Jump to content

Fire devastates Notre-Dame Cathedral, centuries-old Parisian landmark


webfact

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, fantom said:

After the Windsor Castle fire £20,000,000 was spent on fire prevention measures, I wonder if there was any fire management measures of any significance at Notre Dame. The thing went up like a bonfire.

 

Also just why should the populations around the world be asked to chip in for the restoration? After the Windsor fire the Queen stumped up the renovation costs as it was her property. Why doesnt the Catholic church / Vatican assume responsibility for the renovation?

Maybe they do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, fantom said:

After the Windsor Castle fire £20,000,000 was spent on fire prevention measures, I wonder if there was any fire management measures of any significance at Notre Dame. The thing went up like a bonfire.

 

Also just why should the populations around the world be asked to chip in for the restoration? After the Windsor fire the Queen stumped up the renovation costs as it was her property. Why doesnt the Catholic church / Vatican assume responsibility for the renovation?

The first pledge I saw was from a private individual, a Frenchman, for $100 Million Euros. They'll find the money.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, fantom said:

After the Windsor Castle fire £20,000,000 was spent on fire prevention measures, I wonder if there was any fire management measures of any significance at Notre Dame. The thing went up like a bonfire.

 

Also just why should the populations around the world be asked to chip in for the restoration? After the Windsor fire the Queen stumped up the renovation costs as it was her property. Why doesnt the Catholic church / Vatican assume responsibility for the renovation?

Notre-Dame cathedral building is owned by the French State and has been since a law was passed in 1905.

The Catholic Church is the designated beneficiary, the have sole rights to use it for religious purposes. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand what the French must be feeling but getting other countries to pay for the restoration is not what I was expecting, Should I have thought that through more?

 

The 41-year-old president described the 850-year-old monument at the heart of Paris as "the epicentre of our life" and the cathedral of "all the French", whether religious or not.

 

He said that "starting tomorrow" he would launch an international appeal for the restoration of the beloved church.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, maxcorrigan said:

Yes she did, but that was after it was reported that the tax payers would cover the cost which caused an outrage!, only then did the Queen step in!

 

1 hour ago, Tongjaw said:

Notre-Dame cathedral building is owned by the French State and has been since a law was passed in 1905.

The Catholic Church is the designated beneficiary, the have sole rights to use it for religious purposes. 

Likewise Windsor Castle is owned by the state... 

Quote

Funding
It was initially feared that it would cost £60 million to restore the castle, though the final cost was £36.5 million, and that drying out the castle would take 10 years. Occupied royal palaces like Windsor Castle are too valuable to insure, and items in the Royal Collection are not insured against loss. An independent trust for private donations towards the cost of the restoration was announced on 16 February 1993 by the Queen's bank, Coutts. On 29 April 1993 it was announced that 70% of the cost would be met by charging the public for entry into the castle precincts and £8 for admission to Buckingham Palace for the next five years. The Queen contributed £2 million of her own money, and she agreed to start paying income tax from 1993 onwards, making her the first British monarch to do so since the 1930s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Windsor_Castle_fire

Initial reports of the Windsor Castle fire suspected contractors doing restoration work, but I can not find any reference to an official inquiry, reports differ as to the cause, curtains up against a spotlight, spotlight up against curtains, spotlight shining on curtains...

 

Again first reports will suspect contractors, just hope they are well insured.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Aforek said:

 do you think that in 2019 we can build something like this, with the methods of 800 years ago ? 

I doubt 850 year old technology would get anything much done these days, let alone 850 year old labor laws.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One wonders how this could have happened. A worker tossing a cigarette butt in the direction of a rag soaked in turpentine, or paint thinner? Igniting the entire wood scaffolding? Is something like that possible? It took 200 years to build, and 8 hours to destroy? If so, what would be an appropriate penalty for such an act?

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

One wonders how this could have happened. A worker tossing a cigarette butt in the direction of a rag soaked in turpentine, or paint thinner? Igniting the entire wood scaffolding? Is something like that possible? It took 200 years to build, and 8 hours to destroy? If so, what would be an appropriate penalty for such an act?

Quite.

 

How did this horror happen?

Edited by dick dasterdly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A sad and tragic loss.

 

Seems to be a trend for historic buildings to be catch fire whilst undergoing renovations. Over the years several have suffered similar fate, Windsor Castle comes to mind.

 

Hope the authorities take extra care during the current renovations of Big Ben.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

One wonders how this could have happened. A worker tossing a cigarette butt in the direction of a rag soaked in turpentine, or paint thinner? Igniting the entire wood scaffolding? Is something like that possible? It took 200 years to build, and 8 hours to destroy? If so, what would be an appropriate penalty for such an act?

Highly suspicious to say the least.  Perhaps an intentional act against Catholicism?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Snow Leopard said:

I understand what the French must be feeling but getting other countries to pay for the restoration is not what I was expecting, Should I have thought that through more?

 

The 41-year-old president described the 850-year-old monument at the heart of Paris as "the epicentre of our life" and the cathedral of "all the French", whether religious or not.

 

He said that "starting tomorrow" he would launch an international appeal for the restoration of the beloved church.

I don't see anything wrong asking for donations  just like so many GoFundMe requests on Social Media. Millions of people  not just Catholics or religious  people visited every year to admire the sheer size, grandeur and art and history of the place. 1 city/country might not be able to manage the costs to repair.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Snow Leopard said:

I saw that a French billionaire is going to pay for it. Not like the Vatican is short of a few bob is it?

Many people will pay for it.

 

Can you provide a link to the French billionaire..and his connections to the Vatican?

 

..and give any reasons as to why the French gov't and people will not assist in paying for it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

One wonders how this could have happened. A worker tossing a cigarette butt in the direction of a rag soaked in turpentine, or paint thinner? Igniting the entire wood scaffolding? Is something like that possible? It took 200 years to build, and 8 hours to destroy? If so, what would be an appropriate penalty for such an act?

Given the very strict EU h&s laws that sort of senario is almost impossible. But they already decided it was an accident, before any investigation is under way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Odysseus123 said:

Many people will pay for it.

 

Can you provide a link to the French billionaire..and his connections to the Vatican?

 

..and give any reasons as to why the French gov't and people will not assist in paying for it?

 

 

https://www.ft.com/content/62ac5270-6015-11e9-b285-3acd5d43599e

 

There is no link to the Vatican. I was saying that instead of a request to go fund me the Vatican could meet the cost easily. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Oleolf said:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47942786

 

It's a bit more than "just a building". I'm not religious but this is certainly a very sad moment. A historic and majestic symbol has been mostly destroyed.

Yes, and the fire it self may not be the last we will hear about - if and when the cause will be found it may be discovered that the fire didn't start by itself ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...