The big Gunn legal battle of the 1670s

There was  a (possibly two linked) huge Gunn legal battle (s) involving the Mackeamish family in the 1670s and it was briefly mentioned in the 'Gunn papers' of 15 February 1911; see entry of 27 November 2012. I have repeated the key images below.  The central document is quoted on the right hand side and straddles both images.

I like this document because it is a rare item as it's an actual primary source document which mentions Gunns. Now (revised) below is a copy of an original document very similar to the above - it may even be  identical to the above - as I suspect there were two court cases which go to Edinburgh.

Now  

• Firstly this means I am inclined to like the 'Gunn papers' material as I have a copy of one document he uses. 
• Secondly it is important to note this document  / these documents is / are from the major court in Edinburgh namely the Lords of Session.  This was a major event and the Gunns lost in both cases
• There are many more documents relating to this case; around twenty-two A3 closely handwritten pages exist (much was originally on a scroll). I note a separate submission by Adam Gunn of Kinbrace is part of it. Yes, I'm attempting to read it all...
• The light read I have had is interesting already for lots of reasons; John Gunn of Navidale is alive then (and is just 'of Navidale') so he was still Chief at this time. William Gunn, an elder son of Alexander Gunn, was alive. What John Gunn of Killearnan was doing may be of interest (I can't quite work that out yet); the heir to Alexander.... There's a Donald Gunn in Kinbrace, William Gunn   and George Gunn of Borrobol also involved... 'John and Alexander Gunn both personallie apprehendit'.
• Start of next document ; 'William Sutherland ... Lord Duffus  .. Against John Gunn of Killearnan'. Now, John Gunn is the eldest son of Alexander who seems to have disappeared from the history books... (his brother is Donald Crottach...)

Anyway, you get the idea - this is a major incident in Gunn history involving lots of 'Chief' material  which has barely been scratched before and which makes a lot of page 168 of Mark Rugg Gunn's history 'outdated'. More to come...

But this post is only based on a light read; I may well change my mind once I have worked on these documents.

And yes, I've booked myself in to the opticians....

Adam Gunn Kinbrace document

This again is a useful document as it

• Clearly identifies Adam Gun of Kinbrace (as before, we have William - Adam - William)
• Shows 'William Gun my father'
• Also identifies 'my grandfather Donald' of Kinbrace
• So making the line Donald - William - Adam - William all of Kinbrace, This makes the start Donald the Scholar.
• 1678 (also on back)

So it's now a very clear line of descent for this important Gunn line.

top 

bottom

William Gunn of Kinbrace 1658 document - Achnahow lands

This is again one of those rare items; a primary source document relating to the Gunns which seem to have not been explored before. This Kinbrace line has, though, been explored; see 22 November 2012-

Concerning the next Clan Gunn Chief 2; Gunn of Kinbrace

as that provides the narrative framework for this document and the information merges well with this document.. Note that this document and the one of 22 December 2012 show primary source material rejecting the view put forward by Thomas Sinclair and Mark Rugg Gunn in their history texts.

The key points for the below documents are (although I have not deciphered every word) -

• William Gunn, of Kinbrace, took on Achnahow in Kildonan from the Earl of Sutherland in 1658. This provides support for the clarification of the Kinbrace line.
• It seems likely that his wife (previously not known) was Anna Cordover? Given the lack of a married name was the added land in consequence of what she was bringing in to a marriage?

William Gunn and Anna  ???????

back

top

bottom

In the fullness of time  - when I have deciphered all of this - I will enter my reading of it...

Alexander Gunn of Killearnan - new Gunn Mackeamish document 1652

I was told some years ago by a person high up in the Clan Gunn Society of the UK  that everything was known about Gunn history and nothing new would ever be found. I thought then that was a rubbish idea due to the power of the internet which enables greater sharing of knowledge and with the amount of research being done by people on genealogical websites. I know more information can be found including the real Gunn Chief, details of which I have already put on this site. What I think that person really meant was 'no new information has been given to the Clan Gunn Society' which reflects that not all information is given to that society for many reasons but that's an entry for another time...

The below is one of those very rare items; an early Gunn primary source historical document. It's a nice change from the invented Gunn history of the  late 1800s. I haven't finished reading it all  but I  note

• It involves Alexander Gun (note spelling) of Killearnan. Mark Rugg Gunn considers he held the lands of 'Killearnan, Navidale and Easter Balnavaliach' (page 168). This document of 1652 (the year of 1652 is given on the back) has a different list of properties on the sixth line. The Mark Rugg Gunn properties may have been held later or earlier - or not held at all.  Given the legal nature of the document it is probable that all lands then 'owned' would have been listed.
• The document involves Alexander Gunn and John Gunn of Borbool (obviously Borobool). This is really good stuff. The John is very unlikely to be Alexander's father John (another Mackeamish) as one assumes the father would have been listed first. It can't be Alexander's son John as Alexander is born c. 1625 and the document is 1652. I It must be a relative though; who else at that time would you get into a serious legal document with?  I suspect therefore we have new information. Previously Alexander's son was viewed as George Gunn of Borrobol. It now seems more likely, given the document, that Alexander Gunn (Mackeamish) had a brother John Gunn of Borrobol - and that his son was the George Gunn previously assumed to be the brother of Alexander. This markedly alters anyone claiming to be Chief through the Borrobol line (consider Rhives).
• The 'signatures' are fascinating; Alexander is Gun; but John is Gune / Gunee / Gunes (with a line over the u) which shows both names were operating at the time. Now Gune gets very close to Smibert's argument about the origin of the Clan Gunn (which is not Norse; note that family names weren't even fixed in 1652 let alone in Norse times) see On the real origins of the Clan Gunn

Note 'Contract between Alexander and Jon Gunn to The Earl of Caithness 1652'

Top

Bottom; note the Gunn signatures on the right

Now as I am still trying to read all this I am not putting my version of it out yet as I don't want to influence your version of what you think is there.

Anyway, enjoy....

And further on the non-existent Clan Gunn crest badge

The full document  of  Coats of Arms and Crest Badges by Lord Lyon can be found at http://www.scotarmigers.net/pdfs/info-leaflet-2.pdf and it includes

•  Many established and reputable Clans do not have a Chief, where the Chief’s line has died out or been lost — possibly through long past emigration of the line who are now heirs to the Chief ship. No Chief can exist for such Clans till a claimant comes forward and proves to the Lord Lyon King of Arms that he is the senior heir, when the Lord Lyon will Officially Recognise him as the Chief  ... In some such cases, the Arms and Crest of a former Chief are known from past records, though not the present Chief. His clansmen may wear the Crest Badge of the last known Chief, which would be the same as that of his present undiscovered successor. In some cases there is no such record, and the clansmen have no Crest Badge for their Chief at all, nor will have until a Chief is discovered. (Bold is by me.)

Now I could be wrong  but given there has been no Clan Gunn Chief recognised by Lord Lyon there are no Gunn Chief granted arms by Lord Lyon so there is legally no Crest Badge for the Gunns. What currently acts as a Crest Badge for the Gunns was made up by someone. I suspect it happened in the 19th century romanticisation period of Scottish highland history but I can't prove that.  Using the current 'Gunn Crest' is therefore  an extremely questionable activity as it pretends to be that which it isn't  - and it isn't a 'Gunn Crest' badge.

*****

I also note from the same Lord Lyon source -

• The strap—and—buckle is NOT a "Garter", and it should NEVER be shown coloured blue with gold buckle and edgings like the insignium of the Order of the Garter.

See http://www.clangunn.us/ and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Garter accessed 7 May 2013.... Interesting....

Also http://www.clangunn.us/store2013.htm....