Agnes of Courtenay

Agnes of Courtenay
The annulment of the marriage of Agnes and Amalric
Born	c. 1136
Died	c. 1184
Spouse	Reynald of Marash Amalric of Jerusalem Hugh of Ibelin Reginald of Sidon
Issue	Baldwin IV of Jerusalem Sibylla of Jerusalem
House	House of Courtenay
Father	Joscelin II of Courtenay
Mother	Beatrice of Saone

Agnes of Courtenay (c. 1136 – c. 1184) was a Frankish noblewoman who held considerable influence in the Kingdom of Jerusalem during the reign of her son, King Baldwin IV. Though she was never queen, she has been described as the most powerful woman in the kingdom's history after Queen Melisende.

Agnes was of high birth but an impoverished young widow when she married Amalric of Jerusalem. They had two children, Sibylla and Baldwin. When Amalric unexpectedly inherited the crown in 1163, the High Court of Jerusalem refused to accept Agnes as queen and insisted that Amalric repudiate her. Agnes contracted two further advantageous marriages, to powerful noblemen Hugh of Ibelin and Reginald of Sidon successively.

Agnes's influence grew rapidly after Amalric died in 1174 and their teenage son, Baldwin IV, became king. Despite having been separated from him since his infancy, she became Baldwin's trusted advisor. Since he suffered from leprosy, he could not marry and was growing weaker. Agnes selected government officials and influenced succession by choosing husbands for both Sibylla and Isabella, Amalric's daughter by his second wife, Maria Comnena. She advised Baldwin to have Sibylla marry Guy of Lusignan, who thus became the king-in-waiting, and when Baldwin decided to disinherit Guy, Agnes convinced him and the nobility to crown Sibylla's son, Baldwin V, instead. The leper king died in early 1185; she died around the same time, possibly somewhat earlier.

Count Raymond III of Tripoli and the brothers Balian (second husband of Maria Comnena) and Baldwin of Ibelin were Agnes's chief contenders for power, and it is from sources close to them that nearly all information about Agnes is derived. She has consequently usually been criticized by historians as self-seeking, unscrupulous, and morally loose.