Podcast Summary: Todo Concostrina – Acontece que no es poco | 24 de diciembre de 1734: Arde el Alcázar. Un incendio muy oportuno

Podcast: Todo Concostrina, SER Podcast
Host: Nieves Concostrina
Guest/Co-host: Marta
Date: December 24, 2024
Episode Main Theme:
A lively and personal retelling of the catastrophic fire that consumed the Alcázar of Madrid on Christmas Eve, 1734. Through her signature wit and historical insight, Nieves Concostrina explores how the fire affected the Spanish royal family, dramatically reshaped Madrid’s skyline, led to immense cultural loss, and contributed to the erasure of important female artists like Sofonisba Anguissola.

Episode Structure and Key Discussion Points

1. Setting the Scene: An Unpeaceful Christmas Eve

[00:59 - 01:12]

• The episode opens with warning and humor about fire hazards during the holidays.
• Nieves draws a direct line to the historical subject:

  “El 24 de diciembre de 1734 hubo un incendio muy gordo en el Alcázar de Madrid... El incendio fue tan gordo... lo poco que quedó en pie, que fue prácticamente nada, pues todo ennegrecido con una peste a humo que tiraba para atrás.” (Nieves, 01:12)

• The fire completely obliterated the Alcázar, paving the way for the construction of the Palacio Real – a style more attuned to Bourbon (French) tastes.

2. The Origin of the Fire and Early Conspiracies

[03:25 - 05:29]

• The fire began in the rooms of painter Jean Ranc, likely from an unattended chimney.

  “Parece que el fuego se originó en las habitaciones del pintor francés Jean Ranc... la chimenea que estaba encendida... se desmadró. Saltaría alguna chispa, nadie estaba al cuidado.” (Nieves, 03:36)

• The royal family was notably absent, which stoked rumors they might have welcomed (or even orchestrated) the destruction:

  “La familia real no estaba en el Alcázar... otro motivo de sospecha.” (Nieves, 05:29)

3. Immediate Response and Tragic Ineptitude

[05:29 - 07:53]

• The fire was first noticed by nearby monks, not palace staff.
• Confusion with the Christmas “Misa del Gallo” delayed the alarm; people thought the bells signaled the mass, not a disaster.
• Authorities refused entry to ordinary citizens for fear of looting, letting the fire rage:

  “…no se dejó entrar a la gente a que ayudaran a apagar el incendio por miedo al pillaje.” (Nieves, 07:03)

4. The Catastrophic Losses

[07:53 - 09:59]

• The fire burned for four days, practically destroying the Alcázar; only the Torre de Carlos I and two facades survived.
• Estimated 500 irreplaceable works of art perished—paintings by Ribera, Tiziano, El Greco, Rafael, Rubens, Leonardo, Tintoretto, and notably, works by Sofonisba Anguissola.

  “Se quemó todo. Se quemaron hasta los aleros que no se podía llevar nadie.” (Nieves, 07:53)

• Some masterpieces, like Las Meninas by Velázquez, were saved by throwing them out the window; over 1,100 works were rescued.

5. Spotlight on Sofonisba Anguissola: Art, Gender, and Erasure

[10:20 - 16:32]

• The disaster intensified the historical invisibility of Sofonisba Anguissola and other women artists.
• Many of her paintings were lost or misattributed to men—even as recently as the 21st century.

  “La ausencia y el silencio son obstáculos habituales en la carrera pública y póstuma de una pintora. Otro obstáculo es la autoridad arrebatada. Fin de la cita.” (Citing Peyo H. Riaño, 11:52)

• Example: Her works, including a well-known portrait of Felipe II, were attributed for centuries to Alfonso Sánchez Coello.

  “…ese retrato hasta 1989 ha estado atribuido a Sánchez Coello, porque claro, cómo iba a ser eso obra de una mujer? Y no, resultó que era de Sofonisba.” (Nieves, 15:32)

6. The Loss and Recent Revival of Velázquez’s “La expulsión de los moriscos”

[16:32 - 19:30]

• The fire destroyed “La expulsión de los moriscos,” a major work by Velázquez, which elevated him to royal painter status.
• In 2024, artist Fernando Sánchez Castillo, with Paula García and AI tools, recreated an approximation of the lost painting based on historical documentation and a rediscovered preliminary sketch.

  “No es que hayan reproducido la pintura, porque eso sería trampa. Han hecho un vídeo de cuatro minutos…” (Nieves, 16:41)

7. The Bourbon Perspective: Happy to Rebuild

[22:18 - 24:40]

• The episode’s trademark irreverence: The Bourbon dynasty appeared to welcome the fire, which rid them of a fortress-like, “ugly” Habsburg Alcázar in favor of a French-style palace.

  “Felipe V, que lo derriben, que me tiren esto... siempre ha sido sospechoso porque el Alcázar era horrible para su gusto.” (Nieves, 22:33)

• Nieves humorously compares Felipe V’s possible attitude to Hitler’s infamous “¿Arde París?” question.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On holiday fire prevention:
  “Cuidado con las velitas hoy. Cuidado con los adornos navideños… Dejen a los bomberos que pasen también la noche en paz…”
  — Nieves, [01:12]

• On the loss of cultural patrimony:
  “Se quemó todo... S estime que fueron unas 500 obras de arte, pero pinturas de Ribera, de Tiziano, de El Greco, Giordano, Rafael, Rubens, Leonardo, Tintoretto, Sofonisba Anguisola...”
  — Nieves, [07:53]

• On artistic erasure:
  “La ausencia y el silencio son obstáculos habituales en la carrera pública y póstuma de una pintora. Otro obstáculo es la autoridad arrebatada.” (citing Peyo H. Riaño)
  — Nieves, [11:52]

• Wry humor comparing the Alcázar fire to “Arde París”:
  “Pues yo me imagino a Felipe V. Pero ¿Ha terminado ya de quemarse el Alcázar o qué? No lo sé. Seguramente no fue él. Seguro que no. Pero siempre ha sido sospechoso…”
  — Nieves, [22:33]

Timestamps for Key Moments

| Timestamp | Segment/Event | | ---------- | --------------------------------------------------------------- | | 01:12 | Context for the Alcázar fire and Nieves’s witty warning | | 03:36 | How the fire started (official version) | | 05:29 | Why the royal family was absent; monks spot the fire | | 07:53 | Four days of fire: extent of destruction and details on losses | | 09:59 | Discussion of lost masterworks, especially by women | | 10:20 | Sofonisba Anguissola’s story and erasure | | 13:40 | On misattribution of Sofonisba’s works | | 16:32 | Loss and recreation of Velázquez’s “La expulsión de los moriscos”| | 19:38 | The role of historical description and sketches in the recreation| | 22:33 | Bourbon ‘enthusiasm’ for rebuilding; the “Arde París” comparison|

Tone and Style

Nieves Concostrina tells history with cheeky skepticism, irreverence, and a dash of personal experience. Her style is direct, unafraid to blend earnest commentary with humor, and consistently attentive to the overlooked, particularly women and the less powerful. Marta acts as facilitator and foil, clarifying points for listeners and prompting deeper dives into details.

Conclusion

This episode delves deep into one of Madrid’s greatest artistic disasters, dissecting its causes, its opportunistic “beneficiaries”, and the long-term ripple effects on art history, especially for neglected female artists. Nieves Concostrina’s narrative makes the episode accessible, funny, and memorably insightful. For those interested in lost art, royal machinations, and the fate of forgotten women, this is required listening.