Sijena case: unknowns surrounding the transfer of the MNAC paintings

BarcelonaThe Supreme Court's confirmation of the Sijena ruling, which requires the National Art Museum of Catalonia (MNAC) to return the mural paintings to the monastery in Aragon, has put experts and conservators on alert due to the high risk of damaging the pieces during transport. The President of the Generalitat, Salvador Illa, He has already said from Japan that he respects the ruling. and that it will not obstruct its implementation, which it leaves in the hands of the MNAC (National Museum of Culture), whose board of trustees includes representatives from the Regional Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Culture, and Barcelona City Council. The Minister of Culture, Ernest Urtasun, has expressed similar views. "We must have the best institutional collaboration to take the next steps and achieve what we all most desire: the protection of a very important heritage asset," he said, making it clear that the ruling must be respected.

The President of Aragon, Jorge Azcón, calls for the "unconditional return" of the paintings and demands that the transfer be "as soon as possible," although he admits that "it won't happen overnight." Azcón also says he trusts in the "collaboration and cooperation" of the Generalitat (Catalan Government), and Aragon "will prioritize security measures to ensure that the paintings do not suffer any damage."

To find out what the consequences of the verdict are and what moving the paintings might entail, let's talk to historians and experts about the possible scenarios following the court's ruling.

What are the risks of moving the paintings?

"This is not a mural painting, but rather a kind of artifact," says Carme Ramells, head of the MNAC's restoration and preventive conservation department. Ramells explains that when the paintings were removed using thestrappo, which was common in the last century, other materials were added and mounted on a new wooden structure. All of this has made them very fragile works. "It's a proven fragility confirmed by laboratory tests," he asserts. The main reason for this fragility is that there are diverse materials with different sensitivities. Furthermore, these paintings suffered a fire and were subjected to very high temperatures, and this not only altered their color but also caused a physical and chemical alteration. "They are very reactive paintings; we're looking at a small explosive cocktail," says Ramells. Furthermore, they cannot withstand vibration. "A move and a change of location could mean damaging the paintings. It's an extremely high risk," he adds.

Carles Mancho, professor of art history at the University of Barcelona and a specialist in Romanesque art, advises against moving them. "As a technician, I would refuse to touch these paintings. I would refuse for a matter of professional ethics, because I know that if I touch them, I will damage them. In any case, the technicians from Aragon should come and take responsibility," he asserts. Mancho details that the process would be very complex: "It would seriously damage the surface of the paintings. The layer of plaster is very thin and everything would crack when they were removed," he explains. Furthermore, when they were installed at the MNAC, an entire restoration process was undertaken because small fragments had come loose, and all the work done to join these fragments would be lost.

Immaculada Lorés, professor of medieval art history at the University of Lleida and member of the Institute of Catalan Studies, shares a similar view. Lorés refers "to what the conservation and restoration experts say," and also "to common sense if you take into account the origin of the paintings." "Like all removed mural paintings, they were once part of a building's walls, and are now considered a very delicate object. Any removal is a traumatic intervention, because what is extracted is a thin outer layer that must then be relined and placed on a support to stabilize it. In the case of Sixena, they had been burned, and that makes it even more complex. Experts warn of the fragility of the paintings and say that there will be inevitable losses," Lorés emphasizes.

In this regard, the director of the Generalitat's Center for the Restoration of Movable Property, Mireia Mestre, explained yesterday to TV3 that the problem is not whether the paintings can be moved or not, but at what cost. The conservator warned that moving them will lead to "irreversible deterioration." Mestre noted that these mural paintings are a masterpiece of art from the 1200s and were damaged during the fire that burned down the Aragonese monastery of Santa María de Sijena in 1936. "They are in a very vulnerable physical and chemical state," he asserts. "The paintings are unable to withstand the stress that dismantling would entail. Can it be done? Yes, but you run an extremely high risk," he adds.

What are the differences with other works' transfers?

Teacher compared the case of Sijena with the Guernica Picasso's work: "It's a large painting that was moved many times, resulting in significant damage to its structure." Mestre considers the Supreme Court's decision on Sijena to be "aberrant": "In all the world's museums, there are very clear limits, which are the technical limits." When the Basque Country demanded its return he Guernica by Picasso, the technicians advised against it and the work remained in Madrid. "It is much easier to move the Guernica because it's a canvas. The complexity is much less in any work that is born as an object-work. In the case of Sijena, it's a painting covering, part of a building. They should create a new museum space, as was done in the church of Santa Coloma in Andorra. Obviously, they would be much better off in a museum," he explains.

Can we compare the transfer of the paintings from Sijena with another recent transfer, that of Rubens' paintings at CaixaForum in Barcelona? According to Lorés, no. "The comparison doesn't work because we're talking about paintings, not murals, and they're pieces from very different periods. What we should be asking ourselves is: 'How many medieval mural paintings are presented in exhibitions, the result of loans from another museum?' Very few. And that's without taking into account everything that's happened at the Sijena exhibitions. Occasionally, some fragments of murals that are still mounted on a flat support are moved, but this is done with all the necessary guarantees. Paintings move much more than murals."

Where will the paintings end up?

The mayor of Vilanova de Sijena, José Jaime Castellón Bonet, is clear on this. "For years, the government of Aragon has been investing in renovating the chapter house with the goal of reinstating the paintings. We've air-conditioned it; it's in good condition for them to return. It's ready," Castellón told 3/24. On the other hand, experts warn that this option is not without risks. "The other serious problem is that the paintings cannot be returned to the wall of the monastery chapter house where they were, because the paintings become deformed throughout the process. Aside from the problems of humidity and capillarity, the paintings wouldn't fit," says Mancho.

Another important factor is the air. "At the MNAC, we monitor air quality; it's not just humidity and temperature that are important. In the room where they are on display, the air is filtered," says Ramells.

Lorés points out that "everyone has their own priorities" and adds: "I don't know if everyone prioritizes the conservation of heritage with the firmness and intensity comparable to the 2025 criteria. What is clear is that the consequences must be assumed by whoever exposes the paintings to the risk of transfer."

Who should be responsible for the transfer?

"Catalonia will be responsible for enforcing the judgment, because it is the convicted party," asserts Attorney Jaume Aso Roca. "It will be responsible for transporting the works and returning them to their place of origin," he adds. If it refuses to take technical responsibility, it would still have to pay for it. Finally, if the judgment is deemed impossible to enforce, an equivalent measure would have to be sought. "There is no possibility of a judicial appeal. In any case, the only option would be through an appeal for protection before the Constitutional Court, but it would have to be demonstrated that some right has been violated or that there is a problem with the judgment or the procedure," says Aso.

According to Aso, there are now three scenarios: "Catalonia complies with the judgment (article 699 of the LEC), Aragon carries out the execution at the expense of Catalonia (article 701.1 of the LEC) or the impossibility of executing the judgment is determined and an equivalent measure is sought (article 701). In the latter case, the lawyer points out that "if the absolute impossibility of executing the judgment in its terms is proven, it must be executed in an equivalent way. For example, with financial compensation" that Catalonia would pay.