Talk:Latin Patriarchate of Antioch

So... something's wrong

The running text from the century-old Catholic Encyclopedia says the patriarch at the time of the fall of Antioch was "Christian" while the list below states that it was Opizzo. Was that his episcopal name? or someone's just wrong? — LlywelynII 07:06, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Just a typo I suppose. His name was definitely Opizo - he's fairly well known, he was actually one of Pope Innocent IV's many nephews. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:58, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I see you've already written a lengthy article about Opizzo Fieschi :) I think the confusion in the Catholic Encyclopdia stems from Eubel's Hierarchica catholica, which mentions a "Christianus" following Opizzo. But this cites a letter of Alexander IV to the patriarch, which doesn't mention him by name but does mention "Christians", so perhaps Eubel misread it. Eubel also cites a letter from Urban IV, but that one doesn't actually name the patriarch either. Since there are no other letters appointing a new patriarch, we can probably assume that Opizzo was patriarch until 1268. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:15, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

See also Hamilton's Latin Church in the Crusader States (p. 232), which mentions that Claude Cahen already proved that the supposed "Elias" and "Christian" after Opizo are due to misunderstanding of the sources. Adam Bishop (talk) 23:02, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

To clarify further, Hamilton cites Cahen's, Syrie du Nord, which explains why there were no patriarchs of Antioch named Elias and Christian - you can read it here, paragraphs 5 and 6, or about p. 662 in the actual book. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)