The comparison between one of the most important documents of the universal constitutionalism, the Magna Charta Libertatum, and an autochthon feudal charta, the Freedom Charta from Bucharest in 1631, in what concerns the political and historical conditions which have led to their adoption, the claiming content of rights and their solemn shape, their juridical nature, has shown us conclusions regarding the different causes for evolution of the two documents. Broadly, the different political roles of the Statutes Assemblies which generated the adoption of the beforementioned documents and the specific traits of the two law systems from which they come, are responsible for their reception in public law. Although from the perspective of its content, the Freedom Charta from Bucharest in 1631 includes regulations with the same constitutional potential as the Magna Charta Libertatum, it has not been able to project itself in the juridical conscience of the Romanians. In this framework, the article is a first attempt to explain why the Romanian constitutionalism does not have a founding document or why does our constitutional tradition not claim itself from such a source.