Talk:Hugh O'Neill, Earl of Tyrone

message: What on earth are you doing referring to the Uí Néill as a figure in "British political history"? The British state wasn't even invented when Ó Néill was in action. He was a Prince of Gaelic Ireland and if you must put a modern description on him you could call him an Irish statesmen because of his involvement with European powers in his struggle against the English crown. And why can't you have the historical accuracy- not to mention respect- to refer to him by his real name, Aodh Mór Ó Néill? Would you anglicise a Chinese, Japanese or other name? 
Lastly, how in the name of God can you say he resisted the seventeenth century plantation when he fled from Rathmullen in 1607 (Flight of the Earls), the very year the plantation commenced? Instead of an independent Prince, Ó Néill was reduced to being an extremely powerful landowner after the Treaty of Mellifont in 1603. His resistance was between 1594-1603 and it was inspired primarily by a realisation that, because he was a Gael, he would never become the most powerful man in Ulster under English rule. Ó Néill would have sold his granny, had the English been able to contain their hatred for the "barbarous" Irish a bit better. It had nothing to do with resisting a plantation which was implemented in order to subdue Ulster after the Nine Years War 1594-1603.
Why does Hugh O'Neill, 2nd Earl of Tyrone get directed to this page which says '3rd Earl of Tyrone' ?
I haven't seen anywhere else O'Neill (1540-1616) labelled as the 3rd Earl of Tyrone. Tehmasp
:Blunders are made - there's a similar one in relation to Gerald Fitzgerald, 15th Earl of Desmond, who should in my opinion be listed as the 14th. As for resistance to plantation - it was a creeping policy of the crown from the mid-1550's. O'Neill had seen the first effort in Ulster in Clandeboye under Essex in the 1570's, and would have realised that William Fitzwilliam's push toward the Ulster borders in the 1590's - especially his execution of the MacMahon, following that of the O'Rourke a few years earlier - not only reduced his influence but left his territory vulnerable to various legal claims (see later the Case of the Bann Fishery in 1609, which asserted a legal entitlement stemming from the Norman conquest that had been extinct for hundreds of years) and a splintering off of his dependents. Eventually, he would have been surrounded in Tyrone by English landowners with a more direct line to the English court. The same thing happened to Desmond and, to a lesser extent, Ormond. It was not a good time to be overmighty and Irish (Gaelic or Norman).---shtove 22:54, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  So which is he, 2nd or 3rd? He can't be both.  And if you have a problem with it why don't you correct it? Mike Hayes (talk) 06:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 2005 post

message: Just revised  "Uí Néill Dynasty Today" to "Ó Neill Dynasty Today". People constantly confuse the two, which is understandable, but leads to deep misunderstanding. Fergananim 18:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Minor but important change

message: On the recent edit to his name - does Mór make him Hugh the Great, or Big Hugh?--Shtove 22:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely "The Great" Irishpolitical (talk) 15:28, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mór 

message: The birth date given in the text and infobox is c. 1565; but the birth category is 1540s; should it be changed to 1560s? which is correct?--FeanorStar7 (talk) 10:01, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth date confusion

message: This article has both. Which is correct? 87.38.42.48 (talk) 08:45, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Uí Néill or Ó Néill

message: http://www.historyireland.com/volumes/volume13/issue5/features/?id=113898 said to be "developed from a ‘true likeness’ of the earl".86.42.193.65 (talk) 10:28, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Portrait is from 1800s, not original

message: O'Neill never claimed this title. He wished to see Phillp of Spain, or any other European Catholic monarch, as King of Ireland, rather than an English or Scottish one. Fergananim (talk) 17:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: But you deleted a referenced paragraph on this point - need to show the ref is bad.Shtove (talk) 11:00, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: O'Neill never claimed the title Ard ri

message: I have replaced the family section but someone may wish to mine the old text for more information, so I am placing it here. NB the sources need to be checked against the text as not all of them are accessible.
He had a large number both of legitimate and illegitimate children: four legitimate daughters, including Sarah, Cortine who married Sir Henry Oge O'Neill, grandson of Shane the Proud, and Alice, who married Randal mac Sorley Mac Donnell, the two latter having issue in the O'Neills of the Feevagh, including Captain Conn O'Neill, with whom Bonnie Prince Charlie Stuart escaped from Culloden; two illegitimate sons, Turlogh and Conn; four legitimate sons, Hugh, Henry, Bryan, John. His many descendants include Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington  and Queen Elizabeth II.Professor M. Humphrys website, 2011
-- PBS (talk) 17:40, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the online link for his descendant Elizabeth II is still working. Easiest to cut them all out, eh? This is why so many people dislike wikipedia.78.16.22.229 (talk) 15:50, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hugh O'Neill, Earl of Tyrone. 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/20110807142408/http://publish.ucc.ie/celt/docs/T100070 to http://publish.ucc.ie/celt/docs/T100070
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:42, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Hugh O'Neill, Earl of Tyrone. 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/20110807142233/http://publish.ucc.ie/celt/docs/E600001-002 to http://publish.ucc.ie/celt/docs/E600001-002
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807142134/http://publish.ucc.ie/celt/docs/E590001-003 to http://publish.ucc.ie/celt/docs/E590001-003
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: An infobox was added by  in December saying that Hugh was a disputed High King of Ireland, that his immediate predecessor was Edward Bruce, and that his immediate successor was somebody called Diolmhain Críostóir Ua Ruairc Lobley, Duke of Meath. I'm reverting as unsourced, but I'm curious to know how somebody who was born in 1550 could succeed someone who died in 1318. If Tadhg can produce a reliable source, perhaps he could tell us about it here on the talk page.  Scolaire (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Succession to the Irish High Kingship is not direct and is not always one-after-the-other. The history of Ireland's High Kings is riddled with interregnums and disputed claimants. Not to mention that the last undisputed High King of Ireland, Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, died in 1198, then legitimate claimants are often far and few between, and would only be recognised often upon coming to great power and/or influence (usually in Ireland). As such, Edubard a Briuis technically has no successor. There is seldom a direct successor to such a title, and Edward himself could hardly be called a successor, save for Gaelic recognition and support. In any case, on of the many O'Neill Clan Association websites claims that Hugh was a self-proclaimed High King of Ireland. I will search for the exact webpage and post it here when I have found it. Tadhg Dómhnall  Ó Ruairc 17:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Family web pages do not count – you need to find a reference in a book published by a reputable publisher or an article in a reputable journal. As for Diolmhain Críostóir Ua Ruairc Lobley, Duke of Meath, he appears to be the same person as Dylan C. Lobley, an otherwise unremarkable person who claims to be the current High King of Ireland. Good luck finding a reliable source for that!  Scolaire (talk) 17:51, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.ronsattic.com/oneill.htm Tadhg Dómhnall Ó Ruairc 18:27, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Did you read what I said? A family web page is not a reliable source. This one is particularly bad; it calls him "Red Hugh O'Neill", which nobody in history ever called him – obviously the author confused him with Red Hugh O'Donnell! And anyway, that web page doesn't say that Hugh claimed the High Kingship of Ireland.  Scolaire (talk) 19:31, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

text: Your reversion makes sense to me, thanks. Pinkbeast (talk) 19:20, 21 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disputed succession infobox