The Roman Past of three Spanish Cities as the Impetus behind the Rise of Archaeological Tourism

General aspects

We begin by looking at the regulations that directly affect archaeological heritage in terms of its discovery, inventory, restoration, and public presentation (cf. Fig. 1). In this long and complex path, the legislative process and, therefore, the political power that legislates it, sometimes pre-empts the social demand that drives the enactment of decrees and legal regulations that serve to regulate the different situations that arise (Bouazza, 2017Bouazza Ariño, O. (2017) “Los orígenes de la normativa y organización administrativa del turismo en España.” Revista española de Derecho Administrativo, 182, pp. 355-373.; Alegre, 1994Alegre Ávila, J. M. (1994) Evolución y régimen jurídico del Patrimonio Histórico. 2 vols. Madrid: Ministerio de Cultura.); although most of the time it is the social demand itself, stimulated by a certain context, that incites the legislative process to be accelerated or, at least, to be set in motion.

It can be said that the process, as regards the regulations that officially mark the tourist initiative in our country, begins with the passing of the Royal Decree of October 6, 1905, which constitutes the first step in state planning for the future of tourism. These regulations were implemented through the creation of the National Commission for the Promotion of Tourism²If we look at Europe, we find that the creation of similar institutions occurred later: in France and Austria, they arrived in 1910, while in Italy it was in 1911. De Ortueta, 2007, p. 265. with the principle objective of ‘attracting the foreign tourist’ and would remain in force until 1910 (De Ortueta, 2007, p. 264De Ortueta Hilberath, E. (2007) “Tarragona destino turístico. El Patrimonio cultural y los nuevos espacios para el ocio.” Norba-Arte, vol. XXVII, pp. 263-284.; Brandis and Del Río, 2015, p. 83Brandis, D. and Del Río, I. (2015) “Paisaje y cultura en la oferta y promoción del turismo en España (1875-1936).” Ería, 96, pp. 77-96.). One of the specific concepts used for this action was to disseminate the country’s wealth of artistic monuments and historical artefacts. This legislative framework was also used to organise the Royal Commissariat of Tourism, directed by Benigno de la Vega-Inclán, with the very important aim of safeguarding cultural assets to promote and display them to foreigners; arguments that were also linked to the pragmatic need for the arrival and accommodation of foreigners (Socías and Gkozgkou, 2012, pp. 29-31Socías, I. and Gkozgkou D. (2012) “El marqués Benigno de la Vega-Inclán (1858-1942), un mecenas poliédrico.” In: I. Socías, and D. Gkozgkou, Agentes, marchantes y traficantes de objetos de arte (1850-1950). Gijón: Trea, pp. 25-38.; Brandis and Del Río, 2015, p. 84Brandis, D. and Del Río, I. (2015) “Paisaje y cultura en la oferta y promoción del turismo en España (1875-1936).” Ería, 96, pp. 77-96.). In these first steps, several interesting details can already be appreciated: on the one hand, the matter of the custody and promotion of the assets; on the other, the fact that ‘artistic and natural treasures’ (De Ortueta, 2007, p. 266De Ortueta Hilberath, E. (2007) “Tarragona destino turístico. El Patrimonio cultural y los nuevos espacios para el ocio.” Norba-Arte, vol. XXVII, pp. 263-284.) are referred to at the same level. It is important to remember that at the beginning of these processes concerning tourism-within the private sector-the demand would continue to be based on interest in spas and natural landscapes that became especially relevant in the last quarter of the nineteenth century until the early twentieth century (Brandis and del Río, 2015, pp. 78-79Brandis, D. and Del Río, I. (2015) “Paisaje y cultura en la oferta y promoción del turismo en España (1875-1936).” Ería, 96, pp. 77-96.).

This Commissariat would continue until the dictatorship of Primo de Rivera, and on April 25, 1928, it was replaced by the National Tourist Board (PNT) which, despite returning to the themes of the past, incorporated two elements that emphasised the concept of tourism as a source of income and as a showcase for the nation: “to promote national prestige” and to value the activity as a “source of wealth” (Moreno Garrido, 2020Moreno Garrido, A. (2020) “El Patronato Nacional de Turismo (1928-1932). Balance económico de una política turística.” Investigaciones de Historia Económica, 18, pp. 103-1). This Board was directly concerned with the task of providing a state hotel industry, and at the end of 1928, the Committee of Paradors and Hostelries of the Kingdom was set up,³The Comisaría Regia took up the previous proposal of the Network of State Accommodation and, in 1928, the opening of the Parador (state-owned hotel) de Gredos was organised, with the aim of showing the excellence of hunting, fishing and, in general, the landscape offered by this part of the mountain range (Brandis and Del Río, 2015, pp. 84-85). Together with this, a few years later, the Parador of Mérida was created, restoring an old convent, cf. point 3 of this study on the subject of the Parador of Mérida. to provide suitable accommodation for travellers. This was a step that would prove to be relevant not only for accommodation but also for the restoration, as part of this initiative, of special ancient locations. Later, during the Second Republic, the PNT was restructured through the creation of the General Directorate of Tourism in April 1931, an event that would help to stimulate local, regional, and professional initiatives (De Ortueta, 2007, pp. 267-269De Ortueta Hilberath, E. (2007) “Tarragona destino turístico. El Patrimonio cultural y los nuevos espacios para el ocio.” Norba-Arte, vol. XXVII, pp. 263-284.). Indeed, in the book written by Constancia de la Mora, the granddaughter of Antonio Maura, we find information from the middle of the Spanish Civil War, in which she reports on the headquarters of this Board, located in the old ‘Palace of Ice,’⁴ De la Mora, 2017, p. 173: “A few days later, I was called to the National Tourist Board. The offices were located in a modern building recently acquired by the State, where the ice rink for skating used to be.” We know that the Centro de Estudios Históricos (CEH) under the Junta para Ampliación de Estudios (JAE) had its headquarters, from 1910, at Calle Almagro nº 26 (Limón, 1988, pp. 613-614; Tortosa, 2019b, pp. 375-377, fig. 110a, b and c). From here, after a refurbishment, the CEH moved to the central part of the building in Duque de Medinaceli, where it shared its headquarters with the PNT and the Unión Iberoamericana. This is the context of the paragraph quoted by C. de la Mora (1906-1950). which occupied numbers 4, 6, 8, and 10 of Duque de Medinaceli street in Madrid, and was shared by several institutions. Apart from the National Tourist Board (PNT, Patronato Nacional de Turismo), from 1931 onwards it was also the headquarters of the Centre for Historical Studies, which was dependent on the Board for the Extension of Studies (JAE-Junta para Ampliación de Estudios).⁵After the civil war, the JAE became the CSIC, created by the Law of November 24, 1939, and occupied the former ‘Palacio de Hielo’ (Ice Palace), where it installed most of its centres for the humanities, cf. Limón, 1988, pp. 615-616.

The 1930s would be the chronological ceiling of this study and, from that time onwards, it was not until after the civil war that there was a broad and renewed interest in tourist activity, which was confirmed in 1938 with the creation of the National Tourism Service; however, the biggest breakthrough would come with the creation of the Ministry of Information and Tourism in 1951, which would lead in the 1960s, under the leadership of Manuel Fraga Iribarne, to the opening and preparation of our country to receive ‘mass tourism’ (De Ortueta, 2007, pp. 271-272De Ortueta Hilberath, E. (2007) “Tarragona destino turístico. El Patrimonio cultural y los nuevos espacios para el ocio.” Norba-Arte, vol. XXVII, pp. 263-284.).⁶An anecdote known for the repercussion that the phrase had on Fraga Iribarne’s lips is the advertising slogan “Spain is different;” a phrase that would have its origin in this previous one by L. A. Bolín-head director of tourism in 1948-“Spain is beautiful and different,” cf. Bayón Mariné, 1999 cit. by De Ortueta, 2007, p. 271. Although this is not a topic we will address on this occasion (Prieto and Moreno, 2017Prieto, J. and Moreno, A. (2017) “Acción exterior del Turismo en España.” International Journal of Scientific Management and Tourism, 3-4. pp. 101-116.).

Bringing this brief overview of the legal framework from a national perspective, we will now explore and introduce the more specific process associated with the archaeological nature of heritage.

Specific actions related to archaeology

We will now look at some of the specific regulations, institutions and factors that allowed or made it possible for the three elements mentioned at the beginning (cf. Fig. 1): sites, ‘monuments’ and archaeological materials to be recognised, catalogued and, above all, conserved, restored and observed.

The dissemination of archaeological heritage: guidebooks, postcards, international exhibitions

Having outlined some of the aspects that are essential for evaluating the three specific cases we present, we will now look at some of the actions related to the dissemination of archaeological heritage and the necessary requirements for this to be effective. As we have already pointed out, when it comes to visiting certain monuments or sites, it is necessary to provide adequate infrastructures to encourage attracting tourists, such as offering suitable accommodation and easy access to archaeological monuments, something that we have seen in the contents so far presented. In any case, we will see this in more detail when we talk about Mérida or Tarragona. In addition to this necessary infrastructure, however, the other cornerstone to encouraging tourists would be to provide attractive information about the places or sites to be visited and, in this sense, it is logical that each place should endeavour to produce the necessary guides for this purpose; however, the Ministry, aware of deficit of information-especially in the early days of this process-produced a variety of publications such as El Arte en España, which would initially help to resolve the existing lack of information (De Ortueta, 2007, p. 266De Ortueta Hilberath, E. (2007) “Tarragona destino turístico. El Patrimonio cultural y los nuevos espacios para el ocio.” Norba-Arte, vol. XXVII, pp. 263-284.). In 1864 the journal changed its subtitle to “monthly journal of art and its history,” adopting its frequency and reducing its format. From this date onwards, a section on archaeological-historical discoveries was included, under the supervision of Aureliano Fernández-Guerra y Orbe (1816-1894).¹⁵This magazine, published in Madrid for the first time in 1862, was initially published fortnightly and was dedicated-as the subtitle that accompanies it indicates to “the arts of drawing”-to promote the artistic heritage and the teaching of the fine arts in Spain, cf. hemerotecadigital.bne.es

Another common practice, which has been confirmed in different cases, was to issue postcards with photographs of the emblematic archaeological sites or buildings that served as souvenirs for the visitor and which today -if they can still be found- have become static images that inform us of aspects such as their state of conservation at a given moment in time.

This array of elements that help to publicise our archaeological heritage also includes the enormously important International/Universal Exhibitions¹⁶The most recent exhibitions are indebted to them: from the Universal Exhibition in Seville in 1992 to the most recent Universal Exhibition in Milan, organised in 2015. that were held from the second half of the nineteenth century onwards. These spaces, which have not yet been studied in relation to the impact they have on archaeology and tourism (Tortosa, 2019aTortosa, T., ed. (2019a) Patrimonio arqueológico español en Roma. ‘Le Mostre Internazionali di Archeologia’ de 1911 y 1937 como instrumentos de memoria histórica. Mérida: L’Erma di Bretschneider.), were not only used to exhibit archaeological pieces-whether originals or casts-together with photographs and models, but also became forums for debate in which current scientific issues were discussed. In addition, they also helped to attract tourists, not only scientific specialists but also the middle class, aristocrats, and intellectuals who visited these important events,¹⁷Proof of this are the references we find, for example, in the work of Benito Pérez Galdós (Memorias de un desmemoriado, 2020, pp. 28-29), in which he refers to the Universal Exhibition in Paris in 1867: “Days went by, and as the summer of 1967 approached, a member of my family arrived in Madrid with a son of his, my nephew, and they gave me the pleasant news that they were taking me to Paris to see the Universal Exhibition, the culminating event of that year... Let’s not talk about the Universal Exhibition; it was set up in an immense elliptical hut-the Champ de Mars or March Field-and surrounded by magnificent gardens, where each nation had erected a building in a peculiar style.” making them spaces for the general dissemination of archaeological heritage. We will discuss the examples of Mérida and Tarragona, associated with the exhibitions organised in 1911 at the Baths of Diocletian in Rome and at the International Exhibition in Barcelona and at the Ibero-American Exhibition in Seville in 1929.

This brief overview will help us to better understand the specific examples that we will analyse below. Over time, this organisational structure attempted to reconcile national expectations with regional and local ones, which we are not dealing with on this occasion. Nevertheless, in this context it is interesting to mention the pioneering municipal regulations of the city of Mérida, as they were passed in 1677.¹⁸These ordinances are, together with those of Talavera la Vieja (Cáceres) enacted in 1578 (Hermosilla, 1796, p. 361, cited in Morán, 2009), pioneers in terms of the conservation of old buildings. They expressly prohibited the systematic plundering of archaeological remains, and imposed heavy prison sentences and penalties such as the loss of the tools, oxen and carts used, on anyone who failed to respect these rules (Morán, 2009, p. 80, fig. 19Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2009) Piedras, Ruinas, Antiguallas. Visiones de los restos arqueológicos de Mérida. Siglos XVI a XIX. Memorias de Arqueología Extremeña, 11, Mérida: Junta de Extremadura, Consejería de Cultura y Turismo.; 2018a, pp. 29-30, fig. 3Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2018a) Memoria arqueológica y social de dos escenarios romanos. El teatro y el anfiteatro de Mérida (1910-1936). Anejos de Archivo Español de Arqueología, LXXXIII. Mérida: CSIC.).

We will now go on to analyse the three selected examples that will help us to understand the wide variety of processes involved, and which we will return to in the final discussion, although they do share common elements, especially the final goals and objectives that were sought. We will see that the strategies integrate aspects ranging from a pure chance to conscious dynamics that lead to the final phase of this process: the exhibition of archaeological heritage.

The archaeological project

The Roman necropolis of Carmona¹⁹The Roman necropolis of Carmona is a funerary complex made up of a large number of different types of graves, excavated in the rock, with a notable predominance of cremation. Many of the rock-cut tombs preserve a large number of mural paintings, including the tombs known as the Servilia and Elephant tombs, among others. Next to the necropolis is a Roman amphitheatre, with both areas forming part of the Carmona Archaeological Ensemble. Ruiz Cecilia et al., 2011. is probably the oldest example in the Iberian Peninsula of an archaeological project that focused on promoting the site for tourism.

In 1868 the Roman Necropolis was discovered by a local man called Juan Reyes (nicknamed “El Calabazo”) and from that time onwards various excavations were carried out in the area by different people. One of the most important was the pharmacist Juan Fernández López,²⁰ Ayarzagüena and Renero, 2009. who carried out a series of digs in collaboration with the well-known collector of antiquities from Seville, Francisco Mateos Gago²¹Biography in the Biographical Dictionary of the RAH (Real Academia de la Historia), Chaves Tristán F. And Fernández Chaves, M.: “Francisco Mateos Gago,” available at: http://dbe.rah.es/biografias/12342/francisco-mateos-gago [Consulted on: 15/10/2020]. together with other local scholars and public figures from the region. Although these projects were mainly aimed at increasing the archaeological collections of the collectors who carried them out, they also responded to a growing interest in these scholarly circles in local history and studies (Maier, 1997Maier Allende, J. (1997) “Las sociedades arqueológicas en España: la Sociedad Arqueológica de Carmona.” In: G. Mora and M. Díaz-Andreu, eds., La cristalización del pasado: génesis y desarrollo del marco institucional de la Arqueología en España. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga, Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, CSIC, pp. 303-310.).

The arrival in Carmona of one of the last of the nineteenth-century tourists, George Edward Bonsor, would be decisive for the future approach towards the archaeology of this area. Jorge Bonsor, who was from a wealthy French family, had been awarded a prize as an artist-archaeologist at the Academy of Fine Arts in Brussels, and decided to undertake the tour to complete his studies in Spain and Morocco, starting his itinerary in 1880.²²Brief biography of Jorge Bonsor in the Biographical Dictionary of the RAH (Real Academia de la Historia), Maier Allende, J.: “Jorge Bonsor Saint-Martin,” available at: http://dbe.rah.es/biografias/18253/jorge-bonsor-saint-martin [consulted on 05/10/2020]. Following his father’s advice, after touring a number of Spanish cities, he decided to visit Carmona, and the artist was so fascinated by the place that he settled there. Bonsor soon made contact with the city’s wealthy and erudite circles who were interested in heritage, especially with Juan Fernández López. The pharmacist put Bonsor in contact with Juan Reyes, who served as his guide through the necropolis he knew so well, showing him what was known as the ‘banquet tomb’ (Tumba del Banquete). The frescoes that can be seen on the walls of this mausoleum caused such a strong impact on the artist that he decided to dedicate himself from that moment on to archaeology, as he himself would narrate shortly afterwards (Maier, 1999a, p. 35Maier Allende, J. (1999a) Jorge Bonsor (1855-1930). Un académico correspondiente de la Real Academia de la Historia y la Arqueología española. Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia.).

It was in this cultural environment, represented in the “archaeological gatherings” that were periodically organised in the back room of Juan Fernández López’s pharmacy, that the association between the pharmacist and Bonsor was forged. In the same year that Bonsor arrived in Carmona, in 1881, he and Juan Fernández began the purchase of the land occupied by most of the finds from the Roman necropolis. From that moment on, and for the next two years, the partners Bonsor and Fernández focused on the programming of the archaeological project, visiting museums in Spain and abroad to learn about material culture and how to interpret and display it (Rodríguez Temiño, Pachón Romero and Ruiz Cecilia, 2021Rodríguez Temiño, I., Pachón Romero, J. A. and Ruiz Cecilia, J. I. (2021) “Sociabilidad y socialización en torno a las excavaciones, hallazgos y ruinas: los casos de Carmona y Osuna (provincia de Sevilla) durante la Restauración.” In: T. Tortosa and G. Mora, eds., Las Comisiones de Monumentos y las Sociedades Arqueológicas como Instrumentos para la construcción del pasado europeo, Spal Monografías Arqueología, XXXVI. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, pp. 343-381.). The archaeological excavation work began at the end of 1882 and continued until the spring of 1885, following a methodology with a scientific approach based on careful documentation of the archaeological record that Bonsor had become acquainted with during his travels in various European countries.

The initiative was of a private nature, financed by the two partners, J. Bonsor and J. Fernández, without any contribution from the public administrations. However, when they presented the results of the research to the scientific community in 1885 and 1886, the work was praised for its execution and results, and the two partners became members of the Royal Academies of History and San Fernando (Maier, 1999a, p. 40Maier Allende, J. (1999a) Jorge Bonsor (1855-1930). Un académico correspondiente de la Real Academia de la Historia y la Arqueología española. Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia.). The methodological novelty introduced by the archaeologists consisted of a system of archaeological recording based on field notebooks, photographs and excellent drawings by J. Bonsor, which constituted a model of documentation that was ahead of its time. In parallel to the excavations, in 1885 the protagonists founded, together with other members who regularly attended the archaeological gatherings at the pharmacy, the Carmona Archaeological Society. Through this Society, the project was given institutional and social backing and, although the excavation project would continue to be managed by Bonsor and Fernández, it would have the scientific support of its members, in some cases leading figures in art and archaeology such as Arthur Engel and Juan de Dios de la Rada, among others. The Archaeological Society also received the backing of some public administrations, which provided its library and subsidised excavations, and established fruitful relations with other institutions such as the Seville Athenaeum and the Excursion Society (Maier, 1997, p. 307Maier Allende, J. (1997) “Las sociedades arqueológicas en España: la Sociedad Arqueológica de Carmona.” In: G. Mora and M. Díaz-Andreu, eds., La cristalización del pasado: génesis y desarrollo del marco institucional de la Arqueología en España. Málaga: Universidad de Málaga, Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, CSIC, pp. 303-310.). The activities carried out by the Carmona Archaeological Society included excavations and prospecting throughout the Alcores region,²³The Region of Los Alcores, in Seville, is made up of the municipalities of Carmona, Mairena del Alcor, Alcalá de Guadaíra and El Viso del Alcor. Available at https://losalcores.info/ [consulted on 30/11/2020]. a prelude to Bonsor’s later work, as well as the continuation of the excavations in the Necropolis and the amphitheatre.

Enhancement through social dissemination: the museum and the visit

The most striking aspect of the project that Bonsor and Fernández carried out in Carmona was its innovative aspect of social outreach. They were able to develop a management model which, without external funding, managed to be sustainable, providing them with an economic income that allowed them to continue the excavations at zero cost or even at a profit; However, the informative nature and the desire for the conservation, enhancement and promotion of the site and the region was the main driving force behind all of the actions (Rodríguez Temiño and Ruiz Cecilia, 2015, pp. 238-240Rodríguez Temiño, I. and Ruiz Cecilia, J. I. (2015) “El conjunto arqueológico de Carmona. De Juan Fernández López y George E. Bonsor a Facebook.” Menga. Revista de Prehistoria de Andalucía, Monográfico 03 pp. 237-267.). Within eight years of Bonsor’s arrival in Carmona, a large part of the necropolis and the amphitheatre had already been excavated; paths had been built to create a visitor’s route; a guide to the site had been published; and what is considered the first “site museum” in Spain had been built (Gómez Díaz, 2019b, p. 89Gómez Díaz, A. (2019b) “La llegada del turismo arqueológico a España: La excursión Carmona y los Castillos de los Alcores.” In: L. R. Méndez and R. Plaza Orellana, coords., Arte y turismo: la identidad andaluza en la configuración cultural de Europa. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, pp. 79-106. ). We can understand this “site museum” as a precedent of the modern-day “visitors centres,” but in this case, it not only functioned as the exclusive museum of the necropolis, but also housed pieces from the private collections of archaeologists from other sites in the region. Moreover, the museum would become the nerve centre of archaeological activity in the whole of the Alcores region, as it housed the headquarters of the Archaeological Society and its library, as well as Bonsor’s private home.

Disclosure and Dissemination as promotional tools

The strategy chosen to promote the site was publicity, mainly through advertisements and posters inviting visitors not only to visit the necropolis but also the monuments in the city and the surrounding area. The advertisements, which were published in French and English as well as in Spanish, included practical information such as train and bus timetables from Seville; they also offered curious details such as the use of part of the proceeds for the schooling of underprivileged children, the latest discoveries at the site, and discounts and reductions on the entrance fee for those who were accompanied (Gómez Díaz, 2019b, p. 86Gómez Díaz, A. (2019b) “La llegada del turismo arqueológico a España: La excursión Carmona y los Castillos de los Alcores.” In: L. R. Méndez and R. Plaza Orellana, coords., Arte y turismo: la identidad andaluza en la configuración cultural de Europa. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, pp. 79-106. ). This novel management approach would establish a precedent in Spain, and would serve as a stimulus for other contemporary archaeological projects such as those at Italica, Baelo Claudia and, as we shall see below, Mérida (Gómez Díaz, 2008, p. 106Gómez Díaz, A. (2008) “Jorge Bonsor, a la vanguardia en la gestión patrimonial. Un francés que consagró su vida a la investigación arqueológica.” Andalucía en la Historia, 21 pp. 104-107.).

As regards its dissemination in specialised circles, a milestone that has generally gone unnoticed deserves special interest: the inclusion of Carmona in the Mostra Internazionale di Archeologia held in Rome in 1911, through the drawings made by J. Bonsor.²⁴These drawings have recently been found in the correspondence analysed as part of the research carried out by T. Tortosa for the publication of the book Patrimonio arqueológico español en Roma (Spanish Archaeological Heritage in Rome). Tortosa, 2019b, p. 375. In the only surviving photograph of the Sala Hispaniae we have indicated the display case where the Carmona drawings were probably exhibited (cf. Fig. 3). Although other sites provided copies of pieces or photographs, Bonsor’s drawings and watercolours are, as far as we know, the only original items in the Sala Hispaniae. For this reason, and because of their artistic and documentary value, they were displayed in a showcase within the exhibition, constituting one of the most valuable objects brought from Spain. Bonsor had also planned the casting in plaster of several sculptures from the necropolis that in the end could not be sent to the Mostra. The presence of Carmona in this room, together with the capitals of the Roman provinces and other singular elements of national archaeology, shows that the necropolis was already at that time, thanks to Bonsor’s work, one of the most important Roman sites in Spain.

Within this framework of scientific dissemination and divulgation, J. Bonsor produced a number of key publications for understanding the archaeology not only of Carmona, but also of the Alcores region and part of Andalusia (Maier, 1999a, pp. 271 ff.Maier Allende, J. (1999a) Jorge Bonsor (1855-1930). Un académico correspondiente de la Real Academia de la Historia y la Arqueología española. Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia.). His eagerness to promote the necropolis also led him to prepare numerous press releases and interviews, as well as to publish collections of postcards, maps and guides in different languages that provided support for tourists and at the same time offered an economic benefit for the maintenance of the necropolis and the museum.

The work of dissemination and attracting tourists that Jorge Bonsor began in Carmona was extended to the Alcores region itself. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Bonsor bought the Luna Castle, located in Mairena del Alcor, and rebuilt it to convert it into a museum of the region, dedicated to pre-Roman antiquities, as well as his permanent residence. With this model, he repeated the tourist management experiment that had given him such good results in Carmona. In 1925, Bonsor decided to go a step further in the promotion of tourism and created a travel itinerary that brought the two projects together, creating the excursion “Carmona y los Castillos de los Alcores” (Carmona and the Alcores Castles). To promote this archaeological tour of the region, he produced posters in several languages, published collections of postcards, produced guides and itineraries, and even offered the possibility of renting chairs and tables so that tourists could eat at the site during the visit (Gómez Díaz, 2019b, p. 89Gómez Díaz, A. (2019b) “La llegada del turismo arqueológico a España: La excursión Carmona y los Castillos de los Alcores.” In: L. R. Méndez and R. Plaza Orellana, coords., Arte y turismo: la identidad andaluza en la configuración cultural de Europa. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla, pp. 79-106. ). The tourist incentives, in the form of reduced-price tickets, collections of photographs or postcards, or guides in several languages, would evolve over time revealing the interest in always offering the “product” most in line with the tastes and needs of the time. Moreover, we can see how a project that began with the nucleus of the Roman necropolis and amphitheatre of Carmona, extended to the city and the region, encompassing the research, enhancement and tourist promotion of remains and artefacts from the Islamic, prehistoric and protohistoric periods.

As part of the Ibero-American Exhibition held in Seville in 1929, the advertising of the Castle of Mairena del Alcor provided tourists with all the information they needed to visit (Gómez Díaz, 2019a, pp. 212-213Gómez Díaz, A. (2019a) Necrópolis romana de Carmona. Un proyecto innovador de gestión cultural (1881-1930), Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla.) (Fig. 6). If we add to this the sending of drawings from Carmona to the Rome Exhibition of 1911, we can see the interest in presenting the discoveries and promoting the sites for tourism at the various exhibitions held at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries, which were veritable showcases for the latest developments at an international level.

It could be argued that the model implemented first in Carmona and then in Los Alcores was the first private initiative for the promotion of tourism associated with archaeological heritage in Spain (Díaz Andreu, 2020, p. 72Díaz-Andreu, M. (2020) A History of Archaeological Tourism. Pursuing leisure and knowledge from the eighteenth century to World War II. Berlin: Springer Briefs in Archeology. ). Its development implied a profound knowledge on the part of J. Bonsor of the interest in learning about the past in situ that had motivated visitors and tourists from all over Europe since the end of the nineteenth century. The fact that it was a private initiative and that it required the economic support provided by tourist income, went hand-in-hand with a clear vocation of dissemination and transmission to society of the historical knowledge obtained in the different archaeological projects.

The social dimension of the project was confirmed in 1930 with the transfer of the necropolis and its museum to the Spanish state by Jorge Bonsor. This idea had been put forward many years earlier together with the other mainstay of the archaeological and tourist project, his partner Juan Fernández. To facilitate this transfer, Fernández bequeathed to the French archaeologist both his private ownership of the necropolis and his share in the jointly owned land (Maier, 1999a, p. 282Maier Allende, J. (1999a) Jorge Bonsor (1855-1930). Un académico correspondiente de la Real Academia de la Historia y la Arqueología española. Madrid: Real Academia de la Historia.). The generosity that permitted this passage from individual to collective interest was the product of a vision on the part of Bonsor and Fernández of Heritage as a common and social good, in a very modern perspective.

Archaeology in Mérida: a wish fulfilled

From the eighteenth century onwards, various attempts were made to “rediscover” the Roman buildings, mainly the theatre and the amphitheatre, and studies of the city by scholars and antiquarians became frequent. The excavations at Pompeii and Herculaneum, undertaken by Charles III, would fuel the desire in the city to explore the archaeological remains of what was considered “the Rome of Spain” (Morán, 2009, pp. 187-188Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2009) Piedras, Ruinas, Antiguallas. Visiones de los restos arqueológicos de Mérida. Siglos XVI a XIX. Memorias de Arqueología Extremeña, 11, Mérida: Junta de Extremadura, Consejería de Cultura y Turismo.). Although some unsuccessful projects were begun at the end of the nineteenth century, it was not until 1910 that systematic archaeological excavations were carried out in the city. These projects were carried out within the framework of an extensive archaeological project, thanks to the confluence of several factors. Firstly, as we have already mentioned, the demand from the citizens of Emerita for archaeological work, backed up by the numerous chance discoveries and the numerous studies on the antiquity of the city; secondly, the existence of a Subcommittee of Monuments²⁵The Subcomisión de Monumentos de Mérida was created in 1867 at the request of the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando to attend to the extensive archaeological heritage of the city and based on the pre-existence of an “Diputación Arqueológica” for the same purposes. Its creation as a body independent of the Comisión Provincial de Monumentos de Badajoz, led to constant disputes and misunderstandings (2021). and a Museum of Antiquities since the nineteenth century, created precisely because of the historical and archaeological importance of Mérida; and thirdly, the arrival in 1906 of José Ramón Mélida in the city to embark on the project of the Monumental Catalogue of the province of Badajoz.²⁶On the project for the Catálogo Monumental de España, see López-Yarto, 2012. The interaction of these factors made it possible for José Ramón Mélida to take an interest in the important archaeological finds and to find in the community of Emerita and in the Subcommittee of Monuments, as an institution representing the Academies at a local level, the ideal basis for proposing a project of archaeological excavations in the city.

At that time, the multi-talented José Ramón Mélida Alinari was one of the most renowned archaeologists in the country, a member of the Numancia excavations commission and director of the National Museum of Artistic Reproductions. His involvement in the preparation of the Monumental Catalogue of Badajoz made it possible for him to get to know the province and to come to Mérida, where he was impressed by its vast and barely explored archaeological potential. With the help of Maximiliano Macías, a well-read resident of Mérida interested in the heritage of his city, he set up an archaeological excavation project that began in 1910. José Ramón Mélida obtained the first financial support to carry out excavations in Mérida thanks to his close personal contact with Álvaro de Figueroa y Torre, Count of Romanones, who held various political posts in the government at the time (Morán, 2018a, pp. 79 ff.Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2018a) Memoria arqueológica y social de dos escenarios romanos. El teatro y el anfiteatro de Mérida (1910-1936). Anejos de Archivo Español de Arqueología, LXXXIII. Mérida: CSIC.).

The main distinguishing feature of the project in Mérida in relation to the one carried out in Carmona was, precisely, this public funding. To ensure a constant supply of funds for the excavations in Mérida, José Ramón Mélida would deploy, throughout the years of the project, his management skills, his persuasive abilities and his enthusiasm in the corridors of the different Ministries involved at the time. In this way, Mélida ensured that the annual financial provisions would not be interrupted at any time, despite the different governments that followed one after the other (monarchy, dictatorship, and republic) until 1934. Also, the Subcommission of Monuments provided the basic instrument from which to channel and formalise all the steps proposed in the project to give it an institutional character. Maximiliano Macías would be Mélida’s alter ego at the local level: he would influence the landowners, manage the financial allocations and direct and organise the fieldwork throughout the projects.

The declaration of the archaeological remains of Emerita as National Monuments was another of the objectives achieved with this project. This declaration, which began to take shape in 1911 and became effective in 1913, would cover all of the known monuments, whether public or private, or those to be discovered in the future, including non-visible elements such as the Roman sewage network (Morán, 2018a, pp. 96-97Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2018a) Memoria arqueológica y social de dos escenarios romanos. El teatro y el anfiteatro de Mérida (1910-1936). Anejos de Archivo Español de Arqueología, LXXXIII. Mérida: CSIC.). The main consequence would be state protection of the remains, which became exponents of national identity, and also to facilitate as necessary (which it indeed was) the expropriation of the land containing the sites to ensure their exploration and protection.

The project, which began with the Roman theatre, would later be extended to the amphitheatre, the circus and will include numerous finds scattered throughout the city, covering its entire territory.

Publicity and Dissemination as means of promotion

In December 1910, barely two months after starting the archaeological excavations at the Roman theatre in Mérida, Mélida gave an interview to the press in which he outlined his plans for the site:

These statements in the press, even before the appearance of the numerous and important decorative and sculptural remains, show that when the archaeological project began, Mélida already had an idea of how he wanted it to take shape. This vision already included an approach to the “reintegration” of the monument into society through its reconstruction and enhancement by recovering its use as a theatre. A few months later, at the beginning of 1911, the sculptures and columns of the stage began to appear, and Mélida and Macías embarked on an intensive process of notifying the findings to the press, scientific dissemination in specialised publications, and informing the public through lectures.

As a result, the excavations of the Roman theatre of Mérida achieved considerable repercussions thanks to the press releases, articles and conferences that the archaeologists were continually scheduling. Visits by scholars began to be frequent, with Jorge Bonsor’s visit standing out among them, due to his connection with the project studied above. The archaeologist in charge of the Carmona necropolis visited the excavations in January 1912, and these made a lasting impression on him which he transmitted to his friend José Ramón Mélida a few days later: “I have recently returned from Mérida, where I was amazed at how much has been done in the Roman theatre in such a short time and with so little money” (Maier, 1999b, p. 103, letter 194Maier Allende, J. (1999b) Epistolario de Jorge Bonsor (1886-1930). Madrid: Gabinete de Antigüedades, Real Academia de la Historia.). Bonsor, who was guided on the visit by Maximiliano Macías, was in favour of the idea of reconstructing the stage front and offered Mélida a series of recommendations for the promotion of tourism and the presentation of the Roman theatre to visitors. Some of these indications were already in Mélida and Macías’ initial approach, but it is clear that the French archaeologist’s experience in Carmona and his advice served as inspiration for many of the tourist promotion and publicity actions that they undertook throughout the project, such as planting trees to create a screen of vegetation behind the stage front, selling postcards, and probably providing visitors’ books at the site.

In parallel to the archaeological interventions, scientific dissemination would focus on the presence of the Mérida excavations on the both national and international stage, as well as their dissemination through conferences and the creation of “tourist products” such as collections of postcards or guided tours of the site. In this sense, one of the most important interventions would be the reconstruction of the front part of the stage. Although this possibility had been discussed since the start of the archaeological excavations, the work was finally begun in 1921 and lasted until 1925. However, the erection of the stage front, before it was finished, would provide a setting for various activities such as the Floral Games that took place in 1922, inspired by the Roman world and with the theatre as a backdrop.

In relation to the context of the Exhibitions we have mentioned in the case of Carmona, the casts of the most representative sculptures of the theatre and other places in the city were sent from Mérida to the Mostra de Roma in 1911. The sculptures from Mérida, therefore, served to represent the Roman province of Lusitania, due to the absence of pieces-only one is recorded-from Portugal. (Morán, 2019Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2019) “La presencia de Extremadura en la Mostra Internazionale di Archeologia, Roma, 1911.” In: T. Tortosa, ed., Patrimonio arqueológico español en Roma. ‘Le Mostre Internazionali di Archeologia’ de 1911 y 1937 como instrumentos de memoria histórica. Mérida: L’Erma di Bretschneider, pp. 235-254.). Apart from drawing attention to their prestige, the presence at these international events was also an opportunity to promote the archaeological monuments and, consequently, an obvious tourism incentive (cf. Fig. 3).

As a means of promoting the archaeology of the city, the publication by Maximiliano Macías in 1913, Mérida Monumental y Artística, bosquejo para su studio (Monumental and Artistic Mérida, an outline for its study), would serve as a veritable guide to the site, offering detailed information on the archaeological remains of Mérida. Together with numerous photographs and drawings, it even included a plan showing the location of the monuments, including information such as the sewage network. This publication was so successful that it was republished in 1929, including new archaeological data from the excavations carried out over the years.

One of the most important milestones in terms of tourism in Mérida was a lecture given by José Ramón Mélida in 1914 in the Roman theatre. The conference had been planned for the Secondary Schools of the cities of Cáceres and Badajoz and organised by the Sub-Commission of Monuments, as announced in the local newspapers; however, since it was announced that admission was free, the delegations from the schools were joined by various personalities from both cities, teachers, scholars and numerous photographers and journalists (Caballero, 2008, pp. 274-276Caballero Rodríguez, J. (2008) Maximiliano Macías y su tiempo (1867-1934). Mérida: Artes gráficas Rejas.). It had a major social impact, and the news of the conference and photographs appeared both in local newspapers and in other national newspapers such as La Esfera and ABC (Morán, 2018a, pp. 211-213Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2018a) Memoria arqueológica y social de dos escenarios romanos. El teatro y el anfiteatro de Mérida (1910-1936). Anejos de Archivo Español de Arqueología, LXXXIII. Mérida: CSIC.). The most immediate consequence of this event was the awareness on the part of the City Council of the importance of the archaeological excavations for the future development of tourism in the city. This new perspective led to the City Council publicly thanking the archaeologists who were carrying out the project, naming J. R. Mélida an adopted son of the city. In the minutes of the City Council’s plenary session, reference was made to the great benefits that “modern tourism” would bring to the city (reproduced in Morán, 2018a, Documentary Appendix 3, Doc. 18Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2018a) Memoria arqueológica y social de dos escenarios romanos. El teatro y el anfiteatro de Mérida (1910-1936). Anejos de Archivo Español de Arqueología, LXXXIII. Mérida: CSIC.). From this moment on, the City Council of Merida began to actively support the promotion of tourism in the city by publishing maps, guides, and adapting the streets adjacent to the different monuments.

The increase in the number of tourists visiting the city throughout the whole process was considerable, and the archaeologists spared no effort to promote it. Around 1924, two signature books were set up in the theatre and amphitheatre for visitors to leave their comments. In them, both ordinary tourists and personalities who visited the site recorded their impressions, becoming nothing short of an institutional “Facebook” of the monuments of Merida. The study of these books has provided an insight into the social impact of this project at all levels and how tourism was promoted, with visitors arriving from different parts of Spain and further afield (see Morán, 2018a, chapter 4Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2018a) Memoria arqueológica y social de dos escenarios romanos. El teatro y el anfiteatro de Mérida (1910-1936). Anejos de Archivo Español de Arqueología, LXXXIII. Mérida: CSIC.; 2018bMorán Sánchez, C. J. (2018b) “La huella del visitante en el Museo de Antigüedades de Mérida: El libro de firmas (1930-1937).” In: A. Carretero, C. Papí and G. Ruíz Zapatero, eds., Arqueología de los Museos: 150 Años de la Creación del Museo Arqueológico Nacional. Actas del V Congreso Internacional de Historia de la Arqueología / IV Jornadas de Historiografía SEHA-MAN. Madrid: SEHA-MAN, pp. 1285-1298.). At first, these books were offered to visitors in one of the temporary huts in the theatre excavations; however, in 1932, when Maximiliano Macías was appointed Provincial Delegate of Fine Arts, he undertook the construction of a “cabin for tourism”,²⁸This hut is still preserved in the Roman theatre, although it no longer has the function for which it was designed. See Morán, 2018a, pp. 249-251. where the signature books would be displayed exclusively. This cabin, located at the entrance to the monument, also contained the first toilet for visitors, as well as a rest area with benches (Morán, 2018a, pp. 249-252Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2018a) Memoria arqueológica y social de dos escenarios romanos. El teatro y el anfiteatro de Mérida (1910-1936). Anejos de Archivo Español de Arqueología, LXXXIII. Mérida: CSIC.). With this construction, the importance given to tourism and the attention given to travellers to make their visit as pleasant an experience as possible is clear, something that was a very modern concept at this time.

These visitors’ books were perhaps one of the elements inspired by the experience of Carmona and the conversations between J. Bonsor and J. R. Mélida, as these books (álbumes) had been in use at the necropolis since 1885 (Rodríguez Temiño, Ruiz Cecilia and Mínguez García, 2015Rodríguez Temiño, I., Ruiz Cecilia, J. I. and Mínguez García, C. (2015) “Análisis de la visita pública a la Necrópolis Romana de Carmona entre 1885 y 1985.” Archivo Español de Arqueología, 88 pp. 263-282.).

Once the archaeological project and its tourist promotion activity had been acknowledged by the city and the local authorities, the promotion of tourism in Mérida began to be promoted both by the institutional platform and by private initiatives. Guidebooks, collections of photographs and postcards and tourist attractions, such as the one included in a specific publication for the Ibero-American Exhibition in Seville in 1929, were published: Mérida was presented as a city close to Seville, an obligatory stop on the Madrid route, both by train and by road, and its archaeological riches promised to inspire the admiration of the tourist.

With the emergence of tourism, it became clear that there was a lack of first-class accommodation to encourage overnight stays in the city. Word of the excavations in Mérida had reached the Court from the ministries, and Alfonso XIII decided to travel to Mérida in 1927 to see the city at firsthand, accompanied by the Duke of Alba, Minister of Culture, and the Marquis of Vega Inclán, the Royal Commissioner for Tourism (cf. section 2.1). Francisco López de Ayala, the mayor of Emerita, took advantage of this occasion to call for the construction of a hotel in keeping with the city’s tourist boom and with a view to the forthcoming Ibero-American Exhibition in Seville in 1929. Although it would not be ready by that date, the “Tourism Hotel” did begin to take shape in line with the philosophy devised by the Marquis of Vega Inclán. The aim of the Regional Commissioner for Tourism was to create a network of State Tourist Hotels which, in addition to offering quality infrastructures in points of interest, could serve to recover historic buildings for this purpose (López Trujillo, 2006, pp. 354-355López Trujillo, M. Á. (2006) Patrimonio. La lucha por los bienes culturales españoles (1500-1939). Gijón: Ediciones Trea.). This initial project later took shape as the Network of Spanish Paradores and, although the first establishment to open was in Gredos in 1928, the one in Mérida was the first to be designed with the philosophy of recovering a historic building, the Hospital de Jesús (Rodríguez Pérez, 2018, pp. 971-972Rodríguez Pérez, M. J. (2018) “El nacimiento de una red pública de alojamientos turísticos: paradores, hosterías, refugios y albergues de carretera.” In: R. Vallejo Pousada and C. Larrinaga Rodríguez, C., dirs., Los orígenes del turismo moderno en España. El nacimiento de un país turístico: 1900-1939. Madrid: Sílex Universidad, pp. 965-1004. ). Paradoxically, the building work was protracted and the tourist hotel was inaugurated during the Second Republic, in 1933, together with one of the events that has given the greatest boost to tourism in the city: the classical theatre festival.

The culmination of the project devised by José Ramón Mélida and Maximiliano Macías would come through the recovery of the Roman theatre as a stage, an aspiration that had been pursued from the outset. After some unsuccessful negotiations and sporadic activities on the stage, in 1933, the specially adapted version of Seneca’s Medea by Miguel de Unamuno was staged in the Roman theatre. This performance was driven by the interest of the minister Fernando de los Ríos who, together with the actress Margarita Xirgù, one of the leading figures of the time, planned this act subsidised by the government, thereby becoming a symbol of Republican culture. The repercussion of the event was enormous due to a large number of people in attendance and the presence of the President of the Republic, Manuel Azaña, as well as numerous personalities from the social and cultural world of Spain. The Roman theatre of Mérida became the cultural epicentre of the nation during the days of the performance, which was broadcast live on the radio and filmed, and was widely reported in the national and international press. This event was the seed of the current International Classical Theatre Festival of Mérida, whose sixty-sixth edition was held in 2020, and which continues to be one of the city’s major tourist attractions.

The museum as an integrating element of the city’s archaeology

Another important element of the project carried out by the archaeologists was the Museum of Antiquities. Since the mid-nineteenth century, a Museum of Antiquities had been in existence, which had been put together from the numerous archaeological artefacts that were discovered each time a public or private project was undertaken. Even before the archaeological excavations began, Maximiliano Macías undertook the task of making an inventory of objects, which had not existed until then, consisting of a total of 566 items. The Museum of Antiquities was located at that time in a pair of rooms in the former Convent of Santa Clara, with the artefacts piled up in a very restricted space (Álvarez and Nogales, 1988Álvarez Martínez, J. M., and Nogales Basarrate, T. (1988) 150 años en la vida de un museo. Museo de Mérida, 1838-1988. Mérida.). The main objective of the archaeologists was to obtain more space for the antiquities, as stipulated in the decree creating the Museum; however, this demand had been made by the Subcommittee on Monuments since the end of the 19^th century, with little success. The start of the archaeological excavations and, with them, the exponential increase in the number of artefacts, would aggravate the lack of space. Due to these circumstances, the archaeologists even considered the possibility of building a “site museum,” commissioning plans from the architect in charge of the reconstruction of the stage, Antonio Gómez Millán (Morán, 2018a, p. 159Morán Sánchez, C. J. (2018a) Memoria arqueológica y social de dos escenarios romanos. El teatro y el anfiteatro de Mérida (1910-1936). Anejos de Archivo Español de Arqueología, LXXXIII. Mérida: CSIC.). The construction of this small museum, which was intended to relieve the pressure on the increasingly crowded Museum of Antiquities, was not finally carried out, but was directly inspired by the experience carried out by Jorge Bonsor in the Roman necropolis of Carmona. Finally, after various negotiations, the archaeologists managed to recover a large part of the Convent of Santa Clara for the collection, undertaking the task of completely reorganising the Museum. This new activity, which took place between 1929 and 1930, gave the Museum a more modern discourse, a space more in keeping with the collection it housed, and allowed it to display in a dignified manner the pieces that had come to light during the excavations (Álvarez and Nogales, 1988, pp. 29-32Álvarez Martínez, J. M., and Nogales Basarrate, T. (1988) 150 años en la vida de un museo. Museo de Mérida, 1838-1988. Mérida.). It was at this point that the decision was taken to keep another visitors’ book on this site, giving the Museum an essential role in the promotion of tourism in the city (Morán, 2018bMorán Sánchez, C. J. (2018b) “La huella del visitante en el Museo de Antigüedades de Mérida: El libro de firmas (1930-1937).” In: A. Carretero, C. Papí and G. Ruíz Zapatero, eds., Arqueología de los Museos: 150 Años de la Creación del Museo Arqueológico Nacional. Actas del V Congreso Internacional de Historia de la Arqueología / IV Jornadas de Historiografía SEHA-MAN. Madrid: SEHA-MAN, pp. 1285-1298.) and constituting the seed of the current National Museum of Roman Art.

The performance of Medea on July 18, 1933, was the culmination of the project conceived by J. R. Mélida and M. Macías, as it was the last public function of both archaeologists, who died shortly afterwards. The far-reaching nature of this project can be seen not only at a spatial level, as it finally covered the entire site of Merida, but also at a temporal level, as its consequences and results have lasted until the present day and, fundamentally, at a conceptual level. With archaeology as a cornerstone, it integrated the reconstruction, enhancement, and promotion of tourism, among other actions.

Associationism and the first museum as instruments for the dissemination of archaeological knowledge

From the 18^th century, Tarraco has confirmed its interest in archaeology, as evidenced by a diversity of sources ranging from the work done by canon Ramón Foguet i Foraster (1729-1794) at local level to the impressions left by travellers and scholars in their writings, like volume XXIV -Antigüedades Tarraconenses- of the España Sagrada by Enrique Flórez (1769) or volume XIII of Viaje de España by Antonio Ponz (1785-1788). In addition to these works, actions such as the ‘excavation’ carried out at the Roman Circus site in 1784 by William Burton, 2^nd Earl of Conyngham, demonstrate the importance of the city’s archeological heritage (Massó, 2004, pp. 16-18Massó Carballido, J. (2004) “Historia de la investigación.” In: X. Dupré, ed., Las capitales provinciales de Hispania 3. Tarragona. Colonia Iulia Urbs Trimphalis Tarraco. Roma: L’Erma di Bretschneider, pp. 15-26.).

However, in the particular case of Tarragona, one of the fundamental elements that helped to advance this process was the desire and interest of some of the city’s collectors-the notary Joan Francesc Albiñana i de Borràs (1802-1868) and the lawyer Josep Maria de Torres i Sedò (1800-1874)-in founding the Tarragona Archaeological Society, one of the main aims of which was to set up a “private museum” consisting of the archaeological artefacts belonging to the members of the society. This Society and the Provincial Monuments Commission of Tarragona each established two museums, which merged in 1849, resulting in the publication of a joint catalogue of both collections.³⁰Catálogo de los objetos que se conservan en el Museo de la Sociedad Arqueológica Tarraconense, Tarragona 1852. In this context, it is important to note the appointment of Bonaventura Hernández y Sanahuja (1810-1891) as Inspector of Antiquities by the Real Academia de la Historia and as a key figure in the ‘care’ of Tarragona’s heritage, cf. Massó, 2004, pp. 19-20 and n. 3. This museum would become the repository for finds from the different Roman archaeological sites in the city, including the forum, the circus, and the theatre.

To fully understand the significance of these events, it is necessary to realise that this ‘private’ movement resulted in an enormous qualitative leap forward: the idea of utility, associated with the concept of antiquities, acquired a new dimension: from this moment on, it would be linked to the teaching and dissemination of historical knowledge. This interest is clearly expressed and reflected in the first article of the Regulations of October 6, 1844, of this Archaeological Society.³¹This article states: “the main object of this society is to collect in the Museum as many fragments, coins, medals and other historical documents worthy of appreciation found in this Province, whether they belong to Antiquity or the Middle Ages, to attend to their conservation and promotion, and to propagate among the youth, by all the means at its disposal, a fondness for the study of our antiquities, which, like a shining torch, reveal to us the civilisation of our ancestors and the glories of our privileged country.” This Tarragona Archaeological Society was founded on September 21, 1844 (Tortosa and Mora, 1996, p. 205). About the Real Sociedad Arqueológica Tarraconense, see Ferrer, Dasca, and Rovira, 1994. This ‘unifying’ movement is also explained by the creation, in the same year, of the Provincial Commissions of Monuments. One of the tasks entrusted to them was the creation of the Provincial Museums, so that they could accommodate both archaeological and artistic artefacts, becoming a means of both narrating and disseminating historical knowledge within a broader framework of the nation’s history (Tortosa and Mora, 1996, p. 205Tortosa, T. and Mora, G. (1996) “La actuación de la Real Academia de la Historia sobre el patrimonio arqueológico: ruinas y antigüedades.” Archivo Español de Arqueología, 69, pp. 191-217. ; 2021bTortosa, T. and Mora, G. (2021b). “Las Comisiones Provinciales de Monumentos y los iconos de una arqueología de gestión nacional: ¿caminos paralelos o convergentes?” In: T. Tortosa, and G. Mora, coords., Las Comisiones de Monumentos y las Sociedades Arqueológicas como instrumentos para la construcción del pasado europeo. SPAL Monografías Arqueología XXXVI. Sevilla: Universidad de Sevilla.).

An important aspect of this process, which began in earnest in the second half of the nineteenth century, was the tradition of associationism in Catalonia, which not only made it possible to discover, document and publicise archaeological-historical sites and materials through various activities such as excursions, visits and conferences,³²Cf. Puig i Cadafalch, de Falguera, and Goday, 1909, XII. prologue: “Un altre esforc es el de les Associacions d’excursions cientifiques… En De Caumont havia encarnat la seva nació científica en obra social: en la “Société française d’Archeologie’ que ha recorregut tota la Fransa y ha extés per ella un exércit d’associats qu’estudien y apleguen tots els monuments artistichs. Les nostres associacions excursionistes se formaren a sa imitació, encara que prenent altre carácter.” [Another effort is that of the Associations of scientific excursions... In (the work) De Caumont had symbolised his (vision of) a scientific nation in social work: in the “Société française d’Archeologie” which has covered the whole of France and has spread throughout it an army of associates who study and gather together all the artistic monuments. Our excursionist associations were formed emulating (of this one), although they have a different character]. In Madrid, we also find associations of this type, although within a political and identity framework that has different nuances to those reflected in the Catalan area. In 1893 the ‘Sociedad Española de Excursiones’ (Spanish Excursion Society) was created., cf. Brandis and Del Río, 2015, p. 83. but also to gradually foster a sense of identity with the general public through the remains of the past (Alcolea Blanch, 2008Alcolea Blanch, S. (2008) “La misión arqueològica-jurídica del Institut d’Estudis Catalans al valle de Arán y la Alta Ribagorza.” In: La missió arqueológica del 1907 als Pirineus. Barcelona: Fundació La Caixa, pp. 12-29.). This awareness also served to complement the broader political and cultural framework, represented by the widespread and renovating movement known as the Reinaxença, or renaissance. Its philosophy is evident, as noted by Josep Puig i Cadafalch³³Cf. Puig i Cadafalch, de Falguera, and Goday, 1909, XIV, prologue: “Les escoles y la cátedra universitaria, seguint un criteri extremadament generalizador, han oblidat l’art local como si aquest estés forma del art universal… en algunes de nostres cátedres s’explica l’art del Tibet… no s’hi deserin l’art romanich ni l’art gótich de Catalunya.” [The schools and university chairs follow an extremely generalising criterion, they have forgotten local art as if it were part of universal art... in some of our chairs the art of Tibet is explained... neither the Romanesque nor the Gothic art of Catalonia are observed]. and we have explored this issue elsewhere. In this sense, we cannot resist recovering some evidence of these journeys. This is an account published by Bonaventura Conill,³⁴Bonaventura Conill i Montobbio (Barcelona 1876-1946) was a modernist architect, trained at the Barcelona School of Architecture, cf. Wikipedia. years later, but which allows us to understand the continuity of these actions until later times. It is interesting to note the importance of these excursions, whose reports were published in the journal Anuari del IEC (1923), the historical-archaeological publication of the Institut d’Estudis Catalans, based in Barcelona, together with the scientific articles; both the purely scientific and the informative facets acquire a similar value in terms of their archaeological dissemination. On this occasion, a detailed account is given of a three-day trip to the city of Tarragona by members of the Centro Excursionista de Catalunya, based in Barcelona. One of its members narrates their impressions and the visits they made: from the archaeological museum to the area of the forum and the circus or amphitheatre, as well as other monuments such as the cathedral.³⁵ Conill, 1923, pp. 245-246: “anavent miran lo que es la Tarragona d’avuy vèyem també ab la vista de l’ànima lo que fou Tarragona; y a cada pas crèyem veure aparèixer patricis envolquellats ab llargues togues, matrones romanes, esclaus y esclaves… les ruines de les famoses termes romanes… y les del famós amfiteatre.” [We were looking at what Tarragona is today and we also saw with our soul’s eye what Tarragona once was; and at every step we thought we saw patricians in their long togas, Roman matrons, male and female slaves... the ruins of the famous Roman baths... and those of the famous amphitheatre]. Without a doubt, the phenomenon of excursionist associations was one of the main exponents of culture in Catalonia from the last quarter of the nineteenth century until the Civil War (Munilla and Gracia, 2016, p. 384Munilla, G. and Gracia Alonso, F. (2016) “Ampurias y los orígenes del turismo arqueológico en Cataluña.” Boletín del Museo Arqueológico Nacional, 34, pp. 383-404.) and, in the specific case of Tarragona, it was the seed of the city’s archaeological museum.

The presence of Tarraco in Rome in 1911 and Barcelona in 1929

In previous cases, we have seen actions or strategies that acted directly upon archaeological spaces through the excavation, restoration and social and economic enhancement of monuments and/or archaeological sites. In this Catalan case, we refer to other actions that made it possible to identify some of the tools used by the national government, such as the declarations of national monuments, aimed at protecting archaeological property, to exercise control over these assets. Secondly, there is the case of the archaeological remains of Tarraco that were displayed at the International Exhibitions of 1911 and 1929. These exhibitions served to publicise the improved conditioning and accessibility of several monuments, as we will see in the specific case of the Arch of Barà. These factors, as part of a wider process, influenced the preparation of these sites and monuments for the thousands of visitors that would arrive in the future and helped these visual icons to become landmarks of the historical memory of these locations and, as such, fully-fledged destinations on the tourist circuits. These were the visual icons - both artefacts and photographs from Tarraco- that would be displayed in Rome in 1911 and Barcelona in 1929.

The Mostra Internazionale di Archeologia, organised in 1911, celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the unification of Italy. A number of European countries, former provinces of the Roman Empire, participated in this forum to exhibit, through archaeological casts, photographs and models, the indelible mark left by Rome on their territories. Our country was represented by a large delegation, including Tarragona as part of the group sent by the Institut d’Estudis Catalans (Institute of Catalan Studies, IEC)³⁶In our country, the Junta de Ampliación de Estudios (JAE)-the Centro de Estudios Históricos-in Madrid and the Institut d’Estudis Catalans (IEC) would be in charge of choosing and sending the materials that would represent our country at the exhibition. from its office in Barcelona, an institution that appointed Josep Puig i Cadafalch³⁷ Tortosa and Pizzo, 2019. as the person in charge of the selection of archaeological finds from the ancient province of Tarragona that would be sent to Rome.

In the Italian capital, this event would be the stimulus for restoring and recovering an iconic monument of the city, the Baths of Diocletian, the venue for the archaeological exhibition; while the Hispaniae hall would house, in part, the selection sent from our country belonging to the conventus tarraconensis. The archive documentation-correspondence and minutes of the sessions-deposited at the IEC have revealed that, despite the wishes of the Catalans to send the casts of the pieces and photographs, in the end, for economic reasons,³⁸Cf. letter from Rafael Altamira to Josep Puig i Cadafalch (4-12-1910), in which he states that although the Government budget allocates 10,000 pesetas to the exhibitions in Rome, it has been decided to allocate this money to the Spanish part of the Fine Arts Exhibition, which was also being organised in the Italian capital. Therefore, the IEC would only have the 1,500 lire from the Italian State to cover the expenses of this exhibition. Cf. Tortosa and Aquilué, 2019, p. 157, BDArch 29. For a detailed account of these details, cf. the article cited above. the consignment was reduced to 43 photographic enlargements that were finally submitted, part of which can be seen on the left wall in the only preserved photograph of the Spanish room, from 1911.³⁹In the letter from the IEC to J. Castillejo (Secretary of the JAE) dated 16-2-1911, it is explained that since they only had 1500 lire received from the Italian Committee organising the Exhibition, they could only afford the 43 enlarged photographs (cf. fig. XX) and some drawings from the Barcelona School of Architecture. As we do not have a list of the photographs that were sent, we have only been able to identify sixteen of those that appear on the wall, fifteen of which correspond to monuments or archaeological objects from the province of Tarragona. Of these, we also know from the bibliography of the period that the other Catalan location whose photographs were sent to Rome in this consignment was Ampurias (Emporiae), a city to which we will return in the final discussion. These photographs are the work of the Catalan photographer Adolf Mas and some of these plates, to which we have had access, are deposited in the Fundació Institut Ametller d’Art Hispanic, based in Barcelona.

Among the group of images identified on the wall of the Hispaniae Room (cf. Fig. 3), we would like to highlight four of them here because of their importance as visual icons in relation to the territory of Tarragona:

The sculpture traditionally identified as Pomona⁴⁰Cf. in Tortosa and Aquilué, 2019, p. 150 (nº 3) . Print Arxiu Mas nº 1488. This archive is currently part of the Fundació Institut Ametller d’Art Hispànic, Barcelona.. and subsequently identified as Hora, from the first to second century AD, comes from the southern sector of the lower part of the city, a residential neighbourhood which since the eighteenth century was used as a quarry for the construction of the present-day port (Koppel, 1986, pp. 14-15, fig. 31Koppel, E. (1986) “Las esculturas romanas de Tarraco.” Fòrum 4. Tarragona: MNAT, pp. 1-16.).

The funerary mausoleum known traditionally as the ‘Tower of the Scipios’⁴¹Cf. in Tortosa and Aquilué, 2019, p. 150 (nº 4). Print Arxiu Mas nº 3492. from the first century AD, located next to the Via Augusta and close to the northern entrance into Tarragona (Mar et al., 2015, pp. 34-36Mar, R., Ruiz de Arbulo, J., Vivó, D., Beltrán-Caballero, J. A. and Gris, F. (2015) Tarraco. Arquitectura y urbanismo de una capital provincial romana, Vol. II. La ciudad imperial. Documents d’Arqueologia Clàssica, 6. Tarragona: Universitat Rovira i Virgili.).

The city walls of Tarragona⁴²Cf. in Tortosa and Aquilué, 2019, p. 152 (nº 18). Print Arxiu Mas nº 1412.-declared a National Monument as early as August 24, 1884-from which we have chosen this detail of the interior of the city’s Late Republican wall, corresponding to the second phase of construction (150-125 BC). It is located in the area known as the ‘Baixada del Roser,’ and it is possible to see the marks left on the stones by the Roman quarrymen who built it (Mar et al., 2012, pp. 85-106Mar, R., Ruiz de Arbulo, J., Vivó, D. and Beltrán-Caballero, J. A. (2012) Tarraco. Arquitectura y urbanismo de una capital provincial romana, Vol. I. De la Tarragona ibérica a la construcción del templo de Augusto, Documents d’Arqueologia Clàssica, 5. Tarragona: Universitat Rovira i Virgili.).

Finally, a relevant local icon, revisited especially since the eighteenth century, which is known as the ‘Arch of Berà’⁴³Cf. in Tortosa and Aquilué, 2019, p. 151 (nº 12). Print Arxiu Mas nº 3498.; an honorary arch built in Augustus’ time by Lucius Licinius Sura-son of Lucius and a member of the Sergia tribe-and located on the Via Augusta about 20 km north of Tarragona, in the municipality of Roda de Berà. It is one of the most emblematic monuments of Roman Hispania (Dupré, 1994Dupré Raventós, X. (1994) L’arc romà de Berà. CSIC, Madrid.; Mar et al., 2015, pp. 37-40Mar, R., Ruiz de Arbulo, J., Vivó, D., Beltrán-Caballero, J. A. and Gris, F. (2015) Tarraco. Arquitectura y urbanismo de una capital provincial romana, Vol. II. La ciudad imperial. Documents d’Arqueologia Clàssica, 6. Tarragona: Universitat Rovira i Virgili.) and forms part of the archaeological complex of Tarraco, as well as being considered an Asset of Cultural Interest and part of a World Heritage Site.

In this exhibition, Tarragona, together with Mérida, the Augusta Emerita once the capital of the province of Lusitania, were the places that most prominently represented the country at this exhibition in the Italian capital. However, we will now go on to see the repercussions of this international event on Catalonia’s own territory. Both the minutes of the IEC at the time and the Catalan press shed light on the matter. We know from the documentation that on an unspecified day between May 1 and 7, or even on May 8 itself, the photographs had been sent to Rome for exhibition. Before being shipped, the photographic enlargements were exhibited at the Palau de la Generalitat in Barcelona; we also know that a series of postcards were made with these images, postcards that we have not been able to locate, and we also know that, on April 30, 1911, Josep Puig i Cadafalch gave a lecture at the Palau on the materials that were to be sent to the exhibition in Rome. This is confirmed in the minutes from April 24, 1911, which state: “He also informed the Institute, inviting it to attend, that next Sunday he would be giving a conference on the ‘Palau de la Generalitat,’ continuing the work that was being done. Mr. Corominas proposes, if it is agreed, that if possible, this opportunity be used to hold an exhibition of the photographs sent to the Rome exhibition.”⁴⁴“Posa també en coneixement del Institut, convidantlo, el fet de que l’diumenge prop vinent donarà una conferencia sobre’l Palau de la Generalitat, resseguint les obres que s’hi venen fent. El Sr. Corominas proposa, essent acordat, que si es possible s’aprofiti aquesta ocasió pera fer una exposició de les fotografíes que s’envien a l’exposició de Roma.” [He also informed the Institute, inviting it to attend, that next Sunday he would be giving a conference on the ‘Palau de la Generalitat,’ continuing the work that was being done. Mr. Corominas proposes, if it is agreed, that if possible, this opportunity be used to hold an exhibition of the photographs sent to the Rome exhibition]. The action being proposed here would become a reality, as reflected in the following month’s minutes (May 1, 1911):

It therefore seems clear that this photographic material was placed in these rooms so that it could be admired by the citizens of Catalonia before being sent to the Baths of Diocletian in the Italian capital (cf. enlargements of Fig. 3).

The exhibition at the Baths of Diocletian was reported in several Catalan newspapers.⁴⁶From La Vanguardia (21-2-1911) to La Veu de Catalunya (9-2-1911); The latter also reported on the opening of the exhibition on April 8, 1911, in an edition published two days later. Cf. Tortosa and Aquilué, 2019, pp. 156-ss. We can see the morning and afternoon editions (here on page 1) of La Veu de Catalunya from Monday, May 1, 1911, where the lecture given by Josep Puig i Cadafalch on Sunday 30 April at 11 a.m. in the Palau de la Generalitat is published in detail-as we saw in the previous report-explaining the history of the building and visiting its different spaces. Today we know that only those who attended the lecture and guided tour on Sunday 30 April were able to see these photographs, as on Monday 8 May the photographs were on their way to Rome.⁴⁷For more detailed information on participants and shipping, cf. Tortosa and Aquilué, 2019, pp. 155-162.

From Tarragona, therefore, we can see a strategy of making archaeological heritage visible through the exhibition of archaeological materials in the original Tarragona Museum since the nineteenth century, and how the vocation to disseminate archaeological heritage is deeply rooted in the IEC, from where the selection of the material from Tarragona to be exhibited in the exhibition in Rome was promoted.

As a final part of this discourse, we will briefly look at the International Exhibition, organised in Barcelona in 1929,⁴⁸This International Exhibition, inaugurated in Barcelona in April 1929, was echoed by the Ibero-American Exhibition in Seville in the same year, and both were included in the General Spanish Exhibition (1929), whose brief bulletin was published by the ‘Consejo de Enlace de las Exposiciones de Sevilla y Barcelona’ (Seville and Barcelona Exhibition Liaison Council). to confirm some of the consequences that this event had on several of the monuments in Tarragona that were shown in the photographs sent to the Italian capital in 1911.

To start with, the structure of the Barcelona exhibition consisted of three main sections; the first, as is logical in this type of event, was dedicated to ‘Industries,’ in which the innovations and applications that science was introducing into the industrial world were displayed (Tortosa, 2019a, pp. 19-20Tortosa, T., ed. (2019a) Patrimonio arqueológico español en Roma. ‘Le Mostre Internazionali di Archeologia’ de 1911 y 1937 como instrumentos de memoria histórica. Mérida: L’Erma di Bretschneider.); the second space-which is the one we are interested in-was dedicated to ‘Art in Spain,’ which includes the themes of Archaeology and Fine Arts, dealing with the presentation of an artistic perspective in its diachrony and, finally, the area dedicated to ‘Sports,’ which confirmed the gradual importance that these events were acquiring on an international level (Exposición General Española, 1929, p. 21Exposición General Española 1929. (1929) Sevilla-Barcelona. Consejo de enlace de las Exposiciones de Sevilla y Barcelona. Madrid: Gráficas Reunidas. ). The place chosen as the venue for these exhibitions was the incomparable setting of Montjuich mountain, which was transformed into a monumental scenography that descended to the port and the rest of the urban area of the Catalonian capital.

According to some authors, the archaeological materials from Tarragona that were taken to the Catalan capital were a total of forty-five original pieces;⁴⁹On the rest of the archaeological material that was sent, cf. De Ortueta, 2011, p. 184. of which we are interested in highlighting, for our Roman scope of analysis, three sculptures: the torso of Pomona (photograph sent to Rome in 1911), the bronze lampadarium and the small bronze statue of the goddess Juno or Hera. One of the important features of this event is that before this trip, the objects were restored for the exhibition, as was the case with the Pomona. In addition, as is customary in these forums, an archaeological congress was held in association with these exhibitions. On this occasion it was the fourth,⁵⁰It was held between 23 and 29 of November of that year, in coordination with the Asociación Española del Progreso de las Ciencias, where, as on other occasions, the pro-Catalan situation was highlighted in the face of pro-Spanish interests (De Ortueta, 2011, p. 184). We were also able to confirm this situation in the context of the creation of the Spanish School of History and Archaeology in Rome, in its first period of activity, cf. Tortosa, 2019b, pp. 309-ss. and although it seems that the archaeological issues of Tarragona were left to one side, the congress participants did visit the city on October 5, 1929, guided by Joaquín María de Navascués (1900-1975) who accompanied them to the Archaeological Museum and the different archaeological remains of the city, both Roman and medieval (De Ortueta, 2011, pp. 184-185De Ortueta Hilberath, E. (2011) “La Exposición Internacional de Barcelona y su Impacto en Tarragona.” Anuario del Departamento de Historia y Teoría del Arte, vol. 23, pp. 183-200. ).

Despite the fact that the Roman walls of Tarragona were declared a National Monument as early as 1884, urban planning policies in this type of historic city generally took a long time to become aware of the importance of preserving the traces of the past, and Tarragona was no exception; consequently, the city did not have an adequate municipal conservation policy until very late in its history;⁵¹Adolf Schulten deplored the loss of the remains of the past in certain areas of Tarragona, cf. De Ortueta, 2011, pp. 191, n. 27. Reconciling ancient remains with the urban planning policies of contemporary cities has not been and is not an easy task.⁵²On some episodes surrounding the complex processes of adaptation in the Tarragona landscape, cf. De Ortueta, 2011, pp. 187-188. In spite of this, the ancient monuments outside the city of Tarragona, such as the Mausoleum of the Scipios and the Arch of Berà-which we have already seen represented in the photographs taken to Rome in 1911-were declared National Monuments on July 28, 1926, on a date close to this Exhibition of 1929; in addition, at that time the ‘Special Circuit of Roads’ was established, which favoured road access to these monuments, stimulating and helping to make tourist visits a reality. Specifically, in the Tower of the Scipios, the area was landscaped, while a bypass was built on the road leading to the Arch of Berà to facilitate access to the monument (De Ortueta, 2011, p. 188De Ortueta Hilberath, E. (2011) “La Exposición Internacional de Barcelona y su Impacto en Tarragona.” Anuario del Departamento de Historia y Teoría del Arte, vol. 23, pp. 183-200. ).⁵³We recommend this study for details on the repercussions for Tarragona of the exhibition organised in Barcelona.

What is evident in the analysis of these procedures is that private Catalan initiative, above all, recognised the impact that the attraction of this archaeological heritage could have on the economy of the community; so much so that in 1908, a ‘Society for the Attraction of Foreigners’ was created, with some public funding from the City and Provincial Councils of Barcelona. It survived until the outbreak of the civil war, to provide information about the archaeological heritage of Catalonia to travellers (itineraries, means of transport, accommodation and places of interest). In 1930, the Tourism Library of the Society for the Attraction of Foreigners of Barcelona⁵⁴The index of titles published in this Library Series includes other places such as Girona and the Balearic Islands. These bulletins act, therefore, as guides to the places to visit. published a brochure on Tarragona complete with photographs that were the same as those sent to Rome in 1911, taken by Adolf Mas. Those corresponding to the Roman remains included the Sepulchre of the Scipios, the Arch of Bará, or Pomona itself.⁵⁵Whose author is Juan Ruiz Porta 1930: Pomona appears on p. 9; the Arch of Bará, on p. 23; the Tomb of the Scipios, on p. 27; and the sculpture of Pomona, on p. 38.

For our final discussion, this case provides a number of insights and confirms several strategies that emerge, early on, in the idea of social dissemination of this Roman archaeological heritage that we are dealing with here, both in terms of the sites and the archaeological objects themselves. In the two exhibitions mentioned, we can see that although they are separated by almost two decades in time, their messages reiterate similar visual icons that would become tourist references for the territory of Roman Tarraco; landmarks that would have a lasting impact on the public’s memory as a representation of the vicissitudes of its history.