Diaconescu, Marius (szerk.): Mediaevalia Transilvanica 1998 (2. évfolyam, 1. szám)
Relaţii internaţionale
The Political Relations between Wallachia and Hungary 35 information is found in a letter issued by the king on the 11th of July 1382 in favour of some noblemen who had to take part to the Palatine's troop during the campaign from Wallachia190. Nicholas de Gara was the Palatine of that period191, the same who led other military campaigns against Wallachia. One only can speculate in what the reasons of this campaign from 1382192 were concerned given the present available information. Maybe that the appearance of the Hungarian Kingdom arms in Radu I's coat of arms means the vassality oath taken to Louis I193 194. After King Louis the Great's death, a period of internal crisis followed, with international implications. The new Wallachian voivode, Dan 1 (1383-1386), who attacked and occupied the Severin Banate194 took advantage of this context. It is interesting to notice that the Romanian knezes from the Severin region stood against the Romanian voivode, as the Wallachian army destroyed some of their assets and documents. The last years of Louis's reign were troubled by the Wallachian voivodes' independence manifestations. After 1374, the king's suzerainty over the Romanian State was not practically permanent. The failure of the Hungarian royalty is obvious, despite the campaigns from 1375 and 1382. This period of independence made up a precedent, which allowed Mircea the Old to initiate a far-reaching foreign policy, after 1386. 4. The Character of Vladislav Vlaicu's Ruling in Transylvania Wallachia's rulers (as well as Moldavia's ones beginning with the 15th century) exerted certain rights of "ruling" over some territories and lands in Hungary, situated in Transylvania. The history of these governments was approached by historiography either from the perspective of their dating, or from that of their significances195. A certain examination concerning the characters of these reigns is necessary. The Romanian historians have the propension to overbid the character of the Romanian rulers’ activity in Transylvania. It is usually considered that the territories circumscribed to the Banate of Severin and to the 190 L. B. Kumorovitz, op. cit., p. 978, doc. no. 9: ,.eo quod idem Laurentiusfilius Stephani cum eodem palatino, domino suo ad presentem exercitum nostrum ultra partes Transalpinas proficiscituratur”. 191 P. Engel. Archontológia, I, p. 4. 192 L. B. Kumorovitz, op. cit., p. 971. considers that this campaign outburst because of Radu Is response towards the institution of the Argeş Catholic bishopric. The idea was assumed by Gy. Kristó, Az Anjou-kor, p. 177. The supposition does not seem to be plausible. The absence of the necessary information does not allow us to unravel the causes of this campaign. Any assumption is only a matter of probability. 193 L. B. Kumorovitz, loc. cit. 194 DRH. D„ I, pp. 123-124. 195 D. Onciul, Titlul lui Mircea cel Bătrân şi posesiunile lui, in Convorbiri literare, XXXVI, 1902, pp. 716 et passim; P.P. Panaitescu, Mircea cel Bătrân şi suzeranitatea ungurească, AARMSI, s. DI, t. XX, 1938; I. Moga, .Marginea". Ducatul Amlaşului şi scaunul Săli ştii, in idem, Scrieri istorice. 1926-1946, Cluj, 1973, pp. 56 et passim; etc.
