Alba Regia. Annales Musei Stephani Regis. – Alba Regia. Az István Király Múzeum Évkönyve. 20. 1980 – Szent István Király Múzeum közleményei: C sorozat (1983)

Tanulmányok – Abhandlungen - Kralovászky Alán: The earliest church of Alba Civitas. p. 75–88. t. XXVII–XXXII.

perfectly represented the ideology which was manifested on the outside and served by the inside. In addition, the character of the patron is also reliably represented by these features. While the function is shown by architectural means (isocèles cross, four pillars, the cupola) and artistic decorative elements (altar, a curtain dividing the choir and the nave, frescoes, carvings), the special significance of the building is illustrated by its location on a highpoint, durable material, dimensions and color (TOMPOS 1971, 117—153; Györffy 1969, 20). The dating of the construction work No written sources are available for determining the age of the building. Thus, the dating must be based on information derived from the material, technological data, morphology, occupation patterns and data on the Christianity of the inhabitants. Understanding the socio-political possibilities and limitations of the age is of special importance in establishing the date of construction. The possibility of Roman origin was ruled out in the previous paragraphs. The church beside the building under discussion here began to function in 1235. Thus, because of the proximity of the two churches a date later than the 13th century should also be excluded. In the light of these facts a date in the 10th

—12th centuries seems to be most realistic. The conquering Hungarians who practiced land cultivation and animal husbandry, came into the Carpathian Basin around the turn of the 9th and 10th centuries. The economic and social possibilities and traditions of this population did not allow and/or require the formation of eastern type of settlements. The existence of such settlements however, would have been basic in terms of creating brick or stone constructions of architectural value. It is known that settlements characterized by such brick or stone architecture in the areas formerly occupied by the ancient Hungarians always had their unique origins. Some of them were built on classical predecessors (Pontus region), or near intercontinental or water routes between Asia and Europe. Other such settlements were built under economic or strategical pressure forced on the early states during the formation process (Bulgaria on the Volga river, Kazarian kaganate). Even in these settlements the construction was directed by masters invited and hired from the Caucasus and Byzantium (Bilari, Sarkel). This construction activity was supported by various factors. Among these were the regular exchange of goods which occurred as the result of the increasing specialization of production, and the development of the State which also led to a concentration of the population (Riibakov 1948, 315—369; ARTAMONOV 1962, 385—399; PLETNJOWA 1978, 96—126; Györffy 1973, 219—244). At the beginning the conquest, defence and maintenance of the new country favoured the development of specialization and exchange of goods in the conquering Hungarian society. The majority of industrial products required (precious metals, refined textiles) were imported from abroad. Some of them arrived in form of taxes from the industrially developed countries (Byzantium, Lombardia). Others were the results of attacks on these and other, west European countries or were the bouty from wars organized by careful diplomacy (VAJAY 1968, 81—85). Less luxurious demands were satisfied by local craft industries (textiles, leather, bone, wood and iron products; GYÖRFFY 1977, 40—53). There was a lack of the motivation which would have inspired independent Hungarian architecture in the first half of the 10th century. The conquering Hungarians were organized in seven tribal units which settled down in clan formations and the occupation was not concentrated in special spots. The newly conquered area did not have towns which still functioned. Such surviving urban settlements could have provided a good basis for building activities with the support of local masons. The settlements on the southern (Sirmium) and western (Poetovio, Emona, Vindobona) frontiers of the new country were of classical origin. Due to their geographical location however, (they were located beyond the range of secure borders) they had no connections with everyday life in Hungary. In addition, no data are available concerning the possible activity of masons who may have lived in territories which were not affected directly by the Hungarian conquest. Such areas were Transdanubia (dominated by the Franks on the western bank of the Danube river), and the east bank of the Tisza river (influenced by Bolgars). The organization of the Hungarian state and Church represented a turning point in the last half of the 10th century. These two phenomena occurred simultaneously and were not separable. Around 950 A. D. the Byzantine emperor noted that the Hungarians had no primary sovereign but several kings (MORAVCSIK 1950,179). This situation gradually changed by the second half of the century. The five year peace treaty between the Byzantines and Hungarians lasted until 948 and was prolonged in the same year. At the same time karchas Bulcsú and Prince Tormás were baptized in Byzantium. The same thing happened to Gyula (=Zombor) of Transylvania in 953. He also brought back a Greek missionary bishop to Transylvania from Byzantium called Hierotheos. The raiding Hungarian groups suffered heavy losses in the Augsburg battle in 955 A. D. The Byzantines also won in the clashes which took place in 959 and 961 A. D. The pope consecrated Zacheus as the bishop of Hungarians in Rome in 961 A. D. The new bishop however, could not enter the country. He was detained without by Emperor Otto the First. In 970 A. D. the Byzantines won the battle of Arkadiopolis against the united army of southeast European countries of which the Hungarians formed a part. The East Roman and West Roman Empires agreed on a dynastic treaty in 972 A. D. which was the first such one in recorded history. Emperor Otto the Second and Princess Theophanu were then joined in marriage by the pope in Rome. In the same year Bruno, a monk from St. Gallen was ordained as bishop of Hungary by Otto. The bishop arrived at the court of Grand Duke Géza. In 973 A. D. twelve leading Hungarian noblemen took part in the east European peace talks, which Emperor Otto organized simultaneously with the Imperial Assembly in Quedlinburg. Grand Duke Géza was also gradually improving his foreign connections by the marriages of his daughters. His sons-in-law eventually included the Pole 80