Volume 9: Cheshire and Lancashire

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.

Current Display: Bromborough 12, Cheshire Forward button Back button
Overview
Present Location
Lost (see endnote [1]).
Evidence for Discovery
As Bromborough 1 above
Church Dedication
St Barnabas
Present Condition
Not known
Description

This stone is not clearly identifiable in the surviving photographs — though it may be recognisable as Bromborough 12 in the British Museum photograph of the Rectory Garden assemblage (Ills. 43–4) — but Cox's drawing shows a circular head with a fragment of shaft or base below (Allen 1894, pl. XIII, 4). The cross (type E8) is formed by four ovate sunken panels.

Discussion

Appendix A item (stones dating from Saxo-Norman overlap period or of uncertain date)

Though round-headed grave-markers are known from both early and late dates within the pre-Conquest period (Cramp 1984, 7), forms with a short shaft and discoid head seem to be of eleventh- and twelfth-century date. None occur with characteristic Anglo-Saxon ornament like interlace, scrolls or animals. Well-dated examples have come from the pre-1178 graveyard under Newcastle castle and from the foundations of the church of c. 1150 at Adel in west Yorkshire (Cramp 1984, 244–5, pls. 247.1370, 248.1371; Ryder 1991, 8–9, 50; Coatsworth 2008, 271–3, ills. 784–95); others have been published from Northumberland, Co. Durham, Yorkshire, Cumbria, Lincolnshire, Derbyshire and Gloucestershire which offer analogies for the Bromborough form (Cramp 1984, pls. 232.1314, 234.1325, 258.1403; Lang 2001, ill. 1132; Everson and Stocker 1999, 275; Bailey and Cramp 1988, ills. 624–7; Butler and Jones 1972, pl. I (ii); Ryder 1985, pl. 48; id. 1991, 8–9, 12, 22, 36, 41; id. 2000, 82, 90, 100, 109; id. 2001, fig. 11; id. 2002, 136). In Scotland, Fisher (2001, 17, figs. on 58) has listed similar carvings for which an eleventh-century date, based on Northumberland parallels, is proposed. Altham provides two further regional examples of the form; so also, probably, do Heysham 9, Swettenham 1 and Woodchurch 1 (Ills. 381, 382, 527, 719–22). Specific parallels for this form of cross on a discoid head are, however, elusive, Birtley 4 in Northumberland perhaps providing the closest analogue (Cramp 1984, pl. 234.1325–7). Cox (in Allen 1894, 29) drew attention to a similar carving in the tower turret at the nearby church of St Helen's, Sefton.

Date
Eleventh or twelfth century
References
Allen 1894, 29, pl. XIII (4); Allen 1895, 166, fig. on 164 upper right; Bu'lock 1959, 8, 11 (D17); Thacker 1987, 286, fig. 38 (3), mid left
Endnotes
[1] Most of the pre-Norman sculpture from this site has been lost. Its original discovery and subsequent history are recorded in a letter dated 13 May 1936, to the editor of the Bebington News, from Mrs A. Anderson, a copy of which is preserved in the files of the former Department of Medieval and Later Antiquities (now Prehistory and Europe) in the British Museum. This states that the stones were found in 1863 when the church — itself built in 1828 — was demolished; they had apparently been used in its foundations. The carvings were then placed in a pile on the lawn of the Rectory garden. This assemblage, of which photographs survive in the British Museum departmental files (Ills. 43–57), was dispersed in 1909. The transom fragment (no. 3) along with two shaft fragments (no. 1) were then placed on the windowsill in the south porch of the church; a fragment of an 'upright grave cros' was set on the windowsill of the north porch, and the rest were distributed around the walls and rockeries of the Rectory. In May 1933 there was a proposal to develop the Rectory site and the Bromborough Society tried to intervene to save the stones. The Society was rebuffed and the builder who took over the property subsequently claimed not to have recognised any carvings. It was at this stage that most of the sculpture seems to have been destroyed. The later treatment of the surviving stones is described below.

Forward button Back button
mouseover