User talk:Jdorney/Archive 1

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! -- Francs2000 | Talk [[]] 15:01, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for your contributions. This is a reminder to please include a brief description of your changes in the Edit Summary, so that other contributors to the articles you edit can more efficiently track the progress of said articles.--A. S. A. 15:52, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Hey there! Nice work on the seventeenth century, also an era of deep interest to myself. More, please! Fergananim

Hi, thank you for rewriting the page on Michael O'Riordan. There were a few mistakes in the original piece which I thought necessary to amend. For instance, my grandfather was not a native speaker as it had previously stated. I don't know where this notion came from, Gerry Adams even included in his tribute.

I've just done a few rewrites of this article and opened the discussion page. Thanks for starting it up, as well as the other Tudor Ireland articles (I'll have a go at those too). Is this message longer than is preferable?--shtove 20:23, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, don't worry about it. What are you planning for other tudor articles? Jdorney

I'd say the Tudor Ireland articles will need illustrations, and more references, footnotes and linkage, before the Wiki-powers rank them. I'm new to to this and expect to contribute to various other articles touching on this period, but have no plans to start any from scratch. I suppose there's a lot of battles that could be described in separate articles. I don't have full access to my notes or library at the moment, so I'm constrained by having to work mostly from memory. I'll get better, but it's far more time-consuming than expected.

I've done a bit on your Nine Years War, and I'll have a go at the Desmond Rebellions after that. In the Tudor area I've added to the articles on Elizabeth I (NPOV'd on my description of the Desmond War 1580-83 - bloody monarchists!), Trial by Combat, and Spanish Armada. I also had an etymology article on the word Hubbub (of Irish Tudor interest) trans-Wikied from Wiktionary, but it was instantly returned to its nesting place, which led to some techno discussion about protocols and procedures. I'm preparing an addition to the Harp article, with a description of the development of the instrument in post-Desmond Munster in the 1580's - it's an odd achievement of Gaelic culture, to have created one of the most sophisticated European instruments of the period (second only to the violin?) in a province so buggered up by war.

In my edits, I generally omit the apostrophe from Irish names (O Neill, instead of O'Neill), which may cause problems on internal links; and I prefer the term sept to clan in the Tudor Irish context (no problem when it comes to Scotland).

Anyway, I gather your main interest is in the Confederacy/Cromwellian period, so thanks for setting up such well judged articles on this period. Years ago I spent too much time reading documents from Elizabethan Ireland, and then chose to pursue a career rather than lose myself in the maze. Any researcher of this material will recognise the truth of Sean O'Faoilean's observation (afterword to his book on Hugh O'Neill) on how quickly the problems come crowding in. More power to your elbow.--shtove 22:11, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sounds good. Personally I prefer clan to sept because it is a more internationally recognised word, but it doesn't make much difference. I actually did my MA on Florence McCarthy and the Nine Years war in Munster. You're dead right, its impossibly complicated,everyone constantly changing sides and stabbing each othe in the back. O'Faoilean didn't know the half of it. Re getting ranked, I wouldn't get your hopes up. I've edited and illustrated the confederate/cromwellian articles away and nobody really takes any notice. Modern history unsurprisingly gets all the attention. Good luck though! Jdorney 23:56, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if this has been mentioned already or you know about it, but you may be interested in Wikipedia:Irish Wikipedians' notice board. It's useful for collaborating, requesting comments or general notices on Irish-related articles. zoney ♣ talk 15:59, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The Confederate period is very interesting, what do you think of the articles I've contributed here about it? Re accounts by participants, most of them were destroyed either an a fire in the customs hse in the1700s or the during the civl war. But there are some surviving ones left, like Richard Bellings, a Supreme Council member, who wrote a book aout his experiences. The other main source is the letter collections of the earls of Ormonde and Clanricarde, who had people like Patrick Darcy and loads of others constantly writing about what was going on in the assemblies. Also, there's a collection of writings by Rinuccini and his assistants, who tell us about their time in Ireland. There's been great work done on this time recently by people like Micheal O Siochru and Padraig Lenihan, but I don't know if any of it has really penetrated to the Irish public at large. Maybe someone should write a general narrative history - you fancy it?! Jdorney

I think your articles are fantastic, much tighter and more 'together' than mine. My fav is the one on the Nine Year's War, though the ones about Confederate Ireland and the battle of Clonmel come close. They are all extremely involved subjects, so frankly I'm very suprised that no one has yet given you any awards concerning them, either as individual or collective efforts. Maybe its because we only really know our history from 1798 onwards?

Are you aware of any translations of Rinuccini's published works? All the ones I've seen are in Latin, and I would very much like to consult them myself.

The family member I speck of was both a first cousion and brother-in-law to Patrick Darcy; Richard Martin fitz Oliver. Darcy too is a man who deserves an in-depth article.

Maybe someone should write a general narrative history - you fancy it?! How do you mean? Fergananim

Ah, you're making me blush! The Rinuccini, thing, yes its available in english, where i don't remember, but it was translated from the latin in the 19th century. I got a photo-copy of Rinuccini's report to the Pope when he got back to Italy in college. needless to say, its extremely biased, it could also be titled, "why the Irish catholics lost due to everyone else's fault except mine". There's also an irish language source called Cin Lae O Meallain, which was written by a cleric acompanying the Ulster army. i saw this re-published recently in a history of Tyrone I think it was. O Meallain wouldn't have much to say about the actual confederation though, because he was on campaing the whole time and like a lot of his felloulstermen tended to think of the supreme council members as traitors anyway.

Re the general narrative thing, i meant that someone should write a book that was an entertaining general history of the time, so that more irish people would learn about it. A Daunting challenge though! Oh I've done the expansion of the History of Dublin history, now, but i may have annoyed some people because the article is now very long. Jdorney

I've created a new article on Augrhim which you may find of interest Galwaymen at the Battle of Aughrim, though I must state it is still very much incomplete. Fergananim

Very interesting. Interesting that even at this date, after all the mass confiscations of land, the Irish landowners and chiefs could still go around bringing people off to war in the way they had always done - eg the O'Kelly came out with his people etc, this could easily have been referring to the 16c or hundreds of years before. Also, there were clearly a hell of a lot of "important" people ("of rank" as it says) killed at the battle, and it seems to have been an especially bad day for the Kirwans! No wonder the battle's memory resonated so much. If I could make on suggestion though, how about re writing the info rather than publishing the whole source - which is very interesting from a historical point of view, but maybe a modern commentary would be better by encyclopedia standards.

Oh yes also, about Darcy and Martin, if you're interested there's a hell of a lot of info about them in "Confederate Ireland" by Micheal O Siochru, if you can get your hands on it. Its basically the first in depth look at Confederate politics. Jdorney

I read O Siochru's book and I agree its pretty good. Being a bit of a slew of books on this subject over the last few years, don't you think? Not a bad thing as it has being for quite a while an overlooked chapter in our history. But you're right, a 'popular' history of that era, less dense than the likes of O Siochru et al (though I devour such books) full of pictures, maps, battle plans ... but not now! I still have to finish off the book I'm working on!

Actually I've found out more about Richard myself via my own research over the years. For the last couple of years I have wondered if I could write a book based on the events in County Galway between 1632 and 1652, as there is so much scope, intrigue, mystery, triumph and tragedy there. Course I'd have to deal with the background to it all on a Galway and national level, which is massively complicated. This is why I ended up writing on wikipedia in the first place, because it makes the job of 'publication' and peer review so much easier!

Yeah, I think you're right, and I will re-write it. It did'nt even mention the eight Dilleens who died there!

We ought to try and get more people checking out this stuff; it really won't do to have just the two of us working and commenting on this.Fergananim

Yeah I know - but maybe people will just come across them and read them. Loads of people have edited the confederate articles, so obviously there's some interest. The most readable book recently has been Lenihans confederate catholics at war, which gives you much more of flavour of the time - using the Irish peotry and personal diaries to show what the fighting was like. i think it helps that he was an Irish army soldier and so knows what these things are like a bit more. I'd also love to write a general history, maybe some day. But I'll still be happy if people come on to wikipedia and read what I've written here. Jdorney

One other thing I've being meaning to mention to you. I am in the process of creating king-lists of all the major and minor Irish kingdoms (see Kings of Lenister, Kings of Connacht, for examples). In addition to these lists, I want to add additional pages briefly describing the history of the various ruling dynastys themselves. What I want to ask you is should they be placed under some new heading or catagory, such as Irish Kings, Irish Kingdoms, or what? Fergananim.

Yes they all should be in the one category. Is there one for irish Kings? Maybe you could put links on the pagre Irish kings? Jdorney

Thanks for your comment on my user page!

Here it is:

"Hi, re the edit on Richard Boyle, there is no key on my comuter for the numbering thing, so thats why th earl of orrerry was misnumbered, but now htere is no link on the Earl of Cork page to the main article on Orrerry, who was by far Boyles most important son. I'm not going to go reverting it but it should be changed - properly numbered etc"

If you have a look, you will see that the First Earl of Orrery was already listed (as child No.11 of the Great Earl)!

The thing that possibly distracted you was that he was known as 'Roger the Wise', but what I have done as a result of your (very welcome) prompting, is to put "1st Earl of Orrery' in the listing.

Do you know exactly how Richard Boyle, First Earl of Cork died?

I couldn't find the answer to that question in Dorothea Townshend's biography.

Thanks

ericross

Thanks, got to say that this is something I knew nothing about until I stared fixing a redlink on a page last week, so correct me all you like! You mentioned the Montrose military genius thing being royalist propaganda. Any idea if that extends as far as royalist losses? They seem awfully low given the number of troops fighting, and I can't find any explanation for 106 "knights and gentlemen" which go missing between the battles at Tippermuir and Aberdeen. Cheers. Anilocra 14:35, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I've tried to answer your (perhaps justified) criticisms on my contributions to History of Scotland (see Talk). Having now seen your list of your articles, I'm happy to admit that you may know more than me. I got started on the article tryign to improve its flow and prose rather than on the facts - but I do think a few were misleading. Since your comment, I've put back the commonwealth para and expanded the Civil War stuff. Perhaps you could take a look at it and see if you concurr. I'm happy to be corrected - but I think a full revest of my edits would leave the text weaker. Cheers --Doc Glasgow 15:46, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That may be so, and fair play to you for contributing, but I just think you were bit hasty there. The main mover in the History of Scotland article has been User:Derek_Ross, so you should really take it up with him. Jdorney

If you do have a bit of time, I think that starting the Plantations of Ireland topic (even if only the headings) would be more important than more detail to my Act of Settlement 1662 article - that can wait. --Red King 13:45, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Right, I've made a start on it anyway Jdorney

good stuff. I've found an essay with references on the net, at [1] which may be of help. I don't have the background to assess it.

Yeah, its not bad at all. Its bit hazy on the stuff from the Confederate war era, but thats to be expected because a huge amount of new research in the last ten years has clarfied this area a lot. Without wanting to look big-headed, there's a lot of background info on the political contexts here at Tudor re-conquest of Ireland, Nine Years War (Ireland) Desmond Rebellions Cromwellian conquest of Ireland etc. There looks to be some good info in that essay about the particulars of the plantations though. I have some stuff that I wrote myself before on the Munster and Ulster plantations, but I'll have to look through it again before I'd be confident to write about it here. Jdorney

Yo! Sorry I have neither been in touch nor kept up the work for a while; stuff going on. But yes, I will do a write-up on the seiges of Forthill and Galway. Very complicated but fascinating subject. Cheers! Fergananim

I look forward to it! One thing though mate, its SIEGE, "I before E except after C!" Jdorney

Re:SIEGEs of Galway ... one down, fourteen to go! Fergananim

In the Battle_of_the_Boyne you note that Irish Republicans (which has a red link btw) blew up his statue. Afaik, the IRA never claimed it. Have you a source that the IRA did? There was a story that Trinity students did it! as his (and his horse) backside faced the college. For a history the the statue and the trinity students [2] --ClemMcGann 12:12, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've re-edited the battles I added, removing most of the red links, and have moved the battle of Knockdoe under the heading Late Medieval Battles as most modern historians date the early modern Irish era to begin with the involvement of Henry VIII in Irish affairs (surrendur and regrant, et al). In addition I have filled in the 15th century with many of the relevant battles, some of which I hope to expand either into stubs or full-blown articles.

If you go to this - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_battles_%28geographic%29#Ireland - you can see I have expanded the list of Irish battles on a provisional basis. Some of those I will remove after consideration as I don't think they are important, while the ones I will concentrate on will be of at least some reasonable military and/or political significance.

For myself, I have found the process of making this list to be very illumanating, as it begining to make me see aspects of Irish warfare that were not apparent before. My main revelation is that, despite regular warfare - almost endemic you would think - there were not that many really large-scale battles, or battles of political significance. So I've left out a lot of seiges, raids, border skirmishes, dynastic clonflicts and the like.

Yet and all I have to emphasise that this is still very much an ongoing process, and anything you wish to add to this would be most welcome. My main source online for these battles are taken from the main Irish annals, which you can read at this site - http://www.ucc.ie/celt/publishd.html - others I'll take from published accounts, such as the state papers.

As reguards a list of Irish battles, I think the 14th and 15th centuries can be reguarded as done. Ditto reguards the Nine Years War, Confederate Wars, the War of the Two Kings and 1798. However, a huge amount of work still needs to be done for the era between the 5th and 12th centuries, especially the Viking conflicts and the Norman era. Just getting them all listed is difficult enough!

On a final note, I'm nearly ready to write up Lord Forbes Seige of Galway (August-September 1642), the seiges of Forthill (April-June 1643), Clanricarde's Seige of Galway (14th August-4th September 1647) and Sir Charles Coote's Seige (1652-53). Again, I'm sorry that you've had to wait so long. Hope they were worth the wait! Fergananim 31st May 2005.

No worries. fair play to you! You're dead right to say that most of the warfare in Ireland was always skirmishes and raids. I suspect a lot of the encounters mentioned in the annalls were just thatJdorney

Thanks! As I said before, ill-health kept me from finishing them off too. Its just that the more you dig into this, the more depth you find. And naturally you wish to say something on them all. To see all the trouble I have gotten myself into, check out Seiges of Galway! I promise to do the Confederate-era seiges first though! Fergananim 1st June 2005.

I don't know exactly when the refugees began arriving in Connacht. While the dates you give make sense, could the Plantation have started without a similar population movement?

Lapsed Pacifist 03:24, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

To my knowledge, what happened in the Ulster Plantation was that the native population was moved to worse land, like hills and bogs in Ulster to make way for the planters. A couple of things that facilitated the plantation were that the province was severely de-populated after the Nine Years War, where maybe up to 100,000 people had died and more had moved elsewhere or fled abroad. Also, the number of settlers arriving was reasonably modest, about 25,000 adult males by 1641, which probably meant a total settler population of about 80,000. And the planters tended to clump together in certain areas - eg Antrim and Down, east Tyrone, north Armagh, east Donegal etc.

That said, I couldn't say for definitie that there wasn't a migration to Connacht by some Gaelic Irish people at this time, its not unreasonable. However, I do know that there was mass displacement of people in 1640s and 1790s. Not sure what happened to the refugees of the Confederate/Cromwellian era (though my guess is they re-setled in north connacht/north-west Leinster), but the ones of the 1790s definitely ended up in Connacht. The peep o day boys and co used to pin notices on thier houses saying, "To Hell or to Connacht". There's an interesting pamphlet online by Padraig Lenihan about this and how it relates to Irish folklore and prophecies. Jdorney

Do you know where I could find that pamphlet? Any other info or links you have on these refugees, especially on the areas they came from, would interest me greatly. Thanks,

Lapsed Pacifist 03:23, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I didn't find it online, may not be there any more, but I downloaded it a good while ago and will email it to you Jdorney

Thanks, J. One thing that strikes me, though, is the prevalence of surnames in Mayo I would associate more with pre-plantation western Ulster (particularly Donegal), rather than areas like Armagh. I know Donegal was planted extensively during the early years of the plantation, but I always believed subsequent immigration was concentrated in eastern and central Ulster.

Lapsed Pacifist 18:06, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Donegal, yeah, mainly settled in the plantation years alright. And yes most subsequent settlement was east of the Bann. But Donegal was heavily fought over in the 1640s and produced refugee groups called "creaghts" who lived with their cattle. This is from "Confederate Catholics at War" (p.121) by Padraig Lenihan (same author as pamphlet). "As British raids into mid Ulster intensified during the winter of 1644-45, about a dozen clan based creaghts fled southwards, sheparded by O'Neill's army. This the largest single exodus, may have been swelled by 30-50,000 presons, or as much as a quarter of the native population of Ulster. The figure is a rough estimate based on a report of an O'Donnell creaght numbering 3000 men, woemn and children. This wave of refugees spread further afield than north Connacht and north Leinster, some even penetrated the Iveragh peninsula in the extreme south-west of Kerry."

The planter's army was based in east Donegal during this war, calling itself the "Lagan army" -despite the fact that it was actually in the Finn and Foyle valleys (!), the other reference to Donegal here is the O'Donnell name. Beyond that I don't really know the answer to this question. It is plausible that there was a lso a bg population transfer during the Ulster plantation as well. Jdorney 09:47, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

(I have only just read your comment on my talk page as I haven't visited this site for ages!) I really appreciate what you have added to the Wars of the Three Kingdoms page it gives an excellent overview and pulls all the separate conflicts together very well. I'm also pleased to see that mid 17th century Irish history (confederate Ireland etc) is now well represented on this site. --Cap 20:48, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi Jdorney, my request is a bit odd, so my apologies for the interrupting. I am translating some articles about Ireland for the hebrew wiki, and need an Irish to make sure some of the details are accurate. Now I am mostly interesting at the 70’s (bloody Sunday and etc’). Is it o.k if I’ll ask for some details when I’ll need to? Do you know other wikipedians which can assist? (you are the first active Irish wikipedian I saw, so..sorry). Best, Dorit 15:19, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Sure, no problem! Go ahead, ask all the questions you like! I'll be glad to help. What would you like to know about Bloody Sunday?

Some other Irish wikipedians include User:Djegan User:Red King User:Lapsed Pacifist User:Fergananim Jdorney 21:51, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you! I found most of the details I wanted, and hopefully 2 of the "Irish" articles I worked on lately will become "Today's featured article" at the hewiki. But before asking, would you like me to e-mail the questions or just leave it at this page? For me e-mail is better, but whatever you prefer. best, Dorit 22:02, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If email is better for you that's no problem .Jdorney

Great, I’ve just sent it. I also delete the e-mail address, since it is a known receipt for junk mail. Thank you, Dorit 11:01, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)