This fact has an extrinsic interest, on account of Fletcher being known
to have belonged to the company of players in London which included the
immortal Shakspeare. About eighteen months after this time, May 1603,
immediately after James VI. arrived in London to take possession of the
English throne, he granted a patent in favour of the players acting
at the Globe Theatre, ‘Pro Laurentio Fletcher, Gulielmo Shakspeare,
et aliis,’ and which licenses the performances of ‘Lawrence Fletcher,
William Shakspeare, Richard Burbage, Augustine Phillips, John Hemings,
Henry Condel, William Sly, Robert Armin, Richard Cowley, and the rest
of their associates.’ It has therefore been judged as not unlikely
that Shakspeare was present on this occasion in Aberdeen, as one of
the company of ‘the king’s servants’ headed by Fletcher--a probability
which Mr Charles Knight has shewn to be not inconsistent with other
facts known regarding Shakspeare’s movements and proceedings about the
time, and to be favoured by many passages in the subsequently written
tragedy of _Macbeth_, which argue a more correct and intimate knowledge
of Scotland than is usually possessed by individuals who have not
visited it.[275]
The presbytery of Aberdeen was occupied with the case of Walter
Ronaldson of Kirktown of Dyce, a man who was ‘a diligent hearer of the
word, and communicat with the sacrament of the Lord’s Table.’ Walter
was brought before the reverend court for ‘familiarity with a spirit.’
He confessed that, twenty-seven years before, ‘there came to his door a
spirit, and called upon him, “Wattie, Wattie!” and therefrae removed,
and thereafter came to him every year twa times sinsyne, but [he] saw
naething.’ At Michaelmas in the bypast year, ‘it came where the deponer
was in his bed sleeping, and it sat down anent the bed upon a kist, and
callit upon him, saying “Wattie, Wattie!” and then he wakened and saw
the form of it, whilk was like ane little body, having a shaven beard,
clad in white linen like a sark, and it said to Walter: “Thou art under
wrack--gang to the weachman’s house in Stanivoid, and there thou shall
find baith silver and gold with vessel.”’ Walter proceeded to say that,
in compliance with this direction, he went with some friends and spades
to Stanivoid in order to search. He himself was ‘poustless’ [unable
to act]; but his friends searched, and found nothing. He expressed
his belief, nevertheless, that ‘there is gold there, gif it was weel
sought.’ Walter was remitted to his parish minister, ‘to try forder of
him.’--_A. P. R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: NOV. 24.]
The pest was declared to have at this time broken out in the town of
Crail in Fife, and in the parishes of Eglesham, Eastwood, and Pollock
in Renfrewshire. Orders for secluding the population of those places
were, as usual, issued.--_P. C. R._
On the 21st of December, the pest was understood to have entered
Glasgow. The inhabitants of that city were therefore forbidden to visit
Edinburgh.
On the 26th of January 1602, it is stated that the infected families
of Crail, being put forth upon the neighbouring moor, and there being
no provision for ‘the entertening of the puir and indigent creatures,’
they had wandered throughout the country in quest of food, and thus
endangered the spread of the disease. The sheriff of Fife was ordered
to see provision made for these people, and to take measures for
punishing those who had wandered.
[Sidenote: 1601.]
On the 4th of February, the pestilence was in Edinburgh, and the Court
of Session was obliged in consequence to rise. Birrel notes: ‘The 19
of February, John Archibald with his family were taken out to the
Burrow-muir, being infectit with the pest.’ Probably others immediately
followed. This circumstance brings before us the celebrated John
Napier, younger of Merchiston, who, on the 11th of March, complained to
the Privy Council that the magistrates having ploughed up and turned
to profitable service the place where they used formerly to lodge
people infected with the pest, had on this occasion planted the sick in
certain yards or parks of his at the Scheens, without any permission
being asked. The magistrates did not come forward to defend themselves;
nevertheless, the Council, considering the urgency of the demands of
the public service, ordained that the lands in question should be left
in the hands of the magistrates till next Candlemas, on terms to be
agreed upon.
On the 16th of March, the pest still increasing in Edinburgh, the king
took thought of Dunfermline, ‘being the ordinar residence of the queen,
his dearest spouse, and of their majesties’ bairns,’ and ordained that,
for its preservation from the contagion, the passage by the Queensferry
should be stopped. He himself seems to have at the same time gone north
to Brechin, where we find the Privy Council held for some weeks.
The 20th of May was ‘ane solemn day of fasting and thanksgiving for his
merciful deliverance of the pest.’--_Bir._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: NOV. 26.]
Owing to the influence of the noble family of Maxwell, popery
had a great harbourage in the town of Dumfries. At this time
denunciations were launched against sundry gentlemen connected with
the place--William, Lord Herries; John, Master of Herries; Walter
Herries of Knockshinnan, Edward Maxwell of the Hills, John Herries in
Braco, Robert Herries in Killiloch, Adam Corsan, John Corsan, Robert
Carran, John Horner, Matthew Forsyth, John Gibson, Robert Ka, Patrick
Ka, Mr John Maxwell, and upwards of a dozen more, charging them with
contravening sundry ‘guid and loveable acts of parliament and secret
council’ against saying and hearing of mass, and entertaining priests.
Mr John Hamilton, and Mr William Brown, sometime commendator of New
Abbey, had been kept amongst them, and they had heard these men say
mass, and allowed them to baptise some children, to the displeasure of
God, and contempt of the king and his laws. For these reasons they were
summoned to appear and answer, under pain of rebellion.--_P. C. R._
[Sidenote: 1601.]
On the 24th of December, sixteen of the men who had been summoned,
including Lord Herries, appeared. For some others a certification was
presented, that they were prevented by infirmity from travelling. Those
who appeared were asked to declare upon their oath what they knew
about the matters in the charge; and on their refusing to do so, they
were ordained to be kept in ward in Edinburgh till they should be tried
for their alleged offence. The others were again summoned.
These, on the 14th of January, the day appointed for their appearing,
failed to appear, and were denounced as rebels.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: DEC. 11.]
Great hatred and strife had now lasted for some years between the
Earl of Cassillis[276] and Sir Thomas Kennedy of Colzean, on the one
side, and the Laird of Bargeny, the Laird of Blairwhan, the Laird
of Girvanmains, and some other Carrick gentlemen, on the other. The
crafty Laird of Auchindrain, though professedly reconciled to Sir
Thomas Kennedy,[277] was mainly on the side of Bargeny, who was his
brother-in-law. It is believed that he employed himself to inflate
Bargeny, who was but a youth, with ambitious designs, making him
believe that he could easily put himself on a level with the Earl of
Cassillis. The king made an effort to reconcile the parties, but it
had no permanent effect. For some time these Carrick chieftains were
chiefly busied in devising plots against each other’s lives. On one
occasion, the earl, having been induced to accept the hospitality of
the Laird of Blairwhan, was apprised that certain of his unfriends,
along with Blairwhan, intended to murder him in his bed; he therefore
left the house by a back-door, and made his way by night to Maybole.
On another occasion, with the consent of Bargeny, the Laird of Benand,
with some associates, lay in ambush in the kiln of Daljarrock, in
which they had made holes for their hagbuts, designing to shoot Lord
Cassillis as he passed that way. Receiving timely warning, he escaped
the danger by going his journey by another road.
[Sidenote: 1601.]
On the 6th of December 1601, the Laird of Bargeny had occasion to go
to Ayr on business. Along with him rode his brother and the Laird of
Benand--the two leaders in the affair of the kiln--and ten or twelve
other horsemen. Passing within a quarter of a mile of Cassillis Castle,
and not stopping to pay their respects to the earl, they violated one
of the most sacred of the social laws then existing. Lord Cassillis
could interpret it into nothing but the grossest insult. He was the
more enraged, knowing that Bargeny’s two principal companions had
lately lain in wait for his life. He immediately took measures for
gathering his friends about him, and sent spies to Ayr to apprise him
of all Bargeny’s movements.
After spending four or five days in Ayr, Bargeny proposed to return
to his own house, much against the advice of his friends, who feared
dangers by the way. Setting out with a company of about eighty on
horseback, in the midst of a dense snow-storm, he made a halt at the
Bridge of Doon--that place since made so famous from another cause--and
there addressed his people, protesting that he sought no quarrel with
Lord Cassillis, but expressing his hope that, if attacked, they would
stand around him, and do their duty as became men of honour. They all
assured him that they would die in his defence. He then divided his
train into two parties, and riding on, at the Lady Cross met the earl,
who came out of Maybole with fully two hundred men. ‘Being all ready
to meet, the ane on the Teind knowe, and the other on the next, within
the shot of ane musket, they began to flyte [use despiteful language
towards each other]. Patrick Rippet [of the earl’s party], cryit:
“Laird of Benand! Laird of Benand! Laird of Benand! This is I, Patrick
Rippet, that took thy [hagbut]. Come down here in the holm, and break
ane tree for thy love’s sake!” But the other gave nae answer, albeit he
had given the laird stiff council to ride forward before.’
[Sidenote: 1601.]
The Laird of Bargeny, anxious still to avoid fighting if possible,
led off his men along the side of a bog; but the Cassillis party came
by the other side, and met him at the bottom. He then made a dash
forward across a ditch, with Mure of Auchindrain, his page, and three
other gentlemen, but, not being supported by any others, found himself
outnumbered by the enemy. A brief conflict took place, in which the
laird and his friends did some damage to the opposite party; but it was
all in vain. Auchindrain was wounded, the page was killed, one of his
friends unhorsed, and another sore hurt. He himself, though but one of
his friends remained, was not daunted, but rode rapidly into the ranks
of the enemy, calling: ‘Where is my lord himself? Let him now keep
promise and break ane tree!’ He was instantly set upon by a host of the
earl’s friends, who strake at him with swords, and bore him back by
sheer force. At that moment, one John Dick, who had formerly received
benefits at his hands, thrust a lance through his throat and stopped
his breath. The poor gentleman was then borne off by his horse towards
such of his party as still stood their ground, and fell at their feet.
The skirmish being now at an end, they were allowed to conduct him
away from the field, taking him first to a barn at a place called
Dingham, then to Maybole, and finally to Ayr, where he soon after died,
being but twenty-five years of age, leaving a widow and two children
to bewail his bloody end. ‘He was,’ says the contemporary historian of
the Kennedies, ‘the brawest man that was to be gotten in ony land; of
hich stature and weel made; his hair black, but of ane comely face; the
brawest horseman, and the ae-best of mony at all pastimes ... gif he
had [had] time to [have] had experience to his wit, he had been by his
marrows [superior to all his mates].’
The procedure consequent on this sad tragedy is very notable. The
Countess of Cassillis--a lady much the senior of her husband, the
widow of the late Chancellor Maitland, and of course well acquainted
with all the principal people around the king--rode immediately to
court, to intercede for James’s favour towards her lord. With the
help of the Laird of Colzean, she contrived to obtain an act of
Council, making the earl’s part in the late conflict ‘good service to
the king’--the pretext being that, in the opposite party, was Thomas
Kennedy, Bargeny’s brother, a denounced rebel. ‘_The ten thousand merks
given to the treasurer was what did the turn._‘[278] The earl was able
afterwards to reimburse himself by causing all the gentlemen who had
been with Bargeny to come to him and purchase remissions for their
concern in the death of one of his followers, slain in the skirmish.
‘The Lady Bargeny rade to Edinburgh, and made her complent to the king
and queen, but was little better, or least but heard; for she was
compellit to buy the ward of her son, and to give thirteen thousand
merks for the same.’ It is alleged that she afterwards used all the
means she could to take the life of Lord Cassillis, in revenge for her
husband’s death. An ambush was laid for him at Monkton, but getting
timely warning, he waited for an increase to his retinue, by which he
overawed the intending assassins. Lady Bargeny died in 1605, on her way
home from London, whither she had gone to consult Dr Martin for ‘the
eittik’ [that is, hectic, meaning a pulmonary consumption]. Her body
was met at Sanquhar by ‘the haill friends of the house,’ and by them
brought ceremonially to Ayr, and placed beside her deceased husband in
the church. She had, however, erected a sumptuous tomb to her lord in
the church of Ballantrae, and to this the two bodies were transferred
with great state, ‘the _honours_ and all the rest being preparit very
honourably.’ By this is meant, a procession bearing the escutcheon,
pencil of honour, sword, helmet, corslet, &c., of the deceased. ‘The
day being come, there was of noblemen the Earls of Eglinton, Abercorn,
and Winton, with the Lords Semple, Cathcart, Loudoun, and Ochiltree,
the Lairds of Bombie, Blairwhan, and Gairland [Garthland], with ane
great number whilk I will not mint [attempt] to express; his honours
being borne by the Guidman of Ardmillan, the Guidman of Kirkhill,
with sundry mae of the friends; his sister’s son, Young Auchindrain,
bearing the _Banner of Revenge_, whereon was paintit his portraiture,
with all his wounds, with his son sitting at his knees, and this ditty
written betwixt his hands: “JUDGE AND REVENGE MY CAUSE, O LORD!” And
sae, conveyit to Ayr, bure all very honourably, to the number of ane
thousand horse, of gentlemen, and laid in the foresaid tomb.’--_Hist.
Ken._
It is scarcely necessary to remark the amount of local means here
indicated by a funeral train of a _thousand mounted gentlemen_. The
Banner of Revenge seems to have been an imitation of that carried in
the streets of Edinburgh in June 1567, to inflame the popular mind
against Queen Mary.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1602.]
The winter of 1601-2 is described by Birrel as of unheard-of severity
and duration. It lasted from the 1st of November to the 1st of May.
In February was a ten-days’ snow-fall.[279] The Earl of Sutherland
was at this time travelling with his ordinary train from Golspie
through the glen of Loth, on his way to Killeirnan. The ground being
already deeply covered with snow, the party found themselves in a hard
plight, when a fresh storm burst upon them, driving thick snow full in
their faces. The like was not seen for many years after. ‘Some of the
company being thirsty, drank _aquavitæ_, which by chance happened to be
there. This made them afterwards so feeble, that they were not able to
endure against the storm.’ This is an observation in conformity with a
statement of Sir John Franklin respecting his men when travelling in
the frozen regions. Spirituous liquor, according to him, did no one
any good. The earl, being strong, made his way through the snow, and
such of his company as kept close together near him were safe. ‘Some
were dispersed by the extremity of the tempest; some were carried home
upon their fellows’ shoulders, and recovered afterwards.’ Several
others, including the earl’s _harper_, were found dead in the snow next
morning.--_G. H. S._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: FEB. 14.]
James and George Vallam, sons of David Vallam of Woodwrae, were hanged
in Edinburgh for stouthrief. The dittay reveals some of the practices
of the age. These two men had, in June 1596, attacked two cadgers
or carriers at the Cot-town of Melgum in Forfarshire, as they were
‘driving seven packs of merchant geir on seven horses towards Brechin,
to the fair thereof,’ and did ‘thiftously and masterfully convey the
same away with them, together with the said cadgers, to the mouth of
Glenmoy, and disponed upon a grit part of the said merchant geir at
their pleasure.’ The circumstances are precisely what might occur at
the present day in Spain.--_Pit._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: FEB. 26.]
[Sidenote: 1602.]
After such a variety of examples of violence in the south and west
provinces, where a comparative civilisation prevailed, it may be
curious to see an example of the outrages occasionally committed in the
north. On this day, if we are to believe the statement of the suffering
party, the house of Moy, belonging to John Campbell, commissary of
Inverness, was attacked, despoiled, and utterly destroyed by a party
under command of Alexander M’Ranald of Glengarach. They came ‘to the
number of three score persons,[280] all thieves, broken men, and
sorners of clans, bodin and furnist with bows, habershons, twa-handit
swords, and other weapons invasive, and with hagbuts and pistolets.’
Reaching Moy ‘upon fair daylicht,’ they ‘divided their company in twa
several companies, ane whereof remainit about the complenar’s house
and biggings, where they treasonably and awfully raisit fire, burnt
and destroyit his haill house, onsets, and biggings; consisting of
ane hall, twa chalmers, ane kitchen, ane stable, and ane barn, and
some other office-houses; together with his haill corns being in the
barn and barn-yard, extending to twa grit stacks of aits, ane stack of
wheat, and ane grit stack of beir, after they had spulyit, reft, and
intromittit with his haill insicht plenishing’.
The other company ‘past to the house of umwhile James Buchan, the
complenar’s tenant, where they first spulyit his house, guids, and
geir, and then treasonably raisit fire therein.... They took James
Buchan, Patrick Buchan his son, and Robert Anderson his servant, and
having cuttit off their legs and arms, and otherwise dismemberit them
at their pleasure, they cast them quick in the fire and burnt them....
In their departing, they reft and away-took with them twenty oxen and
three score sheep pertening to the complenar, and wrackit and herryit
his haill puir tenants. The like of whilk barbarous cruelty committit
sae fer within the in-country has sendil been heard of.’
All that could be immediately done in this frightful case was to
denounce the guilty parties as rebels for not appearing to answer
Campbell’s complaint. Soon after, we find the Privy Council expressing
its grief that the broken men of the Highlands, ‘not content with the
robbery and reif whilk they were accustomed to commit upon the borders
of the country, have tane the bauldness in troops to repair in fair
daylicht within the heart of the in-country and to the ports of Elgin,
whilk was the maist peaceable and obedient part of the haill land, and
there to herry and sorn at their pleasure.’ The gentlemen of Morayshire
were summoned to advise with his majesty, as to the best means of
restraining this insolence.--_P. C. R._
There is afterwards (June 28), a complaint by Campbell of Moy as to the
favour and entertainment which Dunbar of Westfield, sheriff of Moray,
had given to the men by whom his estate was despoiled. It was even
alleged that the Dunbars had brought the broken men into the country.
This group of men accordingly had some trouble about this business, but
not any of serious consequence. We do not find that any of the actual
perpetrators of the outrage at Moy ever suffered for it.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: APR. 8.]
[Sidenote: 1602.]
Thomas Musgrave, Captain of Bewcastle, being accused before the Privy
Council of England, of sundry breaches of duty, particularly of having
made Bewcastle a den of thieves, and open to the Scots at their
pleasure, challenged the accuser, one Lancelot Carleton, to the trial
by combat on Canonbie Holm, ‘before England and Scotland,’ on Thursday
in Easter-week, being the 8th of April 1602, betwixt nine o’clock and
one of the same day. It was agreed that they should fight on foot,
armed with jack, steel-cap, plait sleeves, plait breeches, plait socks,
two baslaerd swords,[281] with blades a yard and half a quarter long,
and two Scotch dirks at their girdles. Two gentlemen were to view the
field, and see that the agreement as to arms and weapons was strictly
observed; and the field being so viewed, the gentlemen were to ride to
the rest of the company, leaving the combatants only two boys to hold
their horses. The result is not known.[282]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: MAY 11.]
Sir Thomas Kennedy of Colzean was this day murdered in the immediate
neighbourhood of the town of Ayr. ‘He was ane very potentous man, and
very wise. He had buildit ane proper house in the Cove [the mansion
superseded by the present Colzean Castle], with very brave yards; and,
by ane moyen and other, had conquest ane guid living.’ We have seen,
under January 1, 1596-7, an attempt upon the life of this gentleman at
Maybole, by Mure of Auchindrain, who subsequently was reconciled to
him, and, for the confirmation of amity, caused his son to be married
to Sir Thomas’s daughter. It nevertheless became in time apparent that
Mure was the prime mover of this atrocious murder, the circumstances of
which are thus related by the king’s advocate, Sir Thomas Hamilton.
[Sidenote: 1602.]
Sir Thomas Kennedy, ‘being only intentive on his own _adoes_, whilk
did require his resort to Edinburgh, there to consult with his lawyers
in his wechty business, he send his servant to Maybole, to seek
Auchindrain and advertise him of his purpose; with direction, if he
missed him there, that he sould certify him by letter of his intended
journey; to the effect Auchindrain might, upon the next day, meet
him upon the way at [the Duppil, a place near Ayr], and inform him
of anything he wald wish him to do for him in Edinburgh, seeing it
was but ane travel for him to do his friend’s business and his own.
This servant of Colzean’s, missing Auchindrain in Maybole, desired
Mr Robert Mure, schoolmaster at Maybole, to write ane letter of that
substance to Auchindrain; who did so, and sent it by ane boy of his
school, called William Dalrymple; who, finding Auchindrain at his house
of Auchindrain, with his cousin Walter Mure of Cloncaird, ane deadly
enemy to the Earl of Cassillis; so soon as he [Auchindrain] fand
himself certified of Colzean’s purpose and diet, he dismissed the boy,
commanding him to return back in haste, carrying the letter with him;
directing him further to shaw to his master and Colzean’s man that he
had not fand him at his house.... Immediately thereafter, [he] resolved
with his cousin Cloncaird, that this occasion of revenge of Bargeny’s
slaughter by Colzean’s murder was not to be unslipped.... After some
deliberation, [he] concluded upon the choice of the actors and manner
of the execution, making advertisement thereof, as weel by letter to
Thomas Kennedy of Drumurchy ... as by message to Cloncaird.... The said
Thomas Kennedy, Walter Mure of Cloncaird, and four or five servants
with them, weel armed and horsed, convoying themselves near the way
appointed by Colzean’s letter for his meeting with Auchindrain, did
lie await for Colzean’s by-coming; who, being in full security of his
dangerless estate, riding upon ane pacing nag, and having with him ane
servant only, they suddenly surprised him, and with their pistols and
swords gave him ane number of deadly wounds; and, not content to have
so barbarously and traitorously bereft him of his life, spoiled him
of ane thousand merks of gold, being in his purse, ane number of gold
buttons upon his coat, and some rings and other jewels.’
‘He being slain, his man Lancelot brings him with him to the Greenan,
and there gets ane horse litter, and takes him to Maybole, where there
was great dule made for him.’--_Hist. Ken._
Sir Thomas Hamilton proceeds to narrate that, while the actual
murderers were first outlawed and afterwards forefaulted, Auchindrain
fell under strong suspicion of having been the deviser of the deed.
He, ‘being summoned to underlie the law, did boldly compear, and,
seeing that the pursuers, for want of sufficient evidence, were not
then to adventure his trial, fearing that he might be cleansed and
so perpetually freed of that crime ... he seemed grieved thereat, as
bragging exceedingly of his innocency, whereof he had given proof, by
offering himself to trial of law--[he now proposed] if there were any
man of Colzean’s kindred or friendship, who wald advow him any ways
participant of the device or execution of that murder, he wald readily
offer himself in that quarrel to the trial of combat to the death....
So, wanting ane party, [he] was dismissed, more free in the persuasion
of most part of such as were present, than in his own conscience.’
[Sidenote: 1602.]
The reader must be referred onward to July 1611 for the remainder of
the history of this extraordinary criminal. Here, however, may be
introduced the remarkable fact, that the Earl of Cassillis made an
attempt to obtain a private revenge on Auchindrain for the murder of
his uncle Colzean. The earl had long been on bad terms with his brother
Hugh, whom we have seen as the guilty associate of Auchindrain. Now, he
made up all past quarrels with Hugh, and granted him a bond, September
4, 1602, stating: ‘Howsoon our brother, Hugh Kennedy of Brownston, with
his complices, _takes the Laird of Auchindrain’s life_, we sall mak
guid and thankful payment to him and them of the sum of twelve hundred
merks yearly, together with corn to six horses, [until] we receive them
in household with ourself, beginning the first payment immediately
after their committing of the said deed. Attour [moreover], howsoon we
receive them in household, we shall pay to the twa serving gentlemen
the fees, yearly, as our awn household servants. And hereto we oblige
us, _upon our honour_.’[283]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: OCT. 8.]
[Sidenote: 1602.]
A proclamation issued by the king at Dumfries, gives some idea of the
social state of the middle marches, and of the arrangements required
for the execution of justice amongst the rude and turbulent people of
that district, while as yet the government had no standing force at its
command. ‘Forsamickle,’ it proceeds, ‘as the king’s Majesty has causit
proclaim and appoint justice-courts to be halden within the burghs of
Peblis and Jedburgh upon the fifteen and twenty-sex day of October
instant, for punishing and trying be order of justice the monyfauld
enormities and insolencies whilk has been sae frequent and common
thir years bygane within the middle marches, Like as his Majesty,
accompaniet with a nowmer of his council, intends to be present at
the said courts, and to hald hand to the due execution of justice,
Wherefore necessity it is that his Majesty be weel and substantially
accompaniet with a force of his guid subjects, Therefore ordains
letters to be direct, charging all and sundry his Majesty’s lieges and
subjects betwixt saxty and saxteen years, and others fencible persons,
as well dwelling to burgh as to land, regality and royalty, within the
bounds of the sheriffdoms of Peblis, Selkirk, and Roxburgh, that they
ilk ane of them weel bodin in feir of weir in their substantious and
weirlike manner address themselves to meet his Majesty at the days and
places following; That is to say, the saids inhabitants within the
sheriffdoms of Selkirk and Peblis to meet his Majesty at Peblis the
said fifteen day of October instant, and the saids inhabitants within
the sheriffdom of Roxburgh to meet his Majesty at Jedburgh upon the
twenty-five day of the same month, provided to remain and attend upon
his Majesty the space of fifteen days after their coming to the said
burghs under the pain of tinsel of life, lands, and guids.’--_P. C. R._
From some expressions in this proclamation, it seems likely to have
been written by the king himself.
He did make a progress by Peebles and Jedburgh, and executed justice
upon a number of luckless Elliots and Armstrongs.
* * * * *
A quarrel at this time took place between two chiefs of the North
Highlands, Kenneth Mackenzie of Kintail and Macdonald of Glengarry.
It were not easy to arrive at a just understanding of the case, or of
the degrees of blame to which the several parties were liable; but it
is not necessary. Enough that there was blood between these fierce
paladins of the north, and that, however the right stood, the affair
boded ill for Glengarry, seeing that he had to contend with an enemy
crafty and able far beyond his class, and one who, by these means, was
generally able to keep on good terms with the heads of administration
in Edinburgh.
[Sidenote: 1602.]
According to an unprinted memoir of the Clan Mackenzie--Glengarry and
his son Angus, who had recently attained perfect age, took advantage of
the temporary absence of Kintail in France to make a charge against the
latter before the Privy Council; and Mackenzie was summoned at the pier
of Leith to ‘compear’ before a certain day, under pain of forfeiture.
This ‘moved Mr John Mackenzie of Tollie, parson of Dingwall, to travel
to France, and bring his chief against the day of compearance. He
came to Edinburgh only the night before, and having advised with his
friends, he kept the diet unexpectedly before the Council. In the
meantime, Alister M‘Gorrie and Ronald M‘Rorie [Glengarry men] made
another onset to the Brae of Kissearn, and killed a gentleman of
the family of Davachmaluach, called Donald M’Kinnich Vich Allister,
sleeping in his bed; whose bloody shirt Mr John Mackenzie presented
that day at Edinburgh. Glengarry could prove nothing against Mackenzie
done in his time; but Mr John proved Glengarry to have been the
instruments of this murder. Likewise he proved him to be a worshipper
of the _Coan_, which image was afterwards brought to Edinburgh,
and burnt at the Cross. Also he gave in against him that he was an
extortioner and oppressor, sorning on his own commons and the commons
of others, and that he still lived in adultery. Which moved Glengarry
to steal from the place of justice, and to take to the hills, whereupon
he was proclaimed rebel, and Mackenzie got the laws against him.’
Glengarry’s son having invaded Kintail, and done some mischief
there, Mackenzie raised a force of seven hundred men, and retaliated
by spoiling the district of Morar. Then the Macdonalds came in
thirty-seven boats to Loch Broom, and counter-retaliated. Here Alister
M‘Gorrie, one of their party, was killed, and his party beat back
to sea. Indeed, the whole expedition failed. Soon after, however,
while Mackenzie was absent in Mull, the Macdonalds came once more to
his country, at Loch Carron, and committed great devastations. Their
leader, Glengarry’s son, not only carried off all the cows he could
find, but slew all the people that fell in his way, even the women and
children. He was overtaken, however, by a fearful retribution.
[Sidenote: 1602.]
‘Advertisement was sent to Kintail and Lochalsh, who gathered as fast
as they could; but he [Glengarry’s son, Angus] had his boats laden
before they came. After they gave him a flight of arrows, he took the
sea, and they wanting boats, could not follow; but part of them went
afoot to the Kyle; others made straight to Ellandonan, where they got
a ten-oared boat and a four-oared boat. Mackenzie’s lady carried to
them arrows and ammunition with her own hand. They rowed to the Kyle
boldly, having no chieftain, but ilk ane striving who would act more
for his mistress’s credit, and for the country’s defence. They came to
the Kyle [a narrow strait] after the night had fallen. When they spied
the first of Glengarry’s boats, they resolved to let her pass without
challenge. He followed next himself in his long-boat of thirty-two
oars, loaded with men and spoil, which, when they perceived, they rowed
calmly to meet him; and he challenging them, and asking who they were,
they answered: “We are all Clan Vich Allister,” giving them balls and
arrows alike; at which they took alarm. The clouds overshadowing the
moon, made a dark shadow on the sea; so they thought it had been shore,
and got all to the fore-end of the boat, which made the boat to sink.
When the Mackenzies saw their boat sink, they sent their little boat
ashore, lest any should make their escape to land, and _the Kintail men
had the killing of them like selchies_ [seals]. At last they killed
Glengarry’s son and all those that were in that great boat with him.
The rest, when they heard the alarm, retired to Strathardle, and left
their boats; from whence they went afoot, and took boats from the Isles
to Morer. When they knew their chieftain was dead, with the best of his
company, they gathered all together to ane isle, where the Lord Kintail
came timeously the next morning in the sight of the Isles....
‘When Mackenzie came to the Kyle, he spied a number of dead corpses
which the rage of the sea had casten ashore, which made him to think,
seeing his enemy together a little while before, that it was his own
men that were killed there. He had in his company two of Glengarry’s
natives, who had quat Glengarry and submitted to him, and who were
acquaint with both the country people [both clans or sets of people in
the district] ... whom he desired to go ashore and see who they were
that were dead. No sooner were they ashore but he espied them strike
their hands upon their breasts, making great lamentation. “Praised
be God!” said Kintail, “it is not for my countrymen you make such
great lamentation. I am confident that God hath been favourable to my
countrymen in giving them a pleasant victory.” When Robert [one of the
Glengarry men] returned to the boat, Kintail asked: “What news?” “My
lord,” saith he, “good news for your lordship; there is many a brave
fellow of your enemies dead in yonder place; not so much as one of your
countrymen amongst them.” Immediately they sailed away to Ellandonan,
where Kintail’s men were no sooner landed but he met his countrymen
returning from the burial of young Glengarry, whom they buried _in the
very door of the Kirk of Kintail, as testimony that they might trample
over his body whenever they went to church_.’[284]
Next year, Glengarry and some of his friends were indicted for
slaughter in the Mackenzie country; and not long after, his lands of
Lochalsh and castle of Strome had passed to the possession of the chief
of Kintail.
[Sidenote: 1602.]
In a _Catalogue of the Scots Nobility and Officers of the Estate_, by
John Colville, written between 1600 and 1603, several of the Highland
or rather Hebridean chiefs are described, as ‘The Lord of the Isles,
callit Makrenald; ane Irish [Celtic] and barbar--The Lord of Kintyre,
callit Makoneill; Irish and barbar--The Lord of the Lewis, callit
Makgloyid; Irish and barbar--The Lord of Makklen, callit Makklen;
Irish, a child of good expectation.’
The chief personage of the preceding notice is thus introduced: ‘The
Lord of Makkenzie, callit Makkenzie; Irish; a protestant _and verey
politique_.’
* * * * *
[Sidenote: NOV. 1.]
At Perth--‘Henry Balnaves and William Jack made their repentance in
their awn seats on Sabbath afternoon, for making libel against Mr
William Couper, minister, and Henry Elder, clerk--
As King David was ane sair sanct to the crown,
So is Mr William Couper and the clerk to this poor town.
Ane act of council against them, that nane of them should bear office
or get honourable place in the town thereafter.’--_Chron. Perth._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: DEC. 1.]
It had become a practice for persons who had revengeful feelings
towards their neighbours to obtain petards from the continent, and
employ them for the destruction of those against whom they had an
ill-will. The king now issued a proclamation against ‘sic detestable
and unworthy crimes, without example in any other kingdom,’ whereby
‘na man of whatsomever rank and calling can assure his awn safety and
preservation within his awn house and iron yetts.’ He ordered all who
have any ‘pittartis’ to surrender them at the next burgh immediately,
and forbade any more being brought home by sea, or made or mended
within the country.--_P. C. R._
It seems not unworthy of observation, that by his familiarity with this
explosive practice in his own country, as well as by the recollection
of his father’s fate at the Kirk of Field, James might be in some
measure prepared to smell out the gunpowder treason, as he did a few
years later.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1603.