Leeds Museum Discovery Centre: from 2008 will be on display in the Leeds Gallery of the new City Museum. Accession numbers LEEDM.D.1973.339.1; LEEDM.D.1973.339.2; LEEDM.D.1973.339.3

See Leeds 1. First mentioned by Collingwood (1912, 130).

St Peter

Fragments, only one complete in width, worn and abraded in places

Three fragments of a cross -shaft, all showing evidence of cabled edge mouldings. The style is similar on all pieces and is strongly reminiscent of Leeds 1 except in the use of cable mouldings.

A (broad): 2a has a fragment of the torso of a frontal figure with a very simplified stylised robe and arms expressed as boneless curves holding a book in front of his body. A very worn cable-moulded edge survives on the right. 2b is quite battered. It has cable moulding on both edges, and between them again the torso of a frontal figure expressed as very stylised looping curves, almost like a very squeezed key pattern. Below is part of a long plain under-robe. 2c has the lower part of a Weland scene as on Leeds 1Ciii (Ill. 485), in fact supplying some of the missing detail from the bottom centre of that scene (Ill. 487). The upper part of the scene with the woman is completely missing. A cable moulding survives on the right.

B (narrow): 2a and 2b have cable mouldings on both edges; 2c is not complete in width and has the cable moulding only on the left-hand edge. It is battered but shows a section of the plain area from the foot of the shaft. The two upper fragments have short runs of a three-cord twist, and 2c credibly has part of the Stafford Knot (simple pattern E) termination of the plait.

C (broad): 2a and 2c show evidence that this face had a run of ring-knots (turned pattern C with added diagonal), that on 2c showing the termination of the pattern as a simple joining of the strands from the lowest knot. 2b has evidence of strands which could belong to the glide between knots. 2a has worn cable edging on the left, 2b and 2c on the right.

D (narrow): Missing on 2a; 2b has a fragment of three-cord plait identical with face B, but 2c appears to show it had animal-head terminals. The head in the bottom left corner has a round incised eye and a stubby snout-like jaw.

These fragments are more stylised than Leeds 1 but are clearly related to it. Lang (1976a, 91–2, figs. 7a–b) used the lowest section on face A to reconstruct the design on Leeds 1, face C. It is not impossible that these three fragments belong together, as Collingwood believed, and a similar programme including frontal figures in panels is suggested. The simpler patterns on the sides and the appearance of runs of interlace without plant-scroll suggest a simplification of the programme on Leeds 1.

Tenth century

Haigh 1856–7, 522, ?no. 5 or 6; Collingwood 1912, 130; Collingwood 1915a, 217–18, 263, 269, 282, 289, 292, figs. n–p, q–t, u–w; Collingwood 1915b, 272, 285, 308–12, 318, 321, 338, figs. on 309 (Leeds VI), pls. (I) 2, 6, 7, (II) 2A, 6A, 7A, (III) 2B, 6B, 7B, (IV) 6C; Morris 1923, 338; Collingwood 1927, 163, fig. 194; Morris 1932, 338, 556; Lang 1974, 17–18, fig. on 18; Lang 1976a, 91–2, 94, fig. 7b; Cramp and Lang 1977, cat. 14, and pl.; Bailey 1980, 104, fig. 16b; Bailey 1981, 92, cat. F15; Cramp 1984, 75; Bailey 1986a, 117, fig. 64b; McGuire and Clark 1987, 25–7, nos. 4, 5, 6, figs. 26–35; Bailey and Cramp 1988, 121; Brears 1989, 65, fig. 1; Lang 1991, 27, 37, 59, 203; Everson and Stocker 1999, 174, ill. 491; Lang 2001, 62, 85

[1] The following are general references to the Leeds stones: Pettigrew 1864, 308–9, 310–11; Bogg 1904, 75–6; MacMichael 1906, 363; Morris 1911, 46; Collingwood 1915a, 209–10, 292; Collingwood 1915b, 267–9, 271–2, 338; Collingwood 1927, 109; Faull 1981, 218; McGuire and Clark 1987, 5–9, 31–2, 42–5; Ryder 1993, 165.