Tickhill

In her book ‘Explore Green Men’, published in 2003, Mercia MacDermot reported the presence of a ‘Sheela’ and a phallic male on the gatehouse of Tickhill Castle, just a few kilometers west of Austerfield. The castle located 9km south of Doncaster, is on private land which is owned by the Duchy of Lancaster who have refused access to the public for a number of years. Although blocked by a large wooden gate the medieval gatehouse and its carvings can be clearly seen from Castlegate Road. Viewing is difficult during the summer months due to dense tree foliage.

The castle at Tickhill was built by Roger de Busli (alternate spellings abound and include Busili, Buslim,Buslin, Buesli and more commonly Bully) from the land given to him by William I for his assistance in the invasion of 1066. Roger de Busli was a major landholder in the Domesday book holding 174 estates in Nottinghamshire. His seat of power was at Blythe but Tickhill was his main castle. Originally, a Motte and Bailey the castle was added to throughout the years, culminating in the 17th century Manor House. The curtain wall, and gatehouse was constructed during early 12th century (1129-30?), and the barbican added in the 13th century.

The gatehouse is decorated with four pediments inlaid with small crude statuettes and slabs. The carvings are considered of late 11th or early 12th century ornamentation. There are five human figures amongst the decorations but of the two are of particular interest.

To the right is a rather squat figure which could be MacDermot’s suggested Sheela, where both arms held down the trunk, come to rest at the lower abdominal area. Two short legs are held straight, and at an angle of the body. Although an outline of a head is just evident, no features can be seen.

The figure to the left is more complex, and could be male or female. It has a long slender body, its large head contains a broad nose, and the position of the two nares is evident, as are two small eyes. Two arms are held close two the body and come to rest, cupping the genital area, where fingers are clearly discernible. If a female, the pudenda consists of a circular hole, and like the Church Stretton figure seems to contain a stone. The rather large pelvic area, which may suggest the figure is female, is supported by two short legs. If the figure is male, the large pelvic area becomes the figure’s hands (a little too large when compared to the size of the figures arms however). In effect the large hands are holding the base of the penis. The hole may be a socket where a penis was inserted. Both figures are rather worn, and it is difficult to be certain.

Although fairly common in Ireland, secular/castle Sheelas are very scarce on the British mainland. The only known other known example can be found in Haddon Hall. However while sheelas on castles may be rare in Britain sheelas associated with castles are more common. Kilpeck, Devizes, Holdgate and the possible sheela figure at Bredwardine are all castle churches and are intimately connected with their accompanying castles often forming part of the castle complex.

Interestingly a definite sheela na gig lies around 5 miles to west in the village of Austerfield in church built by another member of the Bully family, John de Bully. This figure, dating from around the same period as the gatehouse, adds weight to the likelyhood of these worn figures being exhibitionist with local sculptors being familiar with the exhibitionist motif. Like Kilpeck and Holdgate these castles were the main castles for their lords and all are connected with sheela na gig carvings. Tickhill is another example where we have (possible) exhibitionist figures associated with the main castle of a powerful local Norman lord. It seems that sheelas and status are connected in some way (this idea is currently being explored by Dr Theresa Oakley).

Text John Harding and Keith Jones

Photographs copyright Keith Jones

Other worn figures on the castle the last with some facial features still evident

Location

Directions

Taynuilt

The following information and photographs were kindly supplied by Marc Calhoun.

“This figure is located 10 feet above the ground on the west end of the south wall of Muckairn Church in the village of Taynuilt (NN 005 310). The figure is roughly 2 feet high, and 1 foot across. The arms are missing, the eyes are closed, and its mouth appears to be open. The stumpy legs make it appear to be squatting, and there is a hole at the base that may mean it is an anus shower.

Referred to as a Sheela in The Sheela-Na-Gigs of Ireland & Britain (item 45 in the Scotland section of the catalogue), where the figure is described as a ‘plump and undemonstrative goddess figure.’

Referred to as a Sheela in Argyll and the Islands; An Illustrated Architectural Guide, (item 115). This source dates it to 13^th century and says it was removed from the late medieval church of Killespickerill which once stood on the site.”

Marc Calhoun

This figure though damaged and worn does have some evidence to indicate that it was originally an exhibitionist of some sort. A hole presumably indicating the anus is very much in evidence and there is some damage around the groin area. The figure has the remains of two fairly thick legs and is quite rotund. The face is still evident and the head appears to be round and hairless. It is hard to say whether or not this was once a sheela na gig or a male exhibitionist but its reasonable to assume that it was an anus shower of some type. If we surmise that this figure is a survival from the earliest church “Killespickerill” dating from around 1228 then it would put the figure just outside the correct period for a sheela na gig yet not so far outside to make it impossible.

John Harding

Location

Directions

Stoke Sub Hamdon

The Church

Abstract corbels, an astrological tympanum, St Michael slaying the dragon and host of other architectural features make Stoke Sub Hamdon a veritable feast of medieval carving.

The church has been added to many time over the centuries resulting in a many different features from different times. The church is thought to have been originally built in 1100 the first version of the church not having a tower. This figure and a later nude figure on the church is discussed in the paper Two Sheila-na-gigs at Stoke Sub Hamdon by Paul Ashdown in Somerset Archaeology and Natural History 1993.

The Figure

The figure can be found on the left side of the church as you enter from the main gate. Walk past the tower and you should find a series of Romanesque corbels. The picture below indicates the exact position.

At first glance the figure is unremarkable just a face staring out from a squatting body. However when you go directly beneath the figure you can clearly see a cleft indicating either buttocks or a vagina. Unfortunately it is hard to from the carving which it is meant to be. There also seems to be some indication of hands pulling a the cleft apart but this not clear. While the figure is undoubtedly exhibitionist is it a sheela? Well it has all the characteristics of a sheela except for the fact that it’s exhibitionist nature is not immediately obvious. It is not as “in your face” as the Kilpeck or Oaksey sheelas and has less of an impact. In fact you have to go out of your way to discover that the figure is indeed exhibitionist at all. The same goes for the later figure on the rear of the church (see below) mentioned in Paul Ashdown’s paper.

This later figure (right) can be found on the rear of the church high up on the back wall. It consists of a nude figure with it’s mouth wide open which is blocked by a piece of rubble. The figure is missing the right hand limbs but gestures to the vulva with it’s left hand. The vulva is not immediately obvious and it was only due to the fact that we had read John Ashdown’s paper that we noticed it. In fact both myself and Keith Jones missed this figure on several separate visits despite the fact we were looking for figures of this type. The figure appears to have been moved from elsewhere and looks like the type of gargoyle figure you see adorning later medieval church towers. If this is the case then the figure would have faced head outwards with the feet on the tower while a channel would have been set to make waste water emerge from the mouth. If this description holds true then the vulva would have been facing the church and would not have been immediately obvious. There is also some indication that the vulva may have been carved at a later date than the main figure as it appears to be out of line with the main body. If you look at the photograph above you can see that if you draw a vertical line through the vulva it points to beyond the figure’s left shoulder rather than straight up to the head.
Once again we are faced with the question of the definition of a Sheela na gig. This figure lacks the overt exhibitionism of the Kilpeck and Oaksey figures in much the same way as the earlier Romanesque corbel on the other side of the church. Nevertheless it is displaying it’s vulva (if not in an immediately shocking way) This and the fact that stylistically it appears to much later than the usual Romanesque period, makes it one of the latest vulva displaying figures in the UK.

The rest of the church is very interesting with many different carvings dotted around it. There are some corbels which very abstract in design and would not look out of place in an Escher drawing. In addition to these some carvings (see below) are very odd defying a simple explanation of what they are meant to represent.

Tympanum over the main door to the church containing the astrological symbols of Saggitarius and Leo.
Interestingly the Sagitarius/Leo motif is duplicated on the font at Hook Norton including the explicit naming of the figures with inscriptions.

Location

Directions

Southwell

The Figure

This figure lies on the right hand tower of Southwell Minster in Nottinghamshire and was discovered by Norwegian Art Historian Kjartan Hauglid.

The minster goes back to the Saxon period and is believed to have been founded in 687 by Paulinus the first archbishop of York.
King Eadwing gifted land at Southwell to the church in 956 and it is on this land that the minister was built.
Construction of the minster started in 1108 replacing the earlier Saxon church from which a tesselated floor and a tympanum still exist.
The building was completed in 1150 which would seem to place the carving of the sheela na gig some time in the first half of the 12th century.
The carving itself is of a doward facing figure with hunched shoulders with both hands reaching below the legs to pull open an exaggerated
vulva (see above). Like a number of other figures e.g Stoke Sub Hamdon the exhibitionist nature of the carving can only really be seen from below
the figure. People viewing from further away simply see a hunched over figure in almost an Atlas like pose. This begs the question of the nature of
the figure if the exhibitionism cannot be seen easily then it would seem to argue against a didactic explanation of the figure and may
possibly lend weight to the argument that it is there as an apotropaic symbol warding off evil.

My thanks go to Kjartan Hauglid for permission to use these excellent photographs of the Southwell sheela na gig

The sheela na gig can be seen second from the right. This photograph clearly shows the Romanesque context of the sheela na gig with a number of other romanesque motifs such as the bridled animal head and the double human heads. — The sheela na gig can be seen second from the right. This photograph clearly shows the Romanesque context of the sheela na gig with a
number of other romanesque motifs such as the bridled animal head and the double human heads.

Location

Directions

St Ives

The Figure

According to The Witch on the Wall the figure was discovered near the remains of St Ives Priory the figure is crudely carved for the most and appears to have signs on burning on it. The photograph to the right was taken in the 1970’s by Anthony Weir author of Images of Lust . At that time the figure was in the private possession of Mr R.C. Jude of St Ives. I contacted the Norris museum near St.Ives with a view to finding out what had happened to the figure and whether the museum now had possession. Unfortunately according to the museum Mr. Jude had since died and had no immediate family. It’s assumed that the figure was left to his cousins or more remote family. Unfortunately this now means that the figure is essentially lost. If anyone knows the whereabouts of the figure or can put me touch with Mr. Jude’s family please let me know.

One of the odder features of this sculpture is that vulva resides in a depression. This could be down to the legs now being missing or possibly that the figure was being eaten by a monstrous pair of jaws,

John Harding

Location

Please note that this shows the Location of St Ives. This figure is now lost.

Directions

Royston

The Figure

Royston Cave is one of the more unusual places in Britain. Possibly the remnants of an Neolithic flint mine, the cave was used for religious purposes in medieval times and is covered in carvings of religious and secular subjects. Local historians insist that there is a Templar connection and that it was used for initiation purposes into that order. The imagery in the cave tends to support this theory with some of the carvings being interpreted as events in Templar history. A number of saints are depcited including St Catherine, St Lawrence and St Christopher. The cave originally had a platform built into it which made the old floor much higher than the modern one.

This sheela figure is situated between a horse and a sword as can be seen in the above picture (Fig 1). It’s open to debate whether the figure should be taken in context with these carvings as Joseph Beldam did in his book The Origins and Use of the Royston Cave 1884 (see below). My initial reaction is to take it as a stand alone figure there does not seem to be a discernable pattern in how they should be read. The figure has the Herculean shoulders and the exaggerated hanging pudenda which marks it as sheela but, as Anderson points out, the figure does not gesture to the genitals the hands hanging loosely at its sides. The carving of the sheela is fairly crude especially when compared to some of the care taken on the other figures. There are a number of holes drilled into the walls of the cave which are thought to have held supports for the candles that lit it. Interestingly one of these holes is directly between the legs of the sheela (Fig 2) this would have meant that the figure and more to the point the vaginal area would have been directly lit further emphasizing the shock that the figure would have been likely to induce.

Whereas it is hard to date the carvings the style of some of the imagery seems to indicate 13th – 14th Century origin. This would make this a later example of sheela if this date is correct.

Royston lies on the intersection of the ancient thoroughfares of the Icknield Way and Ermine St. Interestingly another Sheela can also be found near the Icknield way further south at Buckland

More information on Royston Cave can be found at www.roystoncave.com and on Wikipedia which replicates a number of plates from Beldam’s book.

Joseph Beldam and the Cave

In 1884 Joseph Beldam published a book called “The Origins and Use of the Royston Cave”. In the book the Sheela na gig changes sex and is associated with the horse and sword next to it. This scene is then, somewhat bizzarely, described as the conversion of St Paul. As can be seen in the illustration from the book on the left the Sheela has been bowdlerised into a clothed figure petting the horse next to it. This is one more example of Victorian self-censorship in the describing of exhibitionist figures which can also be seen in tracts on the Llanhamlach figure and the typanum at Stoke Sub Hamdon.

William Stukeley and Royston Cave

Antiquarian William Stukeley made an earlier drawing of the figure which has also been bowdlerised. In this drawing the arms are correctly positioned but the figure has acquired a head of hair similar to other figures in the cave and the carved vulva now becomes part of a skirt or shift. As you can see from the above photograph the legs are indicated either side of the vulva making it distinctly un-skirt like. Stukeley attributed a Norman origin to the cave writing shortly after it’s discovery

“this agreeable subterranean recess, hewn out of
pure chalk. ’Tis of an elegant bell like form … all
around the sides, it is adorned with imagery in
basso relieve of crucifixes, saints, martyrs and
historical pieces … suitable to a time that was
soon after the conquest.”

Location

Directions

Romsey

This figure is situated on the Norman Abbey in Romsey. the current church is the third to stand on the site but has been a place of worship for at least 1000 years going back to Saxon times. Romsey Abbey is widely regarded as one of the best examples of Norman church architecture still standing.

A Sheela with objects

This sheela is unusual in that it is accompanied by a number of objects. The figure holds a crooked staff which has been interpreted as a crozier. The staff is said to indicate that the figure is meant to be the abbess. There is also a hard to identify object in the figure’s left hand which has been identified as shears. However Richard N Bailey examined this figure close up on scaffolding and dismissed this interpretation in his paper Apotropaic Figures in Milan and North-West England (point 12). As you can see in the photograph on the left the object does not appear very scissor like. The figure straddles what appears to be a now damaged bowl. The vulva is indicated by a small notch and is not very prominent.

The Nun on the Potty

The figure was known locally by schoolchildren¹ in the past as “The nun on the potty” this is probably due to the fact that there appears to be something between the figures splayed legs. This object appears to be a damaged pot hence the local name for it. Indeed the figure may be a combination of exhibitionist and an “at stool” figure although there does not appear to be any sign of a stool.

A Miserly Sheela?

Whereas it’s very hard to determine what the unidentified object is, my personal theory is that it’s a purse ring . See Melbourne Church’s Miser Figure for an example of a purse ring. In December 2006 I revisted Melbourne and took some more detailed pictures of the “miser” figure and found that the object that the figure was holding actually included what seems to be the sack of the purse as well. If you compare the Romsey figure to the Melbourne one they both seem to be holding what appear to be very similar objects. This would seem to fit into the alleged satirical nature of the carving as the purse ring is used in Romanesque carving to indicate miserliness. This would mean that carving has been used to imortalise the abbess’s niggardliness possibly in paying the sculptors. However there a problems with this theory in that the purse ring is usually depicted as a open D shape which the object only just resembles. We should also be a little wary of the satirical explanation as this is one frequently used to explain rude or out of place carvings on churches. A similar story is told about the Kilpeck figure and many other anomalous (to our eyes) church carvings. One odd fact is that the carving was originally in position where it could not be seen easily. This begs the question could this be a genuine example of a “mason’s joke”. There are however a number of features that would argue against the satirical nature. The carving is not a quick piece of graffiti but a well carved and detailed panel. It would have taken a significant amount of time to carve taking a sculptor away from other more visible and authorised work. As with most speculation on these figures the fact is we will never really know. There could however be another explanation for the figure which involves a royal scandal and an abbess who became a wife.

A Royal Scandal – Mary de Blois

Tradition has it that two sculpted heads on a capital in the South Transept at Romsey represent King Stephen and his ill fated daughter Mary of Blois. As was the custom in the 12th century Mary was dedicated to a religious life as a child by her mother Matilida. She was placed in the priory of Stratford-atte-Bow in Middlesex along with a group of nuns from St Sulpice in Rennes who were attend to her upbringing. Apparently the strict rule of the English nuns did not sit well with French group who were used to a more lenient regime. No doubt the importance of their royal charge also contributed to the friction. Unfortunately this strife was taste of what was to come for the young princess. Some years later Queen Matilda founded a new priory at Lillechurch in Kent and at the tender age of sixteen Mary found herself the prioress of the St Sulpice nuns.The rents from Lillechurch manor were made over to Stratford priory to cover the costs of the new sister house. It would seem that relations did not improve despite the move and few years later Stratford priory rescinded any claim to Lillechurch on the condition that Mary’s group packed up their bags and left forthwith. During her time at Lillechurch her mother Matilda and her father King Stephen died leaving Henry II to suceeded to the throne. Henry was of a different family to Mary and so her fortunes dwindled somewhat.

It seems easy to read between the lines in this history that group were troublesome and not easy to control. Whatever the reason the group left Kent and were sent to Romsey some time between 1156 and 1158 where Mary was appointed new Abbess. The choice of Romsey was not unusual as it had a tradition of housing those of royal blood who took to the cloisters. Mary began a quiet life at Romsey until 1159 when Mary’s brother William died leaving her the sole heiress of her families estates including Boulogne in France.

It is at this point that scandal rocks 12th century Europe.

King Henry II sees an opportunity to strengthen his alliances on the continent by marrying Mary, despite the fact she is an abbess with accompanying vows of chastity, to Matthew of Alsace the younger son of the count of Flanders. Thomas a Beckett’s horror at the scarelige of this marriage is written about by a number of writers of the period. All but one of the chroniclers of the period paint Mary as the innocent party in this scandal. For a short time she was the “innocent object of execration” ²of most of Europe. The marriage led to the excommunication of Matthew but not that of Mary which seems to indicate that she was seen as an innocent party in this sacreligious union.

Sheela na gig or Mary of Blois?
Does this mean then that the carving at Romsey is actually a record of this scandal? The figure definitely represents a ecclesiastical figure due to the prescence of the crozier. The other objects though are more troublesome, a pot which the figure squats over and looped object held in the left hand which may be a purse representing money. For the most part Mary was seen as the innocent party so is it likely that she would be villified in a satirical piece of sculpture? Despite this the sculpture does seem to represent an abbess and even though Mary was widely believed to be innocent there was a school of thought that she could have objected more strongly had she wished to. Given that Mary’s ecclesiastical career was a matter of circumstance rather than conviction would she have welcomed the marriage? Apparently not as a later letter to the King of France makers clear her hatred of King Henry and it would appear she did not welcome the marriage at all. Nevertheless we have a sexual sculpture of what appears to be an abbess and a sexual scandal involving an abbess both of which come from the same period. Unfortunately there is no definite proof that they are connected.

Romsey Abbey. The arrow indicates the position of the sheela na gig carving. The birthing corbel is on the adjacent lower corbel table.

Unlike most church sculpture we have a likely sculptor for this corbel as he has kindly left his signature on the side of the figure. The name Ellery is fairly easy to make out with a possible date of 1865 below. A Thomas Ellery is recorded in Harrod & Co.’s Directory of Hampshire & Isle of Wight, 1865 “Thomas ELLERY, stone and marble mason, Middle Bridge street, Romsey”. Unfortunately only Ellery is clear with some scratches possibly indicating initials. It’s thought that this corbel is a replacement for an original romanesque corbel of a similar design.

The late Wendy McKenna local resident and archaeologist.
Lives of the Princesses of England M.A. Everret Green 1849
Romsey Abbey Through the Centuries by Judy Walker Pendragon Press 1993

Location

Directions

Rodel

The Rodel Sheela Na Gig

The Figure

Picture copyright Undiscovered Scotland http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/

Used with permission

This figure is located on Rodel Church at the southern tip of the Isle of Harris in the Western Isles of Scotland. The current church is thought to originate from the early 1500’s but it is believed that it was built on the site of an older church of unknown date. The church is associated with the Augustinian nunnery at Iona which also houses an alleged sheela na gig.
The Rodel figure is carved on a roughly square block on the east side of the tower, surrounded by a weathered string course.It is in a seated position with both legs bent and wide apart. The left leg is slightly more extended than the right. The vulva is represented by a small but definite cleft between the legs. The right hand holds a now worn object which has been described as a baby but looks more like an animal such as a dog or lamb. Intriguingly the left hand points to, or is holding a raised rectangular section stone which has a worn and rough surface. The face of the figure is turned towards this object. This rectangle is deliberately carved but it’s function is not immediately apparent. It would appear that the face was originally fairly detailed and the head is covered in what appears to be styled hair. Even though the figure is worn the vulva is still apparent and the splay legged nature of carving would definitely seem to put this figure in the exhibitionist category. On the south side of the tower lies an almost modern jacketed male exhibitionist figure known as “The Lewd Man”. This figure appears to be holding his penis in both hands.
Mairi Kidd writes about the figure on the Flickr Sheela na gig group

“According to Lesley Riddoch’s Hebrides bike-tour programme, Countess Dunmore had her ghillie shoot off this poor wee mannie’s wee mannie. Luckily he missed his clachan! Tradition has it that he is known as Seumas a’ Bhuid, which would be James of the willy in English. Rhymes with ghillie; maybe there’s a limerick in there.

Rodel Church

Location

Directions

Raglan Castle

The Figure

In her recently published book, Sheela-na-gigs Unravelling an Enigma Dr Barbara Freitag gave details of a Sheela na Gig located in Raglan Castle. Although exhibitionist figures are frequently located on secular buildings in Ireland (mostly castles), this is the forth known case on the British mainland. The other figures being Haddon Hall, Tickhill and the recently discovered figure at Donyatt in Somerset (although it’s thought that this figure originated from a chapel).

Raglan Castle, Monmouthshire is considered one of the county’s most magnificent late medieval castles. Constructed on the site of an 1100 motte and bailey castle with timber buildings, the present structure was commenced in 1432. Further additions were made up until 1549. The castle was abandoned on 17 August 1646 following the siege during the Civil War, and is now an atmospheric ruin. The castle is now maintained by CADW.

The Raglan figure, is a waterspout with a channel running down the back in pretty much the same manner as the Margam figure. It has pointed ears and is very worn. The figure has a potbelly, and below there is a shadow between the legs where you would expect to find a vulval cleft. The figure does gesture towards the groin is with the right hand. The right arm is for most part missing. What does remain seems to indicate that this hand is also gesturing towards the groin however the thigh on the left seems to join the body as you would expect so the left hand may have been further back than the right. You could take this as a pointer to the figure being exhibitionist i.e. pointing to the genitals.

The original location of this figure is not known, but a photograph dating from 1860 puts it at the foot of the Grand Stair in the Fountain Court part of the castle. This area of the castle dates from 1460 – 1469. Later it was found among other fragments in the castle grounds. The figure is currently being restored by CADW. Eventually the figure will be put back on display in Raglan Castle.

Richard Avent the Chief Inspector of Ancient Monuments concludes:

‘However, if a gargoyle, it is in a rather different style from the only other gargoyles at the castle which are at the top of the main Gatehouse and Closet Tower. All in all, the exact origins of this sheela are a bit of a puzzle but it must, presumably, be linked in some way to either the 15th century castle or perhaps something which preceded it on the same site.’

Is this a sheela na gig?
Most female exhibitionist figures in the U.K. tend to originate in the 12th and early 13th centuries. By the 15thC figures had become more monstrous and male exhibitionist figures such as bottom showers are more common. Female exhibitionists are few and far between and those that do exist seem to be a lot more modest than their 12thC counterparts. (Another example is the Stoke Sub Hamdon 15thC exhibitionist figure.). There is a question mark over whether this figure was once exhibitionist at all. While it does have a faint suggestion of a vulva it lacks the overt and shocking exhibitionism of earlier figures such asKilpeck and Oaksey. It seems with 15thC figures we are moving towards a “nude” type representation rather than “sheela-na-gig” type exhibitionism. This taken in account with the height at which the figure was likely to reside would seem to indicate that later figures , if indeed they are connected to the earlier shocking “sheela-na-gig” motif they are becoming more modest in their execution.

Our thanks to Sian Rees and the late Richard Avent of CADW for allowing us to photograph this and the Haverfordwest figure and for allowing us to publish these figures on the website.

A front view of the Raglan Castle Figure

Location

Directions

North Grimston

The Church

The Church of St Nicholas at North Grimston North Yorkshire (Also known as North Grimstone)
The Village of Grimston lies 4 miles SE. of Malton in North Yorkshire is recorded in the Domesday book as “Grimeston”. The village is also known for the iron age sword accidentally found there in 1902. The Church of St Nicholas, on which the figure resides, has a number features which date it back to the Norman period but the font is widely regarded to be Saxon which dates the building back even further.

The Figures

The sheela is one of a number of Romanesque corbels some of which appear to be relocated voussoirs.The figure appears to be quite fat and unusually has a pair of pendulous breasts (see Oaksey for another example). There appears to be small cleft between the bent legs of the figure possibly indicating a vagina. The figure’s arms are held against the top of the chest. It’s quite modest in its exhibitionism, in some ways similar to the figure at Worth Matravers in Dorset. In fact a number of the figures bear a passing similarity to the carvings at Stoke Sub Hamdon and Studland far to the South. As well as the corbel table the church boasts a Romanesque chancel arch. This is another example of a figure which is not as unequivocally exhibitionist as say the Kilpeck or Oaksey sheelas yet still has sexual attributes (breasts in this case). It is interesting that this figure has a counterpart in masturbating male figure which seems to firmly put the carvings in the sexual sin category.
Pat O’Halloran’s site www.danu.co.uk has a number of photographs of the church, corbel table and its Saxon font. Thanks go to Pat for allowing the use of his images on this website.

Male figure at North Grimston
This figure while very worn can still just be recognised as a masturbating male figure with the remnants of a penis just visible. The motif can be seen at other Romanesque sites such as the Church of St John in Devizes and possibly at Tickhill Castle although the latter is very worn

Location

Directions

Search

Female

Tickhill

Location

Taynuilt

Location

Stoke Sub Hamdon

The Church

The Figure

Location

Southwell

The Figure

Location

St Ives

The Figure

Location

Royston

The Figure

Joseph Beldam and the Cave

William Stukeley and Royston Cave

Location

Romsey

A Sheela with objects

The Nun on the Potty

A Miserly Sheela?

A Royal Scandal – Mary de Blois

Location

Rodel

The Figure

Location

Raglan Castle

The Figure

Location

North Grimston

The Church

The Figures

Location

Recent Posts

Archives