Talk:Clan Hunter

Armigerous Clan?

On 11 October 2006, an edit was made that added Armigerous clan to the See Also section. I can find no reason for this association, for, as far as I can tell, Clan Hunter is not an armigerous clan. The only relation I can find is on the Scottish-Crafts page for Clan Hunter, where they have a broken link to their page on on armigerous clans (which appears to be nearly identical to the wiki article of the same name). Even there, Clan Hunter is not in that list (all clans listed on that site have the same link). I also am unable to find anything in the definition that would mark Clan Hunter as an armigerous clan. I'm not going to remove the link at this time, to give the one that put it there a chance to give his reasons. Or at least for someone other than myself to look into this. --~Kenzal Hunter 23:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

You are correct that Clan Hunter is not an armigerous clan, since it has a chief. Scottish clan chief explains that armigerous clans are clans without chiefs. 155.213.224.59 (talk) 14:23, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Well the article no longer says that the clan is armigerous and hasn't for quite a long time so nothing to worry about.QuintusPetillius (talk) 15:33, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clan Hunter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726201953/http://www.clanchiefs.org/p/chiefs.html to http://www.clanchiefs.org/p/chiefs.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:59, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Highland and Lowland

I have added the fact that the Clan Hunter is a Highland as well as Lowland Clan, as well as that its territory included parts of Arran and the Cumbraes, where the Hunters long held land and office. This places historical Hunter territory on both sides of the 'Highland line' and meant that the Hunters also operated as part of the Gaelic world. It is only right that this should be remembered by the inclusion of their Island territories. The Hunters are considered a sept of the Stuarts of Bute - as well as a Clan in their own right - precisely because of this historical Hunter presence on Arran and the Cumbaes, which meant that some Hunters in these areas formed alliance with the larger Clan of the Stuarts of Bute during the Viking raids on the Isles. Even a cursory search on the internet will show many Clan maps, such as that by Sir Iain Moncrieffe of that Ilk, which place the Hunters squarely on Arran among the Highland clans. Therefore it is only right that Clan Hunter should be recognised as a Clan with both Highland and Lowland connections.

This fact has been noted before on the Wikipedia page but edited out for some reason. Calbannach (talk) 15:52, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

As an indicator of the above, see Wikipedia's own article 'Scottish Clan', which has a Clan map and notes the Clan Hunter among the Highland Clans and notes their connection with Arran.

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Scottish_clan_map.png#mw-jump-to-license Calbannach (talk) 16:31, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Request to merge from Draft:Clan Hunter

Editors will see that the Draft article is somewhat different from the extant article. The draft article has been created in good faith by request of the current clan chief, by a member of the clan on her behalf. That editor has asked for assistance in seeking to add the new material to the extant article or replacing old material by new.

I have been approached by the COI editor to see if I can determine a manner in which this can be perforned, even if it can be performed.

I think that a requested merge with the foregoing facts disclosed may be an appropriate mechanism.

My nomination is a technical one. I am steadfactly neutral in any discussion about it. Fiddle Faddle 18:22, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose merge I don't know if this is the correct place to post this. I'm no expert in how Wikipedia works, but reading through the draft I can see problems in merging it with the existing article as there will be at least a few direct contradictions.

For example, the Clan should not be listed as a Lowland Clan. That is not accurate. It's historical Clan lands, presence, sphere of influence etc. straddled the Highland Line. A great many Clan maps - including that of Sir Iain Moncrieffe of that Ilk and even the very Wikipedia article that is linked to at the beginning of the Clan Hunter article (Scottish Clans) show maps with the Hunters marked as a Highland Clan with a distinct presence on Arran. This is not an error. Hunter lands included territory on Arran itself, Eilean MoLaise, the little Cumbrae and Great Cumbrae including Millport, and likely Bute itself. This Island presence brought the Hunters into conflict with the attacking Norsemen, and led to an alliance with the more powerful Stuarts of Bute, which is why the Stuarts list the Hunters as a sept of their Clan, as well as the Hunters being a Clan in their own right. This, as said, places the Clan Hunter on both sides of the Highland line and firmly in the Gaelic world, in which the Hunters moved (Arran itself remained Gaelic speaking until the 20th century). The Clan castle may be in Ayrshire, but it is the historical Clan territory which determines its region or whether it is Highland or Lowland - or in the case of Clan Hunter, both. We are the Clann an t-Sealgair. It's also right that our Gaelic name - the name by which the Hunters in Arran and the other islands would have been known and have known themselves - remain as it is in the article. The Hunters are spread across the Lowlands and Highlands. It is a disrespect to many of the name Hunter - Mac an t-Sealgsair - to limit us to the Lowlands and omit the Clan's Highland History, especially as the Clan has in modern times drawn support from all Hunters, from all parts of Scotland and beyond. If it is to do that, then those Hunters whose connection is Highland cannot be expected to continue to support the Hunters of Hunterston if it will not represent them or respect it's own cybercrime to them. The Clan Hunter has a rare opportunity through its history and place in the West coast to represent both sides of the Highland line and both the Scots and Gaelic culture and language.

The draft is, in all, too Lowland focused, speaking for example, of many Lowland families having Norman origins. In fact, many of the greatest Highland clans have Norman origins too, so what really is the point of this comment?

I'll leave it there for now, but I am certainly against replacing the present article with this draft. Calbannach (talk) 02:19, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Correction of above. Cybercrime? Lol. Predictive text. The paragraph was supposed to read something like:

"If it is to do that, then those Hunters whose connection is Highland cannot be expected to continue to support the Hunters of Hunterston, if the Clan will not represent them or respect it's connection to them by acknowledging it's own documented Highland History". Calbannach (talk) 02:28, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

• The post(s) above by Calbannach has/have been copied here on their behalf to seek to ensure completeness of discussion. Fiddle Faddle 13:23, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
• Cmnt: NOTE: All useable, cited content should be merged from the draft into the published article. Anything left behind will be deleted in 6 mos. If there is nothing to merge, then this decision is moot, and the discussion can be closed. A person knowledgeable about the clan(s) would be preferable in completing the merge, if one is to happen. Regards, GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 05:19, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Oppose: the first half of the proposed article is completely unsourced and therefore an unacceptable standard. The existing article is sourced throughout.QuintusPetillius (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2020 (UTC)