28|2  2023 ACTA HISTORIAE ARTIS SLOVENICA  28|2  2023 Wilhelmina and Vincenz Auersperg in the library of Žleby Chateau, 1845, National Heritage Institute, Prague (© Národní památkový ústav) ACTA HISTORIAE ARTIS SLOVENICA 28|2  2023 ZRC SAZU, UMETNOSTNOZGODOVINSKI INŠTITUT FRANCETA STELETA https://ojs.zrc-sazu.si/ahas ACTA HISTORIAE ARTIS SLOVENICA Artistic and Architectural Heritage of the Nobility Between Old and New Regimes Umetnostna in arhitekturna dediščina plemstva med starimi in novimi režimi Contents • Vsebina Tina Košak, Renata Komić Marn, Helena Seražin, Artistic and Architectural Heritage of the Nobility Between Old and New Regimes: Foreword • Umetnostna in arhitekturna dediščina plemstva med starimi in novimi režimi. Predgovor Kamila Kłudkiewicz, Michał Mencfel, The Stateless Nation’s Elite: Artistic Collections of Polish Aristocracy, 1795–1918 • Elita naroda brez države. Umetnostne zbirke poljskega plemstva, 1795–1918 Arianna Candeago, The Molin Collection Between the Old and New Regime • Zbirka Molin med starim in novim režimom Valeria Paruzzo, Ca’ Rezzonico in the 19 th Century: The Dispersal of its Collections and the New Uses of the Palace • Ca’ Rezzonico v 19. stoletju. Usoda zbirke in nove namembnosti palače Šárka Radostová, Kristina Uhlíková, The Role and Activities of Custodians of Aristocratic Collections in Bohemia in the 19 th Century and First Half of the 20 th Century: Selected Examples • Vloga in delovanje skrbnikov plemiških zbirk na Češkem v 19. stoletju in prvi polovici 20. stoletja. Izbrani primeri Dubravka Botica, The New Life of Baroque Castles in North-Western Croatia: The Renovation of the Erdödy and Vranyczány Families’ Castles at the End of the 19 th and Beginning of the 20 th Centuries • Novo življenje baročnih gradov v severozahodni Hrvaški. Prenova gradov rodbin Erdödy in Vranyczány konec 19. in v začetku 20. stoletja Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos, The Restoration and Refunctionalisation of Medieval Fortified Manor Houses by the Portuguese Dictatorial Regime (1926–1974) • Obnova srednjeveških utrdb v času portugalskega diktatorskega režima (1926–1974) Whitney Dennis, “In the Appropriate Setting”: Continuity and Context in the Alba Collection in Liria Palace (1931–1957) • »Primerno umeščena«. Kontinuiteta in kontekst zbirke vojvod Alba v palači Liria v Madridu (1931–1957) Marcela Rusinko, “Keep That German Kitsch Away from the Czech Hands!” Ethnic Cleansing in the Light of Material Culture: Furnishings of the Displaced Moravian and Silesian Nobility on the Post-1945 Brno Auction Market • »Spravite ta nemški kič stran od čeških rok!« Etnično čiščenje v luči materialne kulture. Stanovanjska oprema izseljenega moravskega in šlezijskega plemstva na dražbenem trgu v Brnu po letu 1945 Silvia Marin Barutcieff, Old Edifices, New Uses: Three Residential Buildings of a Romanian Aristocratic Family and Their Destiny after 1930 • Stare zgradbe, nove rabe. Tri rezidenčne stavbe romunske plemiške družine in njihova usoda po letu 1930 25 € XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX LJUBLJANA 2023 ZRC SAZU, Umetnostnozgodovinski inštitut Franceta Steleta ZRC SAZU, France Stele Institute of Art History ACTA HISTORIAE ARTIS SLOVENICA 28|2 • 2023 Artistic and Architectural Heritage of the Nobility Between Old and New Regimes Umetnostna in arhitekturna dediščina plemstva med starimi in novimi režimi XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX Acta historiae artis Slovenica, 28/2, 2023 Artistic and Architectural Heritage of the Nobility Between Old and New Regimes Umetnostna in arhitekturna dediščina plemstva med starimi in novimi režimi Znanstvena revija za umetnostno zgodovino / Scholarly Journal for Art History ISSN 1408-0419 (tiskana izdaja / print edition) ISSN 2536-4200 (spletna izdaja / web edition) Izdajatelj / Issued by ZRC SAZU, Umetnostnozgodovinski inštitut Franceta Steleta / ZRC SAZU, France Stele Institute of Art History Založnik / Publisher Založba ZRC Urednice / Edited by Tina Košak, Renata Komić Marn, Helena Seražin Uredniški odbor / Editorial board Renata Komić Marn, Tina Košak, Katarina Mohar, Mija Oter Gorenčič, Blaž Resman, Helena Seražin Mednarodni svetovalni odbor / International advisory board Günter Brucher (Salzburg), Ana María Fernández García (Oviedo), Hellmut Lorenz (Wien), Milan Pelc (Zagreb), Sergio Tavano (Gorizia-Trieste), Barbara Wisch (New Y ork) Lektoriranje / Language editing Oliver Currie, Kirsten Hempkin, Darja Gabrovšek Homšak, Patricia Anne Odber de Baubeta Prevodi / Translations to Slovene Renata Komić Marn, Tina Košak, Helena Seražin, Borut Praper Oblikovna zasnova in prelom / Design and layout Andrej Furlan Naslov uredništva / Editorial office address Acta historiae artis Slovenica Novi trg 2, p. p. 306, SI -1001 Ljubljana, Slovenija ahas@zrc-sazu.si; https://ojs.zrc-sazu.si/ahas Revija je indeksirana v / Journal is indexed in Scopus, ERIH PLUS, EBSCO Publishing, IBZ, BHA Letna naročnina / Annual subscription: 35 € Posamezna enojna številka / Single issue: 25 € Letna naročnina za študente in dijake: 25 € Letna naročnina za tujino in ustanove / Annual subscription outside Slovenia, institutions: 48 € Naročila sprejema / For orders contact Založba ZRC Novi trg 2, p. p. 306, SI-1001, Slovenija E-pošta / E-mail: zalozba@zrc-sazu.si AHAS izhaja s podporo Javne agencije za znanstvenoraziskovalno in inovacijsko dejavnost Republike Slovenije. / AHAS is published with the support of the Slovenian Research and Innovation Agency. Tisk / Printed by Present d.o.o., Ljubljana Naklada / Print run: 400 Revija AHAS je takoj po izidu prosto dostopna pod pogoji licence CC BY-NC-ND. To ne velja za slikovno gradivo, označeno z znakom © in imenom lastnika avtorskih pravic. AHAS Journal is freely available immediately upon publication under the terms of the CC BY-NC-ND licence. This does not apply to images marked with the © symbol and the name of the copyright holder. 123 Abstract: The Restoration and Refunctionalisation of Medieval Fortified Manor Houses by the Portuguese Dictatorial Regime (1926–1974) 1. 01 Original scientific article In the Modern Age, most fortified manor houses in Portugal fell into ruin, due to the lack of dignified living condi- tions, the obsolescence of defensive structures, and the decline decay of aristocratic families. However, between 1933 and 1974, many ruined fortified manor houses were restored by the Portuguese dictatorial regime. The nationalist dictatorship of Estado Novo used heritage as an ideological instrument of propaganda. This proposal aims to analyse the context of the ideological restoration of medieval fortified manor houses by the dictatorial regime, addressing symbolisms, restoration actions, and the contextualisation of fortified manor houses in Portugal by focusing on particular case studies. Keywords: Portugal; medieval fortified manor houses; heritage rehabilitation; Estado Novo dictatorship; ideological propaganda Izvleček: Obnova srednjeveških utrdb v času portugalskega diktatorskega režima (1926–1974) 1.01 Izvirni znanstveni članek V novem veku je večina srednjeveških gradov na Portugalskem propadla zaradi premajhnega udobja, zastarelosti obrambnih struktur in izumiranja plemiških družin. V letih od 1933– 1974 je portugalski diktatorski režim številne porušene gradove obnovil. Nacionalistična diktatura Estado Novo je kulturno dediščino uporabljala kot ideološki in- strument propagande. Namen članka je analizirati kontekst ideološke obnove srednjeveških gradov v času diktator- skega režima, pri čemer so obravnavani simbolika, ukrepi pri obnovah in kontekstualizacija gradov na Portugalskem s poudarkom na študijah posameznih primerov Ključne besede: Portugalska, srednjeveški gradovi, restavriranje kulturne dediščine, diktatura Estado Novo, ideološka propaganda The Restoration and Refunctionalisation of Medieval Fortified Manor Houses by the Portuguese Dictatorial Regime (1926–1974) Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos, PhD, University of Lisbon, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, Alameda da Universidade, 1600-214 Lisbon, joaquimr.santos@gmail.com, ORCID ID: 0000-0003-4036-9868 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3986/ahas.28.2.06 ACTA HISTORIAE ARTIS SLOVENICA 28|2 ∙ 2023, 123–145 124 JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS Preamble: Medieval Fortified Manor Houses in Portugal The formation of Portugal as an independent country took place, in the first instance, with the pro- cess of territorial expansion from north to south, as the result of the Christian Reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Muslims by the Christian kingdoms of the north; after that, a process of defence and consolidation was followed vi-à-vis the neighbouring kingdoms—first Leon, then Castile, and later Spain. Portugal’s independence was achieved in 1139 by King Afonso Henriques (c.1109–1185), who while consolidating his authority in the northern and eastern frontier territo- ries, continued the territorial expansion to the south, taking advantage of the disintegration of the Almoravid territories. The Portuguese southern frontier was then established on the line of the River Tagus, and it was only with the decadence of the Almohads, around a century later, that the Christian conquerors’ advance took on a new impetus, culminating in the conquest of Silves in 1249 by King Afonso III (1210–1279), and the transfer of the Portuguese court to Lisbon in 1255. Once the Muslim lands on the western part of the Iberian Peninsula were completely conquered, it was necessary to delimit the frontier between the kingdoms of Portugal and Castile, a mission undertaken by King Dinis (1261–1325). After a short period of war with the powerful neighbouring kingdom, taking advantage of its weaknesses, the Treaty of Alcanizes was signed in 1297, defining the frontier between the two countries. The inexistence of significant landforms that could help delimit the frontier between Portugal and Castile led to the adoption of a peculiar policy of territo- rial organisation. Dinis used a policy of fortifying the border, where the castles became gigantic boundary stones delimiting the territory. The concept of a frontier was not a virtual line but rather a succession of points functioning as identifying elements. Whoever possessed the castle also pos- sessed the surrounding lands and communities and, for this reason, the monarch bestowed the administration of the frontier castles as a counterweight to the homage paid to his royal authority. 1 The castles thus played a fundamental part in defining the Portuguese territory and maintaining its integrity and independence. From the outset, the Portuguese Crown proceeded to establish lands throughout Portugal’s territory, whose administration was granted to elements of the lower nobility as counterweight to the homage paid to the royal authority, thus seeking to counterbalance the power of the greater no- bility. However, within a short space of time this system became problematic, with the command- ers increasingly demanding more military, judicial and fiscal power, more lands and also social promotion. The construction of strong houses (domus fortis) 2 by lesser nobles was often abusive, seizing estates and seeking to ascend socially with the constitution of honras 3 (possessions of the greater nobility). 4 According to Mário Barroca, King Sancho I (1154–1211) proceeded to take actions to destroy the strong houses that were not authorised by the monarch, attempting to control their proliferation and its respective consequences. His son, King Afonso II (1185–1223), followed the policy of cen- tralising power, and only when King Afonso III (1210–1279) ascended the throne was the situation controlled, through the recovery of royal possessions and the tearing down of strong houses that 1 Gomes, “ A construção das fronteiras, ” 370–80. 2 On aristocratic residences in Portugal, see Carita, A casa senhorial; Silva, Paços medievais; Gomes, “Monarquia e território;” Barroca, “Torres;” Azevedo, Solares Portugueses. 3 Honra is a Portuguese feudal term that refers to a named set of manors and other lands. 4 Mattoso, Identificação de um país, 1: 95. 125 THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) had been built unlawfully. 5 King Dinis’s actions made it possible to consolidate royal power vis-à-vis the aristocracy, abolishing the system of landholdings in favour of julgados, that is, independently administered villages that were more civil in character; this provided the conditions for the insti- tution of the juridical principle of ius crenelandi, the right to the “crenelation” (which refers to the crowning with battlements) 6 and the strengthening of the royal monopoly to construct fortifica- tions, that would last until the reign of King Duarte (1392–1438). The ius crenelandi was reflected in tight control of the building of fortified residences; only in some particular cases was the construc- tion of strong houses authorised by the king. 7 While in many European countries the nobility could generally own fortifications, in Portugal the castles were exclusive to the royal domain, and their administration was carried out by captains appointed by the king. They could not carry out private residential works in these structures, which generally maintained their military profile. Initially, the Portuguese strong houses followed the towered model from the second half of the 12 th century, adopting configurations inspired by castle keeps; 8 these tower houses were implanted predominantly in accessible places with no concerns about their defence. Mário Barroca states that in the Middle Ages it was not the towered form that gave the fortified aspect to the build- ing, but rather the existence of battlements crowning the buildings: this led to the association of an enormous symbolic load with the battlements, considered synonymous with noble distinction. The limited dimensions and habitability of the towers evolved progressively into the emergence of residential annexes built against the towers. 9 Custódio da Silva states that the strong symbolism and prestige associated with the Muslim alcazars had encouraged the Portuguese kings to adopt as privileged royal residences those that were associated with castles, 10 thus reasserting their power. 11 The centralisation of royal power and the decline of the older aristocratic houses, exchanged for new feudal houses (as a consequence of the political juncture provoked by the independence crisis of 1383–1385), 12 set up the conditions for the construction of new royal and aristocratic manor houses (residences of the monarchy and high nobil- ity or clergy). These new, more imposing manor houses—some of them fortified 13 —were promoted by 5 Barroca, “Torres, ” 45–85. 6 Licence to crenellate means the granting of a royal licence, giving permission to the holder to build a fortification or to fortify an existing structure, such as a manor house. 7 Barroca, “D. Dinis, ” 804–07. 8 Some strong houses (dating from various eras) are the tower houses of Refóios (Ponte de Lima), Dornelas (Am- ares), Oriz in Santa Marinha (Vila Verde), Vasconcelos in Ferreiros (Amares) and the later tower houses of Giela (Arcos de Valdevez) and Quintela in Vila Marim (Vila Real). 9 Barroca, “Torres, ” 57–72. 10 The manor houses inside the castles of Montemor-o-Velho, Óbidos, Lamego, Alenquer, Estremoz, Coimbra and Lisbon were royal residences. 11 Silva, Paços medievais, 25. 12 Because the great noble families supported Castilian pretensions to the Portuguese throne, they lost their privi- leges to the lesser nobility that had remained on the side of the Portuguese pretender. 13 The royal manor house of Leiria was built by King João I (1357–1433) within the castle, showing affinities with Palatine civil architecture; the fortified manor house of the Dukes of Braganza in Guimarães, begun c.1420, shows similarities with certain French aristocratic fortified buildings (the first Duke of Braganza, promotor of the con- struction, was in that country as a diplomat); the fortified manor house of the Dukes of Braganza in Barcelos, built by the second Duke of Braganza, had a fortified configuration due to the symbolism, and because there was no castle in the city; the fortified manor house of Ourém, located next to the old castle, was begun c.1440 by a son of the first Duke of Braganza after returning from Italy as a diplomat (the building had affinities with some 126 persons directly related to the Royal House: the House of Avis, linked to the Portuguese royal dynas- ty, and the powerful House of Braganza. 14 The reformulation or construction of some captains’ houses situated inside castles was also permitted under royal license; 15 very occasionally, the construction of fortified manor houses was also allowed. 16 Advances provided by firearms made the battlements irrelevant and they were progressively replaced by the gigantic merlons adapted to gunpowder artillery. Useless for defence, this took away from the battlements the symbolic value intimately related to aristocratic distinction, enhanced through the ius crenelandi; as such, their use became more liberalised from the beginning of the 15 th century, first in the residences of the high nobility, then in the lower nobility, and finally among peo- ple of wealth who did not have any aristocratic title. Due to their powerful symbolism, the surviving medieval tower houses began to be preserved, recovered and integrated into new manor houses that were added to the old towers (when these did not exist, new towers were built, copying old models). 17 The use (at times whimsical) of battlements gave them the appearance of a manor house; they were also used during the Baroque period, above all in manor houses in the north of Portugal. Ideological Instrumentalisation of Heritage by the Portuguese Dictatorial Regime The tumultuous period of political, economic and social instability of the First Republic (1910– 1926), which also resulted from World War I, culminated in the Coup d’État of 1926, which put in place an authoritarian dictatorial military model of government. The year of 1933 saw the en- thronement of António de Oliveira Salazar (1889–1970), who took on leadership of the country as President of the Council of Ministers in the recently established Estado Novo (New State) dictator- ship. The ideological programme of the new regime was developed with an axiology character- ised by traditional Catholic, nationalist and colonialist conservatism. The political ideology of the Estado Novo attributed an important role to national monuments, which transmitted enormous symbolism related to the national identity. It was therefore in the regime’s interest to exploit herit- age to its own advantage. 18 Reflecting the strongly nationalistic component of the Estado Novo, the classified medieval sets were clearly favoured by the interventions of the regime, given that they were considered wit- nesses of the national origins and that they translated emblematic events of the nation’s history, Italian roccas); the same promotor raised the fortified manor house of Porto de Mós on the old castle, which was a mixture of fortification and civil palace; the fortified manor house of Évoramonte was built by the fourth Duke of Braganza, who partially replaced the ancient keep destroyed by an earthquake in 1531. 14 The House of Braganza was founded through the marriage of a son of King João I to the daughter of Constable Nun’ Álvares Pereira (1360–1431), one of the persons most involved in preserving Portugal’s independence. 15 For example in the castles of Valhelhas, Longroiva, Belmonte and Idanha-a-Nova. 16 For example the fortified manor houses of Alvito, Feira (Santa Maria da Feira) and Penedono, these last buildings built on the primitive castles. 17 Examples of reuse and enlargement of tower houses as residential buildings from the 15 th century: the manor houses of Giela (Arcos de Valdevez), Barbosa (Penafiel), Ribafria (Sintra) and Vasconcelos in Santiago da Guarda (Ansião). Examples of the construction of new towers in manorial buildings: the manor houses of Pinheiros (Bar- celos), Águias in Brotas (Mora) and Carvalhal (Montemor-o-Novo), see Silva, Paços medievais, 168–80. 18 On the ideological instrumentalisation of national monuments for propaganda purposes by the Portuguese dic- tatorship, see Martins, “History, Nation and Politics;” Tomé, Património; Neto, Memória; Cunha, A Nação. JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 127 facilitating the retention of collective ideological messages. The regime considered that medieval monuments should be easily understood by the people and immediately identified with the char- acters or events that they were setting out to exalt, because of which the constructed elements that obstructed or deformed this reading would have to be eliminated. The intention of returning their primitive purity to the monuments drove the realisation of architectural “reintegrations” with the sacrifice of those contributions added on down the ages, above all those that came after the 16 th century, from epochs associated with periods of national decadence. Just as it rewrote history according to its ideology, the regime also rewrote the symbolic mes- sages transmitted by the monuments. The regime imposed its own political agenda as the driver for increasing the activity of heritage recovery, considering architectural heritage to be a funda- mental element at the level of propaganda and the physical ideological support of a symbolism it intended to recover and promote. The people would acquire the message intended by the political system more easily if constantly attaching privileged historical moments to architectural monu- ments: the medieval military sets clearly matched the regime’s propagandistic aims, not only be- cause of their inherent symbolism, but also because of their generally ruined state at the moment when the Estado Novo was created. In an interview granted to António Ferro (1895–1956), the man in charge of the regime’s propaganda service, Salazar denounced precisely the abandonment of Portugal’s monumental heritage and proclaimed the need to restore it, as a national patriotic imperative. 19 In 1929, the General Bureau of National Buildings and Monuments (Direcção-Geral dos Ed- ifícios e Monumentos Nacionais, Portuguese acronym DGEMN) was established, 20 which brought together the state service for building and developing public works as well as heritage works. The DGEMN was directed by Henrique Gomes da Silva (1890–1969), a military engineer appointed by the military junta that governed the country. Gomes da Silva remained in the DGEMN until his retirement in 1960, and was a constant presence during the first thirty years of the institution. He articulated the principles which would (theoretically) be followed in the DGEMN’s interventions in architectural heritage, in a communication presented in 1934 during the I Congress of the National Union; ideals of pristine reintegration of the monuments should be followed, where restored sets of buildings should be integrated in their primitive beauty, “expurgating later excrescences” and “repairing the mutilations” suffered through the actions of men or time. 21 Gomes da Silva, reflecting a concept of intervention shared with the ideology of the Estado Novo, advocated restoring the pristine forms of monuments that had been ruined or transmuted over time. Considering the ruins and architectural deformations as the most visible effects of Portu- gal’s periods of decadence (moral, financial, political, religious, etc.) before the establishment of the Estado Novo, the regime’s messianic imperative as a regenerator of glories of the homeland demand- ed the restoration of monuments to rescue the forms that had existed in the glorious ancestral eras. As medieval castles were symbols favoured by the regime, it was inevitable that restorative interven- tions would be carried out with the aim of re-establishing their pristine form, as in the Middle Ages. 19 Ferro, Salazar, 123–24. 20 Decree-Law nr. 16791 of April 30, 1929. On heritage legislation, the functional organisation of Portuguese her- itage institutions and their actions during the dictatorial regime, see Neto, Memória, 203–80. See also Custódio, 100 anos; Rodrigues, “ A Direcção-Geral. ” 21 Silva, “Monumentos Nacionais, ” 56–57. THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) 128 In 1936, Salazar delivered a speech during the inauguration of the exposition held to com- memorate the “10th Year of the National Revolution”. It was markedly propagandistic, entitled Era of Restoration, Era of Aggrandizement. Interventions made on national monuments by the DGEMN were extolled, justifying the application of the motto “material restoration, moral restoration, na- tional restoration”—formulated in 1940 during the speech inaugurating the Public Library and District Archive of Braga, installed in the recently restored old Archiepiscopal Palace of Braga. 22 In 1938 Salazar decided to celebrate the Double Centenary of the Foundation and the Resto- ration of Portugal’s Independence, associating the regime with the two glorious historical events and mythifying the Estado Novo and its leader. 23 Through precepts established by Salazar, it was decided to grant greater funding to restore the most emblematic sets of monuments related to these two memorable moments of the national historical centenary, preparing them for the magnificent festive programme. Among the monuments chosen for the restoration work to be carried out by the DGEMN was the Fortified Manor House of the Dukes of Braganza, in Guimarães, the city considered to be the cradle of Portuguese nationality. In order to distribute the ideological message more effectively, it was decided that the monu- ments should recover the supposed pristine physiognomy they would have had when the events be- ing celebrated took place. In other words, the guidelines issued presupposed that the monuments undergoing interventions should take on a purified medieval aspect, facilitating their identification by the people with the alleged “glorious Past” generally located in the Middle Ages or beginning of the Modern Age. The visual impact was decisive in the options to intervene: during the beginning of Gomes da Silva’s mandate, the use of new technologies and materials was often rejected, preference being given to the use of ancestral technologies that would ensure greater legitimacy; later on, how- ever, the advantages of reinforced concrete (durability, resistance to stress and ease of use) and steel as elements for structural reinforcement were recognised. Little by little their use was increased from the mid-1930s, although in a dissimulated way, in order to maintain the archaic appearance. The Restoration of Medieval Fortified Manor Houses as Ideological Propaganda in Europe The restoration and reconstruction—or even reinvention—of medieval fortifications (including fortified manor houses) for propaganda purposes was an old practice that gained new impetus with the advent of Romanticism and 19 th -century nationalism. The restoration/reconstruction works were paradigmatic, ideologically motivated by Germanic castellated palaces during the 19 th century. For example, the Rhine Valley region, considered a symbol of pan-German unity against foreign invaders at the time, motivated the reconstruction of medieval fortifications, which were associated with homeland defence and the medieval roots of the German nation. 24 The restoration works carried out on the ruined Stolzenfels Castle by Johann Claudius von Lassaulx (1781–1848), Karl Friedrich Schinkel (1781–1841) and Friedrich August Stüler (1800–1865) from 1834 onwards can be considered a typical example of such heritage interventions. 22 Salazar, “Era de restauração, ” 2: 145–49. 23 Salazar, “Comemorações Centenárias, ” 3: 41–58. 24 On the nationalist mythification of the Rhine region, the reconstruction of Rhenish castles and their symbolism, see, among others, Taylor, The Castles. On heritage interventions in German-influenced regions, see also Liessem, “Castles of the 19 th Century;” Zeune, “The Perception;” Rathke, Preuβische Burgenromantik. JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 129 In the Swabian enclave, which was reintegrated into Prussia in 1851, Hohenzollern Castle (Hech- ingen) was restored between 1851 and 1867, led by Friedrich August Stüler, as a way of affirming the Prussian Hohenzollern dynasty. In Eisenach (Thuringia), Wartburg Castle was rebuilt by Josef Maria Hugo von Ritgen (1811–1889) between 1838 and 1890 due to its various literary and symbolic connotations. It was one of the main sites of German poetry and, in 1207, it was used for the leg- endary Sängerkrieg—a competition of minstrels that would influence Wagner to write the famous opera Tannhäuser und der Sängerkrieg auf Wartburg (Tannhäuser and the Minnesängers’ Contest at Wartburg). Saint Elizabeth of Hungary (1207–1231) also lived and died in this castle, and Martin Luther (1483–1546) transcribed the New Testament into German there. In addition, in 1817, during the celebration of victory over the Napoleonic army, a significant appeal for German unity was made from this castle. As a way of proclaiming German dominance over East Prussia, a territory that came un- der Prussian rule after the first partition of Poland in 1772, the former Ordensburg Marienburg (Malbork), built by the Teutonic Order—of Germanic origin—in the Middle Ages, underwent several restoration works 25 from 1882 to 1922 under Conrad Steinbrecht (1849–1923) and Ber- nard Schmid (1872–1947). While Ordensburg Marienburg marked the eastern edge of the German Empire, Hohkönigsburg 26 (Orschwiller), located in the former French territory of Alsace, marked its western edge and was restored between 1900 and 1908 under the direction of Bodo Ebhardt (1865–1945). There were other notable reconstructions of castellated palaces of symbolic importance to the sovereigns of several countries. For example, to declare possession of the border territories of South Tyrol, Austro-Hungarian Emperor Franz Joseph I (1830–1916) ordered the restoration of the Castle of Runkelstein 27 (Bozen/Bolzano), which was carried out between 1884 and 1888 under Friedrich Wilhelm von Schmidt (1825–1891), and the claim of Austro-Hungarian possession over the territo- ries of Bohemia resulted in the restoration of the Castle of Karlstein 28 (Karlštejn) between 1870 and 1899, led by Friedrich Wilhelm von Schmidt and Josef Mocker (1835–1899). In France, the Castle of Pierrefonds was rebuilt between 1857 and 1885 under Eugène Viollet- le-Duc (1814–1879), Maurice-Augustin-Gabriel Ouradou (1822–1884) and Jean Juste Lisch (1828– 1910). This fortified manor house was to serve as the summer residence of Emperor Napoleon III (1808–1873), who needed to be recognised as the ruler of France. Interestingly, the king’s consort, Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (1819–1861), married to the British Queen Victoria (1819–1901), and his right-hand cousin, Ferdinand II of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (1816–1885), married to the Portuguese Queen Maria II (1819–1853), carried out work on pre-existing buildings, transforming them into castellated palaces. In addition to the cultural issues associated with Romanticism and the influences coming from Ferdinand and Albert’s Ger- manic family, the argument for emphasising their royal houses in the eyes of their subjects was also evident in the choice of the architectural language for their palaces, alluding to medieval castles. 29 25 Between 1817 and 1855, at the behest of Frederick William III (1770–1840) of Prussia, reconstruction was carried out by Karl August Gersdorff (1788–1855), under the supervision of Karl Schinkel. 26 Today, it is known as the Castle of Haut-Kœnigsbourg. 27 It is also called the Castle of Roncolo. 28 It is now known as Hrad Karlštejn. 29 Santos, O castelo português, 173–92. THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) 130 In the 20 th century, several medieval fortifications were restored following nationalist ideo- logical assumptions. For example, Ferdinando Forlati (1882–1975) restored the Castle of Gorizia between 1934 and 1937, which had been extensively damaged by bombing during the World War I; the decision to restore it was therefore also an ideological affirmation of territorial possession and national reconstruction. At the time, Italy was under the fascist dictatorship of Benito Mussolini (1883–1945), whose authoritarian regime was nationalist and imperialist in nature. In this sense, and as was the case with other nationalist dictatorial regimes, architectural heritage was seen as a privileged medium for ideological propaganda. Restorative interventions were therefore seen as an effective means of disseminating propaganda messages directly from the regime to the people. 30 During the Mussolini regime, interventions were in fact carried out on several castles, such as the Castle of Gradara, under Umberto Zanvettori (†1928), in the 1920s; the Castle of Monte in An- dria, under the direction of Quintino Quagliati (1869–1932) in 1928; or the New Castle in Naples, also called Maschio Angioino, under Gino Chierici (1877–1961) and Giorgio Rosi (1904–1974), in the late 1930s. However, medieval castles were not the main focus of the restorations promoted by the Italian dictatorial regime: the interest was mainly centred on the monuments of Classical An- tiquity from the Roman imperial period, of which the regime considered itself the heir. In Spain, which was under the nationalist dictatorships of Miguel Primo de Rivera (1870–1930) from 1923 to 1930 and Francisco Franco (1892–1975) from 1939 to 1978, the propagandistic nature attributed to architectural heritage also motivated heritage interventions on Spanish monuments. 31 Medieval castles did not have as strong a connotation in Spain as they did in Portugal, but several interventions occurred, such as the Castle of Loarre, restored between 1930 and 1950; the Castle of Coca, restored between 1956 and 1958; or the Castle of Mota, in Medina del Campo, restored from 1942. Looking at the catalogue of the 1958 exhibition in Madrid dedicated to monumental restora- tions from the 1940s and 1950s, one can clearly see that fewer castles were the subject of interven- tion than religious monuments, for instance. 32 Restoration of Medieval Fortified Manor Houses by the Estado Novo In the first years of the DGEMN, the procedures and actions begun in previous decades during the First Republic were continued in various monuments, including the palace of the Castle of Leiria, the keep of the Castle of the Feira, and the Fortified Manor House of the Dukes of Braganza, in Barcelos. 33 All of them continued the prerogatives with which they had previously been linked: essentially interventions to consolidate, repair and restore as and when needed, with rebuilding both sporadically and in specific situations, through anastylosis or the incorporation of new elements, 30 On heritage interventions during the Mussolini regime, see, among others, Arthurs, “The Excavatory Interven- tion;” Bellini, “Note sul restauro;” Lamberini, Teorie e storia. 31 See, for instance, Chapapría and Pinazo, Bajo; Chapapría, La conservación; Díez, Historia. 32 Ministerio de Fomento, Veinte años. 33 The primary sources of the interventions carried out by DGEMN can now be consulted online, through the following website http://www.monumentos.gov.pt. However, the 131 issues of the Boletim da DGEMN, published between 1935 and 1990, are also a valuable source of information to understand the DGEMN’s policies and proceedings regarding its interventions in Portuguese national monuments and, in this case, the restoration and rehabilitation of fortified manor houses. The analysis of these primary sources made it possible to systematise the actions of the DGEMN during the Estado Novo period, as described below. JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 131 generally made of differentiated materials such as cement. The ruins were stabilised in order to make possible the global perception of these structures, and at the same time increasing the picturesque sense of landscape associated with the ancient archaeological vestiges, as poetic wit- nesses of the “glorious Past”. 34 However, the gradual instrumentalisation of the monuments and the increasing spend- ing in public works by the DGEMN gave rise to a growing number of interventions: from the most common to the less usual, the operations were distributed among: structural consolida- tion, often with the shoring up of buildings with unstable structures, followed by their re- construction using the same materials and, in some cases, introducing hidden concrete re- inforcements; removal of rubble and debris in order to lower the ground to its original level; demolition of structures considered to be spu- rious, frequently of elements dating from eras later than the Middle Ages; repair and partial replacement of demolished architectural struc- tures, preferably by anastylosis, making use of the materials available; recomposition of archi- tectural elements by formal and constructive analogy; and finally, the broadest reconstruction. 35 The excavations made it possible to discover foundations, but also to recover the original building materials of fallen structures, in order to rebuild them by means of anastylosis, or find other materials which due to their patina could be incorporated into the reconstructions with less of a visual impact than new materials. The intention of preserving the marks of time on the ma- terials was a constant preoccupation: as well bestowing an abstract sense of authenticity on the buildings that underwent interventions, the materials with their natural patina made possible to harmonise picturesque values associated with the environment in which they were found; but they also showed the robustness and Spartan sobriety demanded from medieval structures that contin- ued to resist the struggle against time and people. The interventions in the fortified manor houses of Leiria, Porto de Mós, Évoramonte and Flor da Rosa (in Crato) presented additional challenges, since they were complex sets whose structures were partially demolished. The partial reconstruction of the fortifications of Évoramonte (figs. 1–2) 34 On the restoration of medieval castles during the Estado Novo dictatorship in Portugal, see Santos, “ Anamnesis;” Correia, Castelos; Fernandes, “La restauración. ” 35 Miguel Tomé mentioned very well, although briefly, the modus operandi of the DGEMN in the medieval forti- fications in the 1930s to 1950s, whose reference should be consulted, Tomé, Património, 59–70. See also Santos, Anamnesis, 1: 395–435. 1. Fortified manor house of Évoramonte, before and after the restoration works (© Direção-Geral do Património Cultural - SIPA (above); photo: Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos (below)) THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) 132 2. Empty hall of the fortified manor house of Évoramonte, after the restoration (photo: Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos) 3. Royal manor house inside the Castle of Leiria, before and after the restoration works (© Direção-Geral do Património Cultural - SIPA (above); photo: Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos (below)). and Flor da Rosa, although extensive in character, was carried out through the formal analogous recourse to the symmetry of the buildings, supported by analysis of architectural vestiges and his- toriographical and castellological data. The means used in the Évoramonte and Crato interventions were not, despite everything, applicable to the Leiria (figs. 3–4) and Porto de Mós (fig. 5) fortified manor houses, the extent of JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 133 whose ruin was greater. In addition to this, as singular structures in Portugal, they made formal analogies with other similar structures to be impossible. Although architectural and archaeologi- cal vestiges still existing would allow a specific reconstruction by anastylosis or the reproduction of certain elements, the remaining archaeological evidence and the inexistence of iconographical documentation rendered the data that would make possible a global reconstruction insufficient. For this reason, any reconstruction would have to possess a strong inventive component, a practice that the DGEMN condemned, in the belief that it falsified the values associated with the monu- ments. Those structures with the possibility of being reconstructed by anastylosis or formal repro- duction were partially rebuilt, like certain outside walls, inner walls, staircases and floors. However, the main façades of both fortified manor houses constitute powerful iconic images, dominating the respective urban sets where they were found. Furthermore, as they were largely constituted by galleries, the façades could be easily reproduced from a single arch. The DGEMN technicians reconstructed the galleries with arches, reproducing the existing vestiges quite simply, completing the remaining parietal elements on the basis of formal and constructive deduction based on the actual reconstructed gallery and on remaining vestiges. 4. Rear façade of the royal manor house inside the Castle of Leiria, after the restoration works (© Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos) 5. Fortified manor house of Porto de Mós, before and after the restoration works (© Direção-Geral do Património Cultural - SIPA (left); photo: Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos (right)) THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) 134 6. Fortified manor house the Dukes of Braganza in Guimarães, before and after the restoration works (© Direção-Geral do Património Cultural - SIPA (left); Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos (right)) 7. Hall of the fortified manor house of the Dukes of Braganza in Guimarães, after furnished by the Commission for the Acquisition of Furniture (photo: Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos) The importance of the façades that dominated the cities would drive the exceptionality of specific creative reconstructions. The most visible example is that of the spirelets above the lateral towers of the gallery of the fortified manor house of Porto de Mós: accepting the specificity of the fortification that lacks similarities with other Portuguese buildings, the reconstruction was based on presuppositions based on eventual Italian influences in order to reconstruct the roofs (using reinforced concrete), without clear evidence about the slopes or the original materials. The notable iconic evidence of the main façades, which motivated their exceptional reconstruction, is obvious when the remaining façades are observed which, considered to have no iconic importance, under- went far lesser reconstructions and remained with the image of a consolidated ruin. The recovery of idealised stylistic models was only carried out in very specific interventions made in structures endowed with a strong symbolic character, which for this reason granted the intervention a sense of exceptionality. The most paradigmatic example was that carried out in the Fortified Manor House of the Dukes of Braganza, in Guimarães (figs. 6–7). The DGEMN’s interven - tion, which would continue until the 1960s, begun under the direction of Rogério Azevedo (1898– 1983) in 1936, later becoming part of the programme outlined for Guimarães in the context of the celebrations of the double centenary in 1940. The aim of the ambitious operation was to recover one of the emblematic seats of the House of Braganza, located in the city considered to be the cradle JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 135 of the Portuguese nation. The building, in complete ruins, would be restored and con- verted into the presidential residence, dem- onstrating the importance of Guimarães for the nationalist ideology of the Estado Novo: the Portuguese President’s Palace in the north of the country would be located in the cradle-city of the nation, where the first Portuguese king was born. For this reason, the intervention could not be limited to the mere recovery of the pristine form of the manor house, which in addition to being impossible due to the scant philological bases, would not be con- stituted as an official residence worthy of the President of the Portuguese Republic. In these circumstances, along with the arguments directly associated with herit- age values, functional values would have to exist (official residence with conditions of habitability and modern comfort) and symbolic values (of representativity). Ro- gério de Azevedo, from philological studies based on prospections made in the building and in historical documentation, and in the formal and functional analysis comparing similar buildings, placed the construction of the manor house in the 15 th century, based on influences typologically affiliated to Italy, with French and Catalan contributions: however, according to Custódio da Silva, the main influences were in fact essentially French, though they underwent a process of insertion into the Portuguese reality. 36 Bearing in mind the assumptions that he had made about the manor house in Guimarães, Rogério de Azevedo created a supposed historical reality based on his personal convictions sup- ported on the analysis made in conjunction with the new functions he wished to attribute to the manor house (fig. 8). The guidelines with which he directed the intervention were intended on the one hand to valorise the historical characteristics of the building, achieving a presumed pristine stylistic unity, and on the other hand, to respond to the new pretensions, seeking to harmonise the architecture of the Past with the demands of the Present. The circumstances linked Rogério de Azevedo’s action in the Guimarães manor house to Viollet-le-Duc’s thinking for the intervention in the fortified manor house of Pierrefonds. 37 Rogério de Azevedo was not concerned with the rigour of the physical construction in its plenitude, but rather with the memorial reconstruction of a symbolic medieval edifice. New demands drove the somehow whimsical improvement of the building, which did however maintain its would- be medieval character. Such a fact resulted in the alteration of the integrity of the monument through 36 Silva, Paços Medievais, 139–41. See also Azevedo, O Paço. 37 Brito, “ Alguns vetores, ” 74–87. See also Brito, “Metamorfoses. ” 8. Drawing by Rogério de Azevedo for the restoration of the fortified manor house of the Dukes of Braganza in Guimarães (© Direção-Geral do Património Cultural – SIPA) THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) 136 the mutilation and distortion of its history and architecture. It received a form that in some respects it had never possessed, forced on it by the Italian influence attributed by Rogério de Azevedo. The errors were articulated by Custódio da Silva, mainly about the courtyard surrounded by galleries, the enormous central staircase, the various functional changes and the symmetry that had been imposed. 38 Refunctionalisation of Medieval Fortified Manor Houses The provision of conditions suitable for the recently restored medieval Fortified Manor House of the Dukes of Braganza, in Guimarães, to receive a very highly placed official led to the creation of a Commission for the Acquisition of Furniture, charged with furnishing the manor house accord- ing to a stereotyped, almost museological taste (fig. 9). 39 However, the President of the Portuguese Republic, Óscar Carmona (1869–1951), refused to exchange the cosmopolitan life of the current capital for provincial life of the first Portuguese capital; thus, instead of taking up residence in the medieval manor house of Guimarães, he preferred to remain in the Palace of Belém, which in addi- tion had more amenities (and a privileged view of the River Tagus). This came to create a dilemma for the regime: what to do with a monument that has been restored and appropriately furnished, on which they spent so many funds and which in the end would not be put to any use? The problems related to the possible fate of the Fortified Manor House of the Dukes of Bra - ganza (or even before, the manor house of Castle of Leiria), once the restoration had been com- pleted, gave rise to the debate on its maintenance, given that it was regular use that would assure its conservation. Initially, a castle was restored “to be a castle”, and being its own museum involved housing collections of weapons or assets related to ways of life associated with the fortifications (of the military, the aristocrats or the nearby communities). If some broader fortified structures (captain houses of castles, fortified manor houses) had the capacity to receive significant museum nuclei, in the generality of medieval military sets the exhibitions were reduced, consisting of simple collections with a military or ethnographical theme installed in the keeps that were greater in size that the other towers—in 1936, after its restoration, a museum nucleus had already been installed in the keep of the Castle of Braganza, originally a fortified manor house. Driven by influences deriving from Spain, the conceptualisation of rehabilitation of monu- ments for luxury hotel units was recovered in the second quarter of the 20 th century, bringing together the supposed formal safeguarding of the monumental structure and the cultural tourism industry, with their respective financial benefits. 40 The Spanish policy of rehabilitating architec- tural monuments to function as hotels 41 had a strong impact on the upper echelons of the Es- tado Novo and on various sectors of Portuguese society, with successive requirements for adapting 38 Silva, Paços Medievais, 141–44. 39 PC-40, Cx. 622, pt. 7, Arquivo Salazar, Criação de uma Administração Geral do Mobiliário Nacional (1954), Arquivo Nacional da Torre do Tombo. See also Martins, ed., Mobiliário. 40 After the restoration of the Paço dos Alcaides, inside the Castle of Óbidos, the DGEMN bulletin mentions that “[…] at a certain moment, when the works in the citadel were almost at their final stage, an idea occurred to take advantage of this remarkable building (previously doomed to remain empty and useless until it could be trans- formed into a regional museum or other similar establishment) to install an ‘luxury hotel’ that would attract a great number of national and foreign visitors […]” (Castro, “ Antes da restauração, ” 21.) 41 On the rehabilitation of Spanish castles to function as hotels, see Núñez-Herrador and Espinosa, “Los castillos. ” JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 137 monuments to these functions. More than economic interests, the requests frequently constituted a way of guaranteeing state support for carrying out restorative interventions and to guarantee their maintenance through constant use of these monuments adapted for use as hotels. Another important factor emerged when António Ferro (1895–1956), director of the National Propaganda Secretariat, decided in the 1930s that internal tourism would be an important factor in stimulating knowledge of the country, promoting patriotic values at the heart of Portuguese society. 42 In this context, the first Pousadas de Portugal 43 were created in 1939, by the initiative of António Ferro and Duarte Pacheco (1900–1943), Minister of Public Works and Communications. The medieval fortified manor houses, whose original function had long since been lost, were the first considered for the installation of pousadas, 44 with the works remaining under the control of the DGEMN. The inauguration of the Pousada do Castelo in 1950, located in the captain house inside the Castle of Óbidos, emerged precisely from the need to find a use for the numerous monu- ments restored by the DGEMN through the functional installation of luxury hotels that would as- sure the maintenance through functional usage and the creation of economic values. 45 The growing importance of quality tourism installed in privileged places was thus taken on board, at the same time as the luxury hotels in historical monuments were used as political instruments to house high foreign dignitaries. The Paço dos Alcaides, located inside the Castle of Óbidos (fig. 10), was found in an advanced state of ruin, although walls remained in two of its wings. The manor house would be configured in four wings around a central patio, supported outside on the castle walls. As it had done with other castles, the DGEMN decided on the reconstruction of this captain house within the possible limits, following increasingly cautious lines of action. For this reason the intervention only involved the 42 On the Estado Novo’s ideological discourse about the Portuguese culture, see Melo, Salazarismo; Leal, Etnografias portuguesas; Ó, Os anos de Ferro. 43 Pousadas de Portugal is a chain of luxury, traditional or historical hotels in Portugal. 44 A pousada means a luxury hotel in Portuguese. 45 Lobo, Pousadas de Portugal, 115. Susana Lobo’s work is fundamental to understanding the rehabilitation of Por- tuguese monuments to remodel them for luxury hotels. See also Barreto, “Pousadas de Portugal. ” 9. Military museum nucleus inside the keep of the Castle of Braganza (photo: Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos) THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) 138 two remaining ruined wings, respecting the remaining vestiges and in some cases demonstrating synchrony with the philo- logical precepts of restoration: for example, on reconstructing the stone frames of the Manueline windows on the upper floor of the courtyard, it was decided to opt to fol- low stylised lines inspired directly by the Manueline style, instead of mimicking it. The adaptation of the Paço dos Al- caides (fig. 11) began in 1948 under the direction of João Vaz Martins (1910–1988), and was considered a conservative inter- vention that attempted to respect the mon- ument as a spiritual element and bearer of native values, reflecting the ideology that evoked the exaltation of the nation. A spe- cific work of reintegration and consolida- tion of the built structures was carried out, and was reduced to the adaptation of a mere rational organisation of the spaces resulting from the compartmentalization produced by the restoration. The monu- mental integrity of the castle took prec- edence over the functional aspect, thus the projects to adapt the castle to function as a hotel were no more than simple actions of interior decoration, intended to recreate historicist atmospheres with revivalist furniture and décor. 46 However, the luxury hotel did introduce a new use for the ancient medieval fortification that compelled alterations and readjustments due to the new needs. Among those that were indispen- sable for fitting out a luxury hotel were the redefinition of areas (services, sanitary installations, bedrooms), the infrastructure networks (sanitation, electricity, telecommunications), high require- ments for habitability (comfort, hygiene, salubriousness, safety, aesthetics), leisure sectors (lounges, games rooms, bar, swimming pool), accessibility (for the disabled, lifts) and other concepts that did not exist in medieval fortifications. In the last years of the Estado Novo, another rehabilitation was undertaken in a fortified man- or house with the aim of transforming it into a touristic luxury hotel. In 1970, the Pousada Santa Isabel was inaugurated in Estremoz, included in an ancient royal medieval manor house that King João V (1689–1750) had ordered to be rebuilt in the 18 th century, inside the Castle of Estremoz. The project, drawn up by Rui Ângelo do Couto (1917–1998), followed the line of intervention of the Óbidos luxury hotel, trying to harmonise the hotel programme respectfully with the pre-existing 46 Fernandes, “Pousadas de Portugal. ” 10. Paço dos Alcaides inside the Castle of Óbidos, before and after the restoration works (© Direção-Geral do Património Cultural - SIPA (above); photo: Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos (below)) JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 139 monument so that this could maintain the architectural characteristics and symbolical values as- sociated with them. The atmosphere recreated in the luxury hotel, by valuing the ancient architec- ture and the decoration with its markedly historicist character, sought to involve the tourists in a memorial aura of the Past that it set out to evoke. Aftermath: Contemporary Uses of Fortified Manor Houses The heritage intervention practices regarding medieval fortifications undertaken by the Estado Novo regime were generally accepted and defended by most of the personalities associated with the dictatorship. The censorship that prevailed in the media precluded gauging the sensitivity of the general public to the interventions carried out on architectural heritage. However, the population appeared to accept these interventions, because the monuments could partially recover from their decay, or, at least, people silently ignored them. Yet among some cultural elites, there were more or less veiled criticisms of the reintegrations carried out during the DGEMN’s first phase: for example, Raul Lino da Silva (1879–1974), a senior technician at the DGEMN, implicitly criticised the principles set out by Gomes da Silva in 1941 by vehemently condemning the theories of stylistic unity preconized by Viollet-le-Duc. 47 Later, when the regime’s censorship briefly eased due to the elections for the Presidency of the Portu- guese Republic in 1949, Deputy Manuel Mendes (1906–1969), following a rally in support of the opposition’s presidential candidate, ironized about the DGEMN’s interventions on medieval for- tifications. Here Mendes drew a parallel between the DGEMN’s operations to replace battlements in medieval fortifications and “composing battlements in castles like teeth in dentures”. 48 The art historian Adriano de Gusmão (1908–1989) also criticised the DGEMN’s work, saying that it often employed principles of stylistic unity or, in some cases, inventive principles. 49 47 Lino, “ A propósito. ” 48 Mendes, “Explicações necessárias, ” 1. 49 Gusmão, “ Ainda o Restauro, ” 1, 6. 11. Hall of the Pousada do Castelo, in the Paço dos Alcaides, inside the Castle of Óbidos (photo: Joaquim Rodrigues dos Santos) THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) 140 Gomes da Silva felt the criticisms and strongly contested them, arguing that the DGEMN did not follow the criteria proposed by Viollet-le-Duc, since it was not possible to impose a sin- gle criterion for the reintegration of architectural monuments; even so, the criteria followed by the DGEMN for restorative interventions aimed to reintegrate architectural monuments into their original beauty, cleaning them of excrescences with no artistic value that had been added, while also seeking to repair the mutilations suffered over time by human or natural actions. The example Gomes da Silva chose to illustrate the DGEMN’s action was the Castle of Saint George (Castelo de São Jorge) in Lisbon: more than “a constructive toy or a new building”, Gomes da Silva repeat- edly stated that the castle had always been there, but submerged by other built structures, so the DGEMN’s intervention had essentially been to clear the medieval castle by demolishing the para- sitic structures with no artistic value. 50 At the end of the 1940s, the departure of Baltazar da Silva Castro (1891–1967), a senior tech- nician at the DGEMN and the main executor of Gomes da Silva’s ideas, and the replacement of Gomes da Silva by José Pena Pereira da Silva (b.1906) as the DGEMN’s head, opened up possibili- ties for new ideas and procedures. This was visible particularly in the renewal of the technical staff and the progressive adoption of lines of action closer to the criteria set internationally for safe- guarding heritage—namely, in the International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments and Sites, generally known as the Venice Charter (1964). The fall of the Estado Novo in 1974, with the consequent shift to a democratic regime, led to less effective action by the governmental institutions during the post-revolutionary period. While they attempted to manage the adaptation of the government structures inherited from the previ- ous regime to connect them to the democratic reality, there was also an attempt to resolve serious social situations. The difficulties were reflected in cultural policies, which before the framework of the institutional crisis and the consequent priorities that were established, gave rise to a period of indecisiveness. The change of mentality and ideas in the realm of heritage inevitably had repercus- sions in the entities responsible for Portuguese heritage policies. The opening up of heritage policies to Portuguese society favoured a multiplication of safe- guarding actions carried out on the one hand by different civic associations, mainly in local or regional initiatives, and on the other hand, through private operators who through the later man- agement of the heritage that underwent interventions added greatly to the commercialisation of cultural heritage as a source for generating financial dividends, though not always having the main objective of preserving it. The rehabilitation of monuments to function as hotels, which since the creation of the Na- tional Tourism Company (Portuguese acronym: ENATUR), in 1976, had increased significantly, is illustrative. ENATUR was charged with managing state-owned properties linked to the luxury hotel industry; in 2003 around half of its capital was privatised, with the commercial exploitation being handed over to the Pestana Pousadas Group. The new interventions in fortified manor hous- es involved a presumably respectful matching of the pre-existing ones to the new hotel functions, attempting to harmonise the demands of the hotels with veneration for the architectural monu- ment. Nevertheless, alterations were frequently made in the structure of the buildings with the intention of meeting the actual demands of the new hotel function, with the demolition of interior halls that were then reconstructed differently, or the programmatic attribution of functions that 50 Silva, “ A reintegração;” Silva, “Com a obra realizada. ” See also Direcção-Geral, Obras em Monumentos Nacionais. JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 141 did not blend respectfully with the characteristics of the monument, giving rise to misrepresenta- tions in its reading. 51 But the cultural aspect has also achieved increasing preponderance, with various fortified manor houses and captains’ houses inside castles rehabilitated for museum or multicultural func- tions driven by the municipalities. In these cases, freer from private commercial constraints, the new functions sought to adapt to the pre-existing buildings, with the introduction of assumedly new and often reversible structures. Reference should also be made to the minimalist requalifica- tion programmes, 52 which consist of the consolidation of the remaining structures of the medieval manor houses (often just ruins) and the provision of conditions for visitors, with the introduction of illumination, guard rails, paving, etc., having it in mind to valorise the monuments. 53 51 Lobo, Pousadas, 93–152. 52 Santos, Anamnesis, 1: 395–435. 53 This essay was developed within a contract funded by the FCT – Foundation for the Science and the Technology, under the Decree Law nº. 57/2016 and the Law nº. 57/2017; it also had the FCT support through the ARTIS-IHA- FLUL (ref. UIDB/04189/2020). THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) 142 Bibliography Alçada, Margarida, and Maria Teles Grilo, eds. Caminhos do Património. Lisbon: Direcção-Geral dos Edifícios e Monumentos Nacionais; Livros Horizonte, 1999. Arthurs, Joshua. “The Excavatory Intervention: Archaeology and the Chronopolitics of Roman Antiquity in Fascist Italy.” Journal of Modern European History / Zeitschrift Für Moderne Europäische Geschichte / Revue d’Histoire Européenne Contemporaine 13, no. 1 (2015): 44–58. Azevedo, Carlos. Solares Portugueses. Lisbon: Livros Horizonte, 1988. Azevedo, Rogério. O Paço dos Duques de Bragança (Preâmbulo à memória do projecto de restauro). Oporto: Marânus, 1942. Barreto, Pedro. “Pousadas de Portugal: Elixir para anchietações.” Jornal dos Arquitectos 197 (2000): 49–54. Barroca, Mário. “D. Dinis e a arquitectura militar portuguesa.” História: Revista da Faculdade de Letras da Universidade do Porto 15, no. 1 (1998): 801–22. Barroca, Mário. “Torres, casas-torres ou casas-fortes: A concepção do espaço de habitação da pequena e média nobreza na Baixa Idade Média (Sécs. XII–XV).” Revista de História das Ideais 19 (1997): 39–103. Bellini, Amedeo. “Note sul restauro dei monumenti nel periodo fascista.” In Bajo el Signo de la Victoria: La Conservación del Patrimonio durante el Primer Franquismo (1936–1958), edited by Julián Esteban Chapapría and José Casar Pinazo, 111–34. Valencia: Pentagraf Editorial, 2008. Brito, Maria Mónica. “Paço dos Duques de Bragança em Guimarães: Alguns vetores de leitura.” Monumentos 33 (2013): 74–87. Brito, Maria Mónica. “Paço dos Duques de Bragança em Guimarães: Metamorfoses da imagem na época contemporânea.” M.A. thesis, University of Lisbon, 2003. Carita, Hélder. A casa senhorial em Portugal: Modelos, tipologias, programas interiores e equipamentos. Alfragide: Leya, 2015. Castro, João de. “Antes da restauração.” Boletim da DGEMN 68–69 (1952): 16–23. Chapapría, Julián Esteban. La conservación del patrimonio español durante la II República (1931–1939). Barcelona: Edición Fundación Caja de Arquitectos, 2007. Chapapría, Julián Esteban, and José Casar Pinazo, eds. Bajo el Signo de la Victoria: La conservación del patrimonio durante el Primer Franquismo (1936–1958). Valencia: Pentagraf Editorial, 2008. Correia, Luís Miguel. Castelos em Portugal: Retrato do seu perfil arquitectónico (1509–1949). Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade, 2011. Cunha, Luís Manuel. A Nação nas malhas da sua identidade: O Estado Novo e a construção da identidade nacional. Oporto: Edições Afrontamento, 2001. Custódio, Jorge Raimundo, ed. 100 anos de património: Memória e identidade (Portugal 1910–2010). Lisbon: Instituto de Gestão do Património Arquitectónico e Arqueológico, 2010. D’Anniballe, Maria. “Recreating the Past: The controversies surrounding the refashioning of the medieval castle of Castelvecchio in Verona under the Fascist regime.” Athanor 28 (2010): 75–83. Díez, Isabel Ordieres. Historia de la restauración monumental en España (1835–1936). Madrid: Instituto de Conservación y Restauración de Bienes Culturales, 1995. Direcção-Geral dos Edifícios e Monumentos Nacionais. Boletim da DGEMN 1–131 (1935–90). Direcção-Geral dos Edifícios e Monumentos Nacionais. Obras em Monumentos Nacionais. Lisbon: Direcção-Geral dos Edifícios e Monumentos Nacionais; Ministério das Obras Públicas, 1949. Fernandes, Isabel Cristina. “La restauración de los castillos de Portugal (años 30–60 del siglo XX).” In Arquitectura fortificada: Conservación, restauración y uso de los castillos, edited by Edward Cooper, 157–94. Valladolid: Fundación del Patrimonio Histórico de Castilla y León, 2006. JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 143 Fernandes, José Manuel. “Pousadas de Portugal: Obras de raíz e em monumentos.” In Caminhos do Património, edited by Margarida Alçada and Maria Teles Grilo, 159–77. Lisbon: Direcção-Geral dos Edifícios e Monumentos Nacionais; Livros Horizonte, 1999. Ferro, António. Salazar. Aveiro: Edições do Templo, 1978. Gomes, Rita Costa. “A construção das fronteiras.” In A memória da nação, edited by Francisco Bethencourt and Diogo Ramada Curto, 370–80. Lisbon: Livraria Sá da Costa Editora, 1991. Gomes, Rita Costa. “Monarquia e território: Residências reais portuguesas – Séculos XIV a XVI.” In Lugares de poder: Europa séculos XV a XX, edited by Rita Costa Gomes and Gérard Sabatier, 84–105. Lisbon: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, 1998. Gusmão, Adriano de. “Ainda o Restauro dos Monumentos Nacionais.” República, March 13, 1949. Lamberini, Daniela. Teorie e storia del restauro architettonico. Florence: Polistampa, 2003. Leal, João. Etnografias portuguesas (1870–1970): Cultura popular e identidade nacional. Lisbon: Publicações Dom Quixote, 2000. Liessem, Udo. “Castles of the 19 th Century in the Upper Middle Rhine Valley.” Europa Nostra Bulletin 61 (2007): 7–14. Lino, Raul. “A propósito da Sé do Funchal: A restauração de monumentos.” Boletim da Academia Nacional de Belas-Artes 9 (1941): 5–15. Lobo, Susana. Pousadas de Portugal: Reflexos da arquitectura portuguesa do século XX. Coimbra: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra, 2006. Martins, João Paulo, ed. Mobiliário para edifícios públicos: Portugal 1934/1974. Lisbon: Caleidoscópio, 2015. Martins, Pedro. “History, Nation and Politics: The Middle Ages in Modern Portugal (1890–1947).” PhD diss., New University of Lisbon, 2016. Mattoso, José. Identificação de um país: Ensaio sobre as origens de Portugal (1096–1325). 2 vols. Lisbon: Editorial Estampa, 1995. Melo, Daniel. Salazarismo e cultura popular (1933–1958). Lisbon: Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de Lisboa, 2001. Mendes, Manuel. “Explicações necessárias, em resposta ao Senhor Ministro das Obras Públicas.” República, January 13, 1949. Neto, Maria João. Memória, propaganda e poder: O restauro dos monumentos nacionais (1929–1960). Oporto: FAUP Publicações, 2001. Núñez-Herrador, Esther Almarcha, and Rafael Villena Espinosa. “Los castillos, ¿destino turístico?.” In De Marco Polo al low cost: Perfiles del turismo contemporáneo, edited by Héctor Martínez Sánchez-Mateos and María Rubio Martin, 69–90. Madrid: Catarata, 2020. Núñez-Herrador, Esther Almarcha, and Rafael Villena Espinosa. “Una nación de castillos: Su restauración, imagen fotográfica y significado en el segundo franquismo.” Vinculos de Historia 11 (2022): 189–212. Ó, Jorge Ramos do. Os anos de Ferro: O dispositivo cultural durante a “Política do Espírito” (1933–1949). Lisbon: Editorial Estampa, 1999. Rathke, Ursula. Preuβische Burgenromantik am Rhein: Studien zum Wiederaufbau von Rheinstein, Stolzenfels und Sooneck (1823–1860). Munich: Prestel, 1979. Rodrigues, Jorge. “A Direcção-Geral dos Edifícios e Monumentos Nacionais e o restauro dos monumentos medievais durante o Estado Novo.” In Caminhos do Património, edited by Margarida Alçada and Maria Teles Grilo, 69–82. Lisbon: Livros Horizonte, 1999. Salazar, António de Oliveira. Discursos e notas políticas (1938–1943). 6 vols. Coimbra: Coimbra Editora, 1928–1967. Salazar, António de Oliveira. “Comemorações Centenárias.” In Discursos e Notas Políticas (1938– 1943). Vol. 3, 41–58. Coimbra: Coimbra Editora, 1959. THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974) 144 Salazar, António de Oliveira. “‘Era de restauração, Era de engrandecimento’ – Discurso na exposição do ano X da Revolução Nacional, em 28 de Maio.” In Discursos e Notas Políticas (1938–1943). Vol. 2, 145–49. Coimbra: Coimbra Editora, 1946. Santos, Joaquim Rodrigues dos. “Anamnesis del Castillo como Bien Patrimonial: Construcción de la imagen, forma y (re)funcionalización en la rehabilitación de fortificaciones medievales en Portugal.” PhD diss., University of Alcalá, 2012. Santos, Joaquim Rodrigues dos. O castelo português: Criação de uma imagética cultural. Lisboa: Caleidoscópio, 2022. Silva, Henrique Gomes da. “A reintegração dos monumentos.” Boletim da DGEMN 24 (1941): I–XIV. Silva, Henrique Gomes da. “Com a obra realizada nos Monumentos Nacionais elevou-se muito alto o nivel da nossa cultura.” Diário Popular 2275 (1949): 1, 5. Silva, Henrique Gomes da. “Monumentos Nacionais - Orientação técnica a seguir no seu restauro.” In I Congresso da União Nacional - Discursos, Teses e Comunicações, 56–57. Lisbon: Edição da União Nacional, 1935. Silva, José Custódio Vieira da. Paços Medievais Portugueses. Lisbon: IPPAR, 2002. Taylor, Robert R. The Castles of the Rhine: Recreating the Middle Ages in Modern Germany . Waterloo: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1998. Tomé, Miguel. Património e restauro em Portugal (1920–1995). Oporto: FAUP Publicações, 2002. Zeune, Joachim. “The Perception of the Medieval Castle in the 18 th and 19 th Centuries in Germany: Some Remarks on the Genuine Medieval Style.” Europa Nostra Bulletin 61 (2007): 15–20. JOAQUIM RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS 145 Obnova srednjeveških utrdb v času portugalskega diktatorskega režima (1926–1974) Povzetek V primerjavi z drugimi evropskimi deželami je bila gradnja gradov na Portugalskem v srednjem veku povsem odvisna od portugalskih vladarjev. Vsi portugalski gradovi so bili kraljeva last, grajske poveljnike pa sta imenovala kralj osebno ali oseba s kraljevimi pooblastili, ki je pred tem vladarju morala priseči zvestobo. Brez dovoljenja kralja tako ni bilo mogoče zgraditi nobene utrdbe: prepovedana je bila celo gradnja dvorcev in palač z obzidjem ali drugimi obrambnimi elementi, četudi bi bili ti zgolj dekorativne narave. Večina gradov na Portugalskem je pripadala najvišjemu plemstvu, ki je bilo navadno sorodstveno povezano s portugalsko kraljevo družino. Skoraj vsi gradovi so sčasoma propadli, ker so bili neudobni za bivanje in od renesanse dalje premalo razkošni za potrebe portugalskega plemstva, s pojavom artilerije in novega strelnega orožja so obrambne strukture gradov zastarele, nekateri pa so propadli tudi zaradi izumrtja nekaterih plemiških družin. Kljub temu je diktatorski režim, ki je bil na Portugalskem na oblasti v letih od 1926 do 1974, mnoge porušene gradove v času od tridesetih do šestdesetih let prejšnjega stoletja obnovil. Nacionalistično in konservativno naravnana diktatorska oblast Estado Novo je portugalsko kulturno dediščino izkoristila kot instrument ideološke propagande, vanjo pa je vključila tudi nekdanje gradove. Za vse posege v portugalsko nepremično kulturno dediščino je bila zadolžena državna ustanova Direcção-Geral dos Edifícios e Monumentos Nacional (DGEMN). Namen tega članka je analizirati obnovo srednjeveških portugalskih gradov v ideološkem kontekstu v času diktatorskega režima. V ta namen bodo obravnavani simbolika, obnova z ukrepi DGEMN in umeščanje gradov v portugalski kontekst s poudarkom na izbranih študijah primerov. THE RESTORATION AND REFUNCTIONALISATION OF MEDIEVAL FORTIFIED MANOR HOUSES BY THE PORTUGUESE DICTATORIAL REGIME (1926–1974)