CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · Places & Architecture

Phoenice Libanensis

Byzantine province (c.  394 – 635)

Architectural plans, a scale model, maps and brass measuring instruments
Places and architectureInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionJun 27, 2026
Entity authorityQ11921789 ↗
Source-derived summary

Phoenice Libanensis (Greek: Φοινίκη Λιβανησία, lit. 'Lebanese Phoenicia', also known in Latin as Phoenice Libani, or Phoenice II/Phoenice Secunda), was a province of the Roman Empire, covering the Anti-Lebanon Mountains and the territories to the east, all the way to Palmyra. It was officially created c. 392, when the Roman province of Phoenice was divided into Phoenice proper or Phoenice Paralia, and Phoenice Libanensis, a division that persisted until the region was conquered by the Muslim Arabs in the 630s.

Toponymy

Agapius of Hierapolis used the term “wilderness of Phoenicia” to refer to the steppe between Emesa and Palmyra, in the former province of Lebanese Phoenicia. During the Crusades, William of Tyre and Jacques of Vitry mention Lebanese Phoenicia in its Graeco-Roman borders and limits, undoubtedly based on the administrative and ecclesiastical geographies still known in the Roman Empire. William of Tyre goes on to call Damascus the “metropolis of Little Syria, otherwise called Lebanese Phoenicia”.

Under the Ottoman Empire, the former province of the Lebanese Phoenicia was present only in titles used by local Rûm Christians of the Patriarchate of Antioch and All the East. In the list of episcopal titles, for instance, the Archbishops of Emesa, Baalbek, and Palmyra are “exarchs over the whole of Lebanese Phoenicia”.

History

Phoenice I and Phoenice Libanensis

The province of Augusta Libanensis, mentioned in the Verona List, was short-lived, but formed the basis of the re-division of Phoenice c. 400 into the Phoenice I or Phoenice Paralia (Greek: Φοινίκη Παραλία, "coastal Phoenice"), and Phoenice II or Phoenice Libanensis (Φοινίκη Λιβανησία), with Tyre and Emesa as their respective capitals. In the Notitia Dignitatum, written shortly after the division, Phoenice I is governed by a consularis, while Libanensis is governed by a praeses, with both provinces under the Diocese of the East.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Phoenice Libanensis” is byzantine province (c.  394 – 635). The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Phoenice, Libanensis and Byzantine, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewMost useful as a place-based finding aid connecting the present description to earlier jurisdictions, maps and built evidence. The current 298-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Phoenice, Libanensis and Byzantine is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “byzantine province (c.  394 – 635)” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Place names and jurisdictional language are key evidence: both can reveal earlier catalogue descriptions and overlooked record series. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 27, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q11921789. Authority coordinates are 34.723, 36.714. None of the 1 selected statements returned an explicit reference.

Critical limits

A single description cannot reconcile every naming convention, rebuilding phase or administrative transfer associated with a place. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.

Best used for
  • Historic place names
  • Jurisdictional context
  • Routes into maps and plans
Verify next

Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Phoenice Libanensis”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Phoenice Libanensis primary sources, Phoenice Libanensis archive and Phoenice research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Phoenice Libanensis”?
  2. What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
  3. Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Phoenice Libanensis” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.