Agria 43. (Az Egri Múzeum Évkönyve - Annales Musei Agriensis, 2007)

Palmer Matthew: Alexandriai Szent Katalin szobrának új datálása

Since the discovery in the papal registers that a mention of the foundation of a royal chapel in 1366 referred not to Buda, as was previously thought, but the palace in Visegrád, art historians have been at liberty to rely on stylistic analyses in their attempts to date the Buda palace. As a result the reconstruction of the royal palace during Louis Fs reign is now believed to have started in с 1380, continuing up to 1408 at the latest, when the court moved into the building.

19 This perception of an unbroken cultural tradition in the reconstruction of the palace led to the inclusion of a number of artefacts from the reign of Louis I in the Sigismund exhibition, many of which featured in an extensive preliminary section entitled "The Angevin Inheritance". The importance of Hungarian sculpture during the later stages of Louis's reign has also been boosted by the recent realisation that tomb effigies carved in the red polished limestone of the Gerecse Hills were something of a export commodity, being found in Krakow, in the tomb-chest, effigy and baldachin of the tomb of Casimir III (1333-1370), for example.

20 The Sigismund exhibition also noted manifestations of a court style not only in the more obvious places like the royal necropolis at the cathedral in Székesfehérvár, and the tombs of Louis the Great himself and his daughter Catherine,

21 but out in dioceses like Pécs, where courtier and bishop Vilmos of Bergzabern (1360-1374) founded the Chapel of Golden Mary.

22 As we will suggest later, there is certainly a case for adding the diocese of Eger to this list of courtly satellites. Michael Viktor Schwarz's contribution to the catalogue of the 2006 Sigismund exhibition reiterates his argument for dating the Buda Statues at c. 1400, based on what he considers are the nascent similarities the figures share with contemporary Franco-Burgundian sculpture brought into the region via the international task force that assembled on the battlefield at Nicopolis in 1396. Although it is a view that is not wholeheartedly endorsed by the organisers of exhibition, it should not prevent us from speculating whether both the Eger St Catherine and Buda figures date from this time.

23 Those, however, hoping to find shared features between the Eger St Catherine and the Buda statues will be 19 MAROSI Ernő in PAULY Michel, REINERT, François (eds) 2006. 242. TAKÁCS Imre in TAKÁCS Imre (ed.) 2006. 71. 20 SADRAEI Agnieszka 2001. 102-109. 21 LŐVEI Pál in MIKÓ Árpád-TAKÁCS Imre (eds) 1994. 275-276.; LŐ VEI Pál in TAKÁCS Imre (ed.) 2006. 110-111. 22 G. SÁNDOR Mária-GERŐ Győzó' in MIKÓ Árpád-TAKÁCS Imre (eds) 1994. 270-273.; TAKÁCS Imre 2006. 76, 111-113. 23 SCHWARZ Michael Viktor: "Zsigmond víziója a királyi udvarról: szobrok a budai palotához" in TAKÁCS Imre (ed.) 2006. 225-236. It is a hypothesis Schwarz backs up with the argument that the sculptural programme itself may have been a commemoration of what was a united, albeit unsuccessful, show of strength by the Christian forces against the Turkish infidel. 769