“Medievalism and Social Reform at the Academy of San Fernando in Spain (1760-1808), Studies in...

122 Studies in Medievalism

51. Chapbooks from the nineteenth century confirm the Unionist purposes to which Merlin and Arthur were now being put by Scots who felt themselves contentedly and securely part of a British polity. Prophecies of Thomas the Rhymer, The Ancient Scots Prophet, Containing the wonderful fulfilment of many of his Predictions; and those not yet accomplished (Kilmarnock, 1826), the work of Allan Boyd, Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, blithely described Merlin as, along with Thomas, one of "the two Scots Prophets in the reign of King Arthur" (8). The same claim was made in a later nineteenth-century edition, The Prophecies of Thomas the Rhymer, and the Comical Story of Thrummy Cap & The Ghaist (Glasgow, 1850).

52. Pinkerton, Enquiry, l:xxii.

Medievalism and Social Reform at the Academy of San Fernando

in Spain (1759-1808)

Matilde Mateo

Before the latter part of the eighteenth century, Spanish commentary on medieval art and architecture was scant. It appeared primarily in topographical literature, where medieval works were appraised out of local pride, or incidentally in religious histories, as proofs of the piety of the bishops, abbots, or monarchs who had been their sponsors. As might be expected, the criticism was mostly descriptive, without any appraisal of the artistic worth or aesthetic values beyond size or richness of the materials. These comments generally lacked critical spirit and did not show any conscious interest in the works to which they referred; in fact, they frequently consisted of quotations repeated from older sources, some of them going back to the Middle Ages themselves and hence, of course, invariably laudatory. The reigns of Charles III (1759-1788) and, above all, of Charles IV (1788-1808), however, saw a considerable increase in Spanish criticism and research on medieval art, which was in sharp contrast with the former situation. Most of this work was carried out by members of the Royal Academy of Fine Arts of San Fernando (Real Academia de Bellas A rtes de San Fernando) at Madrid, then the leading art institution of the country in prestige and power.

By comparison with previous centuries, the commentary on medieval art produced by the academicians of San Fernando was impressive both in quantity and in quality, with many original contributions and a wider scope to the inquiries. 1 Most of it concentrated on Gothic architecture, although sculpture and painting, as well as other periods, were also taken

Studies in Medievalism IX, 1997


into account. Many interesting remarks about works and styles appeared in the acclaimed Viage de Espana by Antonio Ponz (1725-1792) and in its continuation the Viaje artistico a varios pueblos de Espana (1804) by Isidoro Bosarte (1747-1807), as well as in the travel diaries and letters of G. M. de Jovellanos (1744-1811).2 Observations about the principles and origin of the Gothic architecture occurred in Bosarte's Disertaci6n sobre el estilo que llaman G6tico (1790), Jovellanos's Carta de philo ultramarino sobre la arquitectura inglesa y la llamada g6tica (1805), and the Marques de Urena's (1741-1806) Reflexiones sobre la arquitectura, ornato y musica del Templo (1785). 3 Monographs were then written, such as J. A. Cean Bermudez's (1749-1829) study of the Gothic cathedral at Seville and Jovellanos's studies of Gothic buildings at Majorca.4 The two greatest historiographical enterprises on Spanish art compiled in this epoch, the Diccionario de los mas ilustres profesores de las Bellas Artes en Espana (1800) by Cean Bemudez and the Noticias de Los arquitectos y arquitectura de Espana (1829) by Eugenio Llaguno y Am!rola (d. 1799), included a considerable amount of new information about medieval artists and works.5 And, last, there were observations about the historical development of medieval art in the publications just mentioned, in Cd.n's Histor.ia def arte de la pintura (1823), as well as in several of Jovellanos' works: Elogio de las Bellas Artes (1781), lnforme sobre la publicaci6n de los monumentos de Granada y Cordoba (1786), and, above all, in his notes to the Elogio de Don Ventura Rodriguez (1788).6 This array of writings brings forward the development of a conscious interest in medieval art for the first time in Spain. The phenomenon can be seen as a part, or as a consequence, of the medievalist trend that was growing in other European countries. Yet the fact that these Spanish comments were written by academicians of San Fernando raises interesting questions about the role that this institution might have played, especially whether its character and goals might have fostered this sudden interest in medieval art, and, if so, in which way.

During the latter part of the eighteenth century, winds of reform blew across Spanish society, aiming to end the economic, political, and social decay of the country. The arts were an important part of this reformist project, especially for those who shared the enlightened view of art as a social product. According to this view, it was not possible to improve society without improving the arts too, for they mirrored the society that had produced them, they affected the economy of the country as well as its social structure, and they could also have a moral impact on individuals. Many of these reformers also believed that the best way to improve society was to educate the nation by means of proper institutions under the control of the state. To their eyes, the already existing Academy

The Academy of San Fernando 125

of San Fernando could become one of such institutions. It had formally been founded on 12 April 1752, out of what in the beginning was only meant to be a school to provide artists trained in the latest European fashions to work in the building of the new royal palace at Madrid. In 1757 the character of the Academy was transformed when the new statutes handed the government of the institution to prominent politicians, aristocrats, and intellectuals appointed by the king himself, while the artists were left with no power to rule their own affairs. This was a peculiar hierarchy with no parallel in other European art academies. Together with the monopolizing aspirations of San Fernando, this hierarchy would reinforce the transformation of the Academy into an instrument to make the art of the country serve the King and the State.7 After the accession of Charles III, "the first enlightened king of Spain," and especially after the accession of Charles IV, who placed prominent enlightened figures-some of them with personal contacts with the French philosophes-in high positions at San Fernando, the Academy became progressively an enlightened enterprise. 8 Among other changes, the Academy was then conceived by some academicians as a contribution to the progress of Spanish society by improving the taste and art of the country (at least that was the intention; it is another matter whether they succeeded, a question which should not interest us here). In this respect, San Fernando, like many other academies of the time, was taking over the role of universities as vehicles for the expression of the new ideas forged by the progressive elements of Spanish society.9

Ponz, Bosarte, Jovellanos, the Marques de Urena, Cean, and Llaguno can be included in the party of the enlightened reformers within the Academy and the country. All of them belonged to the upper ranks in the hierarchy of the Academy, and were there by royal appointment. Cean, Llaguno, and Urena were Academicos de Honor, academicians that although powerless in terms of policy making were still above the artists and owed their appointment to their personal prestige. Jovellanos was a Consiliario, that is, a member of the ruling body of the academy. The Consiliarios regarded themselves as "the healthiest, most enlightened and most original part of the Academy" and boasted about their "integrity, public zeal, and good desires for the wealth of the Academy and the Nation." 10 And last, but not least, Ponz and Bosarte were influential Secretarios-perhaps the most powerful figure in the Academy-in office, respectively, from 1776 to 1790, and from 1792 to 1807. Some of these academicians were also involved in the administration of the state and active politically. Llaguno was Primer Oficial de la Secretaria de Estado and Consejero def Supremo Consejo de Estado, while the Marques de Urena was the supervisor of the


new settlement of San Carlos in Cadiz, an ambitious public work sponsored by Charles III. Finally, Jovellanos was a well known figure in the political arena of the country and famous for his reformist ideas. He was briefly in office as Ministro de Gracia y ]usticia in 1797 and an active member of the Junta Central, which resisted Napoleon's control of Spain. He, together with his good friend Cean, was also well known in the enlightened circles of Spain.

The major reform of the arts that the Academy of San Fernando wanted to bring about in Spain was the implantation of neoclassicism and the eradication of the baroque, especially of its most ornamented and latest form, which was called in a derogatory way the Churrigueresco after its most conspicuous practicers, the Churriguera brothers. For the academicians trained in the enlightened exaltation of Reason, these styles were the biggest display of caprice and extravagance. Furthermore, following a simplistic understanding of art as a social product, the baroque and the Churrigueresque were thought to embody the irrationality and superstition that had been ruling SRanish society. 11 Similarly, the academicians wanted to foster the new neoclassical aesthetic creed, for it was ruled by light, reason, and knowledge, that is, a reflection of the qualities they wanted to see ruling Spanish society. Thus the war against the baroque fought by the Academy of San Fernando was not only a matter of taste, but must be seen against this background of social reform. Battles were fought on many fronts: from the attempts to monopolize the art degrees, so that only artists trained in the neoclassicist tradition could undertake new works, to the efforts to supervise the whole national art production, including any intervention in old buildings. But the battle front that interests us here is the aspiration to set the guidelines of art criticism and taste by becoming the center for art historiographical research and aesthetic enquiries. It was in this latter activity that the academicians displayed a growing interest in medieval art. Given the institutional context, their views acquired a normative purpose and an official character which were lacking in any opinion about medieval art expressed by other authors , before, then, or after.

How did this interest in medieval art interact with the program of reform of the Academy of San Fernando? How could it "fit" with the goal of spreading neoclassical standards, when neoclassicism preached a return to the principles of classical art, and medieval art had been condemned ever since the Renaissance precisely for breaking these standards? And, lastly, what were the values discovered in medieval art-and medieval society-that could help, in the academicians' view, to the progress of Spanish society?


If an interest in medieval art developed within, or despite, the neoclassical bias of the Academy, it was because the didactic and historiographical vocation of these academicians transcended their aesthetic standards (sometimes even transforming them). Let us examine the didactic vocation first. The task the Academy of San Fernando set itself of imposing a neoclassical taste implied that the country had also to be taught why the prevailing baroque and Churrigueresque were bad and had to be abandoned. Since it was the custom in the art theory of the time, the best way to do so was by comparison with other styles. The Gothic was often chosen for this comparison, but, paradoxically, with opposite results: it could be regarded as bad as the baroque, or it could be found superior. Either way, the Gothic was given considerable attention, and not so much because of a real appreciation of the style but rather because it was found useful to highlight the defects of the modern styles.

Bosarte's Disertaci6n sabre el estilo llamado g6tico provides us with an instance of how the Gothic could be aesthetically despised and nevertheless attract attention when conceived as a lesson to be taught. In the Disertaci6n, Bosarte dealt in length with the origin, history, and principles of the Gothic in an extensive way which had no precedent in Spain. He did so resorting often to a paragone with the classical styles and openly acknowledging the superiority of the latter. Thus, the reason why he explored the principles of Gothic was not that he thought them good. It was, as he admits, that he wanted to increase the knowledge of the national architecture, and above all because he wanted to "prevent any further progress of the pestilent pest already made by the other Gothic [the baroque], the modern one different from the ancient one, which has nowadays havocked and corrupted the aspect of the works of Architecture with regard to their ornaments." 12 For him, baroque and Gothic were similar, probably because the Renaissance criticism of the Gothic and the neoclassical criticism of the baroque were grounded in the disparagement of the same features: a taste for lavish ornamentation, a search for novelty, a disregard for the rules, and an overall impression of being governed more by caprice than by reason.

Other academicians, however, thought, that the comparison of both styles transformed Gothic into "a good, judicious, elegant, graceful architecture," despite its "eccentric whims and bizarreries." 13 In these cases, they turned to Gothic not to denounce what should be avoided in contemporary architecture, but to provide models to follow. The two main features by which the Gothic was regarded as superior to the baroque were its fitness for religious buildings and its constructive skills. The insistence on these two issues was fostered by the desire to reform some


architectural practices as well as the religious sensibility of the country, and always with a view to make Spanish society more rational.

In the opinion of the academicians, Gothic churches were the best suited to inspire piety and express the presence of God because of their slender and light proportions. Ponz, for instance, stated that "nobody can justly say that this Gothic architecture lacks majesty and decorum: on the contrary, it seems to have been invented to give it to temples and the Houses of the Lord." 14 Jovellanos also remarked that "it seems that the ingenuity of those artists used up all their knowledge in order to contrive a dwelling worthy of the Supreme Being. On entering in these temples, a man feels invaded by a deep and silent reverence, which seizing his soul, prepares him for the contemplation of the eternal truths." 15 And finally, Llaguno even went as far as arguing the superiority of the Gothic interiors in this respect over any other style, including the venerated Greek (1:215). This laudatory view of the Gothic was directly connected with the rise of the aesthetics of the sublime and was not original, but taken from eighteenth-century French theorists such as Laugier and J. F. Blondel. 16

However, the success it found among these academicians has also to be explained by their wish to reform the W{lY Spaniards expressed and experienced their religion. During the second half of the eighteenth century, a new religious sensibility was introduced in the country. It advocated a more austere and internal experience of religion, in accordance with a more rational basis for religion itself, that would permit believers to regain their sense of greatness and dignity as rational beings. At the same time, this new sensibility implied a reaction against the prevailing external forms of worship promoted by the Counter-Reformation: processions, the cult of images and relics, proliferation of miracles, and so forth. These forms of worship were readily identified with the overornamented, theatrical and rich baroque church interiors, and looked down upon by the enlightened people of Spain as an intolerable display of superstition and irrationality. The concern of the Academy of San Fernando about this issue was considerable, especially on the part of its Secretario Ponz, who in 1777 raised a petition to the King to grant the academy the supervision of all future church architecture and furnishings. 17

So the praise that Ponz and other academicians bestowed on the Gothic interiors can also be seen as a lesson to re-educate the artists and people of Spain in the taste for more authentic forms of worship, both internally and externally.

The other reason Gothic was consid~red superior to the baroque was its skilled construction, especially the solidity, lightness, and boldness of the churches. Jovellanos waxed enthusiastic at "that daring and extraordi-


nary delicacy, that hiding the true solidity of the Gothic buildings, makes them look notably slender and light," while Bosarte acknowledged in his Viage artistico that "Gothic architecture combined lightness with solidity. And that is enough: no more explanation is needed ... as everybody likes lightness." 18 Ponz (11:6,31) and Cean also commented favorably about this aspect of the Gothic (Llaguno, xxxiii). Even such a detractor of medieval art as the neoclassical painter Anton Raphael Mengs (who had become Pintor de Camara of King Charles III in 1761, and Director Honorario de Pintura [1763-4] and Academico de Honor [1764-8] at San Fernando) admitted that "with regard to solidity, the Gothic ... buildings [were] not inferior to the Greek or Latin ones." 19 This view of the Gothic was one of the most widespread, and it appears even in the technical treatises. For instance, the popular textbook entitled Elementos de toda La architectura civil (1763), by Christian Rieger and Miguel Benavente and dedicated to the Academy of San Fernando, did not spare eulogies to Gothic monuments, which were characterized as displaying "fearlessness and sober daring," as well as a "splendor, arrogance, and beauty which could hardly be imitated nowadays."20 But perhaps nobody esteemed this quality of the Gothic more highly than Diego de Villanueva, professor of architecture and perspective at San Fernando. In his Colecci6n de Pape/es Crfticos (1766) he pondered about the duration of Gothic buildings, wondering at the fact that they also exhibited an amazing slimness and height, to conclude that they were model examples of a precise design and execution.21 Not modest praise, especially if we take into account that, in contrast with other opinions, this one came from a professional architect.

The exaltation of the constructive skills of the Gothic served to denounce the shortcomings of contemporary architecture. It also provided some arguments to support the reform of architectural practice and education pursued by the Academy of San Fernando. Diego de Villanueva put his finger on the spot when he argued that Gothic architects were superior to his contemporaries because of their better knowledge of physics and mathematics, which allowed them to produce cheaper and more durable buildings (89-90). The Gothic buildings were among the oldest standing buildings in Spain, especially if we take into account that the Romanesque and Pre-Romanesque were frequently regarded as Gothic, and that their antiquity was often exaggerated. Their solidity was something that Spanish modern buildings seemed to lack. As was deplored by Diego de Villanueva, collapses and constant repairs were not uncommon, although an enormous amount of material was employed to ensure the buildings' durability. This resulted in expensive buildings and extravagant maintenance. And to make matters worse, these buildings fulfilled their


purpose only for a short time. The situation was against the demands for economy preached by Spanish reformists, as well as against the neoclassical standards for a rational and solid design. As Diego de Villanueva had pointed out, the solution lay in improving the education of the architects by enlarging their theoretical knowledge. The Academy of San Fernando supported this view. In the opinion of the academicians, the study of mathematics or physics would result in better calculations for the structures of the buildings, with consequent savings in material and maintenance, while further instruction in the principles of classical architecture would help to produce more rational and beautiful designs. The insistence on the theoretical knowledge of architects had other implications for the reformist program of the Academy. It meant a direct attack on the traditional education of architects in Spain, which was only practical and in the hands of the guilds. And it also aimed to improve the social standing of architecture and its practitioners. On the one hand, by arguing that it only could provide the proper theoretical education, the Academy tried to secure the architects trained at San Fernando a monopoly of the architectural activity of the country, with consequent increase in their profits. And, on the other hand, it also aimed to raise the social recognition of architecture by presenting it as an ars liberalis, an aim that was reinforced by giving the artists of the Academy the nobility rank of hijosdalgos.22

The eulogy of the constructive skills of the Gothic also brought along a new assessment of medieval art and of the Middle Ages themselves. It presented medieval architects as wise professionals, with a considerable theoretical knowledge, and as capable of truly rational designs. It further implied that Gothic buildings were architecture, and no mere constructions, as had been argued, for instance, by Mengs (CA, 273), Jovellanos (EVR, 379) or Bosarte (D, 5). According to neoclassical principles, for a building to be regarded as architecture it not only had to exhibit solidity and economy, but it also had to display beauty. This beauty could be achieved when Reason permeated the whole design and execution, up to the finest details: right proportions, harmony of the parts, adaptation to function, and an ornamentation that foll©wed the rules of simplicity, unity, and fitness . A construction, on the contrary, did not have to be beautiful or respond to the demands of Reason, but only to satisfy the necessity for which a building was erected in the first place. To admit that Gothic buildings were designed by architects instead of by builders meant that the Middle Ages were cultivated enough to produce Works of Art . It also presented the supposedly "Dark Ages" as more enlightened than theoreti-


cians of the Renaissance and later had been willing to admit, and, consequently, as more attractive to the reformists.

There was no total agreement, however, about whether the art of the Middle Ages conformed to the demands of Reason, and could therefore meet the standards of neoclassical criticism. We have already seen how Bosarte equated Gothic with baroque because of their irrationality, and indeed he thought then that medieval architects "completely ignored criticism and philosophy, that is, the use of a sound reason, which raises and perfects the arts ."23 He was not alone in this judgment. Mengs, a friend of the influential neoclassical theorist Winckelmann, considered that medieval art was "barbarous" and the buildings "eccentric and ridiculous things, completely contrary to Beauty and reason."24 As regards Spanish medieval art, Mengs remarked somewhat sarcastically that not only the artists were ignorant, but also their patrons, and "even more so than the artists." He argued that because their main occupation had been war, kings and noblemen had become complete barbarians with regard to the arts, and indeed even people who despised good taste.25 Jovellanos, in his early writings, also argued that this deficiency in reason hindered their appreciation of the regularity and principles of Graeco-Roman architecture and fostered in them the taste for the new and the uncommon characteristic of people with unsound judgment (EVR, 382). In his Elogio de las Bellas A rtes, he concluded that Gothic architecture had no system whatsoever: too slim columns to support the high vaults, a too luxurious and profuse ornamentation with too minute and excessive detail, and a conspicuous lack of proportion among all the constructive elements (351). We also find this negative view in the Elementos de Matematicas by Benito Bails, teacher of Mathematics at the Academy of San Fernando. This work was one the greatest pedagogic enterprises of the Academy and became the most popular handbook on architecture and mathematics of the time. Bails stated that Gothic architecture was an example of the "perverse taste," a taste that was a "disease of the understanding."26 And finally, we can even see how the neoclassicist ideal transformed the uncritical chauvinistic praise of medieval Spanish art into truly Vasarian diatribes in the speeches read by the academicians on solemn occasions .27

On the other hand, however, we find great champions of neoclassicism such as the Marques de Urena and Antonio Ponz praising medieval art as if it were a classicist style. The Marques de Urena, after a careful analysis of the principles of the Gothic, concluded that "one can find traits of simplicity, truth, propriety, unity, character, harmony, and eurhythmy."28 And in Ponz's opinion, the Gothic buildings exhibited some of the good points of Graeco-Roman architecture (1:2,11) . He frequently found


the cathedrals "magnificent" and "beautiful," highlighting their solidity, spaciousness, regularity, good proportions, and, above all, a delicate and wisely distributed ornamentation. Moreover, he surprisingly stated that Vasari had said that the Goths introduced an improvement [!] in Italian architecture (a statement that would have made Vasari turn in his grave) (1:2,11). Cean also argued that "the architects in this Gothic kind were not so ignorant in the art of architecture as it is pretended by those who called it arbitrary and without rules," and maintained that they had followed the proportions of the human body in the design of their buildings.29 He even went so far as to state that the Renaissance architects had a debt to the Gothic ones:

The truth is that the restorers of the Graeco-Roman architecture adopted in their temples the cross plan, the towers and the lanterns used by the Gothic-German architects in their cathedrals: that the restorers owe their first progress in the construction to the same G-othic-German architects; and that the works of the restorers had certain art, certain lightness and freedom that was neither achieved by the ancients; nor understood by the moderns.30

And lastly, even Bosarte himself, in later writings, admitted that "the Goths were not as arbitrary as they have been portrayed" (V, 104). We must not be misled, however, by these favorable comments. The admiration of the Gothic was still relative, as it can be seen when the academicians considered the possibility of actually copying the Gothic buildings. They rejected it even, as in Ponz's case, for additions to Gothic buildings (11:6,41).

It is somehow paradoxical to see how the art of the Middle Ages could be judged with the same criteria-of Reason and neoclassicist tenets-and still reach opposite conclusions, even among the same academicians, as was the case with Bosarte and Jovellanos. One might appeal to the contradictions inherent in a time of change, such as the end of the eighteenth century, or even to the emergence of a romantic sensibility within the neoclassical academy. However, I think that there is one more factor to be taken into account: the co-existence of different traditions with regard to the image of medieval art. First, many negative comments expressed by these academicians appeared in what can be termed the "raiseand-decline-of-the-arts" type of discourses. In them, medieval art appears only incidentally, to contrast the achievements of former or later styles, and it is not the object of a proper and independent reflection. The lack


of originality of these comments-we find them in many other older writings and in various European countries-point to the idea that they are more a cliche deprived of real meaning than a well thought out conclusion.

Secondly, the view of medieval painting and sculpture parted ways with that of medieval architecture. Whereas painting and sculpture always remained, and would still remain, subject to heavy criticism for their neglect of the classical principle of mimesis, the negative image of medieval architecture forged in the Renaissance was challenged and substantially altered.31 So when looking into the criticism of medieval art, we must take into account which tradition is at work. The criticism of sculpture and painting influenced the most negative views, such as those of Mengs and his followers at the Academy of San Fernando. Mengs was a painter, and thus was more likely to surrender to the theoretical tradition in his discipline than in architecture. On the other hand, those who admitted some positive values in medieval art, such as its constructive skills or fitness for religious purposes, were following a more positive view developed in eighteenth-century French architectural treatises. Their theories could have been picked up by the academicians of San Fernando, either directly through their writings or through Mengs's prophet, Francesco Milizia.32

This positive view must also have been helped by the fact that the architecture of Spain, unlike painting and sculpture, lacked any specific historical account (Llaguno's was the first). In other words, there was not a preexisting derogatory image of the medieval architecture of Spain to influence them. On the contrary, all the information the academicians possessed about medieval architecture was the positive portrayal by the historical and topographical literature of previous centuries.

It is also important to remark the existence of two different channels for the criticism of medieval art which resulted in two opposite attitudes. On the one hand, we have a strong condemnation by the artists in the strictly artistic literature, and on the other, the admiration expressed by scholars in topographical and historiographical literature. The more positive attitude of the scholars is paralleled by the fact that their comments on medieval art, although scant, outnumbered significantly those by the artists. Both attitudes remained uncontaminated by each other up till the second part of the eighteenth century. I draw attention to this phenomenon because I think that the interest in medieval art of the academicians of San Fernando can also be explained by the incorporation of the scholarly tradition into the realm of art. Ponz, Bosarte, Jovellanos, the Marques de Urefia, Llaguno, and Cean, despite being prominent members of the first art institution of the country, were not professional artists (although Ponz, Urefia, and Cean did have some experience in this respect). They


are better described as enlightened scholars, with good libraries, knowledge of foreign languages, and firsthand knowledge of other European countries (in the case of Urena, Ponz, and Bosarte). Their range of interests extended far beyond the limits of art. Among them, they exhibited a historical vocation that was lacking in their fellow artists, as well as a strong nationalistic spirit. These two features-nationalism and historiographical vocation-were as efficient as the didactic bias in helping to overcome the prejudices against medieval art derived from artistic literature and neoclassical principles. The growing interest in medieval art within the academy cannot, in fact, be fully understood without them.

The historical vocation of these academicians was a common feature in eighteenth-century learned Europeans, who engaged in endless historical inquiries in the belief that all human activites and institutions should be seen as the result of their history. The fact that they also turned into art historians conformed to the new concept of history, in which art became, as Bosarte put it, "an essential part in the glory of human talents."33 This new methodology was a reaction against the traditional history based on diplomatic and military events, and it was concerned instead with what these Spaniards called the civil history: institutions, customs, law, government, economy, sciences, and arts. Particularly, their curiosity for the art of the Middle Ages was fostered by the enlightened claim for a universal history that comprised all periods and cultures, as well as by the historicist interest in the spirit of the Middle Ages for its own sake, which was developed by Justus Moser and the Scottish historian William Robertson. Furthermore, the concept of history as a chain of events turned medieval art into an opportunity to follow the thread of the history of the fine arts (e . g., Bosarte, V, 45). As Bosarte put it,

we cannot draw any profitable lesson for the improvement of design from the paintings and sculpture in the Gothic style; but for the history of art ... it is advisable to see the works and paintings of the Gothic style, and to observe the extent of their achievements, of their knowledge, which genres were more favored, and even many other curiosities in relation with the progress and decadence of the ideas of the ingenuity of the artist. 34

The result was that the art of the Middle Ages was turned into a respectable, if not necessary, field of historical reseach. From this point of view, the interest in medieval art was mainly scholarly, and it did not necessarily


imply a specific art1st1c apprec1at10n or even an aesthetic enioyment-although they might as well have existed.

Following the new historiographical trends, these academicians also applied a new and more scientific methodology that only accepted the direct inspection of monuments and original documents as valid sources of information (Cean, D, xx; Bosarte, V, pro!.; Ponz, pro!.). Their main concerns were the questions of authorship and chronology, althoughJovellanos also extended his curiosity to materials, techniques, and some questions about the artists, such as their wages and social standing Govellanos, BAE, 46:394, 398-399, 414; Bosarte, V, 93-95). With that purpose, they read the previous bibliography with a critical eye, rejecting all the fantastical material and checking the truth in the factual data as much as they could, whether by travels such as Ponz's Viage de Espana, Bosarte's Viage artistico, and Jovellanos's trips in Spain, or by thorough archival research. Cean, Llaguno, Jovellanos, and, to a lesser degree Bosarte and Ponz, were especially active in the latter activity, helped in some cases, as in Cean's and Ponz's, by their professional experience in the arrangement of archives . They also frequently exchanged information; and Jovellanos, while he was imprisoned in Mallorca, literally had a team of people gathering data for him.35 All this research resulted in a greater and more accurate knowledge about the medieval art of Spain, which ultimately led to a different image of medieval art, in which some of the cliches from the artistic literature were dissipated.

The main cliche to be destroyed was-once again-the belief in the nonexistence of artists in the Middle Ages. Medieval art had traditionally been believed to be anonymous, a fact that had been interpreted as a proof of the absence of artists, or even as an acknowledgment by the artists themselves or by their patrons that they were unworthy of record. However, this view was seriously challenged by the research done by these academicians, who succeeded in unearthing many names of artists hitherto unknown. Also, the traditional arrangement of art history in artists' biographies had contributed to the exclusion of medieval art, since hardly any name was known. Now, however, after all this research, Spanish medieval art finally made its debut in the published artistic literature.36 Many entries on medieval artists appeared in the reputed Cean's Diccionario de los mas ilustres profesores de las Bellas A rtes en Espana (1800), and many medieval works were included in Llaguno's Noticias de los arquitectos y arquitectura de Espana (1829), which, although arranged chronologically, followed the criterion of dealing with documented works. The inclusion of medieval art in these works meant that it had reached a new status, that of A rt, since medieval artists and works appeared in these studies alongside such


prestigious names as those of Herrera, Berruguete, or Murillo. The traditional idea that the Middle Ages were a barren artistic land with no artists had to be definitely abandoned. 37

The current historical methodology also asked for an analysis of the development of art in the different periods of history. There were several of these attempts. One of them was devoted to painting, the Historia del arte de la Pintura by Cean; and the others focused on architecture: Cean's Descripci6n artfstica de la catedral de Sevilla, his edition of Llaguno's Noticias de las arquitectos y arquitectura de Espana, and Jovellanos' Elogio de Don Ventura Rodriguez (1781), which was greatly expanded with twenty notes when the Elogio was published in 1790.38 The last three historical accounts have many similarities and it is difficult to ascertain who was the original mind, if there was one.39 What must be stressed about them is the absence of the apocalyptic tone common in the "raise-and-decline-of-thearts" type of discourse, and its replacement by a dispassionate matter-of-fact characterization of each different style and the enumeration of its most representative works.

Some aspects of the enlightened concept of history borrowed by these academicians affected the appreciation of tfi.e Middle Ages and its art. Bosarte, for instance, following Montesquieu's concept of the spirit of the times, conceived of the Gothic as a transcendental style, whose pointed forms pervaded many other human activities such as clothing and writing (V, 41). But more important still was Winckelmann's influence, which led Bosarte and above all J ovellanos to explain formal qualities by historical circumstances. This connection between medieval art and its historical circumstances helped the reappraisal of medieval art enormously. It made it possible to transfer the responsibility for the "defects" of medieval art from the artists to the circumstances of their times; that is, it was not that medieval artists lacked genius, but that the times were not favorable for artistic creation. The art of the Goths themselves benefited greatly from this viewpoint, since they were not regarded any more as the destroyers of the classical artistic tradition, but as artists striving to produce works of art in the most adverse environment. According to Jovellanos, the artists of the times of the Goths, and during the subsequent centuries till the thirteenth century, could not produce good works of art, for they lacked an artistic tradition of their own, and the Graeco-Roman tradition was already degenerated; hence they had no models to follow. They also lived in a permanent state of war, which did not provide the resources and peace of mind necessary for artistic endeavors. All that the artists of the time could do was to satisfy the immediate needs of providing shelter and defense. In his opinion, it was all these circumstances that turned Goths into builders


rather than architects, and the period of their domination into a vacuum in the development of Spanish art (EVR, 378). Although the Goths were still far from being "art lovers or art patrons," argued Jovellanos, "they should be freed of the label of destroyers of the arts."40

However, other academicians, andJovellanos himself in later writings, took an almost opposite point of view. Instead of using historical circumstances to justify the "defects" of the medieval styles, they valued the medieval art of Spain because it was the product of a historical period that they admired for political, military, economic, cultural, and nationalistic reasons. The Goths of Spain-that is, the Visigoths-were looked upon by the Spaniards with such favorable eyes that the adjective Gothic became a synonym for nobility.41 The prestige of the "Goths" was also extended to the medieval kings of Spain in general, for it was believed that the Asturian kings who started the reconquest of Spain from the hands of the Muslims were descendants of the Visigoths.42 The ambiguity of the stylistic term Gothic, which could adopt the more general meaning of "medieval," also helped to project the positive image of the Goths onto the whole Middle Ages. Among the several reasons why the Goths enjoyed such a prestige was the Spanish view of the Arab invasion as a catastrophe, for it provided a term of comparison that made the arrival of the Goths seem not so destructive as in other European countries. At a time when military deeds and territorial expansion were still regarded as proofs of a great nation, the Gothic kings of Spain were also greatly admired because of their successful fight against Islam. Moreover, the enlightened reformers of the second half of the eighteenth century looked upon the Middle Ages with admiration and nostalgia because of the Gothic laws and, above all, the Visigothic Church. They created an idealized image of the Visigothic Church that mirrored the regalism they wanted to establish in Spain. First, it was a Church where the power of Rome would be subordinate to the State, to the King and the national bishops and councils. And second, they viewed it as a Church with moderate material resources-a model that if followed would put the enormous idle riches of the eighteenth-century Spanish church to the service of the state and philanthropic projects.43

If historical circumstances could validate the worth of the art of a given period, it was also believed, as Llaguno said, that "the architecture of a given age is one of the best ways of learning the ideas and customs prevailing in that age."44 This was a view of art greatly developed by Jovellanos, especially during his political imprisonment in Bellver (Palma, Majorca, Spain). His monographs of the castle of Bellver, the lonja and the cathedral of Palma, became an exploration of the military events, commerce, and religious affairs of Majorca during the Middle Ages, where the


strictly artistic matters are almost an excuse to dwell on the glory of Majorca during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. For him, the Gothic architecture of these buildings

represents the character of the times in which it was cultivated. It was strong, solid, and simple in castles and fortresses; serious, rich, and extravagantly ornamented in the churches; light, magnificent, and delicate in its palaces, which portrayed everywhere the militarism, superstition, and gallantry that distinguished the nobility of the chivalrous centuries.45

He saw these buildings as the product of the period in which the darkness of the Middle Ages was being abandoned. The expansion of the commerce that he sees in relation with the building of the lonja (exchange or chamber of commerce) and the refinement of manners of the chivalrous age of the Castle of Bellver, were two symptoms of the progress of medieval society towards a more enlightened age (BAE, 46:395-397, 441-443). This was a positive view of the Middle Ages that Jovellanos borrowed from the influential work by William Robertson, A View of the Progress of Society in Europe (1769), together with other ideas such as the important role played by the Crusades in the progress of the Middle Ages, or the idea that the stylistic change towards the Gothic had been brought about by external circumstances. 46

All these historiographical studies were meant to fulfill one ultimate goal of the Academy and its reformist spirit: the exaltation of the nation. From this point of view, the academicians were using history of art as an apologetic weapon to counteract the feeling of decadence which pervaded Spanish society and stigmatized the image of the country abroad.47 They expected that their researches would make up for the lack of knowledge about the national history of art, and thus keep up with other European countries, whose national art histories and inventories were more advanced. They also wanted Spaniards to feel proud of their artistic heritage as well as to show to Europe that Spain had no reason to envy her (significantly, the Academy suspended student fellowships to Paris and Rome). Furthermore, by turning the medieval monuments into historical documents in which one could read the medieval past of Spain, they were providing edifying examples of the glories of the nation. These academicians tried to study and make known the works of art of medieval Spain, so that they would became the visible image of the wealth and piety of medieval monarchs, bishops, and abbots, the symbols of the "glorious crusade" against the Muslim domination of Spain, and the reminder of the high develop-


ment that the arts-and, therefore, the society-had achieved during those times. Thus, to the eyes of these academicians, medieval art could help to reform the country, both from the inside and outside. Not only could it furnish a model for a more rational society in its architectural and religious practices, but it could also improve the image of the country by providing proofs of the piety, courage, wisdom, and artistic skills of the Spanish nation.

NOTES

This article deals only with the Christian art of medieval Spain, but for the sake of brevity I shall use the more generic term "medieval art," though I do not refer to the art of the Jews and Muslims also active in the period.

1. This goes against the general belief in the English-speaking world that "Spanish judgements on Gothic are rare," spread by Paul Frankl in his classic work The Gothic: Literary Sources and Interpretations through Eight Centuries (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1960), 315. For more information about the Spanish artistic medievalism of this epoch, see Jose Marfa Azdrate, "La valoracion de! gotico en la estetica de! siglo xvm," in El Padre Feijoo y SU siglo. Simposio celebrado en la Universidad de Oviedo del 28 de Septiembre al 5 de Octubre. Cuademos de la Catedral Feijoo (Oviedo: Universidad de Oviedo, 1966), 3:525-549; also his La interpretaci6n del g6tico en el Madrid del siglo XVIII (Madrid: Delegacion de Cultura de! Ayuntamiento de Madrid-Instituto de Estudios Madrilefios de! C.S.I.C), 1978; Jose Enrique Garda Melero, "Bases metodologicas para el estudio de las transformaciones arquitectonicas de las catedrales goticas," in El arte en tiempos de Carlos Ill. IV Jornadas de Arte. Madrid, 29-30 de Noviembre, 1-2 de Diciembre de 1988 (Madrid: CSIC-Dpto. de Historia de! Arte "Diego Velazquez," 1989), 125-135; also Melero's "Espiritualidad y estetica: las transformaciones en los exteriores de las catedrales goticas espafiolas en el siglo XVill," Hispania Sacra 41 (1989): 603-639, and "La vision de! Romanico en la historiograffa espafiola de! 'Neoclasicismo Romantico,"' Revista de la Facultad de Geograj{a e Historia (Madrid, 1988), 139-176; Javier Baron Thaidigsmann, Ideas de Jovellanos sabre arquitectura (arquitectura bajomedieval) (Oviedo: Principado de Asturias, 1985); Ignacio Henares Cuellar, "El Oriente y la Edad Media en el historicismo de! setecientos," in La teoria de las artes pUsticas en la segunda mitad del siglo XVIII (Granada: Universidad de Granada, 1977), 181-205; Ignacio Gonzalez-Varas Ibanez, "El Gotico de las Luces," in La Catedral de Leon: Historia y restauraci6n (1859-1901} (Leon: Universidad de Leon, 1993), 23-30; and Francisco Jose Leon Tello and Maria Virginia Sanz y Sanz, "La valoracion de! gotico," in Estitica y teoria de la arquitectura en Los tratados espanoles del siglo XVIII (Madrid: CSIC, 1994), 540-554. Information and a specific bibliography about the people dealt with in this article can be found in these studies, and especially in the last one.


2. Antonio Ponz, Viage de Espana en que se da noticia de las cosas mas aprecia· bles, y dignas de saberse, que hay en ella, 18 vols. (Madrid, 1772-1794), passim; Isidoro Bosarte, Viage art{stico d varios pueblos de Espana, con el juicio de las obras de las tres nobles artes queen ellos existen, y epocas d que pertenecen (1804; reprinted with foreword by Alfonso Perez Sanchez, Madrid: Turner, 1978), 39-71, 107-111, 254-277 (cited hereafter as \I); Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos, Diarios (1190·1198), ed. Julio Somoza (Oviedo: Diputaci6n de Asturias, 1953). Jovellanos's letters-known as the Cartas de Asturias-were addressed to his fellows academicians Antonio Ponz and Cean Bermudez. The letters were meant to be a contribution to Ponz's Viage de Espana on Asturias, although only two of them were finally included, on Saint Mark in Le6n and on Oviedo and its cathedral.

3. Isidoro Bosarte, Disertaci6n sobre el estilo que llaman G6tico en las obras de A rquitectura, in Gabinete de Lectura Espanola, 6 Coleccion de muchos papeles curiosos de Escritores antiguos y modemos de la Nacion (Madrid, 1790?), cited hereafter as D. This work was published anonymously and without date. The authorship by Bosarte is acknowledged by himself in a letter addressed to Cefo Bermudez, reproduced by the latter in his Apendice a la Descripci6n art{stica de la catedral de Sevilla (Sevilla, 1805), 26. It is also acknowledged in Bosarte 's Observaciones sobre las Bellas Artes entre Los antiguos ht!sta la conquista de Grecia por Los Romanos (Madrid, 1791), 3:8-9. With regard to the date of his Disertaci6n, it has traditionally been accepted as 1798; however, in my opinion, it has to be around 1790 or before. I support my date on two facts: 1) the above-mentioned acknowledgment by Bosarte himself of his authorship of the Disertaci6n in his Observaciones sober las Bellas Artes of 1791; 2) and Jovellanos's mentioning of Bosarte's Disertaci6n in note 14 of his Elogio de Don Ventura Rodriguez, which was published in 1790. Gaspar Melchor de Jovellanos, Carta de philo ultramarino sobre la arquitectura inglesa y la llamada g6tica (Bellver, 5 de Mayo de 1805), in Obras, ed. Miguel de Artola, B.A.E. 87 (1956): 365-382. Gaspar de Molina y Saldivar, Marques de Urena, Reflexiones sobre la arquitectura, omato y musica del Templo: Contra Los procedimientos arbitrarios sin consulta de la Escritura Santa, de la disciplina rigorosa, y de la crftica facultativa (Madrid, 1785), 2:215-218.

4. Juan Agustin Cefo Bermudez, Descripci6n ardstica de la Catedral de Sevilla (Seville, 1804). Jovellanos carried out studies of the following buildings in Majorca: the cathedral, lonja, castle of Bellver, and the convents of Santo Domingo and San Francisco. For detailed information of the location of the manuscripts as well as published versions see Angel R. Fernandez y Gonzalez, jovellanos y Mallorca (Palma de Mallorca: Biblioteca Bartolome March, 1974), 188-202, items 21, 22, 24, 52-54, 59-60, 62,77-79, 89-91. Some studies can easily be found in Jovellanos, Obras, ed. Candido Nocedal, B.A.E. 46 (1858): 393-447, 50 (1859): 484-489; and in the edition by Artola, B.A.E. 87 (1956): 344-403.

5. Juan Agustin Cefo Bermudez, Diccionario de Los mas ilustres profesores de las Bellas Artes en Espana, 6 vols. (Madrid, 1800), passim (cited hereafter as D). Eugenio Llaguno y Amlrola, Noticias de Los arquitectos y arquitectura de Espana desde su restauraci6n, 4 vols. (Madrid, 1829), vol. 1, passim. These two works were


complementary, the Diccionario being devoted to sculptors and painters and the Noticias to architects. Despite its late date of publication, Llaguno's work was completed before 1799. Llaguno, shortly before his death, handed his notes over to Cean, for him to finish and publish them. They were finally published, with substantial additions by Cefo, in 1829. Cean's authorship of these two publications, however, must be taken with caution and needs to be defined more closely. The arrangement, style, and criteria of the Diccionario were suggested to him by his good friend Jovellanos (see Jovellanos, Obras Completas, ed. Jose Miguel Caso Gonzalez, 3:170-171). On the other hand, Cean benefited, in both works, from the contributions of many learned men (see Cefo's prologue to his Diccionario l:xv-xvi for a full account of those contributors).

6. Despite its late date, Cean's Historia de! arte de la pintura is included here because the research was carried out in the period under study and because Cean is a prominent figure within this group of academicians. This work was never published as a whole. For information about it see Enrique Lafuente Ferrari, "Una obra inedita de Cefo Bermudez: 'La Historia de! Arte de la Pintura,"' Academia 1-2 (1951-1952): 151-243. For Jovellanos see Obras, ed. Nocedal, B.A .E. 46 (1858): 350-

384. 7. For a thorough account of the history of the Academy of San Fernando see

Claude Bedat, La Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando (1744-1808). Contribuci6n al estudio de las influencias estiUsticas y de la mentalidad art{stica en la Espana del siglo XVlll (1973; translation from the French, Madrid: Fundaci6n Universitaria Espanola-Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando, 1989). For supplementary information of the Academy of San Fernando see also Andres Ubeda de los Cobos, "Pintura, mentalidad e ideologa en la Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando, 1741-1800" (Ph.D. diss., Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 1988); Juan Carrete Parrondo, "Informes sobre la Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando de Pedro Rodriguez de Campomanes," Revista de Ideas Esteticas 35 (1977): 75-90. For the general character of the Spanish academies in the eighteenth century see F. Aguilar Pinal, "Las Academias," in Historia de Espana fimdada por Menendez Pidal, 39 vols. (Madrid: Espasa Calpe, 1935-), vol. 29, La Epoca de Los Primeros Borbones, part 2, La Cultura Espanola entre el Barraco y la Jlustraci6n (circa 1680-1759), 151-193.

8. There is no agreement about the depth and character of the Enlightenment brought about by Charles III, although there is no dispute about the fact that it was under his rule that a new way of conceiving things was introduced in the country. For a survey of the different views of the Enlightenment in Spain, see Luis Miguel Enciso Recio, "La Ilustraci6n en Espana," Coloquio Internacional Carlos Illy su siglo. Actas, 3 vols. (Madrid: Universidad Complutense, Departamento de Historia Moderna, 1990), 1:621-696. See also Fran~ois Lopez, "Aspectos espedficos de la Ilustraci6n espanola," II Simposio sabre el Padre Feijoo y su siglo, 2 vols. (Oviedo: Catedra Feijoo, Universidad de Oviedo, 1981), 1:23-39. With regard to Charles IV's policy in the Academy of San Fernando, it is interesting to note the appointments to prominent positions in 1792. First of all, the position of Protector (high-


est position at the Academy) was occupied by the Conde de Aranda, a more enlightened figure than his predecessor, the Conde de Floridablanca. Aranda had been living in Paris, where he made friends with Voltaire, Diderot, and D 'Alambert, with whom he kept in correspondence once he was back in Spain. Then, Bernardo Iriarte, Aranda's friend, became the Viceprotector. He also maintained a correspondence with Voltaire and belonged to the group of the most radical enlightened party of Spain. Other people with great reformist spirit were also appointed this year: Isidoro Bosarte as Secretario, Juan de Villanueva as Director General, and the Marques de Espeja as Consiliario (he would become Viceprotector in 1803). The appointment of these reformers resulted in an attempt to modernize the academy which was not successful. See Jose Enrique Garcia Melero, "Juan de Villanueva y los nuevos planes de estudio," in Renovaci6n. Crisis. Continuismo. La Real Academia de San Fernando en 1792 (Madrid: Real Academia de Bellas Anes de San Fernando, 1992), 22-23. For Bosarte see Elvira Villena, "Grabado en dulce y hueco. Arte y tecnica al servicio de! rey," in the same volume, 83.

9. Jose Luis Abellan, Historia critica de! pensamiento espanol, 4 vols. (Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1981), 3:485.

10. "la mas sana, la mas ilustrada y mas original pane de ella [la Academia], pues aun cuando la pericta necesaria faltase en algunos consiliarios, se compensaba superabundantemente con la integridad, celo p{1blico y deseo del bien de! instituto y de la naci6n" ("Junta particular, del 14 de Marze de 1764," cited in Bedat, 162). The translations into English from Spanish are all my own. I have favored readability over accuracy, although without altering the meaning. The reader will always find the original quotations in Spanish in the notes.

11. M. Lorente Junquera, "Churrigueresque Style," in Encyclopedia of World Art, 17 vols. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959-1987), 3:613. The criticism of the rococo style for its connection with the neoclassical view of the society of the seventeenth century as civilly, morally, and politically decadent, was a European phenomenon (see G. Briganti, "Baroque Art: History of Criticism," Encyclopedia of World A rt, 2:259-260).

12. "para precaver el progreso que ha hecho la plaga pestilente de otro G6tico moderno distinto de! antiguo, que en nuestro tiempo ha estragado y corrompido el aspecto de las obras de Arquitectura en sus adornos" (10-11).

13. "sin embargo de tus caprichos, y extravagancias, te ha hecho buena, juiciosa, gallarda, gentil" ( 4:6, 17; volume, letter, and paragraph).

14. "nadie puede con raz6n decir, que falta en la magestad, y el decoro: al contrario, parece inventada para darselo a los Temples, y Casas de! Senor" {1:2, 13).

15 . "Parece que el ingenio de aquellos artistas apuraba todo su saber para idear una morada digna de! Ser Supremo. Al entrar en estos temples, el hombre se siente penetrado de una profunda y silenciosa reverencia, que apoder:indose de su esplritu, le dispone suavemente a la contemplaci6n de las verdades eternas" Govellanos, Elogio de las Bellas Artes, 351 [cited hereafter as EBA].

16. Blonde! was a very respected theorist among the Spanish academicians, and his works occupied a prominent place in the library of the Academy of San Fernan-


do. Laugier, although not present in the Academy's library, might as well have been familiar to these academicians, either directly, or through his influence in other writings in the library, such as those by W. Chambers or by Milizia, whose Principi di architettura civile (1785) expressed Laugier's views (C. Bedat, "La Biblioteca de la Real Academia de San Fernando en 1793," Academia 25 [1967]: 5-52, 26 [1968]: 31-85. On the French criticism of Gothic architecture see Wolfang Hermann, Laugier and eighteenth century French theory (London: Zwemmer, 1962), 68-90; and Robin D . Middleton, "The Abbe de Cordemoy and the Graeco-Gothic Ideal: A Prelude to Romantic Classicism," Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld

Institutes 25 (1962): 278-320, 26 (1963): 90-123. 17. Most books on the history of Spain during this period deal with this change

in religious sensibility, although there is no agreement about what brought it about. Among the reasons adduced are the introduction of Jansenism in Spain and a revival of sixteenth-century Spanish religious sensibility. See, for instance, J. Sarrailh, La Espana llustrada de la segunda mitad de! siglo XVIII (1954: translation from the French, Madrid: Fondo de Cultura Econ6mica, 1992), 661-707. For more details on the impact of this new religious sensibility in the art of the time see Alfonso Rodriguez G . de Ceballos, "La reforma de la arquitectura religiosa en el reinado de Carlos III. El neoclasicismo espafiol y las ideas jansenistas," Fragmentos

12-14 (1988): 115-127. 18. "aquella atrevida y extraordinaria delicadeza, que escondiendo la verdadera

solidez de los edificios g6ticos, los hace parecer notablemente esbeltos y ligeros" Govellanos, Elogio de Don Ventura Rodriguez, 383 [cited hereafter as EVR]. For other instance of Jovellanos's admiration of Gothic construction see his praise of the vaults of Bellver castle ("Memoria de! Castillo de! Bellver," in Obras, ed. C. Nocedal, B.A.E. 46 [1958]: 393-394). Bosarte's original words in Spanish: "la arquitectura g6tica lleg6 a combinar la ligereza con la solidez. Basta: no es menester mas

raz6n ... la ligereza es de! agrado de todos" ( 40) . 19. "en la pane de la solidez las obras Egipcias, Arabigas y G6ticas no ceden a

las Griegas ni Latinas; y aun por eso habra quien las juzgue igualmente bellas" (A. R . Mengs, "Carta a un amigo," in Obras deD.Antonio Rafael Mengs, primer pintor de Camara de! Rey, publicadas por Don Joseph Nicolas de Azara [1780; trans. from

Italian, Madrid: 1797], 270 [cited hereafter as CA]. 20. "el arrojo, y soberbio atrevimiento; cuyo esplendor, arrogancia, y hermo

sura apenas podria hoy imitarse" (Christian Rieger, trans. Miguel Benavente, Elem· entos de toda la architectura civil con las mas singulares observaciones de Los modernos. lmpresos en Latin por el P. Christiano Rieger. Traducidos al castellano por el R. Miguel Benavente [1763; reprinted with foreword by Luis Moya, Zaragoza: Colegio Oficial

de Arquitectos de Aragon, 1985], 12-13). 21. Diego de Villanueva, Colecci6n de diferentes papeles criticos sobre todas las

partes de arquitectura, remitidos por un professor de este Arte fuera del Reyno, a otro establecido en una de nuestras Provincias, dalos a Luz, D. Diego de Villanueva, Director de Arquitectura en la Real Academia de S. Fernando (1766; reprinted with foreword by Luis Moya, Madrid: Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando, 1979), 89.


22. For further information on the issues dealt with in this paragraph see Garcia Melero, "Juan de Villanueva ... "; Fernando Marias and Agustin Bustamante, "Sohre el 'Curso de Arquitectura' de la Academia," in El Arte en tiempos de Carlos ll/, 151-159; Pedro Navascues Palacio, "Sohre titulaci6n y competencias de los arquitectos de Madrid," Ana/es de! lnstituto de £studios Madrilenos 9 (1975): 123-136; Alicia Quintana Martinez, La arquitectura y Los arquitectos en la Real Academia de Bellas A rtes de San Fernando (1144-1774} (Madrid: Xarait, 1983); and, more specifically on the importance of mathematics in the architect's education see Marfa Virginia Sanz y Sanz, "El concepto de arquitectura en los tratados espaiioles de! siglo XVIII," Archivo de Arte Valenciana (1984), 4.

23. "La Critica y la Filosoffa, esto es, el uso de la sana raz6n, que son las que crian, y perfeccionan las Artes" (D, 4).

24. "cosas extravagantes y ridiculas, totalmente contrarias a la Belleza y a la raz6n" (CA, 273).

25. A. R. Mengs, "Fragmento de un discurso sobre los medios para hacer florecer las Bellas Artes en Espana," Obras, 185.

26. Benito Bails, Elementos de Matemdtica. Toma IX, parte I, que trata de la arquitectura civil, segunda,.. edici6n corregida por el autor (1783; reprinted Madrid, 1816), 619.

27. These speeches, known as oraciones, were read by the members of the upper ranks of the academy on the solemn occasion of aw;rding prizes to students. They took place once a year, and were later published. In the oraciones dealing with medieval art in the beginning of the Academy, we find some positive view of Spanish medieval art; for example, that read by the Viceprotector Alfonso Clemente de Arostegui in 1752, in which he includes several Spanish Gothic cathedrals among the greatest achievements of Spanish architecture; or that by the Viceprotector Tiburcio de Aguirre in 1753 in which he praises the Spanish Gothic goldsmith Enrique de Arce (see Oraci6n de Don Alfonso Clemente de Arostegui, in Apertura solemne de la Real Academia de las tres Bellas Artes, pintura, escultura y architectura, con el nombre de S.Fernando, fundada por el Rey Nuestro Senor. Celebrose el dia 13 de! mes de Junia de 1752 [Madrid, 1752], 9; and Tiburcio de Aguirre, Oraci6n en honor de las Tres Nobles A rtes, in Relacion de la distribucion de Los premios concedidos por el Rey NS. y repartidos por la Real Academia de S. Fernando a Los discipulos de las tres Nobles A rtes Pintura, Escultura, y A rchitectura, en la Junta General celebrada en 23 de Diciembre e 1753 [Madrid, 1754], 38.) Years later, however, such praise gave way to the apocalyptic Vasarian view of the destruction of good art during the Middle Ages (see Oraci6n de Don Agustin Montiano, in Distribucion de Los premios concedidos por el Rey N.S., a Los discipulos de las tres Nobles Artes Pintura, Escultura, y Architectura, hecha por la Real Academia de S.Femando, en la junta General celeb· rada en 25 de Enero de 1756 [Madrid, 1756], 26-28; and Oraci6n de D. Ramon Pignateli, Distribucion de Los premios concedidos por el Rey Nuestro Senor, a Los discipulos de las Nobles Artes hecha por la Real Academia de S.Fernando, en la junta publica de 25 de Julio de 1778 [Madrid, s.d.], 72-73).


28. "Se hallan rasgos de simplicidad, de verdad, de propiedad, de unidad, de caracter, de armonia y de eurithmia" (216).

29. "los arquitectos de! genero g6tico no eran tan ignorantes en el arte, como pretenden los que le Haman arbitrario y sin sujeccion a reglas" ( Llaguno, introduction by Cean Bermudez, xxxii).

30. "Lo cierto es, que los restauradores de la greco-romana han adoptado para sus templos las plantas en forma de cruz, las torres y los cimborios, que los g6ticogermanicos usaron en sus catedrales: que deben los primeros progresos en la construcci6n a eStoS mismOS arquitectos; y que SUS obras tienen cierto arte, cierta ligereza y libertad, que ni los antiguos alcanzaron, ni los modernos comprehenden" (Cean Bemudez, Catedral de Sevilla, 18).

31. For the negative criticism of sculpture and painting see Cean's Historia de! arte de la pintura, chapters 15, 16 and 17, Bosarte, V, 42 and 44-46, and Jovellanos,

EBA, 352. 32. Milizia had greatly stressed the importance of the practical aspects of archi

tecture, such as its solidity and technical achievements; he had also justified the slender and daring proportions of Gothic architecture by the existence of different circumstances (Dell'arte di vedere nelle belle arti de! disegno, in Opere complete di Francesco Milizia [Bologna, 1826], 1:269). Milizia was often mentioned by the academicians in their writings. His popularity was such that his treatise Dell'A rte di vedere was translated into Spanish by Cean Bermudez (A rte de ver en las artes de! diseno, segun Los principios de Sulzer y de Mengs, escrito en Italiano por Francisco de Milizia [Madrid, 1827]. Milizia is regarded as "Mengs's prophet" by Marcelino Menendez Pelayo in his Historia de las Ideas Esthicas en Espana (1883-1905; reprinted, ed. Enrique Sanchez Reyes, Madrid: C.S.I.C., 1940), 3:537. See also above, note

16. 33. "Las bellas artes necesitan historia propia. Ellas son una parte esencial en la

gloria de! ta!ento humano" (V, pro!.). 34. "Aunque de las pinturas y esculturas de! estilo g6tico no podemos sacar

partido alguno ventajoso para el adelantamiento de! diseiio; pero para la historia de! arte ... conviene ver las obras de pintura y escultura de! estilo g6tico, y observar hasta que punto llegaron sus autores, que extension tuvieron sus conocimientos, que generos fueron los que mas freqiientaron, y aun otras curiosidades que tienen relacion con el progreso y decadencia de las ideas de! ingenio artista" (V, 270).

35. With regard to the exchange of information among these academicians see, for instance, how Bosarte asked for contributions to update the new edition of Palomino that he was preparing (V, introd. by Alfonso Perez Sanchez, xxiii-xxiv). See also the correspondence between J ovellanos, Cean, and Ponz (J ovellanos, Obras, ed. Gonzalez Caso, 2-5, passim); and also the correspondence between Cean and Vargas, in which it can be seen how much pressure these scholars sometimes put on each other to find out a specific piece of information, and how failing to do so led to an exchange of not very polite remarks ("Correspondencia epistolar entre don Jose de Vargas y Ponce y don Juan Agustin Cean Bermudez, durante los aiios de 1803 a 1805, existente en los Archivos de la Direcci6n de Hidrografia y de la


Real Academia de la Historia," ed. Marques de Seoane, Boletin de la Real Academia de la Historia, 48 [1905]: 5-60).

36. Cean's Historia def arte de la pintura is not taken into account here, for it remained in manuscript form and did not have such a big impact. Other previous accounts of the history of Spanish painting-but that do not qualify as proper histories-despised medieval painting and hardly paid it any attention (see Felipe de Guevara, Comentarios de la Pintura [ca. 1535; ed. Antonio Ponz, Madrid, 1788], 226; Pablo de Cespedes, Discurso de la comparaci6n de la antigua y moderna pintura y escultura, donde se trata de la excelencia de las obras de Los antiguos, y si se aventajaba a la moderna. Dirigido a Pedro de Valencia, y escrito a instancias suyas, ano de 1604., en Fragmentos de obras que escribi6 sobre la pintura el pintor Pablo de Cespedes, racionero de la santa iglesia de Cordoba, and Poema de la Pinwra in Cean Bermudez, D, 5:292-296, and 328). The "first" history of Spanish art, Antonio Palomino's Museo Pict6rico y Escala Optica, 3 vols. (Madrid, 1715-1724), perpetuated the same attitude (3:233).

37. In this respect it is interesting to note that Llaguno complained to Azara, the editor of Mengs's writings, about the treatment given to Spanish medieval artists by Mengs, who stated that "Spanish medieval architects were despised" in his Fragmento de un discurso si1bre Los medio para hacer florecer las Bellas Artes en Espana. Llaguno argued that Spanish medieval architects might have been ignorant, but never despised in their own times, as the inscriptions in the cathedrals, and royal privileges proved. Llaguno succeeded in the word "despised" being withdrawn from the Spanish edition of Mengs's works (Emilio Orozco Diaz, "Sabre el libro de Mengs," Archivo Espanol de Arte 16 [1943]: 267).

38. Jovellanos's Elogio de las Bellas Artes (1781) also includes an outline of the evolution of the arts in Spain, but the Middle Ages receive much less attention than in the Elogio de Don Ventura Rodriguez.

39. See above, notes 5 and 35, about Jovellanos, Cean, and Llaguno's exchange of information. Some of the similarities can be attributed to the use of a common source: J. F. Felibien's Recueil historique de la vie et des ouvrages des plus celebres architectes (Paris, 1687).

40. "sin poder presentarlos coma aficionados ni protectores de las artes; salvarlos de la no ta de destructores de las artes" (EVR, 378).

41. Wayne Dynes, "Concept of Gothic," Dictionary of the History of Ideas: Studies of Selected Pivotal Ideas, ed. Philip P. Wiener (New York: Scribner, 1973), 2:368-370; Ramon Menendez Pidal, Los Godos y la epopeya espanola (Madrid: n. d.),55-56. See also the Diccionario de la Lengua Castellana compuesto par la Real Academia Espanola, editions of 1780, 1783, 1791, 1803, and 1817, where the entry "gotico" gives as a second meaning "Noble, ilustre."

42. See Joseph Manuel Trelles Villademoros, Asturias ilustrada. Odgen de la nobleza de Espana, su antigiiedad y diferencias, 2 vols. (1736 and 1739). This study provides an extensive survey of the arguments used for and against the belief that the Asturian monarchs were direct descendants of the Visigoths. Trelles wants to


refute this belief, but the great length and effort put into his refutation are the best proof of how rooted the idea was in Spain.

43. See Rieger-Benavente (12) for an equation of the principles of Gothic architecture (from the fifth century to the Renaissance) with the Gothic laws. With regard to idealization of the Visigothic Church see Te6fanes Egido, "La religiosidd de las Ilustrados," in Historia de Espana fundada par Ramon Menendez Pidal, vol. 31, La Epoca de la Jlustraci6n, part 1, El estado y la cultura {1759-1808), 404-405.

44. "la arquitectura de cada edad es uno de las medias de conocer las ideas y costumbres queen ella prevaledan ... " (1:48). With regard to the historiographical value of the researches in art history, it is interesting to note that Cean' s introduction to Llaguno's Noticias de las arquitectos y arquitectura de Espana containing a short history of Spanish architecture was read before the Academia de Historia and not at San Fernando, as one would expect (Henares Cuellar, 139).

45. "Parece que esta arquitectura representa el caracter de las tiempos en que fue cultivada. Grosera, s6lida y sencilla en las castillos y fortalezas; seria, rica y cargada de adornos en las templos; ligera, magnifica y delicada en las palacios, retrataba en todas partes la marcialidad, la superstici6n y la galanteda, que distingui6 a las nobles de las siglos caballerescos" (EBA, 351).

46. Cf. Jovellanos's Memoria def Castillo def Bellver (BAE, 46:395-397) and William Robertson's first chapter, "Interior Government, Laws and Manners" (The Progress of Society in Europe. A historical outline from the Subversion of the Roman Empire to the Beginning of the Sixteenth Century [1769; ed. Felix Guilbert, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972], 26, 57 ff.). Jovellanos acknowledged his admiration for Robertson in his Elogio de Don Ventura Rodriguez (381).

47. The foreign attacks on Spanish culture and temperament that caused the strongest Spanish reaction were Montesquieu's Persian Letters (1721) and The Spirit of Laws (1748), and, above all, the entry "Espagne" by Masson de Morvilliers in the Encyclopedie Methodique (1783), in which it was denied that Spain had made any contribution to the European culture in the last ten centuries. About this and other aspects of the Spanish historiography of the eighteenth century dealt with in this article, see Antonio Mestre Sanchis, "Conciencia hist6rica e historiografia," in Historia de Espana de Menendez Pidal 31, 1:299-345; also his "Ilustraci6n e historia. Sabre las origenes de! criticismo hist6rico en Espana," lnflujo Europeo y herencia hispanica. Mayans y la !lustraci6n Valenciana (Valencia, 1987), 299-350, and "La historiografia espanola de! siglo XVIII," in Coloquio Internacional "Carlos 111 y su siglo," 1:21-60; Jose Marla Sanchez Diana, "Ideas espanolas sabre la ciencia de la historia en el siglo XVill," Theoda 7-8 (1954): 51-64; Fernando Baras Escola, "Politica e historia en la Espana de! siglo XVill: las concepciones historiograficas de Jovellanos," Bolet{n de la Real Academia de la Historia 111 (1994): 295-385.

Foreign travel books on Spain were also quite derogatory of the country. In fact, Ponz acknowledged in the prologue to his Viage de Espana that one of the reasons for his enterprise was to do justice to Spanish art in view of some unfavorable accounts by foreign travelers, specifically by Norberto Caimo's Lettere d'un vago italiano (1759-1767).

“Medievalism and Social Reform at the Academy of San Fernando in Spain (1760-1808), Studies in...

Documents

Transcript of “Medievalism and Social Reform at the Academy of San Fernando in Spain (1760-1808), Studies in...