And concerning the previously mentioned Sweyne Assleifsson - he was a great pirate (think 'Pirates of the Caribbean'); the sort of person from whom clans could originate. But Gunns are not Sweynessonn / Swanson they are Gunns. If you believe the Gunn mythic history we are named after Sweyne's anonymous grandson. This anonymous grandson (Gunni Andresson) did nothing bar marry well. Nobody, but nobody, gets family named / surnamed after an anonymous person especially when the grandfather was so well known. And, as often said, this supposed 'Gunn Chief' line died out in Norway with Snaekoll Gunnarson see http://clangunn.weebly.com/why-gunns-are-not-of-norse--orkney-descent.html
Another reason why Sweyne Assleifsson, Gunni Andresson or Snaekoll Gunnarson descent option does not work for the Gunns is that 'Many Scottish surnames originated in patronymics, whereby a son’s surname derived from the father’s forename, e.g. John Donaldson’s son might be Peter Johnson, whose son might be Magnus Peterson, and so on. Patronymics present something of a challenge for the family historian in that the surname changed with each successive generation. This practice died out in Lowland Scotland after the 15th century, as patronymic surnames became permanent family names. It persisted, however, in the Highlands & Islands well into the 18th century..' http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/Content/Help/index.aspx?r=551&560
So according to mythic Gunn Norse / Viking / Asleiffsson history the Gunn patronymic surname was fixed roughly 600 years before everyone else's surnames / family names were fixed in the Highlands of Scotland and also when all Scottish Highland society was doing something totally different to the Gunns for family names / surnames. That's impossible to believe but that's what you have to believe if you support the fairy story that the Gunns originated from Assleifsson and / or had Norse / Viking origin...
to read that Mr Gunn of Banniskirk’s new coat of arms is decided and that the ‘supporters’
for it would be ‘a
Norse warrior and a Pictish woman … representing our (Gunn) descent from Sweyne
Asliefsson and the Pictish Mormaers of Caithness.’
There isn’t a snowball’s
chance in hell that Gunn origin is from Sweyne Asliefsson and the Pictish
Mormaer descent is even more implausible so the ‘supporters’ sum up the fiction,
and the ongoing farce, which some accept as Gunn history. For why the whole Gunn Orkney / Norse / Viking
/ Asliefsson origin is a load of utter tosh see http://clangunn.weebly.com/clan-gunn-has-no-orkney-origin.html
The Pictish Mormaer (aristocracy) idea is so ludicrous I haven’t yet dealt with
it on my sites, sorry! I agree we descend from the Picts but it’s ‘normal Picts’
as Gunn origin is from a non-kindred tribe of early settlers of Sutherland / Strathnaver
/ Caithness. See http://clangunn.weebly.com/real-origin-of-the-clan-gunn.html
documentary evidence includes primary sources from the Sutherland Estate
archives held in the National Library of Scotland. I am confident that this
material has not been explored for Clan Gunn Chief issues before.
means that the premise underpinning the Clan Gunn Convention’s behaviour and
motion – that all Clan Gunn Chief descent knowledge was known - was wrong. No
opportunity was given at the Convention to discuss any new information.
rejecting the original Clan Gunn Chief descent lines (which is what supporting
the modern Chief invention is doing) one is rejecting the traditional history
of the Clan Gunn.
descendants of the original Clan Gunn Chief have a right to feel dispossessed –
their past has been wrongly reduced to unimportant by the Convention’s motion.
challenge to Lord Lyon’s consequent interlocutor about the Clan Gunn Chief (an
interlocutor is not a final statement in Scottish law) can be made in the Court
of Sessions. Such a challenge has been
made in the past about a very similar case and Lord Lyon’s capacity to make a
call in a disputed Clan Chief argument was denied.
Convention had no agenda and, at the time of writing, neither the minutes from
it nor Lord Lyon’s interlocutor have been published where they can be readily
found which seems an amazing lack of transparency in this day and age.
branch of the Osclay Gunns is of major cultural importance in Australia, namely
the family of Aeneas Gunn of ‘We of the Never-Never’. Mrs Aeneas Gunn’s
colonial classic holds a warm place in Australian hearts – in American terms
think writers like James Fenimore Cooper or Nathaniel Hawthorne. How would
Americans feel to have the family history of such authors treated with
As they say 'The latest images of Scottish births, marriages and deaths are available from 1 January. This year they consist of births registered in 1915, marriages in 1940, and deaths in 1965. The 1940 marriages are very significant because that year saw the introduction of civil marriages by registrars.'