Monks' Dormitory, Durham cathedral, catalogue no. 58

See Brompton In Allertonshire 4 (St Thomas)

St Thomas

A complete hogback, damaged along the top

Fragments of the ridge survive by the end-beasts' jowls but show no trace of decoration.

A (long) : Below the position of the ridge is a horizontal run of interlace following the arc of the hogback ridge. It tapers at the ends and is surrounded by roll moulding. The pattern is closely knit, disorganised three-cord plait. Below, the sides are plain, possibly scabbled.

The end-beasts are very stylised, their heads liveried in interlace. The damaged head is the smaller of the two. The interlace on the surface of the head is median-incised. The incised eyes are elliptical, consisting of two rings. The ears are small and pricked. The jowl has drilled nostrils and a thin mouth-slit. Instead of a muzzle, the paws are placed over the jowl. Around the wrists is a plain band and each paw has four toes. The forelegs are held vertically, rising from a neat scrolled joint. The backs are slightly rounded.

C (long) : As face A, but the interlace is damaged.

This is a type d (extended niche) hogback and its end-beasts are among the most elaborate in the series. Unlike the hogbacks nos. 17–19, this has a pair of highly stylised end-beasts, of the same proportions as their naturalistic neighbours but with creative conceits in their decoration, like the wrist-bands, livery and position of the paws. The surface interlace covering of the heads may be compared with the animal-head posts of the Oseberg ship (Wilson and Klindt-Jensen 1966, pls. XI–XII) or, nearer in date, to the treatment of the terminal heads of the Søllested horse-yokes (ibid., pl. XXXVII c). This does seem to be undiluted Scandinavian influence, as there are no Insular parallels for it. This hogback is unique in its end-beast ornamentation.

First half of tenth century

Haverfield and Greenwell 1899, 122, no. LVIII, fig. on 122; Collingwood 1907, 276, 300; Collingwood 1912, 123; Cramp 1965a, 8, no. 58; Lang 1967, 43–7, figs. 9, 10, pl. VIII; Schmidt 1973, 70 fn.; Lang 1984a, 99, 101, 108, 122, no. 9, fig. 11e, pl. on 123; Hawkes 1996, 111, fig. 90

[1]The following are general references to the Brompton stones: (—) 1867–8, lxxxviii; Rowe 1870, 240; (—) 1871–2, xxiv; Greenwell 1869–79a, lx; Rowe 1877, 61–4; Allen and Browne 1885, 352; Browne 1885–6, 124, 128; Saywell 1886, 481; Allen 1887, 126, 386, fig. 28; (—) 1890–5a, viii; Haverfield and Greenwell 1899, 125–6; Bulmer 1890, 389; Hodges 1894, 195; Morris, J. 1904, 32, 84–5, 420; Bogg 1908, 28–32, ills. on 29 and 32; Page, W. 1914, 430, 431; Morris, J. 1931, 33, 86, 87, 417; Elgee and Elgee 1933, 219–20, 245; Mee 1941, 41–2; Fisher 1959, 89; Pevsner 1966, 90, pl. 8; Bailey 1980, 85, 100, 240, 252, 255, 265; Kerr and Kerr 1982, 38–9 and ill.; Morris, R. 1983, 7; Cramp 1984, 11, 30, 93; Bailey and Cramp 1988, 54; Lang 1988a, 14, 24, 56; Cambridge 1989, 378; Richards 1991, 80, 119, 124, ill. 81; Everson and Stocker 1999, 138; Stocker 2000, 205–6.