Above high-level doorway in west face of tower.

In situ. Noted in present position by Haigh (1846, 13) and Butterworth (1862, 93) and visible in a photograph taken before the major restoration of 1861–2 (Knowles 1927, pl. XIII (fig.1)).

St Mary

Very weathered and some stone has broken off the muzzle area. The main part of the head and neck are, however, quite stable.

Animal-head prokrossos. This creature is much more angular that the lower example (Deerhurst St Mary 9). The top of the beast's head rises in an almost straight line from the square muzzle to a sharply defined brow-ridge before falling away through a shallow curve to the wall. Below the muzzle there is an abrupt angle between the straight-sided jaw and the equally straight-sided neck. A narrow band (c. 3 cm wide with a recessed centre between narrow bordering ridges) runs at an angle from the brow ridge down across the neck towards the wall. This could be a strap similar to the muzzle strapping on a prokrossos from Gloucester (Gloucester Tolsey 1, Ills. 377–8), but it could also be a geological feature. The end of the muzzle has broken away on the southern side, leaving a vertical scar. The jaws may have originally been even longer than the surviving stone suggests. There is no detailing of facial features.

This prokrossos is significantly different to the other Deerhurst beasts. It is also set centrally above a very distinctive, straight-topped and straight-sided hood-moulding which follows the shape of the lintel rather than the semi-circular head of the high-level doorway (Ill. 157). However, the doorway is associated with a second-floor chamber in the tower and a gallery around the tower that Hare (2009, 55–6) has shown belong to the same structural phase as the other Deerhurst animal heads (Period IV in the development of the building as originally defined by Rahtz et al. 1997). There is no indication that this prokrossos and its associated animal-head label stops (nos. 11–12) are later inserts or adaptations to the Period IV fabric. Furthermore, despite the differences in the style of carving when compared to the more fully decorated animal heads (nos. 13, 14, 16–18), there are also similarities to the more simplified, blocked-out style employed on the southern animal head on the chancel arch (Deerhurst St Mary 19, Ills. 206–10) and on the Virgin and Child (no. 5, Ill. 147). Recent study supports the opinion that these carvings were originally as highly decorated as any of the other Deerhurst carvings, but that all the surface detailing was added in paint (Gem et al. 2008) Therefore, it is suggested that this prokrossos and its accompanying label-stop beast heads (nos. 11 and 12) belong to the same programme of building and carving as the other animal heads and much of the rest of the sculpture, and that the missing details would have been added in paint.

First half ninth century

Haigh 1846, 13; Butterworth 1862, 93; Brown 1925, 205–6, 210, 213; Knowles 1927, 147–8, pl. XIII (fig.1), fig. 9; Fisher 1959, 88, 93; Quirk 1961, 30; Fisher 1962, 175, 183–4, pl. 70; Taylor and Taylor 1965, I, 195; Taylor and Taylor 1966, 33–5, 50; Gilbert 1969, 7; Verey 1970b, 167; Rahtz et al. 1997, 103, 146, 178, figs. 77, 78, 81, 82, no. 5 in Table VIII; Verey and Brooks 2002, 331; Bailey 2005, 1–7; Gem et al. 2008, 112; Hare 2009, 43