Talk:Royal Alcázar of Madrid

Jean Ranc ?

The supposed source:[1]

Does not say Ranc caused the fire, actually states:
"En la Nochebuena de 1734, un misterioso fuego brotó del corazón del Alcázar de Madrid, un antiguo castillo medieval que la dinastía de los Austrias había reconvertido en palacio residencial. El incendio, según se sospecha, se originó en el aposento del pintor de Corte Jean Ranc. A pesar de los esfuerzos por apagar el fuego, que se extendió a lo largo de cuatro días, nada se pudo hacer por salvar el edificio, ni a las 500 obras de arte que allí perecieron, entre ellas varios cuadros de Diego Velázquez."
"Las causas del incendio nunca quedaron claras. Supuestamente el fuego surgió en el aposento del pintor de Corte Jean Ranc, donde un grupo mozos del palacio incendiaron por accidente uno de los cortinajes de la estancia. Lo poco que agradaba el edificio a Felipe V, la extraña ausencia de la familia real ese día –que normalmente celebraba los maitines de Nochebuena en la Capilla Real–, el traslado previo de algunas de las obras de arte y la rapidez con la que surgió la propuesta de crear un nuevo palacio en esos mismos terrenos son los ingredientes que alimentaron la sospecha de que el Monarca sopló no para apagar las llamas, sino para avivarlas. "

Translated:
"On Christmas Eve 1734, a mysterious fire erupted heart of Madrid Alcazar, an ancient medieval castle Hapsburg dynasty had turned into residential palace. The fire, as suspected, originated in the chamber of the court painter Jean Ranc. Despite efforts to extinguish the fire, which spread over four days, nothing could be done to save the building, nor the 500 works of art perished there, including several paintings by Diego Velázquez."
"The cause of the fire never became clear. Supposedly the fire erupted in the chamber of the court painter Jean Ranc, where a group of palace boys burned by accident one of the curtains of stay. What little we liked the building Felipe V, the strange absence of the royal family that day which normally celebrated Christmas Eve Matins in the chapel Real-, the previous transfer of some of the works of art and how quickly emerged the proposal to create a new palace in the same grounds are the ingredients that fueled the suspicion that blew the monarch not to smother the flames..."

Is this the source that "proves" Ranc caused the fire? --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:35, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

That 'mysterious" fire and of that conspirative theory says that because the French House of Bourbon did not like this alcazar because it was austere, it was in complete opposition with the French taste which had imbued his life, so this fire could be premeditated, although there would be no negative if built another palace, but there was that competition of sumptuosity between dynasties... but historians agrees that the fire was started from the Jean Ranc chamber--Vvven (talk) 00:03, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

See this article, it states [2]

French chroniclers were always the most critical of the architecture of Alcázar of Madrid and who actually created the "black" legend of the dark and decrepitude of the building... ...After several days burning finally the fire was extinguished. The building had been reduced to rubble, except for the area of vaults and lower Hall than had gotten better preserved by its remoteness to the flames. However, all that was left standing was demolished as French Philip V was determined to build his new Royal Palace on the ruins of the old Alcazar, although this is not the most suitable site. So a new dynasty rose victorious over the ruins of the ancient symbol of the House of Hapsburg. Quite a gesture, of course, full of political significance. So wanted to make delete to the Habsburgs, the Alcázar and the fact of its fire that not preserved drawings, drawings or paintings that embody this episode we not even possess relations of the facts that have detail what happened. Something that no longer strange being the biggest disaster suffered by the royal collections

--Vvven (talk) 00:35, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

That "article" appears to be a blog, which is not considered a reliable source.

Also, I see nothing in the quote stating Jean Ranc started/caused the fire.

I do not care if Ranc started the fire or not, but if we are going to state that he did cause it, we will need a published secondary source. Considering the sources I have found, it appears most historians have no idea how the fire started. --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:55, 14 May 2016 (UTC)