Hagley District 50 – 1086AD

Back Forward Contents Index

Romans to Normans AD 50 – 1066

Evidence to formulate any sort of an account for any part of the first millennium AD is in very short supply for Hagley and the surrounding area.

Before discussing the evidence that is available locally, the national picture, based on both documentary and archaeological records is outlined below.

The inhabitants of Britain at the time of the Roman invasion were civilised by the standards of the time, organised in large tribes and petty “kingdoms”, and were trading with the Continent.

When the Romans arrived they were met initially, with some resistance but local politics weakened the temporary alliances between the 20 or so tribes in what is now England and Wales. As far as the area round Hagley is concerned it was probably on the borders of the Dobunni (Gloucestershire and adjacent areas) and the Cornovii tribes (Shropshire etc.). This could account for the relatively large number of small hill forts, including Wychbury in the Stour basin.

Some 30 years after the invasion the Romans had control of central and southern England and the military were concentrated in the north. The population was still essentially British but were enjoying the benefits of Roman administration and, increasingly, technology. This way of life continued until the early fifth century.

Around AD370 the Saxons had started raiding the east coast and before AD450 the Romans had retreated to the Continent and the Saxons were no longer raiders but had become established as farmers in the east of the country.

The Saxons established kingdoms by both negotiation or brute force and, at any one time, one of these kingdoms was accepted by the others as supremo. From c685 to 825 Mercia enjoyed supremacy, until Wessex took the position by force.

The spread from east to the Welsh marches took several centuries and it must have been considered necessary to call a halt to the move west c790 when Offa, King of Mercia, built his dyke on the line of what is still essentially the border with Wales.

By the middle of the ninth century the Danes were raiding the east coast and subsequently settled. At one time the Danes had overrun much of Mercia and Wessex and it was not until the mid-tenth century that the “Danelaw” territory was largely regained. However, by 980 Danish raids had been renewed and “Danegeld” (protection money!) was being paid.

The period leading up to the Norman conquest, with its mixture of Saxon and Danish kings, was perhaps a continuation of the unsettled position that had existed much of the time since the departure of the Romans. Nevertheless, the Normans took over an administrative system that enabled them to record the value4 of all land and to re-allocate the various holdings throughout the shires and their hundreds without any great change.

The above summary of a thousand years of history indicates continuous fluctuations and the next thousand years is equally fluid. The main difference is that much more is known of the latter, through records, accounts and archaeological remains.

In the Neolithic period, man indicated that he at least had passed through Hagley and left a stone axe behind and the Romans and Saxons also came into our area.

The most tangible evidence is the road from Droitwich to Greensforge on the western side of the parish. Droitwich was a centre for salt production before the Romans came, but the network of roads was certainly developed by them. The evidence for the local road can be outlined from large-scale maps and confirmed from aerial photographs and, occasionally, from freshly ploughed soil. The route deviates from the present day footpath between Brakemill Farm and Iverley by some 30 metres to the east of the footpath. Parts of the road have been field walked but no surface evidence was found. Greensforge is the site of Roman forts and the road splits at this point.

Dr.Nash mentions a pot of Roman coins5 of the “lower Empire” found in a pool on the side of Wychbury some short time before 1780. As often happens with Nash, the details are lacking in quantity and quality. The location is also vague. There is one small pool on the southern side and another one existed on an 1834 estate map to the east. It is certain that this hoard was hidden with the intention of retrieving it at some stage. The value of the hoard is unknown, as indeed is its present location. It can be assumed that it did exist and that the owner did not return to recover his hoard. It would be interesting to know if this was a local inhabitant hiding his savings, a thief on the run or some other fugitive about to be caught. There are a number of similar hoards recorded in the county, which suggests a breakdown in law and order at the end of the fourth century.

Recent pipe laying6 on the side of Wychbury has revealed coarse Roman pottery of the 2nd to 3rd century, and aerial photography indicates buildings or enclosures in the same area. Together it can be assumed that some Romano-British settlement could have existed in Hagley.

Stories of battles between the Romans and the British seem to have been around in the 18th century and have regurgitated at regular intervals ever since. No shred of real evidence to confirm any major conflict has been found, and, as Roman documentary sources for the Midlands suggest a relatively rapid progress to the Welsh Marches and northwards, it is not considered worthwhile speculating on the myth.

Place names and Saxon charters provide some clues for post-Roman activity.

Hills and rivers often retain their British name throughout a range of occupying peoples. The river Stour is an example and it means a strong, powerful river. Because the name has come through from the British it strongly suggests that sufficient numbers of people were around to ensure its continuity.

Wychbury can be interpreted as the fort of the Hwicce, who were a British and Christian tribe, with lands in Gloucestershire (east of the Severn), Worcestershire and south west Warwickshire. However, as King Penda (626-696) of Mercia regarded the Hwicce as a sub-kingdom of his own, it is not very likely that the former iron age fort would have been allowed to be used as a military power base.

Alternative spellings of Wychbury are not available before the 18th century so one can only speculate the “fort” is based on the old English word “burg”, but a word for “hill” is the old English “beorg”. Not so very different and it could be that the name identifies a boundary marker for the Hwicce tribe.

The Hwicce are last mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle in 800 when they were defeated by the men of Wiltshire. This is at the time when the Mercian kings lost power to those of Wessex.

Harborough in 1275 was spelt Herdeberewe, the hill of the herdsman, which makes sense, as this area was common grazing land until 1832.

Examination of the Anglo-Saxon charter bounds for Oldswinford in 951 and 955 shows “sicanbyrig” on the Pedmore/Hagley boundary (GR SO 88/98 8970 8120). This translates as Sica’s fortification. “Byrig” is the dative form of “burg” and, as the original written form is available, it must be taken at face value. It is probable that Sica had a defended farmstead in this area and the name is perpetuated in several fields on the Pedmore side of the boundary with the name Buckbury. On the Hagley side, the fields all have the name Birches. It could indicate the obvious and this was common grazing until 1830, but it also could be a corruption of “byrig”.

The place names of settlements in the area of Hagley have a range of suffixes associated with Saxon settlements. The -ton of Bellington and Belbroughton, the -cot of Amblecote and the -wick of Chadwick, all suggest small and relatively early settlements. The -leys of Hagley, Wolverley, Himley, Cradley, Lutley, Dudley and Frankley, all represent later settlements. There are two interpretations of the word “leah”. One is an area of land that has been deliberately cleared and the second is a natural clearing in an essentially wooded area. It is suggested that the latter applies to this area of north Worcestershire. The land is relatively poor and not worth a great deal of effort to bring into cultivation. The suggested lateness of settlement would also make sense as the best land in the Avon and Teme valleys would be taken up first, which is confirmed by the large number of -tons in both regions.

The name Hagley is usually explained as the wooded area where haws are found. This is perfectly accurate. Hawthorn shrubs abound and, as has already been suggested, the area was wooded to some degree. However the description would have fitted a very large area and hardly a detailed description on which to base accurate directions to a traveller.

The word for haw is “haga” and the identical form is used to mean a fenced enclosure. This seems to be a more logical explanation and more useful for giving directions to a traveller.

Reinforcing this view is the fact that in 1066 Hagley was held by Godric, a king’s thegn. There were various ways to achieve the rank of thegn but the one that required ongoing status was based on holding land rated at five hides; a church; a kitchen; a bell house; a castle gate; a seat and a special office in the king’s hall. These criteria had to be maintained for three generations so Godric’s forebears must have developed their position some 75-100 years prior to 1066, and, perhaps, a mid-tenth century date is correct for the establishment of Hagley as a separate holding.

Consideration of Anglo-Saxon charters for Ismere (c750) and Oldswinford (951, 955) both indicate large unitary holdings where the river Stour, at different places, forms part of the estate boundary.

It is suggested that earlier estates were still larger and that rivers were central to an estate’s economy. There it is a possibility that Olswinford and Kingswinford was one estate deriving its name from a swine ford at its centre.

Further examination of the southern border of Oldswinford in 951-5 has given a number of scholars problems in making the boundary markers fit. However, if they are applied to the southern Pedmore boundary with Hagley it is much easier to follow the clues. This suggests that Pedmore was carved out of Oldswinford and Hagley came from a larger Clent at about the same time, say c960.

960 is a date following the re-conquest of the “Danelaw” protected areas and both Hagley and Pedmore, along with other small estates, could have been given to soldiers for services rendered.

In the case of both Hagley and Bell End, the tenants both did well enough to become king’s thegns no later than 1016, when Clent was transferred to Staffordshire, that is if the manors were indeed carved from a larger Clent.

Hagley in 1066 and 1086

The Domesday Book is the earliest known reference to Hagley and it is written as Hageleia in 1086 and it was in Clent Hundred.

Domesday in North Worcestershire

It is interesting to note that boundary modifications are not a modern phenomenon. The Romans and the upper class Romano-Britons had large estates. The Saxons perpetuated the practice but as the need to reward their followers spiralled, estates were cut and carved, as has already been suggested for the creation of Hagley and Pedmore.

Having increased the number of holdings and allocated them to a range of sub-tenants there came a time when the civil servants of the day (9th century for Wessex and early 11th century for Mercia) organised the holdings into hundreds. A hundred being a hundred hides and each hide originally, it is suggested, matching the land that a plough could cope with in a year i.e. 120 acres in this part of the country.

The hundreds (either 12 or 24) were grouped to form counties or shires. In Worcestershire there were 12 hundreds, seven of them controlled by the church based on the abbeys at Worcester, Evesham, Pershore and Westminster. The other five were held by a number of tenants-in-chief from the king, but probably as a result of the allocation of land suggested above, no one person had any great holding held in one block. The result was, of course, that alliances by any group of nobles became more difficult. This was the situation in 1066 and Duke William saw no reason to change it.

Clent hundred appears to be an artificial combination of small estates because it is made up of three areas. The first is, as might be anticipated, based on Clent and the second part has Droitwich as its centre while the third, and smallest, is Dudley and its immediate surroundings. Cresslau hundred was on the west and Came to the south and east. Both of these hundreds were single areas of land.

In 1066 Hagley was held by Godric, a king’s thane. Godric is a name that occurs 16 times in the Worcestershire volume of Domesday and it is unlikely that it was the same man in every case. However, at Stockton-on-Teme, it is noted that Godric, a freeman, held the manor from Queen Edith, wife of King Edward.

By 1086 Roger de Lacy held both these manors, along with many more and a Roger (without any surname) held Hagley. The associations between the men and the estates may be regarded as tenuous, but other examples indicate that groups of Saxon estates were transferred intact to their Norman successors. If this is the case then Roger and Roger de Lacy are the same person.

There is no known historical evidence to link the Domesday date with the earliest reference to the de Hagley’s in 1130. If the speculation that Roger de Lacy was the tenant in 1086 is correct, he in turn could have given the manor to one of his followers, who adopted the name Hagley. This is speculation and the readers are welcome to develop their own hypotheses on the matter.

4 Ed.Morris – Domesday Book – Worcestershire 23,9
5 T.Nash – History of Worcestershire Vol 1 p.485
6 H.C.W.C.C. S.M.R.No.22307

Back Forward Contents Index Original Document (1.0MB)