Magyar Műemlékvédelem 1980-1990 (Országos Műemléki Felügyelőség Kiadványai 10. Budapest)

Történet - Lővei Pál: A zsámbéki rom műemléki védelmének története

164. sz. 23. pont; MOB 1897/251. sz. 10. pont; MOB 1897/305. sz. 25. pont; MOB 1898/39. sz. 54 Guzsik 1977. 231. 55 MOB 1890/151. sz.; MOB 1890/160. sz. 7. pont; MOB 1891/16. sz.; MOB 1891/33. sz. 19. pont. 56 MOB 1895/44. sz.; MOB 1895/63. sz.; MOB 1895/67. sz. 12. pont; MOB 1895/102. sz. 24. pont; MOB 1895/ 157. sz. 10. pont, a falképekről; MOB 1895/170. sz. 57 MOB 1902/94. sz.; MOB 1902/111. sz. 58 MOB 1904/704. sz. 59 MOB 1912/737. sz.; MOB 1912/842. sz.; MOB 1912/862. sz. 60 MOB 1918/80. sz. 61 MOB 1928/367. sz.; MOB 1932/471. sz.; MOB 1934/310. sz. 62 MOB 1922/267. sz.; MOB 1922/296. sz.; MOB 1928/107. sz.; MOB 1928/108. sz.; MOB 1928/367. sz., MOB 1928/ 402. sz. 63 MOB 1931/454. sz. 64 MOB 1932/217. sz. 65 MOB 1932/471. sz. 66 MOB 1933/320. sz. 67 MOB 1934/409. sz. A támogatást Gerevich Tibor meg is sürgette: MOB 1934/434. sz. 68 MOB 1934/457. sz. 69 MOB 1934/570. sz.; MOB 1935/99. sz. 70 MOB 1935/549.b. sz.; MOB 1935/589. sz.; MOB 1936/ 733. sz.; Lux 1939. 4. 71 OMvH Tervtár. 72 Lux 1939. 4.; 14. kép. 73 MOB 1945/202. sz. 74 MOB 1946/168. sz.; MOB 1946/231. sz.; MOB 1946/259. sz.; MOB 1946/284. sz. 75 Guzsik 1977. 237-238. 76 Műemlékvédelem V (1961) 186-188.; Guzsik 1977. 234. 77 Lapidarium Hungaricum 1. Bp. 1988. 333. 78 Az első előzetes jelentések: Valter Ilona — Tamási Judit: Zsámbék — premontrei templom és kolostorrom. Régészeti Füzetek I. Ser. 1. No. 40. 1987. 124-125.; Valter Ilona: Zsámbék, premontrei monostorrom. Régészeti Füzetek Ser 1. No. 41. 1988. 111-112.; 42. 1991. 97-98.; 43. 1991. 80-81.; 44. 1992. 97.; 45. 1993. 104. RÖVIDÍTÉSEK Dümmerling 1960 ifj. Dümmerling Ödön: Möller István (1860-1934). Műemlékvédelem TV (1960) Lux 1939 229-233. Gerő 1958 Gerő László: Építészeti műemlékek fel- Möller 1921 tárása, helyreállítása és védelme. Bp. 1958. Guzsik 1977 Guzsik Tamás: Műemlékvédelem Zsámbékon. Építés — Építészettudomány. IX Möller 1925 (1977) 229-246. Horler 1984 Horler Miklós: A műemlékvédelmi gondolat kialakulása Európában. Bp. 1984. Lux Géza: A zsámbéki templomrom. Bp. 1939. A zsámbéki templomrom. Kivonat Möller István műegyetemi tanár zsámbéki előadásából. Építő Ipar — Építő Művészet XLV (1921) 69-71. Möller István: A zsámbéki templom. Technika VI (1925) 69-78. ZSAMBEK IN HUNGARIAN MONUMENT PROTECTION The interest toward the ruins of the Premonstratensian church of Zsámbék in the second third of the 19th century was reflected in the activity of the developing organization of monument protection. The monument was described in several publications of the Central-Comission in Vienna. The Provisional Committee of Hungarian Monuments had dealt with the state of the ruins in the year of its foundation in 1872: they proposed an immediate measure, as the building was used as a stone-mine by the population of the village. An action took place only in 1889, when the young architect, István Möller was commissioned with the leading of the conservation works. Although the conservation of the southern aisle did not take place as a result of lack of money, and this lead to the collapse of a vault in 1931, and the starting of a new reconstrucion work it can be surely stated that without the 1889 works not much would have been left of the ruins of Zsámbék. The walls and basement undermined at several places were crumbling and were supported by Möller with new walls. The work was done well, the majority of the hundred years old supplements are still in good condition. The restorations of Zsámbék done by István Möller are considered by the monument literature an epoch-making work fhrst of all because of the brick supplement of the missing, destroyed details, like the western portal. According to this the use of brick different from the original stone material would have been the first - and for a long time not followed — practice of the principle of 20th century monument protection in Hungary. Möller's other works - the restoration of the castle of Léka, and the cathedral of Gyulafehérvár — do not seem however to have been so modern and exemplary as Zsámbék. No wonder that considering contemporary appreciation and the notes of the architect it is clear that the above statements are to be considered as fiction, and are the applications of newer restoration principles to the past. In reality — according to his later publications — Möller used brick as a provisional solution, as he had not enough financial means for the necessary conservation. Permanent completions were made however even at that time of stone. He did not stop fighting till the end of his life to rebuild in its original form the church, destroyed by the 18th century earthquake and further demolished by the population of the village. This was considered by the majority of his colleagues — according to the report of a 1922 meeting of the National Committee of Monuments — to be an out-of-date point of view. This does not mean however that Möller's activity in 1889 would not have brought a new attitude in Hungarian monu-