The Decorative Sculpture : Sundial 301 



As the best stone- and metal-work containing the Celtic interlacing 

 is late, and ' comes close to the eleventh and twelfth centuries,' ^ 

 and as the knotwork on the Bewcastle Cross is evidently of Celtic 

 pattern, it is clear that, even judged by these considerations alone, 

 the Bewcastle Cross must belong to a comparatively late period.^ 



4. THE SUNDIAL ' 

 The sundial on the south face of the Bewcastle Cross is, by common 

 consent, as old as the rest of the carving. 



This dial is a semicircle with hole for the gnomon now lost, and rays 

 marking twelve divisions between sunrise and sunset. It is certainly 

 a part of the original monument.* 



The sun-dial, with its rays marking the hours, and the hole for its 

 gnomon, has been cut at the time of the making of the cross, and is 

 part of the original design, so far as we can see.^ 



It is contemporary with the sculpturing of the scroll of fohage.^ 



^ Anderson, Scotland in Early Christ. Times 2. 109. 



^ Bishop Browne, who regards the Bewcastle Cross as of the 7th century, 

 finds difficulty here. He says {Conv. of Heft., pp. 197-8) : ' As to the inter- 

 lacing patterns, the question is more difficult. Our Hibernian friends claim 

 that the whole of this art came from them. But they have no stone-work 

 of anything hke the date of the Bewcastle Cross with anything like these 

 patterns. Their earliest great cross, too, dates from 920 only [really 12th 

 century ; see p. 54, note 3]. ... If it is claimed that the Irish parchment 

 ornamentation gave the patterns of these panels of interlacing ornament, 

 Ave have to reply that we are not aware of any MS. of Irish production with 

 these patterns so early as the year 670.' He accordingly finds himself 

 obliged to resort to the hypothesis of an independent Anghan development, 

 and, as an alternative, to that of a borrowing from Lombardy, the peacock 

 screen at Brescia (see p. 79, above) being cited as a crucial example of the 

 Lombardic work (op. cit., pp. 198, 228-9 ; but of. his Theodore and Wilfrith, 

 p. 238, where he accounts for the absence of knotwork from the Ruthwell 

 Cross by the desire of its artists ' to shake themselves free from the local 

 associations of Anghan and Scotic interlacements, and to look to more 

 classical decoration '). Rivoira {Burl. Mag., April 15, 1912, pp. 23, 24) 

 Avill not allow that any British carved interlacing is earher than the 8th 

 century. 



^ See p. 27. 



* Colhngwood, in Victoria Hist. Cnmb. 1. 255. 



^ Calverley, Early Sciilpt. Crosses, p. 41. 



® Browne, Conv. of Hept., p. 194. 



(89) 



