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: Part of shaft [1]
Measurements: H. 81 cm (31.9 in); W. 34.5 > 30 cm (13.6 > 11.8 in); D. 25.5 > 23.5 cm (10 > 9.2 in)
Stone type: Sandstone, pale grey, very coarse to granular, with white quartz pebbles to 30mm across. Quartz-grain dominated and quartz cemented. Upper Carboniferous, local Millstone Grit Group. [G.L.]
Plate numbers in printed volume: Ills. 403-6
Corpus volume reference: Vol 8 p. 180
(There may be more views or larger images available for this item. Click on the thumbnail image to view.)
A cross-shaft of rectangular section, both surviving faces edged with flat mouldings.
A (broad): A twist of two broad flat strands laces through double loose rings, of which two complete, and two partial, examples survive.
B (narrow) and C (broad): Now dressed away
D (narrow): This face has a continuous interlace, four registers of half pattern A with a double strand. The upper register has been damaged since Collingwood drew it.
Collingwood thought Kildwick 3, 4 and 5 very comparable, but nos. 4 and 5 are both much more competently carved than 3, not least in the designer's ability to lay out and follow logically a regular pattern which was either gridded or for which he used a very good template. The large-scale pattern and loose rings nevertheless suggest a late date, but Kildwick 4, 5 and 6 (and possibly the lost head fragment no. 8) appear to be the work of a different carver from that of Kildwick 1, 2 and 3. Collingwood (1927, 48) pointed to the use of the pattern on face D (half-pattern A) of this shaft and also on no. 5, and compared it to the use of the same pattern on earlier sculptures from Melsonby, north Yorkshire (Lang 2001, 176–7, no. 2, ill. 660); Ilkley 3A (on a narrow horizontal band: Ill. 361); and on a shaft from Dewsbury, no. 6 (Ill. 209), which is probably the same date as the examples from Kildwick, implying that these are very much in the Anglian tradition, and possibly part of a revival of such traditions.
