In my previous post, I traced the origin of the story and the pedigree purporting to connect the Colquhouns of Luss in Scotland with the Colhouns of Crosh in Ireland. To summarize, it originated as a hypothesis published by Charles Croslegh in 1904, then was expanded on by Orval Calhoun in 1976. With advances in information technology and increased availability of sources made since those authors’ times, we now have the ability to cross-check many pieces of this hypothesis. I began this process in the previous post by questioning what we can truly say about the inheritance of the Colquhouns’ Irish estate, Corkagh.
In this post, I will continue by examining many commonly held “facts” about the three central figures in this pedigree––Adam Colquhoun, his sister Nancy, and his supposed son, Robert––to assess what is likely to be true and what isn’t. The format I will use is to put the asserted “fact” in italics, followed by my assessment of whether it is substantiated by evidence in bold, followed by my comments on why. For the purposes of this post, the term “true” means that I personally believe it is substantiated by the evidence I have seen, and “false” means it is not. Of course, I encourage every reader to make up his or her own mind.
Adam Colquhoun
“Adam Colquhoun was a son of Alexander Colquhoun, 15th/17th of Luss.” True. Alexander’s probate records, dated May 1617, name Adam as a son. In my earlier post about Adam, I discussed that Adam Colquhoun, son of Alexander of Luss, acquired the estate of Glens in Stirlingshire, married Giles MacFarlane in 1644, and died in 1655. There are primary source records to support these dates of marriage (namely, a muniment of Clan MacFarlane) and death (namely, Adam’s probate records).
“Adam Colquhoun was born about 1601.” False. As I elaborated in my earlier post about Alexander’s family, strong circumstantial evidence indicates that Adam was Alexander’s seventh and youngest son, and his tenth child overall. Given Alexander’s marriage in 1595 and a typical two-year spacing between children, Adam was more likely to have been born about 1612. The commonly-cited date of 1601 was probably suggested by Croslegh to squeeze several generations into a limited timeframe. For details see the earlier post.
“Adam Colquhoun inherited the Irish estate of Corkagh from his father.” False. In another post, I described how the Scottish probate laws at the time required that Corkagh pass to Alexander’s eldest son and successor, Sir John Colquhoun, 16th/18th of Luss. Documents bear out that Corkagh was in the possession of Sir John from the 1620s, and I will lay these out in an upcoming post about Corkagh.
“Adam Colquhoun married a daughter of Lindsay of Bonhill and had a daughter who married Thomas Buchanan of Carbeth.” False. Again, Adam married Giles MacFarlane in 1644. Is it possible that Miss Lindsay was an earlier wife? No. The idea that Adam married Miss Lindsay originated with a case of mistaken identity by Charles Croslegh in 1904. There were many men with the name Adam Colquhoun, and Croslegh mixed up two of them. Writing in 1723, William Buchanan of Auchmar stated that Thomas Buchanan, son of Thomas Buchanan, 3rd of Carbeth, “married a Daughter of Adam Colchoun Merchant in Dumbartoun, said to be a Son of Luss’s, her Mother being Lindsay of Bonneil’s Daughter. He had by her Two Sons, John his Successor, and Walter.” (William Buchanan. A Historical and Genealogical Essay Upon the Family and Surname of Buchanan. Glasgow: William Duncan, 1723, p. 88.) However, when did this Adam live? John Guthrie Smith states,
Thomas Buchanan of Carbeth, by disposition dated 2nd December 1614, sold the Temple lands of Letter to Sir William Livingstone of Kilsyth. He married Agnes Blair, and he and his spouse are parties to a contract, 3rd March 1621…. Auchmar (p. 88) states that the last Thomas Buchanan of Carbeth married a daughter of Adam Colquhoun, merchant in Dunbarton. If this is correct, Agnes Blair must have been the second wife.
John Guthrie Smith. Strathendrick and Its Inhabitants from Early Times. Glasgow: James Maclehose and Sons, 1896, p. 347.
Because Thomas Buchanan’s eldest son, John, was married in 1632, he was probably born about 1605, give or take a few years. Working backwards, that means that Thomas and his first wife (Adam’s daughter) were born about 1575, and his father-in-law, Adam Colquhoun, merchant of Dumbarton, was born around 1550, give or take a few years. This was 60 years before the birth of Adam son of Alexander Colquhoun, 15th/17th of Luss. Clearly, the Adam Colquhoun who married Miss Lindsay and the Adam son of Alexander of Luss were two different people from two different generations.
Orval O. Calhoun goes one step further than Croslegh, calling Adam’s wife “Christian Lindsay.” This first name appears neither in Buchanan nor in Croslegh, so I suspect Orval mistook her for the Christian Lindsay, daughter of John Lindsay of Bonhill, who married John Colquhoun, 7th of Camstradden (see Fraser vol. 2, p. 189). However, this Christian was born in the early years of the 1500s, about 100 years earlier than Adam’s wife would have been. There was also a 16th century Scottish female poet named Christian Lindsay (fl. 1580-1620), but she was married to William Murray and had nothing to do with any Adam Colquhoun.
As far as evidence currently shows, Giles MacFarlane was Adam Colquhoun’s only wife.
“Adam Colquhoun was a merchant in Dumbarton, and an unsuccessful one.” False. The same case of mistaken identity that caused Croslegh to believe that Adam married Miss Lindsay also caused him to believe that Adam was a merchant. According to Buchanan of Auchmar, the Adam Colquhoun of an earlier generation who married Miss Lindsay was indeed a merchant. However, I have seen no document that describes the occupation of Adam the son of Alexander of Luss. Fraser notes a record stating, “In December 1634, Adam Colquhoun, brother to the Laird of Luss, was indebted to William Towart (Stewart) £42, 2s” (Fraser vol. 1, p. 235). Croslegh, perhaps taking this debt as evidence of poor business acumen, states, “The ownership of one thousand acres beyond the sea could not tempt the merchant of Dumbarton to give up his apparently not very successful business, in order to become a resident landlord in Ireland” (Croslegh, p. 214). Adam was not a merchant, but even if he had been, it would be a stretch to suggest that a single debt of £42 meant he was an unsuccessful businessman. Furthermore, as I noted above, Adam was not the owner of Corkagh, the 1,000-acre property in Ireland that Croslegh alludes to.
“Adam’s wife died in 1629.” False. As described above, Adam was not born until about 1612, and his only known marriage did not even occur until 1644. The idea that he had a wife who died young was probably invented by Croslegh to explain why Robert Colquhoun went to Ireland as a boy.
“Adam himself died in 1634.” False. His probate records tell us unambiguously that he died in 1655. The idea that Adam died in 1634 seems to have originated with Orval Calhoun, who states,
Records show that Robert’s father, Adam Colquhoun, brother of Sir John Colquhoun, BT, Laird of Luss, in Dec. of 1634, at the time of his death was indebted to William Stuart, Captain of Dumbarton Castle, for £42.2s. on account of Sir John Colquhoun encumbering the Estates. But this was cleared and paid off at the time, Adam’s WILL was probated in 1635….
[Adam’s wife died in 1629. It] is not recorded what caused her death at such an early age, but it sure left Adam Colquhoun, in quite a quandry [sic], with a store on his hands to operate and two very small children to raise and look after. Being that Adam was not a well man, health wise, he made his WILL and gave the Lands in Ireland to [his son] Robert in 1630, when Robert was only eight years of age. It was a good job that he did, for Adam died in December of 1634, a young man, with both health and financial troubles, as there are records to show this.
Orval O. Calhoun. OCF vol. 1, pp. 21 and 24.
Records do show that Adam incurred a debt in December 1634: as I stated above, Fraser notes that Adam was indebted to William Towart in December 1634 (Fraser vol. I, p. 235, in which he cites “Dumbarton Records, loose slips, vol. i”). However, Fraser does not state––nor is there any reason to infer––that this was at the time of Adam’s death or had anything to do with his brother encumbering Irish property.
Orval reiterates that there are “records to show” that Adam died in December 1634 amidst health and financial troubles. To be blunt, I have seen no such records. The “records” Orval mentions may be his own assertion that Adam left a will that was probated in 1635 and that bequeathed Irish land to a son named Robert. Adam’s actual probate records from 1655 do not include a will, and the inventory makes no mention either of Irish property or a son named Robert. I have considered the possibility that Orval could have mistaken some other probate record from 1635 for Adam’s will. However, the only probate record for a Colquhoun from 1635 on file with the National Records of Scotland, as per the indexes at ScotlandsPeople and elsewhere, belongs to John Colquhoun, 2nd of Kenmure. The source of Orval’s claim is unknown, at least to me.
Nancy Colquhoun and John McAuselan
“Nancy Colquhoun was a daughter of Alexander Colquhoun, 15th/17th of Luss.” True. We know this from Alexander’s will, dated May 1617.
“Nancy Colquhoun married John McAuselan, a younger son of the last Baron McAuselan, of Dunbartonshire.” Unknown, but probably false. We have no evidence as to who Nancy married, if anyone, so there is no way to gauge the truth of this statement. For what it’s worth, The Red Book of Scotland states that Nancy died unmarried. Why would anyone postulate a marriage between Nancy and a McAuselan in the first place? Croslegh mentioned an oral tradition in his family that stated the founder of his family, who he claimed to be Robert, was raised by an uncle named McAuselan. A surmised marriage between Nancy and John would have satisfied that claim.
“Alexander Colquhoun, 15th/17th of Luss, sent his son-in-law and daughter John and Nancy McAuselan to Ireland to manage the Corkagh estate for him.” False. Nancy was probably born about 1604 and would have been about 13 when her father died. Even if she did eventually marry John McAuselan, it would probably not have been before 1624 and therefore not during her father’s lifetime. According to William Buchanan of Auchmar, “the greatest Number and of best Account of [McAuselans] reside in the Counties of Tyrone, Derry, and Down in the North of Ireland. The Ancestors of the principal Men of there last were Andrew, and John M’Auselans, Sons of the Baron M’Auselan, who went out of the Paroch of Luss to that Kingdom, in the latter Part of the Reign of King James VI” (Buchanan, p. 275). James VI/I ruled Scotland from 1603-1625, so it does appear that John McAuselan’s relocation to Ireland would have occurred in the early 1620s. Where in Ireland he went, and whether he was married to Nancy Colquhoun when he did so, are open questions.
In the list of Irish counties mentioned by Buchanan, Donegal is not included. Furthermore, a muster roll of able-bodied males on the Colquhouns’ Corkagh estate from 1630 mentions no one named McAuselan. That is not to say that John could not have been a freeholder at Corkagh either before or after 1630, but Buchanan’s failure to mention Donegal as a place of McAuselan settlement argues against this.
Robert Colquhoun
“A Robert Colquhoun was made denizen of Ireland in 1630.” True. Index entries to the letters patent of denization clarify him as follows: “1630, July 14. Robert Colqunhowne, Esq., a native of Scotland. (Patent Roll 6, Car. I., 1st part, f. m. 25.).” This Robert was made an undertaker of “the small proportion of Corkagh” consisting of 1,000 acres. (James Morrin. Calendar of the Patent and Close Rolls of Chancery in Ireland in the Reign of Charles the First. Dublin: Alexander Thom, 1863, p. 538.)
“The Robert Colquhoun made denizen was the son of Adam Colquhoun.” False. Adam Colquhoun did not marry until 1644, and his only known sons were named John and Alexander (sources: Adam’s probate records, and The Red Book of Scotland). Let’s say for the sake of argument that Adam also had an illegitimate son named Robert, born before his marriage to Giles, who went unrecorded. Even so, with Adam born about 1612, such a son would likely not have been born before 1632. Therefore, this son could not have been made denizen of Ireland in 1630, and he could not have been the father of William Colhoun of Newtownstewart, who was born about 1635.
“The Colhoun family of Crosh was founded by a man from Luss named Colquhoun who went to Ireland as a young boy, in the charge of an uncle named McCausland.” Unknown, but possibly true. As I outlined in the previous post, this comes strictly from oral tradition in the Crosh family, as related by Croslegh. There is probably at least a kernel of truth to this, and the fact that William Colhoun of Newtownstewart married a McCausland does support a connection between the two families in the 17th century. This founder might have been William himself, but it was more likely his father, whose name is not stated on any primary source document. William was probably born about 1635, and his father (whatever his name was) was probably born around 1600-1605. (Actually, I now have my suspicions about who William’s father was, but you’ll have to wait a couple of weeks for my next post!)
“The Robert Colquhoun made denizen of Ireland in 1630 was that founder.” Probably false. Having come across the denization record of Robert Colquhoun from 1630, Croslegh concluded that Robert was the founder of the Crosh family and the father of William of Newtownstewart. To make this hypothesis work, he proposed a birth year for Robert of about 1622, making him a boy in 1630. However, there is no reason to assume any of this, since many other scenarios are equally possible if not more likely. Worth noting is that the name Robert was not used for any known sons, grandsons, or great-grandsons of William Colhoun, which argues against William’s father having been named Robert.
So who was Robert colquhoun?
In the section above, I tried to establish that the “Robert Colqunhowne, Esq.” made denizen of Ireland in 1630 was not the grandson of Alexander Colquhoun, 15th/17th of Luss and not the ancestor of the Colhoun family of Crosh, County Tyrone. So who was he? We know from the letter of denization that he was from Scotland, and since Undertakers came from the peerage and the gentry class, we need to look to the Scottish Colquhoun families from these classes––namely the Colquhoun of Luss family and its cadet branches––to identify him. The title “Esq.” was reserved for the eldest sons of peers and knights, but within those senior Colquhoun families, I cannot find a knight or baronet who would be a candidate for Robert’s father. Keep in mind, however, that the same index of letters patent where he was called “Robert Colqunhowne, Esq.” also referred to Alexander Colquhoun, 15th/17th of Luss as “Sir” and “knight”. Alexander was not in fact a knight, so I suggest that Robert’s title might have been similarly inflated.
By 1630, the name Robert had not been used in the Luss family for many generations. In fact, the only senior Colquhoun family where the name Robert was in common usage at that time was Colquhoun of Camstradden. Interestingly, two independent sources suggest that Robert was in fact from the Camstradden family. The first is Burke’s entry for “Colhoun of Carrickbaldoey”, which states,
By Patent dated 14 July, 1630, another member of the family, Robert Colquhowne (probably Robert Colquhoun, afterwards of Camstradden) was granted letters of denization together with Corkagh, which was then created the Manor of Corkagh, with the usual manorial rights.
Sir Bernard Burke. A Genealogical and Heraldic History of the Landed Gentry of Ireland. London: Harrison and Sons, 1912, p. 121.
The second source, interestingly enough, is noted by Croslegh himself in the following footnote:
The Venerable William Colquhoun, Archdeacon of Derry,––who tells me that he takes no personal interest in the history of the family,––has very kindly sent me a pedigree which makes the Irish branch to spring from “Robert Colquhoun of Comstroden, living in 1620.” I am unable to attach any importance to this document. It is impossible to reconcile it either with Fraser’s Monograph, or with the public annals of the nation. [Croslegh then enumerates several errors in the pedigree between the years 1120 and 1373.] It is unnecessary to examine this alleged descent more closely. I have not indeed gone into the history of the Camstradden branch. But the identification of any Robert of that line with our ancestor Robert, who received letters of denization in 1630, is negatived by all the evidence before me, whether of extant documents, or of uninterrupted and unvarying family tradition.
Croslegh, p. 211.
Croslegh is right in pointing out the errors in the very early part of the archdeacon’s pedigree. However, by using that as a reason to discard the more recent (and likely more reliable) parts of the pedigree, I think he was being overzealous. Ven. William Colquhoun (1842-1920) was from an Irish Colhoun family originating in parish Taughboyne, Co. Donegal, not from the Crosh family. Several years ago, I contacted William’s only surviving great-grandchild, but unfortunately he had no records of the family handed down from William. The fate of that pedigree is unknown, but it is possible that if research notes from Rev. Croslegh have survived, it might be among them.
I believe that the Robert Colquhoun made denizen of Ireland in 1630 was indeed from the Camstradden family, and in fact was the Robert Colquhoun (ca. 1588-1669) who in 1642 became 10th laird of Camstradden. This Robert was a close associate of the Luss family and likely a personal friend of Alexander, 15th/17th of Luss and of his son, Sir John. Robert’s father, John Colquhoun, 9th of Camstradden, was witness to the will of laird Alexander in 1617. In 1612, Robert, then fiar (heir-apparent to the laird) of Camstradden, received a charter from Alexander to the lands of Auchengavin, perhaps as a wedding present (Fraser vol. 2, p. 201). Robert was also the man who in 1653 paid off the mortgage of the lands of Aldochlay to Adam Colquhoun of Glens, son of Alexander (Fraser vol. 2, p. 202). In 1662, Robert served as bailie of barony to Alexander’s grandson Sir John Colquhoun, 17th/19th of Luss (Fraser vol. 2, p. 202). Taken together, this suggests that several generations of the Luss family had placed their trust in this Robert.
I do not know exactly why Robert Colquhoun of Camstradden should have been made Undertaker of Corkagh, a property that both before and after 1630 was clearly under the ownership of Sir John Colquhoun, 16th/18th of Luss. However, in 1630 Sir John was engaged in the purchase of several new Scottish lands from John Colquhoun of Kilmardinny “for great sums of money” (Fraser vol. 1, p. 248). Therefore, I speculate that Sir John temporarily sold Corkagh to Robert, a trusted family friend and associate, as a means of raising funds, keeping open the option of reclaiming Corkagh at a future date, which he seems to have done.
Summary
In my assessment, most of what is commonly believed about Adam, Nancy, and Robert Colquhoun is not true. Again, many of these beliefs originated with the hypothetical connection between Luss and Crosh proposed by Croslegh in 1904. This connection was not an entirely unreasonable assumption on Croslegh’s part: since Robert Colquhoun held title to Corkagh in 1630, and since Corkagh was the Irish manor previously granted to Alexander, 15th/17th of Luss, Croslegh assumed that this Robert must have been an heir and therefore a direct descendant of Alexander. Unfortunately, this does not seem to have been the case. (Worth noting here is that George Hill made the same mistaken assumption on p. 511 of his work, An Historical Account of the Plantation of Ulster, where he states without evidence, “On the 14th of July, 1630, letters patent of denization were issued to Robert Colqunhowne, son of Sir John….”)
As far as I can tell, neither Adam Colquhoun of Glens (originally of Luss) nor Robert Colquhoun of Camstradden (made denizen of Ireland in 1630) left descendants in Ireland. Robert became 10th laird of Camstradden in 1642, so if he lived in Ireland at all, he had returned to Scotland by 1642, and it appears that his children lived in Scotland as well (see Fraser vol. 2, pp. 202-204). The parentage of William Colhoun of Newtownstewart, and therefore the origin of the Colhoun family of Crosh, therefore remains unknown. However, if we are at long last willing to part with Croslegh’s story, the way will be clear for us to look for the truth. With some luck, we may find it.
*****
Once again, I express my gratitude to Paul Calhoun and to a second reader for critical reading of this post and helpful edits.
*****
© 2023 Brian Anton. All rights reserved.
*****
Genealogy of the Calhoun Family 
Thank you for your excellent research! Getting closer to the truth always is appreciated. So far YDNA is backing up your conclusions also.
LikeLike