Diaconescu, Marius (szerk.): Mediaevalia Transilvanica 1998 (2. évfolyam, 1. szám)
Relaţii internaţionale
6 Marius Diaconescu reasonable demonstrations. S. losipescu takes the question into consideration from another perspective, adding valuable nuances, in a collective volume about the process of constitution of the Romanian states7. Ş. Papacostea has paid during the latest decades a special attention to the birth of the Romanian states, going over various topics connected with the ones concerning the relations with the Hungarian kingdom. The latest serious researches on this subject in the Romanian historiography have meant to prove the importance of the international commercial routes, which crossed the territories of the Romanian states for their establishment as states8 or approached the reinterpretation of some new sources published by Hungarian historians9. A valuable synthesis referring to the 13th century Romanians properly places the evolutions of the Romanian space within the international frame and offers a survey over the Romanians' history of that age10. This contribution is especially precious for the understanding of the evolution of the Hungarian suzerainty over the Southern-Carpathian territories during the 13th century. The Hungarian historiography, beside those general studies approaching the Anjou dynasty, in which the connections with Wallachia were also included, like A. Huber's11 and B. Homán's12 works, records particular attempts to research the topic. J. Pataki's13 endeavour to bring together the contributions of Romanian and Hungarian historians has tried to present a general picture of the relations established between the kings of Hungary and the voivodes of the Romanian states during the 14th century. The latest contribution is L. B. Kumorovitz's14 work, which reveals original documentary information and makes the correction of a wrong dated conflict between the Romanian voivode and King Louis. The diversity of the historiographic approaches of the topic made us reassess the relations between the rulers of Wallachia and the kings of Hungary from a neutral perspective. The most part of the Romanian historiography has focused on the conflicts between the two sides. Often overstates the relevance or the position of a military victory within the context of the respective relationships in order to try and support the independence of Wallachia and minimised the 7 S. losipescu, Românii din Carpafiii Meridionali la Dunărea de Jos de la invazia mongolă (1241- 1243) pînă la consolidarea domniei a toată Ţara Românească. Războiul victorios purtat la 1330 împotriva cotropirii ungare, in voi. Constituirea statelor feudale româneşti, Bucureşti, 1980, pp. 41- 96. 8 Ş. Papacostea, începuturile politicii comerciale a Ţării Româneşti şi Moldovei (secolele XIV-XVI). Drum şi stat, (following up: începuturile politicii comerciale) in SMIM, X, 1983, pp. 9-55. 9 Idem, Domni români şi regi angevini: înfruntarea finală (1370-1382) (following up: Domni români şi regi angevini), in idem, Geneza statului în evul mediu românesc, Cluj-Napoca, 1988, pp. 113-130. 10 Idem, Românii în secolul al XlII-lea. Intre cruciată şi Imperiul mongol (following up: Românii în secolul al XlII-lea), Bucureşti, 1993. 11 A. Huber, Ludwig I von Ungarn und die ungarischen Vassailenländer, Wien, 1884, pp. 7-10; 32- 38. 12 B. Homán, Gli Angioni di Napoli in Ungheria 1290-1403, Roma, 1938, pp. 300-304; 384-388; 401- 405 etc. 13 J. Pataki, Anjou királyink és a két román vajdaság, Kolozsvár, 1944. 14 L. B. Kumorovitz, I. Lajos királyunk 1375. évi Havasalföldi hadjárata (és „török") háborúja, in Századok, 117, 1983, no. 5, pp. 919-979
