WHETHER the district of Fladbury was inhabited before the "English" invasions we do not know. The only evidence of the earlier "British" peoples is their word for water-afon-now the name of the river Avon. They preferred hills to damp lowlands, and knew the river nearer its source. The whole valley was a dense woodland during Roman times, and the nearest villa was at Eckington, not far from the Roman Way from Gloucester to York.
As no signs of earlier habitation have been found, it is probable that the first men to settle here were those who called it Fledanburg or Flaedanburb, as it was known in 691. This name has considerable historical interest. It is thought that most of the vale between the Malverns and the Cotswolds was settled by West Saxons coming from the south after a victory won by their King Ceawlin, but this does not seem to apply to Fladbury itself. The name Fladbury contains the same personal name, Flaede, which, unknown in the areas of Saxon settlement, is also found in Fledborough on the bank of the Trent in Nottinghamshire. This leads to the conclusion that a slightly later Anglian settlement took place around Fladbury. It also helps to explain why the district later formed part, not of the West Saxon Kingdom of Wessex, but of the Anglian Kingdom of Mercia.
Flaede is a feminine name; the earliest settlement was the "burh" or fortified camp of a woman named Flaede. It is not unusual to find settlements of this date called after women. They played an important and active part in the life of the Anglo-Saxon invaders of England.
Cropthorne was Cropponthorne or Croppethorne in 780; "the Thornbush of Croppa." This personal name is found only in one other place, not far away, Croppedune, one of the possessions of Worcester Priory.
The settlement at Fladbury flourished, and by the end of the seventh century the village contained a monastery, probably founded when Christianity was introduced soon after the middle of that century, to bring teaching and baptism to the men of the surrounding country. In 691-2 Ethefred, King of the Mercians, gave it, together with 40 cassati of land, to Ofthor, the second Bishop of Worcester, for the welfare of his soul and that of his wife Osryth. This gift was afterwards disputed by the monks of Evesham Abbey, founded by Bishop Ecgwin, Ofthor's successor They claimed that Ethelred had given Fladbury to Ecgwin for the Abbey in 703, but that they were unable to recover what was their right owing to the power of the Bishop of Worcester. In this early example of a dispute between monks and their bishop the bishop was victorious, for, though another charter tells how Ecgwin renounced Fladbury to a noble named Aethelheard, the village was among the possessions of the bishop shortly afterwards. About 780 Bishop Tilhere subscribed to a deed by which Aldred, subregulus of the Hwiccas, Ethelred's descendant, granted the monastery to his kinswoman Aethelburh for her life.
Bishop Tilhere was the contemporary of Offa, King of the Mercians, who re-established the supremacy of Mercia among the kingdoms of England and was responsible for what might seem, if we knew more about it, the most illustrious event in the history of Fladbury. The Bishop entertained Offa and his chieftains at a great feast in the village, and the grateful King granted to the Bishop's church the royal village of Cropthorne, land worth 40 mansae, and a Bible with two clasps of pure gold.
The monastery disappeared before the Norman Conquest, eclipsed by its larger and more favoured sister of Evesham, but the see of Worcester continued to hold the manor, and it was distinguished among the Bishop's lands by the vines-whatever that term may have implied-which grew there. A piece of land called "the Vineyard" was still owned by the Rector of Fladbury at the end of the eighteenth century.
We can learn little about the history of Fladbury in the Middle Ages that makes it different from a thousand other villages. There are no records except routine entries in the Bishop's Registers, and most of the clergy have left nothing but their names. The present church of St. John the Baptist, which was the most important feature in the medieval village and in its life, was built in 1340, when the earlier church was pulled down. The three lower stages of the tower, dating from the twelfth century, were allowed to remain.
The most distinguished family was that of the Throckmortons, taking their name from Throckmorton village, which was part of Fladbury until 1415. They are found as tenants of the bishop in the twelfth century, and by the end of the thirteenth had achieved some eminence, for Thomas Throckmorton, who served in the retinue of Thomas Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, was escheator for the county of Worcester in 1402 and constable of Elmley Castle in 1404-5. His son, Sir John, the first baronet, was also of the Warwick allegiance. He ended a long career in the service of Henry V and Henry VI as Chamberlain of the Exchequer and Under-Treasurer of England, and was Member of Parliament for Worcestershire. He first held Throckmorton as a separate entity, being granted 40 messuages (or houses) and 2 carucates of land in Throckmorton, to be held of the Bishop of Worcester at a fee farm rent. This alienation so intensely displeased John Carpenter, who became Bishop of Worcester in 1444, that he threatened to excommunicate the Prior and monks of Worcester, who appealed to the Archbishop of Canterbury. The dispute ended amicably, and it is said that Carpenter made Thomas, son of Sir John, the steward of his lands. To the memory of Sir John Throckmorton, who died in 1445, and of Eleanor his wife and Thomas their son, was erected the most impressive monument in Fladbury church.*
The Throckmorton family did not welcome changes, in religion or in politics. During the Reformation Thomas Throckmorton, great-great-grandson of the Thomas who put up the tomb, suffered for his opinions. As he was a staunch supporter of the old faith and would not conform to the established Church, his estate was sequestered and he himself imprisoned. During the Civil War the family, like most of those who lived in the country districts of Worcestershire, supported the King, and were unfortunate once again. In spite of disasters they remained in the district, their family seat still being Coughton Court, Warwickshire.
There was a mill at Fladbury at the time of the earliest record which could be expected to mention it, the so-called "Domesday Survey." We may surmise that a mill and weir of some sort had existed almost as long as Fladbury itself; even the most primitive peoples rapidly discover how to harness water to grind the corn for their daily bread, and the Anglo-Saxons had a certain degree of civilisation.
From the Domesday Survey it appears that in 1086 the Bishop of Worcester held the mill at Fladbury, which was stated to be worth 10S. a year, and received from it a yearly rent of 20 sticks of eels (i.e. 500 eels). A mill is mentioned in the early thirteenth century, and in 1302 there were two mills at Fladbury, valued at £3 19S. 6d. Two mills were included in the seventeenth-century sale of the manor, and the second of these was probably Wyre Mill, south of Wyre Piddle.
A water mill was a valuable part of any manor, and the nominal rent of Fladbury Mill appreciated as the value of money decreased. We do not know what the early mill or the weir looked like, but probably both would seem small and fragile to us, the "weir" mainly or entirely made of wood, the mill of wattle and daub. Such a structure would have suffered frequently in the floods, and there must have been several mills at Fladbury before the present mill was built. Louis Barrow discovered while taking measurements for his plans that the remains of one old mill had been incorporated within the present mill building.
The date of this is a matter for speculation. Louis Barrow pointed out that "the thickness of brick gives a rough estimate of its age; the thinner, the older; the thicker, the newer," and that the bricks of Compton Winyates, built in the sixteenth century from fifteenth-century bricks, are of the same thickness as those of Fladbury Mill-two and a quarter inches. Because, as he explained, before coal was easily obtainable (towards the end of the eighteenth century), bricks were usually burnt with wood, and therefore at a lower rate of combustion. They are now usually three inches thick. He also drew attention to the rough adze-trimmed timbers of what is thought to be remains of the previous mill, indicating a very early date for that part of the building. It is unlikely that much of the present mill was built before the sixteenth century.
The parish boundary between Fladbury and Cropthorne runs up the middle of the river below the mills, but then joins the left bank of the river so as to include in Fladbury parish the greater part of the weir. This makes it necessary to ask if the mill at Cropthorne owned by the Prior and Convent of Worcester, which had the same value and rent as Fladbury Mill in 1086, was on the site of the present Cropthorne Mill. It is not usual to find the mills of two neighbouring villages facing each other across a weir, even if the site was peculiarly suitable for a mill-race; disputes about ownership and upkeep would have been unavoidable. The present mill is a mile from the village-an unnecessary distance, since the river forms the border of the parish for some distance below Fladbury Mill and runs much nearer to the village. It is possible that the mill of 1086, which paid 355. and 30 sticks of eels in 1240, and the two other mills which existed in Cropthorne in the thirteenth century, had their own weir or weirs farther down the stream. In this case the mill was probably moved when William Sandys (of whom more follows) was making the navigation between 1635 and 1638. There is no doubt that he was unwilling on the score of trouble and expense to make more weirs and locks than were essential. As the upkeep of the new weir at Fladbury would in any case be the responsibility of himself or future owners of the navigation, Cropthorne had much to gain and nothing to lose by acceding to his persuasion and building a new mill on the present site. The existing building of Cropthorne Mill neither supports nor conflicts with this argument, for in the experienced opinion of Mr. W. A. Cox of Evesham it was built about 1700.
* This was formerly in the chancel and is now
under the tower. For description and illustrations see
Trans. Worcs.Artb. Soc., Vol.
IV, pp.34-42.
