Timeline of the Principality of Antioch

Last updated

The timeline of the Principality of Antioch is a chronological list of events of the history of the Principality of Antioch (a crusader state in northern Syria).

Contents

Background

867

869

969

1016

1017

1046

1050s

1052

1054

1059

1071

1070s

1078

1081

1082

1083

c. 1084

1085

1095

1096

1097

1098

Crusader state

Establishment

1098

1099

1100

1101

1102

1102–1103

1103

1104

1105

1106

1107

1107/1108

1108

Late 1108/Early 1109

1109.

1110

1111

1112

1113

1114

1115

1116

c. 1117

1117

1118

1119

Under regents' rule

1119

1120

1121

1122

1123

1124

1125

1126

1127

1128

1129

1130

c. 1131

1130s

1131

1132

1133

1135

1136

1137

1138

Late 1138-early 1139

1139

1140

1140/1141

1141

1142

1143

1144

1156

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Baldwin I of Jerusalem</span> First count of Edessa (r. 1098–1100) and first king of Jerusalem (r. 1100–1118)

Baldwin I was the first count of Edessa from 1098 to 1100 and king of Jerusalem from 1100 to his death in 1118. He was the youngest son of Eustace II, Count of Boulogne, and Ida of Lorraine and married a Norman noblewoman, Godehilde of Tosny. He received the County of Verdun in 1096, but he soon joined the crusader army of his brother Godfrey of Bouillon and became one of the most successful commanders of the First Crusade.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bohemond I of Antioch</span> 11/12th-century prince of Taranto and Antioch; military leader in the First Crusade

Bohemond I of Antioch, also known as Bohemond of Taranto or Bohemond of Hauteville, was the prince of Taranto from 1089 to 1111 and the prince of Antioch from 1098 to 1111. He was a leader of the First Crusade, leading a contingent of Normans on the quest eastward. Knowledgeable about the Byzantine Empire through earlier campaigns with his father, he was the most experienced military leader of the crusade.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bohemond II of Antioch</span> Prince of Antioch

Bohemond II was Prince of Taranto from 1111 to 1128 and Prince of Antioch from 1111/1119 to 1130. He was the son of Bohemond I, who in 1108 was forced to submit to the authority of the Byzantine Empire in the Treaty of Devol. Three years later, the infant Bohemond inherited the Principality of Taranto under the guardianship of his mother, Constance of France. The Principality of Antioch was administered by his father's nephew, Tancred, until 1111. Tancred's cousin, Roger of Salerno, managed the principality from 1111 to 1119. After Roger died in the Battle of the Field of Blood, Baldwin II of Jerusalem took over the administration of Antioch. However, he did acknowledge Bohemond's right to personally rule the principality upon reaching the age of majority.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Baldwin II of Jerusalem</span> King of Jerusalem from 1118 to 1131

Baldwin II, also known as Baldwin of Bourcq or Bourg, was Count of Edessa from 1100 to 1118, and King of Jerusalem from 1118 until his death. He accompanied his cousins Godfrey of Bouillon and Baldwin of Boulogne to the Holy Land during the First Crusade. He succeeded Baldwin of Boulogne as the second count of Edessa when he left the county for Jerusalem following his brother's death. He was captured at the Battle of Harran in 1104. He was held first by Sökmen of Mardin, then by Jikirmish of Mosul, and finally by Jawali Saqawa. During his captivity, Tancred, the Crusader ruler of the Principality of Antioch, and Tancred's cousin, Richard of Salerno, governed Edessa as Baldwin's regents.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crusader states</span> Christian states in the Levant, 1098–1291

The Crusader states, or Outremer, were four Catholic polities that existed in the Levant from 1098 to 1291. Following the principles of feudalism, the foundation for these polities was laid by the First Crusade, which was proclaimed by the Latin Church in 1095 in order to reclaim the Holy Land after it was lost to the 7th-century Muslim conquest. Situated on the Eastern Mediterranean, the four states were, in order from north to south: the County of Edessa (1098–1150), the Principality of Antioch (1098–1268), the County of Tripoli (1102–1289), and the Kingdom of Jerusalem (1099–1291). The three northern states covered an area in what is now southeastern Turkey, northwestern Syria, and northern Lebanon; and the Kingdom of Jerusalem, the southernmost and most prominent state, covered an area in what is now Israel, Palestine, southern Lebanon, and western Jordan. The description "Crusader states" can be misleading, as from 1130 onwards, very few people among the Franks were Crusaders. Medieval and modern writers use the term "Outremer" as a synonym, derived from the French word for overseas.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Principality of Antioch</span> Crusader state in the Levant from 1098 to 1268

The Principality of Antioch was one of the Crusader states created during the First Crusade which included parts of modern-day Turkey and Syria. The principality was much smaller than the County of Edessa or the Kingdom of Jerusalem. It extended around the northeastern edge of the Mediterranean, bordering the County of Tripoli to the south, Edessa to the east, and the Byzantine Empire or the Kingdom of Armenia to the northwest, depending on the date.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Battle of Ager Sanguinis</span> Battle in the Middle East in 1119

In the Battle of Ager Sanguinis, also known as the Battle of the Field of Blood, the Battle of Sarmada, or the Battle of Balat, Roger of Salerno's Crusader army of the Principality of Antioch was annihilated by the army of Ilghazi of Mardin, the Artuqid ruler of Aleppo on 28 June 1119.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pons, Count of Tripoli</span> Count of Tripoli from 1112 to 1137

Pons was count of Tripoli from 1112 to 1137. He was a minor when his father, Bertrand, died in 1112. He swore fealty to the Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos in the presence of a Byzantine embassy. His advisors sent him to Antioch to be educated in the court of Tancred of Antioch, ending the hostilities between the two crusader states. Tancred granted four important fortresses to Pons in the Principality of Antioch. Since Pons held his inherited lands in fief of the kings of Jerusalem, Tancred's grant strengthened the autonomy of the County of Tripoli. On his deathbed, Tancred also arranged the marriage of his wife, Cecile of France, to Pons.

Constance of Hauteville (1128–1163) was the ruling princess of Antioch from 1130 to 1163. She was the only child of Bohemond II of Antioch and Alice of Jerusalem. Constance succeeded her father at the age of two after he fell in battle, although his cousin Roger II of Sicily laid claim to Antioch. Alice assumed the regency, but the Antiochene noblemen replaced her with her father, Baldwin II of Jerusalem. After he died in 1131, Alice again tried to take control of the government, but the Antiochene barons acknowledged the right of her brother-in-law Fulk of Anjou to rule as regent for Constance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bohemond III of Antioch</span> Prince of Antioch from 1163 to 1201

Bohemond III of Antioch, also known as Bohemond the Child or the Stammerer, was Prince of Antioch from 1163 to 1201. He was the elder son of Constance of Antioch and her first husband, Raymond of Poitiers. Bohemond ascended to the throne after the Antiochene noblemen dethroned his mother with the assistance of the lord of Armenian Cilicia, Thoros II. He fell into captivity in the Battle of Harim in 1164, but the victorious Nur ad-Din, atabeg of Aleppo released him to avoid coming into conflict with the Byzantine Empire. Bohemond went to Constantinople to pay homage to Manuel I Komnenos, who persuaded him to install a Greek Orthodox patriarch in Antioch. The Latin patriarch of Antioch, Aimery of Limoges, placed Antioch under interdict. Bohemond restored Aimery only after the Greek patriarch died during an earthquake in 1170.

The Treaty of Deabolis was an agreement made in 1108 between Bohemond I of Antioch and Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos, in the wake of the First Crusade. It is named after the Byzantine fortress of Deabolis. Although the treaty was not immediately enforced, it was intended to make the Principality of Antioch a vassal state of the Byzantine Empire.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Battle of Harran</span> Battle in 1104

The Battle of Harran took place on 7 May 1104 between the Crusader states of the Principality of Antioch and the County of Edessa, and the Seljuk Turks. It was the first major battle against the newfound Crusader states in the aftermath of the First Crusade, marking a key turning point against Frankish expansion. The battle had a disastrous effect on the Principality of Antioch as the Turks regained territory earlier lost.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tancred, Prince of Galilee</span> Italo-Norman leader of the First Crusade (1075-1112)

Tancred was an Italo-Norman leader of the First Crusade who later became Prince of Galilee and regent of the Principality of Antioch. Tancred came from the house of Hauteville and was the great-grandson of Norman lord Tancred of Hauteville.

Alice of Jerusalem was a Princess consort of Antioch by marriage to Bohemond II of Antioch. She engaged in a longlasting power struggle during the reign of her daughter Constance of Antioch.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crusades</span> Religious wars of the High Middle Ages

The Crusades were a series of religious wars initiated, supported, and sometimes directed by the Christian Latin Church in the medieval period. The best known of these military expeditions are those to the Holy Land in the period between 1095 and 1291 that had the objective of reconquering Jerusalem and its surrounding area from Muslim rule after the region had been conquered by the Rashidun Caliphate centuries earlier. Beginning with the First Crusade, which resulted in the conquest of Jerusalem in 1099, dozens of military campaigns were organised, providing a focal point of European history for centuries. Crusading declined rapidly after the 15th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem</span>

The timeline of the Kingdom of Jerusalem presents important events in the history of the Kingdom of Jerusalem—a Crusader state in modern day Israel and Jordan—in chronological order. The kingdom was established after the First Crusade in 1099. Its first ruler Godfrey of Bouillon did not take the title of king and swore fealty to the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, Daimbert. Godfrey's brother and successor Baldwin I was crowned the first king of Jerusalem without doing homage to the patriarch in 1100. By 1153, Baldwin I and his successors captured all towns on the Palestinian coast with the support of Pisan, Genoese and Venetian fleets and also took control of the caravan routes between Egypt and Syria. The kings regularly administered other crusader states—the Counties of Edessa and Tripoli and the Principality of Antioch—on behalf of their absent or underage rulers.

Robert fitz-Fulk the Leper, also known as Robert Fulcoy, Robert the Leprous, or Robert of Saone, was a powerful baron in the Principality of Antioch.

Rainald I Masoir, also known as Renaud I Masoir, was constable of the Principality of Antioch from around 1126, and also baillif of the principality from 1132. Although he was a prominent military commander and held important offices, most details of his life are unknown. He received his first estates in the southern regions of Antioch in the 1110s. He made the strong fortress of Margat the center of his domains. He regularly witnessed the Antiochene rulers' diplomas from the 1120s. He was most probably still the actual ruler of the principality when he died.

The siege of Aleppo by Baldwin II of Jerusalem and his allies lasted from 6 October 1124 to 25 January 1125. It ended in a Crusader withdrawal following the arrival of a relief force led by Aqsunqur al-Bursuqi.

The Lordship of Marash was a territorial lordship in northeastern Cilicia between 1104 and 1149, centred on the city of Marash. One of the lesser Crusader states, it played a major role in the defence of the northern frontier in the 1130s and 1140s under Lords Geoffrey and Baldwin. Its position became untenable after the fall of Edessa in 1146.

References

  1. Treadgold 1997, p. 454.
  2. Harris 2003, p. 48.
  3. Treadgold 1997, p. 456.
  4. 1 2 Lock 2006, p. 14.
  5. Norwich 1992, p. 9.
  6. Norwich 1992, p. 19.
  7. Norwich 1992, pp. 39, 68.
  8. 1 2 Norwich 1992, p. 99.
  9. 1 2 Harris 2003, p. 50.
  10. Norwich 1992, pp. 103–105.
  11. Norwich 1992, p. 127.
  12. Lock 2006, p. 15.
  13. Jotischky 2017, p. 42.
  14. Treadgold 1997, p. 610.
  15. 1 2 Lilie 1993, p. 2 (note 3).
  16. Treadgold 1997, pp. 610, 613.
  17. Norwich 1992, p. 227.
  18. Norwich 1992, pp. 228, 233.
  19. Norwich 1992, pp. 243–244.
  20. Treadgold 1997, p. 615.
  21. 1 2 Lock 2006, p. 18.
  22. Treadgold 1997, p. 616.
  23. Norwich 1992, pp. 195–196.
  24. Norwich 1992, pp. 259–260.
  25. 1 2 3 Lock 2006, p. 20.
  26. Treadgold 1997, p. 619.
  27. 1 2 Barber 2012, p. 4.
  28. 1 2 Jotischky 2017, p. 50.
  29. Lock 2006, pp. 20–21.
  30. 1 2 3 4 Lock 2006, p. 21.
  31. Norwich 1992, p. 277.
  32. Asbridge 2004, p. 106.
  33. Asbridge 2000, p. 92.
  34. Asbridge 2004, p. 119.
  35. Asbridge 2004, p. 130.
  36. Asbridge 2004, pp. 134–137.
  37. Asbridge 2004, p. 142.
  38. 1 2 Lock 2006, p. 22.
  39. Asbridge 2004, p. 143.
  40. Asbridge 2004, pp. 143–144.
  41. Asbridge 2004, pp. 146–147.
  42. Asbridge 2004, pp. 157–158.
  43. Asbridge 2000, pp. 30, 32–33.
  44. Maalouf 1984, p. 19.
  45. Asbridge 2004, p. 156.
  46. 1 2 Asbridge 2004, p. 188.
  47. Maalouf 1984, pp. 23–24.
  48. Asbridge 2004, pp. 171–172.
  49. Asbridge 2004, p. 179.
  50. Lilie 1993, p. 34.
  51. Maalouf 1984, pp. 25–26.
  52. Asbridge 2004, pp. 184–185.
  53. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 29.
  54. Asbridge 2004, pp. 192–193.
  55. Asbridge 2004, pp. 200–201.
  56. 1 2 3 Lock 2006, p. 23.
  57. Maalouf 1984, pp. 29–31.
  58. Asbridge 2004, p. 205.
  59. Asbridge 2004, pp. 207–210.
  60. Maalouf 1984, pp. 32–33.
  61. Asbridge 2004, p. 217.
  62. Asbridge 2004, pp. 221–225.
  63. Asbridge 2000, p. 93.
  64. Asbridge 2004, p. 232.
  65. Asbridge 2004, pp. 234–239.
  66. Maalouf 1984, pp. 34–35.
  67. Asbridge 2004, pp. 245, 255.
  68. Asbridge 2000, p. 37.
  69. 1 2 3 Barber 2012, p. 81.
  70. Asbridge 2004, p. 248.
  71. 1 2 Asbridge 2004, pp. 249–250.
  72. 1 2 Lilie 1993, p. 41.
  73. Lilie 1993, p. 40.
  74. Hamilton 2016, p. 10.
  75. Asbridge 2000, pp. 39–41.
  76. Asbridge 2000, pp. 37, 129.
  77. Harris 2003, p. 75.
  78. Lilie 1993, pp. 42–43.
  79. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 43.
  80. 1 2 3 Lock 2006, p. 25.
  81. Lilie 1993, p. 62.
  82. Lilie 1993, p. 63.
  83. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 45.
  84. Hamilton 2016, p. 15.
  85. Lilie 1993, p. 64.
  86. Hamilton 2016, p. 16.
  87. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 51.
  88. Barber 2012, p. 74.
  89. Hamilton 2016, p. 17.
  90. Harris 2003, p. 81.
  91. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 52.
  92. Maalouf 1984, p. 68.
  93. Asbridge 2000, p. 70.
  94. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 53.
  95. 1 2 3 4 Lock 2006, p. 27.
  96. 1 2 3 Asbridge 2000, p. 55.
  97. 1 2 3 4 Lock 2006, p. 28.
  98. Lilie 1993, p. 72.
  99. Lilie 1993, p. 73.
  100. Barber 2012, pp. 16–17, 83.
  101. Barber 2012, p. 84.
  102. Asbridge 2000, p. 57.
  103. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 60.
  104. Lock 2006, pp. 29, 145.
  105. Asbridge 2000, p. 131.
  106. 1 2 Lock 2006, p. 29.
  107. 1 2 Treadgold 1997, p. 626.
  108. Asbridge 2000, p. 62.
  109. Asbridge 2000, pp. 62–63.
  110. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 64.
  111. Barber 2012, p. 359.
  112. Asbridge 2000, p. 63.
  113. Lilie 1993, pp. 75–76, 80–81.
  114. 1 2 3 4 Lock 2006, p. 30.
  115. Asbridge 2000, pp. 112–113.
  116. Asbridge 2000, p. 113.
  117. Asbridge 2000, p. 130.
  118. Asbridge 2000, pp. 64, 115.
  119. Asbridge 2000, p. 115.
  120. Asbridge 2000, pp. 117–119.
  121. Barber 2012, p. 98.
  122. Barber 2012, p. 99.
  123. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 120.
  124. 1 2 3 4 Lock 2006, p. 31.
  125. Asbridge 2000, p. 136.
  126. Norwich 1992, p. 304.
  127. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 61.
  128. Lilie 1993, pp. 85–86.
  129. Lilie 1993, pp. 87–90.
  130. Barber 2012, p. 103.
  131. Lilie 1993, p. 86.
  132. Asbridge 2000, p. 67.
  133. Asbridge 2000, pp. 69, 139–140, 167.
  134. 1 2 3 Asbridge 2000, p. 69.
  135. 1 2 Barber 2012, p. 104.
  136. 1 2 3 Asbridge 2000, p. 73.
  137. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 74.
  138. Barber 2012, p. 122.
  139. Barber 2012, p. 123.
  140. Maalouf 1984, p. 93.
  141. Asbridge 2000, pp. 75, 80, 143–144.
  142. 1 2 Barber 2012, p. 132.
  143. Asbridge 2000, p. 81.
  144. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 82.
  145. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 83.
  146. 1 2 3 4 5 Asbridge 2000, p. 84.
  147. Barber 2012, p. 138.
  148. Lock 2006, p. 36.
  149. Maalouf 1984, pp. 97–98.
  150. 1 2 Lock 2006, p. 37.
  151. Asbridge 2000, p. 85.
  152. 1 2 3 Asbridge 2000, p. 87.
  153. Barber 2012, p. 143.
  154. 1 2 3 Lock 2006, p. 39.
  155. Asbridge 2000, p. 147.
  156. Asbridge 2000, p. 89.
  157. 1 2 Barber 2012, p. 152.
  158. Maalouf 1984, p. 113.
  159. 1 2 Asbridge 2000, p. 90.
  160. Norwich 1992, p. 312.
  161. 1 2 3 4 Buck 2017, p. 22.
  162. Lock 2006, p. 40.
  163. Buck 2017, p. 221.
  164. Maalouf 1984, pp. 115–116.
  165. Lilie 1993, p. 101.
  166. Buck 2017, p. 24.
  167. 1 2 3 4 5 Lock 2006, p. 41.
  168. Lilie 1993, p. 106.
  169. Barber 2012, p. 149.
  170. Asbridge 2000, p. 160.
  171. Buck 2017, p. 25.
  172. Asbridge 2000, p. 161.
  173. Hamilton 2016, pp. 30, 32.
  174. Lock 2006, p. 42.
  175. Lilie 1993, p. 103.
  176. Lilie 1993, pp. 106–107.
  177. Buck 2017, p. 27.
  178. 1 2 3 Lock 2006, p. 43.
  179. Lilie 1993, pp. 117–118.
  180. Buck 2017, p. 29.
  181. Lilie 1993, p. 121.
  182. Lilie 1993, p. 126.
  183. Lilie 1993, p. 129.
  184. Hamilton 2016, pp. 34–35.
  185. 1 2 Hamilton 2016, p. 35.
  186. 1 2 Buck 2017, p. 33.
  187. 1 2 3 Buck 2017, p. 34.
  188. Hamilton 2016, pp. 36, 38.
  189. 1 2 Lock 2006, p. 45.
  190. Buck 2017, pp. 34–35.
  191. Lilie 1993, pp. 136–137.
  192. Lilie 1993, p. 137.
  193. Buck 2017, p. 35.
  194. Barber 2012, p. 180.
  195. Weltecke 2006, p. 113.
  196. Weltecke 2006, pp. 113–117.

Sources