An Extra Dimension? Farm Buildings as Historical Evidence* By P S BARNWELL

Abstract The last decade has seen a growth of interest in historic farm buildings, but they have usually been seen as individual structures, and in isolation from other aspects of rural history. On the basis of a systematic survey of entire farmsteads in part of Lincolnshire, it is here suggested that the physical remains may contribute to understanding agrarian conditions. It is tentatively concluded that, if studied on a regional basis, farmsteads may provide evidence for the local realities which lie behind national agricultural trends and, more especially, that systematic examination of farmsteads can provide valuable evidence for a way of life soon to be lost to living memory. N 1993 and 1994, the Royal (Figure I). Within those areas all Commission on the Historical the extant buildings of almost all the farm- I Monuments of recorded over steads with pre-I93OS structures were 25o farmsteads in five contrasting parts of recorded; there are a few eighteenth- England: north Northumberland, central century buildings, but most are nineteenth- Cheshire, south Lincolnshire, south century. Only the farms with the most Berkshire and east Cornwall. The main fragmentary or heavily converted remains findings of the survey has been published were excluded, and, unlike many previous elsewhere, ~ but the present paper seeks to studies of agricultural buildings, the unit examine the potential of the physical of record was the complete farmstead, remains as evidence for agrarian history (in rather than individual buildings. its widest sense), taking south Lincolnshire as a case study. The conclusions drawn are tentative, but it is hoped that they may I stimulate debate concerning the links The eastern survey area contains four par- between farm buildings and social and ishes on the Black Sluice Fen: each economic history. contains a large amount of fenland, at the The area selected for the survey consists west end of which, where the land rises of two almost contiguous blocks of very slightly, is the main settlement; which lie east of and south of beyond, is a smaller area of land, in places referred to as the Common. Much of the * I should like to express my gratitude to my colleagues, A T Adams, area is strong clayland, described in I85I Colum Giles and D A H Richmond, who read drafts of this paper and suggested a number of improvements, as also did Dr S Wade as 'stiff clay, harsh and difficult to work'? Martins. I am also grateful for the comments of the participants in The western parishes are entirely on the a joint conference of the Historic Farm Buildings Group and the Society for Landscape Studies, held in April ~995, at which I higher land, which is predominantly heavy, delivered an earlier version of the material presented here. None cold clay. of those who have been kind enough to share their thoughts would, however, necessarily agree with my views. Finally, I should Enclosure was achieved shortly after like to thank A T Adams for producing the illustrations. 18oo - and some of it much earlier - but The reports, drawings and photographs of the farmsteads surveyed by RCHME as part of its project are available to the punic through realization of its full potential was ham- the Public Services department of the National Monuments Record pered by inadequate drainage, particularly (RCHME's archive), at the National Monuments Record Centre, Kemble Drive, Swindon SN2 2GZ. The findings of the survey are published in P S Bamwell and Colum Giles, Englist, Farmsteads, :J A Clarke, 'On the farming of Lincolnshire', JRASE, XlI, 1851, r75o-I914, Swindon, 1997. p 268. Ag Hist Rev, 46, I, pp 35-46 35 [i:

36 THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW

~\ Newark

1857 1859

~oiddlng 0 Grantham Bracab Lw..~..t n=~r Folkingham Sappe,

0 6 rnllr~s I',,I I I I I i 10 10 km

FIGURE I The survey areas, showing features discussed in the text.

in the fenland parishes. 3 Traditionally, such it was not until the late I84OS, when the drainage as there had been was effected by South Forty Foot was itself deepened, and the Roman , which runs along a steam pumping engine installed, that the the western edge of the fen, near the system reached its full effectiveness.* villages. Although it took some of the Although the western group of parishes downwash from the higher land, its effect was higher, drainage of a different kind - on the fen proper was negligible. The first underdrainage - was required in order to major improvement came in the late- render the highly water-retentive clays suit- eighteenth century, when the South Forty able for tillage: although commenced Foot drain (which marks the eastern before 1851, it had not progressed very far boundary of the parishes) was created. by that date. s In neither of the survey Although this was a considerable advance, areas, therefore, was the maximum area of the improvement was not sustained, and arable land available until the middle of the there were annual floods between z795 and nineteenth century. 18oz. The installation of windmills to lift A second factor which affected the econ- water from the parish drains into the South 4 Clarke, 'Lincolnshire', pp 298-3o2, 306-7; J A Clarke, 'On the Forty Foot made the land more secure, but Great Level of , including the Fens of South Lincolnshire', JRASE, VIII, I847, pp r22-3; Gfigg, Agricultural Revolutiot,, 3 D B Grigg, The Agriadtural Revolution in South Lincolnshire, z966, p pp z8-9; J Think, English Peasant Fanning: the agrarian history of 33; A Young, General View of the Agriodture of the County of Lincoln, Lincolnshirefrom Tudor to recent times, z957, p zzo. I799, pp 54, 57. s Clarke, 'Lincolnshire', pp 379-8o. /

LINCOLNSHIRE FARM BUILDINGS 37 omic potential of the region was the devel- hamlet of Hanby) were dominated by the opment of new modes of transport. The holdings of the Heathcote family, and Car Dyke had once been navigable, and Pickworth by those of the duke of one source records it as being so in Great St Albans; smaller areas of land were held Hale and as late as 1855. The by a number of other families of varying South Forty Foot was certainly navigable status and importance. In the fenland area, during the entire nineteenth century, and the pattern of ownership was different: in in 1851 it was reported that a steam packet all the land belonged to the was to commence operation along its full Warners of Walsingham Abbey, but else- length. These facilities meant that the east- where the land was owned by a number ern block of parishes had relatively easy of individuals and estates, including quite a access to markets served by the river large number of small freeholders. Partly, Witham - westward to Lincoln and east- but not entirely, on account of the presence ward to Boston and the coast. 6 of the latter, the average farm size in the The situation was greatly improved by fen area was 14o-I6O acres, around half the advent of railways during the second that in the clayland parishes to the west. s half of the nineteenth century (Figure I). The railways were probably even more important for the western area, since they II provided the first easy means by which These general background features are produce could be moved out of the region. directly relevant to the nature of the agric- The significance of this development for ulture which was practised in the survey Lincolnshire as a whole was clearly seen at area from the late-eighteenth to the early- the time, James Caird, writing in 1852, twentieth century - the period from which being explicit about the impact of railways the extant buildings survive. At the begin- on agricultural practice, and land agents in ning of the nineteenth century, grassland the I86OS considering that rents could be predominated: one contemporary, speak- increased in proportion to proximity to ing of a wider area of south Lincolnshire, railway stations/ appears to have seen this as being at least A further factor which could affect both partly a response to poor transport links, profitability and the nature of agricultural since it was easier to move livestock than exploitation was that of land ownership; grain along bad roads to market. The main this is also directly related to buildings, agricultural emphasis was on locally-bred since estates did not always invest in them sheep, and the finishing of cattle which at the same time or in the same way. For were imported from as far afield as Scotland this reason, one of the criteria for the and Wales. In most of the western parishes, selection of the survey area was that it the largest arable crop in I8OI was wheat, should include parts of a number of estates. but the acreages were generally small; the In the western group of parishes, Newton, arable acreage was rather larger in the Haceby and Sapperton were largely owned fenland area, with oats being the main crop by the Welby estate, while Walcot, except in Swaton. 9 Folkingham and Lenton (apart .from the Between I8Ol and I866, the area under

~Kelly, Post Office Directory of Lincobtshire, I855, pp 11o, 1t6-17 HSince the tithe records are so patchy, the figures are based on the states that the Car Dyke was navigable in and records of the r9Io National Property Valuation for the relevant Helpringham, though the 25" OS maps of the i88os show that it Income-Tax Parishes, held in PP.O, Ilk58; for the wider context, had ceased to be by the time of their production. On the South see Grigg, Agricultural Revolutiot,, pp 9x, io8. Forty Foot, see Clarke, 'Lincolnshire', note on p 3o3. 9Grigg, Agrinlltural Revolution, pp 67-9, lO5-6; Think, Peasant ~J Caird, English Agrin~lt.re h~ z85o-r85z, 1852, p 186; T W Beastall, Fanning, pp 299-3oo; the 18Ol Home Office Crop lketums for the Agricultural Revolution in South Lincolnshire, Lincoln, 1978, p 200. relevant parishes are in PRO, HO 67/15. i!i : i:!

38 THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW cultivation expanded, as did the proportion by an increase in the number of farmers of arable, particularly that used for wheat. described as graziers, butchers and cattle The more striking change was in the fen- dealers in successive editions of White's edge parishes, where wheat replaced oats Directory - though this could partly be a as the dominant crop. In I85I, J A Clarke result of the inclusion of slightly greater noted that quite a high proportion of the detail in the later editions. H western area was still under grass (an impression strengthened by the tithe records), and that underdrainage had not III progressed very far: in general, he thought Turning to the extant buildings, the first the area to be backward and mean, particu- question which may arise is their potential larly in relation to the feeding of cattle. as evidence for the agricultural system f Despite this, the main trend of the first which produced them. One of the prob- three-quarters of the nineteenth century lems with using buildings in this way was the rise of mixed fanning. It is difficult concerns the difficulty of assigning accurate to date the change accurately but, in view dates to them. By using a combination of of Clarke's comments, it may be that it the physical evidence, the tithe maps took place at the same time as, or shortly (where they exist) and the successive edi-

after, underdraining. Before then, pro- tions of the twenty-five inch Ordnance i duction and, therefore, income, could be Survey plans (sometimes - though not in maintained by means of expanding the area the particular areas discussed here - sup- used for agriculture, whereas thereafter the plemented by estate and parish maps), it is only scope for improvement lay in the usually possible to narrow the range to intensification of exploitation, by the adop- twenty-five years, and often to ten years: tion of more balanced mixed farming. It is this means that any patterns which emerge more difficult to determine the timing of will only be indicative of broad trends. change in the fen parishes, since Clarke Despite the clear documentary evidence did not comment upon them, and tithe for the importance of both cattle and sheep coverage is poor: the change may have in the late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth begun earlier, but is likely to have been century, the earliest buildings to survive given fresh impetus by the improvements from both survey areas are almost entirely to drainage made in the 184os ~° (see above). those associated with arable fanning- The claylands generally were amongst barns, stables and granaries (often above the most severely affected by the late nine- the stables). Accommodation for cattle is teenth-century depression. Analysis of a hardly represented until the second quarter sample of the crop returns suggests that of the nineteenth century, and for sheep between the I87OS and ~9oos the amount not at all. That this is not a result of the of arable remained roughly stable, but with later reconstruction of livestock housing some shift away from wheat, particularly may be demonstrated by cartographic evi- in the fen. The major change was a large dence. At Old Manor Farm, Braceby increase in the number of cattle, with sheep (Figure 2), for example, the tithe map remaining a significant part of the regional shows that the only agricultural buildings economy. These trends may be confirmed on the site in I839 were the dovecote (dated I7OI), the barn, and the stable range: '° On the western area, see Grigg, Agricultural Revolution, pp I55--6; Thirsk, Peasant Fanl,ing, pp299-3oo; Clarke, 'Lincolnshire', pp 268, 378-8o. For the Fens, see Thirsk, Peasant Fanning, "Thirsk, Peasant Farmhlg, pp 320- ~; the annual Parish Crop Returns p 225. See also the iSoi Home Office Crop Returns for the fiom i866 onwards (in PRO, MAF 68); W White, History, relevant parishes (in PRO, HO 67/I5), and the r866 Parish Crop Gazetteer and Directory of Lincolnshire, Sheffield, editions of I842, Returns (PRO, MAF 68/4i, MAF 68/42). r856, I872. LINCOLNSHIRE FARM BUILDINGS 39

Phase I 1. Dovecote. 2. Barn. Phase It 3. Stable, granary over. 4. Trap house, granary over. 5. Stable, granary over. 6. Trap house. 7. Shelter shed. 8. Loose box. 9. Cowshed?

5 , .... ' 2sd0 I'''1 20 feet

FIGURE 2 Old Manor Farm, Braceby (Braceby and Sapperton parish).

all the livestock accommodation is, there- ings were provided- either at this date or fore, a new creation of the period after later - for sheep. I84O. This pattern is so common in the Although new barns and more particu- survey area that it is possible to suggest larly stables were built during and after the that it was also true of the majority of sites mid-nineteenth century, the bulk of new where the tithe map shows only one or construction was related to the provision two buildings which were later demolished of accommodation for cattle and their in a complete reconstruction of the farm- fodder. The second and, more especially, stead. It would seem that, in the early- the third quarter of the nineteenth century nineteenth century the buildings reflect less saw the provision of open-sided shelter the agricultural system, than the fact that sheds along the sides of formerly com- before the mid-nineteenth century cattle pletely open cattle yards, and the construc- were generally not housed - a point which tion of chaff and root houses, and a smaller may be confirmed by P Pusey's observation number of spaces for other kinds of fodder in I843 that, in Lincolnshire as a whole, a preparation. These features are found on lack of shelter for cattle was not uncom- those farms (the majority) which developed mon. I2 In the same way, no special build- piecemeal, and on those which were built '=P Pusey, 'On the agricultural improvements of Lin.zolnshire', in a single phase. JRASE, IV, t843, p 305. This is what would be expected given

] J 4o THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW the large amount of attention paid to the however, was to set out models - ideal issue of cattle housing by nineteenth- building types and farmstead plans - and it century commentators. What the physical almost always assumes that a completely examples may do, though, is to indicate new farmstead is being designed. the time at which local estates and farmers In reality, of course, relatively few began to seek to increase their profit by farmsteads were completely reconstructed intensifying their activities rather than by at one time, most receiving piecemeal expanding the area of arable. As noted additions and alterations. The pace at earlier, the temporal distribution of docu- which this occurred varied considerably mentary sources which illuminate this from one region - and, in some areas, point is not even, resulting in some uncer- from one estate - to another. In addition, tainty in the chronology. While the build- the authors of the literature, although ings cannot provide the whole answer, sometimes extensively travelled, often they can go some way to filling the gap. (perhaps inevitably) designed farms with For example, the fact that only nine shelter particular regard to the regions with sheds appear to have been built in the whose agriculture they were most familiar, second quarter of the nineteenth century, and their solutions were not always readily while three times that number may with applicable in all parts of the country. The some confidence be dated to the third only way in which to assess the impact quarter, may be significant. Given that on the majority of farmers of new ideas, cattle shelters and cow houses were being of technological advance, and of changes advocated as early as the late-eighteenth in the wider economic context of farming century, the provision of such buildings in (whether national or local) is often likely the mid-nineteenth century is unlikely to be a reflection of advances in contemporary to be through the physical evidence, thinking about the best way to house the which can indicate the time at which the livestock.~3 It may, however, be related perception of need coincided with the both to affordability- the I85os and I86os financial means to implement change. being, in general, a period of agricultural Sometimes estate documentation, such as prosperity - and the perception of need in account books or farming diaries, or other the region - which may be allied to the written material, such as directories, may necessity to maintain and even increase provide an insight into local conditions, income by means other than expansion. but the number of such documents is relatively small. One of the clearest examples of this in IV the survey area relates to the introduction It is in the sphere of the local manifestations of mechanization to the processing of of national trends that the buildings may grain crops. It is well recognized that the have their greatest importance, but in impact of any kind of mechanization on relation to a slightly different aspect. The the way in which labour was deployed development of thinking concerning the was immense, and its introduction marks ways in which farmsteads of various kinds an important point in social history. The were most efficiently laid out is well known timing and form of this development may from the extensive nineteenth-century lit- therefore be of some significance. Neither erature. The purpose of that literature, of the survey areas was particularly advanced in this respect, and there is no ,3 For cattle accommodation in the late-eighteenth century, see positive evidence for the use of mechan- i N Harvey, A History of Farm Buildings in England and Wales, znd i edn, Newton Abbot, I984, pp 75-6. ical power before the I85OS. LINCOLNSHIRE FARM BUILDINGS 4I

1. Open yard. 2 2, Shelter sheds.

1 :5:::1~"" 3. Stable. 4. Chaff house. 5. "Barn". "L~ 6 i 6. Cartshed, granary over. (N.B. Not all rooms labelled)

4 0 40 metres I i I , ~ , , f , , ~ t I

I ' ' I t i i ~ i = ~ I 12 0 120 feet

FIGURE 3 Unnamed farmstead on Helpringham Fen, Helpringham.

Until then, barns, however small, were built in traditional form, with large opposed threshing doorways. In the new farmsteads of the I85OS, however, barns are almost non-existent, being little more than compartments -within larger build- ings, as at an unnamed farm on Helpringham Fen, which is dated I858 r '~Cottage (Figure 3)- Probably at much the same 7 date an even smaller 'barn' - here more ""2, ] properly considered as a processing room / - was built at Poplar Farm, Helpringham 'x, (Figure 4). These two farms, which appear to have been owned by different small landowners, are significant in that their design makes no provision for threshing - 1. Processing room, granary over. whether by hand or by machine - within 2. Cartshed, granary over. 3. Stable, tack room, chaff house. the buildings: this strongly suggests that 4. Later covered yard, mobile steam power was envisaged. What 5 0 30 metres the buildings indicate is not the date at i .... I i i i t I

I ' ' • I which such engines became available 20 0 1{~0 feet (which the literature shows to have been t m in the I84OS), nor even the date at which FIGURE 4 they were introduced into the area, but Poplar Farm, Helpringham Fen, Helpringham. 42 THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW possible to place the chaff and root houses next to the stable and cattle yards, and to move the engine(s) between them. The barn on this farm was a fully-floored two- 1, Loose boxes. --",:~":'~'\ 2. Stable. storey structure, the first floor of which 3. Tack room. was really a granary; the function of the 4. Chaff house. ground floor is less certain, but it may 5. Cartshed. have been a cake store, and also have 6. Root house. housed hand or mechanically powered 7. Wagon house. machines for breaking cake as well as 8. Bern, granary over, grinding and bruising grain. On other 9. Trap house. ]i farmsteads, built at the same time, how- 1 10. Nag stable. ever, the form of the barn (though not 5,,, ,0 ..... 30 metres the way in which it was used) was almost

r" "'l '" I entirely traditional. An example of this is 20 O 100 {eet the planned farmstead built by the marquis of Bristol at Grange Farm, , FIGURE S Hanby Lodge Farm, Hanby (Lenton, Keisby and probably with money borrowed from the Osgodby parish). General Land Drainage Company in i88o-[. ~s There, the barn communicates directly with the cattle yard, and may the date at which some landowners were have housed some aspects of fodder prep- so confident of its future that they were aration. However, although the building prepared to invest in buildings which is a full two storeys in height, it was could not operate in a traditional way." unroofed, suggesting that it was primarily Not all landowners, of course, built used for the storage of straw - which new farmsteads or barns at the moment at many commentators thought could be which portable steam power became done as effectively outside. widely available, so that many farmers A similar point can be made with continued to use old buildings. In the regard to the introduction of more sophis- eyes of contemporary commentators, tra- ticated methods of keeping cattle during ditional barns were ine~cient, but the the second half of the nineteenth century. saving in labour costs cannot have been As indicated earlier, the most basic type thought great enough to merit the invest- of improved accommodation consisted of ment required to replace structurally- open-sided shelter sheds at the sides of the sound traditional barns. What is even formerly open yards, and the majority of more interesting is that not all new farms buildings of this kind were erected in the built during the second half of the nine- ~d-nineteenth century. By then, how- teenth century had new types of barn. At ever, other kinds of cattle housing system some, such as the planned farmstead of were being advocated, though they were the earls of Dysart at Hanby Lodge Farm not adopted on many farms for a consider- (Lenton, Keisby and Osgodby parish), the able time. As early as the late-eighteenth logic of portable power sources was taken century, stall feeding had been rec- further (Figure 5): as power was applied ommended, but no agreement was to the processes involved in preparing reached, and there was still considerable fodder for both cattle and horses, it was debate in the years around I85o concerning

,4 For portable steam engines in general, see N Harvey, The htdustrial Archaeology of Fanning in England attd Wales, I98o, pp [o2-3. ,s PRO, MAF 66/2. LINCOLNSHIRE FARM BUILDINGS 43 the advantages of housing cattle in stalls or the negative effects of a reduction of sun- boxes. 16 light on the health of young cattle. I9 It has been suggested that, while stalls The physical evidence not only confirms became common in south Lincolnshire as a general absence of covered yards before the a whole, this was not the case in south- I88os, but quite clearly indicates that the east Kesteven, in which the survey areas debate had not been concluded. On the lie. 17 This is borne out by the physical newly-planned farmstead of the early I88os evidence: boxes were indeed built during at Grange Farm, Little Hale (Figure 6), for the second half of the nineteenth century, example, cattle were kept in an open yard but on most farms they did not provide with a shelter shed along the north side. At accommodation for a significant pro- the Dysart's planned farmstead at Hanby portion of the livestock - they were prob- Lodge Farm (Figure 5), designed and built in ably used for young stock and pregnant or a single phase dated I883 by a datestone, fully ill cows. Once again, the pattern was not covered yards were provided. On another, uniform, even in the small number of rather smaller, farmstead on the Dysart estate parishes in the survey area. The Dysart's (Grange Farm, Hanby), known from a date- model farmstead at Hanby Lodge Farm stone to have been erected only two years (Figure 5) adopted the covered yard (see after Hanby Lodge, the yards were open: if below) in preference to a large number of one estate did not have a clear policy on boxes, but two farms in Walcot, which newly-planned farmsteads of the 188os, any were effectively completely redesigned in trends drawn from the literature are unlikely I883-4, retained open yards but had a to reveal the considerable local variation in greater number of loose boxes; and a small development. number of sites included enclosed cow What is perhaps even more interesting houses for a larger number of animals. 18 is that what may be the earliest covered Similar variation occurs in relation to yard (perhaps of the late I86OS or the the adoption of covered yards, which were 187os) in the survey area - at Poplar Farm, advocated from the I85OS onwards as a Great Hale - was built on a farm which means of enhancing the growth rate of did not belong to one of the large estates. cattle and of improving the quality of Taken in conjunction with the fact that manure. Some commentators recognized the earliest farms built specifically for port- that farmers in parts of eastern England able steam power also appear to have were more hesitant about covered yards belonged to independent landowners, this than those elsewhere; the main reason may suggest - though very tentatively - adduced for this was that the low rainfall that at least some men of this kind may in the area did not cause sufficient damage have invested at different periods from to the manure for investment in covered some of the owners of large estates. yards to have been worthwhile, or to offset This point may be pursued further by reference to the dates at which completely new farmsteads were built, the only two ,6 For the debates concerning box feeding, see, fbr example, Caird, Enflish Agriculture, pp 385-6; J Ewart, 'On the construction of which are reasonably certainly known to farm-buildings', JRASE, XI, 185o, pp 24I-2; T Tancred, 'Essay have been erected by freeholders were built on the construction of farm buildings', JRASE, XI, 185o, p 194; in the 18 5os - that is, at a time of prosperity. J B Denton, The Farm Homesteads of England, 2nd edn, 1865, p 168; More generally, see D B Grigg, English Agriculture: An Historical Perspective, I989, p 71. ,9 For the advantages of covered yards, see WJ Moscrop, 'Covered cattle t~ Grigg, Agricultural Revolution, p 146. yards', JRASE, 2nd ser I, 1865, pp 88-99, and Denton, Farm ,s The loose boxes are at Manor Farm, and Red House Farm, Walcot Homesteads, pp 129-3o, where their absence in Lincolnshire attracts (near Folkingham); details, including the date, are confirmed by comment. For the fodder used in the area, see Caird, Et,glishAgriadture, architect's plans - Lincolnshire Archives Office, 3 Anc 5/82 p I8o, and Clarke, 'Lincolnshire', p 38o. The link between fodder and and 5/83. covered yards is discussed in Harvey, Farm Buildings, pp i3i-2. 7i;:

4+ THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW

9 1. Open yard.

la. Shelter.

2. Nag stable, trap house. 3. Cake house? 4. Cow house.

5. Barn. 6. Cartshed, granary over. 7. Chaff house.

8. Stable. 4 5 9. Shelter shed.

{N.B. Not all rooms labelled)

4 0 40 metres L ~ I ~ ~ ,~ = , ~ ~ f ~ I

12 0 120 feet

FIGURE 6 Grange Farm, Little Hale.

By contrast, the Ancaster, Bristol and here, since detailed work on economic Dysart estates all invested in new tenant history has not been undertaken. It may be farmsteads during the 188os (and the Welby suggested, though, that analysis of the estate, in one instance, even later) - in timing of the actual introduction of new other words, during the depression. kinds of building on different kinds of farm Combined with what seems to have been provides information concerning the significant investment by the Welby estate nature and type of investment in farm- c 18oo, and certainly was by the Warner steads, which may, when analysed on a estate in the I82OS, it may be possible to regional scale, have implications for the suggest that whereas small landowners may local economy. 2° While a certain amount only have been able to afford major invest- of evidence concerning investment can be ment in periods of prosperity, larger estates obtained from documentary sources, they (which may have had more diverse sources are usually estate-based, and the distri- of income) may have been less concerned bution of suitable sources is considerably to invest when rents were high, but, by more uneven than that of farmsteads with contrast, could afford to try to maintain intelligible historic fabric. As was shown incomes by investment in lean times. The earlier, in the case of the farms in the volume of evidence from the survey area Hanby area, the type of investment was is not large enough to demonstrate this not uniform even on a single estate; to conclusively, but it may be a hypothesis draw regional conclusions from patchy worth testing in other parts of the country. estate documentation alone would be The new types of building adopted, and unwise - particularly in an area like the the speed at which they were introduced to an area are clearly subjects of consider- able interest to historians of farm buildings, =°For a similar suggestion, see A D M Phillips, 'Landlord investment in farm buildings in the English Midlands in the mid-nineteenth but is this material more widely relevant? century', in B A Holderness and M Turner, eds, Land, Labour attd The question cannot be fully answered Agriculture, z7oo-x92o: Essaysfor Gordms Mingay, I991, p 21o.

, .~ ...... ± LINCOLNSHIRE FARM BUILDINGS 45

3 Phase I 1. Stable, granary over. Phase II 2. Stable. 3. Shelter shed. 4. Barn. 5. Chaff house.

6. Cartshed. Phase III 7. Pigsty, calf house. 8. Nag stable.

4 0 40 metres 9. Cartshed. I I I i i ~ t i i i i t l

12 ~) 1:~0 feet

FIGURE 7 Village Farm (now Darwood House), Swaton. fens, where there was a high proportion of the surviving buildings was the second undocumented freeholders. quarter of the nineteenth century and, with its completion, it becomes possible to understand the farmstead quite fully. The V stabling was expanded, a shelter shed was A further aspect of rural life to which provided for cattle, a cartshed (or possible extant farm buildings have particular rel- another shelter shed) was constructed, and evance is the way in which the farmsteads a barn and chaff house were built. The were worked. This can only be understood layout was not convenient, since the grain where a high proportion of the historic was still stored above the earlier stable layout survives or can be reconstructed- which lay at the opposite comer of the often only in the final or penultimate yard from the barn where it was processed historic phase (which typically, in the (probably originally by hand): the threshed survey area, is the late-nineteenth century). grain therefore had to be carried from the One example will suffice - a small farm- barn across the yard and up through the stead of several phases dating from the late- stable to the granary (there being no first- eighteenth to the early-twentieth century. floor doorway to the granary). The chaff Village Farm in Swaton (Figure 7) is a was transferred from the barn to the adjac- small farmstead which has many features ent chaff house, but, once processed into typical of the region. The first phase, which fodder, also had to be taken across the yard probably dates from the late-eighteenth or (after first passing round or through the early-nineteenth century is a stable with barn), to the horses in the stable and the granary above. It is not known whether cattle in the yards. The stables had to be other buildings of the same or earlier date cleaned out regularly, and the cattle yard were once associated with it, and nothing mucked out less frequently, the manure can be deduced of the way in which the being taken either to a midden or direct farmstead as a whole was arranged at that to the fields. In addition, the horses had to date. The major phase of construction of be groomed and otherwise cared for on a ~b

46 THE AGRICULTURAL HISTORY REVIEW daily basis, so that the ill-lit and poorly- sion. This aspect of the interpretation of ventilated stable was the workplace of a farmsteads is becoming increasingly number of men for part of the day. important as the last of the farmers who The third phase, probably of 185o-187o remember traditional ways are coming to (and certainly complete by I887) , saw the the end of their lives. addition of a cart and implement shed, the conversion of the probable former cartshed (opposite the stable) to a shelter shed for cattle or horses, and the building of a VI combined pigsty and calf house, which Students of social and economic history, may also have included provision for poul- on the one hand, and of farm buildings, try. The last was very small, indicating that on the other, have tended to work in pigs and fowl were probably primarily kept isolation. What has been suggested above for domestic purposes; it was situated near is that the work of historians may be given to the house, and hatches were provided an added dimension by taking physical in" the outer wall of the building to reduce evidence into account: the study of build- the distance which the fodder had to be ings enables some of the local realities carried from the back kitchen where it was behind more general trends to be perceived prepared. The final stage in the evolution in ways in which that of documents rarely of the buildings (not on plan) consisted of does. The importance of this may be the construction, in the early-twentieth debated, but the local variability of agricul- century, of a shelter shed to the west of tural development means that understand- the barn, and the roofing over of the ing of the broader national picture is likely southern half of the yard (since removed). to be deepened by appreciation of the local While this may have improved profitability conditions of which it is the sum. For the and conditions for the animals, it did little buildings to be useful in this way, however, if anything to ease the lot of the workers. they have to be analyzed on a regional The amount of labour involved, even basis, and in context. Most existing studies on a relatively small farm such as this, is of farm buildings concentrate on individual easily forgotten in our automated age, as is types of structure rather than on farmsteads its heavy natme. Even when threshing and as a whole, and even regional studies tend other forms of processing were mechan- to concentrate or- the best surviving ized, the distribution of crops and fodder examples (of either complete farmsteads or around the farmstead was still extremely single buildings). This is understandable, labour-intensive, as analysis of the plan of since buildings in a poor state of preser- the model farmstead at Hanby Lodge Farm vation, and those which were always of (Figure 5) will demonstrate. What the poor quality, do not in themselves make buildings show is something of the ways exciting objects of study. Viewed in con- in which farms were worked, and the text, however, they may provide important conditions in which a large mass of the evidence for regional prosperity, and for population lived: by doing this, they pro- the conditions in which ~he majority of vide oral history with a corporeal dimen- the farming population worked.