Talk:Second Desmond Rebellion

Untitled

I have created this article with information collected from the following related pages:

Ard na Caithne Fiach McHugh O'Byrne Ballyferriter James_Fitzmaurice_Fitzgerald William Winter (admiral) Nicholas Sanders Siege of Carrigafoyle Castle Desmond Rebellions Potato Thomas Stukley Richard Bingham County Desmond Earl of Desmond Spanish Armada in Ireland

There are some contradictions, which I have had to select options or make assumptions. Here are a list of those, for review. If you can confirm or contradict the facts, do so and remove the assumption note.

Assuming:

• There was only one arrival of forces from Europe, that of July 1579
• The size of the papal invasion was 600 troops
• Assuming the surrender happened on 10th October 1580, and the masscare happened immediately, not 11 Nov, as mentioned elsewhere
• Grey was personally at the siege of smerwick
• The fleet was siezed by William Winter the year before the land forces arrived
• Winter and his forces were not at the area during the siege of Smerwick
• Assuming the 1579 invasion departed from Ferro, Galicia, not Santander as also stated.
• Projected king of Ireland was the illegitimate son of Pope Gregory, not the nephew
• The invasion force whih landed was numbered approx 600, was the same as the force that set out from spain, was not 700, not 800
• 600 was approx also the number masscred
• It is likely that the Pope and King of spain specifically assisted the second Fitmgaurce invastion foroce, by I have no evidence so not mentioned
• The Spanish/Papal force was 3 ships, not six
• Saunders was on the invastion as papal legate, not nuncio
• Assuming the massacre at Naas was by the forces of Grey de Wilton
• Perhaps the majority of the forces massacred at Smerwick Italian if 200 Spanish were massacred in Naas
• If 600 troops arrived in Smerwick, and 200 went to Naas, what was the number and composition of the forces massacred at Smerwick

--Rye1967 06:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Good stuff. Most of those contradictions seem to come from articles I've posted. Will get back to you! I'm leaving a note with User:Jdorney, to see if a Siege of Smerwick article can be put together - most of the above would be addressed there. If it's done properly, then it will be the best available resource on the siege. Thanks for casting an eagle (or beady?) eye.--Shtove 19:38, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Contradictions

• There was only one arrival of forces from Europe, that of July 1579

No, there were two. A small force, don't know how many right now, with Ftizmaurice in July 1579, another froce 600 strong on Spetember 10 1580.

• The size of the papal invasion was 600 troops

Yes, the second force was

• Assuming the surrender happened on 10th October 1580, and the masscare happened immediately, not 11 Nov, as mentioned elsewhere

My information is early November, but remember we have the Gregorian/Julian calender split to deal with here, which would make October 10 correct for Julian and November 11 correct for Gregorian.

• Grey was personally at the siege of smerwick

Yes.

• The fleet was siezed by William Winter the year before the land forces arrived

Not sure what this refers to.

• Winter and his forces were not at the area during the siege of Smerwick

No. They were. Winter's fleet brought up the heavy guns and provision for Grey's army by sea, this allowe him to bomabrd Dun an Oir into surrender.

• Assuming the 1579 invasion departed from Ferro, Galicia, not Santander as also stated.

My information is that Fitzmaurice's and Nicholas Sanders' force left from Corunna, Galicia, in July 1579.

• Projected king of Ireland was the illegitimate son of Pope Gregory, not the nephew

Don't know anything about this.

• The invasion force whih landed was numbered approx 600, was the same as the force that set out from spain, was not 700, not 800
• 600 was approx also the number masscred

Yes, regarding the second invasion, of Spetember 1580.

• It is likely that the Pope and King of spain specifically assisted the second Fitmgaurce invastion force, but I have no evidence so not mentioned

Phillip II of Spain was preoccupied elsewhere, but Pope Gregory XIII paid for and supplied both Fitzmaurice's force and the 1580 expedition. Without him there would have been no continental soldiers involved at all.

• The Spanish/Papal force was 3 ships, not six

Don't know the ammount of ships, but it was a Papal, not Spanish force.

• Saunders was on the invastion as papal legate, not nuncio

No, Nicholas Sanders wasn't that senior. He was a Papal commisary.

• Assuming the massacre at Naas was by the forces of Grey de Wilton

Know nothing about a massacre at Naas, but if its happened in the summer of 1580, then the English forces in Munster were under Grey's command at this time.

• Perhaps the majority of the forces massacred at Smerwick Italian if 200 Spanish were massacred in Naas

Most of the 1580 Smerwick garrison were Italians, with a small number of Spaniards. As I said, I'm not aware of the massacre at Naas, but they must have been part of the 1579 expedition, because the 1580 troops never got further than Smerwick.

• If 600 troops arrived in Smerwick, and 200 went to Naas, what was the number and composition of the forces massacred at Smerwick

All 600 at Smerwick were from the 1580 landing force. Don't know anything about the Naas force.

Jdorney 12:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Overview

Just read over the article. It is a bit confused with regard to the context of the rebellion and course. A lot of work remains to be done on it. Jdorney 12:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Dún an Oir looked like a fort in 1580, but was more of an enclosure, with no well. Without water, it was about the worst place to try to defend. Does anyone know the rest of Di San Giuseppe's life after the surrender?78.16.70.89 (talk) 23:15, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Giacomo Buoncompagno

I have no idea who this guy was: illegitimate son, or papal nephew? We've established that the nephew was the proposed candidate.--Shtove 18:28, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, just found it here (end of section). Will check 1922 DNB.--Shtove 18:35, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Siege of Smerwick

Raleigh wasn't present? The 3rd last para of the section seems to promise more on this point, but nothing follows. Anyone?--Shtove 15:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

And why is folklore being introduced in an historical article? You should see the other entry it has a 'civilian massacre' infobox rather than what it was an armed foreign invasion by military (shakes head), you really have no need to wonder why educational establishments don't allow using wikipedia as a research tool.Twobells (talk) 20:21, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Dún an Óir.jpg

Image:Dún an Óir.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Word "routed"

"On 25 August 1580, English forces under Grey were routed in the Battle of Glenmalure with the forces of O'Byrne and Viscount Baltinglass." I don't understand the word "routed" in this context. Is it correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by E Mac Gearailt (talk • contribs) 20:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Yes. A rout in battle is disorganised flight, rather than a retreat in good order. Pinkbeast (talk) 23:57, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Many thanks E Mac Gearailt (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:23, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Belligerents

Spain and the Papacy were not at war with England in 1579-83, so cannot be listed as "belligerents" in the infobox. They sent modest amounts of men and money to support the rebellion covertly.78.16.92.5 (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

They were already broiled in conflicts far & wide by this time - this is no exception. Eastfarthingan (talk) 21:16, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Both sparring for position, yes, but not at war until after the Treaty of Nonsuch in 1585. Philip II was not going to declare war over an Irish rebellion in 1579. Faced with losing a province in 1585, he did.78.17.58.240 (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

why no discussion

why is the savagery of the english played down and no link in history to Lord Mountbatten being killed, chickens coming home to roost. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.174.191.14 (talk) 07:36, 15 October 2019 (UTC)