But I'm sure B would have spotted it straight away. She might also have recommended taking a photograph of the stone. And also looking at its other sides (one worn side seems to look like a stone at Ramsbury). How did I miss these things? How can a seasoned font-botherer omit this basic stuff. I have no idea. I was too engrossed in drawing and came away ridiculously chilled out though.
(The top panel)
The stone has two panels of carving, one above the other. One's very organic, and seems remarkably reminiscent to me of the one at Chew Stoke. I suppose some might call it a 'tree of life' as it's apparently all sprouting from the bottom. You'll also notice a bit of the'classic Saxon motif', the twisted rope design. The other is more standardly knotty, but not in a strict regular fashion. Due to inattention I didn't mark any of the central lines in situ and just drew them in when I got home. So they're probably not entirely 'true'. But one imagines they'd all have been there when the stone was initially carved.
(The bottom panel)
As I didn't take a photo I offer this as a more realistic impresion of how the two panels look together. It's from 'Memorials of old Somerset' by F.J. Snell (1906). But he's not got it quite right either, he's been a bit elaborate in places and omitted the very bottom. But you get the impression.
Nunney and Somerford Keynes (see the bottom of this page), some hell-bound piece of dog excrement STOLE it in 2004. What on Earth?? They must have brought a chisel and levered it out of the stonework it was cemented into. It was a very pocket-sized 3" square. It's obvious, and I've said it before, but if they did it for themselves, could they not see the irony, bearing in mind the subject matter? And if they did it to sell to someone else, could that person not see the irony? It's such a niche interest, it really makes you wonder who's responsible - can there really be very many people who'd want this? And if it's only about the money, it has no provenance they can admit to publicly. What Was The Fucking Point?? You despicable idiot.
If we're to go by the sculptures at Langford, then with this Jesus apparently being without his shirt, we're probably looking at Norman not Saxon times. The Corpus also explains that the position of the feet is also important in dating, with side-by-side being earlier than crossed. It's hard to know from this photo though. Perhaps the current holder can elucidate (spit).
Drawings copyright Rhiannon 2015.