Question for those who only wear tartans in their bloodline

[Tobus]

I fall under the 2nd category because I do not have a strong claim to any one clan. (Surname is Gunn but my Wilson is Swedish)(Colquhoun is the most ancient via the paternal rule, but that is on my mothers side and is several generations removed from Scotland) (other name and blood ties)

I am going to probably do the dna testing to try to ascertain whether Gunn or Colquhoun would be more appropriate, and then get a really nice kilt in that tartan. Both of those societies said I am welcome.

OK, so if your surname is Gunn, and the Gunn clan association says you're welcome, then I'm afraid I don't understand your dilemma. How is this not a "strong claim to any one clan"?

I mean, if you want to choose to identify with another clan, that's your business, but I'm not sure why Gunn wouldn't be your default. Is it just that you don't like their tartan or something?

[duffy794]

Thank you bcac! that helps

Tobus,

Part of me wants to be sure that is where I belong. Wilson is a very common name and I think the dna testing has showed many different familys. I am not positive that my Wilson were part of the Gunn Wilsons. If that makes sense. My Wilson is swedish and since the Gunn's were viking there is a possiblity that they are related. (also the same rational as for the Innes)

I can trace the Colquhoun tie to the shores of Loch Lomond and that person has a name that is an accepted sept of Colquhoun, so I feel fairly confident that there is a tie there, but that tie is maternal.

It may be partly the romantic american in me that thinks if I join a clan society my ancestors were actually there and were part of the history of that clan.

If I had not traced my genealogy to a person that I could "prove" was part of the Colquhoun clan then Gunn would be my choice.

I started in genealogy and came to the clans after.

OK, so if your surname is Gunn, and the Gunn clan association says you're welcome, then I'm afraid I don't understand your dilemma. How is this not a "strong claim to any one clan"?

I mean, if you want to choose to identify with another clan, that's your business, but I'm not sure why Gunn wouldn't be your default. Is it just that you don't like their tartan or something?

[duffy794]

I am looking at doing the national genographic project dna test for genealogy purposes anyway. So I figured I could wait on a really nice kilt until then. That would hopefully tell me if the Wilson line was Norse or Gaelic or English or what.

[Grizzly]

Ray i think you are over thinking this. You surname is Wilson therefore you can rightly wear any Wilson tartan or any tartan of the clan to which the sept of Wilson belongs too. If that is more than one clan then great you have an even wider choice. You don't have to belong to any clan association to wear it either.

As others have said it's up to you what you want to wear and no one can tell you any different.

[duffy794]

lol I think you are right. I appreciate all the input and I think I will just go with it.

[Tobus]

Tobus,

Part of me wants to be sure that is where I belong. Wilson is a very common name and I think the dna testing has showed many different familys. I am not positive that my Wilson were part of the Gunn Wilsons. If that makes sense. My Wilson is swedish and since the Gunn's were viking there is a possiblity that they are related. (also the same rational as for the Innes)

Ah, I guess I misread your previous reply. I thought you were stating that your surname was actually Gunn. If it's Wilson, but you have reason to doubt that it's from a Scottish Wilson, then I understand.

I can trace the Colquhoun tie to the shores of Loch Lomond and that person has a name that is an accepted sept of Colquhoun, so I feel fairly confident that there is a tie there, but that tie is maternal.

If you have no provable paternal tie, then there's nothing wrong with choosing the provable maternal tie. Even in Scottish tradition, as I understand it, this is the norm. Whichever tie you have that is closest and/or strongest is the one to choose.

I am looking at doing the national genographic project dna test for genealogy purposes anyway. So I figured I could wait on a really nice kilt until then. That would hopefully tell me if the Wilson line was Norse or Gaelic or English or what.

That sounds like an interesting thing to take part in, but from what I've seen of it, it isn't necessarily going to give you rock-solid answers. Especially considering that many of these bloodlines were all mixed in. There are no such thing as separate Norse, Gaelic, and English DNA strains. A DNA test could tell you that you have Norse background, but that won't tell you whether your ancestors made it through Scotland or not.

[MacGumerait]

Duffy , please forgive me , but after reading these latest posts , I am still a bit confused about your surname ( which means your current last name ) , is it Gunn or is it Wilson ?

If you want to do the DNA testing , there are many levels of this testing . There are many members here on this forum that are quite knowledgable on DNA testing and could possibly help shed some light . MacSpadger and Dram ( memebers here ) first come to my mind , but there are several .

Here is a link from the XMarks forum discussing DNA testing , be patient when reading as it is 11 pages long, but it is informative .


http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f...nealogy-69584/

Hope this helps you in your DNA search .

By the way , if your last name is Gunn , I really like the Gunn Modern tartan ! I know it's blue / green based rather than the red based that you were wanting , but it is a handsome tartan .

Best of luck to you on your search !

Regards , Mike

[Phil]

It is certainly touching to see such lengths being explored, even to the extent of possible DNA testing, before choosing a suitable tartan to wear. No doubt this is either out of a desire to explore one's roots or from a respect for Scottish customs and traditions. As to actual clan membership, however, unless one is a clan chief or a close relation of one with a proven genealogical record I doubt that there is any real way of proving descent from amember of a particular clan. A surname helps to point you in the right direction and no-one is going to dispute your right to wear the particular tartan that your name relates to. That alone, however, is no proof of clan membership as people often moved about the country for various reasons such as persecution, work etc. and, as nobody actually 'joined' a clan or was entered in a 'membership list' like joining a golf club there is little more than a possible association with a name and locality to rely upon as the best you can do to decide.

[HenryT]

Very well said Phil. *** as they say.

[Tam Piperson]

I wouldn't fret too much about seeking any greater justification for wearing a certain tartan more than choosing one that serves to identify the surname that you happen to bear.

The idea of named tartans seems to have first originated with the fact that each of the old Highland regiments wore some specific variation of the Government tartan, with distinguishing overstripes or color variations to the original pattern. Since the Highland regiments were typically named for their founders, the tartans worn by those regiments took on the regiment's name; i.e. the Gordon Highlander's tartan for example, or the Fraser Highlander's tartan, or John Mackenzie, Lord MacLeod's Highlander's tartan. or John Murray the Duke of Atholl's Highlander's tartan.

Within a decade or so of the begining of the 19th century the idea that tartans bore the names of certain Highland regiments came to be transferred to the notion that tartans were associated with certain Scottish clans; and thus the notion of named Clan tartans was born.

Also, unless I'm mistaken, the DNA tests that are currently available probably wouldn't be able to pinpoint either an exact clan association or even a precise geographical origin, since many clans are descended from a common ancestor whose descendants then went on to found other clans.

Even the chiefs of some clans are not direct patrilineal descendants of the founder of the clan. The late John MacLeod of MacLeod for example was actually born John Wolrige-Gordon, a younger son of Joan Walter and Captain Robert Wolrige-Gordon. His mother, Joan being one of two daughters born to the late Dame Flora MacLeod and her husband Hubert Walter.

Since Dame Flora inherited the chiefship of the Clan MacLeod from her father Sir Reginald MacLeod, the line would have died off in Dame Flora's side of the family and the chiefship would have passed to one of her MacLeod cousins. In order to prevent this, her grandson, John Wolrige-Gordon, legally changed his surname to MacLeod of MacLeod and thus claimed the chiefship of the Clan MacLeod when his maternal grandmother died.

The Chief of the Clan Hay, Merlin Hay, the Earl of Erroll, likewise was born Merlin Moncreiffe, the eldest son of Sir Iain Moncreiffe of that Ilk and his wife Diana Hay, 23rd Countess of Erroll. Merlin later changed his surname to his mother's maiden name of Hay so that he could claim the Earldom of Erroll; while his younger brother, Peregrine was allowed to inherit the chiefship of the Moncreiffes from their father on his death.