") about the meaning of the title: voivode of Hungarian-Wallachian - two sentences have been said so far. When some, such as Pray, Gebhardi and Engel, and especially Roesler in Roman. Studien, p. 309, try to prove that the Nultan princes called themselves voivodes of Hungarian-Wallachian in order to make visible their former dependence on the Hungarian crown, then other writers, such as Fotino, Wcnelin, Lauriauu and others, and especially Hażdeu in Istoria critica, I. 43-49, insist even more zealously on the opinion that the Multan princes wanted to signify by this title their rights and the claims they had to certain possessions in Hungary. And although we, on our part, are not supporters of ultra-national, so to speak, the excesses of Romanian historiography, in this case we must nevertheless categorically stand on the side of the national writers and, together with Hażdeu, agree with the opinion that the Multan princes called themselves really only Hungarian-Vlach voivodes in order to indicate their rights and the legal views they had over the principalities of Omlash and Fagarash, as well as the Severine bauat and others estates located within the Hungarian kingdom. This is supported primarily by the fact that the title: voivodes of Hungarian-Vlachia - in Multan documents, was constantly supplemented with formulas such as: great voivode and lord of all the Hungarian-Vallachian land and the transalpine (i.e. Hungarian) possessions belonging to it - or: great voivode and self-ruling lord of all the Hungarian-Vallachian land and the land belonging to it Alpine and Turkish possessions, as well as prince of Omlas and Fagarash and count of the Severine Banat - either: being the ruler and lord of the entire Hungarian-Wallachian land and the Hungarian possessions belonging to it and literally: being also the ruler of the Hungarian land), or prince of Omlasz and Fagarash, etc. And, moreover, scrupulous avoidance of this title in Latin documents indicate that he was not the one; for which Pray, Gebhardi, Engel, Roesler and others think it is, but that this title contained in its very essence grievances that sometimes went further than could be pleasant and convenient for the rulers of the Hungarian kingdom.
®) Chrysowuł, ypncoko^ati, comes from Lex, according to Miklosicz. palaeoslov. 1097 od bizantyń. Xpucróp5uXAov i Means, literally speaking, a document with a golden seal; in diplomacy and Romania.
any document issued in the name of the hospodar and bearing a larger state seal].
') Pay a florin in gold. floremis, from the Italian fiorino, originally meant, according to Miklosicz, Freradworter, jiag. 16. (cf., also Linde's Polish language dictionary I. 659) a zloty coin, with a lily symbol, worth 4 lire or 3 soldi; in Hungary also a gold coin, worth (Ob. Wenelina op. c. pag. 126. S(iq.) of only one sorocot.
') The word "żupan" was originally understood among the Southern Slavs to be nobles of a higher order, and sometimes, with the addition of the word "great", even the reigning Serbian princes themselves, as Daniczyc testifies in his dictionary (Rjećnik-u) of old Serbian things I. 346, saying: H cajin ce ĄpataBnii rocuoAapii ns iipsa 3Baxy acynanii, ajH BejiiKn; TakKO Bejtn jKynan (ijeme Cre-i-aH HeMaHta (M. 1. 4.) h chu siy CTe*aH, AOKJie ce He saKpaabii. Initially, it was the same among the Vlachs and Hungarians. And here, according to Wenelin, op. c. page S2 - 83, zupans in the first times of their existence had the importance of higher dignitaries of the state, sometimes ruling entire parts of the country. However, soon this title became so popular among the Vlachs that it almost completely lost its original prerogatives and meant the same as an ordinary "lord". It also has the meaning of an ordinary "lord" in this document.
") The political importance of the great courtier (in Romanian: vorniculu cellii mare) is determined by the Historical Report (This Report was first published in the Engla Gesch. d. ungr. Reiches etc.
IV. 1. 1U9— 1 15.) on the state of Multan in the years 1679— IGSS, Relatio historica de statu Yalachiae 1679 — 1688 (in Magazinu istor. V. 43) as follows: Yoraik supremus, i. e. iudex Curiae, habet sub se raultos alios vornikos, quos ipse facit, si princeps concedere vult. Ex ofticio habet honum proventum.
'") Logoteta, of course, the great one (logotheta magnus) had the same meaning as the chancellor of the state and was, according to the same historical report (Magaz. istor. Y. 43), the supreme head of the entire state court caucelary.
'•■*) Spatar, spatarius magnus (spatarulti c. marę), in Polish swordfish, according to the same Report