Formerly built into north wall of vestry, interior; over north window in the centre of the wall c. 3.5m from floor. Since removal from the fabric during archaeological investigations completed in August 1993 (Green, F. 1993), reset in east face of newly constructed fireplace in former nave, c. 2 m from floor in the private dwelling into which the church has been converted.

None: the church was remodelled in 1838 and again substantially in the 1880s, but retaining a medieval fabric with post-medieval alterations (Pevsner and Harris 1964, 225; F. J. Green, pers. comm.). The vestry was built in 1899.

St Helen

Good; formerly painted over. Removal of the paint has revealed the decorated surface to be considerably worn and with blotching that suggests exposure to external weathering.

Fragment from the middle of a flat, rectangular or slightly tapering grave-cover of Lindsey type decorated in low relief.

A (top): The remaining border is defined by a single cable moulding, and the decorated surface is subdivided by a (presumably) median longitudinal cabled ridge of semicircular section. The panels thereby created are occupied by two interconnecting lines of simple pattern F interlace, which produce a repetitive figure-of-eight pattern in two surviving rows. The figure-of-eight units measure 16 × 9 cm (6.25 × 3.5 in): they are competently produced but the layout across the slab is lopsided since the units are not accurately paired.

Along the line of the lower break, the inner free strands of the inner row of interlace are stopped against the central rib: the other free strand in the surviving field appears to turn back into the outer row of interlace. This may indicate the end of the panel, either at the edge of the cover (except for a border) or perhaps against a cross-rib along which the cover could have been split in its fragmentation for secondary use (cf. Broughton 1). It is less clear at the next junction whether the free strands against the central rib turned lengthwise into the next figure-of-eight unit in the line (thereby confining the pattern within the panel), or cut through the rib to form a continuous interlacement with the adjacent panel in the manner of Broughton 1.

The carving is in a technique typical of this category of grave-cover, that leaves the decoration standing sharply as a squared U section against a flat cut-away background.

B (long): Undecorated original dressed surface.

C and E (ends) and D (long): Irregularly broken surfaces. F (bottom): Rough original quarried surface.

This is part of an interlaced cover of Lindsey type discussed in Chapter V above (Table 6). The single cable border allies it with sub-group (b), and its width, assuming the longitudinal ridge to be median, makes it closely comparable in size to covers in this sub-group at Cammeringham, Lincoln St Mark (no. 3), and Theddlethorpe St Helen, and comfortably within the range of product that was aspired to. Its execution, too, resembles that of other Lindsey type covers. It differs principally in the cabled median ridge, which bears direct comparison with Broughton 1 (Ill. 69), and in the number of lines of interlace – presumably four – which is unparalleled in the Lindsey type. Presumably in consequence, the unit size of the figure-of-eight motif is smaller than the norm. As with Broughton 1, the narrow cabled rib is specifically like the long cross-arm of Cross Canonby 4, Cumberland (Bailey and Cramp 1988, 89, ills. 222–3), but also more generally resembles the longitudinal arms of square crosses (type A1) whose flanking fields are filled with interlace. As too with Broughton 1, the line of splitting for reuse may indicate the position of a cross member, here coinciding with a termination of the interlace. Whether the interlace crossings also overrode the rib in this case, this piece (like Broughton 1) suggests a degree of hybridization of decorative traditions that may point to a later rather than early place in the type, though perhaps from its width and retention of massed lines of pattern an example more closely integrated in the type's traditions.

The archaeological work on this site provides a very good context for this cover (Green, F. 1993; pers. comm.). Within a ceramic sequence extending from the seventh or eighth century to the post-medieval period, two phases of wooden buildings of a domestic character pre-date a sequence of pre-Conquest burials, that in turn pre-date the construction of the first stone church, assumed to be of eleventh- or twelfth-century date. An inscribed and cross-marked lead plaque from the excavation, perhaps itself a funerary monument, may on epigraphic evidence be closely contemporary with the stone cover.

Later tenth or early eleventh century

(—) 1971, 5-6; Pevsner et al. 1989, 246