After his death Béla III (r. 1172-96) was buried in the venue of coronations and burials of medieval Hungarian kings, the provost church of the Virgin in Székesfehérvár. After the Ottoman rule and the subsequent demise of the church the location of the grave fell into oblivion. The king’s and his wife’s mortal remains were found accidentally in December 1848. Custos of the National Museum János Érdy had the valuable finds and the rest of the grave goods transported to the museum. The significance of the discovery was largely enhanced when scientific research soon verified that it was Béla III’s grave, the only identified royal grave in Székesfehérvár.
During the military operations of the ongoing war of liberation of 1848/49, then in the period of retaliations after the crushing of the freedom fighting the idea of reburying the royal remains in the manner they reserved could not even be raised. In 1859 Ágoston Kubinyi, director of the National Museum commissioned Ferenc Reitter to make a plan for the extension of the museum. The arcade in classical or Rundbogenstil to be erected on the rear limit of the plot would have been terminated at either end with a chapel. Kubinyi wanted to deposit the royal remains and the grave goods in a worthy environment in the chapels. Governor of Hungary Móric Pálffy was shocked to find during a visit to the museum that the bones were in the museum and visitors were allowed to view them without, he thought, the right conditions of reverence being available. He immediately ordered the remains to be buried quietly. In vain did Kubinyi argue that the planned chapels would be worthy places of rest for them, the political situation still did not allow that the grave of the only identified king of the Árpád dynasty be buried in the museum of the nation, in such an exposed place. The remains of the royal couple were buried in the baroque crypt of the Matthias Church on 10 July 1862 in a simple funeral ceremony celebrated by archbishop of Esztergom János Scitovszky. The memorial service was held a year later on 26 March 1863 when a (new) verification process at the Academy of Sciences had confirmed that the remains did belong to Béla III and his wife.
Owing to the reconstruction of the Matthias Church begun under Frigyes Schulek’s guidance in 1873, the remains were transferred to the Anthropological Institute in 1883 where the director Aurl Török put them to scrutiny. The protraction of the renovation also kept putting off the case of reburial. The consecration of the church took place in 1896 as part of the millenary festivities. However, the theme of the festive series was much more Francis Joseph I and the restored Hungarian constitutionalism than the thousand-year-old Hungarian state, consequently the ceremonious reburial of Béla III was left out of the program, although it had been called for by the press. After 1896 at last Aurél Török launched a press campaign and a parliamentary interpellation on 13 February 1897 cata lyzed the events. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Dezső Bánffy the minister of religion and public education Gyula Wlassics organized the royal reburial in cooperation with the Monuments Commission and the building committee of the church. After a long debate the funerary monument was built in the Holy Trinity chapel of the upper church after plans by Frigyes Schulek. (At the beginning Schulek designed a more modest tomb for the crypt, but now it was out of the question.) He took the carvings of French portal pediments (Chartres, Arles) as his models. The sculptural work was done by Ferenc Mikula. A genealogical table on the monument announced that Francis Joseph I descended from the Árpád dynasty on female line. This reference is also included in the royal deed of gift by which the king granted 25 000 florins for the monument and the burial. At last on 21 October 1898 the ceremonious burial took place as a national holiday, officiated by archbishop of Esztergom Kolos Vaszary.
An important area of Antal Grassalkovich I's (1694–1771) art patronage was the erection of ecclesiastic buildings. Máriabesnyő is particularly significant, for it did not only become a popular place of pilgrimage in the region owing to a votive statue, but it also became the burial place of the founder since it was close to his mansion in Gödöllő. A sofar unknown 18th century pictorial source of the Besnyő convent was found in the Capuchin archives in Vienna, which calls for a revision of the building phases of the baroque monastery. The ink and wash drawing by a hand of little talent shows the building complex from two directions on the basis of on-the-spot observation. The monastery was built in three major phases. After the foundation, first the small Loretto Chapel was erected (with the monks' crypt under it) using the mediaeval ruins (1759–1762) together with the dwelling(s) of the hermits, which were either three small hermitages or a part of the groundfloor section of today's western wing. The convent was built on the plans of master builder János Mayrhoffer of Pest in the second phase (1763–1767); its U-shape enclosed a court with the Chapel on the fourth side. The monastery consists of one-storey wings. The oratory is in the southern, the refectory in the eastern wing. On the gable of the southern end of the latter a sun dial was made in 1765 as the Historia Domus registered, on the basis of which the baroque veduta must be dated to 1765/1766 (since the church, the southern corridor and the sacristy are still missing). On the eastern side of the monastery a hanging garden was created with cellars under it. The church with two vault sections and chancel was built on the western side of the Loretto Chapel in 1768–1771 with a portico in front and an undercroft and the crypt of the Grassalkovich family. Mayrhoffer's plan survives in Gyula Wälder's 20th century copy; it contains part of the groundplans of the three levels. The Historia Domus claims that a painter of Pest Ferenc Winkler painted a picture of the Virgin of Besnyő for the cloisters, and he is named as the decorator of the corner tower at the southeastern end of the hanging garden.
Authors:Tibor Zelenka, Endre Balázs, Kadosa Balogh, János Kiss and at. al.
Surface Neogene volcanics in Hungary are abundantly documented in the literature, but buried volcanic structures are little known. Early burial of the volcanic centers beneath latest Miocene to Pliocene sediments preserved much of their original relief, permitting their classification into genetic types. More than two-thirds of Hungary is covered by thick Neogene and Quaternary sediments, below which buried volcanic eruptive centers and the extent of their products may only be recognized by complex geologic-geophysical methods. Our study is based on the data of several thousand wells, more than 60,000 km of seismic sections, as well as airborne and surface geophysical (gravimetric, magnetic, electromagnetic, radiometric) data. Results of chemical, mineralogical studies and K/Ar dating of deep cores were also included. The data were evaluated in terms of the regional deep structure of the Carpathian-Balkan region, the Miocene evolution of which was determined by the position, movement and welding of individual microplates. Integration of all available data reveals that the Miocene volcanic centers are concentrated near microplate boundaries. In the volcanic centers the lavas and pyroclastic deposits far exceed 50 m in thickness. The data show that the buried volcanic rocks below the Transdanubian region (Little Hungarian Plain and Somogy-Baranya Hills), the Danube-Tisza Interfluve and the Great Hungarian Plain extend over a much larger area than do the outcropping volcanoes in Northern Hungary (from the Visegrád to the Tokaj Mts). In the southern part of Transdanubia (W. Hungary) a major calcalkaline, rhyolitic, ignimbritic event took place early, in Eggenburgian and Ottnangian (Early Miocene) times. The centers and tuff sheets of this volcanic event can be traced from the Mecsek Mts to the Salgótarján Basin, the southwestern Bükk Basin and the central part of the Great Hungarian Plain. This event was followed by andesitic volcanism. The rhyolite and dacite volcanic centers of Karpatian age are predominantly situated in Transdanubia, whereas the Badenian (Mid-Miocene) andesite and dacite series of large stratovolcanoes are buried below southern Transdanubia, the Danube-Tisza Interfluve and the Great Hungarian Plain. In Sarmatian and early Pannonian (Late Miocene) times, pyroclastic sheets several thousand meters thick and lava domes were formed; they are predominantly rhyolitic, subordinately andesitic and dacitic, and are situated in the eastern part of the Great Hungarian Plain (Nyírség). With the end of microplate motion, as the plate consolidated in the late Miocene, thick but areally restricted alkali-trachite (Little Hungarian Plain) and alkali-basalt lava domes and tuff craters formed in the Little Hungarian Plain, Transdanubia and the Danube-Tisza Interfluve.
The burial site and fragments of the tomb of Queen Gertrude of Andechs-Meran, first wife of King Andrew II (1205–1235) and a victim of assassination in 1213, were discovered during the excavations carried out in the Cistercian church of Pilis between 1967 and 1982. Her tomb was found along the central axis of the church, in the crossing. The present study, which includes the complete catalogue of the known fragments, attempts to establish the typology, iconography, and stylistic context of the artwork. New reconstructions are proposed for the two short sides of the sarcophagus-shaped tomb, which each bore distinct forms: one contained a wide, shallow niche, while the other depicted two standing figures under a double arcade. The figural ornaments on the sides of the tomb and the gisant with angels on the lid occupy an important place in the history of funerary art. In fact, the tomb displays one of the first examples of this type of decoration. The seated figures on the side relief probably represent the choir of saints in heaven, who provided companionship for the soul of the deceased queen. Gertrude herself is represented not only on top of the tomb, but also appears as a donor in one of the reliefs.
Stylistic analysis of the figures proves that their master came from the workshop responsible for the Last Judgment and Callixtus portals of the cathedral of Reims. He must have left the workshop around 1220, before the portals were completed and installed in the façade of the northern transept. At about this time, Villard de Honnecourt also embarked on his travels that took him from Reims to Hungary. The style of Gertrude’s tomb bears similarities to the Villard’s drawings, even if we do not wish to attribute the sculptures to him. A team of masons from Reims also arrived in Pannonhalma during this time frame and worked on the abbey church there. Their most important work in Pannonhalma is the southern portal of the new church, the Porta Speciosa. The complicated nature of these construction histories reminds us of the need for caution when attributing one work of art to one person.
Both Gertrude’s tomb and the Porta Speciosa are prime examples of the cultural and artistic period that began in the late 12th century, when the Kingdom of Hungary was a leader in the region in the reception of French Gothic.
A magyar jogban a halottakon végezhető, de nem temetési beavatkozásokról csak az egészségügyi jog szól, így egyéb tudományos célú vizsgálatok sem lennének elvileg lehetségesek. Ebben kizárólag a nemzetközi múzeumi etikai kódex érvényesül. Sok kultúra ezt halottgyalázásnak tekinti. A halottgyalázás kriminális formáin túl az orvosi eljárás (kutatás és gyakorlás) is alkalmas lehet arra, hogy a holttest méltóságának sérelmét jelentse. Ennek ellensúlyozása, hogy a post mortem beavatkozásokhoz az érintett vagy hozzátartozói beleegyezése szükséges. A dolgozat a magyar szabályozást mutatja be, amelyben a halottat betegnek tekintjük, a holttest vonatkozásában a betegjogok speciális érvényesülése történik. A jog a boncolást illetően számos jogot ad a hozzátartozónak, és az anatómiai oktatást is szabályozza. A szervnyerés során az opting-out elvét érvényesíti, tiltakozást csak a betegtől fogad el. Szigorúan védi az elhunyt egészségügyi adatait, de nem korlátozza a hozzátartozók érdekérvényesítését. A képzés és továbbképzés csekély figyelmet fordít ezekre a kérdésekre, a szabályozás pedig nem felel meg a jelenkor elvárásainak és lehetőségeinek, ezért célszerű lenne újragondolni a probléma teljes spektrumát. Orv. Hetil., 2012, 153, 330–338.