Notre Dame Cathedral

Tiassa

Tiassa

Let us not launch the boat ...
Valued Senior Member
A few minutes ago I wandered upstairs, past the television droning msnbc, where the host was speaking via telephone with historian Elizabeth Lev, as they watched cycling footage of the burning Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. The network host interrupted, explaining that word has just emerged from the French Ministry of the Interior that firefighters might not be able to save the Cathedral.

The sound that emerged from Lev was that of shock. A weak and plaintive tone, and all she could say was, "What?" So the anchor repeated herself, and was greeted by fifteen seconds of silence before coaxing the art historian back to speech.

Only a moment before, Lev had been trying to consider the future of Notre Dame, and in that moment it seemed to burn away.

I'm waiting for certain information that we can't have now, because it remains necessarily unresolved. Meanwhile, circumstance can pique easy conspiracism: Everything else going on in France; Holy Week; fire started within minutes of facility evening closure; even as a construction accident, the idea that the whole complex was so firetrap hazardous seems absurd compared to its historical significance. So I'm waiting for reality to dispel that knot of suspicion.

So I'm utterly uncertain what goes here, because at this point it's just a matter of waiting and watching and wondering what just happened.
 
Apparently they're a bit more optimistic about saving the building now... well, the stonework at least.
 
Sarkus said:
Apparently they're a bit more optimistic about saving the building now... well, the stonework at least.
Click to expand...

Hopefully. It doesn't look good.

The way I hear it, the medieval construction methods left it with a lead sheet roof specifically designed to keep water out. That's supported by a wooden framework. All of that is over the stone arch roof that people see from inside. Over 800 years the wooden part of the structure got very dry and became a firetrap. If a fire started in there, started by a construction worker or something, the Paris firemen could spray all the water they like on the lead sheeting on one side or the stone on the other, and wouldn't reach the fire.

And as the wood goes, the lead sheeting will collapse and maybe melt. If that brings down the stone arch below, then the whole building, whose forces were very carefully balanced by the builders, will likely come down.

I'm not big on praying, but I really hope that as much of this structure and the art it contains survives as is possible. It is/was one of humanity's great treasures. Something like 800 years old.
 
Last edited:
Yazata said:
The way I hear it, the medieval construction methods left it with a lead sheet roof specifically designed to keep water out. That's supported by a wooden framework. All of that is over the stone arch roof that people see from inside. Over 800 years the wooden part of the structure got very dry and became a firetrap. If a fire started in there, started by a construction worker or something, the Paris firemen could spray all the water they like on the lead sheeting on one side or the stone on the other, and wouldn't reach the fire.
Click to expand...

This starts to answer one of my questions. But the part that keeps nagging has to do with the idea of how the fire spread. I was never an actual professional in the insurance industry, working administrative services at the time, but, still, the idea of underwriting a project of that scale under circumstances when a small accidental fire can so quickly spread to the rest of the complex just grates against my understanding of a commerce sector so given to risk mitigation that, over seventy-five years ago, insurers consulted with death camp administrators to advise on safety equipment and protocols to reduce worker compensation claims among the soldiers loading corpses into ovens. It's not a stretch to imagine the underwriters and adjusters in the select risk division I worked for chattering their theses about what must have gone wrong and who failed to do what if this turns out to be a construction accident.
 
It seems to me that they should have installed a gaseous fire-suppression system in the internal spaces, halon or something like that.

That should still be done in other surviving medieval cathedrals in England, France and wherever, that have similar construction and vulnerabilities.
 
I agree with the comments above but I'm not sure I get the emphasis on the "lead roof specifically designed to keep water out". Aren't all roofs specifically designed to keep water out?

I'm hoping for the best regarding the structure. They were able to get some art work and statutes out. The stone structure will probably be OK. The rest can be rebuilt I guess. It's too bad that it has to be rebuilt.

You wouldn't think, with construction going on, that a fire suppression system would have already been installed. I'm sure there are legitimate reasons why this is hard to do.
 
They lost the spire and most of the roof but the stone parts and the 2 towers survived.
 
Did the stained glass windows survive? I have read contradictory reports.
dsc01646d.jpg
 
Tiassa said:
A few minutes ago I wandered upstairs, past the television droning msnbc, where the host was speaking via telephone with historian Elizabeth Lev, as they watched cycling footage of the burning Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. The network host interrupted, explaining that word has just emerged from the French Ministry of the Interior that firefighters might not be able to save the Cathedral.

The sound that emerged from Lev was that of shock. A weak and plaintive tone, and all she could say was, "What?" So the anchor repeated herself, and was greeted by fifteen seconds of silence before coaxing the art historian back to speech.

Only a moment before, Lev had been trying to consider the future of Notre Dame, and in that moment it seemed to burn away.

I'm waiting for certain information that we can't have now, because it remains necessarily unresolved. Meanwhile, circumstance can pique easy conspiracism: Everything else going on in France; Holy Week; fire started within minutes of facility evening closure; even as a construction accident, the idea that the whole complex was so firetrap hazardous seems absurd compared to its historical significance. So I'm waiting for reality to dispel that knot of suspicion.

So I'm utterly uncertain what goes here, because at this point it's just a matter of waiting and watching and wondering what just happened.
Click to expand...
What a terrible thing to watch. "A sign perhaps" no doubt was going through many peoples minds as they watched the spire topple.

I believe you are being quite reasonable to be a tad suspicious.
From what I have seen
  • The fire started exactly where the maximum fire damage and speed could happen. ( according to reports here)
  • It was started directly under the spire ( all timber ) and one of the greater symbols of the church. ( according to reports here)
  • There was no fire prevention equipment installed.
  • A fire could have been deliberately lit and disguised as an accident very easily. A little kindling , a frayed wire or two....
  • The current anarchist turmoil (yellow vest) and the recent riots using the Churches restoration as an excuse.
  • The timing was perfect for maximum effect.
  • Recent angst about sexual abuse by the clergy of the Catholic church.

yep. every reason to be suspicious or at least ask the question IMO:

Was the fire deliberately lit, disguised as an accident, or was it purely an accident?

I am sure the French authorities are seriously looking into the possibility given the rise in global extremism and recent French terrorist and yellow shirt issues.

Could it have been spontaneous due to heat build up in the attic?
 
Regarding the spate of Catholic church ...uhm issues this was posted to the Conversation today.
58822260_2580129792014633_6745478758091718656_n.png

so yeah there is a possibility that Notre Dam inferno may have been a part of a global push against Catholics...
either by conspiracy, or by copy cat inspiration.
 
Tiassa said:
So I'm waiting for reality to dispel that knot of suspicion.
Click to expand...

i have been wondering how many undocumented illegal immigrants are parading as yellow jackets trying to bring anarchy to France.


setting fire to a foreign motor-vehicle stock pile import yard ? that's french !
setting fire to private motor vehicles ? that doesn't seem french at all !

spray painting the Arc de Triomphe ? that doesn't seem very French either.

Quantum Quack said:
so yeah there is a possibility that Notre Dam inferno may have been a part of a global push against Catholics...
either by conspiracy, or by copy cat inspiration.
Click to expand...

attaching iconography to your terrorism helps polarise material aspects of social cohesion.
this undermines the social interaction of religious tolerance
 
In 1986, Reynald Secher argued that the actions of the French republican government during the revolt in the Vendée (1793–1796), a popular mostly Catholic uprising against the anti-clerical Republican government during the French Revolution was the first modern genocide.[152]
Secher's claims caused a minor uproar in France and mainstream authorities rejected Secher's claims.[153][154] Timothy Tackett countered that "the Vendée was a tragic civil war with endless horrors committed by both sides—initiated, in fact, by the rebels themselves.
The Vendeans were no more blameless than were the republicans. The use of the word genocide is wholly inaccurate and inappropriate."[155] However, historians Frank Chalk and Kurt Jonassohn consider the Vendée a case of genocide.[156]
Historian Pierre Chaunu called the Vendée the first ideological genocide.[157] Adam Jones estimates that 150,000 Vendeans died in what he also considers a genocide.
src : wiki​

French revolution - genocide (?) against a rebellion against anti-clerical policy of the new Government.

Now that is France as well...

I think it is a stretch to seriously consider undocumented migrants as being yellow vest protesters.

More likely alt- right extreme nationalism at the core with anarchy as the their agenda.

Potentially to bring down the Macron Government in favor of Marine Le Pen of the National Rally party formally known as the National front.

Just thoughts....
 
Last edited:
Quantum Quack said:
French revolution
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Revolution
was a period of far-reaching social and political upheaval in France and its colonies beginning in 1789
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huguenots#Wars_of_religion

Following the accidental death of Henry II in 1559, his son succeeded as King Francis II along with his wife, the Queen Consort, also known as Mary Queen of Scots. During the eighteen months of the reign of Francis II, Mary encouraged a policy of rounding up French Huguenots on charges of heresy and putting them in front of Catholic judges, and employing torture and burning as punishments for dissenters. Mary returned to Scotland a widow, in the summer of 1561.[36]
Click to expand...

Criticism and conflict with the Catholic Church
See also: Criticism of the Catholic Church
Like other religious reformers of the time, Huguenots felt that the Catholic Church needed a radical cleansing of its impurities, and that the Pope represented a worldly kingdom, which sat in mocking tyranny over the things of God, and was ultimately doomed. Rhetoric like this became fiercer as events unfolded, and eventually stirred up a reaction in the Catholic establishment.

Fanatically opposed to the Catholic Church, the Huguenots attacked priests, monks, nuns, monasticism, images, and church buildings. Most of the cities in which the Huguenots gained a hold saw iconoclast riots in which altars and images in churches, and sometimes the buildings themselves were torn down. Ancient relics and texts were destroyed; the bodies of saints exhumed and burned. The cities of Bourges, Montauban and Orléans saw substantial activity in this regard.

The Huguenots transformed themselves into a definitive political movement thereafter. Protestant preachers rallied a considerable army and a formidable cavalry, which came under the leadership of Admiral Gaspard de Coligny. Henry of Navarre and the House of Bourbon allied themselves to the Huguenots, adding wealth and territorial holdings to the Protestant strength, which at its height grew to sixty fortified cities, and posed a serious and continuous threat to the Catholic crown and Paris over the next three decades.

The Catholic Church in France and many of its members opposed the Huguenots. Some Huguenot preachers and congregants were attacked as they attempted to meet for worship.[31] The height of this persecution was the St. Bartholomew's Day massacre in August, 1572, when 5,000 to 30,000 were killed, although there were also underlying political reasons for this as well, as some of the Huguenots were nobles trying to establish separate centres of power in southern France. Retaliating against the French Catholics, the Huguenots had their own militia.[32]
Click to expand...


Reformation and growth
Huguenots faced persecution from the outset of the Reformation, but Francis I (reign 1515–1547) initially protected the dissidents from Parlementary measures seeking to exterminate them. After the 1534 Affair of the Placards[33][34] he distanced himself from Huguenots and their protection.[citation needed] Earlier, Francis I persecuted the old, pre-Protestant movement of Waldensians in southeastern France.

Huguenot numbers grew rapidly between 1555 and 1561, chiefly amongst nobles and city dwellers. During this time, their opponents first dubbed the Protestants Huguenots; but they called themselves reformés, or "Reformed". They organised their first national synod in 1558 in Paris.[35]

By 1562, the estimated number of Huguenots peaked at approximately two million, concentrated mainly in the western, southern, and some central parts of France, compared to approximately sixteen million Catholics during the same period. Persecution diminished the number of Huguenots who remained in France
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Quantum Quack said:
More likely alt- right extreme nationalism at the core with anarchy as the their agenda.
Click to expand...
this has crossed my mind while watching the news.

anarchy would be their short term goal as a means to install their military government as a dictator in a war like setting.

it is one of the most common attempted methods to over throw democracy.

political alt-right who mingle with conservatives employ this as a policy to gradually hand themselves more and more absolute legal power over the citizens.
you see it being rolled out in right wing politics constantly.

.. deny the democracy, label it socialist, then hand the minority all the power.
 
Last edited:
I would not be surprised if more Catholic churches are attacked before Easter is over.
5 so far have made the news this week. Starting with Notre Dam.
 
Also I would be very confident that Law enforcement would be diving deep into the Notre Dam restoration contractors affiliations and associations with the alt right of France and may find a money trail running all the way to Sri Lanka.
 
RainbowSingularity said:
i have been wondering how many undocumented illegal immigrants are parading as yellow jackets trying to bring anarchy to France.
Click to expand...

It's true my suspicion wondered after alt-right provocation rising out of the French unrest; the big doubt is a similar disbelief as my feelings about insurance and a workplace accident; it seems an incredibly difficult task to be undertaken for the sake of lulz.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top