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: Grave-cover
Measurements: L. 150 cm (59 in); W. 43 > 40 cm (17 > 15.75 in); D. 20 cm (8 in)
Stone type: Pale olive grey to dark brown, much-weathered silty ferruginous limestone. Tealby Limestone, Lower Cretaceous of Lincolnshire
Plate numbers in printed volume: Ill. 388
Corpus volume reference: Vol 5 p. 274
(There may be more views or larger images available for this item. Click on the thumbnail image to view.)
A flat, slightly tapering grave-cover, decorated in low relief on its upper surface only.
A (top): A plain rectangular cross (type A1) with narrow even arms that extend to the edge of the cover, standing 2cm in relief. The cover's corners and upper arrises appear slightly rounded, but this may only be the effect of weathering and wear on stone of poor quality. Damage apart, the cover is virtually complete.
The cover falls in a local decorative tradition based on crosses of type A1, but its execution in relief and with narrow arms associates it with pieces such as Marton 4 (Ill. 292) or even (with a different cross-head type) Langton by Wragby 1 and 2 (Ills. 228–9). Its production in a local ironstone also suggests a late date: no certainly pre-Conquest sculpture in the area is in this material, whereas several covers of the earliest post-Conquest sort are, as (for example) North Kelsey 1 and Stallingborough. Its reuse in the west doorway of a west tower of Lincolnshire late Saxon type, even if that tower is secondary to the church's nave and probably of post-Conquest construction (see Winterton 3), at first sight affords a useful terminus ante quem, as Fowler (1887–8, 365) presumed. But it offers no such guidance if Taylor is correct in assessing the doorway as not original (Taylor and Taylor 1965, 674), since the doorway has no inherently datable features. Baldwin Brown (1925, 486–7) offers no direct opinion on the doorway. Though Davies included this piece in his first publication of pre-Conquest sculpture from Lincolnshire (1914–15, 226), calling it 'Saxon', he omitted it from his later consolidated catalogue under Clapham's guidance (Davies 1926).