Why Clan Gunn 'Chiefs' are not of Norse / Orkney Islands / Viking descent
The Gunn surname can not be of Orkney Islands / Norse / Viking descent (added 29 January 2019)
The first complication concerning the supposed Gunn Orkney Islands / Norse / Viking origin is the surname Gunn.
The problem 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….’[1] The Lord Lyon Court[2] has also pointed out that ‘surnames were generally adopted in the 17th century’.
What this means is simple. Gunni Andresson (born around 1180[3]) who was the supposed founder of the ‘Clan Gunn’ certainly had Snaekoll Gunnison but Snaekoll’s fictional child – I deal with his supposed son Ottar further down this page - would have had Snaekollson as his surname, and changed surnames would have continued with each generation until the 1600s-1700s. These surnames would not have been Gunn, nor early versions of it. So those who believe in the Gunn Orkney Islands / Norse / Viking origin idea have to explain how the Gunn surname was fixed roughly five or six hundred years before everyone else's surnames were in the Highlands of Scotland and also, therefore, when normal[4] Highland families like the Gunns were doing something totally different to the Gunns with regard to their surnames. That's basically impossible.
Some might argue that the Gunns did not have the surname continuously since 1200 rather Gunns decided to have a surname based on Gunni Andresson some time after his death. That’s not logical - why choose Gunni Andresson to be the foundation person of a Clan? Gunni Andresson is anonymous; there are no stories about him. All he did was marry well. But Gunni’s grandfather ‘pirate’ Sweyne Assleifsson was the sort of person from whom Clans could easily originate. But Gunns are not Sweynesson / Swanson, they are Gunns. Certainly ‘some clans take their name not from the founder of a clan but from a later descendant who substantially improved the clan’s position or was a great hero, or was an outstanding figure in one way or another’[5] but this is demonstrably not true about Gunni Andresson who was, as already said, invisible in history. And, given that surnames were not fixed until say the 1600s when was the name Gunn chosen? After all, Coroner Gunn was alive before the 1450s…
The idea that Gunn is derived from Gunni Andresson goes totally against historical understanding of surnames in Scotland and, as such, there goes Gunn links to the Orkney Islands and Norway.
SUMMARY If you accept the Orkney Islands origin myth you have to accept an impossibility about the surname Gunn. Gunn as a tribal / group name, however, explains why the name Gunn was around from before the 1450s when Coroner Gunn was alive. This tribal / group name later evolved into the surname Gunn.
[1] From Scotlands People http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/Content/Help/index.aspx?r=551&560 accessed 1 May 2014
[2] Page 4 Lyon Court booklet ‘Coats of Arms and Crest Badges’. This has common agreement – for example ‘Surnames as we understand them did not come into general use in the Highlands until the 17th century’. Page 16, Margaret MacLaren of MacLaren, The Maclarens.
[3] The year is derived from his marriage around the year 1200, see footnote 83.
[4] A few, very elite families had early fixed surnames; families with descent from Norman invaders or from the Lord of the Isles being the main examples. These families are massively detailed in history texts. Gunns are not descended from the Normans nor from the Lord of the Isles so should not have a surname at an early time.
[5] Page 16 Margaret MacLaren of MacLaren The Maclarens.
earlier material -
The more I look at the 'Clan' Gunn Norse / Orkney / Viking Gunn origin claim, the weaker it becomes;
Part Two - concerning Ottar
I thought I'd explore one of the many early problems of Gunn (non) links to Orkney / Vikings. The traditional view of 'Gunn’ Ottar is put forward by Mark Rugg Gunn who writes;
Ottar is mentioned twice in Eirspennill’s Hakon Hakon’s Son’s Saga[1]. The first occasion is when he visited Norway. ‘After that King Hakon went to Bergen. There Gillechrist and Ottar, Snaekoll’s son, and many Hebrideans, came to meet him there from the west beyond the sea and they had many letters concerning the needs of their lands. It is not at all clear what lands Ottar held, or his relationship to the King of Norway. Snaekoll had retired to Caithness to lands outside the King’s immediate jurisdiction, and it is possible that Ottar was attempting to claim some of Snaekoll’s former property’.[2]
This is supposed to be the academic proof that 'Chief Gunn' Snaekoll (Snaekoll Gunnisson) had son Ottar. Now a Snaekoll had a son Ottar but it's not the one the Gunn historians claim. The above has nothing to do with the Gunns even though it has been totally absorbed into the quasi-official histories.
There are many reasons why the above does not relate to the 'Gunns' but let's consider
Now there is a lot more on this which I am fully writing up - this is but a note - but the implication is an important one. There is no proof that Snaekoll married, there is no no proof he had a son Ottar. In fact there are some strong suggestions that Snaekoll spent the rest of his life in Norway (not least a 1239 skaldic poem ascribed to him). He probably died in 1240; he held positions (3) under the rebel Skule Bardsson who assumed the title of King and the rebellion was 'crushed' so it is reasonable to assume that those who held positions under Skule were killed.
To restate; there is no proof that Snaekoll married, had a child or returned to Scotland. There goes the Orkney / Viking link ...
[1] More accurately, Hákonar saga Hákonarsonar.
[2] Page 31-32 Mark Rugg Gunn, History of the Clan Gunn
(3) Gade, Kari Ellen. Poetry from the Kings' Sagas 2: From c. 1036 to c. 1300 (2 vols.). Part I: Poetry by Named Skalds c. 1035-1105. Part II: Poetry by Named Skalds c. 1105-1300 and Anonymous Poetry. Skaldic Poetry of the Scandinavian Middle Ages, vol.2. Turnhout: Brepols, 2009. Pp. cvii, 914. $160 ISBN 978-2-503-51897-8.
Part Three - and more on Snaekollr Gunnison / Snaekoll Gunnisson
And -
'Snaekollr Gunnison who went to Bergen in 1232 to claim Earl John's inheritance (but never seems to have come home again)'[1]
[1] Page 8, B. E. Crawford ' Medieval Strathnaver' in John R. Baldwin ed., The Province of Strathnaver, 2000,
The Scottish Society For Northern Studies.
So who is this author who suggests that Snaekoll Gunnison did not return to Scotland and so imply that the traditional Gunn link to the Orkney Islands is rubbish? Well it's -
Dr Barbara Crawford M.A., Ph.d., F.R.S.E., F.S.A., F.S.A. Scot., Member of the Norwegian Academy
Honorary Reader Barbara Crawford is Honorary Reader in History at the University of St. Andrews having spent over thirty years as a teacher in the Dept. of Mediaeval History. Since taking early retirement in 2001 she has continued to pursue her researches into the history and archaeology of the Scandinavian settlements in Scotland, and contacts across the North Sea in the Middle Ages. ...
Dr. Crawford is a Member of the Norwegian Academy and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. She was a Commissioner of the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland from 1991-2001, chaired The Treasure Trove Advisory Panel for Scotland from 1993-2001, and is currently President of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. As Honorary Director of the Strathmartine Centre for Scottish History (an independent charitable trust established by the late Dr. Ronald Cant before his death in 1999, for supporting research and education in Scottish History) (www.strathmartinetrust.org) she has been instrumental in encouraging many different Scottish history research projects. Her book on the “The Northern Earldoms. Orkney and Caithness from 870-1470 AD. Joint Earldoms and Divided Loyalties”, which reverts back to the subject of her original doctoral thesis, is currently nearing completion.
http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/history/staff/barbaracrawford.html
So it is not unreasonable to suggest she knows what she is talking about.
She first makes this Snaekollr point on page 8 of her 1971 thesis -
'Despite his part in the murder of the earl Snaekoll was not condemned to death at the trial in Bergen but "remained long with earl Skuli and King Hacon" (2) and there is no evidence that he ever returned to Orkney or Caithness' (3)
Her footnote (2) is ibid.. p. 485 (being ES ii p. 480)
but it's the the third footnote I find of interest -
(3) is ' Despite the claims of Clan Gunn to be descended from him (The Highland Clans, Moncrieffe of that ilk, p. 160)
see http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/handle/10023/2723
As I have said before,the 'Chief' Gunn - Orkney Island link fails on every count...
Part Four
‘The last sole heir-male of the line, Snaekoll Gunnason ... is last heard of in Norway in 1239.’ Page 168, Old-lore Miscellany of Orkney, Shetland, Caithness and Sutherland, Volume 10, Parts 3-5, The Club, 1938.
‘when he was arrested by the king’s men as a rebel in the active service of the rebel Duke Skuli, for which he probably paid the same penalty as his companions, after giving vent to a poetic lament, which may have been one of the earliest recorded verses of a Caithness man. With Snaekoll, the line of Erland became extinct.’[1]
[1] Page 186 Old-lore Miscellany of Orkney, Shetland, Caithness, and Sutherland, Volume 10, Parts 3-5, The Club, 1938
Part Five (added 28 February 2014) - more on Snaekollr
Hákonar saga Hákonarsonar (The Saga of Haakon Haakonarson) is an Old Norse kings' sagas, telling the story of the life and reign of King Haakon Haakonarson of Norway. The saga was written by the Icelandic historian and chieftain Sturla Þórðarson, in the 1260s. Sturla was at the court of Haakon's son Magnus when he learned of his father's death, and he is said to have immediately commissioned Sturla to write his father's saga. It is the main source to Norwegian history for the period of 1217 (Haakon's accession) to his death in 1263.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A1konar_saga_H%C3%A1konarsonar
I have been reliably informed by a Norwegian that Gunn historians have paid little attention to section 208 of this Saga, namely
Kong Håkon sendte noen sveitehøvdinger nordover mot vårbelgene, det var Gunnar kongsfrende, Peter fra Giske og Åsulv bonde, de hadde 25 skip. Før de seilte fra byen, talte han til dem og sa at de skulle seile så langt nordover som det var trygt. Han sa at de skulle holde kirkefreden og kvinnefreden, slik som alt hans forfedre før ham hadde gjort.
Så tok de av sted, og da de kom til Borgund, var vårbelgenes sysselmann der, det var Olav Kåbein, Snekoll og Andres Skjæla. Det falt noen mann av vårbelgene før de kunne komme seg i kirken. Birkebeinene tok leidangen som de hadde samlet, men mennene fikk grid for å møte kongen.
...
Peter og hans menn fikk greie på at det ikke var flere vårbelger på vei nordfra, men at hertugen satt med mange menn i Nidaros, så at det ikke var trygt å komme der. De snudde da og seilte sørover tilbake til Bergen med det gods og de menn de hadde tatt. 'They returned to Bergen with prisoners and goods'...
in essence -
"King Håkon sent some leaders north against the varbelgs (Skule´s friends/warriors), that was Gunnar the King´s friend, Peter from Giske and Åsulv the farmer, they had 25 ships...."When they came to Borgund (Sunnmøre near Ålesund) they met Olav Kåbein, Snekoll and Andres Skjæla (one of them was sysselmann (administrator / district governor)... awkward to follow in the original)
Some of the "varbelgs" men were killed (no names) - and the others got "grid".
In other words King Hakon's men defefeated Skule's supporters who included the 'Gunn' Snekoll; some of the rebels were killed and some later got 'grid'. 'Grid' means 'freed'.
But let's consider this Saga - it's the official history to show Hakon as the good guy. If Snaekoll Gunnision did not die in the battle (a 1 in 2 chance if you like) then he was freed. But he would not have been given Orkney or Scottish land or any wealth as that would have been mentioned to show how wonderful Hakon was. Equally it's logical that he wouldn't be given it. Why would you reward a rebel?
After this 1239, or so, time it is legitimate to assume that Snekoll is either dead in the rebellion, or died soon after or stayed in far Norway (he's a person who rebelled against the King so who would assist the rebel to travel?). Given his character - Earl killer and rebel supporter - I suspect he died as otherwise he would have turned up in the Saga again as he was not the man for a quiet life.
Part Six
The below is an interesting family tree concerning 'Snaekoll Gunn'. Note the bottom right corner.
The first complication concerning the supposed Gunn Orkney Islands / Norse / Viking origin is the surname Gunn.
The problem 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….’[1] The Lord Lyon Court[2] has also pointed out that ‘surnames were generally adopted in the 17th century’.
What this means is simple. Gunni Andresson (born around 1180[3]) who was the supposed founder of the ‘Clan Gunn’ certainly had Snaekoll Gunnison but Snaekoll’s fictional child – I deal with his supposed son Ottar further down this page - would have had Snaekollson as his surname, and changed surnames would have continued with each generation until the 1600s-1700s. These surnames would not have been Gunn, nor early versions of it. So those who believe in the Gunn Orkney Islands / Norse / Viking origin idea have to explain how the Gunn surname was fixed roughly five or six hundred years before everyone else's surnames were in the Highlands of Scotland and also, therefore, when normal[4] Highland families like the Gunns were doing something totally different to the Gunns with regard to their surnames. That's basically impossible.
Some might argue that the Gunns did not have the surname continuously since 1200 rather Gunns decided to have a surname based on Gunni Andresson some time after his death. That’s not logical - why choose Gunni Andresson to be the foundation person of a Clan? Gunni Andresson is anonymous; there are no stories about him. All he did was marry well. But Gunni’s grandfather ‘pirate’ Sweyne Assleifsson was the sort of person from whom Clans could easily originate. But Gunns are not Sweynesson / Swanson, they are Gunns. Certainly ‘some clans take their name not from the founder of a clan but from a later descendant who substantially improved the clan’s position or was a great hero, or was an outstanding figure in one way or another’[5] but this is demonstrably not true about Gunni Andresson who was, as already said, invisible in history. And, given that surnames were not fixed until say the 1600s when was the name Gunn chosen? After all, Coroner Gunn was alive before the 1450s…
The idea that Gunn is derived from Gunni Andresson goes totally against historical understanding of surnames in Scotland and, as such, there goes Gunn links to the Orkney Islands and Norway.
SUMMARY If you accept the Orkney Islands origin myth you have to accept an impossibility about the surname Gunn. Gunn as a tribal / group name, however, explains why the name Gunn was around from before the 1450s when Coroner Gunn was alive. This tribal / group name later evolved into the surname Gunn.
[1] From Scotlands People http://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/Content/Help/index.aspx?r=551&560 accessed 1 May 2014
[2] Page 4 Lyon Court booklet ‘Coats of Arms and Crest Badges’. This has common agreement – for example ‘Surnames as we understand them did not come into general use in the Highlands until the 17th century’. Page 16, Margaret MacLaren of MacLaren, The Maclarens.
[3] The year is derived from his marriage around the year 1200, see footnote 83.
[4] A few, very elite families had early fixed surnames; families with descent from Norman invaders or from the Lord of the Isles being the main examples. These families are massively detailed in history texts. Gunns are not descended from the Normans nor from the Lord of the Isles so should not have a surname at an early time.
[5] Page 16 Margaret MacLaren of MacLaren The Maclarens.
earlier material -
The more I look at the 'Clan' Gunn Norse / Orkney / Viking Gunn origin claim, the weaker it becomes;
- There is no known proof (as in, primary source material) of any connected family before Crowner / coroner Gunn and such 'proof' which is offered - being disconnected Gunn 'Chief' names - is very shaky.
- Why would the Gunns be named after an anonymous son of Sweyn Asliefsson (the great pirate) rather than the 'hero'? Families begin with the hero (or the infamous) ...
Part Two - concerning Ottar
I thought I'd explore one of the many early problems of Gunn (non) links to Orkney / Vikings. The traditional view of 'Gunn’ Ottar is put forward by Mark Rugg Gunn who writes;
Ottar is mentioned twice in Eirspennill’s Hakon Hakon’s Son’s Saga[1]. The first occasion is when he visited Norway. ‘After that King Hakon went to Bergen. There Gillechrist and Ottar, Snaekoll’s son, and many Hebrideans, came to meet him there from the west beyond the sea and they had many letters concerning the needs of their lands. It is not at all clear what lands Ottar held, or his relationship to the King of Norway. Snaekoll had retired to Caithness to lands outside the King’s immediate jurisdiction, and it is possible that Ottar was attempting to claim some of Snaekoll’s former property’.[2]
This is supposed to be the academic proof that 'Chief Gunn' Snaekoll (Snaekoll Gunnisson) had son Ottar. Now a Snaekoll had a son Ottar but it's not the one the Gunn historians claim. The above has nothing to do with the Gunns even though it has been totally absorbed into the quasi-official histories.
There are many reasons why the above does not relate to the 'Gunns' but let's consider
- the dates. R. Andrew McDonald in The Kingdom of The Isles Scotland’s Western Seaboard c 1100-c.1336 (Scottish Historical Review Monograph 4, Tuckwell Press, Scotland, 1998) agrees with the quotation but provides a time; 1224. Now we have a good idea when Snaekoll was born; his mother's first husband was well-known and definitely killed in 1198 so if we say Snaekoll was born circa 1200 that means the above child Ottar - if Snaekoll's son - was hopping on a boat when aged say 4. And 'had many letters' with him. Or not.... No mother / father mentioned, nor servants... Now, Snaekoll is actually free in 1224 - he only kills the Earl in 1230 so why would 'his' child be popped on a boat to Norway?
- And don't forget the Hebrides and Caithness are different Kingdoms at this point. Why would they drop in for this young child?
- Especially as the Hebrides have their own Ottar son of Snaekoll (in fact several possibilities); the Sudreyan chief Ottar Snaekollson is well known and more on him another day. So a boat from the Hebrides goes to Norway with just Hebridean linked people or the boat picks up a random young child in Caithness? I know which option makes logical sense
- It is, as well, worth considering the Orkneyinga Saga. Now, the saga exaggerates but Snaekoll is very important in it. And he's famous; you don't ignore an Earl killer. And he's explored in detail; we know his friends and what he does and where he lives. And there is no mention of a marriage and no mention of children before he has to flee to Norway. And that sort of 'marriage / children' gossip would not have been ignored.
Now there is a lot more on this which I am fully writing up - this is but a note - but the implication is an important one. There is no proof that Snaekoll married, there is no no proof he had a son Ottar. In fact there are some strong suggestions that Snaekoll spent the rest of his life in Norway (not least a 1239 skaldic poem ascribed to him). He probably died in 1240; he held positions (3) under the rebel Skule Bardsson who assumed the title of King and the rebellion was 'crushed' so it is reasonable to assume that those who held positions under Skule were killed.
To restate; there is no proof that Snaekoll married, had a child or returned to Scotland. There goes the Orkney / Viking link ...
[1] More accurately, Hákonar saga Hákonarsonar.
[2] Page 31-32 Mark Rugg Gunn, History of the Clan Gunn
(3) Gade, Kari Ellen. Poetry from the Kings' Sagas 2: From c. 1036 to c. 1300 (2 vols.). Part I: Poetry by Named Skalds c. 1035-1105. Part II: Poetry by Named Skalds c. 1105-1300 and Anonymous Poetry. Skaldic Poetry of the Scandinavian Middle Ages, vol.2. Turnhout: Brepols, 2009. Pp. cvii, 914. $160 ISBN 978-2-503-51897-8.
Part Three - and more on Snaekollr Gunnison / Snaekoll Gunnisson
And -
'Snaekollr Gunnison who went to Bergen in 1232 to claim Earl John's inheritance (but never seems to have come home again)'[1]
[1] Page 8, B. E. Crawford ' Medieval Strathnaver' in John R. Baldwin ed., The Province of Strathnaver, 2000,
The Scottish Society For Northern Studies.
So who is this author who suggests that Snaekoll Gunnison did not return to Scotland and so imply that the traditional Gunn link to the Orkney Islands is rubbish? Well it's -
Dr Barbara Crawford M.A., Ph.d., F.R.S.E., F.S.A., F.S.A. Scot., Member of the Norwegian Academy
Honorary Reader Barbara Crawford is Honorary Reader in History at the University of St. Andrews having spent over thirty years as a teacher in the Dept. of Mediaeval History. Since taking early retirement in 2001 she has continued to pursue her researches into the history and archaeology of the Scandinavian settlements in Scotland, and contacts across the North Sea in the Middle Ages. ...
Dr. Crawford is a Member of the Norwegian Academy and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. She was a Commissioner of the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland from 1991-2001, chaired The Treasure Trove Advisory Panel for Scotland from 1993-2001, and is currently President of the Society of Antiquaries of Scotland. As Honorary Director of the Strathmartine Centre for Scottish History (an independent charitable trust established by the late Dr. Ronald Cant before his death in 1999, for supporting research and education in Scottish History) (www.strathmartinetrust.org) she has been instrumental in encouraging many different Scottish history research projects. Her book on the “The Northern Earldoms. Orkney and Caithness from 870-1470 AD. Joint Earldoms and Divided Loyalties”, which reverts back to the subject of her original doctoral thesis, is currently nearing completion.
http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/history/staff/barbaracrawford.html
So it is not unreasonable to suggest she knows what she is talking about.
She first makes this Snaekollr point on page 8 of her 1971 thesis -
'Despite his part in the murder of the earl Snaekoll was not condemned to death at the trial in Bergen but "remained long with earl Skuli and King Hacon" (2) and there is no evidence that he ever returned to Orkney or Caithness' (3)
Her footnote (2) is ibid.. p. 485 (being ES ii p. 480)
but it's the the third footnote I find of interest -
(3) is ' Despite the claims of Clan Gunn to be descended from him (The Highland Clans, Moncrieffe of that ilk, p. 160)
see http://research-repository.st-andrews.ac.uk/handle/10023/2723
As I have said before,the 'Chief' Gunn - Orkney Island link fails on every count...
Part Four
‘The last sole heir-male of the line, Snaekoll Gunnason ... is last heard of in Norway in 1239.’ Page 168, Old-lore Miscellany of Orkney, Shetland, Caithness and Sutherland, Volume 10, Parts 3-5, The Club, 1938.
‘when he was arrested by the king’s men as a rebel in the active service of the rebel Duke Skuli, for which he probably paid the same penalty as his companions, after giving vent to a poetic lament, which may have been one of the earliest recorded verses of a Caithness man. With Snaekoll, the line of Erland became extinct.’[1]
[1] Page 186 Old-lore Miscellany of Orkney, Shetland, Caithness, and Sutherland, Volume 10, Parts 3-5, The Club, 1938
Part Five (added 28 February 2014) - more on Snaekollr
Hákonar saga Hákonarsonar (The Saga of Haakon Haakonarson) is an Old Norse kings' sagas, telling the story of the life and reign of King Haakon Haakonarson of Norway. The saga was written by the Icelandic historian and chieftain Sturla Þórðarson, in the 1260s. Sturla was at the court of Haakon's son Magnus when he learned of his father's death, and he is said to have immediately commissioned Sturla to write his father's saga. It is the main source to Norwegian history for the period of 1217 (Haakon's accession) to his death in 1263.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A1konar_saga_H%C3%A1konarsonar
I have been reliably informed by a Norwegian that Gunn historians have paid little attention to section 208 of this Saga, namely
Kong Håkon sendte noen sveitehøvdinger nordover mot vårbelgene, det var Gunnar kongsfrende, Peter fra Giske og Åsulv bonde, de hadde 25 skip. Før de seilte fra byen, talte han til dem og sa at de skulle seile så langt nordover som det var trygt. Han sa at de skulle holde kirkefreden og kvinnefreden, slik som alt hans forfedre før ham hadde gjort.
Så tok de av sted, og da de kom til Borgund, var vårbelgenes sysselmann der, det var Olav Kåbein, Snekoll og Andres Skjæla. Det falt noen mann av vårbelgene før de kunne komme seg i kirken. Birkebeinene tok leidangen som de hadde samlet, men mennene fikk grid for å møte kongen.
...
Peter og hans menn fikk greie på at det ikke var flere vårbelger på vei nordfra, men at hertugen satt med mange menn i Nidaros, så at det ikke var trygt å komme der. De snudde da og seilte sørover tilbake til Bergen med det gods og de menn de hadde tatt. 'They returned to Bergen with prisoners and goods'...
in essence -
"King Håkon sent some leaders north against the varbelgs (Skule´s friends/warriors), that was Gunnar the King´s friend, Peter from Giske and Åsulv the farmer, they had 25 ships...."When they came to Borgund (Sunnmøre near Ålesund) they met Olav Kåbein, Snekoll and Andres Skjæla (one of them was sysselmann (administrator / district governor)... awkward to follow in the original)
Some of the "varbelgs" men were killed (no names) - and the others got "grid".
In other words King Hakon's men defefeated Skule's supporters who included the 'Gunn' Snekoll; some of the rebels were killed and some later got 'grid'. 'Grid' means 'freed'.
But let's consider this Saga - it's the official history to show Hakon as the good guy. If Snaekoll Gunnision did not die in the battle (a 1 in 2 chance if you like) then he was freed. But he would not have been given Orkney or Scottish land or any wealth as that would have been mentioned to show how wonderful Hakon was. Equally it's logical that he wouldn't be given it. Why would you reward a rebel?
After this 1239, or so, time it is legitimate to assume that Snekoll is either dead in the rebellion, or died soon after or stayed in far Norway (he's a person who rebelled against the King so who would assist the rebel to travel?). Given his character - Earl killer and rebel supporter - I suspect he died as otherwise he would have turned up in the Saga again as he was not the man for a quiet life.
Part Six
The below is an interesting family tree concerning 'Snaekoll Gunn'. Note the bottom right corner.
It's from pages xlii-xliii, Icelandic Sagas and other Historical Documents realting to the Settlements and Descents of the Norsemen on the British Isles, Volume 1 Orkneyinga Saga and Magnus Saga with Appendices, edited by Gudbrand Vigfusson London HMSO 1887.
The key issue is that it argues Snaekoll is brother to Ragnhild and Gunni (the Clan Gunn supposed name sake) not son. It seems an unsupported idea but I haven't yet checked it against the given reference. It doesn't matter, anyway, as far and away it is most likely that 'Snaekoll Gunn' died in north Norway as I have discussed above - there is certainly no proof whatsoever of his return to the Orkney islands or Scotland...
Part Seven ; The example of Snorri Sturluson
The renowned and well-born Icelandic poet and historian Snorri Sturluson, whose Háttatal is all about Duke Sculi and King Hákon, supported Duke Sculi in the late 1230s rebellion. Snorri Sturluson was later put to death by the King’s emissary in Iceland in 1241 for this behaviour. This execution of Snorri Sturluson again suggests that it would be extremely unlikely for King Hákon to have pardoned Snaekollr Gunnison / Snaekoll Gunnisson / Snaekoll Gunn and then send him back to various castles and lands in Scotland as suggested by traditional Gunn history.
If the King killed one well-known person who supported the rebellion against his rule then it is extremely unlikely that he honoured another.
The key issue is that it argues Snaekoll is brother to Ragnhild and Gunni (the Clan Gunn supposed name sake) not son. It seems an unsupported idea but I haven't yet checked it against the given reference. It doesn't matter, anyway, as far and away it is most likely that 'Snaekoll Gunn' died in north Norway as I have discussed above - there is certainly no proof whatsoever of his return to the Orkney islands or Scotland...
Part Seven ; The example of Snorri Sturluson
The renowned and well-born Icelandic poet and historian Snorri Sturluson, whose Háttatal is all about Duke Sculi and King Hákon, supported Duke Sculi in the late 1230s rebellion. Snorri Sturluson was later put to death by the King’s emissary in Iceland in 1241 for this behaviour. This execution of Snorri Sturluson again suggests that it would be extremely unlikely for King Hákon to have pardoned Snaekollr Gunnison / Snaekoll Gunnisson / Snaekoll Gunn and then send him back to various castles and lands in Scotland as suggested by traditional Gunn history.
If the King killed one well-known person who supported the rebellion against his rule then it is extremely unlikely that he honoured another.
