HUNTLY, Earl of, a title in the Scottish peerage, conferred in 1449 on Alexander de Seton, the elder of the two sons of Elizabeth Gordon, only daughter and heiress of Sir Adam Gordon, lord of Gordon, who fell at Homeldon, 14^th September, 1402, by her husband Alexander de Seton, second son of Sir William Seton of Seton, descended from a sister of Robert the Bruce. Alexander de Seton and his wife, Elizabeth de Gordon, received a charter from Robert duke of Albany, dated 20^th July 1408, in liferent, with remainder to the heirs to be procreated between them, whom failing, to the heirs whatsoever of the said Elizabeth, of the lands and baronies of Gordon and Huntly, and others in Berwickshire, Strabogie, and Beldy-Gordon, Aberdeenshire, and all other lands which had belonged to her said father. Her husband was, in consequence, thenceforth styled lord of Gordon and Huntly.

      Their elder son, Alexander de Seton, lord of Gordon, previous to being created earl of Huntly, was one of the Scots nobles who attended the princess Margaret, of Scotland, daughter of James Il, to France, in 1436, on her marriage to the dauphin, Louis, son of Charles VII. The following year, after the murder of King James I. At Perth, he was appointed ambassador to England, to treat of a peace. In 1449 he was created Earl of Huntly. Between 1451 and 1458, he was employed in several negotiations to the court of England, and on May 18, 1452, he defeated the earl of Crawford in the neighbourhood of Brechin, that nobleman being then in rebellion against James II. The action is called the battle of Brechin, though the spot on which it was fought is not in the parish of that name, but a little to the north-east of it. Two years afterwards the earls of Moray and Ormond, brothers of the earl of Douglas, having excited a rebellion in the north, he raised a force against them, but was defeated at Dunkinty. Soon after, however, he forced them to take refuge in the western isles. He died 15^th July 1470, and was buried at Elgin, where a monument was erected to his memory. He was thrice married. By his first wife, Jean, daughter and heiress of Robert de Keith, grandson and heir-apparent of Sir William de Keith, great marischal of Scotland, with whom he got a large estate, he had no issue. His second wife, Egidia, daughter and heiress of Sir John Hay of Tulliebody, Clackmannanshire, bore to him a son, Sir Alexander Seton, who inherited his mother’s estate, and was ancestor of the Setons of Touch. By his third wife, Elizabeth, eldest daughter of William, Lord Crichton, high-chancellor of Scotland, he had three sons and three daughters, who took the name of Gordon, for on the issue of the third marriage, the succession to the earldom of Huntly was settled by charter, dated 29^th January 1449-50. The eldest son became, in consequence, second earl. The second son, Sir Alexander Gordon of Midmar, was ancestor of the Gordons of Abergeldie, Adam, the third son, was dean of Caithness and rector of Pettie.

      George Gordon, second earl of Huntly, the eldest son of the third marriage of his father, was one of the conservators of the peace with England in 1484. He was one of the privy council of King James III., to whom he, for a long time, firmly adhered, when the great body of the Scots nobility had combined against him. In 1488, he and the earl of Crawford were, in open parliament, appointed lords of justiciary north of the river Forth. He is said to have, soon after, been instrumental in bringing about a sort of hollow agreement between the confederated nobles and the king at blackness, but in consequence of James not fulfilling some of the concessions involved in it, he quitted that unhappy monarch and joined the rebellious lords; though he was always opposed to any violent measure. On the accession of James IV., in June of that year, he was sworn of his privy council, and empowered to repress disorders in the northern parts of the kingdom during the king’s minority. On 13^th May, 1491, he was constituted his majesty’s lieutenant in the northern parts of Scotland beyond the river Northesk. In 1498, he was appointed high-chancellor of Scotland, which office he resigned in 1502, and died soon after. He was twice married: first, to the princess Annabella, daughter of King James Il, and widow of the earl of Angus, by whom he had, with six daughters, four sons; and secondly, to Lady Elizabeth Hay, eldest daughter of William, first earl of Errol, relict of Patrick, master of Gray, without issue. His sons, by his first marriage were: 1. Alexander, third earl. 2. Adam, lord of Aboyne, who married Elizabeth, countess of Sutherland, and in her right became earl of Sutherland (see SUTHERLAND, earl of). 3. Sir William Gordon, ancestor of the Gordons of Gight, killed at Flodden 9^th September 1513. From this personage Lord Byron, the celebrated poet, was descended through his mother, Catherine Gordon, only child of George Gordon, Esq. of Gight. 4. James Gordon of Letterfourie, admiral of the fleet in 1513. The eldest daughter, Lady Catherine Gordon, married in 1496, by direction of James IV., Perkin Warbeck, the pretended duke of York, who had taken refuge in the Scottish court, and after invading England was taken and executed by order of Henry VII. In 1499. That monarch, struck with the beauty, virtues, and misfortunes of Lady Catherine, recommended her to the charge of his queen, and assigned to her a pension, which she long enjoyed. She was popularly styled the White Rose, the badge of her husband’s claim. She married, secondly, Sir Matthew Craddock, in Wales, ancestor of the earls of Pembroke.

      Alexander, third earl of Huntly, the eldest son, received from the Crown, large grants of land in Banffshire, Lochaber, and Strathearn. In 1505, a rebellion having broken out in the Isles, he was sent by James IV. To invade them on the north, while the king himself led an army against them in person from the south, when many of the chieftains submitted to the royal authority. The following year Huntly stormed the castle of Stornoway in Lewis, the stronghold of Torquil Macleod, the great head of the rebellion. He was one of the guarantees of a treaty of peace with the English in 1509, and a privy councillor. He accompanied James to the fatal field of Flodden, 9^th September 1513, and was one of the nobles who endeavoured to dissuade him from risking a battle. Hollinshed says that this earl of Huntly was held in the highest reputation of all the Scots nobility, “for his valiancy, joined with wisdom and policy.” In that memorable battle, so disastrous to his countrymen, he commanded, with Lord Home, the van of the Scots army, assisted by his two brothers, Adam, earl of Sutherland, and Sir William Gordon of Gight. Huntly and Home charged the right wing of the English, under Sir Edmund Howard, with so much impetuosity that it was speedily put to flight. With his brother the earl of Sutherland, he escaped the carnage of that dreadful day, although Tytler, (Hist. Of Scotland, vol. v., p. 81), with his usual inaccuracy, mentions him among the slain.

      In the parliament which met at Perth n October, when the regency was committed to the queen-mother, it was determined that she should be guided by the counsels of the earls of Huntly and Angus, and Bethune, archbishop of Glasgow. During the minority of James V., Huntly was the most influential lord in the north, and in 1517, on the regent Albany’s departure for France, he was appointed one of the council of regency. By patent dated 26^th February 1518, he was constituted the king’s lieutenant over all Scotland, except the west Highlands. In 1523, he excused himself from joining, with his vassals, the force which Albany had collected for the invasion of England, on the ground of indisposition, and when Albany finally left Scotland, the same year, Huntly was again appointed one of the members of the regency. He died at Perth 16^th January 1524. He was twice married: first, to Lady Johanna Stewart, eldest daughter of John earl of Athol, brother uterine of King James II., by whom, with two daughters, he had four sons; and, secondly, to a daughter of Lord Gray, widow of the sixth Lord Glammis, by whom he had no issue. His sons, by his first marriage, were, 1. George, who died young. 2. John, Lord Gordon, one of the young noblemen whom Albany carried with him to France in 1517, and who died at the abbey of Kinloss, December 5^th the same year, soon after his return to Scotland. By Margaret, his wife, natural daughter of King James IV. And Margaret Drummond, Lord Gordon had two sons, George, fourth earl of Huntly, and Alexander, bishop of Galloway, the only Popish prelate who embraced the Reformation, a memoir of whom is given below. 3. Alexander, ancestor of the Gordons of Clunny. 4. William, bishop of Aberdeen from 1547 to his death in 1577.

      George, fourth earl of Huntly, succeeded his grandfather in 1524, being then in his tenth year. This nobleman acted a conspicuous part in the historical transactions of his time. From his childhood he was brought up with his uncle, James V., they being nearly of the same age. The earl of Angus, who had then the chief direction of affairs, obtained his guardianship, and intended to have married him to one of his own relations, but his fall in 1528 prevented it. After that event, by the king’s express command, he was placed under the care of the most able masters. In 1535, he was sworn of the privy council, and the year following, he was appointed one of the regency during the king’s absence in France, when he went to marry the princess Magdalene, daughter of Francis I. On the king’s return in 1537, he was appointed lieutenant-general of the north, and in 1540 he accompanied the king in his voyage to the Western isles. He was commander of the forces which defeated Sir Robert Bowes, English warden of the east marches, at Haddenrig in Teviotdale, 24^th August, 1542, taking that commander and 600 of his men prisoners. A larger force, amounting to 30,000 men, under the duke of Norfolk, was in October of the same year, sent into Scotland by Henry VIII., to avenge that defeat, but were kept in check by Huntly, with a force not exceeding 10,000 men.

      After the death of James V., the earl was sworn a privy councillor to the regent Arran. To repress the disorders that had broken out in the Highlands, a special commission was granted to him by Arran, making him lieutenant-general of all the highlands, and of Orkney and Zetland. The earl lost no time in raising a large army in the north, with which he marched, in May 1544, against the clan Cameron and the Clanranald and the people of Moydart and Knoydart, who had wasted and plundered the whole country of Urquhart and Glenmorriston, as well as Abertarf, Strathglas, and others; but on his approach they dispersed and retired to their own territories. After the battle of Loch Lochy, Huntly, at the head of a large force entered Lochaber, which he laid waste, and apprehended many leading men of the hostile tribes, whom he put to death. He was subsequently appointed high-chancellor of Scotland, the great seal being delivered to him in parliament 10^th June 1546. He was one of the chief commanders at the battle of Pinkie, 10^th September 1547, and being taken prisoner there, was sent first to London and afterwards to Morpeth castle, whence he made his escape in 1548. During his imprisonment, being reproached with opposing the projected marriage between the youthful Queen Mary and Prince Edward, afterwards Edward VI., he excused himself by saying that he did not mislike the match so much as the manner of wooing.

      In 1548, on the proposed marriage of Queen Mary to the dauphin of France, he received the order of St. Michael from the French monarch. On 13^th February 1549, the earl of Huntly had a grant of the earldom of Moray.

      Being the head of the Scots Catholics at the era of the Reformation, we find him present at the trial for heresy at Edinburgh of Adam Wallace, the martyr, in 1550, and taking a prominent part in the proceedings against him. The promptitude and severity with which he suppressed the insurrections in the north, raised up many enemies against him, and, the same year, as he and his brother, the earl of Sutherland, were about to proceed to France, with the queen-regent, a conspiracy was formed to cut him off, at the head of which was Mackintosh, chief of the clan Chattan. The plot being discovered, Huntly ordered Mackintosh to be immediately apprehended and brought to Strathbogie, where he was beheaded. On their return from France, the earl was sent by the queen-regent, with full authority, on an expedition to the north, for the purpose of apprehending the chief of the Clanranald, who had recommenced his usual course of rapine. Having mustered a considerable force, chiefly Highlanders and of the clan Chattan, he passed into Moydart and Knoydart, but his operations were paralysed by disputes in his camp, and he very soon abandoned the enterprise and returned to the low country (Lesley, p. 251). Attributing the earl’s conduct to negligence, the queen-regent committed him a prisoner to the castle of Edinburgh, where he remained from October till March. He was compelled to renounce the earldom of Moray and the lordship of Abernethy, with his tacks and possessions in Orkney and Zetland, and the tacks of the lands of the earldom of Mar and of the lordship of Strathdie, of which he was bailie and steward, and condemned to a banishment of five years in France. But as he was about to leave the kingdom, the queen-regent recalled the sentence of banishment, and restored him to the office of chancellor, of which he had been deprived, though she exacted a heavy pecuniary fine from him.

      In 1554, when the queen-mother was constituted regent, the great seal was taken from Huntly and delivered to Mons. De Rubay, a French advocate, whom she had appointed vice-chancellor, leaving the earl only the name of chancellor. He was in the Scots army destined for the invasion of England in Oct. 1557, but the Scots nobles being then opposed to a war with England, the queen regent was obliged to disband her forces. He at first assisted her against the lords of the congregation, and in June 1559, when the army of the protestant lords marched upon Perth, he hastened to entreat them to delay besieging the town for a few days, but was told that it would not be delayed even an hour. Soon after, on the part of the queen-regent, he signed the agreement with the protest and lords which led to their evacuation of Edinburgh. He afterwards entered into a bond of association with the duke of Chatelherault and the other lords of the reformed party, at the same time stipulating in a separate treaty, for the preservation of his authority and the security of his great possessions in the north. On 25^th April 1560, he joined them with 60 horse, and signed the fourth covenant drawn up by the congregation two days after, for their mutual protection and assistance, in which they obliged themselves, not only to support the reformation, but to endeavour to obtain the expulsion of the French from the kingdom. The same year the queen-regent, in her last interview with the leaders of the congregation, denounced the crafty and interested advice of the earl of Huntly, who had interrupted the conference at Preston, when she was herself ready to agree to their proposals. In the famous parliament of 1560, in which popery was abolished, he was named one of the twenty-four noblemen and gentlemen from whom the council of twelve was to be chosen, for the government of the kingdom. But he never was hearty in the cause of the congregation, and took the first opportunity of deserting them.

      On the death of the young queen’s husband, Francis II. Of France, when the Estates had resolved to send over Lord James Stuart, prior of St. Andrews, the natural brother of the queen, to present an address to her majesty, Huntly and the other popish nobles met secretly and despatched Lesley, then official of Aberdeen, and afterwards bishop of Ross, to explain their views to Mary, and to offer their service and allegiance. He was one of the seven leading men in Scotland to whom a commission was transmitted from Mary, directing them to summon a parliament, and on her return to Scotland in 1561, the great seal was redelivered to him. Between Huntly and the lord James Stuart an inverterate animosity had early begun to be manifested. On one occasion Huntly had boasted that if the queen commanded him he would set up the mass in three shires, when Lord James answered that it was past his power to do so, and so he should find the first moment he attempted it. Lord James, who had been created by the queen, earl of Mar, had long had an anxious wish for the earldom of Moray, and as she, in February 1562, invested him with that title and the estates attached to it, of which Huntly was in possession, the latter became his implacable foe. Another cause of enmity was the opposition which Moray made to a project of marriage between Huntly’s third son, Sir John Gordon, and the queen, that had been proposed by her French relatives of the house of Guise, with the view of encouraging him to undertake the attempt of restoring the popish religion in Scotland. Upon this young man, Sir John Gordon, Alexander Ogilvy of Ogilvy had, in 1545, settled the estates of Findlater and Deskford in Banffshire, to him and his heirs male, whom failing, to his brothers, William, James, and Adam, they taking the name of Ogilvy. This settlement occasioned a violent feud between the Gordons and the Ogilvies; and on 27^th June 1562, a street encounter took place between them at Edinburgh, when Lord Ogilvy was dangerously wounded by Sir John. The latter was, in consequence, committed to prison, but made his escape.

      On an excursion to the northern part of her kingdom, Mary was met at Aberdeen, in August 1562, by the countess of Huntly, who interceded for her son, but the queen declared that he must first return to prison before she could extend to him her clemency. The countess begged that the castle of Stirling might be assigned as his place of imprisonment. The queen consented, and Lord Glammis was appointed to conduct him thither, but when near Glammis castle, Sir John left his escort and hastened back to the north. The queen had intended to go to Huntly’s house of Strathbogie, to which she had been invited, but was met on her way thither, by the earl, who earnestly besought her to pardon his son. She continued, however, inexorable, and being suspicious of his designs, determined, instead of going to Strathbogie, to proceed onward to the castle of Inverness. By this departure from her original intention, a plan which Huntly had formed for cutting off Moray, Morton, and Maitland of Lethington, was frustrated. At Inverness, the queen was refused admittance to the castle by the deputy-governor, a dependent of Huntly. The force of the country being raised, the castle was besieged, and taken, and the deputy-governor hanged. Although informed that Huntly watched to intercept her in the woods on the banks of the Spey, Mary crossed that river without seeing him, and returned at the head of 3,000 men to Aberdeen. There the countess of Huntly requested another audience of the queen, which was denied to her, and a proclamation was issued, commanding all who could bear arms in the surrounding districts to attend her majesty. Believing his ruin to be contemplated, Huntly resolved upon seizing the queen’s person and putting an end to the influence of the earl of Moray. After fortifying the castles of Findlater, Achindoun, and Strathbogie, he assembled his vassals, to the number of 1,500 men, and commenced his march to Aberdeen. As he advanced, his force melted gradually away, and with scarce 500 men he found himself attacked by the queen’s army, under the earls of Moray, Morton, and Athol, at a place called Corrichie, on the east side of the hill of Fare, 14 miles west of Aberdeen. Being driven from his position on the hill into a low marshy level, he was there set upon by the spearmen of the earl of Moray, and completely defeated. From his corpulence and the weight of his armour, he was trampled to death in the pursuit, October 28, 1562. Two of his sons, Sir John Gordon, and Adam Gordon, were among the prisoners. The latter was pardoned on account of his youth, being only eighteen years of age, but his brother, Sir John, was beheaded on 31^st October, much pitied by the spectators. As he had aspired to the hand of the queen, she was compelled, by the earl of Moray, to witness his going to execution, where he was cruelly mangled by an unskilful executioner. Before his death he confessed his treasonable designs, and laid the blame of them on his father. The earl’s body, after having been embowelled, was conveyed to Edinburgh, and in accordance with an old feudal custom, kept unburied till parliament met, 2d November 1562, when an indictment having been exhibited against him, he was convicted of high treason, and his estates and honours forfeited to the crown.

      By his countess, Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Robert Lord Keith, son and heir-apparent of William third earl Marischal, he had nine sons and three daughters, namely, 1. Alexander Lord Gordon, who married Lady Margaret Hamilton, second daughter of the duke of Chatelherault, and died, without issue, before 11^th August 1553. 2. George, fifth earl. 3. Sir John Gordon, above mentioned. 4. William, who, according to Gordon’s History, was designed bishop of Aberdeen, and who died at Paris in the college of Bons Enfans before 1567. 5. James, a Jesuit, who died at Paris in 1620. 6. Sir Adam of Auchindoun, pardoned by Mary, who, in a feud with the Forbeses, burnt down the old castle of Corgarff in Strathdon in 1551, when twenty-seven persons, among whom were the wife and children of Alexander Forbes, perished in the flames. Subsequently a meeting for reconciliation took place between a select number of the heads of the two houses in the hall of the old castle of Drumminor. The differences were made up, and the parties sat down to dinner, when mistaking a gesture of their chief, the Forbeses slew a number of the unsuspecting Gordons. The chiefs looked at each other in silent consternation. At length Forbes said, “this is a sad tragedy we little expected; but what is done, cannot be undone, and the blood that now flows on the floor of Drumminor will just help to sloaken the auld fire of Corgarff.” (See Picken’s Traditionary Stories of Old Families..) Sir Adam took arms in the queen’s cause, which he long upheld in the north. In 1571, several parties were sent against him, but he defeated the king’s adherents in repeated actions. He died at Paris in 1580. 7. Sir Patrick, of Auchindoun and Gartly, killed at the battle of Glenlivet 3d October 1594, without issue. 8. Robert, killed accidentally, 25^th April 1572, by one of his men, when cleaning his gun. 9. Thomas. Lady Elizabeth Gordon, the eldest daughter, became, by marriage, countess of Athol. Lady Jean, the second daughter, was thrice married; first, on 22d February 1566, to the fourth earl of Bothwell, but their marriage was annulled in May 1567, to enable Bothwell to espouse Queen Mary; secondly, 13^th December 1573, to Alexander, eleventh earl of Sutherland, with issue; and 3dly, to Alexander Ogilvy of Boyne. She died in 1629, aged 84. Lady Margaret, the youngest daughter, married John eighth Lord Forbes.

      George, fifth earl of Huntly, the eldest surviving son, had, with other charters, one of the office of sheriff of the county of Inverness and keeper of the castle thereof, on his father’s resignation, 7^th August 1556. He had married Lady Anne Hamilton, third daughter of the second earl of Arran, duke of Chatelherault, the sister of his brother’s widow, Lady Gordon, and after the defeat at Corrichie, he fled for protection to his father-in-law, at Hamilton; but the queen requiring him to be delivered up, he was, on assurance of his life made to the duke, sent to Edinburgh, whence he was committed prisoner to the castle of Dunbar. Being convicted of treason, February 8, 1563, he was sentenced to be executed, but was remitted back to Dunbar till the queen’s pleasure should be known. An order for his execution, surreptitiously obtained from the queen, was sent to the governor of Dunbar castle, who communicated it to Huntly. He received it with calmness, but declared that he had every confidence in the assurance made by her majesty that his life would be saved, if his enemies, resolved upon his destruction, had not prevailed with her against him. The governor rode immediately to Holyrood, and requesting an audience of the queen, informed her that her “commands had been complied with.” “What commands?” asked her majesty in surprise. “The execution of the earl of Huntly,” replied the governor. “I gave no such commands,” exclaimed her majesty, “and did not intend that his life should be taken.” The governor then informed her majesty that, relying on her assurance of his life, he had not fulfilled the order sent to him. Huntly was immediately set at liberty, and restored to the queen’s favour. He was in the palace of Holyrood at the time of Rizzio’s murder, 10^th March 1565, and with the earl of Bothwell he contrived to escape from it, when in possession of the conspirators. When Mary fled from the palace with Darnley, Huntly with other nobles joined her at Dunbar; and on the 20^th of the same Month (March 1565), on the forfeiture of the earl of Morton, he was appointed high-chancellor of Scotland, although his forfeiture was not then reversed. He was one of the lords who proposed to the queen to obtain a divorce from Darnley, and when she retracted her consent, he, with Argyle, Lethington, and Sir James Balfour, signed the band or agreement for his murder. On the perpetration of that crime in February 1567, he joined Bothwell in his bedchamber in the palace, whither he had immediately retreated, and these two noblemen, with others belonging to the court, were the first to acquaint the queen with the dreadful fate of her husband. Soon after, Huntly was among the nobles of the court who accompanied the queen to the seat of Lord Seton near Dunbar. At this time he fully shared the confidence of the unhappy Mary. Tytler, quoting a manuscript letter in the State Paper office, says that scarce two weeks after her husband’s death, the court at Seton was occupied in gay amusements. Mary and Bothwell would shoot at the butts against Huntly and Seton, and on one occasion, after winning the match, they forced these lords to pay the forfeit in the shape of a dinner at Tranent. In the parliament following the acquittal of Bothwell, Huntly’s attainder was reversed, and his estates and honours restored, April 19^th, 1567.

      The same year, he was one of the nobles who signed the bond recommending Bothwell, though married to his sister, as a husband to the queen. He was in the royal cavalcade, when surprised by Bothwell at Almond bridge, six miles from Edinburgh, and carried to Dunbar castle. On Lethington joining the confederacy against Bothwell, Huntly and the latter resolved upon his death, when Mary threw herself between them, and declared that if a hair of his head perished, it should be at the peril of their life and lands. He now began to correspond with the queen’s enemies, and when the party against Bothwell became too strong to be withstood, he signed the bond to support the authority of the young king, James VI. He carried the sceptre at the first parliament of the regent Moray, 5^th December, 1567, in which he was chosen one of the committee of the lords of the articles. At this time he was courted by the regent, who held out a prospect to him of giving his daughter to his son in marriage. In the following May, on the escape of Queen Mary from Lochleven, he joined the association in her favour at Hamilton, and went north to raise forces for her service. After the defeat at Langside he lost his office of chancellor. He and Argyle and the Hamiltons held a convention at Largs on July 28^th, when they resolved to let loose the borderers upon England. They also wrote to the duke of Alva, requesting his assistance. Huntly and Argyle kept the field at the head of a large force, and having completely reduced the northern and western parts of the kingdom, they were upon the point of marching southward when they received letters from Queen Mary, then a captive in England, commanding them to disband their forces, as Queen Elizabeth would compel the regent to desist from hostilities against them. Soon after she issued a commission appointing the duke of Chatelherault and the earls of Argyle and Huntly her lieutenants, but in May 1569, they submitted to the regent Moray. After the murder of that nobleman in 1570, Mary invested Huntly with the office of lieutenant-general, and for some time he remained at Aberdeen, concentrating the strength of the north. He and the leaders of the queen’s party were proclaimed traitors by the new regent Lennox. At page 29 of ‘Bannatyne’s Journal’ will be found a letter from Huntly to the duke of Chatelherault, dated Aberdeen, 7^th August 1570, relative to some enterprise concerted between the queen’s friends, which Bannatyne thinks could be nothing else than the apprehension and destruction of the king’s person, but which was more likely to have been intended against Lennox himself. Having commenced his march southward with all his forces, he was attacked at Brechin by Lennox, and defeated, the regent having stormed Brechin castle, and hung up 23 of the garrison.

      At a parliament held at Stirling in 1571, an act of forfeiture was passed against Huntly and his brother, Sir Adam Gordon, one of Queen Mary’s most determined adherents, the Hamiltons, Kirkaldy of Grange, and various others. He was one of the leaders of the force sent by Kirkaldy against the regent at Stirling on 2d September of that year, when Lennox was slain. Captain Calder, who committed the deed, declared, previous to his execution, that before reaching Stirling, he had received orders both from Huntly and Lord Claud Hamilton, to shoot both the regent and the earl of Morton in revenge for the death of the archbishop of St. Andrews. On being elected regent, Morton set on foot a treaty of peace with Chatelherault, Huntly, and other leaders of the queen’s party, and an agreement was signed at Perth, 23d February 1573, whereby the king’s authority was recognised by them, and the regent bound himself to get the act of attainder against them repealed and their lands restored. In a parliament which met soon after, this was accordingly done. Huntly retired to the north, and died at Strathbogie in May 1576. A detail of the circumstances attending his death, which was very sudden, is appended to ‘Bannatyne’s Journal,’ page 483, ed. 1806, edited by Sir John Graham Dalzell. It appears from this that he was never in better health and spirits than on the morning of his death. After hunting for some time, and killing “thrie haris and ane tod,” (three hares and a fox,) he returned home to dinner, and in the afternoon, while playing at football, he fell down in a severe attack of sickness, and being carried to his bed, died about seven o’clock in the same evening, his last words being “Look, look, look!” The account concludes with viewing the earl’s death, under the circumstances in which it took place, as a judgment from God for his participation in the murder of Darnley, and the slaughter of the regent Lennox at Stirling and “also,” adds the writer, “of the first regentis murther, whairof experience teiches me some part.” Referring to the five who were in the conspiracy against the king, he says, “Four is past with small provisione, to wit, the secretare, Argyle, Bothuill, and last of all Huntlie. I hoip in god the fyft sall die mair perfitelie;” meaning Morton, who was afterwards beheaded for being “art and part” in the murder of the king. By his countess, a daughter of the duke of Hamilton, the earl of Huntly had a son, George, sixth earl, and a daughter, Lady Jean, countess of Caithness.

      George, sixth earl and first marquis of Huntly, succeeded his father, when a minor. At first he possessed the favour of the king, by whom he was personally liked. He was a zealous Roman Catholic, and in 1588, about the time of the Armada, he entered into a correspondence with Spain. Considering himself in danger from the protestant party, in the following year he raised the standard of rebellion in the north, and the king having marched against him, he and his associates surrendered. On being brought to trial, they were found guilty of repeated acts of treason, but the king would not allow sentence to be pronounced against them. After a few months’ confinement, James took occasion, among the public rejoicings on account of his marriage, to set them at liberty. The earl now retired to his possessions in the north, and one of his first measures was to erect a castle at Ruthven in Badenoch, in the neighbourhood of his hunting forests. This gave great offence to Mackintosh, the chief of the clan Chattan, and his people, as they conceived that the object of its erection was to overawe the clan. He was afterwards involved in a dispute with the Grants. In consequence of some outrages committed by John Grant, the tutor of Ballindalloch, that person and such of the Grants as should harbour or assist him, were declared outlaws and rebels, and a commission was granted to the earl of Huntly to apprehend and bring them to justice. In virtue of this commission, he besieged the house of Ballindalloch, which he took by force 2d November 1590, but the tutor effected his escape. Sir John Campbell of Calder, a tool of the chancellor Maitland, who had plotted the destruction of the earl and the laird of Grant, now joined in the conspiracy against him, and stirred up the clan Chattan, and Mackintosh their chief, to aid the Grants. They also persuaded the earls of Athol and Moray, the latter a young nobleman of handsome appearance and great promise, popularly called “the bonny earl of Moray,” to assist them against Huntly. Entering Badenoch, the earl summoned his vassals, and proclaimed and denounced the tutor and his abettors as rebels and traitors. The earls and others opposed to him met at Forres, to consult on the best means of defending themselves, but the sudden advance of Huntly to that town struck them with terror, and the whole party assembled, with the exception of the earl of Moray, left Forres in great haste, and fled to Tarnoway. On his approach to that place Huntly found the castle too well fortified to be attacked. He accordingly disbanded his men, 24^th November 1590, and returned home. In the following year, when the turbulent earl of Bothwell made an attack on the palace of Holyrood, under cloud of night, with the view of seizing the chancellor Maitland, and was forced to flee to the north, to escape the vengeance of the king, Huntly, who had become reconciled to Maitland, was sent, with the duke of Lennox, in pursuit of him, but he escaped their hands. Having received letters of fire and sword against Bothwell and his followers. Huntly availed himself of these to gratify his own private revenge against the earl of Moray. Under pretence that the latter had harboured Bothwell in his castle of Donibristle in Fife, he surrounded that place with a strong force, and burnt it to the ground. The unfortunate earl fled towards the shore, intending to cross the Forth in a boat, but was overtaken by Sir Thomas Gordon of Cluny and Gordon of gight, and slain (See MORAY, earl of). Huntly immediately despatched John Gordon of Buckie, who was master of the king’s household, to Edinburgh, to lay a statement of the affair before the king. The clergy straightway denounced Huntly as a murderer, and a tumult having, in consequence, taken place at Edinburgh, the king was obliged to cancel the commission he had granted to him. Captain John Gordon, brother of Gordon of Gight, although mortally wounded, having been taken prisoner, was tried before a jury, condemned, and executed. Huntly himself was summoned to stand his trial. Assured by a private letter from the king, in which he says, “Alwise, I sall remaine constant. When ye come heere, come not by the ferreis; and if yee doe, accompanie yourself, as ye respect your owne preservatioune,” he surrendered at Edinburgh, and was committed a prisoner to the castle of Blackness, 12^th March 1591. On giving security, however, that he would appear and take his trial when called upon, he was discharged on the 20^th of the same month.

      The following year the earls of Argyle and Athol, and the lairds of Grant and Mackintosh having ravaged his lands in the north, on account of the slaughter of the earl of Moray, Huntly, after his return home, was engaged in various contests with the Grants and Mackintoshes, for the purpose of keeping them in due order and subjection, frequently laying waste their possessions, and carrying off large booty from them. But he had no sooner subdued his enemies in the north than, in consequence of some letters having been intercepted on Mr. George Ker, of the Newbottle family, when about to sail for the continent, he found himself accused of having renewed his treasonable correspondence with Spain, and of having entered into a conspiracy with the earls of Errol and Angus, to overturn the protestant religion in Scotland. The king and his council appear to have been convinced of their innocence, but being importuned by the ministers to prosecute them, James, yielding to necessity, and to the intrigues of Queen Elizabeth, summoned them to St. Andrews on 5^th February 1593. On their refusal to obey the citation, they were, with Sir Patrick Gordon of Auchindoun, denounced rebels on the 8^th of February, and summoned to appear in parliament on the 2d June. It is stated in Calderwood’s History that at a convention of the nobility, held in the beginning of May, “the king sought a whinger to throw at William Murray, for compairing Huntlie to Bothwell in wickedness.” On the 17^th October, Huntly, Angus, and Errol appeared in presence of the king, and offered to submit to a legal trial, for which a day was fixed, but on 26^th November, it was finally agreed that they should be exempted from prosecution, and that before 1^st February 1594, they should either submit to the church, and renounce popery, or leave the kingdom. At a parliament held in the end of May 1594, the three earls were attainted without trial, and their arms torn in presence of the Estates of the realm.

      A Spanish ship, which had landed at Aberdeen, having been seized by the citizens, the earls of Angus and Errol with others arrived in that city with about 160 spearmen, and threatened, if the crew, who had been made prisoners, were not liberated, they would burn the town. On the arrival of Huntly soon after, with a larger force, the citizens were obliged to give the men up. An army, amounting to about 7,000 men, commanded by the earl of Argyle, a youth of 19 years of age, was now sent against Huntly and Errol, who collected their forces to the amount of about 1,500 men, mostly horsemen, They met at Glenlivet, in Banffshire, where the royal army was totally routed, 3d October 1594. On Huntly’s side, about 14 gentlemen were slain, including Sir Patrick Gordon of Auchindoun and the laird of Gight. The earl of Errol and a considerable number of persons were wounded. At the conclusion of the battle the conquerors returned thanks to God on the field for the victory. Among the trophies found in the field was the ensign belonging to the earl of Argyle, which was carried, with other spoils, to Strathbogie. James now advanced against them in person, when Huntly and his friends retired into Sutherland for a time. Soon after his return, he was accused of a new conspiracy with the earls of Angus, Errol, Bothwell, and Caithness, the object of which was said to be the imprisonment of the king, the crowning of the young prince, and the appointment of Huntly, Errol, and Angus, as regents of the kingdom, but on the ‘band’ betwixt the traitorous lords being delivered up, it turned out that it related to some compensation being offered to the young earl of Moray, then a minor, for the slaughter of his father. The king promised to pardon Huntly, if he would deliver Bothwell, but he refused to betray him. Huntly and Errol afterwards had a meeting at Aberdeen with the duke of Lennox, the king’s lieutenant in the north, when they agreed to leave the kingdom, during his majesty’s pleasure. In his absence, his countess made some offers to the synod of Moray in her husband’s name, and various efforts were made by his friends to procure his recall, which gave great alarm to the church, as their proceedings, recorded in Calderwood’s History, testify.

      After spending sixteen months in travelling through Germany and Flanders, Huntly returned to Scotland, and was received by the king at Falkland 13^th August 1596. He arrived in Edinburgh on the 6^th of the following December, and he and the earls of Angus and Errol were restored to their former honours and estates by the parliament held at Edinburgh, the 12^th of that month. On this occasion Huntly bore the sword from the parliament house to the palace of Holyrood. He had a grant of the dissolved abbacy of Dunfermline, was appointed lord-lieutenant of the north, and, on the baptism of the princess Margaret, a daughter of King James, who died young, in testimony of the king’s regard for him, he was created marquis of Huntly, by patent, dated 17^th April, 1599. At this time he was in high favour at court, and Calderwood, under date 1600, says that he and the king “passed over the time with drinking and waughting.” to waught, in the Scots language means to quall, to drink in large draughts. On the 23d February 1603, after great pains taken by the king, the earls of Huntly, Moray, and Argyle were reconciled.

      Having made no secret of his attachment to the Church of Rome, notwithstanding that several ministers had at various times been sent by the General Assembly to remain with him and resolve his doubts, the marquis, in 1606, was accused of encouraging the Roman Catholics, and thereby occasioning a great defection from the reformed doctrines. At a convention held at Linlithgow on 10^th December of that year, he was ordered to confine himself with his countess and children at Aberdeen. He was summoned before the General Assembly, which met at Linlithgow July 1608, and not obeying the citation, sentence of excommunication was, by the mouth of Mr. James Law, bishop of Orkney, moderator of the Assembly, solemnly pronounced against him. After which, the earl of Dunbar, his majesty’s commissioner, assured the Assembly that forty days after the sentence the civil sword should strike, without mercy, him and his. From the civil consequences of the act he was able to protect himself, by living in his fastnesses, and among his vassals in the north. In 1609 he was committed to Stirling castle, but liberated in December 1610, on his engaging to subscribe the confession of faith, and make satisfaction to the church. He now began to show what was called “open insolencie,” by directing his officers to prohibit his tenants from attending the Established church. For this he was in 1616 cited before the court of high commission. On the 12^th of June, he appeared before the commission, and on his refusal to subscribe the confession of faith, or to give any kind of satisfaction, he was committed prisoner to the castle of Edinburgh, but on the 18^th of the same month, the lord-chancellor set him at liberty on his own warrant. Having previously received the king’s permission to go to London to court, he now began his journey. At Huntingdon, he met Mr. Patrick Hamilton, on his way to Scotland, with a letter from the king to the council, sharply rebuking them for releasing him, in contempt of the court of high commission. The marquis persuaded Hamilton to return and inform the king that he had come up with the intention of giving his majesty full satisfaction in all points, and to entreat permission to appear at court. The king, pleased with his offer to make satisfaction, authorised him to proceed. He was absolved from the sentence of excommunication by the archbishop of Canterbury at Lambeth, with the consent of the bishop of Caithness, who was then in London, 7^th July 1616, after which he received the communion. The news of this created a great sensation in Scotland, being considered a practical revival of the old claim of supremacy which the archbishop of York had anciently set up, but which had always been successfully resisted. On the 12^th July the archbishop of St. Andrews (Spottiswood) noticed it in his sermon in St. Giles’ church, Edinburgh, and said that the king had promised that “the like should not fall out hereafter.” He also wrote a long letter of remonstrance to the king, and James in his answer justified the absolution. The archbishop of Canterbury, at the king’s desire, also addressed an epistle to him on the subject. These letters gave the Scots clergy great satisfaction, and on the marquis’ return to Scotland, it was resolved that he should present a supplication to the General Assembly, which was to meet at Aberdeen, 13^th August of that year (1616), acknowledging his offence, promising to continue in the profession of the truth, and to educate his children therein, and that thereupon he should be of new absolved, according to the form used in the Church of Scotland. This was, accordingly, very solemnly done by the archbishop of St. Andrews, on the first day of the assembly, and the marquis made oath that he would truly conform to the Established church, and subscribed the confession of faith.

      Although he had become reconciled to the earl of Moray, the son of “the bonnie earl,” and in token thereof had given him his eldest daughter in marriage, he was obliged, in 1630, by Charles I. To give up to him, for £5,000, the heritable sheriffships of Aberdeen and Inverness, Moray having declared to the king that the marquis of Huntly was so great a man, of such friendships and power, that none could live beside him, unless he and his posterity were deprived of these offices. The same year, the viscount Melgum (see MELGUM, viscount) second son of the marquis, being burnt to death in the house of Frendraught, the Gordons repeatedly plundered the lands of Crichton of Frendraught, and threatened to take his life. The marquis, convinced that the burning was wilful, made many unsuccessful attempts to discover the incendiaries, and in 1633, intended to pay a personal visit to King Charles on his arrival in Edinburgh that year, to request him to order an investigation into all the circumstances, but being taken ill on the journey, he sent forward his marchioness and the widowed Lady Aboyne, both in deep mourning, to lay a statement of the case before the king, who promised to see justice done. Soon after, John Meldrum of Reidhill, was tried on a charge of being concerned in the fire, and being found guilty, was hanged and quartered at Edinburgh.

      The confederacy against Frendraught having become very formidable, the lords of the privy council subsequently wrote to the marquis, desiring him to prevent those of his surname from plundering his lands, as they held him responsible for all such disorders carried on by the Gordons. The marquis returned for answer, that as the aggressors were neither his tenants nor his servants, he could in no shape be answerable for them, that he had neither countenanced nor incited them, and that he had no warrant to pursue or prosecute them. Frendraught himself, convinced that the ravages committed on his property were done with the concurrence of the marquis, went to Edinburgh, and entered a complaint against him to the privy council, to whom the king also write, desiring them to adopt measures for suppressing the outrages complained of. They accordingly cited the marquis, in the beginning of 1635, to appear before them, and on his proceeding to Edinburgh, in compliance with this citation, he was commanded to remain there till the matter was investigated. Several persons of the name of Gordon were committed to prison, and the marquis, although nothing could be proved against him, was obliged to find caution for all persons of that surname within his bounds, that they should keep the peace, and also that he should present the rebels, as the pillagers were called, at Edinburgh, or make them leave the kingdom. On his return to the north, most of the guilty parties fled to Flanders, but about twelve were apprehended by the marquis, and sent to Edinburgh, where two of them were executed. The marquis was subsequently accused, by Adam Gordon, second son of Sir Adam Gordon of Park, and one of the principal ringleaders of the conspiracy against Frendraught, of having instigated him and his associates to commit all the depredations that had taken place, and on his appearance at Edinburgh 15^th January 1636, he was confronted with his accuser before the committee of the privy council, but although he “cleared himself with great dexteritie, beyond admiration,” as Gordon of Sallagh observes, he was, “upon presumption,” committed a close prisoner to the castle of Edinburgh. By the king’s command, however, both he and gordon of Letterfourie, who had also been imprisoned, were released, and the king enjoined Sir Robert Gordon, who was related to both parties, to bring about a reconciliation between the marquis and Frendraught. He accordingly prevailed upon them to enter into a submission, by which they agreed to refer all differences between them to the arbitrament of friends. The marquis, who had retired to his house in the Canongate of Edinburgh, having fallen into a decline, was desirous of returning north to Strathbogie, and was conveyed, on a bed, in his chariot, as far as Dundee, where he died, on 13^th June 1636, in his 74^th year. He was interred in the family vault at Elgin, on 30^th August following, “having,” says Spalding, “above his chist a rich mortcloath of black velvet, wherein was wrought two whyte crosses. He had torchlights in great number carried be freinds and gentlemen; the marques’ son, called Adam, was at his head, the earle of Murray on the right spaik, the earle of Seaforth on the left spaik, the earle of Sutherland on the third spaik, and Sir Robert Gordon on the fourth spaik, Besyds thir nobles, many barrons and gentlemen was there, haveing above three hundred lighted torches at the lifting. He is carried to the east port, doun the synd to the south kirk stile of the colledge kirk, in at the south kirk door, and buried in his own isle with much murning and lamentation. The like forme of burriall, with torth light, was not sein heir thir many dayes befor.” This author gives the marquis a very high character, which, in many respects, is not borne out by history. He certainly was a remarkable man for the age in which he lived. The king had the greatest regard for him, and bestowed on him, in marriage, Lady Henrietta Stewart, eldest daughter of his dearest favourite, Esme, duke of Lennox. Being a Roman Catholic, the widowed marchioness was obliged to leave Scotland, on account of her religion, in June 1641, and died in France September 2d, 1642. They had five sons and four daughters. The sons were, 1. George, Lord Gordon, and earl of Enzie, second marquis. 2. John, viscount Melgum, so created by Charles I. In 1627. 3. Lord Francis, who died in Germany in 1620. 4. Lord Laurence. And 5. Lord Adam of Auchindoun. The daughters were, 1. Lady Anne, countess of Moray. 2. Lady Elizabeth, countess of Linlithgow. 3. Lady Mary, marchioness of Douglas, and 4. Lady Jean, married to Claud, Lord Strabane.

      George, second marquis of Huntly, when Lord Gordon, was kept for some time at court in England by King James, who took great pains to educate him in the protestant religion. He was also styled earl of Enzie. The clan Cameron having, during the years 1612 and 1613, disturbed the peace of Lochaber, he raised a force to overawe them, and having taken prisoner their chief, he soon restored that country to order. In 1618 he was involved in some disputes with Sir Lauchlan Mackintosh, chief of the clan Chattan, in consequence of the latter, who was the vassal of his father, the marquis of Huntly, refusing to assist him against the Camerons, and as Mackintosh had not performed certain services for lands held of the earl and his father, he raised an action at law against him. He also inhibited him from disposing of the tithes of Culloden to which the earl had a right, and which belonged to Mackintosh. Having formerly obtained a decree against the latter for the value of the tithes of the preceding years, he sent two messengers at arms to distrain the corn upon the ground under that warrant. They were, however, resisted by Mackintosh’s servants. The earl, in consequence, pursued him before the privy council, and got him and his servants proclaimed rebels. Sir Lauchlan fortified the castle of Culloden, and prepared for a stubborn resistance, but on the approach of the earl, he went off first to Edinburgh, and afterwards to England. The castle subsequently surrendered to the earl, who returned the keys to the uncle of Mackintosh, in whose charge the castle had been left. The corn he bestowed on Mackintosh’s grandmother, who enjoyed the liferent of the lands of Culloden as her jointure. Having other claims against the turbulent chief, he cited him before the lords of council and session, and failing to appear, Mackintosh was again denounced rebel, and outlawed for disobedience. Being then at court, he complained to the king, and the earl in consequence posted up to London and laid before his majesty a true statement of matters. Sir Lauchlan was thereupon sent to Scotland, and committed to the castle of Edinburgh, until he should give the earl full satisfaction. In 1619, he and the laird of Grant, who had encouraged and assisted him in his proceedings, became reconciled to the earl, but there were afterwards many dissensions between them. In 1622 the earl received a commission from the privy council to proceed against the earl of Caithness, but in consequence of a message from court to go to France on some affairs of state, he left for that country in 1623, accompanied by a party of young gentlemen. In 1624 he had a company of the gens d’armes in the French service. He was created viscount of Aboyne 20^th April 1632, with remainder, after his death, or succession to his father, to his second son James and his heirs male. On the death of his father in 1636, he was in France, but arrived in Scotland in October of that year. In 1639, after Charles I. Had roused the spirit of the nation, by his rash and ill-judged attempt to introduce episcopacy into Scotland, the marquis of Huntly having received a commission from him as his lieutenant in the north, raised the royal standard, and took possession of Aberdeen in name of the king. Being informed that a meeting of Covenanters was to be held at Turriff on February 14, he resolved to disperse them, and wrote letters to his chief dependents, requiring them to meet him at Turriff the same day. One of these letters fell into the hands of the earl of Montrose, then on the side of the Covenanters, who, at the head of 800 men, crossed the range of hills called the Grangebean, and marched into Turriff on the morning of the day appointed. When Huntly and his party, amounting to 2,000 men, arrived, finding Montrose already there, he ordered his men to disperse, without offering an attack, on the pretence that his commission of lieutenancy only authorised him to act on the defensive. On the approach of Montrose to Aberdeen, the marquis abandoned the town, which the former entered without opposition on 30^th March. Spalding, after describing their entry, says, “Here it is to be notted, that few or none of this haill army wanted ane blew ribbin hung about his craig, doun under his left arme, which they called the ‘Covenanters’ Ribbin.’ But the Lord Gordon, and some other of the marquess’ bairnes and familie, had ane ribbin, when he was dwelling in the toun, of ane reid flesh cullor, which they wore in their hatts, and called it ‘The Royall Ribbin,’ as a signe of their love and loyaltie to the king. In despyte and derision thereof this blew ribbin was worne, and called the ‘Covenanters’ Ribbin,’ be the haill souldiers of the army, and would not hear of the ‘Royall Ribbin,’ such was their pryde and malice.”

      The advance of Montrose to Inverury, where he pitched his camp, alarmed Huntly, who despatched Robert Gordon of Straloch, and Dr. Gordon, a physician of Aberdeen, to his opponent, to request an interview, which the latter agreed to. At an adjourned conference on the 5^th April, the marquis agreed to subscribe the Covenant, with his friends, tenants, and servants. After this arrangement the marquis returned to Strathbogie, where, in a few days, he received a message from Montrose to repair to Aberdeen, with his two sons, the Lord Gordon and the Viscount Aboyne. On the 11^th April, at a council of the principal officers of Montrose’s army, it was resolved to arrest the marquis and his eldest son, Lord gordon. To do away, however, with any appearance of treachery, Montrose invited him and his two sons to supper, when he hinted the expediency of resigning his commission of lieutenancy. This the marquis agreed to, and also, at Montrose’s suggestion, wrote a letter to the king in favour of the Covenanters. That same night sentinels were placed around his lodging. Next morning, Montrose demanded from him a contribution for liquidating a loan of 290,000 merks, which the Covenanters had borrowed from Sir William Dick, a rich merchant of Edinburgh. With this demand the marquis declined to comply, as he was not concerned in borrowing the money. Montrose then requested him to take steps to apprehend James Grant, and some others, who had opposed the covenanters in the Highlands. Huntly objected that, having resigned his commission, he had no longer power to act. Montrose, finally, required the marquis to reconcile himself to Crichton, the laird of Frendraught, but this he positively refused to do. Then, changing his tone, Montrose thus addressed him: “My lord, seeing we are all now friends, will you go south to Edinburgh with us?” Huntly answered that he could not, as he was just going to Strathbogie. “Your lordship,” rejoined Montrose, “will do well to go with us.” “My lord,” said Huntly, “I came here to this town upon assurance that I should come and go at my own pleasure, without molestation or inquietude; and now I see why my lodging was guarded, and that ye mean to take me to Edinburgh, whether I will or not. This conduct, on your part, seems to me to be neither fair nor honourable.” He added, “My lord, give me back the bond which I gave you at Inverury, and you shall have an answer.” Montrose thereupon delivered the bond to him. Huntly then inquired, “Whether he would take him to the south as a captive, or willingly of his own mind?” “Make your choice,” said Montrose. “Then,” observed the marquis, “I will not go as a captive, but as a volunteer.” viscount Aboyne, his second son, was allowed to return to Strathbogie; but the marquis and Lord Gordon were conveyed to Edinburgh, where they were committed close prisoners to the castle. They were, however, soon after set at liberty, in accordance with the seventh article of the treaty of Berwick, 20^th June of the same year.

      In April 1644, the marquis received a new commission from the king, to be his majesty’s lieutenant-general in the north, and having collected a considerable body of horse and foot, he proceeded to Aberdeen, which he again took possession of. On the approach, however, of the marquis of Argyle, with a large force, he retired to Banff, where he disbanded his army, and retreated into Strathnaver, in Sutherland, where he remained inactive for a year and a half. When Montrose, who now supported the king’s cause, and had been appointed lieutenant-general of the kingdom, arrived in the north, Huntly kept aloof from him, and he never could be induced to co-operate with him during the subsequent struggle in which Montrose was engaged. He seems to have considered the latter’s appointment as trenching on his own authority as lieutenant in the north, and he could not forget the treatment he had formerly received from him. In 1646, with a force of 1,500 foot and 600 horse, he appeared at the gates of Aberdeen, which he stormed in three different places, and a third time took possession of that city; but soon returned to Strathbogie.

      In December of the same year, when the unfortunate Charles had resolved upon escaping from the Scots army, and putting himself at the head of such forces as the marquis of Huntly could raise in the north, he sent Robert Leslie, brother of General David Leslie, with letters and a private commission to the marquis, informing him of his intentions, and desiring him to levy what forces he could. Huntly accordingly collected some men at Banff, and fortified that town. In the following month a portion of the of the convenanting army stationed in Aberdeenshire attempted to dislodge him, but were obliged to retire with loss.  He was excepted from pardon, 4^th March 1647, and a reward of £1,000 offered for his apprehension. On the approach of General David Leslie with a considerable force in April, the marquis fled, with a few friends, to the mountains of Lochaber for shelter. Leslie thereupon reduced all the castles belonging to him in the north. After having been pursued by Lieutenant-general Middleton through Glenmoriston, Badenoch, and other places, the marquis was at length captured by Lieutenant-colonel Menzies at Dalnabo, in Strathdon, in December 1647. He was taken about midnight, just as he was going to bed. He was attended by only ten gentlemen and servants, who made a brave attempt to defend him, in which six of them were killed and the rest mortally wounded. On hearing that he had been taken prisoner, the whole of his vassals in the neighbourhood, amounting to about 500, with Grant of Carron at their head, flew to arms to rescue him. Menzies, in consequence, carried the marquis to the castle of Blairfindle in Glenlivet, about four miles from Dalnabo, whence he sent a message to his people dissuading them from attempting his rescue, for that, now almost worn out with grief and fatigue, he could no longer live in hills and dens; and hoped that his enemies would not drive things to the worst; but if such was the will of Heaven, he could not outlive the sad fate he foresaw his royal master was likely to undergo; and be the event as it would, he doubted not but the just providence of God would restore the royal family, and his own along with it. (Gordon’s History of the Family of Gordon, vol. ii. p. 546.)

      Shortly before the capture of the marquis of Huntly, John Gordon, of Innermarkie, Gordon, younger of Newton-Gordon, and the laird of Harthill, three of his chief friends, had been taken prisoners by Major-general Middleton, and sent to Edinburgh, where they were imprisoned. The two latter were condemned to die by the committee of estates, and although their friends procured a remission of the sentence from the king, they were, notwithstanding, both beheaded at the market cross of Edinburgh. Harthill suffered on the 26^th October 1647, and Newton-Gordon a few days thereafter.

      Besides the gentlemen and servants attending Huntly’s person, there were some Irish who were quartered in the offices about Dalnabo, where he was taken. These were carried prisoners by Menzies to Strathbogie, where Middleton then was, who ordered them all to be shot, a sentence which was carried into immediate execution. On receiving accounts of the capture of the marquis, the question was debated in the committee of estates at Edinburgh, whether he should be immediately executed or reprieved till the meeting of parliament; but although the Argyle faction, notwithstanding the marquis of Argyle withdrew before the vote was taken, and the committee of the church did everything in their power to procure the immediate execution of Huntly, his life was spared till the meeting of parliament by a majority of one vote. (Buthry, p. 207).

      If he had joined heartily with Montrose, instead of keeping apart from him, during the critical period of that chivalric nobleman’s brilliant career, he might have changed the whole fortune of the war and of the kingdom. He had not the magnanimity to do this, and his morbid jealousy of Montrose, and resentment for his arrest by him and conveyance to Edinburgh in 1639, ruined the king’s cause in Scotland, and brought on his own destruction.

      He was carried, under a strong guard of horse, to Leith, and, after being kept two days there, delivered up to the magistrates of Edinburgh, and confined in the tolbooth of that city. For the reward of £1,000 sterling offered for his apprehension, Menzies obtained an order from the committee of Estates. The king, from his prison in Carisbrook castle, wrote a letter to the earl of Lanark, then in London, entreating him to do his best to intercede for him, that his life might be spared; but it does not appear that any attention was paid to this letter. After the execution of the king and the duke of Hamilton, the marquis of Huntly, who had been allowed to lie in prison since December 1647, was, by an order of the Scots parliament, beheaded at the market cross of Edinburgh, on 22d March 1649. As he had formerly been excommunicated, one of the ministers, says the author of the History of the Family of Gordon, “asked him, when brought upon the scaffold, if he desired to be absolved from the sentence,” to which he replied, “that as he was not accustomed to give ear to false prophets, he did not wish to be troubled by him.” He suffered with great courage, professing his loyalty to the last, and declaring that he had charity to forgive those who had voted for his death, although he could not admit that he had done anything contrary to the laws. By his wife, Lady Anne Campbell, eldest daughter of the seventh earl of Argyle, he had five sons and three daughters.

      The eldest son, George, Lord Gordon, “of singular worth and accomplishments,” served in his youth in Lorraine and Alsace, under the marquis de la force, and distinguished himself by his valour, particularly at the siege of the fortified town of spire, where he was wounded in the thigh. In April 1639, for appearing in arms for the king, he and his father were committed prisoners to the castle of Edinburgh, but were released in the following June. In 1643, when his father and his brother, Viscount Aboyne, stood out against the covenant, Lord Gordon adhered to the Estates of the kingdom, and In September 1644 he joined the earl of Argyle, his uncle by the mother’s side, on his arrival in the north, in pursuit of the marquis of Montrose, then in arms for the king. For not interfering to prevent Argyle’s troops from laying waste the lands of the Gordons in Strathbogie and the Enzie, he has been blamed by some writers. Spalding remarks that it was “a wonderful unnaturalitie in the Lord Gordon to suffer his father’s lands and friends, in his own sight, to be thus wreckt and destroyed, in his father’s absence;” but it is probably that his lordship had not the power to interfere effectually. Soon after, with three troops of horse, he joined the Covenanters, at their rendezvous at the bridge of Dee. On Montrose’s arrival at Elgin, in February 1645, after the battle of Inverlochy, in which Argyle was defeated, he was joined by Lord Gordon, with some of his friends and vassals. He had long been kept under the control of his uncle, Argyle, and he now took the first opportunity to declare for the king. Spalding says, “The Lord Gordon being in the Bog, leaped quickly on horse, having Nathaniel Gordon, with some few others, in his company, and that same night came to Elgin, saluted Montrose, who made him heartily welcome, and soups joyfully together. Many marvelled at the Lord Gordon’s going in after such manner, being upon the country’s service, and colonel to a foot regiment and to a horse regiment.” In Strathbogie, whither Montrose proceeded, Lord Gordon speedily raised a force among his father’s vassals, of about 500 foot and 160 horse. With these he accompanied Montrose to Stonehaven, which was burnt, but as the lands in Strathbogie were exposed to be plundered by the Covenanters, Lord Gordon and his brother Lord Lewis Gordon, with the Gordon horsemen, returned to defend their father’s estates in that district. He had the command of Montrose’s horse at the battle of Auldearn, which was fought in the succeeding May, when the troops of the Covenanters, under Major-general Urrie, commonly called Hurry, were defeated. It was to protect the Gordons from the destruction that seemed to await them from the superior force of Urrie that Montrose hastened to Aberdeenshire, and so brought on this battle. General Baillie having been sent north in pursuit of Montrose, another battle took place, on 2d July of the same year (1645) at Alford, on the river Don, when Lord Gordon, conjunctly with Sir Nathaniel Gordon, had the command of the right wing of Montrose’s army. Previous to the battle, observing a party of Baillie’s troops driving away a large quantity of cattle which they had collected in Strathbogie and the Enzie, he selected a body of horse, with which he attempted a rescue. This caused a general engagement, in which Baillie was defeated, but the victory on the part of Montrose was clouded by the death of Lord Gordon, “a very hopeful young gentleman, able of mind and body, about the age of twenty-eight years,” (Gordon’s Continuation, p. 526). His lordship was, unfortunately, shot dead when in the act of pulling General Baillie from his horse, having, it is said, promised to his men, to drag him out of the ranks and present him before them. Wishart gives an affecting description of the feelings of Montrose’s army when this amiable young nobleman was killed. “There was,” he says, “a general lamentation for the loss of the Lord Gordon, whose death seemed to eclipse all the glory of the victory. As the report spread among the soldiers, every one appeared to be struck dumb with the melancholy news, and a universal silence prevailed for some time through the army. However, their grief soon burst through all restraint, venting itself in the voice of lamentation and sorrow. When the first transports were over, the soldiers exclaimed against heaven and earth for bereaving the king, the kingdom, and themselves, of such an excellent young nobleman; and, unmindful of the victory or of the plunder, they thronged about the body of their dead captain, some weeping over his wounds and kissing his lifeless limbs; while others praised his comely appearance even in death, and extolled his noble mind, which was enriched with every qualification that could adorn his high birth or ample fortune; they even cursed the victory bought at so dear a rate. Nothing could have supported the army under this immense sorrow but the presence of Montrose, whose safety gave them joy, and not a little revived their drooping spirits. In the meantime he could not command his grief, but mourned bitterly over the melancholy fate of his only and dearest friend, grievously complaining that one who was the honour of his nation, the ornament of the Scots nobility, and the boldest assertor of the royal authority in the north, had fallen in the flower of his youth.” Lord Gordon was unmarried. He has obtained a place in Walpole’s Catalogue of Royal and Noble Authors (vol. v, p. 102, ed. 1806,) for having written a few lines ‘On Black eyes,’ printed in the third part of Watson’s Collection, 1711.

      The marquis’ second son, James, had the title of viscount of Aboyne, In 1639, after his father and elder brother, Lord Gordon, had been sent prisoners to Edinburgh, he collected about 2,000 horse and foot, and for some time watched the movements of the Covenanters in the north, but afterwards disbanding his army, he went by sea to England, to inform the king of the precarious state of his affairs in that part of Scotland. Charles conferred on him the commission of lieutenancy which his father held, and gave him a letter to the marquis of Hamilton, requesting him to afford the viscount all the assistance in his power in his support of the royal cause. From that nobleman, however, he received only a few officers and four field-pieces. “The king,” says Gordon of Sallagh, (Continuation, p. 402,) “ coming to Berwick, and business growing to a height, the armies of England and Scotland lying near one another, his majesty sent the viscount of Aboyne and Colonel Gun to the marquis of Hamilton, to receive some forces from him, and with these forces to go to Aberdeen to possess and recover that town, (then in the hands of the Covenanters). The marquis of Hamilton, lying at anchor in the Forth, gave them no supply of men, but sent them five ships to Aberdeen.” On the viscount’s arrival in the bay of Aberdeen, the earl of Montrose, who then supported the Covenanters, abandoned that city, and hastened into the Mearns.

      On landing, the viscount issued a proclamation prohibiting the payment of any rents, duties, or other debts to the Covenanters, and requiring every person to take an oath of allegiance to his majesty. On the 10^th of June, four days after his landing, he advanced upon Kintore with about 2,000 horse and foot, and compelled the inhabitants of that place to subscribe the oath of allegiance. On the 14^th he crossed the Dee, with the intention of occupying Stonehaven, but was attacked by the earl Marischal on the way, and his forces being dispersed, he returned to Aberdeen. This affair has been called “the Raid of Stonehaven.” After again collecting his army, he resolved to dispute with Montrose, who had advanced to the bridge of Dee, the passage of that river. By a stratagem, however, the latter succeeded in withdrawing a part of Aboyne’s forces from the defence of the bridge, and thus gained an easy victory. When the viscount saw the Covenanters in possession of the bridge, he fled in great haste towards Strathbogie, and afterwards escaped by sea to England. This battle was fought 19^th June 1639.

      In 1643, the viscount was summoned before the council, to answer for his negotiations with the earl of Antrim, an Irish nobleman who had undertaken to raise a force in Ireland to assist Montrose, now created a marquis, in his attempt to restore the king’s authority in Scotland; but not appearing, he was forfeited and declared a traitor. In April 1644, he attended Montrose to Scotland, when Dumfries surrendered to him, but was obliged, in a few days, to retire with him to Carlisle, to avoid being surprised by the Covenanters. On the 24^th of the same month, he was excommunicated by the General Assembly at Edinburgh. The command of the garrison of Carlisle was given to his lordship, but that town being closely besieged, he and some other noblemen and gentlemen contrived to make their escape from it, and immediately hastened to Scotland to join Montrose, which he did in Menteith in April 1645. Accompanying him to the north, he was present at the battle of Auldearn, the following month. General Urrie’s troops, after their defeat, were pursued for several miles, and might have been all taken or killed, if Lord Aboyne had not, by an unnecessary display of ensigns and standards, which he had taken from the Covenanters, attracted the notice of the victorious party, who halted under the impression that a fresh army was coming up to attack them. At the battle of Alford, 2d July, he had the joint command of the left wing of Montrose’s army. He was also with Montrose at the battle of Kilsyth in August following, but on the commencement of the march of the royal army to the borders, on the 4^th September, the viscount left him, and not only carried off the whole of his own men, but induced the other horsemen of the north to accompany him. Indeed, Sir Nathaniel Gordon appears to have been the only individual of that name who remained behind. The cause of such a hasty proceeding on the part of Lord Aboyne, does not sufficiently appear; but it seems probably that his lordship had taken some offence at Montrose, who, according to a partisan of the Gordon family, arrogated to himself all the honour of the victories which the viscount had greatly contributed to obtain. (Gordon’s continuation of the History of the Earls of Sutherland, p. 528). After the battle of Philiphaugh, so disastrous to Montrose, that nobleman retired to the north, and had an interview with Lord Aboyne, whom he prevailed upon to join him at Drumminor, with 1,500 foot and 300 horse, but before reaching Alford, first Lord Lewis Gordon, and then his brother viscount Aboyne, left him, their father, the marquis of Huntly, being averse to their serving under Montrose. The viscount was, in 1648, excepted from pardon. He made his escape to France, and was at Paris, when intelligence of the execution of Charles I. Arrived there. The grief which this event occasioned him affected him so greatly that he died a few days afterwards, when, being unmarried, the title of viscount of Aboyne became extinct.

      The 3d son of the 2d marquis of Huntly was Lord Lewis Gordon, who succeeded his father as 3d marquis. Lord Charles, the 4^th son, adhered firmly to the royal cause during the civil wars, and in consideration of his great and faithful services, he was created by Charles II. Earl of Aboyne, and Lord Gordon of Strathaven, and Glenlivet, by patent to him and the heirs male of his body, dated 10^th September 1660. In the following year he had a charter under the great seal of the whole lands and lordship of Aboyne. He died in March 1681. By his countess, Lady Elizabeth Lyon, only daughter of the second earl of Kinghorn, he had four children, namely, 1. Charles, second earl of Aboyne, of whom afterwards. 2. The Hon. George Gordon. 3. The Hon. John gordon, who served in the army abroad, and died at Edinburgh at an advanced age, 22d July 1762. And one daughter, Lady Elizabeth, married in 1685, to John, Viscount Tarbet, who after her death became second earl of Cromarty.

      The fifth son of the second marquis was Lord Henry Gordon, who went into the service of the king of Poland, in which he remained for several years. He returned to Scotland, and died at Strathbogie. The marquis’s daughters were, Lady Anne, countess of Perth; Lady Harriet, married, first, to Lord Seton, and secondly, to the second earl of Traquair; Lady Jean, countess of Haddington; Lady Mary, the wife of Alexander Irvine of Drum; and Lady Catherine, who married Count Morstain, high treasurer of Poland, of which marriage Prince Czartorinski and other families of distinction in Poland are descended.

      Lewis, third marquis of Huntly, showed, when Lord Lewis Gordon, great changeableness of mind in the contest between the king and the nation. He first took arms in behalf of the king, and in June 1639, when his brother, viscount Aboyne, landed at Aberdeen, he collected from among his father’s friends and tenants, a force of about 1,000 horse and foot, at the head of which he joined him in that city. He afterwards fought on the side of the Covenanters, and at the battle of Aberdeen in September 1644, commanded their left wing against the troops of Montrose, then supporting the cause of the king. He also held a high command in Argyle’s army, at the battle of Fyvie, soon after, which led to the desertion of a small body of Gordons, who had joined the standard of Montrose. In the following year, Lord Lewis, who is described as of an impetuous temper, deserted the Covenanters and went over to Montrose, but seems to have shared his father’s feelings of dislike and jealousy of that nobleman. After the defeat of Montrose at Philiphaugh and his appearance in the north, he joined him with a considerable force, but soon left him. It is related by Wishart, that in 1646, when Montrose had sent three troops of horse to the fords of Spey, to watch the motions of Lieutenant-general Middleton, who had been sent in pursuit of him, Lord Lewis invited the officers to an entertainment in the castle of Rothes, which he then kept, and detained them there until Middleton had crossed the Spey with a large army and penetrated far into Moray; then he dismissed his guests with the words, “Go, return to your general, Montrose, who will now have better work than he had at Selkirk.” But the story is extremely improbable.

      Being the eldest surviving son, Lord Lewis succeeded his father, as third marquis of Huntly, in 1649, and in 1651 was by Charles II. Restored to the titles and estates, which had been forfeited. He died in December 1653. By his marchioness, Isobel, daughter of Sir James Grant of Grant, he had one son, George, fourth marquis of Huntly and first duke of Gordon (see GORDON, duke of), and three daughters. The title of marquis of Huntly was thereafter borne by the eldest son of the duke of Gordon, till the death of the fifth duke in 1836, when that title became extinct, and the titles of marquis of Huntly, &c., reverted to the earl of Aboyne.

_____

      Returning to the Aboyne family, Charles, second earl of Aboyne, succeeded his father in 1681. On offering to take his seat in the Scots parliament, 27^th July 1698, it was objected that, being a professed papist, he ought not to be allowed to sit; but declaring openly in parliament that he had embraced the true protestant religion, and owned the confession of faith as agreeable to the word of God, his lordship was permitted to qualify himself, and he took the oaths and his seat accordingly. He died in April 1702. By his countess, who was his cousin, Lady Elizabeth Lyon, second daughter of the third earl of Strathmore and Kinghorn, he had a son, John, third earl of Aboyne, and three daughters.

      John, the third earl of Aboyne, died in August 1732. By his countess, Grace, daughter of George Lockhart of Carnwath, he had 1. Charles, fourth earl. 2. The Hon. John gordon, lieutenant-colonel of the 81^st regiment, who died at Kinsale, 30^th October 1778. He married his cousin, Clementina, daughter of George Lockhart of Carnwath, and had three sons and two daughters. 3. The Hon. Lockhart Gordon, who was educated at the university of Glasgow, and originally designed for the bar, but entered the army, and was captain in the same regiment with Lord Cornwallis. He retired from the service with the rank of lieutenant-colonel, and resuming the study of the law, was appointed judge-advocate-general of Bengal in 1787. He died at Calcutta, 24^th March 1788. He was twice married. By his second wife, Catherine Wallop, sister of the earl of Portsmouth, he had, besides other children, two sons, the Rev. Lockhart gordon, and Lieutenant Loudoun Harcourt Gordon.

      Charles, fourth earl of Aboyne, born about 1726, succeeded his father in 1732. After coming of age, being apprehensive that his small estate would not be sufficient to enable him to live suitably to his rank in Scotland, he sent his luggage to Paris, intending to reside in France, but afterwards ordered it to be brought back, and by attending carefully to the judicious cultivation of his landed property, forming plantations, building extensive stone fences to enclose and subdivide his estate, and the introduction of improved modes of agriculture, his tenants were enabled easily to pay advanced rents for their farms, so that he soon cleared the estate of debt. He died at Edinburgh, 28^th December 1794, in his 68^th year. He married, first, at Edinburgh, 22d April 1759, Lady Margaret Stewart, third daughter of the sixth earl of Galloway, and by her he had a son, George, fifth earl of Aboyne, and ninth marquis of Huntly, and two daughters, Lady Catherine and Lady Margaret, the latter the first wife of William Beckford, Esq. of Fonthill-Gifford, author of ‘Vathek.’ His lordship married, secondly, Lady Mary Douglas, only surviving daughter of the ninth earl of Morton, by his first wife, Agatha, daughter of James Hallyburton of Pitcur, and had a son, the Hon. George Douglas Gordon, born in London, 10^th October 1777, who, on the death of his cousin, the Hon. Hamilton Douglas Hallyburton of Pitcur, in 1784, succeeded to his extensive property in Forfarshire, in right of his other, and in consequence assumed the name and arms of Hallyburton. He was a colonel in the army, and long M.P. for Forfarshire. On the succession of his brother of the half-blood to the marquisate of Huntly he was allowed the title and precedency of a marquis’ youngest son, 24^th June 1836. Lord Douglas Hallyburton married Louisa, only child of Sir Edward Leslie of Tarbert, county Kerry, baronet, who had no issue. He died 25^th December 1841. His widow survived him for ten years.

      George, ninth marquis of Huntly, eldest son of Charles, fourth earl of Aboyne, was born at Edinburgh 28^th June 1761. Lord Strathaven, as he was then called, entered the army at such an early age, that in December 1777, before he had completed his seventeenth year, he was promoted from an ensigncy in the first regiment of foot-guards to a company in the 81^st regiment of foot – then, we believe, a Highland regiment. In 1780 he was appointed one of the aides-de-camp to Frederick earl of Carlisle, then lord-lieutenant of Ireland. He had a troop in the ninth regiment of dragoons in 1782, when Lord Carlisle was displaced from the Irish viceroyalty; and in March next year he became major of an independent corps of foot, which was reduced at the peace of September 1783. He now visited France; and his agreeable person, sprightly manners, and admirable skill in dancing, soon rendered him as much a favourite at the court of Louis XVI. As his ill-fated ancestor, the second marquis of Huntly, had been, a hundred and fifty years before, when, as “Monsieur le marquis de Gordon,” he commanded the Scots guard in the court of Louis XIII. The attention shown to “the gay Gordon” by Maria Antoinette was one of the points of slander with which that unfortunate princess was assailed. We read, for instance, in the correspondence of Mirabeau with the count de la Marck, that “the Polignacs spoke maliciously of the queen’s delight in dancing Ecossaises with young Lord Strathaven, at the little balls which were given at Madame d’Ossun’s.” At the beginning of the Revolution he left France for England. In 1788 he exchanged from half-pay to the majority of the 35^th regiment of foot; and in April 1789 was promoted to be lieutenant-colonel of that regiment. In the same year he exchanged his lieutenant-colonelcy, for the company in the Coldstream guards held by Lieutenant-colonel Lennox, afterwards duke of Richmond and Lennox – the duel between that officer and the late duke of York, then colonel of the Coldstream, rendering it desirable that he should quit the regiment. Lord Strathaven himself left the army in 1792, about a twelvemonth after his marriage with Catherine, second daughter of the late Sir Charles Cope of Brewerne, Oxfordshire, and Overton or Orton Longueville, Huntingdonshire, baronet – a cadet of the family which had for its head the Sir John Cope so famous in the songs and annals of the rebellion of 1745.

      On the death of his father 28^th December 1794, Lord Strathaven succeeded to the titles of earl of Aboyne, and Lord Gordon of Strathaven and Glenlivet, created in the year 1660, to reward, in the person of a younger son, the signal loyalty and sufferings of the house of Huntly during the great civil war. In 1796 Lord Aboyne was chosen one of the sixteen representative peers of Scotland, an honour which he enjoyed by successive re-elections until the year 1815, when he was created a peer of the United Kingdom by the title of Lord Meldrum of Morven. In 1803 he had been appointed colonel of the Aberdeenshire militia, and continued to hold that office till his death. He also held a baronetcy of Nova Scotia, of the creation of 1625.

      George, fifth duke of Gordon, and eighth marquis of Huntly, died on the 28^th May 1836, without issue. The ducal honours, dating from 1684, had been restricted to the heirs male of the body of the first duke, and, in default of these, now expired. The title of marquis of Huntly, created in 1599, had a wider destination. It was conferred on the first marquis and his heirs male, and so now appeared to devolve on the earl of Aboyne. His lordship accordingly claimed the honour, and his claim being remitted to the lords committee of privileges, he led proof (1) that the direct male line of Huntly and Gordon, derived through Lewis, third marquis of Huntly, from George, first marquis of Huntly, the patentee, his grandfather, failed in the person of George, fifth and last duke of Gordon; (2) that the younger male descendants of the above class of heirs sprung from the fourth, third, and second dukes of Gordon, have also failed; and (3) that the claimant is the direct male descendant of Charles, first earl of Aboyne, immediately younger brother of Lewis, third marquis of Huntly, and fourth son of George, second marquis of Huntly, son and heir of the patentee, and, as such, the nearest heir male of his body. His claim was sustained, and he was accordingly declared to have right to the titles of marquis of Huntly, earl of Enzie, Viscount Melgum and Aboyne, lord of Badenoch and Aboyne. He thus became the premier marquis of Scotland, and the chief of the great House of Gordon. This accession of honours brought with it no accession of fortune, for the ancient patrimony of the Gordons, including all that remained to them of the once broad lordships of Strathbogie, Badenoch, and the Enzie, devolved through a female heir on the duke of Richmond and Lennox, and the new marquis of Huntly enjoyed only his paternal barony of Aboyne, which had been settled upon his ancestor, as the appanage of a second son, in the middle of the seventeenth century. Lord Huntly had early begun to add to his territorial possessions; but his ambition proved greater than his means, and he had scarcely attained his marquisate when his pecuniary embarrassments – springing in a great measure from ill-advised purchases of land, and the absconding of a confidential agent, disappointing him of at least £80,000 – caused him to procure a sequestration of his estates. His liabilities amounted to £517,500, and by judicious management and his extended age, about seventeen shillings in the pound, without interest, was, in the course of time, paid to his creditors. His lordship in 1827 was chosen a knight of the Thistle. He was also aide-de-camp to the queen, and a deputy lieutenant of Forfarshire and Aberdeenshire. He had never much distinguished himself in political matters, and in his latter years he withdrew altogether into private life. He died June 17^th, 1853, within a fortnight of his 93d year. By his lady, who died in 1832, he got the estate of Orton Longueville in Huntingdonshire, to which he added largely by the purchase of the two adjoining parishes. He had by her six sons and two daughters, Lady Catherine, married in 1814, to the Hon. Charles Campton Cavendish, and Lady Charlotte Sophia. The sons were: 1. Charles, first styled Lord Strathaven, and on his father’s becoming marquis of Huntly, earl of Aboyne and Enzie, who succeeded as tenth marquis of Huntly. 2. The Rev. Lord George, born in 1794, who became, in 1819, rector of Chesterton and Haddon, Huntingdonshire, which had been purchased by his father in 1803. 3. Lord John Frederick Gordon, born 15^th August 1799, captain R.N. and K.C.H., and at one period M.P. for Forfarshire, who, on succeeding, on his uncle’s death, to the estate of Pitcur, assumed the additional name of Hallyburton. He married, in 1836, Lady Augusta Fitzclarence, natural daughter of King William IV., and widow of the Hon. John Kennedy Erskine, of Dun, Forfarshire. 4. Lord Henry, born in 1802, in the military service of the Hon. East India Company at Bengal. 5. Lord Cecil, born in 1806, who, on his marriage in 1841, to the daughter of Maurice Crosby Moore, assumed the additional name of Moore. 6. Lord Francis Arthur, born in 1808, married in 1835, the only daughter of Sir William Keir Grant, K.C.B., and in 1837 became a captain 1^st life-guards.

      Charles, tenth marquis of Huntly, born at Orton in 1792, was educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he graduated M.A. in 1812. When Lord Strathaven (the second title of the earl of Aboyne), he was M.P. for East Grinstead, from 1818 to 1830, and sat for Huntingdonshire in the latter year, but was unsuccessful in the election of 1831. He was a lord in waiting to the queen, but resigned in 1841; a deputy-lieutenant of Aberdeenshire. He married, 1^st, in 1826, Lady Elizabeth Henrietta, eldest daughter of the first marquis Conyngham, without issue. She died in 1839, and his lordship married, secondly, in 1844, Mary Antionetta, only surviving daughter of the Rev. Peter William Pegus, by his wife, the countess-dowager of Lindsay, issue, charles, earl of Aboyne and Enzie, born March 5, 1847, six other sons, and four daughters.