Vadas József (szerk.): Ars Decorativa 13. (Budapest, 1993)
SZILÁGYI András: Az Esterházy gyűjtemény Cupidós násfájáról
as identical: earlier, they were regarded to have been made in a Spanish or German workshop, while recently they are attributed to a Spanish or Dutch one. We tend to support the first hypothesis, which, at least as we think, is also true for the Budapest pendant. The Spanish origin is corroborated by a portrait made in the middle of the sixteenth century, depicting Isabella, the daughter of Philip II, King of Spain. The model of the bust portrait wears a Cupid brooche, as an important accessory of her gala dress. 8 Among contemporary illustrations of the jewel described above, we have to mention a seventeenth century portrait of a woman, which is now in the collection of the Historical Gallery of the Hungarian National Museum. The picture, which depicts Borbála Wesselényi, who - before her sudden, early death - was the fiancée of Simon,the son of János Kemény, later ruling prince of Transylvania, was doubtlessly made in Hungary, in 1662. 9 The portrait shows the fourteen-year-old bride in her gala dress, with plenty of magnificent jewels. Her stringed bodice is decorated with an easily recognizable Cupid pendant. The portrait provides a significant, important data to certify that this type of jewellery was a fairly wide-spread one in Hungarian aristocratic circles of the mid seventeenth century. The fact that the type was present in Hungary already a few decades earlier is undeniably verified by one of the most beautiful jewels of the Esterházy collection - which we have already referred to in present study. This piece has so far been unique among Hungarian relics; it can be identified with the following item of an early inventory of the Esterházy treasury: "egy Kupido formaiu Függő, melyben 20 gemant, 51 rubint es 20 giöngy szem foglaltatik." (rough translation: a pendant of Cupid shape, set with 20 diamonds, 51 rubies and 20 pearls). 10 The pendant is from 1653 and at that time it belonged to the dowry of the fourteen-year-old Orsolya Esterházy, inherited from her parents and grandparents. For this reason we may suppose that the pendant had already been mentioned by other, earlier inventories as well, giving a detailed description of jewels owned by Erzsébet Thurzó (1621-1642), the mother and Krisztina Nyáry (1604-1641), the grandmother of Orsolya. In fact, these inventories, written in 1626, in 1641 and 1642, do not deny and do not definitely verify our supposition, either. The three specifications and inventories are only fragmentary, and though a Cupid pendant is mentioned several times 11 , the data provided there do not coincide with the 1653 description or the present condition of the jewel. The types of the precious stones are only partly the same, and significant, sometimes remarkable difference can be observed in the number of the stones (the items in the earlier inventories usually mention more). On the other hand, these differences might be explained by practical, or rather, prosaic reasons (mistake, inaccurate description). One of the reasons might have been lhat in the earlier inventories the pendant is usually described together with its original necklace. In this case, the following fact becomes exciting and remarkable: "Anno 1618 .. az kézfogáskor az úr adta az mátkájának: egy arany lánczot spanyol mádra függőstől, melyben vagyon: korsó 20, gyémánt 20, rubint 60, gyöngyszem 40." (rough tranlalion: Anno 1618 ... the lord has given to his bride at the time of engagement a gold necklace of Spanish art, including: 20 carafes, 20 diamonds, 60 rubies, 40 pearls). 12 The above description comes from an often cited document of the archives of the Thurzó family. The text of the document assures that the jewel was presented by Imre Thurzó (1589-1621) to her fiancée,
