Talk:Patrick O'Neill, 1st Count of Tyrone

Sourcing and notability

Not sure if those sources all actually mention Patrick, I can't find much mention of him other than possibly existing. His father John/Shane/Sean is notable, but Patrick does not seem to be. Wikipedia records notable people, not simple genealogy. Fences&Windows 15:57, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I would agree with Fences and windows about not being sure that the sources given mention the subject; I would go further and suggest the sources need examination and verification here. As a priority, I would suggest that someone with JSTOR access examine the reference used for asserting that Patrick was the son of John O'Neill and a Madame de Buixin which is sourced to an article by Micheline Walsh, "The Will of John O'Neill, Third Earl of Tyrone"; the article would of course be a reliable source, but we need to confirm that the details ascribed to this article are actually there. The Walsh article is available here on JSTOR. However there are other problems with the article particularly with chronology that I can see: the article asserts that Patrick, born in 1622 and per the article, is the younger brother of Don Hugo Eugenio O'Neill. According to sources found for the article for Patrick's father, in particular an article by Tomás Ó Fiaich (writing in his capacity as Professor of History at Maynooth rather than any clerical capacity), Don Hugo Eugenio was not born until after O'Neill seniors' 1630 trip to Madrid. While the article's assertion that "he maintained a lengthy affair with a Countess of the O'Donnell family" is true in the sense that Hugo's mother was Isabel O'Donnell and O'Neill senior and Isabel O'Donnell never married and they were together long enough to produce Hugo and a sister Catalina, all this happened during the 1630s - not the 1620s - and in Madrid, not in Brussels. Another chronology problem raised by the O Fiaich article is that it raises the prospect of a political marriage in 1627 between O'Neill senior and another O'Donnell, Mary Stuart O'Donnell. This marriage didn't happen, but we still have a problem; if O'Neill was married to Madame de Buixin in 1620 or 1621, what happened to her that left him free to marry in 1627 and yet have to make provisions for Madame de Buixin in his will in the late 1630s? FlowerpotmaN·(t) 23:44, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Briefly, this article is a double hoax. A nineteenth-century French family of Martiique claimed to be Comtes de Tyrone; they had articles published in France and in Ireland, by a younger brother and a brother-in-law of the family; their only evidence was a single scrap of parchment, supposed to be in the possession of one of them, saying "This is Henry, son of James, son of Patrick, son of Shane, son of Hugh, son of Matthew, son of Conn Bacach, son of Conn Mor..." written most of a century after Patrick's supposed birth. Some older genealogies copied the data; I haven't seen anybody sincce the First World War who thinks these claims proved. In particular Micheline Kearney Walsh says that Shane had only one son (the bastard Hugo Eugenio O'Neill, born 1631, whose successors are well known and not this family).

To this, an ingenious editor has added a number of claims which have no source whatever. It should be merged with Count of Tyrone when that is rewritten, and until then marked {{hoax}}. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:05, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I would have to agree with the necessity of a hoax tag. There are far too many inconsistencies with other sources but more importantly, there are assertions that do not tally with sources actually offered in the article.

Were the 19th Century claims a hoax? Possibly, or possibly a case of wishful thinking by those making them; however, while they were taken as fact by some (John O'Hart in his Pedigrees for example), there were a lot of others at the time who weren't convinced. (For example, Charles Patrick Meehan writing his history of the O'Neills and O'Donnells politely skips over the issue here (p. 509)) Should the claims be part of the Count of Tyrone article? Perhaps, but without undue weight.

But, regarding this article, we have to return to the inconsistencies. Why, for example, is Don Hugo Eugenio O'Neill consistently referred to as the elder brother, when there are sources used in the article that put his birth in the 1630s? (1633 is the date sources outside this article seem to agree on.) If it was a case of someone relying on the extremely flawed genealogical sources offered in the 19th Century, that I could understand. The 19th Century genealogical sources are a quagmire of conflicting claims. But if they are using more modern historical scholarship, and they claim to be doing that by citing Micheline Walsh, then how do they explain assertions made in the article when she says something different? So, pending a rational and persuasive explanation of these concerns, I'm afraid that I would have to concur with the tag that questions the truthfulness of the assertions in the article. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 14:17, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you are right that the 19th century claims were wishful thinking; in any case, they should be explained at Count of Tyrone. (Since Count is not a rank in the Irish Peerage, that article must deal with various claimants; Earl of Tyrone is a different article.)

On Patrick, this article seems to be sheer fantasy; the flawed 19th sources have severe problems, but they do not claim to know who Patrick's mother was. One of them is here. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:25, 8 July 2011 (UTC)