held against

22:30 Feb 14, 2015 

Yes, I shouldn't have included (1). It's late.

22:26 Feb 14, 2015 

The two constructions have different meanings:
"... he held against them their earlier support of Mithridates" means that he held that earlier support as a grudge against them;
"Wischai't, however, was taken prisoner by the English in the Castle of Ciipar, which he held against them in 1306" is actually ambiguous. It probably means that Wischai't held (i.e. defended) the Castle of Ciipar against the English in 1306, but it could mean that, in 1306 Wischai't had the chance to get revenge against the English for having held him prisoner.

To hold out against something is to continue to oppose it, usually when that opposition is difficult to sustain.

22:10 Feb 14, 2015 

That's more common certainly, but this construction does exist. For example
"[had no] affection for the Thebans; he held against them their earlier support of Mithridates"
" taken prisoner by the English in the Castle of Ciipar, which he held against them in 1306."
“We held against them once so why not again?”

Whether it's entirely appropriate here depends on the wider context.

20:40 Feb 14, 2015 

I think it probably should have been "held out against".