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: Fragment of grave-marker (reused stele?) [1]
Measurements: H. 15.5 cm (6.1 in); W. 25.7 cm (10.1 in); D. 7.6 cm (3 in)
Stone type: See no. 2.
Plate numbers in printed volume: 95-98
Corpus volume reference: Vol 3 p. 66
(There may be more views or larger images available for this item. Click on the thumbnail image to view.)
A and C (broad): There is a double edge moulding, the inner band being even slimmer than the thin outer one. Within the panel is an incised cross, roughly picked out and the pick holes not united. The cross has a circular junction and half-round expanded terminals on the arms (type F). The lower and one lateral arm is intact on each face. The lower terminal is seated upon a narrow stem.
B (narrow): Plain, with no edge moulding; finely dressed.
D (narrow): Broken off.
There are two distinct qualities of work on this piece. The dressing of the surface is as fine as the other stelae and the edge moulding of face A is assured. The picking of the cross, however, is clumsy, unbalanced, and probably unfinished. The moulding of face B is less competent. It seems likely that a plain stele decorated or inscribed on one face only was reused. The Hartlepool, co. Durham, type of cross being secondary, the date of the primary phase of the monument could be very early, suggesting that the stele might pre-date, or belong to the earliest phase of, the Hartlepool series (Cramp 1984, I, 101). The stemmed cross may have resembled that from fol. 26v of the Lindisfarne Gospels.
1. All the pieces from the Minster were discovered as a result of the excavations of 1966-71 by H. Ramm and D. Phillips. They are to be published as a handlist, together with a critical essay, in the forthcoming Royal Commission volume on the excavations. That publication will provide the finer detail of their archaeological contexts, both in a table, and in a description of the excavation of the south transept cemetery.
The following are general references to the stones: Wilson 1978, 142; Hall 1980b, 7, 21; Lang 1988b, 8, 12; Lang 1989, 5.



