1a, reset in south-west quoin of south aisle, sixth stone from plinth (1.5m above ground level). 1b, reused as nosing of a set-off against the nave clerestory wall (south side) at east end immediately above south aisle parapet.

None. 1a was presumably reset in this position when the present south aisle was built. The date of the aisle is uncertain. The arcade is twelfth-century, but it has clearly been enlarged, possibly in the early post-medieval period. 1b was presumably reset in its present position either when the south aisle was built or when the clerestory was added. The clerestory appears to be of fifteenth-or sixteenth-century date. This is probably the stone 're-used as a merlon on the south aisle west end' (sic), referred to by Kerr (1985, 55–6).

St Nicholas

Poor. Both stones are greatly weathered.

Stone 1a. A section from either a large standing shaft or a mid-Kesteven type cover. The only visible original surface is greatly weathered and abraded. It has also been recut towards one end, where it has been used as the setting for a simple mass-dial with a central gnomon and a complete circle of drilled holes around it. Although it is conceivable that this dial was an original feature, it is much more likely that it was cut once the stone had been reused in its present position. Towards the other end of the visible original surface is the remains of a transverse panel decorated with interlace in low relief. The panel is contained within a border which, where it survives at all, has slight evidence of cable decoration. Within the border is a run of four-strand plait.

Stone 1b. A greatly recut fragment from a shaft or cover. Decoration has only survived on one face. It has a run of four-strand plait (possibly simple pattern F), of similar appearance to that on 1a, which is confined within a border which is undecorated to one side and cable-moulded to the other. The interlace run is offset within the present stone.

Stone 1a could represent a shaft of generally similar type to that at Brattleby, which has similar transverse panels at the base of the decoration on each of the three surviving decorated faces (Ills. 64, 66–7). However, 1a appears to belong to the same original monument as stone 1b, and 1b could not come from such a shaft. Furthermore, when viewed in con-junction, both decorated faces could be seen as part of the flank of a mid-Kesteven type grave-cover (Chapter V). In such an interpretation, the interlace on 1a would represent a transverse panel at one end of the monument, whilst that on 1b would represent the horizontal decoration towards the centre of the face (see reconstruction in Fig. 9). This explanation, embracing as it does both stones, is probably preferable to one which proposes two distinct monuments with such similar decoration. In either interpretation the stones must date from the period between the mid tenth and the early eleventh century.

Mid tenth to early eleventh century

Stone 1a: Stocker with Everson 1990, 88. Stone 1b: Kerr 1985, 55–6