Lost

Found July 1833 '...In digging the foundations of a house belonging to Mr John Bulmer in a field called 'Cross Close' at a distance of about 135 yards from the present church-yard and in a south-easterly direction at the depth of three feet and a half and immediately upon the limestone' ((-) 1833, 218). Associated with skeletons lying roughly north-south (ibid). Early accounts agree that flat, unornamented stones, 4 to 5 inches square, were found under the heads of some skeletons, but reports vary for the 1833 group as to whether the ornamental stones were found under ((-) 1833, 218) or over (Haigh 1846, 185) the skulls.

St Hilda

Unknown

A (broad): All comment depends on drawing in Gage (1836). The stone is described as being in five pieces although only four are shown on the drawing. It could have been of a round or half-round form. It appears to have a fine raised outer band, and a plain outlined border enclosing a narrow pelleted band enclosed in double outlines. This is cut by the terminals of a cross, type G1, with a dot centre surrounded by three irregular circles. The cross-arm is incised with a median line and in the centre is a wide circular hole surrounded by a pelleted band. The quadrants of the cross appear to have contained Latin inscriptions in Anglo-Saxon capitals:

Fragments a–c: II — EQ] V [I] ES [CI] T II

Fragment d: — C O II

The completion of the inscription poses difficulties. Okasha (1971, 76) suggests HIC IN SEPULCHRO REQUIESCIT CORPORE. Scott (1956, 200) considered that fragment d must have formed the end of a word, and so cannot have been part of the word corpore. There is no reason to suppose that the word division would always have respected the division into quadrants however. This stone is of a more elaborate form than any of the other small inscribed stones from Hartlepool or Lindisfarne and parallels the `Herebericht' slab (Monkwearmouth 5). This piece is also the most elaborately decorated of the small inscribed stones. It appears to have been carved in a combination of incised and low relief ornament. All these factors seem to put it late in the series. (See also Discussion under no. 8.)

Eighth century

(—) 1833, 219; Gage 1836, pl. 52, 4-5; (—) 1844; Haigh 1846, 186-7, fig. on 186; Westwood 1846, 342-3; Sharp 1851, 26-33; Boutell 1854, 2-3; Haigh 1858, 18 and fig.; Greenwell and Westwood 1869; Haigh 1875, 366, no. 1; Hübner 1876, 69, no. 188, and fig.; Allen and Browne 1885, 352; Pettigrew 1888, 27, fig. on 28; Allen 1889, 215-16; Hodges 1905, 212; Lethaby 1913, 152, fig. 3; Howorth 1917, III, pl. facing 188; Brown 1918-19, 200-1, fig. 2; Brown 1921, 64, fig. 3; Åberg 1943, 105, fig. 77; Scott 1956, 200, pl. 6, 2; Okasha 1971, 76, pl. 44; Morris 1976, 143

1. The following are general references to the Hartlepool stones: Charlton 1855-7, 70-1; Haigh 1873, 269; Smith and Cheetham 1880, 1979; Stephens 1884a, 189; Allen and Browne 1885, 352; Browne 1886b; 12; Howorth 1914, 47; Peers 1914-15; Clapham 1930, 75; Rivoira 1933, 153; Pfeilstűcker 1936, 127; Kendrick 1938, 110; Henry 1965, 158; Page 1973, 25.