An historical survey and environmental rehabilitation of Dumbrvioara

Castle Garden (Romania)

L. KOVCS1 E. KENTELKY1 A. FEKETE2
1. Department of Horticulture, Faculty of Technical and Human Sciences, Sapientia
University, Tg-Mure, Romania, Calea Sighioarei 1/C, kovacs_lorant@yahoo.com
2. Corvinus University Budapest, Faculty of Landscape Design Science, Budapest, 1118
Budapest, Villnyi str. 44 / Hungary
Keywords: Transylvanian castle parks, Teleki, monument protection, landscape design.
ABSTRACT
Our aim of research is the evaluation of Dumbrvioara Castle Park, assessing both its actual
stage as well as drafting its revitalization plan. The dynamical changes of the park have been studied with
the help of military maps, which turned out to be more precise than any other map. Topographical
measurements were carried out during the survey, accompanied by a conclusion regarding the present
state of the park. 439 reference points were used on the investigated site. The geodesic assessments,
together with the present state of the park, contain the most important restoration and revitalization
dates. The article ends with a conclusion and references about the investigation.

INTRODUCTION
Garden researches in Transylvania have no comparable tradition in other similar
sciences. This applies to Transylvanian garden art too, which was highly neglected compared
to other countries. There is also a deficiency in studies regarding park investigation and
restoration both in botanical and dendrological sense.
In this study the notion of historical garden was adopted from the Charter of
Florence, which comes to complete the Charter of Venice. Their role is to control the rules of
modern international protection of primarily important monuments, stating that historical
gardens belong to the creation of buildings and they form a common value with buildings in
historic or artistic terms. Therefore, they can be considered as historical monuments.
(Charter of Florence, see Romn 2002: 26).
After the First World War historical gardens in Transylvania lost their historical
importance. This importance diminished much more after the Second World War, due to the
horrors of war and destructions of the local people. On top of that, the intentional destructive
policy of the communist regime destroyed the remains of these monuments together with the
castle buildings. Wherever the castle remained, its garden-size was significantly reduced, and
their condition deteriorated. Nowadays it is depressing that there are no efforts to evaluate the
overall situation of castle gardens, which nevertheless constitute an important part of
Transylvanian cultural heritage. As a result, whatsoever protection of these monuments
remains questionable.
HISTORY OF DUMBRVIOARA CASTLE GARDEN
Dumbrvioara is a village with several streets, situated on Mure river bank, 18
kilometres north from Trgu-Mure. Originally it was a royal property and later the owners
were of the most famous families of the time, such as Szechenyi, King Sigismund, Erdlyi of
Somberek, Dnes Bnffy and Count Teleki. The Count Teleki family, the owner and the
builder of the present castle, called himself Teleki of Sec at the beginning of the 17th century.

The Teleki family of Sec had an important role both in the history and society of Transylvania
of that time, establishing a well-known library and also making important geographical
discoveries worldwide. Their castles, built in the eastern part of Transylvania, were fortresses
in the noblest sense of the word. They protected themselves both physically and spiritually, in
supporting their national identity and cultural heritage.
Two main stages can be distinguished in the history of the castle building.
1. The stage of the building construction with the ground floor, built by Count Samuel
Teleki of Sec (1739-1822), Chancellor of Transylvania, the founder of the Teleki Library in
Trgu-Mure. The building bears the influence of Trgu-Mure Artistic Centre. It consists of
two parts, with a length of 60 metres each, vertically extended to the road. The northern wing
is older, its cornerstone was placed in 1769 and a housing estate was built (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. The northern wing of the building

2. Count Samu Teleki (1845-1916), the Chancellors grandson, started to build the upper
part, the two-storied building. He was a famous traveller and researcher in Africa (the
discoverer of Lake Rudolf and Lake Stefanie). This building in the middle, parallel to the
road, has an attic and it connects the two older buildings. The three buildings altogether form
a U and bear all the characteristics of baroque castle gardens; there is also a Court
d`honneur (circular courtyard), as the castles basic plan shows (Fig.2).

Figure 2. The U-shaped building system

Only a short description is given about the garden: Behind the castle, up to Mure River
there was a lake and enough space for the landlords horses for training and riding shows. The
castle, with a modest exterior, was surrounded by a dendrological landscape garden and a fir
forest. (Keresztes 1995, Fig. 3).

Figure 3. The park

Hilda Horvth also reminds of the shadow of the big oak in front of the castle
(Keresztes 1995) as the favourite resting place of the family. The castle also has a burial vault,
including a large hall and the funeral chapel of the Teleki family. The decorated sarcophagus
of Samuel Teleki and other family members are to be found here, covered with stone slabs
placed on the floor. The frontside of the tomb was built in the same baroque style (Fig. 4).

Figure 4. Telekis tomb

It is worth mentioning that contemporary descriptions should be treated with a certain

reservation; the names of places used in some cases are not exact and may be interpreted
wrongly. The same remark is valid for the old sculptures and representations. Military maps
may be regarded as the most authentic contemporary documents. The evolution of the castle
and its park, their size and garden style in Dumbrvioara can be best supported by analyzing
the measurements of Transylvanian military maps.
According to the First Military Metrics Map (I Military Josefinische Aufnahne, 17691773), Dumbrvioara is a village with 38 houses, fields on both sides of the road, similarly to
the 18th century Transylvanian prevalent style. At this time, a larger building is already
situated in the north-west part of the village, which is supposedly the north wing of the castle
compound, a construction shown even during military measurements. There is no park or
garden to be observed near the building, which is probably due to simultaneity of the
construction and drawing the maps (Fig. 5).

Figure 5. The first military map of Dumbrvioara

The third military measurements (18691874, Map Archives History of Wars)

inform us about the presence of the castles ground floor wing; however, there is no trace of
the middle wing built by Samu Teleki.
A garden can be distinguished behind the castle, which lies close to Mure River
flowing at 1500m from the castle. Two channels were built in the middle of the site, parallel

to the road. It is estimated that this landscape garden belonging to the castle was about 60ha.
Four lakes, somewhat symmetrical, can be seen on both sides of the path leading to the
backside of the park. Compared to the first military measurements, the village enlarged its
territory in the past 100 years, and it ran south first (Fig.6).

Figure 6. The third military map of Dumbrvioara

THE GEODESIC STUDY OF DUMBRVIOARA CASTLE GARDEN

The geodesic study presented below was conducted in July 2004, in digital form,
scaled 1:1000 (Fig.7).

Figure 7. Geodesic assessment

During these measurements, 439 specific points were recorded on the analyzed
territory. The geodesic study contains data of the characteristic heights of the territory, its
boundaries, the buildings on site, outbuildings, roads, pedestrian roads, outdoor constructions,
objects of art, trees with trunk diameter larger than 10cm and other characteristic data about
the respective garden. It is remarkable that the assessed garden is only a part of the original
old garden and it belongs to Dumbrvioara Agricultural School. The larger part of the old
dendrological park, especially the area located outside the school fence, is under agricultural
use and its property is unelucidated. This area also contains the remains of the old lakes. The
evaluation of the gardens state and its value was carried out using the basic geodesic map.
Specific dates about the assessed objects were set on the evaluation sheets, considering the
possible protection of the historic monuments, the landscape, the image of the territory and
the gardens dendrological importance. The primary task is to protect the landscape values to
be found here in both botanical and architectural terms.
THE CURRENT STATE OF THE GARDEN
On assessing this Dumbrvioara heritage, Peter Goodchilds four basic criteria was
taken into account, who is a founding member of the Advisory Committee of English
Heritage Garden History. These criteria are as presented below (Goodchild 2003):
1. the historical value of the garden and buildings
2. the style of the garden and buildings
3. the state of the garden and buildings
4. its geographical context
Thus Dumbrvioara garden is divided into two by the main building, and these are
independent from each other; the front garden (instead of the former "court d'honneur") on the

eastern part of the road and the garden on the west side, located near Mure River bank. In
accordance with these findings, our surveys were completed separately for both gardens, but
the most important elements are presented on a measurement sheet of the garden architecture
which corresponds to the garden area scale of 1:1000 (Fig. 8).

Figure 8. The vegetation assessment plan

The circumference of the front garden is 228m and 3241m. The front garden is
disturbed to a great extent and highly accessed by school staff and pupils. However, this
garden is separated from the main road by wired fence, which is built on the remains of the
old stone fence, and it does not match the character of the historic monument.
Outside the fence, between the road and the pavement, a green patch of 80cm in width
can be observed, as well as an open ditch line crown of 150cm wide for water evacuation.
The tree vegetation consists of 38 individuals with trunk diameter greater than 10 cm. The
proportion of the active area is 51.12% of the entire front garden, whereas the canopy cover is
40%. The division of the front garden is geometrical; there are four rectangular shapes, each
of 330m. There is a pond made of concrete formed in the middle part of each of the four
rectangular shapes, as Figure 9 illustrates. During the evaluation there was no water in any of
them.

Figure 9. The front garden

Although the front garden attempts historising from an architectural point of view, this
is questionable from several points, as discussed below:
- the Baroque arrangement is not supported by the historical events, as we could not identify
any similar arrangement in the representation of plans, neither in the engravings, nor in the
pictures or descriptions during the research.
- the proportions of the plan and the various sizes suggest a Renaissance style rather than a
Baroque one, as there is nothing built in the Baroque period around the castle, bearing
characteristics of Baroque or Neobaroque style. Some evidence of the Baroque style may be
observed on the decorative plants (Buxus sempervirens and Ligustrum ovalifolium )
surrounding the rows. However, plant individuals (trees) appear in these rows, which are not
at all typical for the Baroque, such as perennial plants (spruce - Picea abies) or a couple of
fruit trees (walnut tree - Juglans regia or apple tree - Malus spp., etc.). Two oak individuals
planted at regular distances (Quercus petreae "columnaris") are the only acceptable species in
terms of style in this part of the garden, located parallel to the central wing of the building.
Layers built in geometrical forms, floor types do not contain specific forms of floor
flowers, grass or other type of embroidery, due to the high vegetation. Their function is not
appropriate either in terms of plant material, or in composition. Artificial elements used in the
garden (fences, benches, ponds, areas for paths and asphalt) are not in harmony with the
material they were created from, or with the building. The current state of the front garden is
neglected and it may be regarded as deserted. The feeling of ineffability is enhanced by the
neglected state of the flora and the deplorable state of the buildings. The character of the
former dendrological park can be hardly recognized, except for some plants. The garden area
decreased significantly, as it is equivalent to the current institution limits of the Agricultural
School. After having identified the park borders, the garden area is about 26,852m. It is

difficult to identify the current northern border on the surface of the ground. A part of the
southern road is closed by a barbed-wire fence hanging on a few rusty metal posts.
In the rear garden we identified some improvised outbuildings, which do not fit into
the environment and largely destroyed both the image and the atmosphere of the garden. The
condition of the current roads is also neglected, full of potholes and weeds, providing the first
the link between a former stable, now a garage for tractors and a learning ramp, and a lateral
entry from the main road. All the buildings and gardens are imbued with the black
communist atmosphere of the 1970s and 1980s. We were unable to trace any sign of the
garden composition in the back garden.
Although the dendrological garden represented an invaluable biological value in the
past, there is hardly anything left of it by now. Its value can only be associated with the
historically important figures or families; on the other hand, it represents the environment of a
building which can be considered an historical monument.
Currently, from an aesthetic point of view, which is a rather broad concept and a relatively
subjective category, the garden cannot be regarded as having an aesthetic value. This is due to
the direct consequence of the collectivization following the Second World War.
Unfortunately it cannot be classified as fitting into any category of the traditional garden
styles, as only some isolated plant individuals remained after the devastation, with less
significant dendrological value.
Given its present educational role of the building, a beautifully maintained garden
would be beneficial both in terms of social use and cultural recreation. However, as the
garden is in such a neglected state, its use is minimal.
The area is in a poor physical condition and, as described above, it has lost its
importance as a garden. Its present state unfortunately does not favour its declaration as an
historical site, as nobody would consider, for instance, that the ruins of a medieval fortress
should be protected only because it has been preserved in ruins. Sadly, the relationship
between physical condition and historical importance cannot be defined so clearly. This is
true to a marked degree in case of Dumbrvioara Castle Garden, where the larger part of the
garden was entirely destroyed, and the remaining part could not ensure the preservation of its
historical value and local character. There is a wider regional framework of which
Dumbrvioara Castle Garden was part of, similarly to other castle gardens, such as those in
Glodeni, Voivodeni, Apalina, Gorneti, Gurghiu, Ernei, Brncoveneti, Sngeorgiu de Mure,
as well as Peri, Pingeni, Pcureni, Ceua, Sngeru de Pdure, or Clueri. These formed and
still form an ecological - economic system together with the gardens and the properties of
manor houses. The garden of Dumbrvioara is an historical place and because it represents the
values of noble life of humanism tradition, it can be considered an historical monument, and
its saving and preserving must be of public interest.
REFERENCES
1. Alfldy, G. (2003) Current questions of protecting historic gardens, Protection of
historic monuments, 47 (3), 15-16.
2. Bir, J. (1938) Transylvanian Castles, Budapest, The Literary Institute New Times.
3. B. Nagy, M. (1973) Fortresses, castles, manor houses, Kriterion Publishing House,
Bucharest.
4. Erdlyi, L. (1977) Teleki Samu in Africa, Kriterion Publishing House, Bucharest.
5. Galavics, G. (2000) Historic Gardens, Corvina Publishing House, Budapest.
6. Goodchild, P. (2003) Evaluation of historic gardens and parks - English Theory,
Protection of historic monuments, 47 (3), 23-28.

7. Horvth, H. (1998) Hungarian Castles in the past, Gemini Publishing House,

Budapest.
8. Keresztes, Gy. (1995) Manor houses and castles in Mure County. Publishing
Impress, Trgu-Mure.
9. Kpeczi, B., Makkai, L., Mcsy, A., Szsz, Z. (1988) History of Transylvania I-III,
Academic Publishing, Budapest
10. Romn, A. (2002) The book of Cards, ICOMOS National Hungarian Commission,
Budapest.
11. Stirling, J. (1996) The Art of Renaissance Gardens in the 16th and 17th century,
Enciklopdia Publishing House, Budapest.
FIGURES
Figure 1. The northern wing of the building ........................................................................... 2
Figure 2. The U-shaped building system............................................................................. 3
Figure 3. The park.................................................................................................................. 3
Figure 4. Telekis tomb .......................................................................................................... 4
Figure 5. The first military map of Dumbrvioara .................................................................. 4
Figure 6. The third military map of Dumbrvioara ................................................................. 5
Figure 7. Geodesic assessment ............................................................................................... 6
Figure 8. The vegetation assessment plan............................................................................... 7
Figure 9. The front garden...................................................................................................... 8