Budapest Régiségei 18. (1958)

TANULMÁNYOK - Vattai Erzsébet: A margitszigeti korona 191-210

E. VATTAI THE CROWN OF THE MARGARET ISLAND After the recess of the devastating flood that occurred in the spring of 1838 the gardeners of Palatine Joseph, the then owner of the island found a tomb among the ruins of the church of the convent that once stood on the Margaret Island. The tomb contained a crown lying beside a luxuriously-appareled corpse. When, as a bequest of Palatine Joseph, the objects found in the tomb, and also other relics unearthed on the island and at Alcsut, were subsequently transferred to the National Museum, not only the silver-gilt, gemmed crown but also a small ring of gold adorned with chalcedony and the mouldered remnants of a silvergilt lace were registered in the inventory of the museum. Unfortunately only the crown is still extant (Figs. 3, 5, 6). The crown was published by Luczenbacher in 1847 : he presented a picture of the reconstructed crown (Fig. 1) together with the drawing of a golden signet-ring and that of three golden medals showing both their sides. Although none of these smaller objects is mentioned by Luczenbacher either in the inscription of the drawings or in the accompanying text, their picture suggests a close connection with the crown. Yet, the register of the museum reveals the fact that neither the three golden medals nor the ring were brought to light from the tomb found in the long chancel of the church (Fig. 2/1) which contained the crown : they came from another tomb discovered next to the northern side-wall in the nave (Fig. 2/2). This tomb figures in the literature as that of the "Greek knight", in spite of the fact, that the medals do not belong to the 12th century and are not of Byzantine origin as was originally assumed. The fig. 1 represents a cantonal "kreutzer" from Basel, while one of the lower pictures shows an undefined device of the Balkanic type, the other a French jetton fromthe 14th or 15th century. The data as revealed by the entries in the inventory had later sunk into oblivion and subsequent literature, following Luczenbacher's version, regarded the said crown as having come to light together with the medals and the large ring. No thorough study of the treasures found on the Margaret Island in 1838 has ever been made so that the error is still uncorrected. Yet, it is all the more important to elucidate the circumstances in which the discovery was made and to obtain reliable information of the relics brought to light with the crown, as investigators are in the dark about the person of its original owner ; while its small size induced some authors to regard the crown as one made for a woman, others have associated it with the name of Stephen V (f 1272). There is a good explanation for the fact that the name of Stephen V was suggested. According to the chronicles, this king was laid to rest in the church of the convent on the Margaret Island. Earlier authors, however, repeatedly refused to identify the tomb under review with that of Stephen V. In doing so they were led by the consideration that the tomb in question had been found in the long chancel on the side opposite to that mentioned by a Hungarian legend about Margaret which, dating from the 16th century, was based on an earlier Latin text, while another reason of their refusal was that the tomb is made of sandstone although the legend speaks of a marble tomb in connection with Stephen V. The crowns of kings and queens had the same form in the 13th and 14th centuries. The small size of the crown unearthed on the island points to a feminine crown, and the objects found with it point to a woman's grave. Unfortunately, we know of no queen or princess with whom the crown in question could reliably be associated. Seeing that opinions are contradictory as to whether the crown did or did not belong to Stephen V, the person of its owner gives us no clue for its date of origin. Some authors suggested the second half of the 13th, others the 14th century. Two reasons were given in favour of the latter date. On the one hand, the fleur-de-lys ornamentation of the crown was associated with the Anjou dynasty ; on the other, the leaf-like ornament on the hinges was regarded as a later addition or, else, on account of this ornament, the entire crown was regarded as having been made at the end of the 14th century. The fleur-de-lys seen on crowns has, however, an earlier history, and its appearance in Hungary need not necessarily be associated with the reign of the Anjous in the 14th century. The leaf-like ornament in itself supplies no cogent reason for accepting the later date because similar ornaments are often seen in the representations of crowns from the 13th century. It is undeniable that the ornamentations of crowns tended to become simpler towards the 14th century, so that the origin of the crown of the Margaret Island may safely be placed between the second half of the 13th and the outset of the 14th century. The end of the 13th century suggests itself for the following reasons. It was found that, above all, the lilies of the crown of the Margaret Island, at least as regards the details of the lower petals, resemble those of two crowns from 208