Genealogie Wylie » Hugh IX de Lusignan , Comte de la Marche (± 1163-1219)

Persönliche Daten Hugh IX de Lusignan , Comte de la Marche 

• Er wurde geboren rund 1163 in Lusignan, Vienne, Poitou, France.Quelle 1
• Er ist verstorben November 1219 in Damietta, Egypt.Quelle 1
• Ein Kind von Hugh VIII-1 2 "Died Young" de Lusignan und Orengarde
• Diese Information wurde zuletzt aktualisiert am 11. April 2023.

Familie von Hugh IX de Lusignan , Comte de la Marche

(1) Er ist verheiratet mit Agatha de Preuilly.

Sie haben geheiratet in 1st wife.

(2) Er ist verheiratet mit Mathilde (Mahaut) Taillefer de Angouleme.

Sie haben geheiratet vor 1185 in 1st/2nd wife.

Kind(er):

1. Hugh X de Lusignan  ± 1186-± 1246 

Notizen bei Hugh IX de Lusignan , Comte de la Marche

Note: Based in part on the following posts to SGM, I am making MatildaHugh IX's wife and mother of Hugh X. The fact that Hugh X became Countof Angouleme certainly adds to the case that his mother was Matilda, andnot some 1st wife who was proposed as a solution to a problem, which goesaway if Raoul is Hugh IX's uncle instead of brother. I am actuallymaking Raoul his 1st cousin, son of his uncle Geoffrey.

--------------------------------------

The following is excerpted from a post to SGM, 3 Aug 1999, by DaveUtzinger:

From: (XXXXX@XXXX.XXX) ((XXXXX@XXXX.XXX))
Subject: Re: Mahaut and Isabelle of Angouleme
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 1999/08/03

HUGH IX (-1219) de Lusignan; Ct LA MARCHE; The Brown; One referencestates he was Count Poitou; engaged to Isabella Taillefeur of Angouleme,but in 1200, when she was in the care of HUGH'S uncle, Count of EU, shewas taken by his feudal lord King JOHN of England who wed her at Bordeauxin August (subsequently 5 issue) HUGH formed an alliance with PHILIP IIKing of France against King JOHN resulting in JOHN's loss of hiscontinental possessions. HUGH may have married Agetha de Preuilly, butmost references show he m Matilda, daughter of WULGRIM III countANGOULEME & sister to YMER/AIMAR/AUDEMOR Ct ANGOULEME the father ofIsabella Taillefeur. It has been claimed that Matilda was his 2nd wifeand that his issue were by a previous wife, perhaps Agetha?

--------------------------------------

The following is a post to SGM, 16 Mar 1999, by Todd Farmerie, whichillustrates the ideas behind the debate over the Lusignan pedigree atthis point:

From: Todd A. Farmerie ((XXXXX@XXXX.XXX))
Subject: Re: de Lusignan, another glitch...?
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 1999/03/16

Kathie Weigel wrote:
>
> Weis' A.R. 117-27 shows the marriage of Isabella, widow of King John, to
> Hugh X de Lusignan...Count of La Marche and Angouleme, "son of
> Hugh IX de Lusignan but by another wife, not Matilda, daughter
> of Wulgrim III..."
>
> However, Weis 123-28 shows Alice d'Eu marrying Raoul I de Lusignan...
> Count d'Eu, "bro. Hugh IX and son of Hugh d.y. (son of Hugh VIII,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Sire de Lusignan and wife Bourgogne)"
>

OK, first of all I have to take the credit or blame for this one, havingsupplied the correction to Sheppard, based on the work of Sidney Painter.

Painter argued that:

1) there was an extra Hugh in the pedigree, son of Hugh VIII and fatherof Hugh IX. He died v.p. (he was also young, in that he wasn't exactlyold, but was an adult).

2) that Ralph, Count of Eu was brother of Hugh IX (and hence son of thenew Hugh)

3) since Ralph married the heiress of Eu prior to the marriage of Hugh toMatilda, one must ask why such a valuable heiress was not married by Hughhimself, rather than his younger brother. He concluded that Hugh musthave already been married.

4) for chronological and consanguity reasons, Hugh X was more likely tobe son of this earlier wife than of Matilda, his own wife's first cousin,who Hugh IX didn't marry until after Isabella dumped him for John.

> So where does Hugh X, alleged son of Hugh IX fit in if the "son of Hugh
> died young"?

The Hugh who "died young" was the father of Hugh IX, not his son. Hugh Xwas son of Hugh IX.

> Since Raoul only appeared to be the Count of Eu, and not
> that of La Marche and Angouleme, the reference to his brother and adeceased
> son seems irrelevant, but it certainly appears to contradict 117-27. Can
> anyone shed light on this?

So Ralph, by this reconstruction, would be younger brother of Count HughIX. I should note that ES has instead placed Ralph as younger brother ofthe Hugh, d.v.p, son of Hugh VIII and uncle of Hugh IX. This mightexplain his marriage to the Eu heiress rather than his nephew, andeliminate the argument for Hugh IX having an earlier wife. I have notseen the placement of Ralph argued since Painter's article, so I don'tknow the basis for the ES placement.

taf

From: UTZ AT aol.com (UTZ AT aol.com)
Subject: Re: Mahaut and Isabelle of Angouleme
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 1999/08/03

From: Todd A. Farmerie (taf2 AT po.cwru.edu)
Subject: Re: de Lusignan, another glitch...?
Newsgroups: soc.genealogy.medieval
Date: 1999/03/16

Haben Sie Ergänzungen, Korrekturen oder Fragen im Zusammenhang mit Hugh IX de Lusignan , Comte de la Marche?
Der Autor dieser Publikation würde gerne von Ihnen hören!

Zeitbalken Hugh IX de Lusignan , Comte de la Marche

Klicken Sie auf den Namen für weitere Informationen. Verwendete Symbole:  Großeltern    Eltern    Geschwister    Kinder