Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

➤ Gửi thông báo lỗi ⚠️ Báo cáo tài liệu vi phạm

Loại tài liệu: PDF

Số trang: 89 Trang

Tài liệu: ✅ ĐÃ ĐƯỢC PHÊ DUYỆT

TẢI VỀ

Nội dung chi tiết: Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

https:// k h oth uv i e n .com_

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906ations, & Master Projects2013Conflict at the College: William and Mary 1750-1776andrea Lynn WilliamsCollege of William & Mary - Arts & SciencesFollow

this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wm.edu/etdb Part of the Higher Education Commons, and the Other Education CommonsRecommended Citati Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

onWilliams, andrea Lynn, Conflict at the College: William and Mary 1750-1776' (2013). Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Paper 1539626736.ht

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

tps://dx.doi.Org/doi:10.21220/s2-x65n-aq77This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses, Dissertations, a Master Projects at W&

https:// k h oth uv i e n .com_

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906For more information, please contact scho!arworks@wm edu.Conflict at the College: William and Mary 1750-1776Andrea Lynn WilliamsHerndon, VirginiaBache

lor of Arts. The College of William and Mary, 2012A Thesis presented to the Graduate Faculty of the College of William and Mary in Candidacy for the D Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

egree of Master of ArtsLyon Gardiner Tyler Department of HistoryThe College of William and Mary August, 2013APPROVAL PAGEThis thesis is submitted in p

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

artial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofMaster of ArtsApproved by the Committee, July 2013/Committee ChairPulteiiProfessor of History

https:// k h oth uv i e n .com_

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906tal of Virginia, The College of William & Mary was certain to have been affected by the rising political and social turbulence before the American Rev

olution; however, its location was not the major factor contributing to conflict at the College. The real source of tension was the difference in pers Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

pective between the Anglican clergymen serving as professors, and the Board of Visitor members who were gentry used to significant control over provin

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

cial affairs. From the 1750s to 1776, the Board of Visitors attempted to gain more local, secular control over the College, while faculty members used

https:// k h oth uv i e n .com_

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906esidential elections, faculty dismissals and appointments, and statute revisions, in which faculty ties to Britain allowed them to counter Visitor eff

orts to establish increased power over the professors. The firm reliance of the Anglican faculty on their British superiors protected them from Visito Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

r interference, but kept them from adapting to an institution in a colonial setting that functioned very differently than British universities. The so

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906

urces most important to understanding this struggle are the William and Mary College Papers and the Fulham Palace papers, which include descriptions a

https:// k h oth uv i e n .com_

Chelsfield_joint_School_Log_Books_1883_to_1906ectives that sparked conflict at the College.TABLE OF CONTENTS

https:// k h oth uv i e n .com_