Photography was undertaken in 35mm digital SLR colour photography (using a 10.4 Mpixel format). Photography was undertaken of the historic farm buildings to create a primary archive and included general shots of the site and detailed photography of room arrangement; main elevations and constructional details such as window openings, and fixtures and fittings, such as doors and window fenestration. Weather conditions began very wet on 11th February and while the rain became patchy, remained heavily overcast and occasionally foggy for the duration of the survey. Low light levels necessitated the use of flash in all interior situations and included some fill-in flash to penetrate the gloomy conditions in the exterior shots. The photographs were further supplemented by Room-based record sheets and Brickwork recording sheets. Historical research shows that at the time of construction of the outbuilding group, Little London Farm was part of the Nelthorpe estate: it represented an expensive and planned conversion to a double-crewyard arrangement typical of the High Farming movement in central Lincolnshire; this was undertaken between 1841 (when the farm buildings seen on a plan of this date were loosely arranged) and 1866 where the present C-plan buildings can be clearly identified. Building A consisted of a large two-storey storage barn to the east with a cart/implement shed with granary over to the west: north-range structures of this kind are typical of mid-19th-century planned farms, as is the single-storey west range for cattle accommodation (Building B). The lost eastern range was largely composed of stables, but the southern part of the east range (Building C) appears to have been the 'pigsty with pigeoncote over' described in the 1910 Land Tax assessment: a lucky survival and more typical of earlier farming traditions at a time when keeping pigeons was becoming a more urbanised activity. Building C was converted to farm office use in the late 20th century, removing nearly all evidence of its original and subsequent fixtures and fittings, but Buildings A and B retain their original layout and quality of construction - albeit with some modern alteration and localised disrepair- allowing the surviving buildings to be considered good examples of their types in the context of a partially preserved mid-19th-century planned farm complex.
Simon A Savage (Wed,) studied this question.