ISVS-6
6th International Seminar on Vernacular Settlements,
Contemporary Vernaculars: Places, Processes and Manifestations,
April 19-21, 2012, Famagusta, North Cyprus.
Portuguese Popular Architecture: Appropriations
M. H. Maia, A. Cardoso
CEAA | Centro de Estudos Arnaldo Araújo (FCT uRD 4041)
Escola Superior Artística do Porto (ESAP), Portugal
Abstract
Between 1955 and 1960 the Portuguese Architects’ Union carried out the Inquérito à
Arquitectura Regional [Survey on Regional Architecture], commonly known as ‘Inquérito’. The
first result of this inventory to the rural vernacular dwellings was a book titled Popular
Architecture in Portugal, published in 1961.
This work constitutes a remarkable register of an ancient rural Portugal at the exact moment it
was about to disappear. This would guarantee the importance of this survey both in the field of
anthropology and in the history of photography.
But the fact that it was done by the second generation of modern architects, interested in
expressing the regional diversity of our vernacular architecture, guarantees it a paramount place
in the history of modern Portuguese architecture.
Moreover, the ‘Inquérito’ was, from the first moment, understood as a return to the source –
that is, to vernacular architecture - in the sense that it creates an honest, active and healthy
regionalism. This attitude is in the origin of what was considered a "third way" in Portuguese
modern architecture, characterized by a strong connection between tradition and modernity, in
a moment when the principles of the modern movement were being critically questioned.
But it also brought about a repository of images that have been feeding the imagination of the
builders of resorts, especially in the Portuguese coast, creating a perversion of the result desired
by its the authors.
This paper intends to identify the appropriation of vernacular in Portuguese architecture from
the sixties to present days.
This study results from the work developed under the research project in progress The “Popular
Architecture in Portugal”. A Critical Look, coordinated by Pedro Vieira de Almeida.
Keywords: vernacular architecture, Portuguese architecture, modern movement, architectural
heritage
312
ISVS-6, April 19-21, 2012, Famagusta, North Cyprus
The Survey on Regional Architecture
Between 1955 and 1960 the so-called Inquérito à Arquitectura Regional [Survey on Regional
Architecture] was undertaken in Portugal. A systematic survey of vernacular building in the
country resulted from it, one that underlines the particular interest of its authors in rural
dwelling structures. In fact, with this work Portuguese architects sought to demonstrate the
diversity of popular housing solutions, as well as to provide to ‘students and professionals of
construction […] the basis for an honest, active and healthy regionalism’, as it was stated by the
architect Keil do Amaral in the text that first launched the idea [1]. Promoted by the Portuguese
Architects’ Union, with financial support from the government [2], the Survey was carried out by
six teams of architects, each team being responsible for one of the six regions in which the
country has been divided for this purpose. Each team gathered three architects who covered the
territory by car, scooter, on horseback or on foot, drawing and above all photographing
examples of vernacular architecture still ‘alive’
The collected material - about 20.000 photographs and drawings – was later treated and
selected to join the book in which the results were presented. Entitled Arquitectura Popular em
Portugal [Popular Architecture in Portugal] [3], this book was published in 1961 and reprinted in
1979, 1988 and 2004. With this work modern architects demonstrated the absence of a single
type of casa portuguesa [Portuguese house], as easily it can be seen from the analysis of the
published documentation, closing in their opinion, a problem inherited from the nineteenth
century [4].
Indeed, for the Survey’s authors, demonstrate the existence of diversity of popular architectural
solutions was a core argument from the beginning, one they opposed to quest for the
Portuguese house that had inherited from the previous century [5]. As a consequence, the teams
have departed for field work ‘militantly willing to read the diversity, all that in the national
territory results non uniform, disconnected’ instead of privileging ‘to read what in the country
are permanencies not only in time but also in space’ [6]. In other words, taken as a whole, the
Survey’s results were constrained by the specific gaze of each team that covered the territory.
This happened due to the methodological fragility that characterizes it. As an example, one
might call attention to the multiplicity of symbols adopted for the registration of vernacular
typologies. In fact each team choose their own graphic elements to identify those typologies in
maps corresponding to each study zone. The unsystematic notation of different types of
dwellings, as well as its characterization on a grid, according to individual criteria, makes it
almost impossible to set an effective global reading of the Survey.
Conversely, a strong interest for the formal aspects of popular architecture connects the teams,
reflecting the architectural formation of all authors. It should be noted that, taken as a whole,
the Survey had important consequences in the evolution of modern Portuguese architecture, as
we shall see. Moreover, the graphic and photographic record made for the Survey was very
important for an effective knowledge of contemporary rural Portugal.
Indeed, as Nuno Teotonio Pereira [7], one of the authors, has already noted, one of the most
immediate consequences of the Survey was its contribution to the expansion of the concept of
architectural heritage related to popular architecture and urban settlements. It is thus
undisputed that the Survey on Regional Architecture is an important record of a rural reality that
almost immediately disappeared.
313
M. H. Maia, A. Cardoso
Background and Context
Ten years after the publication of Popular Architecture in Portugal, Portuguese architectural
historiography and criticism became interested in this issue [8], which was getting density. Some
assumptions concerning its background and context are now commonly accepted. The
connection between the Survey and the problem of the quest for a Portuguese house, as well as
its consequences in modern Portuguese architecture are now clear. It is also accepted that its
origins are linked to the 1st National Congress of Architecture promoted in 1948 [9]. In this
Congress, modern architects reacted against the quest for a Portuguese house and the notion of
Portugueseness in architectural language [10] thus paving the way for the publication of a series
of texts demonstrating the error on which those ideas were based.
One must also stress the importance of the journal Arquitectura [Architecture] in the historical
context that gave rise to the Survey. As has already been underlined [11], by the late 1940s some
young architects had assumed control of this publication and were introducing their critique of
Functionalism’s values through its pages. It was in this journal that in 1947, Keil do Amaral
published the article Uma Iniciativa Necessária [A Necessary Initiative] [12]. In this text, Keil
defends the importance of collecting and surveying Portuguese vernacular architecture of
different regions of the country. In other words, he formulates the idea of the Survey.This idea
was not entirely new.
Indeed, without questioning the paternity attributed to Keil, it is important to remember the
prior existence of a number of official and unofficial surveys on popular architecture, to which
the idea of the Survey was also indebted [13]. Among them, we can highlight the Inquérito à
Habitação Rural [Survey of Rural Housing] which was completed in the late 1930s by
agronomists and also counted on official government support. These two surveys are different in
their approach to the rural dwelling. While the agronomist’s one denounced the miserable living
conditions of the inhabitants of these houses, in a clear challenge to the dominant discourse of
the time, the survey conducted by architects was characterized by a detachment from social
concerns, in favor of fascination for the formal aspects of popular architecture [14]. Moreover,
architects were well aware that the images chosen for publication produced ‘a distortion of the
real aspect of life conditions of the villages’ as it is confessed in the Introduction to the book
itself [15]. Nevertheless, this discrepancy explains why the agronomists were prevented by the
censorship to disclosed the results of their work, while the architects were received by Salazar
himself with a particularly manifestation of interest in the results of the Survey and fully
supporting the initiative of the Architects’ Union.
This has been explained [16] as resulting from ‘a curious coincidence of misunderstandings or
false pretences’ that decisively contributed to the achievement of the Survey. While the
government believed this action would reinforce the Portugueseness in national architecture,
the architects took advantage of this misunderstanding ‘trap[ping]an explosive documentary’
which would demonstrate the existence of as many ‘traditions’ as there were regions. The same
idea is conveyed in the Preface to the 2nd edition of Popular Architecture in Portugal [17]. This
text further reinforces the claim that the equivocation had been intentionally kept by the
architects to ensure government’s financial support crucial to the implementation of the project.
Following the fall of the dictatorial political regime in 1974, there has been an increase in the
interpretations of the survey as an act of resistance against the architectural impositions of the
regime. However, the very notion that the regime held some sort of ‘architectural control’ is not
consensual, and the idea of an imposition of a specific architectural language by the Salazar’s
regime has been questioned. Moreover the very idea of a ‘national style or styles’ imposed by
314
ISVS-6, April 19-21, 2012, Famagusta, North Cyprus
the government has also been considered as a basic misunderstanding of the Survey’s authors
themselves [18].
Appropriations
The impact of the publication of the survey was very significant in contemporary Portuguese
architectural culture and its outcomes have continued for ages. Undertaken at a historical
turning-point, when some of the principles of the modern movement were being critically
reviewed both nationally and internationally, the Survey encouraged modern architects to
recover national history and tradition. As a result ‘the architects began to use more freely,
without feeling they [were] betraying the basic principles of modern architecture, some
traditional elements that were previously considered unclean and therefore proscribed. This is
the case, for example, of the coverage in tile […] the thick masonry walls, […] the arc, […] or the
use of color […]” [19]
Indeed, in articulation with the theoretical aims of the Survey a third way [20] emerged in
Portuguese architecture using tradition in the construction of modernity. Commonly cited
examples of this ‘third way’ are the house of Ofir, by Fernando Távora [21], the house of Afonso
Barbosa and HICA’s [22] inns by Januario Godinho [23] or the house of the poet Ruben A., by
João Andresen [24]. Similarly, the architectural works of Viana de Lima [25], Nuno Teotonio
Pereira, Nuno Portas, Alvaro Siza and many others are also taken to be representative of this
architectural turn (Fig.1).
Figure 1: House of Vila Viçosa. Nuno Portas and Nuno Teotónio Pereira, 1957-59.
Photo by Pedro Vieira de Almeida, 1990
According to Manuel Mendes [26], the study of vernacular architecture has also brought a new
equilibrium ‘that had been deformed by the technological enlightenment of the Modern
Movement: the harmony between space, architecture and the life of the inhabitants, the
relation between transformation proposals and the existing landscape’. Rationalism,
functionality and an intended connection to the landscape were characteristics found by
architects in traditional regional architecture that had a decisive influence in the directions taken
by subsequent Portuguese architecture (Fig. 2). However, the way in which they built modernity
in direct liaison with tradition has varied enormously.
315
M. H. Maia, A. Cardoso
Figure 2: Hydroelectric of river Douro: houses in Picote neighbourhood. João Archer, 1953-54.
Arquivo Técnico da EDP, Photo by Alvão
Nuno Portas [27] calls our attention to the differences of interpretation between the survey
teams, ‘one more cultural, more instrumental or tactical the other’ that ‘announce the split, that
during the 1960s [...] divided the supporters of CIAM from the critics of CIAM’. This division
came into focus precisely in the relationship between tradition and modernity, and in its various
manners of understanding. In fact, in his degree thesis, Arnaldo Araújo, one of the Survey’s
architects, had already argued that it was in the ‘effort for analysis and detection of specific
needs of specific populations, as well as committed to local proposals for intervention’ that one
could ‘come to settle the basis of a new regionalism’ [28]. He also stated that ‘the Portuguese
architect, without having to abandon or reduce (and without being able to do so) his relations
with the universal principles (technical and aesthetic) of modern architecture, should get closer
to the realities of his people, in order to interpret their virtues and build a rooted Portuguese
architecture’ [29] (Fig. 3). Thus, it is not a coincidence that in 1956 the Portuguese committee to
the X CIAM, held in Dubrovnik, chose to present a rural community of the northern area of Trásos-Montes [30], precisely the region that was subjected to an overtly ethnological approach in
the Survey.
The importance of Portuguese presentation in CIAM X, directly connected to the ongoing Survey,
has already been highlighted as a strong contribution ‘for the revision of international method
condensed in the approach of the authentic life forms as an architectural inspiration’ [31]. But,
the publication of Popular Architecture in Portugal has had other architectural consequence,
rather unexpected and unwanted to its authors. In fact, the photographic registers published in
the Survey, provided a renewal of the architectural repertoire.
This repertoire was quickly appropriated for touristic enterprises and has appeared in the many
‘typical’ resort constructions, especially in the coastal areas of the country, reversing the
originally intended critical effect. As an example, we can mention the widespread use, outside its
functional context, of traditional south chimneys and courtyards in Algarve resorts. Finally, it
should be noted that, even if the vernacular Portugal drew and photographed in the Survey has
largely disappeared there are still some vestiges of it all through the country and in rare
occasions, curiously alive.
316
ISVS-6, April 19-21, 2012, Famagusta, North Cyprus
Figure 3: Arnaldo Araújo: Forms of Rural Habitat – North Bragança. Contribution to community
structure. C.O.D.A. (degree thesis), ESBAP, Porto, 1957
Arnaldo Araújo family archives, Photo by Alexandra Cardoso, 2002
This is the case of some of the avieiras settlements, i.e. fishing villages whose buildings are
wooden houses on stilts, to protect them from the abundant flooding of the Tagus river. These
houses continue to be inhabited nowadays, featuring juicy forms of appropriation, adaptation
and reuse of traditional dwellings (Fig. 4-5). Another example, which is characterized by its
exceptional social meaning and the self-expression of its composition, are 23 collective dwellings
located in a rural environment (Picanceira, Mafra), which were built in the nineteenth century
for agricultural workers who had come from Açores Island. The cylindrical shape of the facade
corresponds to an oven, whose chimney passes through the interior first floor bedroom and thus
effectively contributes to heat the house (Fig. 6-7).
317
M. H. Maia, A. Cardoso
Figures 4-5: Escaroupim (Salvaterra de Magos): old palafitic house, known as Avieiros, and new
constructions for storerooms. Photos by the authors, 2011
Figures 6-7: Picanceira (Mafra): collective dwellings
Photos by Nuno Pinto Cardoso, 2009
The Survey today
As has already been noted [32], the documentation produced during the survey can support
approaches directly related to architecture, but may also constitute an important source of
information for other research areas such as history, anthropology, sociology and photography.
With regard to architecture, the survey constitutes an important document in the history of
Portuguese architectural culture. Not only because it is one important historical testimony of its
time, but also because it constitutes ‘a serious challenge to our current critical conscience’ [33].
Two years ago, we begin to work on a research project that takes the Survey as a main working
document. The research project, titled Popular Architecture in Portugal: a critical look [34] is
based on the premise ‘that the critical discussion of the Survey maintains all its relevance, now
that the themes of the vernacular and regionalism have again entered into professional
discussions.’ [35] Indeed, it is an approach based on two complementary hypotheses we believe
are maximally determinants. We considered them as parameters in sordina:
 ‘Firstly, the notion of the generic importance of the greater or lesser degree of thickness
of the walls that delimit the architecture, shaping what we might call, on the one hand, a
poetics of thin walls, and on the other, a poetics of thick walls.
318
ISVS-6, April 19-21, 2012, Famagusta, North Cyprus
 Secondly, the notion of the importance of a transition-space in the general economics of
architectural expression’ [36].
In order to pursue our research we will study examples of vernacular architecture in Portugal (as
the ones mentioned above), inscribing our approach in the notion of vernacular presented by
Pedro Vieira de Almeida:
‘The idea of the vernacular in architecture has always meant, I believe, a construction bearing a
stratified expression over time, having a regional, spontaneous, popular, genuine character, in
the sense of being culturally candid, and not being dominated by erudite ideas which, very
frequently, represent only a very dubious version of that erudition.
As such, and contrary to what Vicent Canizaro [37] appears to conclude, it does not seem that
the vernacular can be merely conceived of as a response to a pure necessity, to the specific
conditions found in a specific location.
The vernacular also implies cultural choices, even if they are not aimed at a predetermined
cultural end. Naturally, these choices may very well be unconscious, but they never are
inherently causal. This is especially so because these choices are made within the framework of
specific cultural values which, in and of themselves, imply a particular mode of living, of being
and of relating to others. It is perhaps in this characteristic manner of living one’s specific
cultural values that may be established the border, one of the borders, between the notion of
the vernacular and the notion of regionalism in terms of culture.
The notion of the vernacular seems to presume a reality in which the expressive maturation was
not adulterated by any excess of information’ [38].
Acknowledgement
This work is funded with FEDER funds by the Operational Competitiveness Programme COMPETE and national funds by FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia within the project
FCT: PTDC/AUR-AQI/099063; COMPETE: FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER-008832.
References
[1] Amaral, Keil do. Uma iniciativa necessária. Arquitectura, 2ª Série Ano XX, nº 14, (Abril, 1947)
[2] The Architects’ Union was funded for this purpose by the Ministry of Public Works, and the
President of the Government, Salazar, was personally interested in the project. Vd. Preface
to the 1st edition of Arquitectura Popular em Portugal, Sindicato Nacional dos Arquitectos,
Lisboa, 1961.
[3] Arquitectura Popular em Portugal. Sindicato Nacional dos Arquitectos, Lisboa, 1st edition
1961 (2 vol.) 2nd edition; Associação dos Arquitectos Portugueses, Lisboa, 1980 (1 vol.); 3rd
edition: Associação dos Arquitectos Portugueses, Lisboa, 1988 (3vol.); 4th edition: Centro
Editor Livreiro da Ordem dos Arquitectos, Lisboa, 2004 (2 vol.). In this paper, all citations
refer to the 4th edition
[4] The problem of the casa portuguesa [Portuguese house] crosses the Portuguese
319
M. H. Maia, A. Cardoso
architectural culture the late nineteenth century and first half of the twentieth century. See
architectural culture the late nineteenth century and first half of the twentieth century. See
Maia, Maria Helena. From the ‘Portuguese House’ to the Survey on ‘Popular Architecture in
Portugal’: notes on the construction of Portuguese architectural identity. Proceeding of
International Conference Theoretical Currents: Architecture, Design and the Nation.
Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, 2010, pp. 136-44.
[5] Para um primeiro levantamento da historiografia do Inquérito e dos problemas a ele
associados see Cardoso, Alexandra e Maia, Maria Helena. Tradition and Modernity. The
Historiography of the Survey to the Popular Architecture in Portugal in Approaches to
Modernity. CEAA, Porto (2010), in press.
[6] Almeida, Pedro Vieira de. Apontamentos para uma Teoria da Arquitectura, Livros Horizonte,
Lisboa, 2008, p. 110
[7] Pereira, Nuno Teotónio. Reflexos Culturais do Inquérito à Arquitectura Regional, J-A, nº 195,
March/April, 2000, pp. 69-71
[8] França, José Augusto. Raul Lino. Arquitecto da Geração de 90 in Raul Lino, Fundação
Calouste Gulbenkian, Lisboa, 1970, p. 106-08
[9] França, José Augusto. A Arte em Portugal no Século XX, Bertrand, Lisboa, 1974
[10] França, José Augusto. Raul Lino. Arquitecto da Geração de 90 in Raul Lino. Fundação
Calouste Gulbenkian, Lisboa, 1970; Portas, Nuno. A Evolução da Arquitectura Moderna em
Portugal: uma interpretação in História da Arquitectura Moderna of Bruno Zevi, 2nd volume,
Editora Arcádia, Lisboa, 1978
[11] Portas, Nuno. A Evolução da Arquitectura Moderna em Portugal: uma interpretação in
História da Arquitectura Moderna of Bruno Zevi, Editora Arcádia, Lisboa, vol. 2, 1978
[12] Amaral, Keil do. Uma iniciativa necessária, Arquitectura, 2ª Série, Ano XX, nº 14, Abril, 1947
[13] See Almeida, Pedro Vieira de and Maia, Maria Helena. As décadas pós-Congresso. Os anos
50 in História da Arte em Portugal.14: Arquitectura Moderna. Edited by Pedro Vieira de
Almeida and José Manuel Fernandes. Alfa, Lisboa, 1986
[14] With the exception of the Trás-os-Montes team who, perhaps because of the extreme
poverty of the region, paid more attention to the living conditions of the local populations.
See Almeida, Pedro Vieira de e Cardoso, Alexandra. Arnaldo Araújo, Arquitecto (1925-1982).
CEAA, Porto, 2002.
[15] Arquitectura Popular em Portugal. Centro Editor Livreiro da Ordem dos Arquitectos, Lisboa,
2004, vol. 1, p. XXV.
[16] Portas, Nuno. A Evolução da Arquitectura Moderna em Portugal: uma interpretação in
História da Arquitectura Moderna of Bruno Zevi, Editora Arcádia, Lisboa, vol. 2, 1978
[17] Preface to the 2nd edition of Arquitectura Popular em Portugal, Associação dos Arquitectos
Portugueses, Lisboa, 1979
[18] Almeida, Pedro Vieira de and Maia, Maria Helena. As décadas pós-Congresso. Os anos 50 in
História da Arte em Portugal.14: Arquitectura Moderna, Edited by Pedro Vieira de Almeida
320
ISVS-6, April 19-21, 2012, Famagusta, North Cyprus
and José Manuel Fernandes. Alfa, Lisboa, 1986 and Almeida, Pedro Vieira de. A Arquitectura
No Estado Novo. Uma leitura crítica, Livros Horizonte, Lisboa, 2004
[19] Pereira, Nuno Teotónio. Reflexos Culturais do Inquérito à Arquitectura Regional in J-A, nº
195, Março/Abril, 2000.
[20] Portas, Nuno. Arquitecto Fernando Távora: 12 anos de actividade profissional, Arquitectura,
3rd series, 71, Lisboa, July, 1961
[21] Portas, Nuno. Arquitecto Fernando Távora: 12 anos de actividade profissional, Arquitectura,
3rd series, 71, Lisboa, July, 1961
[22] HICA is the way in which the Hydroelectric of Cávado is referred to.
[23] Portas, Nuno. A Evolução da Arquitectura Moderna em Portugal: uma interpretação in
História da Arquitectura Moderna of Bruno Zevi, Editora Arcádia, Lisboa, vol. 2, 1978;
Tostões, Ana. Os Verdes Anos na Arquitectura Portuguesa dos Anos 50. FAUP, Porto, 1997
(1994).
[24] Tostões, Ana. Modernização e Regionalismo 1948-1961 in Arquitectura do Século XX.
Portugal. Ed. by Annette Becker, Ana Tostões and Wilfred Wang. Portugal-Frankfurt 97,
1997, pp. 41-53
[25] Fernandez, Sérgio. Percurso – Arquitectura Portuguesa 1930/1974, Edições da FAUP, Porto,
1988 (1985); Almeida, Pedro Vieira de and Maia, Maria Helena. As décadas pós-Congresso.
Os anos 50 in História da Arte em Portugal.14: Arquitectura Moderna, Edited by Pedro Vieira
de Almeida and José Manuel Fernandes. Alfa, Lisboa, 1986
[26] Mendes, Manuel. Porto, The School and its Projects 1940-1986 in Architectures à Porto.
Pierre Mardaga, Brussels , 1990, pp. 42-84
[27] Portas, Nuno. A Evolução da Arquitectura Moderna em Portugal: uma interpretação in
História da Arquitectura Moderna of Bruno Zevi, Editora Arcádia, Lisboa, vol. 2, 1978
[28] Apud Almeida, Pedro Vieira de e Cardoso, Alexandra. Arnaldo Araújo, Arquitecto (19251982). CEAA, Porto, 2002, p. 14
[29] Araújo, Arnaldo. CODA: Formas do Habitat Rural – Norte de Bragança. Contribuição para a
estrutura da comunidade, ESBAP, Porto, 1957
[30] The Portuguese representation was constituted by six architects, four of them were of the
Survey teams: Alfredo Viana de Lima, Alberto Neves, Fernando Távora, team leader of the
Zone 1 (Minho) and all the team of the Zone 2 (Trás-os-Montes): Octávio Lixa Filgueiras
(leader team) Arnaldo Araújo and Carlos Carvalho Dias.
[31] Tostões, Ana. Os Verdes Anos na Arquitectura Portuguesa dos Anos 50. FAUP, Porto, 1997
(1994), p. 165
[32] Pereira, Nuno Teotónio. Preface to the 3rd edition of Arquitectura Popular em Portugal,
Associação dos Arquitectos Portugueses, Lisboa, 1988
[33] Almeida, Pedro Vieira de et al. - Project application presented to FCT in February 2009.
321
M. H. Maia, A. Cardoso
[34] This project, directed by Pedro Vieira de Almeida and funded by FCT [Foundation for
Science and Technology] began in April 2010 and will continue until March 2013. A
preliminary clarification of the development of this project has been published by CEAA in
April, and it also marks the launch of the research work (See Almeida, Pedro Vieira de. Dois
Parâmetros de Arquitectura Postos em Surdina. O Propósito de Uma Investigação, CEAA,
Porto, 2010). In this project, the approach to the survey will be structured and structuring in
keeping the study in constant critical dialogue with the architecture of today and in constant
interaction with theoretical elements connected to the expressiveness characteristic of
some of the modern erudite languages, maintaining in parallel the vernacular and the
contemporary.
[35] Almeida, Pedro Vieira de et al. Project application presented to FCT in February 2009.
[36] Almeida, Pedro Vieira de. Dois Parâmetros de Arquitectura Postos em Surdina. O Propósito
de Uma Investigação, CEAA, Porto, 2010, p. 8
[37] Canizaro, Vicent. (ed.). Architectural Regionalism. Collected Writings on Place, Modernity
and Tradition, Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 2007, p. 20.
[38] Almeida, Pedro Vieira de. Dois Parâmetros de Arquitectura Postos em Surdina. O Propósito
de Uma Investigação, CEAA, Porto, 2010, p. 11-12
322