‘Fragile Buildings’: The Alhambra and The Palace of Charles V. [AHANA MAITRA (UG: III; ROLL NO.: 01)]



Both legend and documented evidence suggest that the kingdom of Al-Andalus, governed at various times by the Umayyad, the Almoravid, the Almohad and The Nasrid dynasties, had overseen one of the most socio-culturally important periods in the history of the region. But, with the fall of Granada in 1492 was completed what has been known as the ’Reconquista’ of Spain. The ‘Reconquista’, reportedly put an end to the climate of tolerance that had characterized the previous era of multiculturalism and coexistence, often collectively referred to as the ‘Convivencia’. Although doubts have lingered over the veracity of such claims – with Lovat and Crotty on the one hand defining La Convivencia as a ‘religio-cultural umbrella’ following ‘a program of multiculturalism and religious pluralism’[1] and  professor Fernandez-Morera, on the other, declaring that ‘the three cultures of Muslims, Jews, and Catholics liv[ing] together in happy harmony [in Medieval Islamic Spain] is one of the many remarkable falsehoods of today’s widely accepted knowledge’[2] – one must acknowledge that this period definitely provides a contrast to the post-Reconquista phase.

It was the Nasrid dynasty which ruled over Al-Andalus in its last years. And it was Muhammad I ibn al-Ahmar, a professed vassal of King Ferdinand III of Castille (known as Muhammad I) of the Nasrid dynasty who was responsible for beginning reconstruction of the Alhambra complex. It becomes possible to locate references to the Alhambra, in certain expressions, from around the end of the ninth century A.D.. The name Alhambra actually describes the red colour of the clay of the hill on which the construction stood and which was later used for building its walls. The last additions to the Alhambra were made by Muhammad V, ‘perhaps by the October of either 1369 or 1370’[3]. The death of King Peter of Castile signified an end to the semblance of peace that had existed between the kingdom of Castile and the shrinking Islamic sultanate of Granada. The Patio de Los Leones (The Court of Lions) and the four halls surrounding it were completed – with what seems to be increasing rapidity – around this time.

Muhammad XII surrendered Granada to the conquering armies of Ferdinand and Isabella on January 2, 1492; bringing an end to the Islamic rule on Spain. With the coming of the new Catholic rule of Ferdinand and Isabella, and the advent of The Tribunal of the Holy Office of The Inquisition all other religious groups – especially Jews – faced persecution. Although, initially, the new Catholic monarchs ‘officially proclaimed their adherence to the principle of religious freedom for their Moorish subjects’, later,[4] following the suggestions of Cardinal Mendoza, the chief prelate of Spain, the Catholic authorities decided that the Inquisition would be the most efficient method for maintaining political stability in the region.

But amidst this environment of religious intolerance, The Alhambra remained ‘relatively well-preserved’. The Alhambra was designated the Casa Real, the royal residence and as Dario Cabanelas Rodriguez, writes, the royal couple ‘took it upon themselves to preserve its fragile buildings’[5]; albeit perhaps not for very innocent reasons. The Alhambra would stand as ‘eternal testimony’[6] to the victory of the Catholic armies and their present dominion over the region. Over time and under successive rulers the Alhambra underwent extensive repairs and further additions, the funds often coming from fines and taxes levied upon the minorities. Although the conservation of this ‘sumptuous and excellent edifice’ was carried on, placing the Alhambra under special jurisdiction and providing it with its own garrison, the most notable addition was effected by Charles V, who decided to build the royal residence within the existing construction.

Even though, regarding Charles V religious tolerance varying accounts exist, Charles V, however, was definitely not universally adored in Spain. Moreover, his being named the Holy Roman Emperor in 1519 did nothing in the way of increasing his prestige or acceptability in a region largely populated by disgruntled converts. As Cammy Brothers writes, Charles V was never present in the Iberian Peninsula for any considerable amount of time; his longest continuous period of residence falling between 1522 and 1529. Additionally, his overseas obligations compelled him to raise taxes, and as Brothers goes on to point out, he failed to ’quell local resentment at being asked to fund exploits in remote areas of the empire.’[7] Also, as evidenced by the prominent presence of Africa on his Royal seal, there was a renewed interest in the conquest of the North African territories believed to be under the sway of the Ottoman Turks. Such inclinations were probably not well received by a population which had in the recent past been asked to give up its freedom to worship; for fear that they could turn out to be potential allies of those in Turkey.

Yet, even while surrounded by an atmosphere of mutual hostility, Charles V remained strangely enamoured with the city of Granada, and especially with the fortified complex of the Alhambra. As Andrea Navagero remembered to mention in his letters, before Charles V lavished his attention on this fortified complex, the city showed relatively ‘few signs of the Christian Reconquest of 1492’[8]. Charles V initially added quarters to the north end of the existing Hall of Two Sisters so that he might reach the Court of Lions more easily. The Court of Lions, probably getting its name from the four lions that seem to be supporting the fountain in the centre, is like The Court of The Myrtles, one of the centres of the complex, each surrounded by a set of apartments. The Court of Lions which had previously housed the Islamic King’s concubines was one of Charles’ favourite sites within the complex, and the aforementioned addition was completed without causing any damage to the existing structure.

Charles’ all-consuming interest in The Alhambra, did not however, always yield palatable results. As has been mentioned before varying accounts exist regarding his religious tolerance. Some of them chronicle ‘his consciousness of the beauty of Islamic architecture, revealed in his prohibition against the further desecration of the mosque at Cordova’; others however ‘charge [him] with the wholesale destruction of the precious objects presented to him by Cortes’[9]. Whatever be the case, Charles however, had a very visible knack for installing his royal emblem on every available surface. Robert Irwin in his treatise on The Alhambra enumerates several instances. Of them notable being his modification of one of the walls of the Mexaur, previously a Muslim council chamber, which had later been turned into a Catholic chapel.[10] Strangely, he also added his Royal emblem to the wall of the Moorish hammam. The Moorish hammam underwent further modifications while his royal residence was being built. Accustomed to the western style of bathing Charles V also installed an immersion bath in the hot room of the hammam so that he could enjoy the comforts of the Turkish bath without having to perform the ablutions manually.[11]

The Cuarto Dorado, also known as the ‘Golden Room’ built in the mid to late Fourteenth century and it was in the first storey of this building, probably, that the sultan held public audience, and therefore, reportedly, has the ‘Throne Verse’ of the Koran inscribed on its wall[12]. The Patio del Cuarto Dorado or the Court of The Golden Room is like an ante-chamber to the private residence of the Sultan, the Torre de Comares, thus, as Zaki writes, it ‘forms a transition between public dependencies and a private place of residence’[13]. The Cuarto Dorado is remembered for its stucco work, seeming ‘to strive for an effect of weightlessness and is reminiscent of the decorative repertoire of lacework.’ [14]  The upper storey of the Golden Room, so renowned for its intricate decorations was, as Irwin mentions in parenthesis, destroyed by Ferdinand and Isabella[15]. Moreover the left of the two identical doors on the southern facade of the Patio del Cuarto Dorado led to the sultan’s private quarters. The hall which one initially encounters was apparently decorated with ‘plasterwork with a frieze of mocarabes’[16] which was painted over during the reign of the Catholic monarchs to depict the taking of the city of Granada.

The repeated encroachments on the various existing architectural features reveal the role such monuments play in upholding the prestige of a particular dynasty. Conquering monarchs will, as in this case, want to install evidences of their conquest on such enduring structures. Therefore, as Brothers points out, the new Catholic authorities – and especially Charles V –probably remained desirous of ‘appropriat[ing] the aura of The Alhambra while inscribing it with the symbol of [their] domination’[17]. Yet, one must also acknowledge that without the attentions of the new rulers The Alhambra could not possibly have retained either its former outlines or its ornamental intricacies which have survived from that age. The Alhambra, thus, remained in s state of uneasy alliance with alien culture, which on the one hand was in awe of its former glory and on the other felt the constant need to leave an imperial imprint as a mark of its subsequent triumph.

The Palace of Charles when it was built led a similarly uneasy existence. Charles has often been criticized for introducing an architecturally incompatible element within the existing structure of The Alhambra. He was the first among the Catholic authorities to order the construction of the Royal residence next to the Islamic Royal City. To understand the situation of Charles’ palace it is important to try and describe the establishment and identify the various styles that have visibly influenced its construction.

Charles began building his coveted place of residence from around May 1533, although the plan for constructing an ‘entirely new palace had probably emerged [by] the early 1530s’[18]. Most accounts identify a blend of the Mudejar and Roman architectural patterns in this construction. The pilasters which usually reveal the pattern which a particular construction follows, is, in this case, Doric on the first storey and Ionic on the second. This pattern thus clearly follows the strictures of the Classical order, something that was being intently studied and had become something of a fashion in neighbouring Italy. One will find carved on the marble slabs of the pedestal painstakingly rendered battle-scenes in the mould of Tuscan bas-reliefs – that is sculptural elevation which projects but only slightly from the background. The Volute – one of the special architectural details of the Ionic column, which differentiates its capital from that of the Doric one – has a regionally unique ‘two-dimensional character’[19].

The facade of Charles’ Palace has also frequently been commented upon. Before going on to describe the style of the pillars of Charles V’s palace, Brothers mentions the façade which is ‘articulated by rustication’[20]. ‘Rustication’ in layman’s terms would signify an architectural feature which has retained the marks that separate its constituent blocks, giving it a more ‘rough outer surface’. As is usual, one finds evidence of rusticated masonry, in the facade of the palace’s ground floor, so that it may provide a contrast in terms of visual weight to the smooth ashlars above. The facades, however, as Georges Loukomski points out, have nothing in the way of ornamentation, except for the north one[21], which has some detailing near and around the entrance portal.

What is lacking in the facades has however been compensated for in the window frames. A number of scholars have commented upon the embellishments around these. Reliefs adorn the window frames, and most visibly the elaborate ornaments of the ones on the second storey. The windows and the other entrances must be observed, keeping in mind, their adherence to the serliana motif. Though, first seen in Serlio’s manual on architecture, L’Architettura , the serliana motif perhaps was first rediscovered by Bramante, and it gradually became a distinguishing feature of Palladio’s works. Its structure – consisting of a central opening with a semi-circular arch over it – suggestively, conveys the ‘rhetoric of triumphal arch[es]’[22].

Curiously, however, it was Pedro Machuca who was commissioned by Charles to plan and construct the Palace. As has been mentioned before, Charles’ anxiety to adhere to ‘purely Roman forms’ is all too apparent and in the light of that it is interesting to surmise the reason behind choosing someone like Machuca. Pedro Machuca was a painter of altarpieces in Spain when Charles visited Granada in 1526 and the initial suggestions regarding a Palace within the Alhambra were proposed. Before this however, Machuca had spent some time in Italy as a painter, known in some measure for his ‘Maddona del Sufragio’ and his work on the colouring of the carved reredos of the Jaen Cathedral. As Gordon Campbell points out in his entry on Machuca, ‘the surviving examples’ of the painter’s works from the time after he returned to Spain, ‘all contain Italian stylistic features.’[23] It is also important to remember that during the early 1500s, it would not have been completely uncommon for a Spaniard –even one who had never travelled to Italy –to be familiar with styles of the Italian Renaissance. Spain under Charles’ reign was no longer an isolated region. Coming under the aegis of the Holy Roman Emperor, also meant a broadening of the Spanish cultural imagination, and as Professor Dandelet mentions, ‘Rome as the old centre of empire, increasingly became a common topos or theme in early modern Spanish writing’[24]

Apart from Machuca’s own connections to Italy, there were also certain additional factors that enabled the construction of such an emphatically Italian monument in a geographically and culturally distanced location. Charles’ enthusiasm for Italianate forms had perhaps something to do with inherited tastes. Dom Manuel, Isabella’s father, was an acquaintance of Lorenzo de Medici’s, a friendship, which as Loukomski writes, ‘greatly impressed’ his daughter and probably led to her interest in cultivating a taste for Florentine art and architecture. Moreover the erstwhile governor of The Alhambra, Luis Hurtado de Mendoza, who had played a significant part in revealing the associations between Roman and Spanish cultures and had introduced the innovations of the Italian Renaissance to Spain, was actively involved in planning its design. A second member of the Mendoza family, Don Rodrigo de Vivar y Mendoza, a cousin of Luis Hortado had also been to Rome in 1508, and he brought back with himself the Codex Escurialensis, a book featuring reproductions of the antiques in the workshop of either Sangallo or Ghirlandaio. To understand its impact it would be most advantageous to study the influence of ‘the decorative motifs represented in the codex’ on the ‘relief ornamentation’ of the period.[25]

But, for all of Charles zeal for constructing a monument –which on the one hand would serve as an endorsement of the reign of the new Monarchs and on the other would rival the grandeur of The Alhambra – for a considerable period of time, especially during the nineteenth century, his palace was merely thought of as an affront to the aesthetic of the existing structure of the residential complex.  As Loukomski cites, Edmondo de Amicis – known for his novel Cuoro – wrote that ‘put[ting] the “baracca” in the Caliph’s garden’ was a ‘criminal idea’ and dismissively declared that ‘Charles V was a barbarian’[26]. And as has been pointed out in at least two essays, Charles had also failed to create a structure that was perfectly in accordance with the architectural styles deemed ideal by the masters of the Florentine High Renaissance. Charles, it has been said, probably preferred the ‘more robust Roman forms’ to the ‘style of the Florentine Renaissance’[27] which was – as Loukomski opines – perhaps a little too delicate for his tastes.  And demolishing E. E. Rosenthal’s claims regarding Charles’ palace being built in alignment with’ Italian Renaissance styles’, Brothers declares that ‘the palace of Charles V [would be] unimaginable on a street in Rome’[28]

A discussion about the structure of Charles the V’s Palace should also include an acknowledgment of the apparent aims of the same. It has been pointed out earlier that Charles was the Holy Roman Emperor, and this meant that the Iberian Peninsula was not the only region under his control, the implication being that he was never able to reside in Spain for any considerable period of time. It was therefore critically important for him to be able to at symbolically assert his imperial authority. Charles’ Palace must then – primarily – be viewed as a representation of the power of an absent Sovereign

And, Charles’ anxiety was definitely not unfounded. Apart from his international entanglements –and those had, at various times, spelled imminent disaster for the Monarch – he had also managed to infuriate some sections of the Spanish population. After being nominated the Holy Roman Emperor in 1519, Charles demanded an additional subsidy from the Castilian towns to fund his journey to Germany, in pursuit of what – they believed –‘could only harm their interests’[29]. The Castilian towns – already suspicious of a Sovereign, heavily dependent on his Flemish entourage, and who had already extracted 600, 000 ducats from them in the name of preserving their autonomy – refused to submit their resources. When Charles was leaving for Germany in May, 1520, the Revolt of the Comuneros had already begun. His financial troubles, however, did not end there. Even when it was evident that the economic situation in the region was far from ideal, in 1530, he started acting on his plan of building a Palace adjacent to the Alhambra. In a letter to Alonso de Toledo – the somewhat ill-favoured nephew of Chievres who was made the Archbishop of Toledo – Charles mentions that he has granted 5000 ducats for its construction[30]; the amount presumably coming from the taxes that he levied upon the Moriscoes for allowing them to retain some of their customs. In 1565, however, the Archbishop of Granada decided that it was necessary to enforce the terms of the edict issued by Charles in 1526 which forbade the use of Arabic and the wearing of Moorish dress. When it received the approval of King Philip II – who had ascended the throne in 1556 – it paved the path for the Second Morisco Rebellion on Granada. After the Rebellion, the Farda became – as Rodriguez writes – ‘for all practical purposes null and void’[31], thus depleting the funds that would be necessary for the conservation of his Palace and the Alhambra as a whole.

But for a monument constructed under circumstances of political turmoil and such financial constraints, the Palace of Charles the V was uncharacteristically ambitious. His aim, it seems, was to rival the grandeur of the Alhambra which was a constant reminder of the former glory of those who had been conquered and – as Brothers writes – the construction of individual triumphal arches or equestrian statues would have appeared ‘dwarfish and insignificant alongside it’. Charles was also perhaps equally anxious to distinguish his monument from the structures that stood around it. William Maltby, in his book, The Reign of Charles V, describes the palace as a ‘classical temple’ and suggests that patronage under his reign ‘leavened a conservative and rather narrow artistic tradition’[32]. It is probably an apt assessment of Charles’ enterprise, acknowledging the monarch’s eagerness to inaugurate and showcase the new ideals of the secular art of the Italian Renaissance. Indeed he believed that architectural theory developed in accordance with the Classical tradition would be able to form an exclusive style distinguishing it from Islamic art. This fixed notion of distinction between the two styles led him to commission a construction whose aim was – seemingly – to oppose a ‘list of the Alhambra’s chief features’[33]. There is a deliberate eschewing of colour and while the other structure of the Alhambra Convey a sense of being in an open space, Charles’ Palace emphasizes the necessity for order. As Brothers writes, inside the courtyard, ‘one has the sense of being in an entirely rational space, closed to the exterior and self contained’[34]. A distinction must also be made between the religious nature of Islamic art and what Charles and the recently secular art of Early Modern Italy. The art adorning the interior walls of the structures of the Alhambra were mainly inscriptions, since figurative art without a religious context was discouraged by Islam. The decorations – a ‘lavish use of ornamental motifs’, not replicated on any other surface of the construction – near and around the centre of the northern facade done in the style of the Early Modern Plateresque, which ‘does not repeat motifs in segment’, provides a deliberate contrast to the calligraphic art on the inside of the existing buildings of The Alhambra.

In the wake of such assertions of exclusivity Charles’ subsequent decision to incorporate his Palace within the Alhambra seems astonishing. Charles’ palace looks like a projection over the southern end of the Court of the Myrtles, and as has been pointed out in the article ‘A Case of two Palaces’, is a ‘timely reminder of how buildings convey messages’[35]. The Comares Palace was the main residence of the Islamic ruler. The courtyard of the Comares Palace, more commonly known as the Patio de los Arrayenes (Court of the Myrtles) was the centre of a series of others, built for the purpose of accommodating the functionaries of the Sovereign. Charles sought to build his Palace adjascent to this former seat of power and connect the two centres – Patio de Comares and Patio de los Leones. His project, however, would necessitate the removal from ‘the south part of the Patio de Comares a room similar in structure to that of the Sala de la Barca (Hall of Blessings)’. A courtyard replaced a spacious garden connected Charles’ Palace to the Sala de los Ajimeces (Palace of Windows) ‘completing the circulation system on the south’[36].  The Palacio de los Leones which had never been intended for ceremonial purposes – used only when the Sultan would occasionally spend the night in the company of poets and commensals – was now connected to the main complex.

The Palace of Charles V and its situation within the Alhambra reveal the contradictory desires for incorporation and alienation that is the usual result of contact between two alien cultures. When Charles drew up a plan for a palace to be built entirely in the Italianate pattern, it was meant to provide a counter-narrative to the existing Moorish structure. The walls, stamped with the Royal emblem, were supposed to proclaim what had been formalized with the Papal Bull issued by Clement VII in March, 1530: that the orb of Charles was to be identified with the terrestrial globe. Such architectural features would reinforce the authority of the ruler in the various centres of the empire.

Although the history of the construction of the Palace of Charles V is also a history of attempted cultural imposition, it would be wrong if one completely disavows the role of the Catholic authorities in the preservation of the Alhambra. In the entry on the Alhambra in the 1911 edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, it has been suggested that ‘immediately after the expulsion of the Moors in 1492, their conquerors began, by successive acts of vandalism, to spoil the marvellous beauty of the Alhambra. Charles V. (1516–1556) rebuilt portions in the modern style of the period, and destroyed the greater part of the winter palace to make room for a modern structure’[37]. This view, however, fails to accommodate the projects that were undertaken for the conservation of the Alhambra. Although, often conservation also included modification of the existing features of the Alhambra, that structurally, it has remained more or less intact owes in large part to the efforts of the Catholic authorities.

Charles’ Palace however was never completed. The funds depleted when after the Second Rebellion the Moriscos refused to pay the tribute. In 1556, he would abdicate the Spanish throne in favour of his son Philip II. Philip – apart from inheriting Spain – was also granted the Low Countries by his predecessor Charles V. Ranke points out that ‘by separating the Low Countries from their historic roots in the empire…Charles created an unnatural situation and paved the way for the revolt of the Netherlands.’ After the creation of the Dutch Republic in 1581 by the Declaration of Independence, Spain, during Philip’s reign, suffered under periodic bankruptcies.

The Renaissance Palace within the Alhambra provides an opportunity for observers from later generations to compare the architecture – and more generally, the culture – of two communities. As Brothers points out ‘the relationship of the two buildings’ of course ‘symbolically replicates the struggle Charles was carrying out throughout the country: to legitimize his empire by demonstrating his mastery over Spain’s Moorish past.’[38] It is however also equally important to arrive at a more proportionate conclusion, that takes into account the contributions of the Catholic Government in the making of Spanish culture. The Alhambra, and within it the unfinished palace of Charles V, is a microcosmic representation of the consequences of contact between two communities and in their present forms are evidences of Spain’s multicultural inheritance.



[1] Terence Lovat, Robert Crotty, Reconciling Islam Christianity and Judaism: Islam’s Special Role in Restoring Convivencia, (Springer, 2015), p. 103.

[2] Prof. Dario Fernandez Morera, “The Truth about Islamic Spain and The harmonious Existence of Muslims , Jews and Catholics”, The ISCSC Newsletter, (Winter, 2010), The International Society for the Comparative Study of Civilizations, p. 10, http://www.wmich.edu/iscsc/newsletter-archive/Newsletter%20Winter%202010.pdf, 10 November 2015.

[3] Dario Cabanelas Rodriguez, “The Alhambra, an Introduction” Al-Andalus: The Art of Islamic Spain, ed. Jerrilynn D. Dodds, (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1992), p. 131.

[4] Terence Lovat, Robert Crotty, ”Dismantling the Umbrella and Destroying Convivencia”, Reconciling Islam Christianity and Judaism: Islam’s Special Role in Restoring Convivencia, (Springer, 2015), p. 117.

[5] Dario Cabanelas Rodriguez, “The Alhambra, an Introduction” Al-Andalus: The Art of Islamic Spain, ed. Jerrilynn D. Dodds, (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1992), p. 131.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Cammy Brothers, “The Renaissance Reception of the Alhambra: The Letters of Andrea Navagero and the Palace of Charles V”, Muqarnas, 10 (1994), Brill, p. 84.

[8] Ibid., p. 2.

[9] William Eisler, “The Impact of Emperor Charles V upon the Italian Visual Culture”, Arte Lombarda, Nuevo Serio, 6 (1983), p. 94.

[10] Robert Irwin, The Alhambra, (London: Profile Books Ltd., 2005), p.29

[11] Ibid., p.46

[12] Ibid., p. 34

[13] James Dickie (Yaqub Zaki), “The Palaces of the Alhambra”, Al-Andalus: The Art of Islamic Spain, ed. Jerrilynn D. Dodds, (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1992), p. 136.

[14] Robert Irwin, The Alhambra, (London: Profile Books Ltd., 2005), p. 33.

[15] Ibid., p.35.

[16] “Comares Palace”, Alhambradegranada.org,, http://www.alhambradegranada.org/en/info/placesandspots/comarespalace.asp, 10 November 2015.

[17] Cammy Brothers, “The Renaissance Reception of the Alhambra: The Letters of Andrea Navagero and the Palace of Charles V”, Muqarnas, 10 (1994), Brill, p.79.

[18] Cammy Brothers, “The Renaissance Reception of the Alhambra: The Letters of Andrea Navagero and the Palace of Charles V”, Muqarnas, 10 (1994), Brill, p. 84.

[19] Ibid., p. 87.

[20] Ibid.

[21] Georges Loukomski, “The Palace of Charles V at Granada”, The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, 84 (May, 1994), Burlington Magazines Publication Limited, p. 123.

[22] Cammy Brothers, “The Renaissance Reception of the Alhambra: The Letters of Andrea Navagero and the Palace of Charles V”, Muqarnas, 10 (1994), Brill, p. 89.

[23] Gordon Campbell, “Machuca, Pedro” Renaissance Art and Architecture, (Oxford University Press, 2004).

[24] Thomas James Dandelet, “Charles V and The Spanish Myth of Rome”, Spanish Rome: 1500-1700, (Yale University, 2001), p. 34.

[25] Cammy Brothers, “The Renaissance Reception of the Alhambra: The Letters of Andrea Navagero and the Palace of Charles V”, Muqarnas, 10 (1994), Brill, p. 86.

[26] Georges Loukomski, “The Palace of Charles V at Granada”, The Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, 84 (May, 1994), Burlington Magazines Publication Limited, p. 120.

[27] Ibid., p. 121.

[28] Cammy Brothers, “The Renaissance Reception of the Alhambra: The Letters of Andrea Navagero and the Palace of Charles V”, Muqarnas, 10 (1994), Brill, p.91

[29] William S. Maltby, “Financing the Empire” The Reign of Charles V, (New York: Palgrave-Macmillan, 2002), p. 18.

[30] Cammy Brothers, “The Renaissance Reception of the Alhambra: The Letters of Andrea Navagero and the Palace of Charles V”, p.91.

[31] Dario Cabanelas Rodriguez, “The Alhambra, an Introduction” Al-Andalus: The Art of Islamic Spain, p. 132.

[32] William S. Maltby, “Financing the Empire”, The Reign of Charles V, p.85.

[33] Cammy Brothers, “The Renaissance Reception of the Alhambra: The Letters of Andrea Navagero and the Palace of Charles V”, p.89.

[34] Ibid.

[35] “Alhambra: A Case of Two Palaces”, Spain: Then and Now, http://www.spainthenandnow.com/spanish-architecture/alhambra-a-case-of-two-palaces/default_129.aspx, 10 November 2015

[36] James Dickie (Yaqub Zaki), “The Palaces of the Alhambra”, Al-Andalus: The Art of Islamic Spain, p. 147.

[37] “The Alhambra”, 1911 Encyclopaerdia Britannica, https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/1911_Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica/Alhambra,_The, 10 November 2015.

[38] Cammy Brothers, “The Renaissance Reception of the Alhambra: The Letters of Andrea Navagero and the Palace of Charles V”, p. 98.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s