West end of nave, by westernmost pier of south arcade

First recorded in 1867 (Murray 1867, 229); presumably found during rebuilding of 1863 by G. Fowler Jones (Morris, G. E., 1988, 2).

Holy Trinity

Upper parts of head and of face D broken away; slightly worn

The monument was originally a monolith of slab section.

A (broad): The surviving lower part of the cross-head has arms of type E10. There is a flat double moulding round the perimeter. The upper limb is lost and the lower limb is larger than the lateral arms. There may have been a central boss, now lost, round which run narrow, plain, bevelled strands which form a Stafford Knot terminal in each arm. The connecting ring is set back very slightly from the ends of the arms (type 1(a)), and is minimally recessed from the face of the cross. It tapers to the lateral arms.

The flat, broad edge moulding narrows slightly where it crosses the top of the panel at the neck of the shaft. The single panel is carved with continuous plain plait with irregular breaks using slender, modelled strands, with a degree of openness. It is reduced to a two-strand twist at the top, where it flanks a crudely depicted human figure, apparently without garments. He has a thick neck, pointed chin, and the remains of a scratched nose and mouth. The arm on the left extends laterally but is broken away. The other arm's elbow is bent and the hand holds a small rectangle, above which is a rectangular filler.

Below this figure the interlace surrounds a long-stemmed cross with slightly splayed arms, type B6. On its surface are faint diagonal marks which align with the surrounding interlace. Within the plaiting at the base is a frontally disposed standing human figure. He stands akimbo, with a round head and pointed chin, and very flat shoulders. On the chest a rectangle is suspended by strands from the neck. Below it are eight vertical incised lines forming a draped 'apron'. The legs are foreshortened and both feet point to the right. The facial features are incised: eyes and nose in a continuous line and a deep slit for the mouth.

B (narrow): The neck of the cross has a plain horizontal moulding and the cross-head is plain.

The shaft has a wide, flat edge moulding and, at the base, a deep, plain moulding. Within the panel are three sections of interlace, divided, without panel division, by two shorter panels of fret. The sections of each form of ornament increase in length the nearer they are to the base. The strands are broad and well-modelled. The uppermost interlace consists of a Stafford Knot at the top, linked to a pattern F loop and a pair of U-bend terminals below. The other two sections are both of four-strand plain plait. The uppermost section of fret forms a square panel containing a swastika motif (a variant of Allen 1903, no. 925). The lower appears to be a bungled, rectangular extension of the same basic type.

C (broad): The cross-head is identical with face A. The surface of the shaft is badly scraped. There is a wide, flat edge moulding, containing a single long panel of plain plait using modelled strands.

D (narrow): The cross-head is plain. There is a wide flat edge moulding round the surviving parts of the shaft, which has six sections of ornament without panel-division. At the top, only the U-bend terminals of a four-cord pattern remain. Next comes a square fret, like the one in the equivalent position on face B. Below that is a panel of six-strand plain plait, clumsily linked to a pair of closed circuit loops. Finally, there is a second square of fret, identical to the one above it, and then another panel of six-strand plain plait. The strands of the interlaces vary in width depending on the number of strands involved, but are all plain and well-modelled.

This cross is markedly different from others in Ryedale, both in form and decoration. The ring-head differs from the Middleton/Kirkbymoorside series in not having the crest and the arm-pits not being drilled. It more closely resembles the heads from Gargrave in the West Riding (Collingwood 1927, figs. 162, 156). Indeed, the proportions of the cross and the squat seating of the head into the shaft are more like monuments in Galloway and Wales, than any Anglo-Scandinavian pieces in eastern Yorkshire. The closest parallel, however, is Maen Achwyfan in Flintshire (ibid., fig. 157; Nash-Williams 1950, 127–9). The disposition of ornament in short runs without panel divisions, the use of plain plait, and the incorporation of human figures, are very close to the Maen Achwyfan cross. The interlace is modelled and open, unlike local pieces from the same period, and the open loops in the cross-head, together with the slender ring, are reminiscent of the head on the Leeds Parish Church shaft, West Riding (Firby and Lang 1981, 23–5).

Even more westerly, or Celtic, aspects of the cross lie in the figures: the orans holding the book occurs in Ireland (Roe 1970, 212–21, pls. 30–3), though there is a cruder, solitary parallel at Ripon, West Riding (Firby and Lang 1981, 27, fig. 7) and the book satchel is also usually associated with Celtic areas.

The ecclesiastical iconography of cross, orans, and priest, stands outside the secular tradition of warrior portraits elsewhere in Ryedale. Here again, the connection with Leeds suggests some leaning to the west and a continuation of ecclesiastical patronage during the Anglo-Scandinavian era. Stonegrave may have been an ecclesiastical island within the Ryedale settlements with monastic or church links reaching westwards across the north of England to Ireland and Galloway. There is much that is Anglian, like the form of the cross, and Celtic, like the frets and iconography. Frets seem to have been reintroduced into North Yorkshire and the Tees Valley in the tenth century, for example, at Hurworth and Sockburn, co. Durham, and at Stanwick, North Riding (Cramp 1984, II, pl. 89, 467; pl. 136, 735; Collingwood 1907, 394, fig. m on 395). There is little that is Viking. The ring-head indicates a date after c. 920 (Bailey 1978, 178–9).

The socket fragments at the site (see no. 6a–d) very probably belong to this cross (Firby and Lang 1981, 28–9).

Tenth century

Murray 1867, 229; Frank 1888, 89–90, fig.; Hodges 1894, 200, fig.; Browne 1897, 231, 234, figs. 12, 12a; Collingwood 1907, 401, figs. a–b on 398; Collingwood 1912a, 127; Edwards 1924, 59; Collingwood 1927, 133, 143, fig. 150; Morris 1931, 366; Kendrick 1941, 9, pl. IVa; Kendrick 1949, 63, pl. XLIV, i; Binns 1956, 19, 20, fig. 5; Pevsner 1966, 360; Adcock 1974, I, 73, II, pl. 120; Lang 1978c, 18, pl. IIId; Bailey 1980, 232; Hamilton-Dalrymple 1980; Firby and Lang 1981, 23–39, fig. 5; Cramp 1984, I, 90; Lang 1988b, 20; Morris G. E., 1988, 2–3

1. The following are general references to the Stonegrave stones: Allen and Browne 1885, 353; Frank 1888, 40; McDOnnell 1963, 56; Lang 1989, 1.