合在一起，在这个阶段，他还没有在他的论证中引入货币，因此，我的结论是洛克的仆人在草皮段落中只是作为主人家庭的一员出现的。

Thomas Davis's General View of the Agriculture of the County of Wilts. (London, 1794) has been scarecely given attention, but I think it is worth noticing. He accurately descibed the differences of regional divisons agriculturally. In this point, his understanding of natural environment is more keen than that of Arthur Young. I have derived other aspects from Thomas's reports, which are quite different from the traditional unduerstanding of the contemporay agriculture.I investigated the relationships between Locke's theory of property and American puritan's theory of landed property. I have arrived at the conculusions as follow. (1) John Locke has been evaluated to be the first political theorist who expounded the labor theory of property. However, I think that his labor theory is subject to the influence of the theory of landed property rights expounded by American puritans, in particular John Winthrop. For example, in his General Observations, Winthrop said, "at Dotham and all other places men accounted nothing their owne, but that which they had appropriated by their own industry...." (2) There is the controversy between James Tully and Neal Wood on the nature of a servant in the turfs passage of chapter 5 of the Second Treatise. But I think that the controversy is irrelevant to the intention of Locke. In the turfs passage he was demonstrating the labor theory of property, which means that man's entitlement to property depends on mixing his labor with the raw stuff of nature, and on this stage he had not introduced the money in his argument yet, Therefore, my conclusion is that Locke's servant appeared in the turfs passage only as a member of master's family.