None of the sources consulted provides information on González de Amezúa’s distant ancestors; some authors claim that the family originated from La Rioja.

[3] At least since the late 1860s he had been working as a broker at the stock exchange and reportedly greatly contributed to its operations during the turbulent times of the Glorious Revolution and the early Restoration.

[18] Amezúa entered the bar and was employed in the office of "a known lawyer" in Madrid;[19] some authors are more specific and maintain that he practiced in the firm of Luis Díaz Cobeña.

[24] Ramón became an engineer and a nationally recognized organist; from 1991 to 2008 he presided over the Real Academia de Bellas Artes and until 2007 he led the executive board of TeleMadrid.

[33] At an unspecified time in the early 20th century he either inherited or otherwise assumed management of the La Poveda sugar plant in Arganda del Rey, built probably by either one of his ancestors or one of his relatives.

[37] In the late 1920s he rose to high positions in Sociedad Azucarera de España, the Spanish sugar trust,[38] and co-ordinated some of its projects also in the early 1930s.

Ramón was married to his sister; Pino concluded that a prestigious academic with a business background would help him open many doors, and offered Amezúa the position of president of the board.

In 1924 he contracted Luis Gutiérrez Soto,[47] at the time the Chief Architect of the Ministry of Public Instruction, to design his house in the prestigious so-called Triángulo Cultural quarter in Madrid.

Amezúa lived there during the following thirty-two years;[49] currently the building serves as Casa de Galicia, the property of regional Galician authorities.

[52] Amezúa owned also another rural estate, his favorite summer getaway, named Dehesa de Cid and located in the village of Sanchorreja near Ávila.

He was inspired mostly by his erudite uncle Ramón Nocedal[54] and his guests met during weekly intellectual sessions, mostly Marcelino Menéndez y Pelayo; despite the age difference, the two became close friends.

[57] He also prologued or contributed to a number of studies or re-editions[58] and published a handful of shorter articles on the author of Don Quijote in the popular press.

Minor contributions are articles scattered across scientific periodicals and dealing with various aspects of 17th century Spain, including municipal regulations, early police forces, distinguished personalities or travelling.

[74] In the 1940s and 1950s he contributed some 100 pieces to ABC and La Vanguardia;[75] apart from a few exceptions they all dwelled on the history of literature and culture,[76] though some contained political undertones, e.g. related to Gibraltar.

[79] Another area of Amezúa’s publishing activity was political theory; like in literature and historiography, he excelled in editorial work and providing introductory or analytical commentary.

Another example is a prologue to Política general by Juan Vázquez de Mella, (1932), already calibrated as a Traditionalist propaganda publication with contributions of Conde Rodezno, Víctor Pradera, Salvador Minguijón or Miguel Fernandez Peñaflor;[80] there are also other minor pieces.

[90] In 1935 he entered the Junta Protectora de las Bibliotecas y Archivos Ecclesiásticos, a body set up by the Church and entrusted with protection of its written heritage.

[93] It was soon replaced by the Consejo Superior de Investigaciónes Científicas; within CSIC he later presided in perpetuity over a sub-section named Patronato Saavedra Fajardo.

The families lived closely[114] and Amezúa spent hours in Nocedal’s enormous library; he also at least witnessed intellectual sessions staged there and naturally absorbed the Integrist outlook.

Amezúa worked to re-organize municipal economic structures,[120] especially with regards to tenancy[121] and city-controlled companies;[122] he remained engaged in the development of the local tram network[123] and was behind improvements to the Canal de Isabel II, the urban water supplier.

His only official engagement prior to the fall of the monarchy was the 1930 appointment to the Comisión Mixta Arbitral Agraria, an arbitrary board set up by the Ministerio de Trabajo y Previsión.

[136] He was evacuated from the Republican zone some time in 1937, as in early 1938 he was already nominated to the Francoist Instituto de España, based in Burgos;[137] he returned to Madrid in 1939.

[138] In 1943 he co-signed the so-called Reclamación del Poder, a letter by key Carlist pundits addressed to Franco; the signatories demanded introduction of the traditionalist monarchy.

Amezúa’s suggestions bordered loyalty to the regent; he advocated nomination of new the Junta Nacional, clarification of the regency question, forging a specific and clear line versus the regime and other monarchist currents, re-organizing Comunión and approaching Don Juan with a view of him adopting the traditionalist principles.

[145] There is no follow-up known and it seems that Amezúa decided to remain loyal to Fal and Don Javier, yet he apparently withdrew into the back row ; there is no information on his party activities in the late 1940s and the early 1950s.

[147] When in early 1956 the claimant visited Spain and resided in San Sebastían, Amezúa travelled there, met him and once more endorsed the Juanista option, apparently with the regent increasingly leaning towards it.

He gained nationwide recognition upon his 1929 entry to the Real Academia de la Lengua, which was acknowledged in a number of major press titles.

Today they might be either briefly mentioned or merely footnoted in studies on Cervantes,[153] Lope de Vega,[154] Zayas,[155] Quevedo,[156] prints in old Spain[157] or even more distant works on slavery and communication.

[158] His most important scientific contribution is supposed to be the term novela cortesana, the courtly novel,[159] a category accepted and reproduced by present-day historians of literature; some even admit that it triggered an “astonishingly productive new direction in Golden Age studies, it has survived a half century of scrutiny and debate”.

[168] An American scholar lambasted him as “crítico fascista”, who, driven by his own personal experience – especially the Catholic upbringing and the Jesuit college frequented – entirely misrepresented Cervantes and focused on marginal threads of his works and lifetime, e.g. the Valladolid spell; he does not spare damning qualifications like “fascist”, “catolicismo jesuita de Amezúa” or “crítico bajo el techo del franquismo”.