Hugh de Moravia (-before 1222)

Same as
Additional names
Parents
Father:1William (-), Lord of Duffus
Spouses and relationship events
Children
Children with :
Sir Walter de Moravia (-around 1263), Lord of Duffus2
Andrew de Moravia (-1242), Bishop of Moray3
William de Moravia (Sutherland) (-1248), 1. Earl of Sutherland4
Attributes
Events
Buried:5St. Peters' Kirk (Church of Duffus) [building], Duffus [city/town], Elginshire (Moray) [county], Scotland [country], United Kingdom [country]
He was buried near the altar of St. Katherine.
Died:6before 1222
Died:7around 1226
Personal Info
He was later canonised.8
He is styled son of William, son of Freskin, and also Hugh Freskin and Hugh de Moravia. He appears under the first designation in various charters from 1195, frequently along with his brother William, who also in a charter about 1200, already cited, styles him lord and brother. He inherited the lands of Duffus and Strabrock, and Brice, Bishop of Moray, granted to him, as Lord of Duffus (between 1203 and 1214), a free chapel in his castle of Duffus. Some time before 1211 he had acquired, by grant or otherwise, a large tract of land in Sutherland. How extensive that was does not appear, but it included Skelbo, in Dornoch parish, on one side, and the greater portion of Creich parish on the other, and perhaps was identical with the later earldom. In any case he granted Skelbo, and the lands of Invershin and Fernebucklyn to Gilbert de Moravia, Archdeacon of Moray, who afterwards gave them to his own brother Richard. Hugh Freskin died possibly before 1214, but certainly before 1222, at which date his son William had succeeded, and he was buried in the church of Duffus. He is called, perhaps on account of his benefactions to the Church, the blessed Hugh, and seems to have been honoured with canonisation.9
Groups
Issues

Sources

1 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume II: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1905), Bothwell, p. 121-22, William.
2 Ibid
3 Ibid
4 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume VIII: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1911), Sutherland, p. 320-21, Hugh.
5 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume II: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1905), Bothwell, p. 121-22, William.
6 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume VIII: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1911), Sutherland, p. 320-21, Hugh.
7 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume II: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1905), Bothwell, p. 121-22, William.
8 Ibid
9 Sir James Balfour Paul, Lord Lyon King of Arms, The Scots Peerage Founded on Wood's Edition of Sir Robert Douglas's Peerage of Scotland Containing an Historical and Genealogical Account of the Nobility of that Kingdom, Volume VIII: (Edinburgh: David Douglas, 1911), Sutherland, p. 320-21, Hugh.
certainlyThe information is supported by primary sources.
probablyThe information is supported by secondary sources which is most likely based on primary sources.
possiblyIt is unclear if the secondary source cited is based on primary sources, or the information is an assumption well supported by other evidence.
likelyThe information is only found in secondary sources with questioned quality, or there is a reason to suspect the information is wrong. Or the information is a likely assumption based on other evidence.
apparentlyThe information is doubtful and poorly documented, but still most likely correct.
perhapsThe information might be correct or it might be wrong. It is not supported by any trustworthy sources. It might me an assumption.
disprovedThe information is proven to be wrong.