the fall of the house of huntly

8/14/2019 The Fall of the House of Huntly

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-fall-of-the-house-of-huntly 1/15

The Fall of the House of Huntly

A year after Mary Stuart’s arrival in Scotland in 1561 at the age

of nineteen she left Edinburgh to travel to the Northern reaches of her

kingdom. When she returned almost four months later, her staunchest

Catholic ally George Gordon, the 4th Earl of Huntly, along with the most

powerful members of the Gordon clan, were disgraced and ruined.

The motives behind this royal progress, which became in the end

a punitive expedition, have been the subject of much dispute. Mary certainly

wanted to get away from the capital: it had not been a happy year, one full of

religious controversy and confrontation, and there had been a recent

unsatisfactory meeting with the Pope’s envoy, Nicolas de Gouda, who had

tried to persuade her to be more severe with adherents of the new doctrines.

The planned meeting with Elizabeth of England, on which she had set her

heart, had just been cancelled (postponed till the following year, but it never

took place). Also, the journey would be long and arduous and this appealed to

her keen sense of adventure. There was the advisability of visiting the Earl of

Huntly, who ruled in the north like an independent potentate, and to cool his

reckless enthusiasm for a Catholic uprising. He had in the previous year

attempted to persuade her to land at Aberdeen and boasted that he could raise

three shires to fight for her. There was also the desire on the part of Mary to

exhibit to Elizabeth and her own protestant subjects that she was capable of

dealing impartially with her nobility, whatever their religious persuasion.

The Fall of The House of Huntly/ 1



-2-

There is some truth in all of these suggested motives, but it is

likely that the prime mover in the whole affair was Mary’s half-brother, LordJames. His motives were clear. Created Earl of Mar by Mary on her return to

Scotland, he craved a far higher honour, that of the Earldom of Moray, which

was in abeyance but administered at that time by George, the fourth Earl of

Huntly. Huntly had been a good servant of Mary’s father who had appointed

him his Lieutenant of the North. He had fought bravely for James against the

English on the borders and had commanded the Scottish army when they

defeated the English at Haddenrig in 1542.

In 1546 he had been created Lord Chancellor after the

assassination of Cardinal Beaton, and the Queen Regent had granted him the

Earldom of Moray along with the rich estates that came with it. He fell

temporarily into disgrace in 1555 when he was unwilling to execute some

Highland rebels, but he was restored to favour two years later. The title of

Earl of Moray was not restored to him, but he was allowed to hold the lands in

fee and was expecting the new Queen to give him back the title. In 1560,

before the death of the Queen Regent, he joined temporarily the Protestant

Lords of the Congregation, a defection which weakened considerably the

power of the Regent and inflicted a severe blow on the Catholic cause. On

account of this he was considered untrustworthy and unstable by his peers, butthere is no reason to doubt his fidelity to the Crown.




-3-

However, the man who was at the very hub of power, theQueen’s principal minister and adviser, was Lord James, the newly created

Earl of Mar. He was nine years older than Mary. At the age of seven he had

been given the Priory of St Andrews, the richest in Scotland, by his father

James V. The Regent Mary of Guise granted him the Priory of Pittenweem.

His marriage with Agnes Keith, daughter of the Earl Marischal, brought him

into a family that had considerable riches and vast estates. He had earlier

acquired the estates of the Earldom of Buchan by means of a false betrothal to

the Countess of Buchan. He held the lordships of Braemar, Cromar and

Strathdee. He was one of the richest men in Scotland. He was also, by virtue

of his influence with Mary, the most powerful man in the Kingdom.

Mary was just nineteen years of age, totally inexperienced in

affairs of state, innocent of political intrigue, accustomed during her brief

reign as Queen of France to the forceful guidance of hardened political

heavyweights. Her Privy Council consisted of men who were experienced in

statecraft and diplomatic maneuvering, among whom were her subtle secretary

Maitland and the “dark and dangerous Douglas”, the Earl of Morton, the son

of her father’s bitter enemy. The formulaic preamble to all acts of Council and

Parliamentary edicts “Hir Hieness, with avyss of the Lordis of Hir SecreteCounsale” had a particular force in Mary’s case. Randolph writes, “The Lord

James is commander of the Queen”, and Cecil, “The whole governance rests

with the Lord James and the Laird of Lethington”. Nicolas de Gouda, an

emissary of the Pope, wrote in 1562: “The men in power acknowledge the




-4-

Queen’s title, but prevent her exercising any of the rights of sovereignty;whenever her opinion does not agree with theirs, they oppose her at once.” He

added, “Many Lords and Earls are Catholics, but these noblemen keep away

from court and from any share in the administration.” It was these Lords of

her Secret Council who virtually ran the country.

Such was the situation in the summer of 1562: the Protestant

Lords of the Congregation still fearful of a Catholic uprising in the North, the

leader of these Catholics a man who was a threat to the central authority, that

central authority virtually in the hands of the triumvirate of Mar, Maitland

and Morton, each of whom had his own agenda for the control of the

Kingdom. In the middle of it all was a young woman, unfamiliar with her

native country, its culture and customs, impressionable and anxious herself to

impress.

Although a progress of some kind to the North had been mooted

and postponed because of the possibility of a meeting of the two Queens, the

immediate spur to move was a brawl which took place in the streets of

Edinburgh during that summer. There was a fight between the Earl of

Huntly’s third son Sir John Gordon and Lord Ogilvie over a matter of inheritance. Ogilvie was wounded and Sir John and several Gordons were

arrested. Mar saw his opportunity and came in haste from Stirling to oversee

their punishment. He set Ogilvie free but imprisoned the Gordons in the

Tolbooth. Sir John later escaped and made his way North to his father.




-5-

Mary left Edinburgh on horseback on 11th August along with

four members of her Privy Council and about one hundred servants and

retainers. Also in the party were Maitland of Lethington and Randolph, the

English ambassador. Randolph wrote frequently to his master, Elizabeth’s

Secretary Cecil, and many of the details of the journey are contained in these

letters. Also of the party was Sir James Ogilvie, a relative of the wounded

Ogilvie, who had been made Master of the Queen’s Household. He kept a

diary and recorded all the resting places on the expedition.

They passed the first night at Linlithgow and dined the next day

at Callendar, the seat of Lord Livingstone, the brother of one of her Maries.

From there the party moved to Stirling where they stayed until the 18th. From

Stirling they moved on to Aberdeen by way of Perth, Coupar Angus, Glamis

and Edzell, where Mary held a meeting of her Privy Council. Randolph

describes the journey thus: “From Stirling she taketh her journey as far north

as Inverness, the furthest part of Murray, a terrible journey both for horse and

man, the countries are so poor and the victuals so scarce…her journey is

cumbersome and painful and marvellous long, the weather extreme foul andcold and all victuals marvellous dear, and the corn never like to come to

ripeness.”




-6-

They reached Old Aberdeen on 27th August and remained there

until 1st September. During that time the Earl and Countess of Huntly came

to Aberdeen and invited the party to visit them at their castle of Strathbogie on

their way to Inverness. The invitation was refused. However, Randolph and

others were allowed to spend a few nights there, where they were regally

entertained. He writes: “The Earl of Huntly’s house is the best furnished that

I have seen in this country. His cheer is marvellous great, his mind such as it

ought to be towards his sovereign.” At the same time Sir John Gordon was

ordered to give himself up at Stirling, but as the castle was in the charge of

Mar’s uncle, Lord Erskine, he realised his danger and returned to his father’s

stronghold.

Mary and her party left Aberdeen on 1st September, avoiding

Strathbogie, and by way of Rothiemay, Grange and Balveny arrived at Elgin.

She left Elgin on 8th September and went to Darnaway Castle, the seat of the

Earldom of Moray. Here she held a meeting of her Privy Council during

which Lord James produced his patent of the Earldom of Moray which had

been privately granted to him earlier by Mary under her Privy Seal. Now he

officially assumed the title, relinquishing that of Mar to Lord Erskine who hadlong claimed it. Randolph makes the pertinent observation: “It is both more

honourable, and greater in profit, than the other.”




-7-

At Darnaway news reached Mary of Sir John’s refusal to givehimself up and a proclamation was issued ordering him to surrender the

fortresses of Findlater and Auchindoune. On 11th September the party left

Darnaway for Inverness. Among Huntly’s titles were sheriff of the county and

keeper of the castle, titles he had given to his eldest son, Lord George, on the

occasion of his marriage to Anne Hamilton, the daughter of the Duke of

Châtelherault. The castle was held by a relative and deputy of Lord George,

one Alexander Gordon, who refused entry without his lord’s permission.

When Huntly heard this he sent orders that the castle should be opened up ,

but they arrived too late. The castle was entered and Alexander Gordon along

with six others were hanged on Moray’s orders. Huntly was now sure that his

own ruin was intended and prepared to defend himself.

On 15th September Mary left Inverness for Aberdeen by way of

Kilravock, Darnaway and Spynie, the seat of Patrick Hepburn, Bishop of

Moray and uncle of her future husband Bothwell. On the 19th she crossed the

Spey at Fochabers, then went on to Banff by way of Cullen. All the way back

to Aberdeen Mary was made to believe by her Council that the Gordons had

amassed a large army and that an attack was imminent, but no opposing forces

were seen at any time. When the Queen’s forces (which were gathering innumbers all the time) skirted the castles of Findlater and Deskford, an order to

surrender was given, but the Gordons, now realising that a confrontation was

inevitable, refused to obey.




-8-

The Queen arrived at Old Aberdeen on 22nd September withabout three thousand men. The following day she made a formal entry into

New Aberdeen and stayed with the Earl Marischal (Moray’s father-in-law) in

Castle Street. Randolph writes: “and the good minds of the inhabitants shown

as well in spectacles, interludes and others, as they could best devise. They

presented her with a cup of silver double gilt, well wrought, with five hundred

crowns in it; wine, coals and wax were sent in, as much will serve her.” A

meeting of the Privy Council proclaimed that Huntly “shall either submit

himself and deliver his disobedient son John, or utterly to use all force against

him, for the subversion of his house forever.” The Privy Council also ordered

all the Gordons in the County to remain confined to their estates and not to

appear out of them on pain of severe fines.

Moray sent to Edinburgh for reinforcements which included the

Master of Lyndsay, Kirkaldy of Grange and Ormiston. A Captain Hay was

sent to Strathbogie to take possession of the huge cannon which had been a

formidable weapon in Huntly’s hands. Hay returned with the message that

Huntly was willing to surrender and enter into ward till his case might be tried

by the whole nobility. The offer was rejected. The Countess of Huntly sent

the message that her husband was being oppressed because he would not giveup his religion “as those who are now about the Queen’s grace have done.”




-9-

This was the final straw. Seeing no hope of reconciliation,

frustrated and desperate, Huntly prepared for battle with Moray. A

detachment of soldiers under Kirkaldy of Grange was sent to Strathbogie to

arrest Huntly, but he escaped into the wilds of Badenoch. The keys of

Findlater and Auchindoune were belatedly surrendered, but Moray refused to

receive them. He, too, was determined to fight. On 17th October Huntly was

put to the horn. On the 20th the Countess came again to Aberdeen to plead,

but she was not allowed into the city. Huntly then offered again to surrender

and be tried by his peers. This, too, was rejected. Goaded beyond endurance,

Huntly gathered his followers and marched against Moray.

On 28th October the two armies met at Corrichie on the Hill of

Fare, twenty miles west of Aberdeen. Huntly had about five hundred

clansmen of whom many, aware of the odds against them, deserted before the

battle. “His own friends, tenants and servants, of whom divers in two nights

before, stole secretly from him”. (Randolph) Moray had two thousand able

and disciplined soldiers along with many Earls and noblemen. The hereditary

enemies of the Gordons – the Frasers, Forbes, Grants and Monroes – many of

whom Huntly had put under restraint, were released to take up arms againsthim. The battle was short, one-sided and bloody. Huntly’s men were driven

by Kirkaldy’s arquebusiers from their eminence on the Hill of Fare into a

morass where they were slaughtered. He lost one hundred and twenty men

while Moray lost none.




-10-

Huntly died on the field of battle. There are conflicting reports of

his death. Randolph says: “The Earl himself, after that he was taken, without

either blow or stroke, being set upon horseback before him that was his taker,

suddenly falleth from his horse stark deid, without word that he ever spoake.”

The Diurnal of Occurents records “that he bristit and swelt, so that he spak not

one word, but deceissit.” Others say that “he deid of a broken heart” and

“that he was slein, either by the sword or suffocated from the weight of his

armour”. It was claimed by another that he was put to death by Moray’s order.

However he died, the corpse of the Earl was crudely embalmed –

“his bowels were taken out and his body salted” – and transported to

Edinburgh by boat where it was tried for High Treason the following May.

The corpse was taken into parliament where it was arraigned – “the coffin

sette upright as if the Erle stood upon his feet”. The Act of Attainder declared

Huntly’s “dignity, name and memory to be extinct” and his posterity “unable

to enjoy any office, honour or rank within the realm.”

Sir John Gordon. The wayward son, was executed in Aberdeen

with six other Gordons. Moray insisted that Mary witness the execution fromthe house of the Earl Marischal in Castle Street. There had been a rumour that

Sir John was in love with Mary and wanted to marry her and even that Mary

herself was not averse to the match. The executioner made a botch of the

beheading, a foreshadowing of Mary’s own execution twenty five years later.

-11-




Mary became faint at the sight. George Buchanan, who was no friend of Mary

or of the family of Huntly, writes of Sir John: “He was generally pitied andlamented for he was a noble youth, very beautiful, and entering on the prime

of his age,” and then he adds typically, “not so much designed for the royal

bed, as deceived by the pretence of it.” The body of Sir John was buried in St

Nicholas Church.

Huntly’s youngest son Adam, who had fought alongside his

father, was pardoned because of his youth, and imprisoned for a time in the

castle of Dunbar. He was afterwards known as Sir Adam Gordon of

Auchendoun and fought for Mary after her escape from Lochleven. The Earl

of Sutherland, a kinsman of Huntly, was attainted and condemned to death by

Parliament for assisting Huntly’s treason. The sentence was not carried out,

but his estates were forfeited to the Crown.

Lord George Gordon, the eldest surviving son, who had been

with his wife and father-in-law, the Duke of Chatelherault, at Hamilton during

the campaign, was nevertheless arrested. He held several heritable titles and

lands from his father which Moray coveted. He was tried in February 1563.

Indicative of the intricate network of family relationships that characterised

the Scottish nobility, the Justice General that presided at the trial was the Earlof Argyle, Moray’s brother-in-law. Gordon was not allowed to offer any

-12-




defence nor object to jury or witnesses. He was quickly found guilty of

treason and condemned to death to await “our soveraine’s pleasure”. Thesovereign’s pleasure was to have him imprisoned in Dunbar Castle. It was

reported that Moray attempted to have him executed by means of a forged

warrant, but Gordon was released and restored to his estates four years later.

The Earl of Huntly’s castles and mansions were raided and

plundered and the rich contents removed. A boatload was conveyed from

Aberdeen to Leith. In the Treasurer’s accounts for November 1562 there is a

charge of thirty pounds for the transport of the booty. The contents, which

included a dozen beds, forty tapestries and hangings, rich embroidered

coverings and velvet cushions, together with gold and silver ornaments, were

shared between Moray and Mary.

The Court left Aberdeen and moved south on 5th November,

stopping the first night at Dunnotar Castle, the seat of Moray’s father-in-law,

the Earl Marischal. They arrived back in Edinburgh on 21st by way of

Montrose, Dundee and Perth.

Thus, by 1563 Moray had become the richest and most powerful

man in Scotland. As well as the title of Moray he had acquired theSheriffdoms of Inverness, Elgin and Forres. He had got rid of all those who

were stumbling-blocks to his ambition: Bothwell had been forced into exile,

-13-




Arran and his son, the chief of the Hamiltons, were in disgrace and banishedfrom court, the Earl of Sutherland, the other great Northern Earl, attainted and

banished, the Earl of Huntly dead and his family disgraced and ruined. Even

the post of Chancellor which had been held by Huntly was given to Moray’s

relative, the Earl of Morton.

It is reported that Mary regretted the severity of the persecution

of the Huntly family and would not share in the rejoicing recommended by

Moray. John Knox, who had his own reasons for writing up Mary’s

displeasure, reports that when Mary received news of Moray’s victory and

was asked to share in the celebrations, “sche glowmed boyth at the messenger

and at the request, and skarselie wold geve a good worde or blyth countenance

to any that she knew earnest favoraris of the Erle of Murray, whose prosperitie

was and yitt is a verray vennoume to hyr boldened harte against him for his

godlynes and uprycht plainess…..of many days she bair no better

countenance, whereby it mycht have bene evidentlie espyed, that sche rejosed

nott greatlie of the successe of the matter.” And Buchanan writes: “Murray

proceeded to the Court, where, amid the mutual gratulations

of the courtiers, the Queen betrayed no symptom of joy, either in her

countenance or speech.”

-14-




There can be little doubt that the punishment of Huntly andthe Gordons was out of proportion to the danger they threatened. The whole

episode can be fairly ascribed to the ambition of James Stewart and the

determination of Mary’s closest advisers, both political and military, to destroy

the Catholic strength in the North. To these compelling pressures can be

added the inexperience and credulity of the Queen herself and her inability,

owing to her sex and youth, to exercise fully her rights of sovereignty.

Moray himself was assassinated in 1570 by a Hamilton, and his

son-in-law, “The Bonnie Earl o’Moray”, was later assassinated by a Gordon,

the grandson of the Huntly who fell at Corrichie.

________________________________


the fall of the house of huntly

Documents