Final answer:
The concepts of 'the promise of a piece of stone' and 'the promise of a field' both symbolize commitments related to land, representing stability, ownership, and trust. The narratives suggest reliability, with one possibly signifying material reward and the other invoking moral or divine assurance. However, to fully understand each man's depiction of freedom, more context is necessary.
Step-by-step explanation:
The similarity between the notions of 'the promise of a piece of stone' and 'the promise of a field' can be seen as a symbolic representation of commitments made in different contexts. Both are tied to the land and suggest a physical and metaphorical promise. The 'piece of stone' and 'field' are embodiments of a pledge that can be associated with stability, ownership, or a rite, as well as a reflection of social or religious significance.
In the narratives provided, there is a common theme of reliability and assurance that comes with these tangible entities. For instance, the examination of the ground's moss between the bricks as 'undisturbed' points to a meticulous and faithful approach to a task. Similarly, the farmer's oath regarding the 'boundary-stone' being exact signifies steadfastness and an assurance of truth in regards to property demarcations.
Differences in how the two men describe freedom may lie in the contexts of their narratives. One narrative hints at a search or investigation rewarded by material gain, possibly freedom from poverty or obligation. The other seems to invoke a moral or divine assurance, potentially offering spiritual freedom or integrity. Detailed insight into how they describe freedom specifically would require additional context from the narratives.