Skip to main content

‹‹‹ prev (20) Page 6Page 6

(22) next ››› Page 8Page 8

(21) Page 7 -
The Montgomery Manuscripts. 7
and was purchased from him a.d. 1586 18 (as hath been mentioned out of John Johnston's book's 1
of Encomiums on the Scottish heroes aforesaid), and his brother Robert dying a.d. 1596, both
without male issue to inherit the honour and title of Earl, the same being extinct (or asleep) for
divers years; nevertheless, the said Hugh left one only daughter, who succeeded him in the estate.
This lady was marry'd to Seaton, Earl of Winton the 20th, according to the said list in that de-
gree, and was his 2nd Countess. She bore to him Alexander, restored to his honour and degree,
which had always been prior to Glencairne. 20
I well knew this Alexander (he was commonly called Grey Steel 21 for his truth and courage)
notice of the house to which it was suspected he had fled,
it was beset and environed, and John Pollock of that Ilk
— a bold, daring man, who was son-in-law of the house of
Langschaw at that time — in a fury of passion and revenge,
found him out within a chimney. How soon he was
brought down, they cut him to pieces on the very spot.
The resentment went so very high against every one that
was suspected to have any the least accession to this hor-
rid bloody fact, that the Lady Langschaw, that was a Cun-
ningham of the house of Aiket, was forced, for the security
of her person and the safety of her life to abscond. It was
given out that she was gone over to Ireland ; but she was
concealed in the house of one Robert Barr, at Pearce Bank,
a tenant and feuar of her husband's, for many years. But
before her death, she was overlookt, and returned to her
own house, whicli was connived at ; but never durst present
herself to any Montgomerie ever after that. This is a
genuine account of this long lasting and bloody feud, and
it is nowhere else extant, in all it cirumstances, but in this
memorial. "
18 A.D. 1586. — There is here evidently a gap in what
the author had originally written. The date 1586 is that
of the murder at the Ford of Annock above-mentioned,
which occurred on the 1 8th of April in that year. Mrs.
E. G. S. Reilly, at p. 20 of her Genealogical History, states
that the event occurred on the 19th ; T. Harrison Mont-
gomery, Genealogical History, p. 61, mentions the 12th of
April as the date ; while Fraser, Memorials, vol. i., p. 49,
agrees with the author of the Montgomery Manuscripts in
placing it on the iSth. See first edition, p. 92.
19 John Johnstoiv's book. — John Johnson, or Johnston,
of Aberdeen, published a volume of excellent poems, en-
titled Heroes ex omni Historid ScoticA Lectissimi, 4to,
Lugd. Batav., 1603. His "Encomiums on the Scottish
Heroes" commence with Ferchard, who lived at the
close of the third century, and end with an account of
the valorous Scottishmen who fell in the civil wars of
the Netherlands, during the author's own time. To each
poem he prefixed a short history of the hero therein cele-
brated, which added very much to the interest of the
general work. — Nicolson, Scottish 'Historical Library,
fol., 1786, p. 20.
20 Prior to Glencairne. — The author had here entered
into a somewhat lengthened statement of the cause or
causes which induced the earl of Glencairn to dispute the
precedency with the earl of Eglinton ; but a portion of
this statement is evidently wanting, and what remains, re-
ferring to the family of the fourth earl, is as evidently un-
founded, — if, indeed, we have his words correctly given,
which is very doubtful. Hugh, slain at Annock, was
fourth Hugh in succession, and fourth earl ; by his death,
and that of his brother Robert, the title could not have
become "extinct," or "asleep," for Hugh, the fourth
earl, left a son also named Hugh, the fifth earl. The
latter married his cousin-german, Margaret, daughter of
his uncle Robert, master of Giffen ; but having no issue,
he, Hugh, fifth earl, settled his estates on Alexander, son
of his aunt Margaret, countess of Wintoun, and by charter
had the titles so settled on him also, with former prece-
dency. The author supposes that Margaret, countess of
Wintoun, was daughter of the fourth earl of Eglinton ;
but she was daughter of the third earl, and sister of the
fourth earl slain at Annock. These transactions are so
well known, that (provided the author's statement be cor-
rectly given) his confounding the families of the third and
fourth earl cannot be easily accounted for. — MS. Notes of
Col. F. 0. Montgomery. Lady Margaret Montgomerie,
who became countess of Wintoun, was celebrated for her
great beauty and amiability, her charms forming the theme
of many of the effusions of her cousin, Alexander Mont-
gomery, the poet. Her son, Alexander Seton, who suc-
ceeded to the earldom of Eglinton in 1615, took with that
title the name and arms of Montgomery. James VI.
ordered the Scottish Privy Council to forbid him using the
title of earl of Eglinton, as he was not the heir-male of
that family. The Council summoned him as Mr. Alexander
Seton, but he refused to appear by that title, stating that
he had been served heir to the estates and titles of the
late earl. But, besides denying him the title, the Court
attempted to deprive him of the more substantial rights of
property, by conferring the lordship of Kilwinning, which
belonged to the late earl, on sir Michael Balfour of Bur-
leigh. After repeatedly remonstrating against this injus-
tice, the sixth earl appeared suddenly before Somerset,
the king's chief favourite, telling him that, although he
(Eglinton) was little skilled in the subtleties of law, or the
niceties of court etiquette, he knew the use of his sword.
After that interview, Seton's rights of property and claims
to the title were quickly and fully acknowledged by the
king. — Paterson, Parishes and Families of Ayrshire, vol.
ii., p. 237; Fraser, Memorials, vol. i., p. 61.
21 Grey Steel. — Family tradition affirms that the sixth
earl of Eglinton obtained this epithet, not so much from
the colour of his armour, as from his well-known readiness
to appeal to the arbitrament of the sword in the settle-
ment of all weighty disputes, public or private. He is the
greatest, and certainly the most historical, of all the earls
belonging to his family, with, perhaps, the exception of
the first lord Eglinton. Of him (Greysteel) there is the
following notice in the Eroomlands MS.: — "This earl
was among the number of those peers who engaged them-
selves against the king (Charles I.) in the year 1638, upon

Images and transcriptions on this page, including medium image downloads, may be used under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence unless otherwise stated. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence