There's a FTWHS called Hôpital Royal de la Santa Cruz. Does anyone have an idea where it is located? Could it even be https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hospital_de_la_Santa_Cruz_y_San_Pablo? (but that wasn't royal). Another idea is that it might be en route between Toledo and Granada.

Asking for a friend...

elsslots
I've been looking for an answer. Really difficult to find. I would bet it is the one in Granada. I found this document to confirm in 1994 started the work to add in the tentative list of "Hospital Real de la Santa Cruz, Granada"

Yeah I think AJRC is correct.

When we mapped the Former T-list sites we ended up with it as Hospital Real, Granada. It was re added later as part of the 2007 updated t-list of Renaissance buildings of Granada, so seems possible and thanks to AJRC's link I can see it is also refred to as Hospital Real de la Santa Cruz.

The alternative is that the Hospital in Granada was based on the Hospital of Santa Cruz in Toledo, however that would already be inscribed when this addition to the t-list was made in 1998 (infact I just saw that Toledo was originally propossed as just as the Hospital, which was news to me).

I think the one in Granada feels more correct to me, more so than Barcelona or Toledo.

Thanks guys!

The Cultural Landscape of the Andalusian Olive Grove nomination by February 1st, 2023 is in jeopardy. Seemingly, there will be a final meeting next week to determine if the file is submitted to UNESCO or not.

https://www.canalsur.es/noticias/andalucia/jaen/embarranca-la-candidatura-del-paisaje-del-olivar-a-patrimonio-de-la-unesco/1893285.html

Meanwhile, Italica and Ferrol are only awaiting their time to submit their nomination.

I just got back from visiting "Cave of Altamira and Paleolithic Cave Art of Northern Spain," which now includes 17 new sites and has been since 2006 or so. Why has no one actually mentioned that the other caves are mostly amazing and you can get into almost all of them and see the actual art? I went to five of them and it was a great experience...and no one has mentioned this AT ALL, even though the Altamira site was expanded years ago!! Why?

...and oh yeah, they have a cute passport program with an app and a toy passport you can get stamped.

"No one has mentioned this AT ALL" ????
Well actually they do!
a. The date of the addition and the list of 17 Caves together with their locations on the map are all shown (and have been since those features were available on this Web site)
b. Of the 9 reviews, 4 refer solely or partially to historic visits to the original Altamira Cave before either the replica or the additions, whilst 4 of the other 5 (Els, Ian, Clyde and Ivan) describe a visit to one of the other caves in addition to the replica.
c. If you "know" that you can get into "almost all of them" it would be helpful to the rest of the Community if you indicated more detail as to what "almost" might mean (with "source") - as well as providing a review of the 5 you did visit since we, so far, only have coverage of El Castillo and Tito Bustillo !!!


In fact, as shown on this site, the additions were in 2008 and were even discussed on this forum at the time

Hey, I was wondering what the consensus is with sites associated with cinematography? I haven't been yet, but Almería was for a time the capital of spaghetti westerns and this period has left a number of cinema sets spread throughout the tabernas desert. I wonder if It merits any consideration and if other similar sites can be found elsewhere, other than Hollywood.

Hey, Does someone know why the name "Romanesque Cultural Enclave in the North of Castile-Leon and the South of Cantabria" is still mantained?? It obviously does not refer the proposed site, which lies in the south of castille-leon and nowhere near cantabria. I think it was recycled from another proposal centered around palentine romanesque.

Dare I suggest that the description is a complete mistake which has resided on the UNESCO Web site for years and years!!
The Tentative list submitted by Spain on 26 June 1996 included BOTH
a. ID 1017- Romanesque Enclaves
b. ID 1021 - Bulwarked Fortifications.

The earliest Wayback Machine version of the Romanesque Enclaves unfortunately only goes back to 21 June 2007 when the site had a title IN SPANISH (albeit mispelt on the UNESCO site) -"El Románico Notre de Castilla y Leon y Sur de Cantabria" (my bold!) - see https://web.archive.org/web/20070625230933/http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/1017/
Note the "Coordinates" are described as being in Cantabria and Palencia. That information is NOT on the latest UNESCO version ( https://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/1017 ) BUT the description remains the same in French.
That description clearly does NOT describe Romanesque Heritage in Cantabria and Palencia - "Les forteresses admettres a la propose sont a I'ouest de Salamanca, tres proches de la frontiere hispano-portugaise. Les forteresses bastionnées à la frontière hispano-portugaise nitrent de la fin du XVI et le XVII siècles a la fin du XVIII siècle par les conflits belliqueux que conduisent a la sécession du Royaume de Portugal. On se caractérisent par l'intégration des éléments qui donnent de nouvelle réponse aux nécessites défensifs qu'impose l'introduction de I'artillerie. C'est ainsi que les forteresses bastionnées a la frontière hispano-portugaise constituent des exemples exceptionnelles sur les différents types des constructions défensifs, celle la de la cite civil comme a Ciudad Rodrigo, celle la de la forteresse militaire c6mme le Fort de la Concepcion et a la fin, celle la de la réutilisation et I'actualisation des types défensifs médiévaux qui existent sur Ie territoire, comme a San Felices de los Gallegos."

It would seem rather to relate to the Bulwarked Fortresses!!!

The earliest Wayback grab for the Fortress T List entry is 25 June 2007 (https://web.archive.org/web/20070625230333/http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/1021/ ) and describes the Fortifications IN ENGLISH - You will note that Ciudad Rodrigo and Felices de los Gallegos appear on both descriptions.

When this mix up occurred , who knows - some time between the original placement of the 2 sites on Spain's T List and the Wayback copies of June 2007 - but i would bet that it IS a "mix up"!!!

If I am correct then the locations we have for the Romanesque enclaves are incorrect ......but we have no other information on what the "real ones" were intended to be. I guess it might be possible to trace them via searches of early references to the T List entry?? See this from 2019 for a start . ... "Desde finales del siglo XX existe la pretensión de incorporar este rico patrimonio a la Lista de la UNESCO"
They aren't referring to Fortifications around Ciudad Rodrigo!!!

So - not so much "recycled" as being one and the same - with the current rather strange T List name being replaced by "Romanesque Palentino" and a correct description given to it??

We could copy some of these, they seem plausible at first sight.

I think the first step is to agree among ourselves that there is NO WAY the current UNESCO description and locations can be referring to "Romanesque Cultural Enclave in the North of Castile-Leon and the South of Cantabria"

Solivagant
Actually I think I might've read the correct description?? In the spanish wikipedia there's a seemingly adeuate description they attribute to Unesco, though I could never find it in the official page. it goes like this:

"Descripción: Situado en ambas vertientes de la Cordillera Cantábrica, aquí se encuentra la mayor densidad de monumentos románicos de España y Europa. Debido a las constantes divisiones territoriales y políticas sufridas por estos territorios a lo largo de la historia, no existe una unidad estilística claramente marcada."
Unesco

I don't know how to track this, but it may be worth looking into. Anyway i'm gonna see if I can contact someone from the ministry to see what the heck happened here.

As for the plausible churches. it's hard to tell. According to the description, we should be looking for high density with no explicit architectural trend. I think this corresponds to norteast palencia and soutwest cantabria. you can take a look here https://www.turismo-prerromanico.com/home-b__trashed-2__trashed-2__trashed-2-2-2/arte/romanico/mapa/

The page you propose centers around Cantabria. As far as I know this proposal was spearheaded by Palencia which, in typical spanish fashion, means most sites will be in Palencia. If I had to hazard a guess I think only the southeastern churches of cantabria were in the nomination.

but that's a guess. Im gonna try contact the early middle age spanish art association to see if they can come up with a plausible first list.

Btw another good web to look for this kind of things is http://www.arquivoltas.com/ and https://www.arteguias.com/romanico_montana.htm (there they even mention the unesco nomination)

Seems obvious to me (wrong provinces, title doesn't match description, and there's another one that does). Here's the Spanish Wikipedia page Alikander referred to. I've amended our site page already (will scout for some more locations). And moved Clyde's review from 2020 too - he already sensed something was wrong.