The Kincardine at which this charter is alleged to have been signed is supposed to be the place of that name situated on the River Dee; for about this time an incident is reported to have occurred in the Forest of Mar in connection with which it is traditionally stated that the Mackenzies adopted the stag's head as their coat armour. The legend is as follows:

Alexander was on a hunting expedition in the forest, near Kincardine, when an infuriated stag, closely pursued by the hounds, made straight in the direction of the King, and Cailean Fitzgerald, who accompanied the Royal party, gallantly interposed his own person between the exasperated animal and his Majesty, and shot it with an arrow in the forehead. The King in acknowledgment of the Royal gratitude at once issued a diploma in favour of Colin granting him armorial bearings which were to be, a stags head puissant, bleeding at the forehead where the arrow pierced it, to be borne on a field azure, supported by two greyhounds. The crest to be a dexter arm bearing a naked sword, surrounded by the motto "Fide Parta, Fide Acta," which continued to be the distinctive bearings of the Mackenzies of Seaforth until it was considered expedient, as corroborating their claims on the extensive possessions of the Macleods of Lewis, to substitute for the original the crest of that warlike clan, namely, a mountain in flames, surcharged with the words, "Luceo non uro," the ancient shield, supported by two savages, naked, and wreathed about the head with laurel, armed with clubs issuing fire, which are the bearings now used by the representatives of the High Chiefs of Kintail. The incident of the hunting match and Colin Fitzgerald's gallant rescue of Alexander III. was painted by West for "The last of the Seaforths" in one of those large pictures with which the old Academician employed and gratified his latter years. The artist received o8oo for the noble painting, which is still preserved in Brahan Castle, and in his old age he expressed his willingness to give the same sum for it in order to have it exhibited in his own collection.

The first notice of the reputed charter to Colin Fitzgerald is in the manuscript history of the Mackenzies, by George, first Earl of Cromartie, already quoted, written about the middle of the seventeenth century. All the later genealogists appear to have taken its authenticity for granted, and quoted it accordingly. Dr Skene, the most learned and accurate of all our Highland historians, expresses his decided opinion that the charter is forged and absolutely worthless as evidence in favour of the Fitzgerald origin of the clan. At pages 223-25 of his Highlanders of Scotland, he says --

"The Mackenzies have long boasted of their descent from the great Norman family of Fitzgerald in Ireland, and in support of this origin they produce a fragment of the Records of Icolmkill, and a charter by Alexander III. to Colin Fitzgerald, the supposed progenitor of the family, of the lands of Kintail. At first sight these documents might appear conclusive, but, independently of the somewhat suspicious circumstance that while these pages have been most freely and generally quoted, no one has ever seen the originals, and the fragment of the Icolmkill Record merely says that among the actors in the battle of Largs, fought in 1263, was `Peregrinus et Hibernus nobilis ex familia Geraldinorum qui proximo anno Hibernia pulsus apud regni benigne acceptus hinc usque in curta permansit et in praefacto proelio strenue pugnavit,' giving not a hint of his having settled in the Highlands, or of his having become the progenitor of any Scottish family whatever while as to the supposed charter of Alexander III., it is equally inconclusive, as it merely grants the lands of Kintail to Colin Hiberno, the word `Hiberno' having at the time come into general use as denoting the Highlanders, in the same manner as the word `Erse' is now frequently used to express their language; but inconclusive as it is, this charter," he continues, "cannot be admitted at all, as it bears the most palpable marks of having been a forgery of a later time, and one by no means happy in its execution. How such a tradition of the origin of the Mackenzies ever could have arisen, it is difficult to say but the fact of their native origin and Gaelic descent is completely set at rest by the Manuscript of 1450, which has already so often been the means of detecting the falsehood of the foreign origins of other clans."

Cosmo Innes, another high authority, editor of the Orgines Parachiales Scotia, the most valuable work ever published dealing with the early history of Scotland, and especially of the Highlands, came to a similar conclusion, and expresses it even more strongly than Dr Skene.

At pages 392-3, Vol. II., he says "The lands of Kintail are said to have been granted by Alexander III. to Colin, an Irishman of the family of Fitzgerald, for services done at the battle of Largs. The charter is not extant, and its genuineness has been doubted." In a footnote, this learned antiquarian gives the text of the document, in the same terms as those in which they have been already quoted from another source, and which, he says, is "from a copy of the 17th century." "If the charter be genuine," he adds, "it is not of Alexander III., or connected with the battle of Largs (1263).

Two of the witnesses, Andrew, Bishop of Moray, and Henry de Baliol, Chamberlain, would correspond with the 16th year of Alexander II." He further says that "the writers of the history of the Mackenzies assert also charters of David II. (1360) and of Robert II. (1380) to `Murdo filius Kennethi de Kintail,' but without furnishing any description or means of testing their authenticity. No such charters are recorded."

This is emphatic enough and to every unprejudiced mind absolutely conclusive. The sixteenth year of the reign of Alexander II. was 1230; for he ascended the throne in 1214. It necessarily follows that the charter, if signed at all, must have been signed thirty-three years before the battle of Largs, and thirty-six years earlier than the actual date written on the document itself. If it had any existence before it appeared in the Earl of Cromartie's manuscript of the seventeenth century, it must have been written during the lives of the witnesses whose names attest it.

That is, according to those who maintain that Colin Fitzgerald was the progenitor of the Mackenzies, thirty-one years before that adventurer ever crossed the Irish Channel, and probably several years before he was born, if he ever existed elsewhere than in the Earl of Cromartie's fertile imagination.

But this is not all. It has long been established beyond any possible doubt that the Earls of Ross were the superiors of the lands of Kintail during the identical period in which the same lands are said to have been held by Colin Fitzgerald and his descendants as direct vassals of the Crown. Ferchard Mac an t-Sagairt, Earl of Ross, received a grant of the lands of Kintail from Alexander II. for services rendered to that monarch in 1222, and he is again on record as their possessor in 1234, four years after the latest date on which the reputed charter to Colin Fitzgerald, keeping in view the witnesses whose names appear on the face of it, could possibly have been a genuine document. Even the most prominent of the clan historians who have so stoutly maintained the Fitzgerald theory felt bound to admit that, "it cannot be disputed that the Earl of Ross was the Lord paramount under Alexander II., by whom Farquhard Mac an t-Sagairt was recognised in the hereditary dignity of his predecessors, and who, by another tradition," Dr George Mackenzie says, "was a real progenitor of the noble family of Kintail." That the Earls of Ross continued lords paramount long after the death of Colin Fitzgerald, which event is said to have taken place in 1278, will be incontestibly proved.

But meantime let us return to the Origines Parochiales Scotiae. There we have it stated on authority which no one whose opinion is worth anything will for a moment call in question. The editor of that remarkable work says: -- "In 1292 the Sheriffdom of Skye erected by King John Baliol, included the lands of the Earl of Ross in North Argyle, a district which comprehended Kintail and several other large parishes in Ross (Acts of Parliament of Scotland, Vol. 1. p. 917). Between 1306 and 1329 King Robert Bruce confirmed to the Earl of Ross all his lands including North Argyle (Robertson's Index, p. 16, No. 7; Register of Moray, p. 342). in 1342, William, Earl of Ross, the son and heir of the deceased Hugh, Earl of Ross, granted to Reginald, the son of Roderick (Ranald Rorissoune or MacRuaraidh) of the Isles, the ten davochs (or pennylands) of Kintail in North Argyle (Robertson's Index, p. 48, No. 1; p. 99; p. 100, No. 1).

The grant was afterwards confirmed by King David II. (Robertson's Index). About the year 1346 Ranald was succeeded by his sister Amie, the wife of John of Isla (Gregory p. 27). Between the years 1362 and 1372, William, Earl of Ross, exchanged with his brother Hugh of Ross, Lord of Phylorth, and his heirs, his lands of all Argyle, with the Castle of Ellandonnan, for Hugh's lands in Buchan (Balnagown Charters). In 1463 the lands of Kintail were held by Alexander Mackenzie (Gregory, p, 83)," when the Mackenzies obtained the first authentic charter on record as direct vassals from the Crown.

During the whole of this period--for two hundred years--there is no trace of Colin Fitzgerald or any of his descendants as superiors of the lands of Kintail in terms of Alexander III.'s reputed charter of 1266, the Mackenzies holding all that time from and as direct vassals of their relatives, the Earls of Ross, who really held the position of Crown vassals which, according to the upholders of the Fitzgerald theory, had that theory been true, would have been held by Colin and his posterity. But neither he nor any of his reputed descendants appear once on record in that capacity during the whole of these two centuries. On the contrary, it has now been proved from unquestionable authentic sources that Kintail was in possession of the Earls of Ross in, and for at least two generations before, 1296; that King Robert the Bruce confirmed him in these lands in 1306, and again in 1329; that in 1342 Earl William granted the ten davochs or pennylands of Kintail--which is its whole extent--to Reginald of the Isles; that this grant was afterwards confirmed by David II.; and that between the years 1362 and 1372 the Earl of Ross exchanged the lands of Kintail, including the Castle of Ellandonnan, with his brother Hugh for lands in Buchan.

These historical events could never have occurred had the Mackenzies occupied the position as immediate vassals of the Crown contended for by the supporters of the Fitzgerald theory of the origin of the clan. It is admitted by those who uphold the claims of Colin Fitzgerald that the half of Kintail belonged to Farquhar O'Beolan, Earl of Ross, after what they describe as the other half had been granted by the King to Colin Fitzgerald. But as it is conclusively established that the ten pennylands, being the whole extent of Kintail were all the time, before and after, in possession of the Earls of Ross, this historical myth must follow the rest.

Even the Laird of Applecross, in his MS. history of the clan, written in 1669, although he adopts the Fitzgerald theory from his friend and contemporary the Earl of Cromartie, has his doubts. After quoting the statement, that "the other half of Kintail at this time belonged to O'Beolan, whose chief, called Farquhar, was created Earl of Ross, and that his lands in Kintail were given by the King to Colin Fitzgerald," he says, "this tradition carries enough of probability to found historical credit, but I find no charter of these lands purporting any such grounds for that the first charter of Kintail is given by this King Alexander to this Colin, anno 1266." That is, Alexander III. But enough has been said on this part of the subject. Let us, however, briefly quote two well-known modern writers. The late Robert Carruthers, LL.D., Inverness, had occasion several years ago to examine the Seaforth family papers for the purpose of reviewing them in the North British Quarterly Review. He did not publish all that he had written on the subject, and he was good enough to present the writer, when preparing the first edition of this work, with some valuable MS. notes on the clan which had not before appeared in print. In one of these notes Dr Carruthers says --

"The chivalrous and romantic origin of the Clan Mackenzie, though vouched for by certain charters and local histories, is now believed to be fabulous. It seems to have been first advanced in the 17th century, when there was an absurd desire and ambition in Scotland to fabricate or magnify all ancient and lordly pedigrees. Sir George Mackenzie of Tarbat, the Lord Advocate, and Sir George Mackenzie, the first Earl of Cromartie, were ready to swear to the descent of the Scots nation from Gathelus, son of Cecrops, King of Athens, and Scota his wife, daughter of Pharaoh, King of Egypt; and, of course, they were no less eager to claim a lofty and illustrious lineage for their own clan. But authentic history is silent as to the two wandering Irish Knights, and the reputed charter (the elder one being palpably erroneous) cannot now be found. For two centuries after the reigns of the Alexanders, the district of Kintail formed pin of the lordship of the Isles, and was held by the Earls of Ross. The Mackenzies, however, can he easily traced to their wild mountainous and picturesque country--Ceann-da-Shail--the Head of the two Seas."

This is from an independent, impartial writer who had no interest whatever in supporting either the one theory or the other. Sir William Fraser, the well-known author of so many valuable private family histories, incidentally refers to the forged charter in his Earls of Cromartie, written specially for the late Duke of Sutherland. He was naturally unwilling to offend the susceptibilities of the Mackenzie chiefs, all of whom had hitherto claimed Colin Fitzgerald as their progenitor, but he was forced to admit the inconclusive character of the disputed charter, and that no such charter was granted to Colin Fitzgerald by Alexander III. Sir William says:--"In the middle of the seventeenth century, when Lord Cromartie wrote his history, the means of ascertaining, by the names of witnesses and other ways, the true granter of a charter and the date were not so accessible as at present. The mistake of attributing the Kintail charter to King Alexander the Third, instead of King Alexander the Second, cannot be regarded as a very serious error in the circumstances." Sir William, it will be observed, gives up the charter from Alexander III. The mere admission that it is not of Alexander III. is conclusive against its ever having been granted to Colin Fitzgerald at all, for, as already pointed out, that adventurer, if he ever existed, did not, even according to his stoutest supporters, cross the Irish Channel, nor was he ever heard of on this side of it, for more than thirty years after the date written on the face of the document itself could possibly have been genuine, the witnesses whose names appear as attesting it having been in there graves for more than a generation before the battle of Largs was fought.

When the ablest upholders of the Colin Fitzgerald theory are obliged to make such admissions and explanations as these, they explain away their whole case and they must be held to have practically given it up for once admit, as Sir William Fraser does, that the charter is of the reign of Alexander II. (1230), it cannot possibly have any reference to Colin Fitzgerald, who, according to those who support the Irish origin of the clan, only arrived in Scotland from Ireland in 1262 and it is equally absurd and impossible to maintain that a charter granted in 1230 could have been a reward for services rendered or valour displayed at the battle of Largs, which was fought in 1263, to say nothing of the now admittedly impossible date and signatures written on the face of the document itself; and Sir William Fraser having, by the logic of facts, been forced to give up that crucial point, should in consistency have at the same time given up Colin Fitzgerald. And in reality he practically did so, for having stated that the later reputed charters of 1360 and 1380 are not now known to exist, he adds, "But the terms of them as quoted in the early histories of the family are consistent with either theory of the origin of the Mackenzies, whether descended from Colin Fitzgerald or Colin of the Aird." In this he is quite correct; but it is impossible to say the same thing of the earlier charter, which all the authorities worth listening to now admit to be a palpable forgery of the seventeenth century; and Sir William virtually admits as much.

There is one other fact which alone would be almost conclusive against the Fitzgerald theory. Not a single man of the name Colin is found, either among the chiefs or members of the clan from their first appearance in history until we come to Colin cam Mackenzie XI. of Kintail, who succeeded in June, 1568--a period of three hundred years after the alleged date of the reputed charter to Colin Fitzgerald. Colin Cam was a second son, his eldest brother, Murdoch, having died during his father's life and before he attained majority, when Colin became heir to the estates. It was then, as now, a common custom to name the second son after some prominent member of his mother's family, and this was, no doubt, what was done in the case of Colin Cam, the first Colin who appears--as late as the middle of the sixteenth century--in the genealogy of the Mackenzies. His mother was Lady Elizabeth Stewart, daughter of John, Earl of Atholl, by Lady Mary Campbell, daughter of Archibald, second, and sister of Colin, third Earl of Argyll. Colin Cam Mackenzie XI. of Kintail, and the first of the name in the family genealogy, was thus called Colin by his mother, Lady Elizabeth Stewart, after her uncle Colin, third Earl of Argyll. It scarcely needs to be pointed out how very improbable it is that, had Colin Fitzgerald been really the progenitor of the Mackenzies, his name would have been so completely ignored as a family name for more than three hundred years in face of the invariable custom among all other notable Highland houses of honouring their direct ancestors by continuing their names as the leading names in the family genealogy.

It is believed that no one who brings an independent, unprejudiced. mind to bear upon the question discussed in the preceding pages can help coming to the conclusion that the Colin Fitzgerald theory is completely disposed of. It is indeed extremely doubtful whether such a person ever existed, but in any case it has been conclusively proved by the evidence of those who claim him as their ancestor that he never could have been what they allege--the progenitor of the Mackenzies, whom all the best authorities now maintain to be of purely native Celtic origin. And if this be so, is it not unpatriotic in the highest degree for the heads of our principal Mackenzie families to persist in supplying Burke, Foster, and other authors of Peerages, Baronet ages, and County Families, with the details of an alien Irish origin like the impossible Fitzgerald myth upon which they have, in entire error, been feeding their vanity since its invention by the first Earl of Cromartie little more than two hundred years ago. For be it remembered that all these Norman and Florentine pedigrees and descents are supplied to the compilers of such genealogical works as those by members of the respective families themselves, and that the editors are not personally responsible for nor do they in any way guarantee their accuracy. It is really difficult to understand the feeling that has so long prompted most of our leading Highlanders to show such an unnatural and unpatriotic preference for alien progenitors--claiming the Norman enemies and conquerers of their country, or mythical Irish adventurers, as ancestors to be proud of. Writing of the clans who claim this alien origin the late Dr W. F. Skene, Historiographer Royal for Scotland, says--

"As the identity of the false aspect which the true tradition, assumes in all these cases implies that the case was the same all, we may assume that wherever these two circumstances are to he found combined, of a clan claiming a foreign origin and asserting a marriage with the heiress of a Highland family whose estates they possessed and whose followers they led, they must invariably have been the oldest cadet of that family, who, by usurpation or otherwise, had become de facto chief of the clan, and who covered their defect by right of blood by denying their descent from the clan, and asserting that the founder had married the heiress of its chief." [Highlands and Highlanders.]

In his later and more important work the same learned historian discusses this question at great length. He analyses all the doubtful pedigrees and origins claimed by the leading clans. Regarding the Fitzgerald theory he says, "But the most remarkable of these spurious origins is that claimed by the Mackenzies. It appears to have been first put forward by Sir George Mackenzie, first Earl of Cromarty," who, in his first manuscript, made Colin a son of the Earl of Kildare, but in a later edition, written in 1669, "finding that there was no Earl of Kildare until 1290, he corrects it by making him son of John Fitz-Thomas, chief of the Geraldines in Ireland, and father of John, first Earl of Kildare, who was slain in 1261." Dr Skene then summarises the story already known at length to the reader, quotes the Record of Icolmkill and the forged charter, and concludes --

"The same mistake is here committed as is usual in manufacturing these pedigree charters, by making it a crown charter erecting the lands into a barony. Kintail could not have been a barony at that time, and the Earl of Ross and not the king was superior, for in 1342 the Earl of Ross grants the ten davochs of the lands of Kintail to Reginald, son of Roderick of the Isles, and we find that the Mackenzies held their lands of the Earls of Ross and afterwards of the Duke of Ross till 1508, when they were all erected into a barony by King James the Fourth, who gave them a crown charter. An examination of the witnesses usually detects these spurious charters, and in this case it is conclusive against the charter. Andrew was bishop of Moray from 1223 to 1242 and there was no bishop of that name in the reign of Alexander the Third. Henry de Baliol was chamberlain in the reign of Alexander the Second, and not of Alexander the Third. Thomas Hostarius belongs to the same reign, and has been succeeded by his son Alan long before the date of this charter."

Dr Skene adds that if the Earl of Cromartie was not himself the actual inventor of the whole story, it must have taken its rise not very long before his day, for, he says, "no trace of it is to be found in the Irish MSS., the history of the Geraldine family knows nothing of it, and MacVureach, who must have been acquainted with the popular history of the western clans, was equally unacquainted with it." [Celtic Scotland, Vol. III., pp. 351-354.]

This fully corroborates all that was said in the preceding pages regarding the Fitzgerald-Irish origin of the Mackenzies and which every intelligent clansman, however biassed, must now admit in his inner consciousness to be fully and finally disposed of. Having, however, quoted Skene's earlier views on the general claim by the Highland chiefs for alien progenitors it may be well to give here his more mature conclusions from his later and greater work, especially as some people, who have not taken the trouble to read what he writes, have been saying that the great Celtic historian had seen cause to change his views on these important points in Highland genealogy since he wrote his Highlands and Highlanders in 1839. After examining them all very closely and exhaustively in a long and learned chapter of some forty pages, he says --

"The conclusion, then, to which this analysis of the clan pedigrees which have been popularly accepted at different times has brought us, is that, so far as they profess to show the origin of the different clans, they are entirely artificial and untrustworthy, but that the older genealogies may be accepted as showing--the descent of the clan from its eponymus or founder, and within reasonable limits for some generations beyond him, while the later spurious pedigrees must be rejected altogether. It may seem surprising that such spurious and fabulous origins should be so readily credited by the clan families as genuine traditions, and receive such prompt acceptance as the true fount from which they sprung; but we must recollect that the fabulous history of Hector Boece was as rapidly and universally adopted as the genuine annals of the national history, and became rooted in those parts of the country to which its fictitious events related as local traditions." [Celtic Scotland, Vol. III., p. 364.]

The final decision to which Dr Skene comes in his great work is that the clans, properly so called, were of native origin, and that the surnames adopted by them were partly of native and partly of foreign descent. Among these native Highland clans he unhesitatingly classes the Mackenzies, the clan Gillie-Andres or Rosses, and the Mathesons, all of whom belong, he says, to the tribe of Ross. In his first work on the Highlands and Highland Clans he draws the general deduction, based on all our existing MS. genealogies, that the clans were divided into several great tribes, descended from a common ancestor, but he at the same time makes a marked distinction between the different tribes which, by indica-tions traceable in each, can be identified with the earldoms or maormorships into which the North of Scotland was originally divided. By the aid of the old genealogies he divides the clans into five different tribes in the following order:--(1) The descendants of Conn of the Hundred Battles; (2) of Ferchar Fata Mac Feradaig; (3) of Cormaig Mac Obertaig; (4) of Fergus Leith Dearg; and (5) of Krycul. In the third of these divisions he includes the old Earls of Ross, the Mackenzies, the Mathesons, and several other clans, and to this classification he adheres, after the most mature consideration, in his later and greater work, the History of Celtic Scotland.

Return To Mackenzie History Index