Report 3 – Portugal

Report on Heritage Practices Concerning Far-Right Movements

Introduction

Should they stay or should they go?, asked a columnist in a 2020 article in The Economist¹, as statues around the world were vandalised and torn down for representing figures whose legacies, in light of the emergent post-colonial consciousness, had become problematic. These actions, carried out mainly by left-wing movements, sparked backlash from conservative and right-wing parties and groups, with some even organising vigils to ‘guard’ memorials and other historically significant monuments². Since then, cultural heritage – including not only buildings and statues but also, notably, cinematographic works³ – associated with colonial racist and nationalist pasts has become a focal point of debate in Western culture. This shift is partly down to movements such as Black Lives Matter, which has led to a reassessment of historical narratives, calling to dismantle symbols of oppression and foster more inclusive cultural representations. However, this reckoning has been met with resistance from a rising wave of ultranationalist rhetoric, which seeks to reassert traditional values and glorify national histories often rooted in exclusionary ideologies.

On the Iberian Peninsula, this debate over cultural heritage and the complexities of historical memory has taken on greater proportions following the exhumation of Francisco Franco’s remains from the Valle de los Caidos / Cuelgamuros (Valley of the Fallen) in 2019. The monument was erected by the Spanish dictator to honour the fallen of the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939). This action by the Spanish government has reopened wounds that have remained unhealed in Spanish society for decades. 

In Portugal the controversy surrounding monuments linked to Portuguese nationalism and, in particular, to the Estado Novo regime, has to become increasingly polarised. On one side, a majority values these objects as part of the national heritage; on the other, some, revisiting Portugal’s heritage connected to colonialism and the dictatorship, propose alternative views, arguing that the societal implications of these monuments are more harmful than beneficial. This perspective is countered by the argument that heritage represents collective memory, with a past that should be critically engaged rather than erased. The value of remembrance – as what recalls or brings back to memory – present in the very concept of ‘Heritage’, should not be confused with other values – namely those of a more celebratory nature. However, sometimes the two are intertwined and confused in the most politicised discourses, from right to left. 

The same society that mourned the loss and the destruction of world heritage sites in the 21^st century – some of sites culturally distant from the Western perspective, such as the Buddhas of Bamiyan (2001) or the Palmyra complex (2016), destroyed by extremist groups from those regions who no longer identify with them – now seems more open to rethinking the role of heritage, whether built or intangible, with which societies no longer identify. 

However, this discussion is far from reaching a consensus. On the one hand, there are those who advocate for the preservation of objects from specific moments in Portuguese history, arguing that these should be preserved as a testament to the historical past and in the light of the concept of anachronism (i.e. not imposing contemporary views on past events). On the hand, there are those who subscribe to a more radical interpretation of the decolonial past, in which certain symbols and monuments have no place in contemporary times. 

The relationship between the Portuguese far-right and monuments commemorating fascist ideologies is increasingly in the spotlight, as far-right parties like Chega gain traction and express a ‘nostalgia’ for the Estado Novo regime. In this context, heritage is sometimes instrumentalised to perpetuate nationalist narratives and to convey and promote far-right ideology.  It is no coincidence that in 2024, the ultranationalist group 1143 organised an anti-immigration rally in front of the Padrão dos Descobrimentos, a monument that both symbolises Portugal’s ‘heroic’ past and the Estado Novo regime, under which the Padrão was built⁴. Similarly, the Chega party also formally and symbolically presented its candidate for the Lisbon City Council, Nuno Graciano, at the Padrão dos Descobrimentos⁵.

The Estado Novo and the Portuguese right-wing emphasise Portugal’s history, especially with regard to its colonial past and the Portuguese maritime exploration – the ‘Descobrimentos’ (Age of Discovery), a term that has fallen out of use in the new historiography, though still widely used in society – to glorify the Portuguese nation. Nationalism, rooted in the view that Portuguese people were bold and courageous, who “gave new worlds to the world”, as the famous verse from Os Lusíadas highlights, remains one of the ‘banners’ of today’s far-right, carrying forward a legacy initiated by the Estado Novo. However, while the former appropriated the ‘discoveries’ and Portuguese Navigations to maintain a sense of unity, peace and a supposed mission that Portugal had towards other people – serving as a justification for the colonial world –, today’s far-right defends these monuments with an overtly racist and xenophobic discourse.

The whitewashing of the oppression that existed under the Estado Novo – when monuments were erected to glorify maritime expansion, its key figures, and the missionary work carried out in overseas territories – now seems absent. Rarely does the contemporary far-right acknowledge and speaks out about the ‘dialoguing’ aspects of the Portuguese encounter with the ‘Other’. Instead, Portuguese achievements are celebrated as part of a national identity, while polarised rhetoric surrounding contentious elements of the heritage (statues of colonizers, dictators, etc.) is used to attack segments of society that question them, accusing them of historical erasure and even anti-democratic sentiments⁶.

The third-largest political force in Portugal, Chega, currently lacks a clear and coherent discourse on Portuguese heritage and monuments. The party’s general indifference to heritage – except when it comes to contentious issues, such as the Padrão dos Descobrimentos – reflects the absence of a cultural and heritage policy in its electoral programmes. In fact, the 2024 Electoral Programme does not have specific measures for ‘Culture’ in a broad sense, but rather focuses on Portugalidade (‘Portugality’) – which includes some generic measures to enhance Portuguese heritage in Portugal and around the world. The use of the term ‘Portugality’, rather than a broader concept such as “Culture”, is telling. Portugalidade points to a narrow and biased view of culture and heritage, rather than the cosmopolitan and dialogical perspective that is essential in these areas. Particularly noteworthy in Chega’s ‘Portugality’ section is the proposal to create a “National Museum of the Discoveries”⁷, described as a “fundamental initiative for the preservation and dissemination of maritime history and Portuguese discoveries”. This proposal stands out as the only concrete plan for the creation of a museum that Chega has put forward.

Contrary to what happens in other European countries, which focus their attention on war memorials, monuments and tombs of ‘heroic’ historical figures linked to war conflicts, the far right in Portugal looks to a more distant past and one associated with maritime history, seen here as the golden age of the Portuguese nation. Thus, three case studies were selected to highlight the points of contact between the heritage of the Estado Novo period, its legacy, and today’s far-right, which can be categorized as follows: (1) Immovable monuments: the Padrão dos Descobrimentos and Jardim da Praça do Império; (2) Movable monuments: statues of key figures in Portuguese history and the Estado Novo (António de Oliveira Salazar and António Vieira); (3) Patrimonialization of Salazar and the Estado Novo, exemplified by the proposal for an ‘Oliveira Salazar House-Museum’ in Santa Comba Dão, the birthplace of the Estado Novo dictator.

Exaltation of the Navigators and the Empire: the Monument to the Discoveries and the Garden of Praça do Império

The Estado Novo was responsible for creating monuments that commemorated the period of maritime exploration, which is commonly regarded as a golden age in Portuguese history. Many of these works were ephemeral in nature, such as those that created for the Portuguese World Exhibition (1940) and the Commemoration of the Double Centenary of Nationality⁸ (1940). Despite the ephemeral nature of these nationalist celebrations, some of these events left a clear mark on the organisation of several Portuguese cities, particularly in terms of town planning, and their impact can still be seen today⁹ . 

It is in this context that the Padrão dos Descobrimentos and the Jardim da Praça do Império, both located in Belém and created in 1940 (with significant alterations made in 1960), hold significance. Both are crucial symbols for the far right, not only because they represent the Portuguese Empire but also because they were created during the Estado Novo regime. During the Estado Novo, a narrative emerged that “if nationality begins in Guimarães (…), the Empire began in the Tagus”¹⁰ positioning this area of Lisbon as a key site for commemorating monumental historical achievements, akin to the birth of the nation itself.

The garden in Praça do Império¹¹ is one of the projects initiated in 1940, designed by Cottinelli Telmo, a prominent figure in public works during this period, as part of the Portuguese World Exhibition. In 1961 – the year of the outbreak of the Colonial War –, the coats of arms of the Portuguese districts and overseas colonies were added to the garden. 

In recent years, the Garden has been the subject of controversy in civil society¹², between those who defend the continuity of the colonial coats of arms¹³ and those who have repudiated their use and the name of the square itself (‘Imperial’ Square)¹⁴. The far right, through the Nova Portugalidade movement, was responsible for two petitions in 2016 and 2021, delivered to the Assembly of the Republic, calling for the continuity of the coats of arms of the former overseas colonies, which are now independent states¹⁵. For those who signed the petitions – and one of them garnered more than 15,000 signatures – the removal of the coats of arms would be an act of “cultural talibanism”¹⁶ and an importation of Anglo-Saxon ideas. Despite societal opposition, the coats of arms were permanently engraved in stone in the 2023 restoration. Many movements spoke out against this act of immortalization, arguing that the coats of arms and the garden (by their very ephemeral nature) were never intended to endure as heritage. To consider them as such raises numerous questions, especially considering Portuguese laws and international charters¹⁷. The restoration of the garden, they argue, also ‘restores’ a nostalgic return to a colonial past, in direct contradiction to a forward-looking vision and a desire for constructive relationships with the independent countries represented in the Praça do Império. According to researcher Francisco Bettencourt, the restoration and preservation of colonial coats of arms in the 21^st century constitutes an act of humiliation and diminishment for those countries¹⁸, undermining their self-determination established in the 1970s. Some left-wing municipal politicians also reject the reinstatement of these symbols in stone, viewing it as a reinforcement of a reality that has long been defeated¹⁹.

A very different case is the Padrão dos Descobrimentos, which is in close proximity to the Praça do Império. The Padrão dos Descobrimentos is one of Lisbon’s most iconic landmarks, as it is located in an area with a lot of tourist traffic in the capital, just a few metres away from the emblematic Jerónimos Monastery and the Belém Tower. According to official figures, in 2019 the monument attracted 309,159 visitors, 90% of whom were foreign tourists²⁰. However, the number of people who visit the monument from the outside is considerably higher. The heritage and tourism values of Padrão dos Descobrimentos are widely recognised, though this does not mean the monument is without controversy. On the contrary, it remains a highly divisive symbol in both public opinion and political discourse.

The Padrão dos Descobrimentos (‘Monument to the Discoveries’)²¹ is an architectural monument that commemorates the period of maritime expansion and Infante D. Henrique. It was designed by two leading figures in Portuguese architecture and fine arts, Cottinelli Telmo and Leopoldo de Almeida. The monument was erected for the first time in 1940, meant to be ephemeral, and was later demolished, following the Portuguese World Exhibition. That same year, other artistic works were created under the motto of revisiting the ‘Portuguese world’ from the metropolis to overseas territories, namely the film Feitiço do Império (António Lopes Ribeiro). 

Twenty years after the Padrão dos Descobrimentos was first erected, in 1960, the monument was recreated in perpetuity to mark the 500^th anniversary of the death of Infante D. Henrique, a key figure in Portugal’s overseas expansion. This was the same year the coats of arms of the overseas provinces were placed in the Praça do Império garden, just as the Colonial War was beginning. The monument’s permanent installation coincided with the rise of independence movements in the former Portuguese colonies, which contested their integration into Portugal. It is perhaps no coincidence that an attempt was made to make this monument (which celebrates the Portuguese World) permanent – originally conceived as ephemeral – at a time when signs of instability were already evident in the colonies.

This monument has become a “trademark” image of the celebration of the Mundo Português and, in particular, of the regime and its ideology²². Due to the historical significance of the events it commemorates, and because the monument emphasises notions such as ‘Portugality’ – a term that is widely used by the extreme right – this monument holds considerable importance for this political spectrum. Established parties like Chega, but also movements like Nova Portugalidade and Grupo 1143, have adopted the monument as one of their key heritage symbols, launching campaigns and rallies in its defense.  In fact, the Padrão dos Descobrimentos can be seen as one of the prime examples of portugalidade, a notion tied to national identity based on Portugal’s historical achievements. The maritime explorations etched this “small country”²³ into the annals of world history, fuelling the patriotic pride that, by definition, is central to the far-right. To this, one could add the concept of the “messenger nation”, the idea that Portugal has a special mission in the world, almost mythological in nature given its past (glorified in stone monuments and literary works) – and one that aligns with the nationalisms that have (re)emerged in the 21st century.

It is also for these reasons that the Padrão dos Descobrimentos has been at the centre of heated political and social controversy and commotion in recent years. In 2021, a member of the Socialist Party – left-wing party that was then in government – stated in an opinion piece that the Padrão, like the Praça do Império, “has no place in today’s world, as it is not a relevant architectural piece and does not fit in the development of a city that aims to be innovative and open to all societies and backgrounds”. He suggested that “in a respectable country”, it should have been “demolished” long ago²⁴. This statement provoked a negative reaction from civil society, as well as from far-right parties and movements that have a particular affection for the monument. Confronted with the backlash generated by these remarks – remarks that the majority of Portuguese citizens likely did not agree with – the socialist deputy reiterated, in another interview, his position that the monument should be demolished since it is a “symbol of dictatorship”²⁵. 

Right-wing extremism, whether through Chega or the Nova Portugalidade movement, has seized on the comments made by a member of the ruling Socialist Party to use built heritage as a political tool and a weapon in their discourse. Among the arguments put forward by Chega supporters is the accusation of historical revisionism and the rewriting of history, which they depict as antidemocratic, alongside a lament over the supposed neglect of Portugal’s history and heritage by “the left” (which is usually a vague, unnamed and generalised entity in these discourses). They claim that, despite its imperfections, Portuguese history “is the result of our evolution as [Portuguese] people”²⁶ . If such rhetoric did not exploit sensitive heritage as a political weapon, it would likely align more with the international moderate right, which also argues that erasing symbols of historical achievements in the urban landscape – however problematic – constitutes the erasure of the history of the oppressed. However, unlike the moderate right, the Chega party has never considered the idea of “layering” history or “building history out and up” as opposed to “reshaping” it, a suggestion often made in opinion pieces by more moderate and informed right-wing commentators²⁷. 

Instead, based on a personal comment made by a member of the Socialist party in 2021, the far-right grabbed the opportunity to craft an argument that attacks the left and the far-left as a unified, monolithic bloc, blaming them for historical revisionism and the toppling of statues and monuments – actions they liken to those seen in the United States, especially following the Black Lives Matter movement²⁸, and in the United Kingdom.

The “suggestion” of demolishing heritage linked to the Estado Novo was not the only instance that provoked a strong reaction from the far-right. In 2021, when the Padrão dos Descobrimentos was vandalised, Chega’s president, André Ventura, blamed the “Left”, stating categorically that the politic parties in this spectrum “have been encouraging this type of behaviour for a long time (…) insist[ing] on rewriting national history and calling all our ancestors criminals”, a statement devoid of any substantiation²⁹. Such populist rhetoric is clearly designed to fuel political polarisation, seeking to gain support from those who do not align with proposals to destroy or vandalise Portuguese heritage, while casting the left as a “boogeyman” that denies Portuguese history and its material legacies.

How does the Padrão dos Descobrimentos, a cultural institution and a museum, reacts? The museum in the Padrão dos Descobrimentos has been addressing these issues by incorporating them into its narrative. The monument has hosted exhibitions that critically engage with its historical context, such as “Racismo e Cidadania” (Racism and Citizenship, 2017) and “Álbuns de Família: Fotografias da Diáspora Africana na Grande Lisboa (1975-Hoje)” (Family Albums: Photographs of the African Diaspora in Greater Lisbon, 2024). These exhibitions represent an attempt to reconcile “the monumental glory of the Expansion, which is depicted on the exterior of the monument”, with “the denunciation of racism”³⁰ , explored in the inside.

Moveable Monuments – Statuary of Key Figures in Portuguese History and the Estado Novo

The ideological legacy of the Estado Novo is not only evident in immovable and urban heritage. When it comes to statuary, several figures linked to the regime gradually disappeared from public spaces in the years following the Carnation Revolution. The busts of António de Oliveira Salazar (by Francisco Franco, the sculptor responsible for numerous statues of prominent Portuguese historical figures, including kings and queens) and António Ferro, the principal architect of the regime’s cultural policy and director of the National Propaganda Secretariat, were covered up in the aftermath of the revolution following a raid on the Foz Palace (Palácio Foz) in Lisbon. At the time, the destruction of these works was not considered. Instead, the Democratic Movement of Plastic Artists decided to hide them with cloths and ropes³¹, under the pretext that “fascist art is bad for the eyes”³². Not all statues of the Portuguese dictator met the same fate, however, as many were beheaded during the years of the Revolutionary Process (PREC), while others were the target of bomb attacks.

Among the figures celebrated by the Estado Novo regime, and which remained “on view” in the years following the Revolution, were statues of prominent men from the Catholic Church, such as that of António Vieira and Bishop António de Barroso – historical figures from Portugal’s past with a strong connection to the Catholic missions in the Portuguese colonies. Interestingly, one of the central figures within the Catholic Church during the Estado Novo period, Cardinal Cerejeira, saw a replica of his statue reinstated in 2019 in Famalicão, after the original had been missing for several years following the Carnation Revolution. It is believed that the statue was toppled during that time³³. The interest in restoring these images after so many years of absence from the public sphere, especially given that they were destroyed during the post-revolutionary period, raises several questions regarding the understanding of heritage related to Estado Novo. It is as if the reintroduction of these images serves as “suturing objects”, healing symbolic wounds, in Marc Guillaume’s sense³⁴. However, contrary to what might have been expected, this restoration did not have any media repercussions, nor did it spark public discussions on the subject.

The representation of António de Oliveira Salazar, on the other hand, elicited more polarised reactions. In 2017, busts and statues of the dictator were donated by the Portuguese Government to the Santa Comba Dão – Salazar’s birthplace – municipality. These pieces – one a bronze statue standing 2.3 metres tall, the other a small stone bust – are not currently on public display, and their intended use and ultimate destination remain unknown³⁵. According to researcher João Paulo Avelãs Nunes, displaying a statue of Salazar would amount to an “assumption of praise” that should not even be considered³⁶. The far-right’s stance on these statues is not widely known, as the hemerographic research that was carried out did not reveal any public statements on the matter.

Unlike the statues and busts of Salazar and Cardinal Cerejeira, which have elicited few reactions from the far-right, the same cannot be said for the creation and placement in public space of a seemingly much less controversial figure: the statue of Jesuit priest and writer António Vieira, who was a Catholic missionary in colonial Brazil. What accounts for the lack of consensus on this sculptural piece is that, both thematically and formally, it bears characteristics that could easily associate it with a period like the Estado Novo. Indeed, the homage to António Vieira, who had strong ties to colonial missions through religion, was critised along with the artistic choice to represent him in a conventional, almost anachronistic, style. Created by Marco Fidalgo in 2017, the statue’s conventional formal approach was chosen, according to the artist, because it aligned with what he thought it would be “expected in a public statuary competition”³⁷. Some scholars have described this stylistic choice as divisive, characterising the statue as something that “pretends to be a contemporary ruin of Vieira when (…) it was only invented in that space in 2017”³⁸. Similarly, the formal presentation of Vieira as an advocate of the Amerindians risks perpetuating a colonialist narrative rooted in both the 19^th century and the Estado Novo: the notion that Portuguese colonisation was inherently humane, bringing civilisational, humanist, and evangelising values to colonised peoples³⁹.

The statue was later vandalised – on the grounds that António Vieira was a “selective slaver”⁴⁰ – with anti-colonial graffiti in red paint applied to his body and face⁴¹. The act was allegedly carried out by an informal movement called Descolonizando, though many left-wing institutions distanced themselves from it⁴², despite having previously promoted non-invasive performative acts in front of the statue⁴³. In response to these actions led by informal leftist movements, the far-right reacted. In 2017, a peaceful protest against the statue, organised by a postcolonial group, was prevented by a group of hammer skins, who stood guard over the monument. Later, in 2020, after the statue was defaced with paint resembling blood, Chega submitted a request to the national assembly urging the government to create a “special police unit”⁴⁴ to deter such actions. The party also described the vandalism as an attack on Portugal’s collective memory. However, the statue dates back only to 2017 and is not a historical piece. Its heritage and artistic values are up to debate.  

António de Oliveira Salazar House-Museum 

The busts and statues of Salazar stored in Santa Comba Dão are directly tied to the on-going debate surrounding the creation of a museum dedicated to the dictator in his hometown. This discussion sparked numerous reactions from civil society, oscillating between the rejection of historical revisionism – and, consequently, the acceptance of history with all its successes and failures – and adverse responses, fearing that such a museum might adopt a celebratory perspective of individual and collective merits, thus fostering a discourse of glorification. 

One of the Portuguese state’s responsibilities, enshrined in the constitution, is to promote and safeguard collective memory, encompassing both its positive and negative aspects, making it incompatible with historical revisionism. The creation of a museum on the Estado Novo is therefore not unwarranted and could complement the Museu do Aljube – Resistência e Liberdade. However, such a museum should not focus on the figure of Salazar, let alone be located in his hometown, as has been suggested. Indeed, Santa Comba Dão has been the site of numerous manifestations, tributes, and pilgrimages related to Salazar for several decades. This occurred not only because it is his birthplace but also because, until the late 1970s, a statue of the dictator stood in front of the courthouse⁴⁵, alongside his gravesite and the Cantina-Escola Salazar, which has been suggested as the site for the proposed museum dedicated to him.

Although Salazar is not buried in a monument or funerary complex of artistic or architectural interest, the modest site where his remains lie has become a destination for “pilgrimages”⁴⁶. The incidence of these visits was initially small and carried out by people from the local region. However, in the 21^st century, organised nationalist groups, such as the Movimento Nacionalista Terra Identidade e Resistência, began arranging pilgrimages and gatherings at Salazar’s tomb to pay homage to him – a practice prohibited by the then Mayor⁴⁷. In 2020, similar undertakings were reported in peaceful manner⁴⁸.

The prospect of establishing a museum dedicated to the Estado Novo and/or Salazar in his birthplace is widely regarded as problematic, as it risks creating a “shrine” for the dictator. Numerous attempts have been made to realise this museum, some of which involved legal actions⁴⁹, and an opening was even scheduled for 2019, though it never occurred. That same year, 18,000 signatures were gathered in opposition to the proposed museum/interpretative centre in Santa Comba Dão, along with a letter of protest signed by more than 200 political prisoners of the Estado Novo⁵⁰.

Civil society has strongly opposed the idea of ‘heritagising’ Salazar’s figure – a phenomenon that some local political entities have attempted to justify under the guise of preserving historical memory and fostering local development through tourism, including placing Salazar within a historical figure itinerary⁵¹. This is reminiscent of what is already happening in Mussolini’s birthplace, Predappio, where such practices even include the sale of merchandise and souvenirs⁵².

For many historians and cultural professionals, such an endeavour represents “an affront to all Portuguese who defend democracy and the act of its founding, the Carnation Revolution of 1974”⁵³. They warn that the proposal risks turning the museum into “a sanctuary” or a shrine⁵⁴. Similarly, historians Fernando Rosas and Irene Pimentel have expressed concerns about the “touristification of fascism” in Santa Comba Dão in recent years⁵⁵.

While the long-contemplated endeavour of establishing a physical museum has yet to materialise, other actions have been undertaken by anonymous entities to celebrate the life and work of the dictator. One such example is the Museu On-Line Dr. Oliveira Salazar, Obreiro da Pátria (“Online Museum Dr. Oliveira Salazar, Builder of the Nation”), a virtual museum dedicated to this figure. It operates under the premise that “40 years of history is too long to be forgotten” and that “a man who governs uninterruptedly for 40 years, defines an era, creates a doctrine, and commands the destiny of a country to the present day must have had at least superior, if not divine, inspiration”⁵⁶. In this website’s guestbook, praise for the dictator multiplies.

Conclusions

The discourse and practices of the far-right concerning heritage are, in the Portuguese context, generally underdeveloped. Heritage is not consistently used to convey ideas tied to a deeper understanding of Portuguese history, nor are there narratives inherently derived from tangible or intangible heritage. However, when the far-right does address heritage, two notable patterns emerge:

1. Heritage is almost always linked to a past that raises divisive questions in today’s society – such as monuments of the Estado Novo, statues, and buildings tied to the Portuguese Empire and colonialism.
2.  It is used as an extension of nationalist ideals.

The far-right’s heritage discourse emphasises “collective deeds, many of them heroic and noble in human history”⁵⁷, as stated by a representative of the Chega party. This discourse reflects an overarching concept of the “Portuguese Nation”⁵⁸ rather than notions of identity, community or quality of life, which are fundamental to the construction of the concept of heritage.

The far-right presents a nostalgic look at the past, where the only prospective and forward-looking value is the legitimation of a political narrative favourable to the party. This includes reiterating themes of nationalism, heroism, and validating the “Portuguese identity” through the so-called ‘civilizational mission that Portugal assumed in past centuries. In this sense, when the far-right addresses heritage-related issues, it often frames them within the concept of ‘Portugality’.

For example, following acts of vandalism against the Padrão dos Descobrimentos, Chega proposed legislative measures for the surveillance of certain monuments, particularly those deemed “fundamental and most symbolic of national history”⁵⁹, alongside “severe punishment” for heritage vandalism. The far-right also uses controversial monuments as settings for vigils and campaign launches or as backdrops for promoting regional government candidates.

In this way, the far-right leverages divisive heritage issues – despite heritage being usually a unifying cultural element – to craft a narrative that disparages the Left. It accuses the Left of importing attitudes from other countries, particularly from the Anglo-Saxon world, and associates it with ‘cancel culture’ movements, often unfairly and inaccurately, given the lack of widespread existence of such movements in Portugal. The Left’s response to problematic heritage, such as that associated with the Estado Novo or colonialism, tends to be more cautious. Leftist discourse usually acknowledges the complexity of addressing historical memory, calling for maturity in examining both the “fragile” and “glorious” aspects of the maritime expansion, as well as the “injustices and cruelties” and the “adventure” and “discovery” in Portuguese history⁶⁰. This was the position of the representative of the Livre party, to whom Chega allegedly implied in an interview that the vandalising of the Padrão dos Descobrimentos had been done by the “Joacines of this life” (alluding to a former Livre MP). However, some informal and smaller groups associated with the Left have supposedly been involved in acts of vandalism, such as the graffiti on António Vieira’s statue.

In short, the far-right’s discourse on heritage is inconsistent, non-consequential and instrumentalised, relying on heritage primarily during divisive times to attack political opposition, particularly the Left, which is most often portrayed as an ambiguous and abstract entity. This approach views heritage less as a unifying societal element between communities and more as a tool to deepen wounds in societies. Additionally, the far-right lacks forward-thinking measures concerning heritage, failing to recognise how it can contribute to present and future societal well-being and quality of life. Furthermore, other forms of “monuments” – in the broad sense of the word, as carriers of memory, such as books, cinematographic works, works of art – are largely ignored in far-right narratives.

The press coverage analysis carried out for this report, as well as the bibliography collected, demonstrates that this is a topic that still needs extensive reflection and research. Alongside the sources used for this work, it will be essential to evaluate the discourse of the far right on digital platforms and social networks in order to deepen this theme.

Authors: Hugo Barreira, Joana Isabel Duarte e Andreia Nunes

Notes

1. The Economist. 2020 (13 June). How to handle racists’ statues. The Economist. ↩︎
2. Sabbagh, Dan. 2020 (10 June). Campaigners fear far-right ‘defence’ of statues such as Churchill’s. The Guardian. ↩︎
3. The censorship and “cancellation” of Gone with the Wind (Victor Fleming, 1939) or Birth of a Nation (D.W. Griffith, 1915) in some film institutions in the United States are the most telling example of this. ↩︎
4. Expresso. 2024 (10 June), Manifestações antifascista e nacionalista confrontam-se no Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Expresso.   ↩︎
5. Público. (2021, 15 March). Comunicador Nuno Graciano é o candidato do Chega à Câmara de Lisboa. Público. ↩︎
6. Lopes, Maria. 2021 (22 February). Chega questiona Costa se mantém confiança política no deputado que pede destruição do Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Público. ↩︎
7. Partido CHEGA. 2024. (15 February). CHEGA Legislativas 2024 – Programa Eleitoral : PROMOVER A NOSSA HISTÓRIA, CULTURA E TRADIÇÕES. Partido Chega. ↩︎
8. It refers to the centenaries of the Foundation of Nationality (1140) and the Restoration of Independence (1640), after 60 years under an Iberian union with the Habsburg dynasty. ↩︎
9. Urban changes in the cities of Lisbon, Porto and Guimarães, for example. These changes to the urban fabric show a clear exaltation of nationality values and the valorisation of certain National Monuments and sites, such as the entire urban arrangement around the Statue of D. Afonso Henriques, Portugal’s first king, and Guimarães Castle. ↩︎
10. Castro, Augusto de. 1940. Inauguração da Exposição do Mundo Português. Revista dos Centenários, N.º 19-20, p. 12. ↩︎
11. Images available in the Diretório da cidade de Lisboa online. ↩︎
12.  Boaventura, Inês. 2016 (19 July). Fim dos brasões no jardim da Praça do Império recebido com críticas | Câmara Municipal de Lisboa. Público. ↩︎
13. Boaventura, Inês. 2016 (19 July). Fim dos brasões no jardim da Praça do Império recebido com críticas | Câmara Municipal de Lisboa. Público. ↩︎
14. Lopes, Ana Sá. 2023 (3 March). “Era fundamental que a Praça do Império mudasse de nome” | Entrevista. Público.  ↩︎
15. Oliveira, Daniel. 2023 (23 February). Brasões da Praça do Império: como criar património colonial em 2022. Expresso. ↩︎
16. Public petition: Contra o Apagamento dos Brasões da Praça do Império : Petição Pública. ↩︎
17. Oliveira, Daniel. 2023 (23 February). Brasões da Praça do Império: como criar património colonial em 2022. Expresso. ↩︎
18. Gago, Marília. 2022 (May 6). “Silence of Innocents”: Portuguese De-colonisation – Public History Weekly – The Open Peer Review Journal. Public History Weekly. https://public-history-weekly.degruyter.com/10-2022-2/portuguese-decolonization/#_ptftn3 ↩︎
19. Lopes, Ana Sá; Dias, Beatriz Gomes. 2023 (3 March). Os brasões das ex-colónias no chão da Praça do Império servem para quê?. Público.  ↩︎
20. Martins, Maria João. 2021 (25 February). Padrão dos Descobrimentos. A nau da discórdia. Diário de Notícias. ↩︎
21.  Images available on the Padrão dos Descobrimentos website.  ↩︎
22. Alves, Alice Nogueira; Mariz, Vera. 2017. “O Padrão dos Descobrimentos como “Imagem de Marca” do Estado Novo”. In Rosas, Lucia; Sousa, Ana Cristina; Barreira, Hugo. Genius Loci: Lugares e Significados/ Places and Meanings. Porto: CITCEM, p. 475. ↩︎
23. “Portugal is not a small country” is an idea perpetuated by the Estado Novo regime, which commissioned a map designed by Henrique Galvão in 1934 to promote the concept of Portugal as a vast, pluricontinental nation. ↩︎
24. Simões, Ascenso. 2021 (19 February). O Salazarismo não morreu. Público. ↩︎
25.  Dinis, Rita. 2021 (19 February). Deputado do PS defende demolição do Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Observador. ↩︎
26.  Lopes, Maria. 2021 (22 February). Chega questiona Costa se mantém confiança política no deputado que pede destruição do Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Público. ↩︎
27. Davis, Kira. 2020 (26 June). Do we erase black history when we take down statues? The Spectator. ↩︎
28. The Economist. 2020 (16 June). Confederate statues are being torn down across America. The Economist. ↩︎
29. It was only a few months later that Joacine Katar Moreira, an MP elected by the Livre Party and who later became an independent member of the Assembly, proposed a “critical historical contextualisation” of seven paintings in the Assembly’s Great Hall. Contrary to what was reported in the press, Joacine did not suggest the total omission of these panels, but rather a contextualisation of them and their inclusion in a museum space. Source: Lusa. 2021 (12 September). Joacine quer retirar painéis do Salão Nobre da AR que prolongam “visão do Estado Novo”. Público. ↩︎
30. Statements on the exhibition “Racism and Citizenship”. Cf. Vaz, Paula Cristina Cerqueira. 2018. Olhar o Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas da Universidade de Lisboa. Lisboa: [edição de autor], p. 36. ↩︎
31. Images of this action can be seen on the official website of the 50 years after April Celebrations. ↩︎
32. This action was carried out in May 1974 by a Democratic Movement of Plastic Artists and the bust of Salazar was subsequently safeguarded by the state. However, it is currently lost, as is the case with other busts from this period. Source: Zap. 2020 (February 6). Obras de arte do Estado desaparecidas são quase impossíveis de localizar. Busto de Salazar é uma delas. Zap Notícias. ↩︎
33. O Minho. 2019 (10 February). Monumento de Cardeal Cerejeira de “regresso” a Famalicão. O Minho. ↩︎
34. Guillaume, Marc. 2003. A política do património. Porto: Campo das Letras, p. 33 ↩︎
35. Soldado, Camilo. 2019 (13 December). Câmara de Santa Comba Dão recebeu duas estátuas de Salazar mas não diz para quê. Público. Ferreira, Marta Leite. 2019 (13 December). Dois anos depois, Santa Comba Dão não sabe o que fazer com estátuas de Salazar. Observador. ↩︎
36. Soldado, Camilo. 2019 (13 December). Câmara de Santa Comba Dão recebeu duas estátuas de Salazar mas não diz para quê. Público. ↩︎
37. Santos, Marina Pinto. 2022. As estátuas e a história da arte: o debate sobre vandalização de monumentos em Portugal. In Arte e monumentos: entre o esquecimento e a memória. Goiânia: Cegraf UFG, p. 180. ↩︎
38. Pereira, Pedro Schacht; Coelho, Rui Gomes; Marcos, Patrícia Martins; Barreiros, Inês Beleza. 2020 (2 February). O padre António Vieira no país dos cordiais.  Público. ↩︎
39. Santos, Marina Pinto. 2022. As estátuas e a história da arte: o debate sobre vandalização de monumentos em Portugal. In Arte e monumentos: entre o esquecimento e a memória. Goiânia: Cegraf UFG, p. 187. ↩︎
40. Ferreira, Nicolau; Louro, Manuel. 2017 (5 October). Estátua do padre António Vieira guardada por “neonazis”. Público.  ↩︎
41. Images of the vandalismo available in Público, by Nuno Ferreira Santos. ↩︎
42. Lusa. 2020 (13 June). SOS Racismo demarca-se de actos de vandalismo e condena mensagens de ódio. Público. ↩︎
43. Ferreira, Nicolau; Louro, Manuel. 2017 (5 October). Estátua do padre António Vieira guardada por “neonazis”. Público.  ↩︎
44. Sapage, Sónia. 2020 (12 June). PCP condena vandalismo, CDS culpa extrema-esquerda e Chega quer equipa de dissuasão. Público. ↩︎
45. RTP. 1978 (6 February). Incidentes em Santa Comba Dão.  RTP Arquivos. ↩︎
46.  RTP. 1998. (28 April). Romagem ao túmulo de Salazar.  RTP Arquivos. ↩︎
47. CNN Portugal. 2007 (22 April). Proibida romagem à campa de Salazar – CNN Portugal. CNN Portugal. ↩︎
48. Claro, Luís. 2020 (26 July). Quem é a Associação Estado Novo que promove hoje romagem ao cemitério do Vimieiro. Sol. ↩︎
49. Interior do Avesso. 2019 (3 August). Historiadores temem a turistificação do fascismo em Santa Comba Dão. Avesso. ↩︎
50. Cardina, Miguel. 2019 (5 September). Patrimonializar Salazar? Público. ↩︎
51. Cardina, Miguel. 2019 (5 September). Patrimonializar Salazar? Público. ↩︎
52. Momigliano, Anna. 2017 (13 July). It’s easy to get a Mussolini souvenir in Italy, but its government now wants to ban them. Gazette. Kington, Tom. 2013 (6 April). Busts of Il Duce and Di Canio T-shirts – welcome to Mussolini’s birthplace. The Guardian. ↩︎
53. Público. 2007 (5 March). Petição contra museu de Salazar em Santa Comba Dão. Público, p. 6. ↩︎
54. Público. 2007 (4 March). Museu Salazar: GNR evita confrontos em Santa Comba Dão. Público, p. 13. ↩︎
55. Interior do Avesso. 2019 (3 August). Historiadores temem a turistificação do fascismo em Santa Comba Dão. Avesso. ↩︎
56. Website SALAZAR – O Obreiro da Pátria. ↩︎
57. Jornal I. 2021. (10 August). Ventura sobre Padrão dos Descobrimentos: “Deve ter sido feito pelas Joacines desta vida”. Jornal i. ↩︎
58. Jornal I. 2021. (10 August). Ventura sobre Padrão dos Descobrimentos: “Deve ter sido feito pelas Joacines desta vida”. Jornal i. ↩︎
59. Jornal I. 2021. (10 August). Ventura sobre Padrão dos Descobrimentos: “Deve ter sido feito pelas Joacines desta vida”. Jornal i. ↩︎
60. Rui Tavares on the TV Programme É Ou Não É? – O Grande Debate, Episode 6 (2 March 2021). Available on RTP PLAY. ↩︎

References

Alves, Alice Nogueira; Mariz, Vera. 2017. “O Padrão dos Descobrimentos como “Imagem de Marca” do Estado Novo”. In Rosas, Lucia; Sousa, Ana Cristina; Barreira, Hugo. Genius Loci: Lugares e Significados/ Places and Meanings. Porto: CITCEM.

Boaventura, Inês. 2016 (19 July). Fim dos brasões no jardim da Praça do Império recebido com críticas | Câmara Municipal de Lisboa. Público. 

Cardina, Miguel. 2019 (5 September). Patrimonializar Salazar? Público. 

Castro, Augusto de. 1940. Inauguração da Exposição do Mundo Português. Revista dos Centenários, N.º 19-20

Claro, Luís. 2020 (26 July). Quem é a Associação Estado Novo que promove hoje romagem ao cemitério do Vimieiro. Sol.

CNN Portugal. 2007 (22 April). Proibida romagem à campa de Salazar – CNN Portugal. CNN Portugal.

Davis, Kira. 2020 (26 June). Do we erase black history when we take down statues? The Spectator. 

Dinis, Rita. 2021 (19 February). Deputado do PS defende demolição do Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Observador. 

Expresso. 2024 (10 June), Manifestações antifascista e nacionalista confrontam-se no Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Expresso.  

Ferreira, Marta Leite. 2019 (13 December). Dois anos depois, Santa Comba Dão não sabe o que fazer com estátuas de Salazar. Observador.

Ferreira, Nicolau; Louro, Manuel. 2017 (5 October). Estátua do padre António Vieira guardada por “neonazis”. Público.  

Gago, Marília. 2022 (May 6). “Silence of Innocents”: Portuguese De-colonisation – Public History Weekly – The Open Peer Review Journal. Public History Weekly. https://public-history-weekly.degruyter.com/10-2022-2/portuguese-decolonization/#_ptftn3 

Guillaume, Marc. 2003. A política do património. Porto: Campo das Letras, p. 33

Interior do Avesso. 2019 (3 August). Historiadores temem a turistificação do fascismo em Santa Comba Dão. Avesso.

Jornal I. 2021. (10 August). Ventura sobre Padrão dos Descobrimentos: “Deve ter sido feito pelas Joacines desta vida”. Jornal i.

Kington, Tom. 2013 (6 April). Busts of Il Duce and Di Canio T-shirts – welcome to Mussolini’s birthplace. The Guardian. 

Lopes, Ana Sá. 2023 (3 March). “Era fundamental que a Praça do Império mudasse de nome” | Entrevista. Público.  

Lopes, Ana Sá; Dias, Beatriz Gomes. 2023 (3 March). Os brasões das ex-colónias no chão da Praça do Império servem para quê?. Público.  

Lopes, Maria. 2021 (22 February). Chega questiona Costa se mantém confiança política no deputado que pede destruição do Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Público.

Lopes, Maria. 2021 (22 February). Chega questiona Costa se mantém confiança política no deputado que pede destruição do Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Público.

Lusa. 2021 (12 September). Joacine quer retirar painéis do Salão Nobre da AR que prolongam “visão do Estado Novo”. Público.

Martins, Maria João. 2021 (25 February). Padrão dos Descobrimentos. A nau da discórdia. Diário de Notícias.

Momigliano, Anna. 2017 (13 July). It’s easy to get a Mussolini souvenir in Italy, but its government now wants to ban them. Gazette.

O Minho. 2019 (10 February). Monumento de Cardeal Cerejeira de “regresso” a Famalicão. O Minho.

Oliveira, Daniel. 2023 (23 February). Brasões da Praça do Império: como criar património colonial em 2022. Expresso.

Partido CHEGA. 2024. (15 February). CHEGA Legislativas 2024 – Programa Eleitoral : PROMOVER A NOSSA HISTÓRIA, CULTURA E TRADIÇÕES. Partido Chega.

Pereira, Pedro Schacht; Coelho, Rui Gomes; Marcos, Patrícia Martins; Barreiros, Inês Beleza. 2020 (2 February). O padre António Vieira no país dos cordiais.  Público.

Público. (2021, 15 March). Comunicador Nuno Graciano é o candidato do Chega à Câmara de Lisboa. Público.

Público. 2007 (4 March). Museu Salazar: GNR evita confrontos em Santa Comba Dão. Público, p. 13.

Público. 2007 (5 March). Petição contra museu de Salazar em Santa Comba Dão. Público, p. 6.

RTP. 1978 (6 February). Incidentes em Santa Comba Dão.  RTP Arquivos.

RTP. 1998. (28 April). Romagem ao túmulo de Salazar.  RTP Arquivos.

Sabbagh, Dan. 2020 (10 June). Campaigners fear far-right ‘defence’ of statues such as Churchill’s. The Guardian.

Santos, Mariana Pinto. 2022. As estátuas e a história da arte: o debate sobre vandalização de monumentos em Portugal. In Arte e monumentos: entre o esquecimento e a memória, editado por Paulo Henrique Duarte-Feitoza; Rubens Pilegi Silva Sá, 171-210. Goiânia: Cegraf UFG.

Sapage, Sónia. 2020 (12 June). PCP condena vandalismo, CDS culpa extrema-esquerda e Chega quer equipa de dissuasão. Público.

Simões, Ascenso. 2021 (19 February). O Salazarismo não morreu. Público. 

Soldado, Camilo. 2019 (13 December). Câmara de Santa Comba Dão recebeu duas estátuas de Salazar mas não diz para quê. Público. 

The Economist. 2020 (13 June). How to handle racists’ statues. The Economist.

The Economist. 2020 (16 June). Confederate statues are being torn down across America. The Economist.

Vaz, Paula Cristina Cerqueira. 2018. Olhar o Padrão dos Descobrimentos. Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas da Universidade de Lisboa. Lisboa: [edição de autor]

Zap. 2020 (6 February). Obras de arte do Estado desaparecidas são quase impossíveis de localizar. Busto de Salazar é uma delas. Zap Notícias.