The northernmost and larger shaft of the two crosses are now on a platform in the market square

The following account of the history of the Market Square monuments relies heavily on analyses by Ormerod (1819; 1875–82), Tait (1948) and Hawkes (2002, fig. 1.3).

Sandbach 1 and 2 were first recorded in the Market Square by William Smith in 1585 (Smith and Webb 1656, I, 46). Since the crosses do not figure in the description of Sandbach by William Webb in 1621 it has been assumed that the sculptures had been destroyed or dispersed by that date. Puritanical iconoclasts are known to have been active locally according to Star Chamber proceedings endorsed in 1614 (Crossley, F. 1940, 75–6). The circumstances surrounding the destruction can only be speculation but there is no doubt that by the mid-seventeenth century various fragments had been removed from Sandbach, whilst others were scattered around the town or re-used as building material. Major pieces, including stones 1c and 1d (then still in one piece) of the larger cross and stone 2b of the smaller were taken, at some date between 1630 and 1670, by Sir John Crewe to Utkinton Hall where they were set up in the field in front of the house as an ornament; here the Crucifixion scene on stone 1d of the larger cross was covered with cement (Lysons 1810, 459; Ormerod 1819, II, 118, III, 57; id. 1875–82, II, 252). In 1711 the Hall fragments were removed by the Revd. Allen to the parsonage at Tarporley (Lysons 1810, 459; Ormerod 1875–82, II, 247–50; BL Add. MS 5830, fol. 34r). Here they were seen in 1755 by the antiquary William Cole who made the drawings and notes which are now BL Add. MS 5830, fols. 33v–35r; drawings were also made in c. 1770 by Dr Foote Gower (Earwaker 1890, 11). After Allen's death the fragments were removed to Oulton Park where they were set in a grotto, a short verse being inscribed on one of them — probably stone 2b of the smaller cross (Lysons 1810, 459–60; Ormerod 1875–82, II, 219).

Other fragments had remained at Sandbach after the destruction of the monument. Importantly, both sockets (Sandbach (Market Square) 4 and 5) and the lower part (stone 2c) of the smaller cross were all in their present positions when drawn at some date before 1810 by both William Alexander and the Lysons (Byrne 1810, pl. 15; Lysons 1810, 460 and fig. facing; BL Add. MS 9461, f. 122v). William Cole's diary record suggests that this was also the arrangement in the mid-seventeenth century since he noted the presence of the two sockets and (at least part of) the smaller cross in the market place in 1757 (BL Add. MS 5830, ff. 34r, 35r). Other pieces which survived in the immediate vicinity were included, with notes about their provenance, in the reconstruction drawings published by the Lysons and in the manuscript notes which lie behind them (Lysons 1810, 460 and fig. facing; BL Add. MS 9461, ff. 122v–127r). Thus stone 1e and stone 1f of Market Square no. 1 are described as 'lying at a well below Sandbach' whilst stone 1a of the same cross was 'lately found in Mr Bull's garden in the market place'; stone 2a of the smaller cross is labelled as 'fragment in the street at Sandbach'.

In 1816 the surviving fragmentary remains of the two crosses were re-assembled into their present position (Ormerod 1819, pls. 1–3 facing 56; Ormerod 1875–82, II, 219 recorded the inscription commemorating the event). Market Square no. 3 was set on the top of the smaller shaft; according to Ormerod it came from the steps of a house near the town well and is probably the fragment for which the town financial accounts show a payment of 1 shilling (Ormerod 1819, III, 58; Harper 1894, 12). Even whilst the crosses were being re-assembled 'a few more stones' were destroyed in the process of local re-paving, and one (Market Square no. 7) was used as the lowest step in the basement of a building overlooking the market place (Ormerod 1875–82, III, 99).

In the 1950s a further re-arrangement involved the removal of the Sandbach St Mary stones (p. 122), which had been attached to the cross-platform, to the church (Rosser 1958, 142).

The present arrangement of the crosses on the platform seems to copy what appears to have existed at the time of the early seventeenth-century demolition. This can be deduced from the fact that William Smith, writing in 1585, described the crosses as being 'on steps' whilst the engravings by Alexander and the Lysons, prepared before the present re-assembly, recorded that the lower part of the southernmost stone (Sandbach (Market Square) 2) remained in its socket on the platform with the larger socket-stone alongside it (Byrne 1810, pl. 15; Lysons 1810, 459–60; BL Add. MS 9461, f. 122v). Whether the platformed organisation of the carvings represented the original Anglo-Saxon appearance of the two shafts must remain an unanswered question: Hawkes has speculated that the edifice may have been erected in 1578 when a Royal Charter was granted for two annual fairs and a weekly Thursday market (Hawkes 2002, 27).

The shaft and fragmentary head now survive as six fragments, reassembled into a single monument in 1816 using plain pieces of similar sandstone cut to shape (Fig. 17). The original stones have been considerably damaged by wear and pollution. The numbering of the stones adopted here, and shown in the accompanying figure, follows Hawkes (2002, fig. 6.2) but uses the Corpus convention of lower case lettering to identify fragments of the same monument.

[2]

A (broad, east): The shaft is flanked laterally by a cable moulding and by a narrower inner frame.

Stone 1aA. This fragment includes the top of the shaft and the lower arm of the head. On the upper surface of this piece is a rectangular hole, 4 cm deep and 8 x 2 cm across. The curving border between shaft and cross-head is marked by a moulding. Above this is the lower part of a figure, with flared skirt and feet facing right, on which is superimposed at waist level a round flat boss surrounded by four drilled holes. A vertical moulding drops from the skirt to the lower border and at each corner of the skirt is a small circular pellet. Flanking the central figure and immediately adjacent to these small pellets are badly-worn curved features terminating above in a circular element.

Below the cross-head are two haloed forward-facing (and ?slightly-inward turning) human heads. Between the heads and in the upper corners of the frame are small pellets. There is a further pellet, at shoulder level, to the right of the right-hand figure.

Stone 1bA, to judge from its tapering width, was originally almost adjacent to stone 1a; the figures on stone 1a must therefore have been half-length. There is a broad flat horizontal moulding dividing the two panels on this stone. What remains of the upper panel is consistent with draped robes belonging to the two figures on stone 1a.

The lower panel is badly worn but appears to carry a thin vertical moulding, topped by an irregularly-shaped horizontal bar. To the left of the bar is a small pellet and, below, are possible traces of a human head. The ornament to the right of the vertical bar is now badly worn but may have contained two human heads.

Stone 1cA. The decoration is sub-divided into a series of arched panels divided centrally by a thin vertical moulding; to the right the arches spring from the inner frame to join this central moulding but to the left the arch has its own shaft set against that inner moulding.

To the left is a seated haloed figure, the head and torso forward-facing, within a deeply canopied arched frame; there are traces of a fringe or hair covering over the forehead. The seat extends, with short front leg at the bottom of the stone, from the left-hand arch pillar, and the figure's knees are contra-posed to the rest of the body, being viewed from the side. The body is clothed in a long robe; parallel lines, which may indicate a cloak, cross the right shoulder. The right arm is bent across the body and to the right of the neck is a small pellet. Laid across this figure's torso is a second smaller figure, possibly seen in profile, with haloed head bowed to the left. Its arm is sharply bent, passing over the right arm of the seated figure to reach up to a ?circular feature set in the angle of the larger figure's elbow. The torso of this smaller figure terminates at the level of the knees of the larger figure; worn traces below may indicate its legs.

To the right of the central vertical divider are traces of three figures with two arched frames dividing them; each arch acting as a lower border for the scene above. At the top of the upper part is a figure, set upside down and turned inward, with a double-outlined profile head; a small pellet is placed to the right. The remains of one arm show the figure holding up a small cylindrical object.

Below is a second complete bust, turned to the left. It has short hair, a deeply-punched eye, prominent nose and double-outlined profile head. There is a pellet to either side of the head, the one to the right extending from the border moulding. The torso inclines slightly to the left and only the shoulder and a sharply-bent arm are depicted, the hand holding a cylindrical object.

A double-outlined profile head, corresponding to that of the figure above, is visible in the remains of the lower niche.

Stone 1dA. Though now set directly below stone 1c, the decoration on face D (see below) indicates that there was originally c.15 cm of now-lost decoration between the two fragments. At the top of the stone is a Latin cross (type A1) whose horizontal arms reach to the framing border; this cross stands on a hollow stepped base. The crucified figure on the cross is thin, fully frontal and upright, the head tipped slightly to the right and surrounded by a cruciferous halo. He has short hair, deeply-punched eyes and an oval face without beard; chest, abdomen and brief loincloth are lightly indicated. The legs are slightly splayed at the knees and the feet are arched and outward-pointed. Above the figure's head, on the upper arm of the cross, are two convex bosses.

In the upper left spandrel of the cross is a half-length nimbed figure with short hair, forward-facing and leaning slightly towards the cross. His right arm, sharply bent across his body, clasps a square object to his chest.

The equivalent figure in the upper right spandrel is badly damaged but seems to have carried a similar square object clasped by a sharply-bent arm across the chest.

Below the horizontal arm of the cross is an animal-headed half-length figure, inward-facing and with a square object clasped across the body by a sharply-bent right hand. The creature has long ears, round eye, long squared snout and deep chest. A pellet is placed between the shaft and beast.

Balancing that creature to the right of the cross-shaft is an inward-facing figure with eagle head and everted-tipped wings; a square object is held against its chest by a sharply bent arm. The figure, which has a round eye, appears to be full-length with tail and feet resting on the arched head of the panel below.

On either side of the lower part of the cross and its hollowed socket is a panel with arched top. To the left this is occupied by a full-length haloed figure with head forward-facing. He wears a long slightly flared skirt; the head is bearded and markedly oval and the facial features are well marked by deeply-drilled eyes and incised nose and mouth. His feet turn towards the cross and he holds a cylinder in his right hand, the arm sharply bent across the body. There is a small pellet over his right shoulder.

In the equivalent niche on the right side is a haloed full-length figure, head similarly forward-facing but with feet and body seen in profile facing the cross. The general facial shape and features, as well as the flaring skirt, are similar to those of the matching figure on the left, though this face appears to have a beard and short hair and the dress is scalloped; the left arm is bent across the body. In this case, however, the figure leans noticeably inwards and there is no trace of any object in its hand. There are single pellets above his left shoulder and beneath his feet.

Within the hollowed socket of the cross is a winged and haloed half-length figure with deeply drilled eyes. Its triangular and deeply scored wings flare out in a steeply curving line from each shoulder and pass immediately below the outline of the cross-base. Below this winged creature are the forequarters of two inward-facing beasts seen in profile; their (inferred) hindquarters are hidden behind the shaft's borders. To the left the animal has a round eye, single ear, long curving neck and snout; its sole foreleg has a well-marked shoulder muscle and bent joint. The beast to the right has two ears, short snout, drilled eye, arching neck and curved foreleg. Between and below these beasts is a crib or bed, seen in profile, with a high headboard, which terminates in a knob to the left; the footboard is set lower. Lying on the bed is a small swaddled shape.

Stone 1eA. As indicated by the reconstruction (Fig. 17), this stone was not immediately adjacent to stone 1d. It is now heavily worn in the upper left area and is also cracked vertically down the centre. There is a horizontal border moulding at the top of the surviving piece.

Below, now obscured by the crack, was a large central figure sitting on (or standing in front of) a low-sided throne whose sides terminate in small knobs. The figure was forward-facing and nimbed, the lower garment of his elaborate drapery flaring out in curved mouldings. The face is set deep within the shoulders, and the right arm appears to be bent across the chest, holding a short rod whose remaining traces appear across his right shoulder. Above the left shoulder is a small pellet.

To the right is a bearded and nimbed full-length figure who leans slightly inwards. The head faces forward and the body is seen in profile with inward-facing feet. His left arm is sharply bent across the chest and carries a short rod laid across his left shoulder; this rod is divided by a clear incision down the middle and terminates above the shoulder with each half curving inwards. The right arm is only vestigially represented. The figure is dressed in a full-length skirt with scalloped hemline whose flaring folds are indicated by curving incisions. Below his arched left foot, and to the right above his head, are single pellets. Set over his head is a bird, seen in profile with both wings extending towards the top right-hand corner of the panel. Its long beak touches the halo of the central figure and an arched foot stretches back to the right. Above the bird's back is a small pellet.

To the left of the seated figure is a similar figure, with forward-looking face, bearded and nimbed; his body is similarly clothed in a flared full-length costume with scalloped hemline and he has inward-turning feet. The right arm is bent at the elbow and holds a rectangular object across his chest. There is a pellet on either side of the neck and beneath his arched right foot. Though there are traces of relief decoration above his head it is now not possible to distinguish its nature.

One foot of each of these flanking figures, and the sides of the central throne, are set on a circular moulding which encloses the partial remains of the scene below. At its centre, badly obscured by the vertical crack, is a (?) seated haloed figure whose head is deeply buried in his shoulders. Both arms are bent at the elbow across the chest and there are possible traces of a cylindrical object, held at an angle, across the body. Below the elbows, the garment flares out to the broken edge of the stone; the lower part of the figure has been lost.

Flanking this central figure are two nimbed and bearded figures, their heads set lower than his, but bowing towards him. Their heads are drawn full-face with drilled eyes and other facial features well marked. The figure to the left carries a rectangular object across the chest and has full-length fluted drapery; the figure to the right, similarly dressed, has a markedly rounded shoulder and carries an object formed by two thin parallel mouldings whose lower element terminates (near the right elbow) in two adjoining hollowed squares; the end of the upper element has been worn away. There is a small pellet between the head of the right-hand figure and the neck of the central figure. Above both flanking figures is a curved element emerging from the circular frame: this may be designed as an extension of one of the feet of the two characters in the scene above.

Stone 1fA. This stone forms part of the bottom of the shaft and is decorated with the remains of a terminal pendant triangular panel, bounded to the left by the lateral cable moulding and inner frame; below it is defined by another broad cable moulding and inner frame which strikes upwards towards the central line of the shaft. At the top is a low pointed arch. Within is a ?human head surmounting a triangular wing.

B (narrow, north): As on face A, six fragments remain on this side bordered laterally on the shaft by an outer cable moulding and a narrower inner frame.

Stone 1aB contains the upper part of the shaft and the lower part of the cross-head. There is no decoration surviving on the cross-head. At the top of the shaft is the forked terminal element of the serpentine decoration seen on the two stones below; within the fork are nested two further chevron forms.

Stone 1bB carries a broad, flat undulating (presumptively serpentine) body; this is crossed by narrower strands which themselves form knots within the curves defined by the main body.

Stone 1cB depicts the lower continuation of the serpentine beast seen on stones 1a and 1b. Here the body broadens towards the bottom of the stone and carries a wing which crosses upwards across the body from left to right. The wing is rounded at the shoulder and outlined with a thin moulding; the scapular and covert feathers are distinguished from each other – the latter represented by parallel mouldings. The wing tapers to the terminal which is formed by a boss (or tightly curved end) and extended tendril. The detail of the body in the lower right corner is no longer clear. It is pierced near the top by a thinner strand which is knotted and terminates between body and wing in a boss or tight spiral; the turn of the strand extends into a tendril and boss, analogous to that of the beast's wing, in the upper left corner of the stone. There is a small pellet above the shoulder of the wing.

Stone 1dB. At the top is the head of the beast whose body extends through stones 1a–c. All that remains are its open jaws with tripartite tongue whose forks are interspersed with small pellets. The marked forehead, in the upper left of the stone, contains a large eye with bulging eyelid and traces of a cheek spiral.

Below is a figure, bent to the right at the waist, with a clean-shaven double-outlined profile head and deeply punched eye. The right shoulder is emphasised and the slightly-bent arm holds a short cylinder across the waist. The figure wears a short flared kirtle with scalloped hemline, whose vertical pleats are marked by mouldings; the knees are bent.

Below is a stepped arrangement of parallel frames divided by a central moulding which terminates at the top in a flat boss; the frames to the right are set higher than those to the left. The horizontal bars forming the frames emerge from this central moulding, reaching towards, but not always touching, the inner lateral frame of the shaft. The figure within the upper right-hand frame differs in his position to all the rest: facing inwards and with a double-outlined profile head, his knees are bent and his head is flung back on an elongated neck to gaze upwards. He has a sharply pointed nose, and a curved frond-like object passes across his body and meets the inner vertical frame.

Though worn, the other figures (and those on stone 1e below) follow a common pattern. All face inwards with double-outlined profile heads; they have elongated chins reaching to the central moulding (? except perhaps the figure in the much-worn upper left), which might indicate that they were planned to be bearded. Each figure has an exaggerated shoulder, perhaps designed to indicate a padded short sleeve or cloak. All wear short kirtles which are widely flared and droop sharply to a point at the corners; pleating is visible on several of the depictions. The arm of each figure is bent sharply across the waist and grasps a curving frond-like object which emerges from the central divide and, where it can be traced, appears to pass over the figure's body. On stone 1d there are three such figures, in addition to the contorted figure in the upper right panel. One, the upper figure to the left, is complete with the frond passing over his body and shoulder. Only the head survives from the figure below – and both head and shoulders of the remaining figure on the right; the chin/beard of this latter figure extends to meet the central vertical moulding.

Stone 1eB continues, almost contiguously, the laddered set of figures whose general characteristics were listed under stone 1d. At the top, on both sides of the central divider, are the feet of figures. One complete frame, with figure, survives to the left; the outer moulding of the double-outlined profile head here terminates in a curl. Below is the upper part of a figure. To the right is one complete panel with, below, a near-complete panel which only lacks its lowermost sections.

Stone 1fB contains the pendant triangle in the lower left corner of the shaft. Flanked to the right by the cabled border moulding it is further defined by an inner moulding border, vertical to the left, curving upwards at an angle to the right. Within this is set a bearded figure, facing inwards, with double-outlined profile head. His right arm is bent across his body and his drapery is represented by a series of mouldings. No feet or lower body are represented.

C (broad, west): Six stones make up this face of the shaft. All the shaft panels are framed laterally by a bold cabled moulding with a narrower inner moulded frame.

Stone 1aC represents the top of the shaft and the adjacent fragmentary cross-head. The head is too heavily weathered to preserve ornament. Below are the remains of two profile figures, their lower parts cut away, facing each other across a vertical moulding. Both appear to have arms bent across their bodies and to be holding short cylinders. In the upper left corner of the left-hand panel is a small pellet.

Stone 1bC carries the remains of two panels divided by a thin vertical moulding. The frame to the left has an arched head; within it is a profile figure facing left, carrying a thin rod over his shoulder. This possibly terminates in a knob; alternatively that feature may be a separate small pellet matching the one set in front of the figure's chin. The right-hand panel is now badly damaged; all that survives is a single small pellet against the vertical moulding.

Stone 1cC. The upper part of this fragment has been cut away and then re-carved with a quatrefoil motif, with moulded edges, on which is carved an elongated lozenge shape terminating in fleur-de-lys and overset with a crescent shape.

Below, and part of the original decoration, are the remains of two arched panels, divided by a thin vertical moulding. To the left is a figure facing left, the outer moulding of the double-outlined profile head ending in a curl. His left arm, bent at the elbow, holds the looped terminal of a rope which curves across his shoulder, passes over the central divider and pinions the wrists of the figure in the flanking panel. The figure's legs are lost but he has a pleated short kirtle. Level with his face is a downward-curving frond emerging from the left-hand inner frame.

To the right, the panel is occupied by a figure whose body faces left but whose bearded face is forward-facing and surrounded by a cruciferous nimbus; traces of hair are visible. His hands are pinioned in front of him by the rope held by the figure to the left. The robe is long, flared and heavily pleated.

Stone 1dC. The upper part of this stone, which is clearly nearly contiguous with stone 1c, has been damaged but sufficient remains to show that it carried four panels, with a large (and potentially original) hole lying where the four niches intersected with each other. The upper two panels had arched heads and were divided by a central vertical moulding which meets the inner frame in a half-round terminal. This vertical moulding also divided the two lower panels, which only survive partially. Between the upper and lower panels was a narrow horizontal moulding.

In the upper left panel is a profile figure, facing (and walking) left, clean-shaven and with short hair; any double-outlined detail of head or halo has been lost. The left shoulder is rounded, and his left arm is bent across his waist to hold a long thin object which passes behind his body to emerge over his shoulder; its lower end hangs down in front of him. His chest is thrust out above the lower part of the body and he wears a short pleated kirtle. There are small pellets on either side of his head; in front of his chest is a ?loose curving frond which swells at its lower end and terminates in a knob or tight spiral at the top.

In the upper right panel is a large-headed figure, with double-outlined profile, marching to the left. His left arm is bent across the body and carries a cross (with slightly flexible stem) over his shoulder. The body is clothed in a short flared and pleated skirt. There are single pellets under his chin and at the back of his head.

The lower left panel is occupied by a forward-facing winged figure with halo, short hair and pointed chin. The wings, formed from parallel thin mouldings, rise sharply from the shoulders on either side of the head. The right arm is bent across the body and may hold a short vertical cylinder.

The carving in the lower right panel is badly damaged, but the vertical sides of a throne, topped by a knob, are visible on either side of a figure whose partially-surviving torso is forward-facing but whose head appears to be turned to the left. There is a small curl at the back of the neck. Other details are now lost though there appears to be an arm bent across the chest.

Stone 1eC. The decoration on this stone is divided into four panels, divided laterally by a thin vertical moulding and horizontally by a further thin moulding which terminates (where visible to the left) in an oblong block adjacent to the inner shaft frame.

In the upper left panel is the lower part of a forward-facing figure, feet splayed and wearing a flared kirtle with scalloped hemline. A right arm is bent across the body and there are traces of a right ?wing flanking the garment. In the lower right corner is part of another long thin ?rod. Nothing is now visible in the upper panel to the right except for a foot, turned to the left, in the lower left corner.

The lower left panel is damaged at the bottom but in its upper sections is a winged beast, back turned to the central moulding and facing upwards with open fanged (upper only?) and contoured jaws from which emerges a knotwork tongue terminating in a foliate form. The upper jaw is short and blunt; the pear-shaped eye behind it is set within a raised brow with marked cheek line. There is a short lappet behind the head. The wing, arching up sharply from the shoulder, passes across the body and terminates in a marked everted wingtip; incised lines mark the chest. The front leg, with arched two-toed foot, is set between the body and the left-hand frame.

The beast in the right panel is better preserved but identical in form to that on the left; here however it is possible to see that the beast's body dissolves into knotwork below. The eye-lappet is also more visible, as are the muscles at the shoulder. The wing is contoured and with an everted tip.

Stone 1fC is nearly contiguous with stone 1e. It shows the lower termination of the central vertical moulding traced on the upper stones; here it divides to form the inner frame for the pendant triangular terminations of the two beast-panels above. Only the right-hand triangle survives complete and shows the knotwork continuation of the beast's body from the stone above. The interlace ends, in the apex of the triangle, in an animal head with gaping mouth similar to that found among the vine-scroll of face D.

D (narrow, south): This face of the shaft appears to have had no panel division. It is bounded laterally by bold cable mouldings and a narrower inner moulding.

Stone 1aD. The remains of the cross-head are too damaged for any carving to be discerned. The top of the shaft seems to have been decorated with a regular knotwork design derived from a three-cord plait, probably half pattern A.

Stone 1bD. An half pattern A knot at the top of the stone appears to develop below into simple pattern F interlace. As indicated by the reconstruction, this fragment was not immediately adjacent to 1c below.

Stone 1cD. Two complete pattern C knots fill this stone. At the top, paired strands join to form a break but two diagonalling strands run up to further knotwork.

Stone 1dD shows, at the top, the continuation (though at a greater distance than is suggested by the present reconstruction) of the complete pattern C knotwork seen on stone 1c. At the bottom, to the left, one strand of this interlace terminates in a half-moon veined foliate form; its equivalent termination to the right seems to continue into the leg of a beast in the scroll below after throwing off a foliate side-shoot. The other two strands develop into the stem of the single-stemmed leafless (but inhabited) scroll which lies below. There are traces of a ridged node where main stem and spiralling offshoots diverge, and two small pellets are set adjacent to the inner left-hand border. There are two complete scroll volutes and, at the bottom, part of another volute on this stone. The spiralling side-shoot in the lower of the two complete volutes terminates in an animal's head with drilled eye, open jaws and marked forehead; a foliate head-lappet springs from the back of the head.

Both complete volutes partially enclose a profile beast whilst there is also a ?bird form set between the two. The back leg of the upper profile beast emerges from the knotwork above whilst his front leg passes under the termination of the curling scroll-offshoot and rests against the main stem; this offshoot is linked by a bar to the main stem. The beast has a marked rear haunch and small tail. Its head is set against the left-hand border and has a lolling tongue with swollen terminal, emerging from a gaping, toothless but outlined jaw; the upper jaw is short and blunt. The eye is set within a raised brow and has a curling scroll form. A small ear ends close to (or in) a small pellet.

Below, and slightly to the right, is a long-necked bird form seen in profile, its curved beak set in the angle between the right-hand inner frame and the scroll stem. One leg extends from a thrust-out chest into the junction of main and subsidiary stems whilst the wing curves down alongside the scroll. Another leg (or wing) passes over the scroll and seems to be linked to the tongue of the beast in the volute below.

The forequarters of this latter beast are entirely contained within the volute and consist of a (now worn) head with open jaw and extended tongue, small ear and single front leg which ends in two toes. The rear part of the body is pierced by the scroll, and the two splayed back legs, each with two toes, reach towards the left-hand inner frame. There is a small tail ending in a pellet or tight spiral.

Stone 1eD shows a non-contiguous continuation of the scroll seen on stone 1d and contains two complete volutes with, at the top, the curve of a third. There is a ridged node at the junction of main and subsidiary stems; the latter terminate in profile beasts' heads with open jaws and small ears.

In the upper right corner is a backward-turned animal, seen in profile, with open jaws and drilled eye, its front paw passing behind the scroll to touch the shoulder of the man below. Its extended haunch and rear paw, ending in a two-toed foot, cross over the curling side-shoot; between the foot and the beast-head terminal of the sideshoot are two small pellets. The beast's tail passes under the main stem and terminates in a triquetra form set above a small pellet.

The upper of the two complete volutes encloses a man with double-outlined profile head, facing left. He has a beard, drilled eye, and slightly opened mouth. He is wearing a short, slightly flared, kirtle. One of his legs passes behind the branch and ends in a curling tendril; the other has a rounded knee and is set against the right-hand inner border where the arched foot is set over a small pellet.

Opposite this figure, in the space between the plant and the outer mouldings, is a well-modelled backward-turned beast, seen in profile, with round head and blunt jaws; it has a short curling ear and tail. The haunch and single rear leg extend into the space between the branches; the single front leg with sharply-arched paw runs against the left-hand inner border.

Within the lower volute is a bird seen in profile and facing right. This has pointed open jaws and a drilled eye, a wing with everted tip, rounded raised tail and single foot. Beneath the tail is a small pellet. In the lower left-hand corner is a shoot, with three curling and lobed ends, which is probably linked to the vestigial remains of the (?zoomorphic ornament) in the lower right corner. To the right of the shoots is a further small pellet.

Stone 1fD represents the terminal pendant triangle on the left of the shaft, its sides defined to the left by the cable moulding and inner frame and, to the right, by the inner frame which here strikes up towards the (lost) centre of the lower part of the shaft. The surviving ornament represents the termination of the scroll seen in stones 1d and 1e, showing, at the top, a split in the scroll with ridged node and, in the lower left, a termination formed by two curling tendrils with a berry set between them.

(See Chapter IV, p. 23.)

(a) Dating

The following analysis shows that the art of the shaft is closely related to that of Mercian and southern English manuscripts, metalwork and sculpture of the late eighth and early ninth century. Within Lancashire and Cheshire only the worn zoomorphic ornament of Overchurch 1 betrays a similar taste (p. 93, Ill. 228).

Two features of the scroll on face D find their parallels in the art of Mercia and southern England in the later eighth and early ninth centuries. Firstly, the manner in which the scroll turns into knotwork (Ills. 257, 271) is strikingly close to a similar transition, involving an identical knot, at Bakewell, Derbyshire, a site with other Sandbach echoes (Hawkes 1998, 41–2; id. 2002, fig. 2.31); Over 1 falls into the same category (Ill. 220). Kendrick saw such breaks in pattern as stemming from a southern English phenomenon evidenced in 'Canterbury manuscripts': it is well exemplified in the Royal Bible, BL MS Royal I. E. VI, dated by Budney to 820–840 (Kendrick 1938, 199, 206; Alexander 1978, ill. 162; Webster and Backhouse 1991, 217, no. 171).

Secondly, the scroll contains two beast-headed terminals to one of the branches (Ill. 272). Animal-headed scrolls appear in a variety of Mercian and southern English works in the late eighth and early ninth century: examples can be found on the eighth-century Rupertus metalwork cross and the early ninth-century BL MS Cotton Tiberius C. II and BL MS Royal I. E. VI (Webster and Backhouse 1991, no. 133; Alexander 1978, ills. 162, 164–5: for manuscript dates see Webster and Backhouse 1991, no. 171; Brown, M. 1996, 178). Alongside these can be placed occurrences in Mercian metalwork of the eighth century and, in sculpture, the early ninth-century cross-head from Cropthorne, Worcestershire (Bakka 1963; Webster and Backhouse 1991, no. 209).

The scroll animals and bird on face D (Ills. 271–2) can also be readily paralleled in late eighth- and early ninth-century art. The most diagnostic of the beasts is the dog-like creature at the top of the scroll which has sculptural analogues among Yorkshire scrolls at St Leonard's Place in York, Croft and Cundall/Aldborough (Lang 1991, ill. 369; id. 2001, ills. 152, 173); the head with its blunt muzzle, marked brow and cheek spirals, lolling tongue and curling head lappet is closely matched at Elstow in Bedfordshire (Tweddle 1992, fig. 574c). All of these carvings have been assigned to the later eighth and early ninth centuries. Of similar date is Lowther 2 which offers further general parallels for the combination of stances in a scroll (Bailey and Cramp 1988, ill. 432). It is in the same period also that we find manuscript examples of animals whose tails or tongues take on exaggerated foliate forms (see e.g. BL MS Cotton Tiberius C. II and BL MS Royal I. E. VI (Wilson, D. M. 1984, ills. 103, 111)).

The evidence considered so far is consistent with a late eighth- or early ninth-century date for Sandbach Market Square 1. This can be more narrowly refined by consideration of the two winged bipeds at the base of face C, which can be readily paralleled among other sculptures from the Mercian area. Bipeds emerge in Anglo-Saxon art in the second half of the eighth century and continue into the following century where they figure, inter alia, in the repertoire of the Royal Bible and in metalwork of the Trewhiddle style (Tweddle 1992, 1156–7; Tweddle et al. 1995, 35–6). General analogues for the heraldic-like bipeds at Sandbach can be found at Elstow in Bedfordshire and at St Peter's in Bedford itself (Tweddle et al. 1995, ills. 265, 269); beasts from St Oswald's in Gloucester and Breedon offer other comparisons (Heighway and Bryant 1999, 154–5, fig. 4.10; Cramp 1977, figs. 62i, 63c). All have similar thrust-out chests, single leg and dissolving lower parts, and among them are the foliate tongues, ear lappets, outlined wings and jaws, pear-shaped eyes and curved cheeklines of the Cheshire animals. These beasts have been variously dated to the later eighth and early ninth centuries (e.g. Webster and Backhouse 1991, no. 207; Tweddle 1992, 1161; Tweddle et al. 1995, 35–6; Heighway and Bryant 1999, 154). Tweddle, however, has pointed out that the particular version seen at Sandbach, in which the lower parts of the animal dissolve into interlace but preserve an ordered distinction between the body and its knotty extensions, only emerges towards the end of the eighth century and then becomes commonplace in the ninth (Tweddle 1992, 1158–9; Tweddle et al. 1995, 36). It is well exemplified in the Royal Bible, the early-ninth century Pentney brooches and generally in Trewhiddle art (Webster and Backhouse 1991, nos. 171, 187). A date in the ninth century — rather than the late eighth — thus looks probable for this Cheshire cross, though, given the close parallel for the head of the Sandbach animal in the late eighth-century Chelsea finger-ring (Webster and Backhouse 1991, no. 175), it is unlikely to date far into that century.

A variety of other motifs point to the same conclusion. Thus the serpentine winged beast on face B, with its body piercing (Ill. 269), can be matched in the early ninth-century Barberini Gospels (Alexander 1978, ill. 175 — though the head differs), and its peculiar form of triple foliate tongue, with curling side leaves flanking a swollen central element with pellet attachments, is repeated in Paris, Bibliothčque Nationale MS lat. 10861, which is dated c. 805–825 and assigned to Canterbury (Alexander 1978, ill. 319; Brown, M. 1996, 175); many ninth-century strap-ends have a somewhat similar foliate element (e.g. Wilson, D. M. 1964, pl. XL). The everted wing-tips on a range of avian and zoomorphic forms on the shaft is another detail which, though beginning in the eighth century, persists through into the early ninth (Wilson, D. M. 1984, 12; Alexander 1978, ill. 133; Brown, M. 1996, 169); it is a detail which can also be seen on a sword pommel from the region (Newman and Brennand 2007, fig. 4.2). A date for this cross soon after c. 800 thus seems the most likely.

(b) Iconography

This section draws heavily on the recent book-length analysis of the monument by Hawkes (2002; see also Hawkes 1989; 1995a; 1997a; 1998; 2001a; 2003a; 2003c).

A (broad, east). It is now impossible to establish the original scene on the cross-head, though the kirtled figure, superimposed on a bar, is clearly closely related to the figure on Sandbach Market Square 3 (Ills. 250, 279). The scene below contained two haloed heads, whose lower (and thus half-length) bodies appear at the top of stone 1b; they cannot now be identified.

Stone 1cA (Ill. 263) carries a representation of the Adoration of the Magi, with a seated Mary and Child to the left under a canopied throne — architectural details which underline the fact that this is the Throne of God. To the right, arranged vertically one above the other, are half-length profile figures of the three Magi, bowing and carrying gifts shaped as cylinders or scrolls. Their vertical arrangement is probably a reflex of the proportions of the shaft, and Hawkes (2002, 33) has convincingly suggested that the reversed nature of the upper figure was designed to ensure that he did not face over the top of the canopy and thus appear to ignore Mary and the Child. Though the Magi can occasionally be found elsewhere framed by niches, and in half-length form (Hawkes 2002, 32–3), this composition is essentially a means of economically representing a scene, which is essentially horizontal, in a vertical setting — and then integrating it with the rest of the shaft's decoration by using its standard figural types, their attributes and the niched settings employed elsewhere on the carving.

The manner in which the Virgin has an awkwardly-turned body, with the Child turned to face her with bowed head, his arm raised towards her well-marked breast, is a version of the 'complementary' composition found elsewhere in Insular art. Though this arrangement is best known through its appearance on the St Cuthbert's coffin, the particular variant seen here — Christ raising his hand towards the breast and the Virgin's hand crossing his body — is very close to the type appearing in the Book of Kells (Battiscombe 1956, pl. X; Hawkes 1997a; id. 2002, 36, fig. 2.4; see also Harbison 1992, i, 246). Henderson (G. 1987, 155) has convincingly argued that this variation was originally developed as a hieratic image in which the Magi played no part. The Sandbach scene of the enthroned Virgin may thus have been developed by the sculptor himself from elements which once had a separate existence, and which may have originally been associated with Iona (Chapter IV, p. 24; Hawkes 1997a, 118–21, 127, 131).

To the Fathers and to Anglo-Saxon writers dependent upon them, the Magi visit was significant as the first manifestation of Christ to mankind, and more specifically to the Gentiles (Hawkes 2002, 37; Thorpe 1846, 104–8). It was also, however, in both commentary and the liturgy, established as an image of the Eucharist, with the Magi as types of the Church approaching the altar, the true Bethlehem and manger of the heavenly bread (Hawkes 2002, 37–8). The positioning of this Sandbach scene above a crucifixion depiction would thus be particularly potent.

Stone 1dA carries a crucifixion scene (Ill. 265), Christ shown with a cruciferous halo and wearing a short loincloth; he is set on a Latin cross which extends the full length and width of the panel, terminating below in a hollowed and stepped base. His arms and legs are shown rigidly extended with feet arched whilst the body is extremely thin. Sol and Luna, represented as two convex circles, are placed above his head in the upper arm. The four evangelist symbols are set in the arms of the cross, all carrying books: Matthew in the upper left quadrant; Mark in the damaged upper right segment; the bull symbol of Luke in the lower left, and the eagle of John in the lower right. The two figures standing on either side of the socket are probably part of this same scene, though not clearly separated by a panel boundary from the Nativity image below. They are presumably John to the left, shown bearded and carrying a scroll, and Mary to the right.

Hawkes (2002, 38–40) has shown that the form of crucifixion with short loincloth, rigid well-defined body and stiff legs derives ultimately from an early Christian model; the early ninth-century Stuttgart Psalter demonstrates, however, that this form was employed within the Carolingian repertoire though it was not, at that date, the dominant type (Schiller 1972, pls. 355–6). The symbols of sun and moon were common in Crucifixion scenes from the third century but remained (as here at Sandbach) relatively undeveloped before the ninth century. This all suggests that the ultimate model for these parts of the composition was of early Christian date, though it may have been transmitted through the intermediary of a Carolingian revival of such motifs. The stepped cross (see discussion of Halton St Wilfrid 1, p. 180) was well established in Insular art by the late seventh century and its appearance here does not necessarily indicate reliance on a Carolingian model: it occurs in the Stuttgart Psalter which we have already noted as drawing on early Christian types. John and Mary are familiar accompanying figures to sculptural crucifixions, though not usually within northern England; their position is here reversed from the usual position of these two witnesses.

The formal variations among evangelist symbols are discussed under Halton St Wilfrid 2 and Hornby 3 (pp. 184, 215). The half-length type seen here which, though clutching books, lack a consistent representation of both wings and haloes, is unusual in Christian art; similar deprivation can be seen, however, on the slab at Wirksworth in Derbyshire and the St Andrew Auckland cross in Co. Durham (Hawkes 1995b, 249–2; Cramp 1984, 37, pl. 3.7). More importantly, it is not common for such symbols to flank a crucifixion scene; indeed this appears to be the earliest example in Insular art. They do, however, occur frequently as parts of a Majestas composition, surrounding the figure of Christ. Two Insular examples among these Majestas scenes are particularly instructive in explaining the meaning of the Sandbach scene. The first is the composition in the Trier Gospels where the symbols are set in the quadrants of a cross around a central bust of Christ (Hawkes 2002, fig. 2.7); the second is on the slab at Wirksworth where they surround a cross with a Lamb at the centre (Bailey 1996a, 72; Hawkes 1995b, 249–52). Both of these compositions reflect the same intention as the Sandbach depiction: by fusing elements appropriate to Majestas with those of Crucifixion they provide an image of Christ's eternal glory and judgement, as well as his sacrificial death.

The scene is thus multi-valent. And reflective contemplation would have yielded yet further dimensions of meaning. All of the elements emphasise the universal and far-reaching nature of the event. The cross reaches out to the four corners of the world, its dimensions identical — as the Fathers recognised from Paul's Letter to the Ephesians III, 18 — with the love of Christ (Hawkes 2002, 45; Coatsworth 1979, i, 24–7, 67–82). The evangelist symbols, whilst carrying associations of Majesty and the apocalyptic vision of St John, also emphasise through their books the message of salvation carried to the whole world. The presence of Sol and Luna, whilst alluding to the darkness which accompanied the Crucifixion, signify the cosmic dimension of the sacrifice. Mary and John were the historic witnesses but they also extend the temporal dimension and implications of the event: Mary links back to the mystery of the Incarnation, portrayed below at Sandbach, and John, as the presumed author of the Book of Revelation, looks forward to the Second Coming.

The lower part of stone 1dA (Ill. 265) is occupied by a Nativity scene with angel hovering over a crib, and swaddled figure lying within. Two beasts lower their heads over the cradle. This seems to represent an abbreviated version of a nativity image which is well evidenced in Italy and Gaul in the fourth and fifth centuries. The summary by Hawkes (2002, 46–9) shows that it is rare in the west after this period and, indeed, equally uncommon after the seventh century even in the eastern world. After this date more complex depictions are favoured, with an increase in the number of participants, including Mary and Joseph; these are the forms seen in various Late Saxon manuscripts (Ohlgren 1986, 340 for listing). Even the elaborate crib can be paralleled amongst the early material (Schiller 1971b, pl. 143) — and it also appears in the ninth-century Sacramentary of Reganaldus from Tours, which significantly appears to be copying a late antique type (Schiller 1971b, pl. 161). This analysis suggests that Sandbach is drawing upon an early model. If this is the case, however, then the presence of the angel is puzzling. This element is rare in any Nativity scenes before the later tenth century, though it does occur when that scene is combined with the Annunciation to the Shepherds. There is however one example, on the early ninth-century Harrach Diptych (Schiller 1971b, pl. 164) which may represent another ninth-century Nativity drawing upon the same early source as Sandbach. Given, however, the fact that the Sandbach angel is closely paralleled in its form by both the angel on the west face and beast-wings elsewhere on the cross, this component may represent a Sandbach addition to a revived early Christian model.

Interestingly this scene is not represented elsewhere in Anglo-Saxon or Irish sculpture. Like the crucifixion scene above, the significance of this image is potentially multi-valent. Thus the lack of a clear division between the crucifixion and nativity depictions emphasises the links between Christ's birth and sacrificial death. And reference to patristic and homiletic texts shows that the themes of revelation and universal adoration by both the natural world and the heavenly world, which run through the scenes above, are equally present here: commentators like Ambrose, for example, saw the beasts as symbolic of humanity in general and of the Gentiles in particular (Adriaen 1957, 50). And they also drew attention to a strong Eucharistic element in their analysis of the Nativity. Thus Bede refers to the Child in the crib as 'the bread of angels' and the beasts as 'sanctified beasts' who feed from 'the corn of his flesh' (Hurst 1960, 49–50). Similarly Ælfric develops the same theme in asserting that the birth of Christ was the birth of the Eucharist, provided by Christ's death and resurrection; the Child in the cradle, wrapped in swaddling bands, was the Eucharist that clothes Christians in an 'immortal tunic' (Thorpe 1844, 34).

Stone 1eA (Ill. 266) carries the worn remains of two scenes. The upper composition consists of three bearded and haloed figures, the central one standing before a low throne and holding a short rod over his right shoulder. The figure to the left carries a book; the figure to the right bears an object over his left shoulder which is divided into two linked parts, each with curling ends, which Hawkes convincingly argues is a depiction of a partially unrolled scroll. Over this latter figure is a bird. Hawkes (1995a; 2002, 49–56; 2003a, 12–13) and others have identified this as the Transfiguration of Christ on Mount Tabor, with Jesus flanked by Moses and Elijah; the same scene is repeated on the west face of Sandbach Market Square 2 (p. 119). Though this event is portrayed in mosaics of the sixth century, it is not until the early ninth century that it grew in popularity in the European west — and even then, it is far from common (Nees 2001). There is a good deal of variation within these representations. In its fullest version Christ is set within a mandorla, the onlooking disciples are depicted and the Voice of God is represented by a hand, cloud or rays of light: a late ninth-/early tenth-century Carolingian ivory now in the British Museum provides a good example, with Elijah and Moses carrying the same book and scroll attributes found on this Cheshire carving (Hawkes 2002, fig. 2.9). At Sandbach the omissions of expected elements are probably a function of the space available, though examples of similar abbreviations occur elsewhere: the sixth-century Rabbula Gospels omit the disciples and the ninth-century Quedlinburg Casket deletes the mandorla (Garrucci 1876, pl. 133; Goldschmidt 1969, pl. LXII).

As well as omitting expected details, this Sandbach scene adds three elements which are not (apart from their re-appearance on Sandbach Market Square 2) apparently found elsewhere: the bird, low throne, and rod carried across the shoulder. This suggests that the Sandbach sculptor developed his own depiction, and its particular symbolism, by drawing on elements from other compositions. The rod is a familiar marker of authority in Insular art (see Hawkes 2002, 52; Harbison 1992, ii, 297, 301; O'Reilly 1994, 382–5), whilst the low throne is equally used as a sign of power (Hawkes 2002, figs. 2.10, 2.11). The bird, which is clearly a version of other avian forms on the cross, is presumably a symbol of the Holy Spirit. As such, it is omnipresent in depictions of the Baptism of Christ and that association is probably being deliberately invoked here, for exegesis emphasised the close links between the two theophonies: in both, the Voice of God identifies Christ as the Son of God (see Thorpe 1846, 242; Hurst 1960, 205; O'Reilly 1994, 350–5; Hawkes 1995a, 216; id. 2002, 54). The bird's presence over Elijah, who is linked to John the Baptist in the biblical narrative of the Baptism, is thus far from accidental.

Alongside these particular extensions of meaning, signalled by unexpected elements, the Sandbach scene must have carried all the significance which was usually associated with the Transfiguration. Commentators saw the event as a further revelation of Christ's divine nature, a guarantee of Christ's own resurrection and a pre-figuration of the Final Resurrection (Hawkes 2002, 55–6). Moses and Elijah, symbolising the Old Law and the Words of the Prophets, here witness to the new covenant and the foundation of Christ's Church on earth — Augustine indeed saw this moment as that of the foundation of the Church (Migne 1865b, cols. 490–1).

The lower scene on stone 1eA (Ill. 266), set within a raised circle, shows three haloed figures who clearly echo the composition above. To the left a bearded man holds a book, to the right a similarly bearded man carries keys. The central figure may hold a cylindrical scroll. Hawkes, following Radford, has identified this scene as the Traditio Legis cum Clavis — Christ committing the keys of Heaven to Peter and the scroll or book of the New Law to Paul (Radford 1956, 3–4; Hawkes 2002, 56–60; id. 2003a, 11–12). She argues that this scene, which combines two originally distinct depictions of individual presentation, may have existed in western Europe by the late seventh century, though surviving examples largely date from the ninth century onwards (Hawkes 2002, 57–8; id. 2007a, 34; see now also Halton St Wilfrid 4, p. 188). The type seen here at Sandbach is close to that which appears on the early ninth-century silver staurothek of Pope Paschal I in the Vatican Museums, and a lost fresco from the church of S. Urbano alla Caffarella in Rome of c. 1000 (Harbison 1992, iii, figs. 923, 924). It should be noted that Harbison has proposed a different interpretation of both these latter examples and some of the Irish analogues, suggesting that they depict the Raised Christ or Mission to the Apostles (Harbison 1992, i, 293) but, on balance, Hawkes's proposal seems the more convincing. This granted, Peter's bearded face is anomalous within the Insular tradition where he is usually shown as tonsured and clean-shaven (Higgitt 1989). Though this might suggest that the sculptor's model came from a non-Insular source it is more likely that Peter has simply been drawn like most forward-facing males on the cross. In the same way the sweeping posture of the two flanking saints echoes that of the angels in the pendant triangles on both shafts.

Clearly the over-riding significance of this scene is that of the founding of the Church on earth — a significance which is consistently present in patristic and later commentaries (Hawkes 2002, 62–3). Significantly however for the juxtaposition on this Sandbach cross, writers like Augustine and Leo the Great link the foundation roles of Peter and Paul to the Transfiguration: Leo, for example, introduces his sermon on the Transfiguration by joining Peter's experience of Christ's divine nature on Mount Tabor to his foundation of the Church of Rome (Chavasse 1973, i, 296–7). The scene thus symbolises the establishment of the Church and, vitally, its basis in recognition of the power and divinity of Christ.

The identifiable scenes on this east face thus refer, in an over-lapping and cross-referencing manner, to the revelation of God and his divinity to a series of witnesses, which leads on to (and justifies) the establishment of his Church on earth. His Salvation is both foretold and shown accomplished, and its implications for the Eucharist and Resurrection are allusively explored.

B (narrow, north). Seemingly containing only a single full-length panel on stones 1a–fB, this face shows a winged serpentine beast, with open jaws and triple tongue, set above a group of eleven figures — assuming that the figures in the lower triangles were part of the group — set in a ladder-like frame (Ills. 247, 269–70). The figures are seen in profile and carry fronds which link them to the frame. The horizontal elements are linked to the central vertical moulding but, perhaps significantly, not to the lateral border moulding. There is some variation within the group: the lowest figure does not seem to carry a frond, the uppermost figure is also frondless and leans over the top of the frame, whilst the one to the right below him is contorted so as to face upwards towards him. The problems posed by this scene are manifold: is the serpentine beast part of the scene?; what is the function of the fronds?; why is the highest figure leaning over the group?; what is the relationship between this set of figures and those on the north face of Sandbach Market Square 2?

Some issues can be resolved fairly rapidly. The frond-carrying device seems to be one favoured by the Sandbach school. The only comparable examples are on shafts from Bakewell — whose other face seems to be linked to the Sandbach Transfiguration composition — and Ingleby in Derbyshire (Hawkes 2002, figs. 2.20, 2.21). It has been suggested that these represent the remains of a model which incorporated vegetable background, but it seems more likely that the motif is a device for linking the figures to their frames, and reflects a technique of openwork metalwork (see Chapter IV, p. 25). It is, however, just possible that the fronds are residual elements whose origins lie in the Ladder/Tree image discussed below.

To Bu'lock (1972, 46) the entire scene was taken as a depiction of the Descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, the beast with triple tongue symbolising the Holy Spirit. If so, it is a distinctly novel form of representation: the Holy Spirit is usually represented by a Hand or the Throne of God, the Arc of Heaven would often be present and rays would fall upon the apostles. In addition the number of apostles would usually be twelve — though admittedly on one occasion they do amount, as here, to eleven (Schiller 1976, pl. 15). There are moreover no parallels among known Pentecost scenes for the bent figure, or the upward straining character below him — and frond-carrying disciples are not part of this iconography. The issue of the claimed meaningful nature of the triple tongue has already been resolved: as seen above, it is a form which recurs in Paris, Bibliothčque Nationale MS lat. 10861 where it clearly carries no Trinitarian symbolism (Alexander 1978, ill. 319).

Bu'lock's identification can therefore be safely rejected. More recently Hawkes (2002, 72–3) has proposed that the beast be seen as purely decorative and that the figures below are to be seen as on a Ladder to Heaven. In support of this interpretation, she notes that the ends of the horizontal mouldings do not touch the vertical borders; this is all the more marked when we consider that in the rest of the carving all parts touch each other. Depictions of the Ladder to Heaven are not evidenced among surviving material before the twelfth century, though it is a theme which is evoked in Latin and Anglo-Saxon vernacular literature (Greenhill 1954). From the twelfth century, however, an illustration from Mount Sinai does provide a striking parallel. This is contained in a treatise by a sixth-century Sinai Abbot, John Climacus, which uses the ladder as an image of monastic life (Martin 1954; Barraclough 1981, 100, pl. 1). Here inward-facing figures, with hands stretched before them, are seen in profile climbing a ladder. At the top, Christ bends over to help them up, whilst, at the bottom, monks with backward-turned heads gaze up at the scene. This parallel might explain both the bending figure at Sandbach (and the fact that he is distinguished from the rest by being clean-shaven) and the upward contortions of the figure immediately below him. Though much later in date than the Sandbach carving, the devil figure from the Mount Sinai illustration is closely paralleled in the Book of Kells (O'Reilly 1994, 391–5), and the whole twelfth-century composition may thus have drawn upon an earlier illustrated tradition which was also familiar in the Insular world — and of which Sandbach is the only surviving example. Greenhill (1954) has examined the patristic and literary expressions of this ladder theme in detail and traced the fusion, in commentaries and poetry, of the cosmological Tree and Jacob's Ladder which leads the faithful souls to heaven. Something of this tradition may also lie behind the figures on the Cumbrian shaft at Urswick in Furness (Bailey and Cramp 1988, 149–50, ill. 568).

C (broad, west). Stones 1aC and bC on this face contain panels, each with two sets of figures divided by a central vertical moulding (Ill. 254). Though one man is carrying a rod and another (perhaps two) carrying scrolls, identification of the scenes is now impossible.

Stone 1cC and the upper part of the contiguous stone 1d carry, in two registers, a depiction of Christ's Road to Calvary, with each of the four component figures set within an arched frame (Ill. 267). Christ, with cruciform halo, is shown in the upper right with bound hands stretched before him. The binding rope leads across the vertical central moulding and over the shoulder of a figure, presumably a soldier or perhaps a priest, walking ahead of him. In the panels below, Simon of Cyrene carries the cross whilst a soldier walks ahead with a spear, or rod, over his shoulder. In her discussions of this scene, Hawkes (1998; 2002, 75–80; 2003a, 10–11; 2007a, 32) has drawn attention to the fact that this is the only such depiction in Insular art; indeed the rarity of portrayals of this event anywhere between the sixth and late tenth centuries lends this example an added significance.

The episode was depicted in early Christian art between the fourth and sixth centuries but, at that date, Christ usually either carries the cross or, with Simon bearing the burden, He is absent; another variant seen in the Gospels of St Augustine shows Simon aiding Christ in carrying the cross (Schiller 1972, pls. 1, 11, 206). Rarely is he shown, as here at Sandbach, as bound and alongside Simon carrying the cross. This combination does however occur on the fifth-century doors of Santa Sabina in Rome where scholars have argued for strong eastern influence (Hawkes 2002, fig. 2.24). The continued use of this eastern-derived composition in the west can be traced on two fragmentary frescoes which are closer in date to Sandbach: at S. Maria Antiqua in Rome in the early eighth century and at Müstair, Switzerland, in the early ninth (Nordhagen 1968, pl. 26; Schiller 1972, pl. 209). But it is Sandbach which most clearly demonstrates the continuity of the scheme whose later appearance in Ottonian art might otherwise be explained as a re-introduction (Schiller 1972, pls. 240, 282, 283, 284, 285; Hawkes 2007a, 32). All of these parallel scenes show the scene as extending horizontally; the Sandbach artist has abbreviated and re-arranged the elements to fit the demands of a tall and narrow shaft — as well as compartmentalising his figures and giving them the standard dress and double-outlined profiles of the other men on the cross. The curling tendrils in front of the soldiers may reflect an (ultimately) early Christian system of dividing scenes and their component parts by vegetable or tree motifs (Hawkes 1998, 43–4; id. 2002, 77–8).

The scene is clearly one of humility and calm acceptance of God's will. Significantly the image is set above an Annunciation depiction where the same theme is present (Hawkes 2002, 82). Indeed the two scenes are not really clearly separated from each other, both sharing the highlighting of some form of jewel or metalwork setting which was placed between them (Hawkes 2002, 84). A similar linking of the two episodes can be seen in both the liturgy and patristic commentators (Ó Carragáin 1978, 131–4; id. 2005, esp. 83–4).

c. 800

Smith and Webb 1656, I, 46; Byrne 1810, pl. 15; Lysons 1810, 459–61, figs. facing 460; Palmer 1818, 303–7; Ormerod 1819, II, 118, III, 56–8, pls. 1–3 facing 56; (—) 1847, pl.; Rimmer 1875, 83–91, figs. on 84, 87; Ormerod 1875–82, II, 219, III, 98–9, pls. facing 98, 100; (—) 1885b, 228; Allen and Browne 1885, 355; Browne 1885a, 135; Allen 1886, 336; Browne 1886a, 128; Browne 1887a, 6; Browne 1887b, 147, 152–6; Browne 1888, 10; Jackson 1889, 35–7, pl. facing 31; Earwaker 1890, 10–15, 283, frontis., figs. facing 13, 14; Harper 1894, 6–13, figs. on 10, 16; Allen 1894, 4, 24–5, pls. XI–XII; Allen 1895, 159–61, frontis. pls., fig. on 160; Yates 1898, 133–5; Allen and Anderson 1903, III, 210, 241, 245, 246; Crofton 1903, pl. facing 48; Collingwood 1907a, 279; (—) 1910, 184–5, pl. facing 184; Browne 1910, pls. on 299–304, figs. on 287, 290, 292, 294, 298; Heywood 1912, pl. facing 44; Browne 1916, 11–13, pl. VII; Brøndsted 1924, 49, fig. 41; (—) 1925; Ditchfield 1926, 72–5, pl. on 74; Collingwood 1927a, 75, 107–8; Clapham 1930, 67, pl. 15; (—) 1937, 316; Brown, G. 1937, 273; Phillips 1937, 299; Routh 1937, 24; Kendrick 1938, 197, 199, 205–7, 209, 216, pls. XCIV–XCV; Tait 1948, pl. facing 10, figs. on 12–18; Nash-Williams 1950, 204; Stone, L. 1955, 238; Radford 1956; Radford 1957, 1–6; Massey 1958, 7, pl. facing 16; Sylvester and Nulty 1958, 14; Bu'lock 1959, 1; Rix 1960, 75, 77; Smith, P. 1964, frontis., pls. 1–14; Bailey 1966, 14–16; Pevsner and Hubbard 1971, 12, 332–3; Bu'lock 1972, 45–7, frontis., pls. 4–7; Cramp 1978a, 10; Cramp 1978b, 126; Coatsworth 1979, I, 253–8, II, 45–6, pl. 121; Bailey 1980, 187; Lander 1980, 2–3; Plunkett 1984, I, 117–18, 124–30, 131–7, 155, II, 272, 306, 354, 378–9, figs. 26–8, pls. 32, 34; Fellows-Jensen 1985, 402, 404; Thacker 1987, 276–7, 291, pls. 20, 21; Bailey and Cramp 1988, 17, 31, 109, 117, 121, 149; Hawkes 1989, I, 244–434, II, 91–113, pls. 26–48; Bailey 1990, 1, 2; Gelling 1992, 187, fig. 71; Higham, N. 1993b, 167–9, pl. 13; Sidebottom 1994, 102–4, 105–8, 128, 139, 147, 157, 169, 267–8, and pls.; Hawkes 1995a, figs. 1–4; Bailey 1996a, 3, 4, 6 13, 18–20, 76, 122–3, pl. 1, fig. 8; Bailey 1996b, 21–2, 23, 42–3, pl. 1; Crosby 1996, 28, pls. 17, 18; Hawkes 1997a, 108, 118–21, 127, 130–2, 133, figs. 8–10; Hawkes 1998, figs. 1–2; Austin 1999, 80; Trench-Jellicoe 1999b, 604, 639, fig. 6; Sidebottom 2000, 216; Hawkes 2001a, figs. 16.1–16.5; Hawkes 2002, passim, numerous figs.; Bailey 2003, 213–15, 236–7, figs. 7, 17; Hawkes 2003a, figs. 1–8; Hawkes 2003b, 279, figs. 30 A and B; Hawkes 2003c, figs. 1–8, pls. 1–4; Hawkes 2003d, 353, 366–8; Higham, N. 2004a, 27, fig. 12; Blair 2005, 128, 309, fig. on 166; Newman, R. M. 2006, 103, fig. 4.12; Pulliam 2006, 69; Edwards, N. 2007a, 411; Everson and Stocker 2007, 39, 41, pl. 2; Hawkes 2007a, 32–4, pls. 8, 10; Mason 2007, 63; Redknap and Lewis 2007, 150; Coatsworth 2008, 131, 135, 245, 250; Bailey 2009, 26, 27

[1] The following are unpublished manuscript references to the Sandbach Market Square stones: BL Add. MS 37547, items 713–23; BL Add. MS 5830, fols. 33v–35r; BL Add. MS 9461, fols. 122v–127r; Manchester Public Library, Hibbert Ware S. MSS: Msf 091 H21, vol. 6, 55–7.

[2] In the following description the term 'double-outlined profile head' is used to describe a recurrent Sandbach form in which a human head is surrounded by an outer moulding which runs from the nose to the nape of the neck. Within this is a further distinct moulding flanking, or laid on top of, the head. For the argument that these represent, respectively, halo and hair, see Chapter IV, p. 23.