Arpadian construction Arpadian reconstruction

1. Preliminary results of a broad investigation on building stones in Székesfehérvár Ruin Garden. Problems encountered in the preservation of monuments. Magdalini Theodoridou Department of Petrology and Geochemistry, Eötvös Loránd University, H-1117 Budapest, Pázmány Péter sétány 1/c, Hungary (e-mail: magdatheodoridou@gmail.com) IntroductionThe size of the Székesfehérvár Ruin Garden, its services and five main different construction phases during the Middle Ages, make it one of the most appropriate examples for studying the medieval building stones in the Hungarian territory. Since the 19th century, the site has been partially excavated in four different ages. The present research is a part of a new microregional research plan of the Hungarian National Museum in frames of science for conservation, it belongs to the project EPISCON-European PhD in Science for Conservation and is founded by Marie Curie Actions of the European Commission. Its aim is the identification of the main types of building stones that were used by the Hungarian Royal architects in the different construction phases and their properties in relation to the state of conservation. • Strategic approach • 1st step:Comprehension of the monument’s significance-Historical survey • 2nd step:Deep comprehension of the ruins in terms of the different construction phases • 7 fieldworks • Literature survey • Several discussions with the archaeologist Biczó Piroska • photographical documentation • modification and enhancement of existing drawings presentation and documentation of the research • 3rd step:Sampling • 1st sampling: fragments randomly taken from the ground 16 thin sections first idea of the building stone types • 2nd sampling: • Macroscopic in-situ observation • Selection of 34 sampling positions due to the frequency of the used materials (detailed documentation-mapping) • Macroscopic investigation of the samples • Specific treatment of the samples according to their individual characteristics • Thin section making procedure • Microscopic investigation with polarizing microscope general petrographic characteristics • Main identified lithotypes Sampling map, after Piroska Biczó, Zsuzsa Branczeiz, Zoltan Szabó (György Bartos et al., 2004). Occasionally, more than one sampling points are depicted by one symbol due to the map’s scale. Investigations in progress - Future plans In the future, further investigation will be carried out leading to the creation of three different kinds of map: map of the main identified lithotypes depicted with different colors on the plan of the monument geographical map highlighting the possible origins of the identified rock types map of decay showing the decay forms on the plan of the monument Taking into consideration the distribution of the material in the construction, the common decay phenomena and the measured porosity, four representative samples from the most important rock types have been selected for further and deeper investigations; a calcareous sandstone, a sandy limestone, a fossiliferous limestone and a red fossiliferous micritic limestone. To that aim, further sampling was carried out. These further investigations include: Mineralogical analysis carried out by X-Ray Diffraction (XRD), Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) in case the existing relevant results are not enough. Physical and mechanical measurements as open porosity and specific gravity according to RILEM C.P.C.11.3, ultrasonic velocity modulus of elasticity, compressive strength, real density by Helium pycnometer, bulk density by Mercury Pycnometer, Nitrogen and Mercury porosity and superficial hardness by a Drilling Resistance Measurement System.A SCHMIDT Hammer will be applied to the materials in-situ for an approximate but non-invasive measurement of compressive strength, measuring a higher number of samples than the possible one in the laboratory. Finally, the main characteristics will be discussed and correlated to the decay forms, in order to achieve a general strategic approach based on a diagnosis that could represent a tool for conservation. Division of samples according to the general category of lythotypes and the phase of construction they belongto Arpadian construction Arpadian reconstruction 1st Gothic reconstruction 2nd Gothic reconstruction Expansion by King Matthias Q R Macroscopic aspect of sample # 1A – category I Sampling position of sample # 1A – category I Thin section microscopic aspect of sample # 1A, 1Nikol – category I f al Q f Thin section microscopic aspect of sample # 7, 1Nikol – category I Thin section microscopic aspect of sample # 4A, 1Nikol – category II Thin section microscopic aspect of sample # 22, 1Nikol – category III Q F Thin section microscopic aspect of sample # 15B, 1Nikol – category IV Thin section microscopic aspect of sample # 2, 1Nikol – category V Thin section microscopic aspect of sample # 16, 1Nikol – category VI Acknowledgments I would like to thank my supervisor Józsa Sandor, my tutor Szakmány György and Biczó Piroska for her help concerning the archaeological information and the permission of sampling. • Relevant bibliography • Piroska Biczó, (2005) “Székesfehérvár. Nemzeti Emlékhely I–II.” Tájak–Korok–Múzeumok Kiskönyvtára 309–310. szám. TKM Egyesület. • György Bartos, Piroska Biczó, Gergely Buzás, Pál Lővei, Klára Mentényi, Melinda Tóth, (2004) “The provostry and church of the Virgin Mary”. King St. Stephen Museum, Székesfehérvár. • Erhard M. Winkler, (2002) “Stone in architecture: properties-durability”. Springer, Germany.