305
or ceramic work, the ensembles which may have inspired them,
or the written comments left by the building´s visitors. Other au-
thors have already answered some of these questions, however on
this occasion we are only concerning ourselves with verifying if
the aesthetic uniformity of this ensemble of tile-work, the most
notable after that of the Alhambra of Granada, is authentic or only
appears to be so. In other words: are all the plinths the same as
those which the building had at the time of the King Don Pedro, as
we are accustomed to think, or are they, as we suspect, the result
of a long, cumulative process?
In the 14th or 15th century Gestoso already had reservations about
whether they should be globally dated
3
. And now, a century after
this Sevillian scholar we ought to point out new concerns, other
than those medieval tilings that caused the initial problem that
were replaced at the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th cen-
tury with a mimetic criterion based on the “stylistic unity” favored
by Gestoso. In his personal collection —nowadays more available
to the public thanks to the generosity of the very same architect
and collector— it seems that a few “samples” of the original til-
ings were included, having been dismantled for restoration
4
. Some
other samples came into the hands of another important collector,
a friend of his
5
(Fig. 1).
The certainty that this ensemble was created in various stages
makes me consider how many there would have been, and how
we could distinguish one from another
6
. It is an interesting topic,
not only because it serves to satisfy our curiosity in this field, but
also because despite the current state of conservation being quite
acceptable, some damage can be seen, especially in the parts we
consider to be the oldest, an area which will have to be restored
sooner or later. At this point it would be interesting to know, for
different reasons, if the analysis, the diagnostics and the proposed
treatments are to be carried out with original material or with high
quality replicas
7
.
As Cómez recently reflected, and as prominent figures in our field
of study have noted, “history should focus on the details”
8
. Well,
this is exactly what we have set out to do here, leaving an in-depth
documentary study of the most recent time period for a later date,
a necessary exploration to give security and precision to what aris-
es from all this
9
. Also beyond our goal is carrying out analytical
laboratory tests as they are already being conducted by two tech-
nical teams whom we hope will be able to confirm or discard the
hypotheses concerned here
10
.
Therefore, if we ask ourselves how much of the ensemble is origi-
nal and how much has been replaced, first we must confirm that,
although quite unified by its general geometric repertoire and
its five basic colors, it has a diverse range of tones which could
initially be explained if we consider it to be a work created over
various phases. But here we must be cautious because “variety”
and above all “asymmetry” as aesthetic principles are as constant
in Mudéjar art as unity and symmetry are in Classic art and in
all that has derived from this. This is a principle that often goes
unnoticed; however we can easily confirm some versions of it in
the Patio de las Muñecas. I am not referring to the three colored
shafts and the different thicknesses or to the diverse forms and
shapes whose irregularity could be attributed to the fact that
all the material was re-used, rather to other characteristics “ex
novo”: consider that they are almost square but not quite; un-
symmetrically composed arches; arches whose position and size
derive from the location of open doors on their axis, which re-
sults in inter-columns of different dimensions. This same prin-
ciple of unsymmetry is also applied when choosing the motifs
for the tile-work in this tiny patio, where in neither the plinth
blocks nor the base are always the same, they are different in two
symmetrical parts of the patio, sometimes divided by their diago-
nal axes and occasionally by a transversal axis traced along their
narrow width. Only the final motif unifies the whole peristyle.
In summary, during the medieval centuries of Mudéjar art sym-
metry was not valued as much as it was in Classical art. In fact, it
seems as though the unsymmetry was not interpreted as a lack of
aesthetic unity, rather it attested to formal wealth
11
(Fig. 2).
Irrespective of the fact that Mudéjar beauty and Vitruvian beau-
ty cannot be interpreted in the same way, I think I can perceive
other not-so aesthetic differences in the tile-work in the Mudé-
jar palace regarding materials and techniques which suggest that
we are looking at tile-work that was not completed all at once. It
is precisely these other differences in which we have focused in
order to be able to define the hypothetical stages of their execu-
tion.
In order to carry out this operation I have followed a simple
method consistent with the completion of the traditional docu-
ment which contains various items grouped in a logical way.
Other possible concepts which do not appear in this document
should be included as long as the aim is not only to show all the
differences of parts but rather to create a catalog of more univer-
sal claims
12
. However the resolution in this case will only affect
some material aspects of the work and amongst the fields that
could be included there are five which are provisionally proposed
here: composition, ornamental motifs, terracotta body, glazing
and construction
13
.
1.- COMPOSITION
One of the most interesting aspects of the coating of glazed tiles
is the compositional structure which lays out the decorative mo-
tifs. A lot could be said about the different methods for composing
a plinth which have come to light over the years, and about the
possible causes of their variation. There are exceptional cases of
unstructured plinths and in those where a single motif covers its
entire height and width, however usually three motifs are chosen
for the three essential parts: the plinth block, base and plinth block
necking. In the case of Hispano—Islamic and Mudéjar tradition,
the base often frequently comprises vertical divisions— different
“paños”
(panels) a term obviously taken from the textile world
14
.
Those from the Alcázar are continuous horizontal plinths, al-
though there are some exceptions with vertical divisions like in
the Sala de Audiencias, on the top floor, and in the Sala de Emba-
jadores, on the ground floor, precisely two of the spaces with the
greatest ceremonial value
15
.
The plinths from the other palace rooms follow a simpler design as
all of them develop in a continuous horizontal way with only one
motif, except in the Patio de las Muñecas, where changes in mo-
tifs, without being explicitly separated by vertical friezes like those
mentioned before, are found in the corners of or on each side of
some of the doors. Regardless of these changes, the horizontal de-
sign of the plinth block, block necking and base is respected in this
small patio and also in most of the other rooms which surround
