University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
Link to University of Wisconsin Digital Collections
The History Collection

Page View

Baldwin, M. W. (ed.) / The first hundred years
(1969)

XIX: The Decline and Fall of Jerusalem, 1174-1189,   pp. 590-621 PDF (13.0 MB)


Page 601

Ch. XIX THE DECLINE AND FALL OF JERUSALEM 6o i 
cern us here. The latter, understandably enough, was not prepared to submit
quietly. Nor was he without friends; for the patriarch and the masters of
the Templars and Hospitallers pleaded before the high court in his behalf.
Neither the king nor his barons were moved, however. Finally in December
1183 or early in 1184 the king strengthened his nephew's position and concluded
his action against Guy by bestowing the bailliage on Raymond of Tripoli.
The move seems to have been popular. Certainly the count's elevation to the
regency a second time marked a personal triumph for himself. Further, it
seems a clear indication that the native barons, of whom he was the most
prominent, had recovered their influence in the kingdom. To provide against
all possible contingencies and especially to forestall the expected resistance
of the court party, elaborate arrangements were made concerning the bailliage
and the guardianship of the boy-king. 
 The baiiiage was to last until the majority of Baldwin V, that is, ten years.
To defray expenses Raymond was given Beirut and its revenues. All other castles
were to be kept by the military orders. The guardianship of the boy-king
was entrusted to Joscelin, the next nearest male relative, lest Raymond be
held responsible in the event of the boy's death. If Baldwin V died before
the ten years had elapsed, a committee consisting of the pope, the emperor,
and the kings of France and England, was to choose between Sibyl and Isabel,
the two daughters of king Amairic by different marriages. Until the choice
was made Raymond was to continue as procurator. All were required to give
their oath to him and to the boy-king. 
 The barons' hesitation to admit Sibyl's rights without the action of the
committee is understandable. They feared her husband, not herself, and presumably
hoped to invalidate her claims (and Guy's) with the help of outside arbitration.
Isabel had married Humphrey, the son of Stephanie of Kerak and Montréal,
and therefore now the stepson of Reginald. No doubt the barons hoped he would
prove more amenable to their wishes than Guy, although in this they were
to be disappointed. In the main the provisions adequately guaranteed an orderly
solution of all foreseeable contingencies as far as law was concerned. As
will be seen, they failed because a conspiracy successfully defied the law.
 We have seen that after ii8o the existence of two parties contesting the
control of the kingdom of Jerusalem was increasingly evident. The events
of 1183—1184 so aggravated the dissension between these two groups
as to make their composition more clear. 


Go up to Top of Page