Talk:Shane O'Neill, 3rd Earl of Tyrone

Summarize Timeline Top Qs Fact Check

Hugh O'Neill, supposedly his father, is well attested to. So why is there no trace of Hugh's "son" in sources? Fences&Windows 23:16, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

• The source you provide does mention John, Conde de Tyrone who went on to serve in the Army of Spain as a General, which agrees with the assertion in the article. Of course Seán is the Irish version of John. The Hugh O'Neill article does mention a son John (and indeed uses the same source you provide). The Earl of Tyrone goes with Shane as a first name (again a variation of John), but also lists Juan, John and Sean as variations. The only book I have to hand that deals with the O'Neills is one by Seán Ó Faoláin, which doesn't deal with his family in detail and is without an index, so I will have to drill through it. But there are sources online using the various variations that agree in principle he was born c. 1599 , rose to high rank in the service of Spain and died in 1641.(He was eventually killed at the Battle of Montjuïc (1641) .) Just using the first few I could find here; there are a lot more to be found. Arguably the article shouldn't be at 3rd Earl of Tyrone as the title was abolished although the Spanish made a point of recognising it. The Conde title was awarded by the Spanish - the argument asserts a Netherlands title, but at the time that was essentially a Spanish title. Of course, no doubt sources are needed, but the argument that there was no son called Séan doesn't hold when you take account that there are accepted variations of John used in sources, although discussion about which version of the name should be used would be valid. The hoax tag argument and by extension the proposed deletion reason given look unsustainable. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 23:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Prod disputed so I reverted. "Of course". Hmm. It's pretty shoddy article writing to say "Seán" when the sources say "John or Shane". Here's a usable source in that case:. Fences&Windows 19:01, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

1641 death? Er, no, that was his brother Brian. 1641 was when he became Count of Tyrone. Fences&Windows 19:03, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, but then he apparently did die later that year, according to another source.... And "without issue", although elsewhere it's said he had a son, Patrick. FFS. Fences&Windows 19:07, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

If you want another FFS, a lot of other sources say Brian died in Brussels in 1617, possibly murdered. . FlowerpotmaN·(t) 01:50, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Ha. Actually one of the sources you point to defends Hugh's son Brian having not died in 1617: - it says the one murdered was probably a grandson or grandnephew of Hugh. I guess we just say the sources can't agree? Probably belongs in Hugh's article more than this one. Fences&Windows 18:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

True, I saw that. Actually sums up some of the problems of approaching a subject from a genealogical point of view, whether on or off Wiki. (One of my pet peeves I have to admit. Genealogy is almost always the last thing to worry about in an article. And when genealogists get something wrong, it seems to amplify itself through the years a lot more than other sources) But I seem to have hit a bit of a motherlode with "The fate and fortunes of Hugh O'Neill, earl of Tyrone, and Rory O'Donnell" (page 458 using the Google page form so onwards or 461 if you use the actual page numbers) which deals with John in detail and explains his significance in more detail. (I know, that's why we are here :)) FlowerpotmaN·(t) 19:08, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

PS Re sons of Hugh. Yes, John is really the only one that that has enough sources for a standalone article (just about). The possible murder of Brian (or Bernard) does pop up in sources but whatever his fate, should be dealt with in he Hugh O'neill article. Conn, the youngest son, also should be dealt with there; there are enough sources to say that he was left behind in the confusion of the Flight of the Earls, suffered vicissitudes that included kidnap and being sent to Eton before disappearing into the Tower of London for good. (There are a couple of pages on him in the Fates and Fortune book above, but still the Hugh O'Neill article is where they should go.) Henry did lead the Irish Regiment but didn't survive long; the sources are a bit variable as to whether he did briefly hold the title after Hugh's death. I'll take a look at the sources and see what I can do later tonight or more likely tomorrow FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:03, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for all this research! Should fit in the article on Hugh nicely. Fences&Windows 15:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I thank both of you for your interest. One problem with this article is likely to be that the chief reason for notability of any of Hugh O'Neill's sons is their genealogy.

It is a disputable point of view that any of those sons "held the title" of Earl; some of them certainly claimed it. But Hugh O'Neill was attainted by act of the Irish Parliament, in 1608 and 1613; holding that his sons were Earls means claiming that Henry VIII was legitimately King of Ireland (to confer the title) and that James I wasn't (or else it was legally taken away). Possible but not consensus.

Patrick O'Neill is a separate problem. A nineteenth-century family of O'Neills from Martinique claimed to be Comtes de Tyrone through him; sources from before 1914 repeat their claim, but everybody I have seen since Complete Peerage studied the matter calls their assertions unproven. Watch the dates on your sources. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

John/Shane/Sean does seem to be independently notable, so this isn't just one of those godawful genealogy articles - at least not now that we've edited it to turn it into a proper biography using actual sources. Patrick I very much doubt is notable, and this issue of the Counts of Tyrone is a separate worry. John/Shane was recognised as Earl of Tyrone by the Spanish at least, but beyond that I suspect that we're into the realm of wishful thinking. Fences&Windows 15:47, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Dug up a bit more regarding John (and to be honest, that is the version of the name that seems to be most used) using a 1971 article by Tomas O Fiaich which deals with John's life in more detail and fills in a lot more of the gaps. You can look at the last few edits of course, but O'Fiaich reports (in much detail) that O'Neill was the mooted leader of an cancelled 1627 Spanish invasion of Ireland and includes a few details of his (complicated) personal life. The 1627 invasion plan does tie in with Falkland's letter of the same year which I added previously; it also seems not to have been the first O'Neill scare. I saw a passing reference in a biography of Henry Docwra (that I happened across on someone else's bookshelf during the day) where there is a passing reference (and passing only) regarding a rumour that John O'Neill (definitely our subject from the context) was on the verge of making a landing in 1623; the quote was "to the destruction of the plantations and the restitution of all men to their lands". The reference provided sources this to the Crown State Papers of Ireland - as this was a biography of Docwra, the footnote understandably doesn't go any further, so that would need clarification. (The date however would make it unlikely that there was any confusion with Falkland's letter of 1627) But the point is not whether O'Neill was legally Earl, but the ramifications of the recognition of the title by Spain (for sound practical reasons from the Spanish point of view), which involved him in future Spanish plans. Essentially they were pocketing him for future use, but never got around to using him. (My purely personal opinion is that the Knighthood of Calatrava smacks of being a consolation prize after Philip IV fobbed off his various invasion plans.) Anyway, we do seem to be getting past the stage of the article being of genealogical interest only. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 21:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

The "recognition by Spain" is a mixture of two different things.

• Did some seventeenth century Spaniards call Shane (and Hugh) by the title they claimed? Of course, especially when discussing funding an expedition to make trouble for the English (less likely in 1623 than in 1627, if I understand the international politics correctly).
• Is there a Spanish title of conde de Tyrone? I don't think so, and would require unquestioned proof; even the sources which represent the Martiniquais claim do not seem to say so. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there an Irish title of Earl of Tyrone? Yes, but not this one; it belongs to the Marquesses of Waterford. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:31, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps we should leave the various claimed descendants views aside, for the moment. Of course, we do need more sources to establish the form of recognition actually accorded John O'Neill by Spain. My only firm opinion regarding the name of the article at the moment is that John seems to be the version of the name most used in English sources, including sources where I thought the author would have been more likely to favour Seán. (Cardinal Ó Fiaich being the obvious one there). I would possibly quibble with your question "Did some seventeenth century Spaniards...?" I don't think there is any real doubt that the official Spanish reaction, up to the King, was to treat him as the legitimate Count of Tyrone, undoubted attaintment by England and the Irish parliament aside. His appointment to the Spanish Supreme Council of War and the Knighthood of Calatrava were hardly gifts to be bestowed on someone that was not officially considerd to be of sufficient elevation. (He was also a General in the Spanish Army, seemingly a major general; I'll add that when I can narrow down the sources to ascertain the exact rank; I'm a bit worried about English language rendering of Spanish ranks). However, as I said, we need more sources before we can go anywhere in that regard. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 16:32, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Is there a consensus on how Shane's titles should be presented? Burke's Peerage and Micheline Walsh call him the Earl of Tyrone, but technically the title was attainted before he succeeded to it. Would it be better to instead just call him "Shane O'Neill, El Conde de Tyrone"? Then again, the titles literally mean the same thing, and the Spanish accepted Shane as the successor of his father. Although Shane WAS technically a member of the Spanish nobility, but Hugh O'Neill was only technically a member of the British nobility (not including their status in Gaelic society). I think that this is a larger issue that needs to be resolved. It's complicated when "history is written by the victors" (England) but Catholic Europe still recognised these titles. Cathal O'Connor Faly called himself Lord of Offaly, and was recognised by the Spanish, but not the English. I think for people like Shane and Cathal, who spent most of their lives in foreign Catholic nations which recognised their titles, we should recognise their titles as they saw it. SkywalkerEccleston (talk) 01:05, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Nominator: SkywalkerEccleston (talk · contribs) 11:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Shane O'Neill (Irish exile)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Borsoka (talk · contribs) 11:49, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Image review

• File:St. Anthony's College, Leuven, by William Oldham.jpg: US PD tag is missing at Commons.
  • Not sure what you mean. I can see the PD tag on its Commons page.

    Yes, and it explicitly says "You must also include a United States public domain tag to indicate why this work is in the public domain in the United States."

    • Updated
• File:Hugh O'Neill, 1608.jpg: Could the source be more specific at Commons?
  • Updated
• File:Flaithrí Ó Maolchonaire founder of the Irish College Madrid.jpg: Its source is missing, and the picture's PD status is also unclear at Commons (a US PD tag is needed).
  • Updated
• File:Batalla de Montjuïc de 1641.jpg: Its source is not specific and US PD tag is missing at Commons.
  • Updated

Borsoka (talk) 12:22, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Source review

• Reference 104 is not linked to any cited source.
  • Corrected
• Atkinson (1974): Could you add an identifier (such as an OCLC number)?
  • Not found
• Bonner (2006): Could an ISSN be added?
  • Added
• Brady (2015): Place of publication is missing (alternatively, delete the place of publication at each title).
  • Location is already present (Dublin)
• Burke (1866): Could you add an identifier (such as an OCLC number)?
  • Not found
• Burke (2003): Could you add an identifier (such as an OCLC number)?
  • Updated
• Clavin (October 2009): Publisher is missing.
  • Added
• Cleary (1913): Why can it still be regarded as a reliable source? Could you add an identifier (such as an OCLC number)?
  • Replaced with a more recent source
• de Mesa Gallego (2020): Could you translate the title and add a language parameter ("lang=es")?
  • Done
• Dunlop (1895): Could you add an identifier (such as an OCLC number)?
  • Done
• Ellis (2002): Place of publication is missing (alternatively, delete the place of publication at each title).
  • Added
• Güell (1998): Could you translate the title and add a language parameter ("lang=ca")?
  • Translated & Added
• Hillgarth (2000): Place of publication is missing (alternatively, delete the place of publication at each title).
  • Done
• Jennings (1941): Why can it still be regarded as a reliable source?
• Mac Craith, Hazard (October 2009): Publisher is missing. (Mac Craith or MacCraith?)
  • Added; surname is "Mac Craith"
• Meehan (1868): Why can it still be regarded as a reliable source? Could you add an identifier (such as an OCLC number)?
  • Added OCLC
• Rodríguez (2007): Could an ISSN be added?
  • Added
• O'Donnell (2006): Could an ISSN be added?
  • Added
• O'Donnell (2023): Could an ISSN be added?
  • Added
• Ó Fiaich (2001): Could an ISSN be added?
  • Cannot find relevant ISSN
• Ó Neill (2021): Could an ISSN be added?
  • Done
• Sparks (2024): Is this study peer-reviewed?
  • Replaced with other sources
• Walsh (April 1957): Is this work a peer reviewed reliable source?
• Walsh (1974): Could an ISSN be added?
  • AddedBorsoka (talk) 12:22, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

@Borsoka Currently awaiting your feedback. SkywalkerEccleston (talk) 12:35, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Please find above. Borsoka (talk) 19:09, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

• @SkywalkerEccleston: as mentioned above, my main concern at this stage of the review is the reliability of certain sources. Could you take a look and address this? Borsoka (talk) 08:55, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

  Hi Borsoka, the sources Walsh 1957, Meehan 1868 and Jennings 1941, to my knowledge have not been peer-reviewed. However Micheline Kerney Walsh was an expert in her field. Jennings 1941 is one of the few sources that exists about Hugh Albert O'Donnell. Meehan 1868 is a source used by many historians of Irish history in the twentieth century, such as Paul Walsh and John J. Silke. I have also kept the information cited from Meehan 1868 at a minimum. SkywalkerEccleston (talk) 11:01, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

OK. I will complete the spot check, taking your remarks into account.

Comments

• ...Tír Eoghain's ruling Gaelic Irish noble family... I would make it clear in the text that Tír Eoghain and Tyrone are one and the same regions.
  • I believe there's an argument that Tír Eoghain (a Gaelic kingdom under brehon law) and Tyrone (an earldom in the Irish peerage) are distinct.
• ... "snap decision"... Name the author of the quote in the text.
  • I have removed the quote and replaced it with "abruptly"
• On the afternoon of 9 September, Hugh left Garret Moore's house—where Shane had been staying to receive his education alongside Moore's family—taking Shane with him. The sentence narrates the story from the perspective of Shane's father, although Shane is the article's subject. Perhaps, Shane's staying and education at Moore's house should be mentioned first. Introduce Moore with one or two words.
  • Done
• ...was accompanied on the Flight of the Earls... I would delete "on the Flight of the Earls".
  • Done
• Introduce Albert VII as the ruler of Spanish Netherlands.
  • Done
• ..., which could instigate further warfare. Clarify that "with England". Is the adjective "further" necessary?
  • Done; removed "further".
• ...the Spanish ambassador in Flanders... I would rather say "the Spanish ambassador to Albert VII/the Spanish ambassador in Spanish Netherlands"
  • Done
• Introduce Isabella Clara Eugenia as Albert VII's wife and Philipp III's sister.
  • Done
• Is the full name of Mancisador known?
  • Yes, added
• Why is "6th Baron Dungannon" written in bold?
  • Removed
• ... patent of the earldom... A link? Which earldom?
  • Clarified the earldom. Further info in note.
• ... the late Earl's will...the late earl's pension... the late earl's secretary...his late father's money... Rephrase to avoid repetitions.
  • Done
• ...had planted spies there during Henry's colonelcy.> I would delete "during Henry's colonelcy" for flow.
  • Removed
• I would follow chronology when presenting his life: in section "Old Irish Regiment" people who died in the previous section (Philip III and Hugh) appear unexpectedly.
  • Updated
• I would avoid the repeated use of the term "colonelcy" in the same paragraph.
  • Let me know if this has been updated to your satisfaction.
• The Spanish earldom of Tyrone was conferred on Shane in 1626. Earldom? Repetition of information mentioned in the previous section.
  • Unsure what the issue is here

    I think "earldom" cannot refer to a Spanish rank. I would say, he received the Spanish title of count of Tyrone. Borsoka (talk) 10:35, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

    • Updated
• Low Countries or Spanish Netherlands?
  • Changed this reference to the Spanish Netherlands
• ...Hugh MacCaghwell installed as Archbishop of Armagh and Primate of All Ireland in early 1626 Was he a resident archbishop?
  • Unsure what the issue is here

    I only assume, MacCaghwell never visited his see. Borsoka (talk) 10:35, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

    • That is true.
• Introduce Sant'Isidoro a Capo le Case as a church.
  • Done
• ...to retake Ireland from English control Retake or liberate?
  • Changed to "liberate"
• A proposal to the Infanta was rejected... By whom?
  • The Infanta. Updated.
• ...(the O'Neill clan and the O'Donnell clan) I would delete it.
  • Updated
• As the Dutch had been able to hold out from Spain in the Eighty Years' War, it was considered possible that this invasion plan could work. Could you rephrase it for flow and clarity?
  • Updated to "This invasion plan was considered feasible, as small Dutch forces were then holding out from Spain in the Eighty Years' War."
• ... the fleet should not bring their banners... Whose?
• The Infanta wrote in April 1627: "It was proposed that I should bring about a marriage between the earl of Tyrone and the sister of the earl of Tyrconnell, so as to join them in closer friendship... this marriage has been treated of, but the sister of Tyrconnell has declared that she has no wish whatever to marry Tyrone." The sentence repeats information from the previous sentence.
• It has been suggested... It was proposed ... By whom?
• "The earls should be called Captains General of the said republic and... one could exercise his office on land and the other at sea". Who is quoted?
• ... "only to preserve what he has" ... Who is quoted?
• Another Irish College at Alcalá was later founded by Baron Jorge de Paz Silveira, a Portuguese nobleman. Delete.
  • Done
• The section “Proposed Spanish invasion of Ireland” is quite long; consider trimming it or dividing it into subsections. Borsoka (talk) 08:32, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

@SkywalkerEccleston: when do you think you can address all above issues? I am planning to close the review till the end of the week. Borsoka (talk) 07:57, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

• After three weeks of inactivity, I have no choice but to fail the article. I hope you will have time to complete and renominate this interesting and well-researched piece in the future. Borsoka (talk) 05:00, 9 November 2025 (UTC)

  Hi Borsoka, I have updated the article based on your suggestions. Is this review still open? Let me know. Thanks. SkywalkerEccleston (talk) 12:06, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

• The review was closed in early November but you can open a new GA nomination. Borsoka (talk) 01:19, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

So an English assassin, broke through the defences of Spain, and killed a 12/13 year old boy by hanging, left no trace, did not attack anyone else and disappeared. Seem OK!!
Shane seems to have been around all the unfortunate events, including older half-brothers that could have been "The O'Neill" dying mysteriously, further it seems the younger brother was more talented and intelligent, my view he was a potential threat going forward - especially from a view point of someone who placed themselves in that position through his Mothers guidance as fourth wife's progeny is way down the line, until all other possible heirs have now been eliminated unfortunately met their maker.
Thoughts, I know source is eveything but...
~2026-32907-87 (talk) 15:38, 2 June 2026 (UTC)