Diaconescu, Marius (szerk.): Mediaevalia Transilvanica 1998 (2. évfolyam, 2. szám)
Relaţii internaţionale
276 Marius Diaconescu To sum up, it is probable that Mircea acknowledged fealty to his lord at least four times: in 1391, 1395 (a pledge by means of envoys is possible as a first step; it was probably followed, some time before March 7th , 1395, by an homage rendered personally in the company of his barons), in 1406, and 1412. The pledge of 1395 is attested in the deed of March 7th; the one of 1406 can be inferred from the meeting at Severin whereas the homages of 1391 and 1412 are deducible from the context. We need to use these inferences because of the lack of direct information, probably lost along the centuries. A repeated homage paid by one and the same vassal to one and the same suzerain was not a singular practice. The oath would be solicited by the suzerain and be taken by the vassal whenever the political and military conditions made it necessary. Another example is that of Alexander the Good, voivode of Moldavia, who paid homage to the king of Poland several times. In this case, documents referring to the matter have been preserved because the Polish royal archives had a different fate from the Hungarian ones. A thing we do not know is if and to what degree did the vassal respect his obligation of paying annual tribute. It is quite possible that the king had renounced it, offering it as subsidy for the support of anti-Ottoman campaigns. The acknowledgement of fidelity to the king of Hungary by the Romanian voivodes had already become traditional in Wallachia. For example the homage paid by Vlad the Usurper to Wladislaw Jagelló, the king of Poland. Vlad rendered homage by acknowledging the king's wife, Hedviga, as rightful successor to Louis I and, consequently, the Polish monarchs' claims to the Hungarian crown. This is clearly stated in the homage deed173, so Vlad became not so much a vassal of the Polish king as of a virtual king of Hungary174 175. If we further examine mutual responsibilities derived from the relations of vassalage and try to analyze the suzerain's obligations, certam aspects may put in a new light the political evolution at the Lower Danube. The suzerain's main obligation, i.e. to protect and support, became effective in the king's support against the Turks. Thus, in the preamble of the above-mentioned deed, dated March 7th 1395 and concluded in Braşov, the voivode mentioned, without naming the king, Sigismund's support against the Turks: "and he supported us especially against those fierce and cunning sons of iniquity, enemies of the name of Christ and bitter foes, the Turks" 175. In spite of the fact that data on Sigismund's support provided before 1395 is uncertain, we do have plenty of information on military support after this date. According to documents, the king offered his help in 1395 (in the 173 Hurmuzaki, Documente (see note 40), 1/2, pp. 374-375: „... Et quia predictum Regnum Vngarie ad memoratum dominam Heduigem Reginam Polonie et heredem dicti Regni Vngarie unicam et superstitem et consequenter ad prefatum dominum Wladislaum Regem conthoralem ipsius iure hereditario esse comperimus devolutum prout hocipsum in literis dicti Lodovici Regis et Regnicolarum Vngarie et Polonie Regnorum predictorum super eo confectis intelleximus fuisse et esse condiccionatum, sic quod eciam nos et dominia nostra dictis dominis Wladislao Regi et Hedvigi Regine et Regno eorum Vngarie in subditos obligamur...“. 174 The nature of this homage was also noticed by O. Iliescu, op. cit. (see note 60), p. 80. 175 DRH, D, 1, no. 87, pp. 138-139: “et favit precipue contra illos immanens et perfidos iniquitatis filios, Christi nominis inimicos et nostros specialissimos hostes, Tureos“.
