It was not until the end of the nineteenth century that Spain’s interest in its heritage began to awaken. A heritage that was ageing, reviled and unknown by many. Spain’s drive to protect its heritage at the beginning of the twentieth century resulted in extensive legislation on the safeguarding of historical heritage. Nevertheless, the regulatory process unfolded gradually and exhibited heterogeneity, which resulted in an uneven landscape in heritage management, characterised by legal gaps and differing approaches across regions, complicating the task of protecting the nation’s artistic treasures.

Meanwhile, an essential debate emerged on the role of historical and artistic heritage in the cultural identity and sustainable development of societies. However, for many, this debate unfolded too late and Spain experienced what the journalist José María Sadia coined as a “self-spoliation”, wherein numerous artworks were sold and exported due to the absence or insufficiency of legislation.

An illustrative case was the hermitage of San Baudelio in Casillas de Berlanga, a monument of great complexity, both physically and conceptually, due to its age and enigmatic origin. Built at the end of the eleventh century, the shrine is still categorised as ‘Mozarabic’ in style.

Today, the events about to be narrated are often referred to as the history of a spoliation. However, in my opinion, it is not merely that; rather, it represents a clash between the interests of the National Commission of Monuments at the time, keen on safeguarding the ancient and unique frescoes within the construction at any cost, and the resistance of the inhabitants of Casillas de Berlanga, who were the landowners and custodians of the ancient monastery, against administrative interference —which, at that juncture, lacked legal grounding— in their property rights.

As per its ownership, by 1893, the estate where the hermitage was located belonged to a group of neighbours from Casillas de Berlanga. In 1917, it was declared a monument. As was later confirmed by the Supreme Court in its ruling on 12 February 1925, the owners were not notified of this declaration, which only affected the building and not its mural paintings, and the monument was not included in the mandatory catalogue. The Spanish Monuments Commission ignored the owners at all times, despite the fact that they were listed in the Land Registry.

From the beginning of the twentieth century, international antique dealers took a keen interest in the Romanesque mural paintings preserved in some Spanish churches, which had been showcased in various publications. The American art dealer, Gabriel Dereppe, using León Levi as an intermediary, managed to identify the owners of the hermitage, and following a lucrative offer of 65,000 pesetas (£335.74), the owners of the hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga sold him the frescoes. This took place in 1922. As soon as the news reached the Provincial Monuments Commission of Soria, they informed the Royal Academy of History. Considering the delicate situation and the ecclesiastical authority’s awareness of the matter, a lawsuit was filed against all those residents claiming any ownership rights over the hermitage. The lawsuit sought a declaration that the hermitage was a Christian church, with the necessary cancellation of all existing entries in the Land Registry of Almazán and that, therefore, in accordance with Ecclesiastical Law, it would be exempt from commerce and should continue to be dedicated to public worship.

This resulted in a Ministerial Order, dated 12 September 1923, through which the right of first refusal in favour of the State was exercised regarding the sale of the frescoes (pp. 1106-1108). However, this decision was not enforced as it was appealed by the sellers, the neighbouring owners of the hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga.

On 24 April 1925, despite the energetic actions of the authorities, the ruling from 12 February of the Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court was published in the Official Bulletin of the Ministry of Public Instruction and Fine Arts. It ruled that, under the current legislation (pp. 255-259) at the time of sale, it was not possible to annul the free sale of the frescoes nor prolong their retention. The Chamber declared that the owners of the hermitage were free to sell its mural paintings and, consequently, León Levi was free to acquire them. León Levi was henceforth free to dispose of them, although the hermitage was subject to the precepts of the Law for the Conservation of Historic and Artistic Monuments (1915) and no preservation or repair work could be carried out without the permission of the Ministry. Despite this condition and the lack of due authorisation to carry out the work, most of the mural paintings, with the exception of those on the vault, were removed with the intention of being transported.

After the removal of the frescoes, the hermitage of San Baudelio was offered to the State in 1943 for 125,000 pesetas (£645.75). However, the operation did not come to fruition. It was later, in 1954, when the then owner, the Fundación Lázaro Galdiano, ceded the hermitage free of charge to the State, as a contribution to the National Artistic Heritage. Since 1986, the management of the hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga has been the responsibility of the Junta de Castilla y León.

Shifting focus from the ownership of the hermitage itself and assuming the Supreme Court judgment, lets revisit the frescoes of the hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga. Once in the possession of the art dealer León Levi, they were promptly exported from Spanish territory. This occurred after the owners of the hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga applied for the execution of the Supreme Court judgment. Thus, in February 1926, the residents of Casillas de Berlanga recovered the keys to the hermitage and in June of the same year, the removal of the frescoes commenced. Employing the strappo technique, the frescoes were divided into twenty-three fragments, enabling their relocation and transformation into ‘movable’ works suitable for sale.

Their first destination was London, where they were restored before being transferred to the United States. There the fragments were sold to various art museums and private individuals. Today, some of the fragments of the frescoes can be found in the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, the Metropolitan Museum (The Cloisters) in New York, the Indianapolis Museum of Art and the Cincinnati Art Museum. Although it might seem that the frescoes would remain forever far from the hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga, the reality was different.

Fast-forwarding to 1957, the Metropolitan Museum (The Cloisters) in New York lent the Prado Museum, as an indefinite deposit, six of the frescoes exported: Bear, Elephant, Hare Hunt, Soldier, Curtain and Deer Hunt in exchange for the Romanesque apse of the church of San Martín de Fuentidueña (Segovia). The church of San Martín de Fuentidueña, despite its dilapidated state, was declared a Historic-Artistic Monument belonging to the National Artistic Treasure (pp. 1181-1186).

On the other side of the Atlantic, in 1925, the Metropolitan in New York took the first steps to create a kind of branch of medieval art, an invented monastery in which to insert cloisters, chapels and Romanesque sculptures, in a country so recently founded. That idea was realised with the opening of The Cloisters in 1938, a neo-Lombard complex in New York’s Fort Tryon Park. The developers’ intention was to faithfully recreate a monastery, although at the time they lacked one essential element: a church in which to pray.

These factors led the United States, taking advantage of the good relations it had with the Spanish government under Franco, to acquire the apse of the church of San Martín de Fuentidueña and exchange the apse for six frescoes from the chapel of San Baudelio de Berlanga.

Given that the Church of San Martín de Fuentidueña was, as a whole, declared a Historic-Artistic Monument belonging to the National Artistic Treasure, its legal protection made it impossible to sell. However, in an attempt to circumvent this regulation, both parties resorted to the legal formula of loan in exchange. In contrast to the implications of the exchange of a pictorial work from one museum to another of mere transfer and installation, it should be noted that the loan of an apse undeniably entails an architectural dismantling of enormous calibre. Although the proposal was not indifferent, the relevant authorities ended up giving their approval.

In this bizarre situation, and following the proposal of the director of The Cloisters in 1957, the governments of Spain and the United States signed an agreement to exchange the apse of San Martín de Fuentidueña for six of the twenty-three frescoes removed from the chapel of San Baudelio de Berlanga. This was therefore a permanent deposit of the frescoes and the respective ownership was retained. The mural paintings of secular subject matter were taken to the Prado Museum in Madrid where they are kept and exhibited as part of its permanent collection in Room 51C of the museum. In exchange, the small Segovian town received 250,000 pesetas (£1,291.52) of the time, money that was to be used for the restoration of the church of San Miguel in this town.

Even today we still find ourselves astounded by what occurred at the hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga and the church of San Martín de Fuentidueña, especially as both are historical-artistic monuments belonging to the National Artistic Treasure. However, if this exchange had not taken place, would we see the frescoes of San Baudelio de Berlanga or the church of San Martín de Fuentidueña restored? I have serious doubts, but this does not prevent me from questioning the nature of the operations that took place.

When The Cloisters presented the apse of the church of San Martín de Fuentidueña in exchange for the frescoes of San Baudelio de Berlanga, its catalogue asked: “When you move a work of art, do you recover the heritage or do you fail to respect its true nature?” This is, in my opinion, one of the most difficult questions to answer. Never would so many people have visited Fuentidueña or the small village of Casillas de Berlanga as the millions of people who visit The Cloisters or the Prado Museum every year. We cannot ignore all the heritage that Spain lost until well into the last century but, despite this, we still have an immeasurable historical and artistic heritage in which we have not invested enough.

The allure of San Baudelio endures, drawing visitors despite the absent frescoes, six of which now reside in the Prado Museum. Analysing these frescoes reveals their unique quality and departure from conventional Romanesque art. The case of San Baudelio demonstrates the coexistence of heritage preservation and collecting practices, albeit with occasional boundary breaches.

The notion of ‘self-spoliation’ introduced before, is particularly intriguing, as it highlights a distinction from what might now be perceived as ‘spoliation’. Hermitages, churches, monasteries and other structures from which works were dispossessed were not subjected to forceful seizure or theft, nor were their frescoes, apses, choirs or capitals forcibly sold. Instead, the works were removed from the walls in exchange for often insignificant sums of money, transported in large trucks, and subsequently exported to the United States. This process of ‘self-spoliation’ significantly influenced our understanding of Spanish historical heritage, leading us to recognise, although belatedly and regretfully, the immeasurable value of our heritage and the imperative to safeguard it.

Image Credits:

Jesús Herrero Marco, 2007. Herrero Archive, IPCE, Ministry of Culture.

Andrea Martín Alacid, 2024. Exterior of the hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga, northwest side, entrance.

Alejandro Ferrant Archive. Official Association of Architects of Catalonia. Demarcation Lleida.

Jesús Herrero Marco, 2007. Herrero Archive, IPCE, Ministry of Culture.