File talk:Hungary 13th cent.png

The map is not accurate. According to the original map, there were no Wallachian local autonomies in Hungary. In Partium we have "románok", not Wallachians. The Banat of Severin and the Carpathian strip is not depicted as a Hungarian territory. Also, the Wallachian bubbles form the Banat of Sevein are not drawn like that in the map. Another thing I don't understand is the hole from the middle of Szekelyfold (SamiraJ (talk) 07:22, 19 September 2011 (UTC))

I have fixed it up. I have only one note. The broken line is the main border of Kingdom of Hungary (original map), see the western (or northern) borders of the kingdom. Banat of Severin was a vassal state of the kingdom or something like this (see the colours on the original map). 'Moldavia' is the same.Fakirbakir (talk) 20:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Changes of Sept. 14, 2017 : details according with
1-Édouard Sayous, Budapest/Paris, published Budapest & Paris, ed. Félix Alcan 1900 https://archive.org/stream/histoiregnra00sayouoft and British Library, Historical Print Editions, 2012, "Histoire générale des Hongrois" ISBN 9781249017387 ;
2-János Mihályi (Budapest University) published Marmaros Sziget 1900, "Máramarosi diplomák a XIV és XV századbol" pp. 619 & following.
According with this studies, Wallachians/Romanians (it's the same group) have their "vlach jog" ("jus valachicum") but not a territorial autonomy as the Saxons or the Széklers. The Croatian states, the serbian banates, the banate of Severin and the Carpathian strip were vassals of the kingdom, outside of the krown domain ; Marmatia and Transylvania are "voivodates", with local rules and councils, but inside of the krown domain, and the King appoints the "voivodes". Later Marmatia became the Comitate of Maramaros, without local rules. --Mélomène (talk) 17:41, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

It is painful and anti-encyclopedic these "publishing wars" between nationalist contributors. The map is not accurate. It is necessary to take into account all the sources, not to take sides for a single point of view. --Julieta39 (talk) 18:35, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

This map shows just a single POV

The nationalist hungarian one, who denies anything that could risk to weaken the theory of the millennial kingdom, unitary and unchanging from the king Saint Stephen until 1918. Why not, if it is reported? --Claude Zygiel (talk) 16:10, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Please understand that the map indicates the areas with autonomy, and Vlach law did not grant autonomy, only special taxation and tax privileges compared to the settled Slavic, Saxon, Szekler and Hungarian populations, since the Vlachs of the time were nomads. It also granted the right to the owner of the land to settle Vlachs on his land. (I can provide you sources if you want.) For this reason, the map is authentic, as there is no reason to depict Vlach law as an autonomous territory on the map. Enlightenment1685 (talk) 00:02, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

The map’s depiction of Croatia in the 13th century contradicts this one which is used in the same articles. It’s 13nth century too so why the massive difference? 108.54.106.49 03:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

This is because this map also marks Slavonia, while the other map takes Slavonia as one with Croatia. Enlightenment1685 (talk) 01:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Claude Zygiel argument. I will take Bosnian medieval state as an example - its massive historiography demolished a myth of autonomous, semi-independent or any form of state decadency to the Hungarian Kingdom. Vassal relations existed only in some periods of time, where Hungarian king was senior to Bosnian ban, between 10th and 12th century, but so was Byzantine emperor and Dioclean king (Bodin for instance), so seniority is still feudal dynamics between persons. Bosnia was de-facto independent medieval feudal state from 10th to 12th century, and from 12th to 15th in every regard. (Reliable sources are abundant in articles on Bosnian medieval history, state and nobility in English Wikipedia.) Santasa99 (talk) 00:46, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

I see Claude Zygiel worry about the map of Hungary which based a real Hungarian academic map, Zygiel many times falsify history maps to spread Romanian nationalist propaganda that "Romanians were always majority in Transylvania since the time of the dinosaurs" (Just nobody knew about those majority people before 1200 in that huge 300,000km2 area between Tisza and Dneister river...), he is also like detatching Transylvania from medieval Hungary, example falsification by Zygiel: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Europe 1097-corrected.jpg OrionNimrod (talk) 12:11, 16 February 2024 (UTC)