Abstract
This chapter focuses on the experiences of Alice of Antioch and her daughter, Constance, in order to better understand the political culture of the Latin East, defined here as the set of attitudes and assumptions that justified the exercise of power and allowed certain individuals access to authority while denying it to others. I argue that the tendency to privilege a single category, particularly gender, in any attempt to understand attitudes defining political participation in the Latin East fails to appreciate the array of factors, ranging from religion to diplomacy to dynastic principles, that comprised the political culture of the region and determined the ability of individuals, men and women, to exercise authority.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
A. S. Tritton and H. A. R. Gibb, “The First and Second Crusades from an Anonymous Syriac Chronicle,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 65 (1933): 99.
- 2.
Thomas Asbridge, “The Significance and Causes of the Battle of the Field of Blood,” Journal of Medieval History 23 (1997): 301–316.
- 3.
See Nicholas Paul, “A Warlord’s Wisdom: Literacy and Propaganda at the time of the First Crusade,” Speculum 85 (2010): 534–566 for a timeline of Bohemond I’s activities. Tancred of Galilee, Bohemond’s nephew, served as regent when Bohemond was in captivity (1100–1103) and again from 1104 to 1111 when Bohemond left Antioch. Roger of Salerno assumed the role in 1112 after the death of Tancred, acting as regent on behalf of Bohemond’s infant son, who remained in Italy with his mother Constance until 1126. Three successive kings of Jerusalem (Baldwin II, Fulk, and Baldwin III) also served periodically as regents. While, as Asbridge suggests, these individuals may have exercised more direct authority than previously assumed, that corrective to the historiography does not alter the fact that the region witnessed an extraordinarily high turnover rate in terms of rulers. Thomas Asbridge, “William of Tyre and the First Rulers of the Latin Principality of Antioch,” in Deeds Done Beyond the Sea: Essays on William of Tyre, Cyprus and the Military Orders Presented to Peter Edbury, ed. Helen J. Nicholson and Susan Edgington (London and New York: Routledge, 2016): 35–42.
- 4.
Natasha Hodgson, “Nobility, Women and Historical Narratives of the Crusades and Latin East,” Al-Masaq: Journal of the Medieval Mediterranean 17 (2005): 63. The most prominent female ruler in the Latin East was Alice’s older sister Melisende, who was designated as Baldwin II’s heir. See H. E. Mayer, “Studies in the History of Queen Melisende of Jerusalem,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 26 (1972): 95–182. Although she is more elusive in the historiography than her older sisters, Hodierna also played a role in political affairs, serving as regent of Tripoli for her son Raymond II after the assassination of her husband, Raymond I, in 1152. Kevin James Lewis, “Countess Hodierna of Tripoli: From Crusader Politician to ‘Princesse Lointaine,’” Assuming Gender 3:1 (2013): 1–26.
- 5.
Kathryn Dutton, “Crusading and Political Culture Under Geoffrey, Count of Anjou and Duke of Normandy,” French Historical Studies 29 (2015): 419–444. Although originating within the discipline of political science, the theory of political culture has been effectively employed by historians attempting to broaden our understanding of the values, attitudes, and norms that influenced political activity and determined who had the right to govern.
- 6.
Andrea Ruddick, English Identity and Political Culture in the Fourteenth Century (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013); C. Insley, “Kings, Lords, Charters and the Political Culture of Twelfth-Century Wales,” Anglo-Norman Studies 30 (2008): 133–153; and Anne E. McLaren, Political Culture in the Reign of Elizabeth I: Queen and Commonwealth, 1558–1585 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999).
- 7.
A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea by William Archbishop of Tyre, trans. Emily Babcock and A. C. Krey, 2 vols. (New York: Octagon Books, 1976), 2:44.
- 8.
Steven Runciman, A History of the Crusades, Vol. 2: The Kingdom of Jerusalem and the Frankish East, 1100–1187 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962), 2:183.
- 9.
This was the second occasion on which Pons asserted the independence of Tripoli. In 1122, he had refused to swear obedience to King Baldwin II, forcing the king to take military action. Kevin James Lewis, The Counts of Tripoli in the Twelfth Century. Sons of Saint-Gilles (London and New York: Routledge, 2017). Similar motives undoubtedly prompted his support of Alice in 1131/1132. See also Jean Richard, Le Comté de Tripoli sous la dynastie toulousaine (1102–1187) (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1945), 20–22.
- 10.
Deeds done Beyond the Sea, 2:53. A noticeably different version of events is presented by Bar Hebraeus: “And in this year (1131) the king of Jerusalem…came…to Antioch to reign over it. But the people of Antioch shut their gates in their faces, until they swore that Antioch should be kept for the daughter of Bohaimond, until she grew up and could be married to a man who should be lord of Antioch.” The Chronicle of Gregory Abû’l Faraj the Son of Aaron, the Hebrew Physician Commonly Known as Bar Hebraeus, trans. Ernest A. Wallis Budge, 2 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 2:255.
- 11.
William condemns Alice for her willingness to ally with the Muslim leader, Zengi. Yvonne Friedman, “Peacemaking in an Age of War: When Were Cross-Religious Alliances in the Latin East Considered Treason?” in The Crusader World, ed. Adrian Boas (London and New York: Routledge, 2015), 98–105. Yet, alliances with local Muslims were neither unprecedented nor unilaterally condemned. Köhler sees nothing unusual in Alice’s actions in 1130, viewing it as merely one instance among many when circumstances aligned to produce alliances with local Muslims. Michael A. Köhler, Alliances and Treaties Between Frankish and Muslim Rulers in the Middle East: Cross-Cultural Diplomacy in the Period of the Crusades, trans. Peter M. Holt (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 133. He echoes the views of Asbridge, who characterizes Latin-Muslim alliances as almost endemic to the diplomatic and military nature of Antioch. According to Asbridge, such alliances, although as common as they were expedient, were often presented in a negative light by contemporary Latin chroniclers due to ideological reasons. See Asbridge, “The Crusader Community at Antioch: The Impact of Interaction with Byzantium and Islam,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 9 (1999): 305–325. See also James, The Counts of Tripoli, 155.
- 12.
The belief that opposition to Alice’s bid for power was, in fact, opposition to female rule seems to stem almost exclusively from the account of events provided by William of Tyre. Scholars who accept William’s narrative without qualification tend to conclude that in spite of considerable support among leading nobles in the region, the majority “feared a woman’s rule.” Steven Runciman, A History of the Crusades, 188. Similar interpretations implying that gender was central to events can be found in Jill N. Claster, Sacred Violence. The European Crusades to the Middle East, 1095–1396 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009), 143–144; Matti Moosa, The Crusades: Conflict Between Christendom andIslam (Piscataway, New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 2008), 530. While some scholars have argued that female regency was prohibited by law in Antioch, Asbridge argues that any such laws were drafted in response to the actions of Alice and her daughter Constance. See Jonathan Philips, Defenders of the Holy Land: Relations Between the Latin East and the West, 1119–1187 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996), 47; Claude Cahen, La Syrie du Nord à l’époque des croisades et la principauté franque d’antioche (Paris: P. Geuthner, 1940), 440. Asbridge, “Alice of Antioch: A Case Study of Female Power in the Twelfth Century,” in The Experience of Crusading, Volume 2: Defining the Crusader Kingdom, ed. Peter Edbury and Jonathan Philips (Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 2003): 29–47, 33.
- 13.
Natasha Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2007), 181–184.
- 14.
While William of Tyre suggests that Alice encountered opposition because she intended to replace Constance, rather than rule as regent for her, his view is not corroborated by any other source. Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land, 182. William was equally critical of Roger of Salerno, viewing his death at the Battle of the Field of Blood as retribution for his attempt to disinherit Bohemond II, suggesting that this was a crime that men could commit as well. Asbridge, “William of Tyre and the First Rulers of the Latin Principality of Antioch,” 37.
- 15.
Cartulaire général de l’Ordre des Hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, 1100–1310, ed. J. Deleville le Roulx, tome 1 (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1894), nos. 103, 89; Alan V. Murray, The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A Dynastic History, 1099–1125 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 131.
- 16.
Hans Eberhard Mayer, Varia Antiochena Studien zum Kreuzfahrerfürstentum Antiochia im 12. Und frühen 13. Jahrhundert (Hannover: Hahnsche Buchandlung, 1993), nos. 2, 113–114.
- 17.
Unfortunately, much of Runciman’s discussion of Alice in this section, which is extremely critical, lacks citation, making it impossible to ascertain the source of his depiction of events. Runciman, A History of the Crusades, 183.
- 18.
Varia Antiochene, nos. 2, 113–114: “Adelicia Balduini regis Hieroslyitani Latinorum secundi filia, uxor quondam domini Boamundi, Magni Boamundi filii, excellentissimi Antiochenorum principis.”
- 19.
Mayer notes the presence of several leading opponents of Fulk at the court of Antioch during this period, including Hugh of Le Puiset, Walter I of Beirut, and Radulf of Fontanelles. Opposition to Fulk stemmed in part from his marginalization of Queen Melisende, Alice’s sister, and their father Baldwin II’s heir. While Hugh’s rebellion ultimately failed, it did succeed in forcing Fulk to grant his wife, Melisende, Baldwin’s eldest daughter and heir, a significantly greater role in ruling the kingdom. See H. E. Mayer, “The Wheel of Fortune: Seigneurial Vicissitudes Under Kings Fulk and Baldwin III of Jerusalem,” Speculum 65 (1990): 860–877.
- 20.
Asbridge, “Alice of Antioch,” 39.
- 21.
Mayer, “The Wheel of Fortune,” 865.
- 22.
Kinnamos relates a different narrative, claiming that the “principal personages in the land” approached the emperor after the death of Bohemond, proposing marriage between Constance and the youngest of the Emperor’s sons. However, while en route to Antioch, the Antiochenes “altered their intention and in place of friends and allies became very hostile to him.” Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus by John Kinnamos, trans. Charles M. Brand (Columbia: Columbia University Press, 1976), 22.
- 23.
According to William of Tyre, certain nobles, fearing that Alice intended to usurp power from her daughter, approached King Fulk: “They begged him to suggest the name of that one who…would be best fitted to wed the daughter of their lord, the heiress of her father’s estate.” Fulk then sent an embassy to the West in search of a suitable husband; Deeds done Beyond the Sea, 2:59. A different version of events is provided by Kinnamos, who suggests that Raymond was already in Jerusalem on pilgrimage, apparently incognito. Upon revealing his identity to the King, he was “induced” to wed Constance, even though she “had not yet come of age.” Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus, 22.
- 24.
Deeds Done Beyond the Sea, 79.
- 25.
Cart. Gen. desHospitallers, nos. 163, 131. She is presumed to have died by 1151, when Constance is clearly in possession of her dower lands in Latakia.
- 26.
Kinnamos, Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus, 36. Thomas Asbridge, The Creation of thePrincipality of Antioch, 1098–1130 (Woodbridge, Suffolk: The Boydell Press, 2000), 101.
- 27.
According to Ferdinand Chalandon, Jean II Comnene, 1118-143 et Manuel I Comnene, 1143-1180, 2 vols. (New York: B. Franklin, 1960), 2:122, John claimed that Alice had promised Constance to him in marriage. Raymond clearly foiled these plans. See also Michael Angold, The Byzantine Empire: A Political History, 1025–1204 (New York: Longman, 1997), 192.
- 28.
For example, see the charter issued in 1149 to the Hospitallers. Cart. Gen. des Hospitallers, nos. 183, 144.
- 29.
Cart. Gen. desHospitallers, nos. 129, 106 and nos. 170, 131.
- 30.
Charlotte Cartwright, “Before She Was Queen: Matilda of Flanders and the Use of Comitissa in the Norman Ducal Charters,” Haskins Society Journal 22 (2012): 59–81.
- 31.
According to Alex Mallett, modern historians, building on contemporary accounts such as that provided by William of Tyre, have exaggerated the impact of Inab on Antioch. See Mallett, “The Battle of Inab,” Journal of Medieval History 39 (2013): 48–60, 58.
- 32.
H. E. Mayer, says Constance, was “formally” in charge, but Patriarch Aimery was actively governing. He does not provide a source for this interpretation of their respective roles in governing. H. E. Mayer, The Crusades, trans. John Gillingham (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972), 111.
- 33.
Cart. Gen. desHospitallers, nos. 190, 148.
- 34.
Cart. Gen. desHospitallers, nos. 198, 154.
- 35.
Deeds done Beyond the Sea, 212–213.
- 36.
The candidates were Ives, count of Soissons, Walter of Falenburg, and Ralph of Merle, all arrived in the Latin East with the Second Crusade; Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land, 222.
- 37.
Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus, 136: “When Raymond prince of Antioch passed from among those here, forthwith his wife Constance offered herself and the Antiochenes’ property to the emperor, but when as aforesaid, the emperor sent the caesar to wed her, she changed her mind by common consent of the Antiochenes and joined in marriage with a certain Reginald, since they were anxious lest when the woman was wedded to Roger they should become subject to payment of tax to the Romans.” While some sources attribute Constance’s rejection of John Roger to personal whim, Choniates makes it clear that her decision was consistent with Antiochene resistance to a marital alliance that would bring them even further within the Byzantine orbit, challenging their political, religious, and financial independence.
- 38.
Runciman, A History of the Crusades, 331.
- 39.
Mayer concurs with such accounts stating “…there were no political considerations to commend the match which was opposed by the patriarch but Reynald was handsome and recklessly brave and by secretly marrying him Constance was following her own romantic inclination.” Mayer, The Crusades, 114.
- 40.
Their relationship parallels that of Ida of Boulogne and Renaud of Dammartin. Like Renaud, Raynaud’s exercise of authority was derived from marriage. Both women were able to negotiate a partnership. “The ‘Abduction’ of Ida of Boulogne: Assessing Women’s Agency in Thirteenth-Century France,” French Historical Studies 30:1 (2007): 1–20.
- 41.
Cart. Gen. desHospitallers, nos. 222, 170–171; nos. 231, 177; nos. 280, 180 and Cartulaire de l’Église du Saint Sépulcre de Jérusalem, ed. Eugène de Rozière (Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1849), nos. 88, 169–172 and nos. 89, 172–178.
- 42.
Deeds done Beyond the Sea, 284–285.
- 43.
Deeds Done Beyond the Sea, 284–285. Mayer seems to accept the account provided by William of Tyre, stating that the barons of Antioch appealed to King Baldwin, who entrusted the government to the Patriarch, “passing over the claims of Princess Constance” and antagonizing the Byzantine Emperor, who had been recognized by Raymond and Reynald as the overlord of the principality. The Crusades, 118. Cahen concurs with Mayer, arguing that Baldwin assigned responsibility for Antioch to Aimery after providing a fair dower for Constance. La syrie du nord, 405.
- 44.
The Syriac Chronicle of Michael Rabo (The Great). A Universal History from the Creation, trans. Matti Moosa (Jerusalem: Beth Antioch Press, 2014), 694.
- 45.
Unfortunately, there is a significant break in the narrative at this juncture; The Syriac Chronicle, 694.
- 46.
The exact circumstances leading up to the marriage of Maria and Manuel cannot be determined, but it seems clear that it happened in opposition to Baldwin, who had been operating under the assumption that Manuel was going to marry Melisende of Tripoli. Constance, conspiring with the Byzantines, clearly foiled his plans. The most detailed, though not completely accurate, account is provided by Kinnamos, Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus, 158–160. A briefer account appears in O City of Byzantium: Annals of Niketas Choniatēs, trans. Harry J. Magoulias (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1984), 65. Buck argues that Baldwin initially assented to Constance’s second stint as regent, but withdrew his support after learning that she had wed her daughter Maria to Emperor Manuel Comnenus. Baldwin removed Constance from power as punishment for her perceived deception. Andrew D. Buck, “Between Byzantium and Jerusalem? The Principality of Antioch, Renaud of Châtillon and the penance of Mamistra in 1158,” Mediterranean Historical Review 30:2 (2015): 107–124.
- 47.
A. S. Tritton and H. A. R. Gibb, “The First and Second Crusade from an Anonymous Syriac Chronicle,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 65 (1933): 303: “Later that year Raynald (1160) ravaged the land of Aleppo but on his way back a Turk army overtook him at the Black river, defeated his troops, took him prisoner, and put him in chains. In that year a son of the first Pitabin [Raymond of Poitiers] became ruler of Antioch; he drove out his mother who went to Latakia.” Cahen argues that the French barons in Antioch accused Constance of requesting a garrison from Manuel, ousting her from power accordingly. Cahen, La Syrie du Nord, 407.
- 48.
Chron. of Bar Hebraeus, 287. Opponents of Alice brought Toros from Cilicia: “And he went into Antioch and drove the queen out of the city. And confirmed her son in the kingdom.” A Charter issued by Bohemond III in 1182 identifies the abbey of Josaphat as the place of Constance’s burial, alongside her son Reynald and her daughter Philippa. Varia Antiochene, nos. 4, 119–121.
- 49.
Sylvia Schein, “Women in Medieval Colonial Society: The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem in the Twelfth Century,” in Gendering the Crusades, ed. Susan Edgington and Sarah Lambert (New York: Columbia University Press, 2002), 140–154 and Mayer, “Wheel of Fortune,” 866.
- 50.
Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land, 159.
- 51.
Hodgson suggests that Alice’s success in garnering the support of such powerful men was due in part to the promise of an alliance with Byzantium, which would have secured her followers wealth as well as superior protection against Muslim attacks. Natasha Hodgson, Women, Crusading and the Holy Land, 84. Although Lilie suggests Alice was motivated primary by personal ambition, he does not deny the potential benefit of an alliance with Byzantium, particularly in light of the threat posed by Zengi. Ralph-Johannes Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States 1096–1204 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988), 103. Runciman, while also expressing opprobrium for Alice’s ambition, reaches a similar conclusion, arguing that an alliance with Byzantium “offered the best solution for the preservation of northern Syria.” Runciman, A History of the Crusades, 198. Admittedly, this theory fails to account for her first failed attempt to seize power, which was foiled by her father, Baldwin II. Unfortunately, this instance is more shrouded in mystery than the others, preventing an adequate understanding of how and why events transpired the way they did. One potential, and admittedly speculative, hypothesis is that Baldwin was aware of his daughter’s ambitions and moved to preempt them.
- 52.
Andrew D. Buck, “Between Byzantium and Jerusalem,” 107–124.
- 53.
A complete account of the terms of the Treaty is included in the Alexiad of Anna Comnene, trans. E. R. A. Sewter (Penguin, 1969), 423–424. Magdalino argues that John II was “as determined as his father to implement the Treaty of Devol,” proposing the marriage of his youngest son Manuel to Constance accordingly. He only resorted to military action after his attempt to resolve the issue diplomatically failed. Paul Magdalino, The Empire of Manuel I Komnenos, 1143–1180 (Cambridge, 1993), 29. The ramifications of the Treaty of Devol on Antiochene independence are the topic of extensive debate among scholars. What is clear is that the leaders of Antioch were increasingly subject to the authority of the Byzantine Emperor, and the terms of Devol were often used to legitimate their claims. Asbridge, “William of Tyre and the first rulers of the Latin principality of Antioch,” 41.
- 54.
One of the more contentious elements of the treaty was the right of the Emperor to appoint the city’s Patriarch. According to Lilie, one of the most forceful opponents of an alliance to Byzantium was the Latin Patriarch, Radulph, who feared his influence would be undermined. Lilie, Byzantium and the Crusader States, 104. See also Runciman, A History of the Crusades, 199. Such fears were not unfounded, as evidenced by the return of Greek Patriarch in 1150 following the defeat of Reynald.
- 55.
The Kings of Jerusalem, however, faced competing interests of their own. While Baldwin II, Fulk, and Baldwin III offered military and political support, the constant need to intervene in Antioch proved costly. See Murray, “The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem,” 142. The principality was eventually cut loose entirely by King Amalric, who shifted the attention of the Kingdom to the south, paving the way for Byzantine control of the North. Rather than viewing Amalric’s pivot south as an abrupt departure from previous diplomatic policy towards Antioch, I would view it as a culmination of events stemming from the death of Bohemond II.
- 56.
For Maria’s fate, see Lynda Garland, Byzantine Empresses: Women and Power in Byzantium, AD 527–1204 (Routledge, 1999), 206–209; Erin L. Jordan, TheWomen of Antioch: Gender, Power and Political Culture in the Latin East, forthcoming. On Agnes of Hungary, see Theresa Earenfight, Queenship in Medieval Europe (New York: Palgrave, 2013), 174.
Bibliography
Primary Sources
Alexiad of Anna Comnene. Translated by E. R. A. Sewter. New York: Penguin, 1969.
Cartulaire de l’Église du Saint Sépulcre de Jérusalem. Edited by Eugène de Rozière. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1849.
Cartulaire général de l’Ordre des Hospitaliers de Saint-Jean de Jérusalem, 1100–1310, tome 1. Edited by J. Deleville le Roulx. Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1894.
The Chronicle of Gregory Abû’l Faraj the son of Aaron, the Hebrew physician commonly known as Bar Hebraeus. Vol. 2. Translated by Ernest A. Wallis Budge. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.
Deeds of John and Manuel Comnenus by John Kinnamos. Translated by Charles M. Brand. Columbia: Columbia University Press, 1976.
A History of Deeds Done Beyond the Sea by William Archbishop of Tyre. Vol. 2. Translated by Emily Babcock and A. C. Krey. New York: Octagon Books, 1976.
Mayer, Hans Eberhard. Varia Antiochena Studien zum Kreuzfahrerfürstentum Antiochia im 12. Und frühen 13. Jahrhundert. Hannover: Hahnsche Buchandlung, 1993.
O City of Byzantium: Annals of Niketas Choniatēs. Translated by Harry J. Magoulias. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1984.
The Syriac Chronicle of Michael Rabo (The Great). A Universal History from the Creation. Translated by Matti Moosa. Jerusalem: Beth Antioch Press, 2014.
Secondary Sources
Angold, Michael. The Byzantine Empire: A Political History, 1025–1204. New York: Longman, 1997.
Asbridge, Thomas. “The Significance and Causes of the Battle of the Field of Blood.” Journal of Medieval History 23 (1997): 301–316.
——–. “The Crusader Community at Antioch: The Impact of Interaction with Byzantium and Islam.” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 9 (1999): 305–325.
——–. The Creation of the Principality of Antioch, 1098–1130. Woodbridge, Suffolk: The Boydell Press, 2000.
———. “Alice of Antioch: A Case Study of Female Power in the Twelfth Century.” In The Experience of Crusading, Volume 2: Defining the Crusader Kingdom. Edited by Peter Edbury and Jonathan Philips, 29–47. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 2003.
——–. “William of Tyre and the First Rulers of the Latin Principality of Antioch.” In Deeds Done Beyond the Sea: Essays on William of Tyre, Cyprus and the Military Orders Presented to Peter Edbury, edited by Helen J. Nicholson and Susan Edington, 35–42. London and New York: Routledge, 2016.
Buck, Andrew D. “Between Byzantium and Jerusalem? The Principality of Antioch, Renaud of Châtillon and the penance of Mamistra in 1158.” Mediterranean Historical Review 30:2 (2015): 107–124.
Cahen, Claude. La Syrie du Nord à l’époque des croisades et la principauté franque d’antioche. Paris: P. Geuthner, 1940.
Cartwright, Charlotte. “Before She Was Queen: Matilda of Flanders and the Use of Comitissa in the Norman Ducal Charters.” Haskins Society Journal 22 (2012): 59–81.
Chalandon, Ferdinand. Jean II Comnene, 1118-143 et Manuel I Comnene, 1143-1180, vol. 2. New York: B. Franklin, 1960.
Claster, Jill N. Sacred Violence. The European Crusades to the Middle East, 1095–1396. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2009.
Dutton, Kathryn. “Crusading and Political Culture Under Geoffrey, Count of Anjou and Duke of Normandy.” French Historical Studies 29 (2015): 419–444.
Earenfight, Theresa. Queenship in Medieval Europe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
Friedman, Yvonne. “Peacemaking in an Age of War: When Were Cross-Religious Alliances in the Latin East Considered Treason?” In The Crusader World, edited by Adrian Boas, 98–105. London and New York: Routledge, 2015.
Garland, Lynda. Byzantine Empresses: Women and Power in Byzantium, AD 527–1204. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Gibb, H. A. R., and A. S. Tritton. “The First and Second Crusades from an Anonymous Syriac Chronicle.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 65 (1933): 69–101.
Hodgson, Natasha. “Nobility, Women and Historical Narratives of the Crusades and Latin East.” Al-Masaq: Journal of the Medieval Mediterranean 17 (2005): 61–85.
Insley, Charles. “Kings, Lords, Charters and the Political Culture of Twelfth-Century Wales.” Anglo-Norman Studies 30 (2008): 133–153.
Jordan, Erin L. “The ‘Abduction’ of Ida of Boulogne: Assessing Women’s Agency in Thirteenth-Century France.” French Historical Studies 30:1 (2007): 1–20.
——–. The Women of Antioch: Gender, Power and Political Culture in the Latin East, forthcoming.
Köhler, Michael A. Alliances and Treaties Between Frankish and Muslim Rulers in the Middle East: Cross-Cultural Diplomacy in the Period of the Crusades. Translated by Peter M. Holt. Leiden: Brill, 2013.
Lewis, Kevin James. “Countess Hodierna of Tripoli: From Crusader Politician to “Princesse Lointaine.’” Assuming Gender 3:1 (2013): 1–26.
——–. The Counts of Tripoli in the Twelfth Century. Sons of Saint-Gilles. London and New York: Routledge, 2017.
Lilie, Ralph-Johannes. Byzantium and the Crusader States 1096–1204. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988.
Mallett, Alex. “The Battle of Inab.” Journal of Medieval History 39 (2013): 48–60.
Mayer, H. E. The Crusades. Translated by John Gillingham. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1972.
——–. “Studies in the History of Queen Melisende of Jerusalem.” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 26 (1972): 95–182.
McLaren, Anne E. Political Culture in the Reign of Elizabeth I: Queen and Commonwealth, 1558–1585. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Moosa, Matti. The Crusades: Conflict Between Christendom and Islam. Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2008.
Murray, Alan V. The Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem: A Dynastic History, 1099–1125. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Paul, Nicholas. “A Warlord’s Wisdom: Literacy and Propaganda at the Time of the First Crusade.” Speculum 85 (2010): 534–566.
Philips, Jonathan. Defenders of the Holy Land: Relations Between the Latin East and the West, 1119–1187. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Richard, Jean. Le Comté de Tripoli sous la dynastie toulousaine (1102–1187). Paris: P. Geuthner, 1945.
Ruddick, Andrea. English Identity and Political Culture in the Fourteenth Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
Runciman, Steven. A History of the Crusades, Vol. 2: The Kingdom of Jerusalem and the Frankish East, 1100–1187. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1962.
Schein, Sylvia. “Women in Medieval Colonial Society: The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem in the Twelfth Century.” In Gendering the Crusades, edited by Susan Edgington and Sarah Lambert, 140–154. Columbia: Columbia University Press, 2002.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Jordan, E.L. (2019). Women of Antioch: Political Culture and Powerful Women in the Latin East. In: Tanner, H.J. (eds) Medieval Elite Women and the Exercise of Power, 1100–1400. The New Middle Ages. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01346-2_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01346-2_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-01345-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-01346-2
eBook Packages: HistoryHistory (R0)