The westernmost of the three crosses in Whalley churchyard to the south of the church

The earliest records of Whalley 1–4 can be summarised from the work of Whitaker (1800–1; 1872–6) and Edwards (B. 1989a). Whitaker (1800–1, 31–2, pl. IV) provides the earliest printed notice of the three large shafts Whalley 1, 3 and 4, and his accompanying engraving not only illustrates those carvings but shows that Whalley 2 was already set on the top of Whalley 1 at the beginning of the nineteenth century. He further — and reasonably — identified the three main shafts with stones recorded in an early fourteenth-century document, De Statu Blagborneshire, which were then believed to date back to the period of St Augustine: 'lapideae tunc erecteae et vocatae a populo Cruces beati Augustini, quae sub eodem nomine usque hodie ibi durant' ('stones then erected popularly called Blessed Augustine's Crosses which remain under the same name to the present day'). The original Latin text was included in the first edition of Baines' History (Baines 1831–6, III, 172–5).

It is clear that the three shafts were disturbed or re-erected at least twice in the post-medieval period. In the mid-seventeenth century John Webster (1610–1682) is recorded as removing the three large shafts (here Whalley 1, 3, 4) to act as a boundary fence for some adjoining fields; in a fit of remorse he later purchased them back and, according to a nineteenth-century source 're-erected them on their present site' (Crossley 1845, xxxix; see also Whitaker 1872–6, II, 557). That assertion of continuity of siting between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries needs, however, to take account of evidence for a further disturbance in the eighteenth century recorded by Whitaker (1800–1, 299), who claimed that the crosses were again in danger of being destroyed at the time of the induction of Mr Johnson (1738) when they were 'lying prostrate'; Johnson 'durably erected them upon their original bases'.

The earliest date at which we can be certain that the main shafts and sockets were in their present relationship is 31 October 1822 when clear drawings were executed by Capt. William Latham (Lancashire Record Office, DP 291/61–62 and 292/1). John Weld's drawings of 21 March, 1844 show the same settings (Lancashire Record Office DP 386/8). On Latham and Weld see Edwards (B. 1989a, 9, figs. 4 and 5).

St Mary

Severely worn on face C (west) and towards the top of both narrow faces. A hole in the middle of the west face is presumably connected to its re-use as a fencepost (see above).

The shaft appears to be complete, with an undecorated area at the base on all four sides. The top of the broad faces is marked by an undecorated pediment, on the same plane as the rest of the shaft on faces A and C, but extending some 1.5 cm (0.5 in) on faces B and D as a roll moulding; this may be the base of the cross-head.
The shaft stands in a socket-stone whose top is now at ground level; this is deeply scored with radiating lines and measures 84 x 37 cm (33 x 14.5 in).

A (broad, east): The shaft is divided into six panels, all bordered laterally by a continuous roll-moulding within the rounded arris. The vertical divisions between panels are marked by flat borders. (i) The upper panel carries a simple two-strand twist with bar terminals, the three crossings enclosed in rings (closed circuit pattern A). (ii) The panel below contains a bird, facing left with downward curved neck and drooping tail; it has a curved and pointed wing and two legs. (iii) The next panel carries a standing human figure, forward-facing, with arms raised alongside his well-marked shoulders in the orans gesture; his thin lower body and legs are flanked by serpent forms, heads against his waist and with curled tails. The figure's feet face to the right and there are traces of a kirtle. A moulding (?halo) encloses his egg-shaped head and there are some traces of facial features including an eye. (iv) The small square panel below contains a profile animal, facing left with its head backward-turned to meet its forked tail, which seems to curl below its rear legs before turning over its back. The beast has four legs, a marked eye, two short ears and well-marked muzzle. Panel (v) contains a fret, set out in four squares (thus producing an incised equal-armed cross), based upon a saltire pattern with angled terminals (type U1: Edwards, N. 2007a, fig. 7.14), whilst panel (vi) carries a 10-strand plait formed by thin cords. Below the frame are traces of a further figure holding a crook.

B (narrow, north): The shaft was decorated with, probably, four panels with a similar border set within a rounded arris as on face A. The horizontal divisions between panels are marked by flat borders. (i) The upper panel is now defaced though there are some possible traces of interlace remaining. (ii) The next panel contains a thin standing human figure, forward-facing and with hands raised in orans gesture; he appears to be wearing a short kirtle. (iii) In the panel below is a simple four-strand plait, whilst panel (iv) is occupied by a two-strand twist terminating in Stafford knots at both top and bottom; the four crossings are surrounded by rings.

C (broad, west): This face is heavily weathered but, in favourable light, it is possible to see that the various panels were framed by a continuous lateral frame set within the arris moulding. There seem to be five panels. Only vague relief decoration can now be seen in panel (i), but immediately below in panel (ii) is a standing human figure, facing forward with legs apart, his head surrounded by a large halo. His arms appear to be raised. In some lights he seems to be holding a spear in his right hand. (iii) The panel below seems to contain an antlered long-necked beast facing right. The two front feet are clear but to the rear the animal seems to dissolve into a curling terminal. (iv) The next panel (there may be two panels here) no longer carries any recognisable ornament, but the longer panel (v) below seems to carry knotwork in two parallel vertical strips.

D (narrow, south): This face appears to have carried four panels, framed laterally as on the other sides. The upper two are now very worn but apparently carried some form of knotwork/interlace; Browne (1887a, pl. III, fig. 4) shows panel (ii) as containing a two-strand twist, with a bar terminal at the bottom, with four rings surrounding the crossings; this interpretation is not supported by the faint remaining traces of decoration. The ornament on the two lowest panels is more distinct: panel (iii) contains a forward-facing human being with legs apart and feet facing left; his arms are raised in orans position. (iv) Below is a neat six-strand plait.

Though heavily worn it is clear that the ornament on the shaft is organised into panels. To Kendrick (1949, 63) this panelling 'bears a Celtic, as opposed to an English, system of panels, continuing the tradition of the late ninth-century Irton cross in Cumberland, and resembling in type late Welsh crosses like that at Penmon in Anglesey or the Maen Achwyfan in Flintshire ... the type is rare in England'. Though not explicit in his definitions, Kendrick's notion of 'Celtic' in this context appears to embrace sets of small (sometimes square) panels, including key patterns, set one above the other on a tall cross. There is no doubt that this is an organisation of ornament found in Wales and in Ireland (Nash-Williams 1950, nos. 37, 38, 111, 185, 190, 303; Harbison 1992, ii, figs. 73, 78–9, 84, 86, 105, 127, 129 and passim). But Irton shows the type well established in England before the Viking settlement (Bailey and Cramp 1988, ill. 357) and, as will be seen below, small panels of key pattern, animals and birds are widespread in Viking-age sculpture. A convincing case for a 'Celtic feel' to this cross has therefore yet to be made.

What is not in doubt is the Viking-age date of the carving. Though not using ornament which is Scandinavian-derived, it employs runs of multi-strand plain plait and simple two-strand encircled twists which have long been recognised as typical of this date (Bailey 1980, 72). The single panels of key pattern are also more characteristic of the later period, and the particular form employed here — a variation on Allen's no. 995 (Allen and Anderson 1903, ii, 358) — is used regionally at Winwick and, in a more simplified form, at Whitford in tenth- or eleventh-century contexts (Ills. 710, 712; Nash-Williams 1950, no. 190, pl. XXXIV). The non-crouching backward-turned quadruped (Ill. 666) is, admittedly, a familiar beast in pre-Norman sculpture, appearing in early Anglian scrolls and, later, combined into other scenes (Brown, G. 1937, pl. CVI; Cramp 1984, pls. 146.767–8, 207.1192, 225.1265; Bailey and Cramp 1988, ill. 245), Neston 3 providing a regional example (Ill. 209). As a single entity within its own frame, however, it seems to be a late form of ornament: there are examples from Viking-age Yorkshire, particularly in the Tees valley area and near Whitby, at Sockburn, Brompton, Hawsker, Kirby Hill and Lythe (Cramp 1984, pls. 129.706, 134.728; Lang 2001, ills. 41, 46, 317, 359, 532). Closer to hand however is Halton St Wilfrid 1 with its accompanying Sigurd iconography (Ill. 468). Similarly, whilst the bird form on face A (Ill. 664), with its raised — perhaps everted — wing, features in Anglian scrolls at Croft and Ilkley (Lang 2001, ill. 152; Coatsworth 2008, ills. 354, 357), single birds within their own panels appear to be a Viking-age phenomenon: there are good tenth-century parallels at Lowther in Westmorland and in the Tees valley area (Bailey and Cramp 1988, ill. 452; Cramp 1984, pl. 61.291; Lang 2001, ills. 39, 45, 408).

The figure on face A seems to be haloed and with arms in orans position; the lower part of his body is flanked by two serpent-like forms (Ills. 665, 670). Haloed and orans figures appear in single panels on the other faces (Ills. 667–9); none have clear flanking elements though both Browne and Collingwood, in their drawings of face B, suggest that the figure there stands between snakes (Browne 1887a, pl. III, fig. 2; Collingwood 1927a, fig. 132). Orans figures are, of course, familiar and longstanding elements in Christian art (in general see Kirschbaum and Braunfells 1968–76, iii, cols. 352–4) but the meaning of the figure(s) flanked by snakes here at Whalley is debateable. Bailey (1980, 158–9) suggested that this was a version of the iconography of Daniel in the Lion's Den, arguing that the transformation of lions into serpents could be paralleled on a group of Merovingian buckle plaques where the Daniel identification is made clear by the accompanying inscription (Salin 1959, 310–24). This proposal was rejected by Edwards (B. 1989b, 23) who rightly emphasised the wide geographical and chronological gap between this sculpture and the plaques, and the consistent preservation on the latter of some elements of quadruped form.

An alternative explanation of the panel as a form of Christ in Majesty, based on Psalm XC, 13, is clearly possible because this iconographic type encompasses a series of variants in both number and form of downtrodden beasts — and in the presence or absence of symbols of power such as triumphal palms or crosses (Smith, E. 1918; Saxl 1943; Kirschbaum and Braunfells 1968–76, i, cols. 401–2; Bailey 1974a, I, 213–20; Haney 1986; Bailey and Cramp 1988, 82). Against this identification must be set the fact that the serpents are not obviously being trodden down, as would be expected in representations based upon Psalm XC, 13; nor are their heads set at or near the figure's feet. A third possibility therefore emerges: that this is a version of the much-discussed theme of the recognition of Christ between two animals — in medio duorum animalium innotesceris — which is based upon the Canticle of Habakkuk and is discussed under Lancaster St Mary 5 (pp. 224–5; Ó Carragáin 1986; id. 2005, 201–8). The same explanation can be applied to the analogous composition at Kippax in Yorkshire (Coatsworth 2008, ill. 426) where the figure's arms are set in Parousia position. If either the 'Majesty' or 'Recognition' argument is accepted for the figure on face A then it is, of course, highly unlikely that the much worn figures on the other sides were originally accompanied by snakes; they are probably simple orans figures.

Tenth century

Whitaker 1800–1, 31–3, pl. IV facing 31; Whitaker 1818, 49–51, pl. IV facing 51; Baines 1868–70, II, 8; Whitaker 1872–6, I, 66–7, 69, 71, II, 15, 157, 557, pl. facing 1; Croston 1884a, 3; Allen and Browne 1885, 355; Browne 1885b, 156–7, pl. IV; Allen 1886, 328, 342; Browne 1887a, 13–14, pl. III, figs. 2, 3, 4; Allen 1894, 15, 17, 21, 23, 25; Allen 1895, 151, 152, 161; Burnett 1900, 178; Taylor, H. 1900, 14, 15, 17–19, pl. facing 18; (—) 1902; Taylor-Taswell 1905, 10, 100–3, pl. facing 101 (A); Garstang 1906, 265; Taylor, H. 1906, 4, 74, 77–9, 485, pl. facing 79 (A); Ditchfield 1909, 115–16, pl. facing 114; (—) 1921a, 190, pl. facing 190; Wallis 1921, 11, pl. facing 10; Collingwood 1927a, 107, fig. 132, left; Wallis 1932, 23, 39; Brown, G. 1937, 274; Kendrick 1941b, 9; Kendrick 1949, 63, fig. 5; Pevsner l969b, 16, 258; Taylor, H. M. 1970b, 281; Edwards, B. 1978a, 72–3; Bailey 1980, 157–9, fig. 38; Edwards, B. 1989a, 5–8, figs. 1–5; Edwards, B. 1989b, 20–4, fig. 1 (A); Kenyon 1991, 99; Edwards, B. 1992, 58; Edwards, B. 1998, 85–6, fig. 42; Reeder 1999, 19–20, fig. 13; Noble 2004, 76, fig. 92a

[1]. The following are general references to the Whalley stones: Whitaker 1800–1, 31–2, 33, 37, 297; Whitaker 1818, 49–51, 250; Baines 1831–6, III, 178–9, 383; Baines 1868–70, II, 8; Whitaker 1872–6, I, 69, 71, II, 15, 157, 557, pl. facing 1; Croston 1884a, 4–5; Croston 1884b, 3; (–––) 1885b, 228; Allen and Browne 1885, 355; Browne 1885b, 156–7; Browne 1887a, 12–14; Jackson 1889, 34; Glynne 1893, 79; Harrison 1896, 4; Howarth 1899, 9; Farrer and Brownbill 1911c, 355; Fishwick and Ditchfield 1909, I, 5; Wallis 1921; Brown, G. 1937, 274; Tupling 1948, 6, 8; Edwards, B. 1975; Edwards, B. 1978a, 72–5; Fellows-Jensen 1985, 407; Edwards, B. 1992, 58; Panikkar 1994, 20; Crosby 1998, 30; Noble 2004, 75–81.

The following are unpublished manuscript references: BL Add. MS 37550, items 724–35; BL Add. MS 37551, items 76–9; Lancashire Record Office, DP 291/61–62 and 292/1; Lancashire Record Office DP 386/8.