THE RESTORATION OF THE MONASTERY OF SAN FRANCISCO IN LA ALHAMBRA. FROM SCHOOL FOR PAINTERS AND LANDSCAPE ARTISTS TO PARADOR NACIONAL DE TURISMO

La rehabilitación del convento de San Francisco en La Alhambra. De escuela de pintores y paisajistas a parador nacional de turismo

Mª José Rodríguez Pérez

Dra. Arquitecta

---

RESUMEN Desde el siglo xix la Alhambra de Granada había despertado el interés de un turismo de élite interesado en el excursionismo cultural. En la segunda y tercera década del siglo xx la administración turística centraba sus esfuerzos en fomentar la incipiente industria de los forasteros mediante la creación tanto de una red de oficinas de turismo en el extranjero como de alojamientos turísticos del Estado en el territorio nacional. Tras la Guerra Civil el interés turístico de la Alhambra se acabó materializando, entre otros, en la rehabilitación hotelera del antiguo convento de San Francisco. El artículo analiza las intervenciones realizadas en el inmueble, desde la escuela de paisajistas y pintores, hasta la posterior transformación en establecimiento hotelero del Estado y sucesivas ampliaciones. La pauta común en todas ellas fue la figura del arquitecto conservador del monumento que se haría cargo de las obras por imposición de la administración patrimonial.

Palabras clave Rehabilitación arquitectónica; turismo; patrimonio; arquitecto conservador

Abstract Since the 19th century the Alhambra in Granada has attracted the attention of elite tourists interested in cultural tourism. In the 1920s and 30s the tourist administration concentrated its efforts on encouraging the developing industry of foreign tourism with the creation of a network of tourist offices abroad and state tourist accommodation within Spain. After the Civil War tourist interest in the Alhambra gave rise to, among others, the conversion of the former Convent of San Francisco into a hotel. This article analyses the interventions carried out in the building, from the school of landscape artists to the later transformation into a state hotel and further expansions. The common thread to all these was the figure of the preservation architect for the monument who would be in charge of works under the heritage administration.

Keywords Architectural rehabilitation; tourism; heritage; commissioner architect

Cómo citar / How to cite RODRÍGUEZ PÉREZ, M. J. The restoration of the monastery of San Francisco in La Alhambra. From school for painters and landscape artists to Parador Nacional de Turismo. Cuadernos de la Alhambra. 2019, 48, 201-216. eISSN 2695-379X.

---

The former monastery of San Francisco, built by the Catholic Monarchs (c.1495) and subsequently restored in the 16th and 17th centuries, was an enclave inside the Alhambra, near the Alcazar and the Palace of Carlos V. The building was partly built on the remains of a Moorish palace, with the Acequia Real [Royal Channel] running through it 1.

Like all the constructions of the eastern sector of the Alhambra, the monastery was damaged during the French occupation, although it remained in use until its disamortization. After the subsequent expulsion of the monks in 1835it became Crown property and was successively used as barracks, storehouse for military supplies and housing, following its conveyance to individuals 2. The monastery was finally abandoned and fell into ruin 3, before being completely restored and adapted for use as the School of Landscape Artists in 1929.

Following the Christian conquest, the fortified complex of the Alhambra, which had been the palatial city of the Nasrid dynasty, became Crown property and underwent interesting restorations and expansions 4. In the early 20th century it gained particular relevance in the field of heritage preservation, having been declared a historic and artistic monument in the last third of the 19th century 5.The importance of the monument can be clearly seen from the numerous interventions it underwent over time, initially under the Ministry of Development, to which the Crown had ceded it. In 1905 a Special Commission was created followed by a Patronato de Amigos in 1913, which in 1914 became the first Patronato de la Alhambra [Council of the Alhambra], eventually appointing a preservation architect for the monument 6. In 1921 the Generalife also became property of the State along with the Alhambra,and in1923 Leopoldo Torres Balbás (1888-1960) was appointed preservation architect for the monumental complex 7. He remained in this post until the Civil War and did not return to restoration work after the war due to a purge of professionals 8.On 9 March 1940 a Council was created to adapt and set up a residence in the Palacio de Carlos V in the Alhambra, and these functions were extended to the rest of the complex by the Decree of 13 August that year. The preservation architect of the seventh zone, Francisco Prieto-Moreno y Pardo (1907-1985), took over the management of the complex (1942-1970), continuing the work of his mentor Torres Balbás.

These two architects played a major role in relation to the monastery of San Francisco within the fortified complex of the Alhambra. Torres Balbás restored the ruins of the monument (IL. 1 and 4) to adapt it as a residence for landscapists while Prieto-Moreno was very active in the refurbishment of the monument as a hotel under the Dirección General del Turismo (1939-1951), and was placed in charge of drawing up the project, while the Ministerio de Educación Nacional placed him in charge of directing the works.

IL. 1. Cloister of the monastery before the restoration (c.1926). Council of the Alhambra and Generalife (PAG)

ANTECEDENTS AND ACQUISITION
OF THE MONASTERY OF SAN FRANCISCO

Following its 19th-century disamortization the ownership passed to the Crown and then to the State, following Order of 18 December 1869. The building was restored between 1927 and 1929 by the monument’s preservation architect Torres Balbás to transform these quarters into a residence for landscape artists. He also worked on the complex of the Alhambra in the restoration projects led by Ricardo Velázquez Bosco in 1917, as well as on the innovative restoration of Torre de las Damas (1923), Sala de Embajadores and Patio de los Arrayanes (1925), Patio de la Alberca (1926),Peinador de la Reina(1929)and Patio de Machuca(1930) 9.

The intervention in the monastery of SanFrancisco allowed the architect to carry out an archaeological study, establishing the floor plans of the former Moorish palace on which the monastery was built, detailing the existing walls still in use, the walls whose outline was conserved only in the foundations, and the superimposed walls which had disappeared with the new configuration.

The residential building had a central courtyard along which a water channel ran at the axis, and part of this was within the cloister. The monastery preserved limited foundational remainsfrom the 15th century as almost all the construction in ruins in the 1920s dated from the18th century,with some Moorish remains.

[…] the remains of an elongated rectangular Moorish room, measuring 7.55by2.80meters,with small alcoves at each end and a west-facing door with three arches and under four windows. It was divided into two floors during the construction work carried out in the 18th century. Large sections of plaster decoration were preserved, including some examples very similar to older ones in the Generalife and in the lookout of the Torre de las Damas; a frieze still conserves an Arabic inscription[…].This room seems to have been at the top of a rectangular courtyard, the axis of which was occupied by the irrigation ditch in the section crossing the cloister: this would form a courtyard like that of the irrigation ditch in the Generalife, but larger. 10

The work conferred unique importance to the restoration of the church, where the only nave had been left roofless. The side chapel of the north side incorporated the original roof which had been stored within the complex of the Alhambra, and a similar one, albeit with a simpler configuration, was built on the chapel adjoining to the right. The chapels, which had lost the walls separating them from the central nave of the church when abandoned, were restored to their original condition when the missing wall was rebuilt with a mono-pitch roof to cover them 11.

An archaeological excavation was carried out in the subsoil of the monastery, and several partly collapsed walls were demolished, although those which preserved Moorish remains were saved.

The cloister was rebuilt following the original plan, making it necessary to dismantle the roof of the eastern bay, eliminating a floor in this area 12, reducing the space for the future residence for landscape artists (IL.5).

The galleries of the cloister maintained their original open configuration(IL.2),although this was later altered when Prieto-Moreno converted it into a hotel for the General Directorate of Tourism in the 1940s (IL.3).

The monastery of San Francisco was located on the final stretch of the Calle Real of the Alhambra, forming a cul-de-sac, where consolidation work was carried out while some ruins and constructions in poor condition were demolished, including the old part of the Pensión Alhambra, the Casa del Guía and the house which became the residence of landscape artists. All of these actions were the result of the incorporation of the parador into the former monastery.

Antonio Gallego Burín, mayor of Granada (1938- 1951),was both director for the seventh zone and provincial delegate for tourism. This meant that the General Directorate of Tourism, dependent on the Ministerio de la Gobernación, was able to choose Granada and the Alhambra as a suitable location for one of its hotel establishments, the second to be proposed by this official body following the inauguration of the parador in Andújar (Jaén).

The tourism board had to request the ownership of the building, which although property of the State, was linked to the National Ministry of Education and whose use at the time was similar to that of a hotel in the network as it was used as a residence for painters and landscape artists.

The education department ceded the use of the building to the Ministerio de Gobernación allowing the Directorate of Tourism to install a parador in it, with some limitations:

All the works carried out in the building must conform to the regulations in place in relation to National Monuments and must necessarily be overseen by the technicians of the Architect in charge of Preservation of the Alhambra.

The current residence of landscape painters in the Alhambra will continue to be located in the building of San Francisco, and up to a maximum of six grant recipients may stay at the Parador for the duration of the grant, paying the administration of the parador a price not to exceed 50% of the cheapest rate established for all other guests. 13

These conditions were unilaterally imposed by the heritage administration and strictly complied with by the tourist administration 14, as Prieto-Moreno took over not only the 1940s refurbishment but he also devised the 1970s expansion under the direction of the State Tourism Secretariat.

The works had to comply with the regulations relating to national monuments 15, so that they had to be carried out under the technical supervision of the architect in charge of preservation, as had been the case with the Cartesian monastery of El Paular (Rascafría, Madrid), with the inconvenience of maintaining the residence of landscape artists in the building of San Francisco.

In 1942 it was decided that the monastery of San Francisco was to be converted into a hotel as part of the state network of tourist accommodation. Torres Balbás was against this:

I was extremely upset when I read of the cession of San Francisco in the Official Bulletin. The people I have talked to agree that this will cause considerable damage to the Alhambra. Its commercial use as a hotel is also a desecration of the historic tomb of the Catholic Monarchs, the first church after the Reconquista and a Franciscan monastery for centuries. 16

The monastery had temporarily housed the bodies of the Catholic Monarchs in the crypt from their death until work on the Cathedral Royal Chapel was completed in 1521. This fact was used in the tourist advertisements for the future hotel.

The tourist administration left the architect of the area in charge of drawing up the project, while making the necessary arrangements to cede the building and acquire adjoining privately owned land needed for the construction of the parking area and the exterior works of the parador 17.The building continued to be owned by the Ministerio de Educación Nacional, which only ceded the use of the 1,863.67 m2 of the monastery. Following its appraisal, the architect in charge of the preservation of the monument was consulted on the possible acquisition of the building:

IL. 2. Work for the refurbishment of the monastery as a School
for Landscape Painters(c.1927-1929). PAG

IL. 3. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Hospedería de SanFrancisco, Alhambra. South and east elevation. 1945. PAG

IL. 4. Monastery of San Francisco before its refurbishment (c.1926). PAG

IL. 5. Rear façade of the monastery after its refurbishment (c.1929). PAG

IL. 6. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Hospedería de San Francisco, Alhambra. South and east elevation.1945. PAG

IL. 7. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Hospedería de San Francisco, Alhambra. Ground and first floor plans. 1944. PAG

The excavations carried out, which led to the creation of the Jardines del Secano, immediately beside the building in question; the restoration of the former Monastery ofSan Francisco, a monument of exceptional historic importance and the recent installation within it of the Residencia de Turismo, are circumstances which encourage the demolition of the building, making it possible to carry out a general refurbishment of this sector, hugely beneficial to the aesthetics of the monument while eliminating an anti-aesthetic building in the center of the Alhambra, would also resolve the current difficulties in accessing the JardinesdelSecano and the former Monastery of SanFrancisco 18.

The architect viewed this as a restoration and recovery project for the monument, very different from the perspective of hotel opportunism to obtain land to build annex pavilions for the expansion of the monastery. The building that was to be acquired was situated within the historic complex and accessed from the Calle Real of the Alhambra, was part of a series of modern constructions arbitrarily built in the 19th century when it was believed that safeguarding the monument depended solely on the restoration of its unique buildings without taking into account environmental and landscape matters and understanding the complex as a whole.

The Tourism department interpreted the opinion of the architect in charge of the preservation of the monument as expressing a need to demolish a building considered “anti-aesthetic and located within the complex of the Alhambra” 19.

The building in question was number 48of the Calle Real of the Alhambra in Granada, a travelers’ inn called “Pensión Alhambra”, by the Arco de San Francisco and the gardens of the Alhambra, known as “El Secano”. The irregularly shaped plot measured522.35 m2 and the building (c. 1893) consisted of three volumes, built with load bearing brick walls, wooden horizontal structures and, pitched wooden structures for the tile roof. The building was assessed by the architect of the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de SanFernando, José María Muguruza Otaño, who often worked with the Directorate of Tourism who did not employ their own architects. The building owners had to reach an agreement in the purchase offer to avoid expropriation by the Directorate of Tourism as the price could not exceed Muguruza’s appraisal. The mortgage on the building was cancelled before the sale of the building, which was scheduled for demolition.

PROJECT FOR A HOTEL AT THE ALHAMBRA (1944)

At the time the Directorate of Tourism was less influential than the Directorate of Fine Arts, which set the guidelines for hotel refurbishment, subsequently limiting the tourist administration to interior design.

The intervention by the preservation architect of the Alhambra was in keeping with the usual way in which restoration work was carried out within the complex, so that the “work necessary for the conversion to its new purpose,[…]has in no way affected the integrity of the construction or altered its physiognomy” 20.

Two successive refurbishments were carried out on the building. The first, carried out by Torres Balbás, was minimal, as it restored the building, giving it a non-intensive use which did not adapt the church or the Moorish room in the eastern bay for residential use, while adding the gateway at the base of the tower, avoiding excessive compartmentalization in the rest of spaces to suit the interests of the School for Painters 21. Space had been reduced on the first floor by eliminating the addition to the eastern bay, respecting the historic staircase and that of the tower,which started from the first floor, where he had placed the painters’ studio in the north bay with a more open design, the bedrooms in the eastern bay and the school common area and dining room towards the south.

The second refurbishment was also carried out by the preservation architect of the Alhambra, Francisco Prieto-Moreno, although the use was more intensive, as more space was needed due to the guidelines issued by the Directorate of Tourism in relation to the program. These forced modifications to be made to façades to incorporate new openings, gaining space through the excavation of the southeast corner of the monastery, the vertical enclosure on the top floor of the cloister, and the modification of the position of the dining room and common room of the parador in relation to that of the artists’ residence (IL.6-9).

However, it respected the historic staircase and that leading to the tower, the Moorish room on the ground floor beyond which the hotel kitchen was installed,while the church remained a courtyard space, only covered at the head of the former nave, the chevet, which later became the focus of an additional project alongside the resolution for the issues of parking and green spaces.

The chevet, which had been one of the rooms used from the former Moorish palace, was respected in its original condition in the restoration by Torres Balbás.

The church was left without a roof, as in his predecessor’s 1920s restoration 22, making it into a courtyard by the ambulatory of the cloister.

Its use as a hotel was very similar to that of the residence so that Prieto-Moreno respected his mentor’s previous intervention almost completely, except for the reconstruction of the second floor on the eastern bay, which had been dismantled in the 1920s just to provide a larger area for the rooms.

IL. 8. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Parador de San Francisco, Alhambra. Surroundings. (c. 1942-1948). PAG

IL. 9. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Hospedería de San Francisco, Alhambra. Ground floor plan. 1944. PAG

IL. 10. Main façade (south)of the monastery before its refurbishment (c. 1926). PAG

IL. 11. Main access to the parador nacional and gardens(c.1945-1948). PAG

IL. 12. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Hospedería de San Francisco, Alhambra. Ground floor plan. 1949. PAG

The site of the parador was large as it had also included the gardens by the entrance of the Calle Real de la Alhambra, and a large orchard which spread mostly across the northern sector.

The building was accessed from the south sector which was considered the main façade of the building.

The dining room of the hotel was in the north bay, leading onto a terrace in the orchard area at the back, while the eastern bay housed the kitchen and another small space, as well as the main staircases of the building. The south entrance bay had two rooms. However, most of the rooms, including the servants’ quarters, were on the first and second floor, covering the whole of the eastern bay but with an independent single-story staircase to avoid modifying the original staircase.

On the first floor the missing southeast corner was completed to incorporate a room, bringing the total to 16 rooms and 9 bathrooms, as not all rooms had an independent toilet, only a sink.

The top floor of the cloister was enclosed with specifically designed joinery, another departure from Torres Balbás’s minimal intervention or consolidation and repair of historic elements in ruin.

The type of intervention carried out by Prieto-Moreno, followed the lines of the intervention in Andújar (Jaén), and represented the mimesis of new and old, where new architectural elements took on the characteristics of the old ones, and the hotel’s garden landscaping merged with the historic building 23.

In his intervention, the architect separated the former church and royal crypt from the spaces used as a parador, and built a chapel at the side as a reminder of its original function.

The buildings surrounding the parador were demolished, following the suggestion of the preservation architect within the context of the landscape assessment of the monument 24.This was the case of the “Pensión Alhambra”, which was acquired by the Directorate of Tourism and demolished in 1945,the year the parador was inaugurated.

The refurbishment works on the monastery were combined with works to add annexes for the services needed for the hotel, and the free spaces immediately by the former monastery were adapted.

After the demolition of the former Pensión Alhambra, work was carried out on the pavilion for the mechanics, which had three bedrooms for drivers, a shared bathroom and five spaces for vehicles, and could be accessed directly from the Calle Real de la Alhambra, in what was essentially a detour in the cul-de-sac which ended upat the access gate to the parador.

The works for adapting the entrances were part of successive projects drawn up in 1942 and 1945, so that the establishment was able to open with all services available, including a laundry pavilion also designed as an annex to the north of the monastery on the site of the former orchard.

In the 18th-century, the Calle Real de la Alhambra ended at the Puerta del Compás, built in brick, flanked by pilasters and crowned by a niche holding a statue of San Francisco. It was integrated into the adaptation project for the square to access to the parador, placing an identical door in the new access beside the Mechanics’ pavilion, joined to a single-story pavilion dedicated to the sale of antiquities according to the 1943 project. The second doordid not copy the niche for the saint, but the intermediate pavilion connecting the two incorporated a single wall with windows.

The parador was inaugurated on 30 June 1945, with a capacity for 26 guests, in an event presided by the Director of Tourism, Luis Antonio Bolín, and other local and regional authorities. 25

FIRST EXTENSION OF THE PARADOR (1948-1958)

As the historic building could not be extended further, any new attempt at expansion would involve building new annex pavilions, as was done in the case of the other paradores. One condition for this was that the project and works should be carried out with the architect of the area and thereforefollow the heritage criteria of the Council of the Alhambra and Generalife. The projects for the extension of the parador were the subject of intense and lively debate from all parties, especially in the 1970s when the most radical interventions were carried out on the former monastery and its immediate surroundings 26.

The former monastery was expanded through exterior pavilions which, in the form of tentacles, liberated the historic buildings, housing services such as the kitchen to free more public space within the original area.

In March 1948 Prieto-Moreno drew up the extension project for the service and pantry areas of the guest house. This consisted in the construction of a single-story pavilion parallel to the pool located in the exterior eastern area of the monastery. The difference in levels between the pool platform and the orchard beyond it, which was lower, made it possible to build a small semi-basement area with natural light, creating a courtyard for the service and clothes-hanging area in the form of an area way.

In March 1949 the expansion project included the residence of the administrator of the parador, also located within an annex pavilion connected to the eastern bay of the monastery,beside the main staircase (IL.12), which in 1948 had been a simple addition used as a boiler room.

The residence was located in a good area, with views of the pool, and it had two bedrooms, a bathroom and a living area. It also remained out of sight from the access area to the parador, and was only visible from the windows of the guests’ dining room. The pool had been transformed to give light to the service premises of the parador.

In the mid-1950smore rooms were needed given the hotel’s popularity. As in the other paradores, the number of rooms was increased by replacing the mechanics’ rooms with rooms for guests who became known as “parador travellers”. In March 1956 a project was drawn up to modify the pavilion and increase the number of rooms, although these would be individual.

The mechanics’ pavilion next to the vehicle entrance by the newly built gate featured a copy of the historic Puerta del Compás, which finished off the Calle Real of the Alhambra in the form of a cul-de-sac, providing access to the area of the parador.

The mechanics’ rooms and garages were in a very simple single-story building in exposed brick with a tiled roof. The interior was divided into two sections: one for vehicles with a total of five spaces and another with three rooms for the drivers, a shared bathroom and an interior courtyard overlooked by the rooms.

The transformation consisted in creating 9 rooms, including a double room, all with independent bathrooms, and special attention was paid to the design and landscaping of the small courtyard overlooked by the bedroom windows. In time it became clear that the mechanics’ pavilion was not a viable expansion and that it was preferable to incorporate new rooms into the historic building or its immediate surroundings through pavilions connected to it, as had been done with the kitchen.

A new extension project was drawn up in 1958, including recommendations which were not executed, such as the proposed construction in the area of the pool, filling the perimeter with buildings. This extension incorporated 16 rooms added onto the existing constructions and the kitchens in the eastern sections were eliminated so that this new plan hosted only rooms. This project must not have been convincing given that what was executed in the February 1958 design was a pavilion in the western access, in the form of a tentacle articulating a wing of rooms which mirrored that already existing in the eastern side for services (IL.13). The pavilion housed a total of 6 double rooms and one for the service, located at the same end as the access square and connected through the courtyard created in the 1940s for the new chapel in the church area.

The intervention in the western sector was complicated by the irrigation channel which ran along it, crossing the cloister, and which had to be respected. The construction of a narrow elongated pavilion made it possible to save and preserve this channel.

Coinciding with the action on the east sector of the monastery, an archaeological excavation was carried out in the area outside the chevet of the church, on a triangular plot which had not been intervened due to the presence of construction remains, recorded in the plans of the extension project of the parador.

The pavilion, which had already been extended in the eastern sector, was also transformed. A volume was added at the back for use as laundry facilities and a second story was added over the pavilion in the area in contact with the historic building, incorporating another three guest rooms. The gardens around the parador were expanded and improved, especially around the summer eating area, while more borders were laid out in the orchard to the north.

The planning and landscaping of the area surrounding the monastery was carried out, leading to the creation of pavement mosaics inspired by Nasrid geometries for the exterior spaces of the garden in the south (IL. 10 and 11), the creation of a new courtyard as an access to the chapel and work on the current cloister of the historic building, dating from Prieto-Moreno’s refurbishment of the former monastery as a national parador.

DEFINITIVE PROJECT FOR THE EXPANSION AND PLANNING OF THE EASTERN SECTOR (1967-1975)

Prior to the definitive expansion of the parador in August 1967,minor retrofitting actions were carried out to add two rooms to the administrator’s lodgings with the minimal operation of a small single-storyaddition. Despite the successive expansions carried out over the previous decades, by the 1970s the parador needed to increase its guest capacity due to the major influx of tourists to the Alhambra. This resulted in a constant demand for accommodation which could not be covered, involving subsequent financial loss for the Ministerio de Información y Turismo (1951-1977),the successor and heir of the earlier Directorate of Tourism.

The parador de San Francisco had rooms with a total capacity for 52 guests. However, it was believed that 14 more rooms were needed, with a capacity for 28 guests to bring the total number of rooms to 40 to lodge a total of 80 guests. The building was still owned by the Directorate of Fine Arts, now part of the Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, and dependent on the Council of the Alhambra and Generalife, as only the right to use it had been ceded. In fact, as time passed a cession with no legal recognition had been reinforced in relation to the gardens in the immediate surroundings, which belonged to the Alhambra, and an archaeological site over with a car park was built. New constructions therefore became necessary around the monastery and several projects were drawn up to be presented to the Council of the Alhambra and Generalife. The extension was opposed by the Vice-president of the Council, Emilio Orozco Díaz, 27 even though a preliminary project for the expansion of the parador had already been presented “[…] in an ideal area, which does not interfere at all with monument and its surroundings, the construction of a large self-service restaurant, cafeteria and car park”. 28

Once again the project was drafted by the architect of the Council in charge of the preservation of the monument of the Alhambra and Generalife, Prieto-Moreno 29,and the design of the installations was left to a technical engineer from the Ministerio de Información y Turismo, Mariano de las Heras, a close collaborator of the architect.

For the preservation architect there had been a need for this project since the 1940s which could not be ignored. This action took material form in “[…] a homogeneous building in similar volumes to those already built and currently in use, […] also improving the architecture of the building as a whole” 30.

Successive projects followed from an initial proposal which aimed to build around the entire perimeter of the pool, thus spoiling the views to the north, where the land sloped downwards and offered a better perspective, to a preliminary project proposing the creation of a cloister parallel to the historic one, but smaller and connected by an intermediate volume (IL. 14). None of these proposals was executed. The extension carried out during the first half of the 1970s was the most radical intervention carried out on the monument up until then (IL.15 and 16), and although it respected the appearance of the built surface by incorporating construction below ground for the service areas, it greatly increased the built volume. The expansion was debated in the Council of the Alhambra where it was ultimately approved, prompting the Vice-president to resign in that session, as he believed it to be illegal and contrary to the Council’s policy on works and constructions inside the walled complex of the Alhambra. 31

IL. 13. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Parador de San Francisco, Alhambra. General floor plan. 1958. PAG

The Vice-president highlighted the positive aspects of Prieto-Moreno’s project for the expansion of the parador, but also explained his personal stance opposing it:

[…] the solution presented is highly acceptable in environmental terms, as it respects the archaeological aspects and places more emphasis on the garden landscape elements, reducing the expansion of the building of the Parador to a minimum, enough to comply with the request of the Ministerio de Información y Turismo.[…] as this solution gives priority to garden landscaping it will also make it possible to carry out the necessary modifications whenever needed, when the adjoining area is remodeled as has been done up to now in all the sectors of Secano.[…] As regards the concept of expansion included within this solution he insists he cannot be in agreement and holds by his initial criterion opposing any expansion work, no matter how small. 32

The keys to the intervention for this extension were integration within the land to hide the volumes needed for the new parador within changing levels, with the creation of areaways, while also encouraging distant views with the subsequent project for the landscaping of the garden in the eastern sector.Theactual irrigation was diverted as part of a project drawn up by the architect in charge of the expansion of the parador, by rerouting the channel after the Puerta del Compás and connecting it once again with its original position through the church, under the transept, so that the monastery cloister maintained its section of irrigation channel, while the pool outside the monastery ensured its water supply. If the outline of the new building and that of the actual irrigation were superimposed it could be seen that the irrigation overlapped with the corridor connecting the rooms of the main new building.

IL. 14. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Draft project [not executed]. Parador de San Francisco. Ground and first floor plan, (c.1967-1968). PAG

IL. 15. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Parador nacional de San Francisco (Granada). Project for the east sector. Cross-section of the irrigation cannel and extension pavilions.1975. Instituto de Turismo de España (Turespaña)

IL. 16. Francisco Prieto-Moreno. Parador San Francisco. General floor plan. 1975. PAG

The result was scattered and staggered volumes which blended into their surroundings with no defined form, and the idea of the previous volume with tentacles was abandoned. In fact, the kitchen pavilion of the eastern sector was completely demolished and concealedby the change of ground level so that the rooms there could be illuminated with an areaway resulting from the ground level difference. Above, this view—from the platform of the pool to the newly designed gardens in the north sector, formerly the monastery orchard—was freed.

The intervention focused mostly on the western side of the monastery, where the former access garden had been transformed into the new dining room, installations and kitchens in the lower basement levels, while allowing the first and second floors to incorporate new rooms.The new dining room was directly connected to the exterior so that an open air space was available in good weather, as it had been in the former monastery.

The new and historic buildings were connected through the church, which had been used as an open-air courtyard since the first adaptation to artists’ residence. Underground, this connection ran from below the transept of chevet through a tunnel to the service areas of the parador. The creation of rooms in the semi basement of the eastern sector made it necessary to add a new staircase on the northwest end of the historic building to allow access to the guests.

The extension also involved the modification of some of the joinery that existed in the monastery, following a design similar to that of the upper gallery. Since the architect was the same, the result wascohesive. The elaborate wooden carvings to decorate the banisters of the staircase or the front of the bar counter were similar to actions carried out in other paradores by the technical specialists of the Ministerio and its external collaborators. Seven rooms were incorporated on the second floor, thirty-four on the first and another twelve in the lower basement of the eastern sector, considerably increasing the parador’s capacity for guests.

During the following two decades,architects worked only on maintenance underthe successive Tourism Secretariats, until the complete restoration undertakenby the hotel administrator Paradores de Turismo de España, S.A. between 2005 and 2008, substantially changed the appearance of the initial parador.

THE INTERIOR DESIGN OF THE
PARADOR-MONASTERY OF SAN FRANCISCO

The interior design of the parador, attributed to Antonio Gallego y Burín, 33aimed to provide a suitable setting to capture the guests’ imagination, taking them back to another era. The installation was a response to the character of the building, harking back to its original use, more of a monastery than a modern hotel. Thismonastic touch was especially visible in the rooms reminiscent of 18th-century cells, although this was not the case in the common spaces with more elaboratedécor for the most part,using antique Spanish furniture, all sorts of paintings, mirrors and other objects on its walls. Antique furniture was combined with reproductionsto resemble the historic atmosphere the architect aimed to emulate as closely as possible.

The furniture highlighted this historical character, focusing on Spanish art, with reproductions of El Greco, landscapes of Castilla, portraits in the style of Goya, drawings or engravings from romantic Spain. The rugs, fabrics, brass,saddlery,embroidery, copper and iron also combinedin an attempt to recover Spanish tradition. 34

The parador only had accommodation for twenty-seven travelers, making it very cozy, even more given that the atmosphere created with the furniture, which made it stand out from the usual hotels. The architecture, furniture, decoration and garden landscaping were specially designed to create settings fitting of a past time and blended in with the style of gardens and buildings of the Alhambra.

The importance of regional industry and art was prominently reflected in the profuse use of popular rugs, fabrics or metals in the dining room and cloister of the parador. The dining room had a fireplace at the front, as well as cupboards along its walls full of all sorts of kitchen utensils, especially china, combining with wooden furniture and rush chairs.

The equally ornate sitting room had a ceramic floor reproducing a drawing of the outside of the cloister, the original design of the former monastery. Its main feature was a fireplace and the wide range of furniture was complemented with decorative chandeliers, grandfather clocks, pictures and mirrors. The paneled wood doors had windows at the top letting light into the corridor, which was also decorated with antique leather seats, chests and bargueño desks, as was the upper gallery of the cloister from which the rooms were accessed.

The room which conserved remains of the former Nasrid palace was decorated with the same sort of furniture superimposed on the original ceramic wall tiles with geometric motifs and the remains of decoration still conserved on the upper part of the wall, below which tapestries or paintings hung. There were leaded windows with religious motifs to fit the original use of the building on the stair landing.

The rooms had fireplaces, just as in the dining room, and featured dropped ceilings with modern reproductions of wooden coffering, which was polychrome in the case of the dining room. Special attention was paid to the type of flooring for each area, as well as to the artistic work of the cloister mosaics and of the church nave reconverted into the patio.

Over time the current furniture and interior design of the parador has greatly changed from the original one, which underwent major modification in the 2005 restoration.

EPILOGUE

The refurbishment of the former monastery of San Francisco as a hotel within the network of Paradores was carried out in the post-war period, when there was a shortage of technical personnel in the Directorate of Tourism. The interference from the heritage administration in what should have been the exclusive competence of the tourist administration meant that priority was given to knowing the building rather than knowledge of hotels in general when choosing the architect.

The period in which the Alhambrabecame part of state-offered accommodation paved the way for real estate expansion of the Ministerio de Información y Turismo, which used former military facilities as well as other architectural typologies, such as the monastery of San Francisco, for its paradores.

The work of Prieto-Moreno in the Alhambra is interesting since it allows the comparative study of the unique form of intervention of the different administrative bodies, Heritage and Tourism, as regards the rehabilitation of historic buildings for use as hotels. The action in Granada directly connects with the interventions of 21st-century paradores, carried out under the direction of the Autonomous Regions, heirs to the heritage competencies in the State’s hotel-economic action, while characterizing them both by hiding much of the construction work underground and emphasizing the importance of the prior archaeological method. 35