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The below is one of those very rare items; an early Gunn primary source historical document.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....
