The Maronites were very much Monothelites:all the contemporary sources, Orthodox (both Chalcedonian and non-Chalcedonian), Ultramontanist, Muslim and Maronite are quite agreed on that. They didn't really get weaned off of it until the pseudo-council of Florence, and even then, not completely until the council of 1736.
Yes contemporary Antiochians (Orthodox and Catholic) and Latins with an axe to grind.
and Maronites too, like the Maronite manuscript that records the Life of St. Maximos the Confessor, only the Maronite has entitled it "The Life of the wretched Maximus, whose tongue was cut out and his hand cut off for his blasphemy" or some such thing (I'm going by memory, I don't have the copy at hand but it is mentioned here:http://books.google.com/books?id=Xa1zdxyfxLYC&pg=PA63&dq=Early+Syriac+Life+of+Maximus+maronite+manuscript&hl=en&sa=X&ei=7iF9T8vAJZKi8gS75uztDA&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=Early%20Syriac%20Life%20of%20Maximus%20maronite%20manuscript&f=false
An introduction to Syriac studies By Sebastian P. Brock
More commical is the Maronites doctoring of their own old manuscripts, but not very well. Like the copy of "Pat." John Maron's Exposition of the Faith, where the Syriac is changed to exonerate him of Monotheletism, but failed to make the changes in the Garshuni (Arabic written in Syriac letters).http://books.google.com/books?id=8Ogp94y8CJgC&pg=PA160&dq=%22failed+to+make+the+same+changes+in+the+Arabic%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fjd9T-HxPIO69QTKs5iIAQ&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22failed%20to%20make%20the%20same%20changes%20in%20the%20Arabic%22&f=false
Just because the Latins couldn't distinguish us WOGS, doesn't mean we couldn't. Before 820, Theodore Abu Qurrah writes against the Maronites and reproaches them as anathematized by the Sixth Council. The next century Pope Eutychios of Alexandria identifies EP Sergius of Constantinople, Pope Cyrus of Alexandria, Emperor Heraclius etc. as "Maronites." Both writers, btw, were in communion with Rome, and Theodore points out the Maronites are not (I don't recall if Eutychios talks about that). Pat. John of Antioch (the one your Crusader friends expelled from his see) writes of the Monothelite Maronites, etc.
It is wrong to call miaphysites monophysites. It is wrong to call miathelites monothelites.
I did neither, regardless of how right or wrong that would be.
Theodosius of Ceasarea's reply to St Maximos the Confessor is a representative statement of what the Maronites taught:
"We too acknowledge the natures and different operations, namely divine and human, and that his Godhead is endowed with will and his manhood endowed with will, since his soul was not without a will. But we do not say two, lest we present him as being at war with himself" (Disputation at Bizye, CCSG 39, p. 109, 387-92).
That he is disputing with St. Maximos the Confessor should have tipped you off to the monotheletism. Btw, Theodosius was monothelite, but he was not Maronite.