Select a site alphabetically from the choices shown in the box below. Alternatively, browse sculptural examples using the Forward/Back buttons.
Chapters for this volume, along with copies of original in-text images, are available here.
Object type: Finial cross, possibly from gable-end of church
Measurements: H. 53.6 cm (21 in); W. 28.2 cm (11 in); D. (base) 25.4 cm (10 in), (head) 16.5 cm (6.5 in)
Stone type: Coarse-grained, massive yellow sandstone
Plate numbers in printed volume: Pl. 238.1349-1352
Corpus volume reference: Vol 1 p. 240-241
(There may be more views or larger images available for this item. Click on the thumbnail image to view.)
A (broad): In the centre is an incised circle with a dot centre. On each horizontal arm is a deeply incised linear cross, type A1, with three incised circles regularly placed in the spandrels. The design of the upper arm is almost obliterated save for a vertical incision. The lower arm has incised saltire ornament.
B (narrow): The end of the arm is deeply incised with a double saltire with inset a rough half circle and circle. The shoulder below the head is smoothly worked and chamfered.
C (broad): In the centre of the cross and of each arm is a compass point and a double circle forming two concentric rings in relief.
D (narrow): The end of the arm is incised with a double saltire. The one on the left has only one line at the base.
Appendix A item (stones dating from Saxo-Norman overlap period or of uncertain date).
This cross is difficult to date by its form since several `architectural' crosses of the B8 type survive from Northumbria (Introduction, p. 8). The design of face A is also very difficult to date, but perhaps the incised saltires or chevron could be ascribed to the eleventh century. Butler (1958, 214-15, fig. 2) considers Cumbrian grave-stones with zig-zag ornament as eleventh century, and a slab from Cleator with a splayed-arm cross, such as this, or one with double-incised circles from Dalston, as eleventh century or of `the early years of Norman rule'. This seems reasonable. (See also Corbridge 3-4.)