This small but beautiful, presumably Anglo-Saxon pure gold cross, with a central garnet, was found just over a kilometre west south west of the village of Winster in the Peak District.
The White Low cross from Museums Sheffield (2012a). Original caption reads: Cross pendant, around 650 AD, previously owned by Thomas Bateman. Gold and garnet or glass, dimensions: Length 3.4cm, width 2.6cm.
It’s history and discovery seemed
well-known as an account of its discovery was published by Thomas Bateman
(1848). I include his whole account as it is instructive about how Bateman
omitted inconvenient facts:
“About a mile west of the village of Winster, on the right hand side of
the road leading from that place to Pike Hall, once stood a barrow, generally
known by the name of White Lowe, which was destroyed in the year 1765 or 1766,
by the farmer to whose share it fell, upon the inclosure of the common on which
it was situate. On this occasion one of the most interesting and valuable
discoveries ever made in the county was casually brought to light; and it is
much to be regretted that no systematic account of it was written at the time,
and correct draughts of the objects taken, which is now impossible, as one article
alone exists of all the valuable deposit (now in the possession of Mr. John
Mander, of Bakewell). Such is the dearth of information upon this subject, that
little more than a list of the articles can be furnished; premising, however,
that they were found in the centre of the barrow, and upon the level of the
natural soil, whether in company with a skeleton or not there is no evidence.
The list is as follows : two large globular urns, seventeen inches in height
and about thirteen in circumference (quere diameter); two glass vessels, about
nine inches in height, with wide circular mouths, and a slight bulge in the
middle: they were made of yellow glass, extremely thin and light, and when
discovered contained about a pint of clear green water; several variegated
beads, square and round, both of glass and earthenware; a large bracelet of
silver, about an inch broad, joining at the ends in dovetail fashion, and
studded with human heads; figures of animals, &c., which were affixed by
rivets; also a large circular fibula of gold, set with garnets, or red glass,
which was strengthened by being riveted upon a plate of silver, which was
assigned to the close of the fifth century by that distinguished antiquary the
Rev. James Douglas. In the barrow the glass vessels were placed on each side of
the urns, and the other ornaments were lying near them; around them were
remains of decayed wood, and pieces of brass in the form of clasps and hinges,
which would indicate that the more precious articles had been deposited in a
box.
It is highly probable that a small cross of pure gold in the author’s museum was discovered in the preceding barrow; the style of workmanship is almost identical with that of the circular fibula just mentioned. It is engraved as a vignette on page 67 of Douglas's ‘Nenia Britannica’ and by that learned antiquary is considered, notwithstanding its crucial form, to be of an era anterior to the introduction of Christianity into Britain. The only circumstances connected with its discovery that are now to be depended upon are these: it was found in the process of demolishing a tumulus on Winster Common, about the year 1767, and was bought from the labourer who was so fortunate as to find it by the Rev. John Mason, then curate of Winster, who had a taste for antiquities.”
Bateman illustrates the gold cross
along with a gold (cloisonné) fibula (a brooch used to fasten garments such as
a cloak, usually using the safety-pin principle) found in same area of the
barrow:
The cross and cloisonné
brooch from White Low from Bateman (1848).
At first sight the above text strongly
suggests the cross was found in the same barrow as the brooch.
However, there are several clues in
his text that indicate that the story is more complex than that stated and
furthermore, that Bateman knew these facts.
Bateman cites Douglas (1793) on the
fibula (brooch) mentioning that it is illustrated with a vignette and giving
the page number. It seems he was thus aware of the information in Nenia
Brittanica. He should therefore have more accurately stated the circumstances
of the find as Douglas had done. Douglas reproduced an oral
report of the find which stated that ‘About twenty years ago, a woman picked up
in a field near Winstor … a small brass cross of fillagree-work; in the middle
is a socket, which probably contained a stone’.
This
brings to light two facts:
Firstly,
Bateman knew the circumstance of the finding of the cross, but choose not to
mention it in his account, that it was NOT found in the barrow.
Secondly
the verbal account states clearly that the cross had an empty socket, thus he
knew that the stone had gone missing in antiquity, or was removed by the
finder, before they sold it on. Lucy (2016) concludes that “the stone therefore
seems to have been inserted between 1793 and 1835, when it came into the
possession of Thomas Bateman”.
Furthermore, Lester (1976) states:
“This description, which reproduces almost word-for-word the entry in Bateman's
own catalogue of 1855,20 is probably the source of the continuing belief that
the faceted central garnet is an integral part of the original jewel. For
instance, Audrey Ozanne has written: "The cross is made up of a solid gold
plate with a central setting containing a single faceted garnet ...", and
more recently R. F. Jessup has remarked with similar lack of qualification:
"The small equal-armed pendant gold cross has a central faceted garnet
boss secured by a beaded mount ...". R. L. S. Bruce-Mitford has reproduced
a drawing of the cross together with a separate diagram of the garnet which emphasizes
the cruciform pattern of the facets." In each of these descriptions there
is no comment to dispel the obvious implication of the stone's originality.”
Lester goes on to cite Douglas and
the fact that there was no stone, garnet or otherwise in central setting, and
repeats Douglas’ source of the verbal account of the finding of the brooch as “Mr. H.
Rooke, of Woodhouse Place, near Mansfield”. He also adds: “The original stone would not have
been anything like the present one. Anglo Saxon garnets were never enhanced
with multiple facets, although a single facet is sometimes found on stones set
en cabochon. Baldwin Brown describes and illustrates: "round, square,
oval, or triangular garnets cut and polished with rounded faces, so as to make
them what would be called in popular language carbuncles." Consideration
of the analogous Winster Moor brooch shows that this is the type of stone which
the central setting is most likely to have contained.
The cross came into Bateman’s
possession 1835, upon the death of his father, William, with the first
description by Bateman, published in his Vestiges (1848). Is it, therefore
possible that Bateman himself had the garnet placed in the setting in the
interim? I can’t really decide, but it is a distinct possibility, considering
his bending of the truth surrounding the discovery of the cross.
Lastly, it may be instructive to
look closely at the brooch, which was most certainly found in the barrow known
as white low:
Gold, silver and garnet brooch from White Low. Original image from Sheffield Museums (2012b) Original caption reads: Date Made/Found: Around 650 AD. Previously owned by Thomas Bateman, Gold, garnet and silver. Dimensions: Diameter 5cm. Accession Number: J93.708.
Note the similarity in the decorative scrollwork, but most particularly, the cut of the garnets: unfaceted of the cabochon cut. This is what the original stone most probably looked like.
I only wish the missing piece of
jewelry, the “large bracelet of silver, about an inch broad, joining at the
ends in dovetail fashion, and studded with human heads; figures of animals,
&c” which were affixed by rivets” could be found. It sounds exquisite. Now
that I would like to see!
References
Bateman, T., 1848. Vestiges of the Antiquities of Derbyshire, and the Sepulchral usages of its Inhabitants: from the most Remote Ages to the Reformation. John Russell Smith.
Douglas, J. 1793. Nenia Brittanic. pp 67-68
G. Lester, (1976). ‘The Anglo-Saxon pendant cross from Winster Moor, Derbyshire’, MA 20 pp136–7.
Lucy, S., 2016. The Trumpington Cross in context. Online at: https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/bitstream/handle/1810/264178/Lucy-2017-AngloSaxon_England-AM.pdf?sequence=1 accessed 10.04.2021
Museums Sheffield (2012a). Cross pendant. At http://collections.museums-sheffield.org.uk/view/objects/asitem/342/271/title-asc?t:state:flow=4b0a49d1-2330-495f-9908-bb3b10e8a644 accessed 15.04.21
Museums Sheffield (2012b). Gold Brooch. At: http://collections.museums-sheffield.org.uk/view/objects/asitem/search@/0?t:state:flow=87ecc460-9a25-43ca-9ccf-a6b7df5d935c accessed 15.04.2021
No comments:
Post a Comment