Sijena: a point of no return

The mural paintings of the Royal Monastery of Sijena, dating from the late 12th century and considered a jewel of Hispanic Romanesque art, have historically been studied and protected in Catalonia, which has valued them as part of the artistic legacy of the Catalan-Aragonese Crown. Lluís Domènech i Montaner had already analyzed them at the beginning of the 20th century. in situ with his students. Years later, they were saved by the Generalitat in 1936, after being affected by a serious fire at the beginning of the Spanish Civil War: they were pulled out using the technique ofstrappo They were then returned to use and moved to Barcelona, ​​where they were restored by Josep Gudiol. They have been on public display since 1961 in the current National Art Museum of Catalonia. Thus, for almost a century, the work of study, protection, and exhibition has been impeccable, a task that could now be jeopardized if the paintings are indeed moved.

The Supreme Court's ruling, issued this Wednesday and concluding a long legal dispute over the ownership of the paintings between the Aragonese and Catalan institutions, opens the door to irreversibly damaging a highly valuable heritage site. What restorers would dare to undertake such a technically risky move? This is a medieval ensemble that all experts have recommended against further manipulation. In fact, with a much more recent emblematic work such as the Guernica Picasso's work, after having been relocated several times in the 20th century, was rejected in 2017 by the Basque government for it to be located in Gernika. Political and symbolic considerations were ruled out. Technical prudence prevailed.

In the case of the Sijena paintings, there are many more compelling technical reasons not to touch them. They are extremely fragile and delicate. The primary objective of any professional in this field is precisely the conservation of artistic heritage. It doesn't seem that the court ruling has taken this into account. Could the Constitutional Court ever take this into account, prioritizing the obligation to preserve heritage? Regardless of whether this possible appeal still exists, what is beyond doubt is the need to prioritize the general artistic interest over political conflict. Because, after all, it's hard not to see an anti-Catalan impulse behind the Aragonese demands. The rhetorical question is obvious: if the works in question had ended up in one of the great art museums in the Spanish capital, would this whole protest movement have occurred? Most likely not. Why, on the other hand, has a loyal collaboration between Aragon and Catalonia not been possible all these years on behalf of the paintings, going beyond ownership and respecting their contemporary historical journey to save them? It would have been the best way to avoid jeopardizing its preservation and, in the process, strengthen historical ties. It's a shame that this point of no return has been reached. And that such an artistically dangerous return has been sought at all costs. We will all lose.