Rózsa György: The Palace of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences

I. The history of the palace's design and construction

collection for the palace. He chose the site of the palace as well, on the busiest and one of the finest squares of the city at that time, on the Pest side bridge-head of the Chain Bridge. He was able to obtain the site on favourable terms partly as a donation of the city of Pest, partly as the result of an advantageous barter with the Dunagőzhajózási Társaság (Danube Steamship Co.). The Academy's Board of Directors nominated a three-member Building Committee consisting of, besides Count Dessewffy, vice-president Baron József Eötvös and Count György Károlyi, a friend of István Széchenyi and a founder member, too. In all matters of construction they were invested with full powers. The committee, without inviting an open tender, called on Imre Henszlmann (1813—1888), an associate of the Academy and a historian of architecture, Heinrich Ferstel (1828—1893), the architect of the Votivkirche in Vienna, and Miklós Ybl (1814—1891) who already possessed considerable experience, to submit plans for the new building. Young Antal Skalnitzky (1836-1878), who had recently returned from Berlin, and Frigyes Feszi (1821-1884), the architect of the Redoute just under construction, submitted their designs without invitation. As the Building Committee was not satisfied with the designs received, Leo von Klenze (1784— 1864) of Munich and Friedrich August Stüler (1806-1865), the architect of the Berlin Nationalgalerie, the Neues Museum and the Stockholm Nationalmuseum, were also invited to contribute. The Building Committee's evaluation of the designs aroused great controversy. Architects, art historians, and laymen alike took part in the wide-ranging debate in the press to express their views. For the first time architecture became public concern in Hungary. The debate centred on the decision whether the neo-Gothic or neo-Renaissance trend of historism was more suitable for the design of a mid-19th century building destined to be the headquarters of an institution governing the country's scientific life. At the same time the debate aroused interest in the problems of Hungarian national architectural style. Henszlmann, who cooperated with Károly Gerster (1819—1867) and Lajos Frey (1829-1877) supported by Arnold Ipolyi, as well as Ferstel and Feszl, represented the neo-Gothic trend, while the others were for the neo-Renaissance version. According to Henszlmann neo-Renaissance was "a deteriorated form of Greek style bequeathed upon us third-hand" lacking any national features. Incorrectly, he considered the characteristic style of Hungary's national past to be the Gothic style. Count János Waldstein, a friend of Széchenyi, put the opposition's views into words most succintly: "There may be, and are, Gothic railway 8