In Sauquillo de Alcázar, a small town in Soria with barely 20 inhabitants that overlooks the neighboring province of Zaragoza, the church of San Andrés languishes, an enormous building of Romanesque origin that has seen its baptismal font moved to the co-cathedral of Soria, before the risk of collapsing.
The temple of Santa Cecilia in the town of Hermosilla, which preserves one of the most impressive apses of the Burgos Romanesque, has been closed for several years due to the appearance of numerous cracks that threaten its integrity, pending a significant investment by the Archbishopric of Burgos.
In Tubilla del Agua, in the same province, San Miguel, with a semi-ruined nave and tower, still preserves some medieval reliefs;
The rest of the most valuable elements were torn down and sold decades ago, and are today divided between the Marès Museum in Barcelona and a private collection.
More information
The only resident of a town in Soria, witness to the live death of the 12th century Romanesque church
The list of Romanesque buildings in danger of disappearance is practically endless.
It extends throughout empty Spain, mainly from Castilla y León to Aragon, the result of a cancer without remedy since the sixties: depopulation.
San Andrés, Santa Cecilia or San Miguel are just some of the examples that follow in the wake of San Bartolomé, the unprotected 12th century temple, whose decline is witnessed firsthand by the last inhabitant of the tiny Soria town of La Barbolla.
Only in the famous Red List prepared by the Hispania Nostra association there are currently 32 churches and hermitages under threat of disappearing.
However, Spain lacks an exhaustive, scientific inventory—the Red List is based solely on complaints sent by affected neighbors—and the real volume is estimated, experts agree, at “hundreds” of properties, such a high number. as ambiguous, which calls into question the work of stewardship of the country.
“Indeed, the declaration of Asset of Cultural Interest (BIC) allows the public Administration to act when cases of abandonment or destruction occur;
When this is not the case, the interest or disinterest of the owners continues to prevail: if there are no resources to undertake conservation measures, the exposure to deterioration is terrible,” describes Professor María José Martínez Ruiz, an expert researcher on the destruction of Spanish heritage.
In situations like La Barbolla "there is no concern on the part of the Administration, because these assets are a burden, much less on the part of the owners, in this case, the Catholic Church," asserts Jaime Nuño, director of the Centro de Estudios del Romanico at the Santa María la Real Foundation, who effortlessly identifies the community most affected by this problem.
"In Castilla y León, sometimes public institutions are already very tired of being burdened with the restoration of religious assets, privately owned, which, however, leave everyone exposed when they fall."
Interior of the temple of San Bartolomé (La Barbolla, Soria), today. Photo provided (Luis C. Pastor)
Listed buildings that no longer exist
The encyclopedia prepared by the Santa María la Real Foundation now includes more than 9,000 Romanesque testimonies throughout the Iberian Peninsula, including complete buildings and smaller structures.
Identifying which of them lack protection or are at risk is “an administrative task that should be done.”
Extremely complex, in any case.
Jaime Nuño warns that it is not even easy to access the lists of BIC assets, in the hands of the different autonomous communities, competent in the field of heritage.
“There are declared buildings that do not even exist anymore,” he notes.
How do you know, then, those who are outside that inventory?
The historian refers to the records prepared “by hand” by each diocese, “very valuable” information to which, today, there is no access.
The situation could change significantly if Romanesque temples had a joint declaration of protection - solely due to their architectural origin -, as in the case of castles.
“I believe that a declaration that gives the Administration the capacity to act to intervene is not enough, even if it is absolutely necessary,” María José Martínez points out, however.
The professor understands that the protection work that has been done since the 19th century, building by building, should be oriented today towards “a broader vision of the cultural landscape, in line with the path marked by UNESCO in recent years.” on the protection of heritage, an area in which “we still have a lot to do.”
Jaime Nuño, for his part, points to the “complexity” of carrying out such generic protection, because “there is a lot” and its definition would be complicated.
“We would have to define what enters and what does not: should we, for example, protect a corbel that is in a private house?” he asks.
Ruins of the tower and church of San Miguel, in the Burgos town of Tubilla del Agua. COURTESY JOSEMI LORENZO
Architect Jesús Castillo, who has worked for three decades on rehabilitation projects at the Santa María la Real Foundation, is even more skeptical.
“That buildings are protected is not a necessary condition for them to be restored, there is even a widespread opinion that a possible declaration limits the rights and interests of the neighbors, although in reality it is quite the opposite,” he says.
What's more, Castillo assures that situations like the one mentioned at La Barbolla can occur in any building, even if it had been included in the catalog of assets of cultural interest.
Towards cultural use
The experts consulted agree to go further and point to the origin of the problem: the exodus and abandonment of the territory.
“Lack of use is a capital factor;
Every time an artistic work has lost its function, it has been vulnerable to abandonment, destruction, looting, liquidation of its materials or ruin,” says Martínez Ruiz.
The professor from the University of Valladolid wonders if “we really want to witness its slow death, the dispersion of its treasures, or perhaps the time has come to consider that it is necessary to act in a comprehensive way.”
The architect Jesús Castillo denies that we should wait for this outcome and calls, in effect, for action through global plans.
“I don't think we should get used to the idea of the natural death of heritage, but those of us who dedicate ourselves to this must pose the problem in other terms.”
This innovative approach is simple to explain, although more complex to carry out: taking advantage of historic buildings as “one of the greatest assets” to execute “territorial development projects” in areas affected by depopulation.
Romanesque hermitage of San Salvador, in ruins, in the Burgos town of Tamarón. COURTESY JOSEMI LORENZO
Carefully, yes.
Often, critical voices censure the “cultural use” towards which religious temples want to be oriented, believing that it is incompatible with liturgical or religious practice.
“It is not about desacralizing a church: there are the examples of the cathedrals of Burgos or Seville, living buildings where there is a lot of devotion and that, at the same time, generate enormous income,” Castillo points out.
The architect bases the proposal on the successful projects carried out by Santa María la Real in depopulated areas in collaboration with public administrations and private companies, under a simple equation: intervention in a temple generates social interest that can boost development tourism in the area, with the help of a minimal infrastructure.
An interesting perspective that does not put a stop, in any case, to the danger faced by properties dispersed in remote areas of rural areas, such as in the province of Soria.
Here, according to Santa María la Real, technology and digitalization come into play.
“We have implemented monitoring systems that allow us to know, remotely and in real time, certain parameters of the buildings: if there are humidity problems, certain structures are moved or unwanted visits occur,” describes Jesús Castillo.
That is, knowing up to the minute what is happening in the hermitage of an uninhabited town without necessarily having to visit it.
Despite everything, as Professor María José Martínez points out, the definitive solution—also the most utopian, today—is to “take care of the lives of the people who live in the towns, education, culture, life resources.” ;
If so, the social group that supports the most valuable testimonies will be there, and will contribute to taking care of its cultural legacy.”
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits
Keep reading
I am already a subscriber
_