Diaconescu, Marius (szerk.): Mediaevalia Transilvanica 1998 (2. évfolyam, 1. szám)
Relaţii internaţionale
22 Marius Diaconescu Steward (magister dapiferorum regalium)110 allows any kind of assumptions. Anyway, if one admitted that Basarab reoccupied Severin after the 1330 victory, then an explanation would have to be given, still hypothetical, concerning the way in which the king regained domination of the Severin Banate in 1335. Much more plausible would be the assumption that Basarab's victory was followed by the conquest of Severin. Anyway, the question is still disputable111. The new Hungarian king, Louis I (1342 - 1382) inherited from his father the statu quo established by the failed campaign in 1330. Some time during the first year of Louis I's reign a substantial change occurred in the relations with Wallachia. John of Târnave's chronicle (Vita Ludovicii) contains a piece of information highly contested by some historians. After the king would have come to Transylvania to suppress an uprising of the Saxons who refused to pay the usual material obligation {census), in 1344, the ceremony of pledging vassality by the Wallachian voivode would have taken place112 *. We must identify the informational basis, which allowed the elaboration of this chapter in the author's text. The information is perfectly valid from the point of view of the basic facts: the pledge of the Wallachian voivode. As we will see, in 1365, Louis I requested from Vladislav Vlaicu, the new Wallachian voivode, to take his oath of obedience, with all its implications. This had a precedent, which could only be the pledge of his forerunner. Nicholas Alexander's oath is also confirmed by documentary sources of the age. First of all, the date of this event is controvertible: 1344 or afterwards? In a document from 1355, the king praises the special services brought by the bishop of Oradea, Demetrius: "he more than once set off to Alexander, son of Basarab, our Wallachian voivode, on the occasion of negotiating, settling and reinforcement the peace and understanding between us and him'"13. The document confirms the chronicler's assertion and even partially corrects it. The homage was expressed subsequent to some negotiations (that is diplomatic pressures) led by a royal servant, a high clerical personality. Louis I's approach is part of the initial period of his reign, when, naturally, the subjects had to pledge their obedience to the suzerain. Which were the actual premises determining the Romanian voivode to swear his faithfulness is impossible to establish. Dating bishop Demetrius’ deputations further complicates precisely dating when the homage took place. The 110 This dignity was constantly held between 1322 and 1341: ibidem, p. 46. 111 The demonstration made by Maria Hóiban, op. cit., pp. 135-138, is not justified. 112 „De obedientia Alexandri wayuode Transalpini/ Cum autem esset in partibus memoratis. quidam princeps seu baro potentissimus Alexander wayuoda Transalpinus ditioni eiusdem subiect us. qui tempore quondam Kamii regis patris sui a via fidelitatis divertendo rebellaverat, et per multa tempóra in rebellione permanserat, audita pietatis ac etiam postestatis eiusdem Lodowici regis fama. ad ipsutn sponte personaliter veniens circa conßnia ipsarum partium ad pedes regie maiestatis humo tenus est prostratus, et ad obedientiam ac fidelitatem debitam reductus et integritatus solennia munera et exenia, cledonia prestando et suum dominium ac sanctam coronam recognoscendo cum gaudio et letitia ad propria remeavit, et ab illő tempore fidelitatem conservavit", Johannes de Thurocz, Chronica Hungarorum, (ed. Elisabeth Galántai et Julius Kristóf I, Budapest, 1985, [§133], P-3162 ,,ad Alexanderm Bozorabi, wayuodam nostrumTransalpinum. occasione pads et concordie inter nos et eundern tractande, disponende et firmande“, DRH. D„ I, pp. 70-71.
