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, possibly of cross-shaft
Measurements: L. 30 cm (11.8 in) W. 20 cm (7.9 in) D. 15 cm (5.9 in)
Stone type: Greyish yellow (10YR 8/3) oolite grainstone, of closely packed 0.3 to 0.4mm diameter ooliths, with sparsely scattered pellets or oncoliths 2 to 3mm in diameter, very fine shell fragments (0.1 to 0.2mm thick and c. 3mm in length), and tiny gastropod fragments, aligned parallel to top and bottom surfaces as carved. Ancaster Freestone, as Bicker 1.
Plate numbers in printed volume: Ills. 46–8
Corpus volume reference: Vol 5 p. 107-108
(There may be more views or larger images available for this item. Click on the thumbnail image to view.)
A small broken fragment from a much larger monument. It has been cut down for reuse as a section of chevron moulding.
A (broad): Along one edge the remains of an undecorated border of rectangular section are clear and it appears that this border turned a corner to run along an original angle between faces A and B. Within the border on face A is a complete triquetra knot (Cramp 1991, fig. 25, Bi) in low relief; it is precisely cut and the interlace strand is decorated with an incised medial line. In one surviving corner of the face is a strand of an unconnected interlace motif which may have been no more than a space-filler in a corner left blank by the triquetra.
B (narrow): This face has been recut to be an element in a run of chevron moulding formed from a sequence of roll mouldings and fillets. It is badly damaged, though it clearly represents a recutting of the face.
C (broad): Defaced.
D (narrow): Within a similar undecorated border of rectangular section to that on face A is a faint trace of interlace, originally in low relief. A single box point is discernible.
E: The face adjacent to the undecorated border on A is plain.
It is not easy to understand what type of monument was the origin of this stone and it does not conform to the description given for the lost stone Bicker 3c (see below). The small scale of the decoration, along with the surviving evidence within the stone of two decorated faces separated by three undecorated borders of rectangular section may suggest that this stone originated in a standing cross-shaft belonging to an Ancaster variant of the South Kesteven shafts. It is possible, indeed, that this is another fragment from the lower part of Bicker 1. However, although the stone types are similar, there is nothing in the surviving decoration to link the two fragments. Indeed the two styles of interlace carving are quite distinct and what can be understood of the original form of no. 2 does not rule out an origin in a major grave-cover. The recut face B clearly dates from the twelfth century.
