74 THE CHURCH OF NORBURY. 



Thomas Gedney, jirior of Tutbury, all their lands at Osmaston, 

 together with lands at Foston and Church Eroughton, in 

 exchange for the fee-farm rent of loos. and other services due 

 to the prior out of the manor of Norbury. 



Meanwhile, the advowson of the rectory remained uninter- 

 ruptedly in the hands of the Fitzherberts, as successive lords of 

 Norbury, from the time of William Fitzherbert, in 1125, down to 

 Sir Anthony Fitzherbert, who died in 1538, seized of this 

 advowson. After his death, the troubles and absolutely mon- 

 strous persecution of the Derbyshire Fitzherberts for recusancy 

 or adherence to the unreformed faith began, and they became 

 incapable as Romanists of presenting to the rectory.* 



The patronage of Norbury after the death of Sir Anthony 

 reverted in the first instance to the Crown, but it was soon 

 disposed of, and the patronage has subsequently changed hands 

 by purchase on several occasions. 



In a previously jirinted list of the rectors of Norbury, the 

 name of the earliest rector given, which was the first mentioned 

 in the diocesan registers of Lichfield, is Roger Fitzherbert, who 

 was presented to the living in 1320 by Sir John Fitzherbert, 

 sixth lord of Norbury. t An earlier instance can now be added. 

 About 1250-60, one Ralph Heylyn granted to William Wertt 

 a small parcel of arable land in the field of Norbury, which is 

 described as being near the Little Cross {parvani cruccm) and 

 adjoining the land of Jordan, late rector of Norbury. This 

 undated charter is witnessed, inter alia, by William Fitzherbert, 

 of Norbury, Nicholas Fitzherbert, and Henry, clerk of Norbury.:}: 



* The treatment of this family throughout Ehzabeth's reign was one con- 

 tinuous drama of outrage and cruelty, in addition to persistent fining and 

 general injustice. They had the misfortune to fall into the hands of the 

 foulest of all tools of the Council, that unprincipled rufiian, Richard Top- 

 clitfe, over whose infamies in Norfolk Dr. Jessopp has waxed eloquent since 

 I first wrote on this subject. Recently I have had occasion (many years 

 after writing on the Derbyshire Romanists in the Church Quarterly and in this 

 /^oiiriial) to take up the question of the treatment of the recusants in Eliza- 

 bethan days in Hampshire, Northamptonshire, Warwickshire, and Essex, and 

 after following the matter up from the original documents in the Public 

 Record Office and elsewhere, I have no hesitation in saying that the conduct 

 of those in power towards the Derbyshire Fitzherberts is the sorriest tale of 

 them all. 



t Chiinhes of Derbyshire, iii., 231-2. 



:|; Brit. Mils., Woll. Charters, ix., 74. 



