'°) And relatively all other lands inhabited by Vlachs, or, as they are called today, lands inhabited by Romanians.
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
") And that the Romanians and the southern Slavs are still called Vlachs, is clearly attested by Vok Karadzich, Lexicon serbico-germ.-latinum, Yindobonae, 1852, page 68.
") In addition to the places indicated above, Marcin Kromer also mentions the Vlachs on page 360, saying: Vlachia (and therefore regardless of country) is a fighting nation, etc.
") Yolumina legum II. 664, III. 50: Wallachian villages are to pay 20 groszy each.
') This is supported by, among others, the stauropigial church in Lviv, which, built with the help of Moldavian hospodars, is still called the "Vlach" church in the mouth of the people.
Stryjkowski, when in his Chronicle (in the Collection of Polish historians, page 295) -') tells that in the 13th century, due to internal discord, the Duchy of Lithuania was greatly affected by the Wallachian farm. And Naruszewicz himself also indirectly confirms this when he says in the 1st c. that Wallachia (and therefore, of course, both halves of the country inhabited by Wallachians) is divided into two parts, etc., and even more so when he adds that "Poles also call the part closer to their borders (and therefore undoubtedly Moldova) Wallachians."
Therefore, I am firmly of the opinion that, despite the confusions that can be found here and there among newer Polish writers, we should maintain the distinction based on the authority of the sources and, in keeping with the Romanians themselves, designate the northern part of their country as Moldavia for a long time.
Taking this opportunity, I would also like to draw the readers' attention to the following, which I believe is quite important.
In Dogiel's diplomatic code, which, as we know, had almost all the Crown and Lithuanian archives at his disposal, I found, among other things -^) a mention that the archives of the Republic of Poland in Lirakow were to contain a larger number of documents coming from Moldavian hospodars and written, as Dogiel believed, in the Wallachian language -*). Although 120 years have passed since then, there have been changes in the structure of the Krakow archives, which we know were not necessarily favorable to the preservation of what the publisher of the codex used so abundantly ^^). What has been collected for centuries has scattered in more recent times
■") The first edition of Maciej Stryjkowski's Chronicle (Hażdea, Istoria critica, p. 91, and in many other places he is falsely called Marcin) was published in Królewiec in 1582; the third one was published in Warsaw by Gliicksberg in 1846.
'") In the Stryjkowski Chronicle, according to the Ki-Ólewiec edition, on page 418 (Cf. Istoria critica 1. c.), we also find the following, very instructive words: Lithuanian and Ruthenian writers also testify that Juria Koriatowicz (Porów, about the fact itself Latopisiec Litwy, wyA. Daniłowicz, Vilnius, 1827, page 50) They took the Vlachs as a voivodeship or voivodeship of Wallachia and Iołda (and again, this is one more proof that Moldova also called itself the Vlach voivodeship) because of their knightly prowess, and raised Suceava to the capital according to their custom. However, as with them, there is an innate instability of the frequent changing the lords, Yuri Koriatovich was poisoned in Suceava. [And] he was buried in the brick monastery in Vashiu, behind Berlad, where I was myself in 1575, half a day away.
•') Codex Diplomaticus regni Poloniae etc, Vilnae, 1758, vol. I, pag. 597., n. a.
") Literae homagiales Palatinorum Moldaviae - there are Mateusz Dogiel's own words - scriptae snnt lingua yalachica, cuius neminem gnarum Cracoviae, cum in tabulario reipublicae instrumentorum originalium esemplaria conficerem, reperire potui: inde est, quod illarum summarium tantum e.\ regesto, quod in eodem tabulario exstat, descriptum hic subiungitur.
^5) I will mention, however, that Dogiel's testimony regarding the language of these documents does not seem to be entirely true. Although there are sometimes documents written in Votosh in Moldova, they are mostly private documents, never public documents, issued by the hospodar's office, which, as is generally known, were written in Russian until the mid-16th century. It's a different thing when we're dealing with Multan documents. In the latter there are entire words and phrases which (as e.g. in Document No. were much smaller in the south than in the north.