Diaconescu, Marius (szerk.): Mediaevalia Transilvanica 1998 (2. évfolyam, 1. szám)
Relaţii internaţionale
26 Marius Diaconescu kingdom" to regain the boundaries and marginal lands from any rebel, by virtue of the power given to him by God to defend his rights132. The document presented reveals the conception Louis the Great had about the vassality relations. The following principles can be summarised:- The suzerain was the "lawful" master of the vassal;- The suzerain rendered the vassal’s insignia of power;-The relation between the suzerain and the vassal, which presumes obligations form both sides was recorded within a written document;-The vassal had to pay several taxes and honour certain material requirements;- The suzerain was the beneficiary of "the entitlement and order conferred by birth", meaning that he could inherit the power over the vassal from his predecessor;- The king had the responsibility, according to the tradition and customs of the kingdom, to initiate armed actions in case of rebellion;- Disrespect towards the suzerain’s rights meant that the vassal was rebelling and, consequently, he had to be punished by means of military repression;- The suzerain’s power to defend his rights was given by God. Even though the document does not record this, a comparison with the information in the 13th century, mentioned above, allows us to presume that there was also a military obligation - auxilium - probably mutual. This also comes out from the events connected to the Hungarian campaign south of the Danube in the following year, when Vladislav Vlaicu was asked to offer his military support133. There are signs of an attempt of the Hungarian king to reform the vassality relationships as well. Louis of Anjou's conception is closest to the Western vision on the feudal relationships. He applied it in the case of other vassals also, at the Southern boundaries as well as the Eastern ones. The explicit aim of the military campaign from 1365 is somehow different from the real one. We do not know for sure if there was eventually a real campaign against the Romanian voivode134. It is only certain that during the summer of that year the Bulgarian Czardom of Vidin was conquered. Probably this was the initial objective of stalling the military campaign from 136513S. The Hungarian king took 132 Ibidem: „... nosque, prout a Deo nobis iura nostra defendendi facultas attribuitor et potestas, circa reoptencionem ipsius terre n[...], qui ex antiqua consuetudine sanctorum regum piorum nostrorum predecessorum et consuetudine regni Hungarici approbata ad [...Istificandas metas et confmia eiusdem regni noştri a faucibus quorumlibet rebellium rebellando, ipsi regno nostro reapplicare et reannectere, astricti et obligati totis nisibus inhyamus et toto posse anhelamus...“. 133 DRH. D., I, pp. 88, 90-91, 93-95, 96-97. 134 From the 23rdto the 30th of June the king was in the Severin Banat: P. Engel, Királyitineráriumok, p. 30. Gy. Kristó, Az Anjou-kor, p. 152, does not leave out the possibility that the Romanian voivode had obeyed before the moment when the Hungarian army crossed the boundaries into Wallachia. 135 Gy. Kristó, Az Anjou kor, p. 153, claims that during 1360, the Hungarian king had to face a Romanian-Bulgarian-Serbian coalition, reinforced by matrimonial relations, in the Balkans. Initially, the campaign from Bulgaria was unleashed against Vladislav Vlaicu whom the Hungarian king succeeded in taking out from the coalition. P. Engel, Gy. Kristó., A. Kubinyi, op. cit., p. 85. Homán
