News Massive Fire at Notre Dame cathedral

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Fire
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the devastating fire at Notre Dame Cathedral, with participants expressing heartbreak over the potential loss of its historic architecture and artwork. Concerns are raised about the extensive woodwork inside the cathedral, particularly in the bell tower, which may have fueled the fire. The renovation project, involving lead materials, is suspected to have contributed to the incident. Despite the damage, it is noted that the main stone structure remains intact, and efforts are underway to save significant elements like the stained-glass windows. The community expresses hope for restoration and acknowledges the cultural significance of the cathedral.
Messages
19,787
Reaction score
10,741
Wow this is crazy. What a beautiful and historic building. Some images look like it could be a total loss.

https://www.cnn.com/world/live-news/notre-dame-fire/index.html

241920
 
  • Sad
Likes pinball1970
Physics news on Phys.org
I would not have expected it to be very flammable - perhaps just the roof?
 
  • Like
Likes Greg Bernhardt
What a pity. I've walked past that cathedral many times (and also been inside). It is located right in the heart of Paris.
 
russ_watters said:
I would not have expected it to be very flammable - perhaps just the roof?

Much of the interior of the cathedral, particularly the bell tower, is full of wood. A lot of it intricate carved and centuries old.

I'm hearbroken watching the news. I've been to Notre Dame a couple of times and it's a beautiful building. All the artwork, carvings, the relics, the tower will all be gone. I hope they're able to limit the fire and save the stain glass, but there have been people on the news just now estimating that there might not be anything more than the stone towers left by the time it is out.

Terrible news.
 
  • Sad
Likes StatGuy2000 and pinball1970
Lead was used extensively in constructing cathedrals due in part to its low melting point.
 
And here's a view from which I remember it best, from the banks of Seine, with lovely surroundings.
 
  • Like
Likes Astronuc, OmCheeto and Klystron
Klystron said:
Lead was used extensively in constructing cathedrals due in part to its low melting point.
According to the Paris Fire Brigade, http://www.pompiersparis.fr/en/news/the-paris-fire-brigade, an ongoing renovation project, involving many tons of lead, may have contributed to the incendiation.

12311676-6925307-image-a-29_1555357197742.jpg


All that scaffolding around the apparent heart of the fire, along with the report of ongoing lead-working, much of which, presumably, involves direct flame application, to me strongly suggests that some activity associated with the renovation project may have incipiated the catastrophe.
 
I passed it countless times when I lived in Paris. Seeing it burn is unbearable. :cry:
 
  • #10
DrClaude said:
I passed it countless times when I lived in Paris. Seeing it burn is unbearable. :cry:
La cathédrale de Notre-Dame ne s'effondrera pas à cause de cette calamité; ses volant-arcs-boutants la soutiendront pour tous nos jours.

The Cathedral of Notre Dame will not collapse due to this calamity; its flying-arch-buttresses will support it for all our days.
 
  • #11
I hope the hunchback made it out OK.

Cheers
 
  • #12
cosmik debris said:
I hope the hunchback made it out OK.

Cheers
Sadly, this story isn't fictional.
 
  • #13
Ryan_m_b said:
Much of the interior of the cathedral, particularly the bell tower, is full of wood. A lot of it intricate carved and centuries old.
Yeah, I guess I had forgotten how much woodwork was in the interior/base. But at the same time, my understanding is that the roof is not structural and it looks to me like the ceiling is entirely masonary. So I wonder if it is possible for the roof to burn and fall off without touching the interior?...though the spire collapsing into it doesn't help, and if it did collapse the ceiling arches it could be structurally catastrophic.

206c952c314736ba929e750ac5ef1907.png
783901-notre-dame-de-paris-interior-ceiling-arches.jpg
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970 and dlgoff
  • #15
Some views from 1994:

1994-2-26.jpg


1994-2-29.jpg


1994-2-27.jpg


1994-2-32.jpg
 
  • Like
Likes DennisN, Astronuc, OmCheeto and 3 others
  • #16
I've never been there but when seeing TV news video of the fire, tears well up in my eyes. :oldcry:
 
  • #17
  • Like
Likes DennisN, dlgoff and atyy
  • #18
I always wanted to visit it once I could afford it, I guess I never will
 
  • #20
sysprog said:
The Cathedral of Notre Dame will not collapse due to this calamity; its flying-arch-buttresses will support it for all our days.
Support?
The vault was in lateral compression - what is left of the vault still is. The flying arches resist the outwards pressure of the vaults - meaning they meet it with corresponding inwards force.
Had more of the main vault collapsed, would the lateral pressure of the flying buttresses have pushed the side walls over inwards?
 
  • #21
snorkack said:
Support?
The vault was in lateral compression - what is left of the vault still is. The flying arches resist the outwards pressure of the vaults - meaning they meet it with corresponding inwards force.
Had more of the main vault collapsed, would the lateral pressure of the flying buttresses have pushed the side walls over inwards?
The comparatively lightweight arches transmit the outward pressure from the walls to the comparatively heavyweight piers on the ground. The arches lean against the walls, but they don't themselves have such mass as to collapse the walls inward, even when the walls are not pressing outward, the hypothetical absence of outward pressure being due to hypothetical absence of the vault. In vaulted cathedral architecture, buttresses allow the walls to be made less massive, but even buttressed walls are more massive than the flying arches are. The piers support against the pressure transmitted to them by the arches, but the piers don't themselves exert shear force against the walls.
 
Last edited:
  • #22
A lot of good things in this article:


Macron: “We Will Rebuild Notre-Dame”
Already, hundreds of millions of euros have been pledged to the [rebuilding] project

“According to a Notre Dame priest during the fire,” reports the Washington Post, “all of the art work had been removed,” much of it taken for restoration at the Louvre before the fire. “French Minister of Culture Franck Riester later clarified that religious relics had been saved and some of the art work inside had suffered smoke damage and was also being taken to the Louvre.”

Remarkably, says the Post, the famous South Rose stained-glass windows, created more than 750 years ago, appear to have survived undamaged.​

I knew almost nothing about Notre Dame before yesterday.
Things I learned:

It's in Paris [I've never been to France]
It's old: 850th anniversary: 2013
Some of the stained glass windows are bigger than the footprint of my house: 130m2 vs 84 m2
The spire was a very recent addition: installed 1844
The interior probably would have left me speechless:


link
"Ava Maria" is a song:


link
 
  • Like
Likes sysprog, Borg, DrClaude and 2 others
  • #23
sysprog said:
The comparatively lightweight arches transmit the outward pressure from the walls to the comparatively heavyweight piers on the ground. The arches lean against the walls, but they don't themselves have such mass as to collapse the walls inward, even when the walls are not pressing outward, the hypothetical absence of outward pressure being due to hypothetical absence of the vault. In vaulted cathedral architecture, buttresses allow the walls to be made less massive, but even buttressed walls are more massive than the flying arches are. The piers support against the pressure transmitted to them by the arches, but the piers don't themselves exert shear force against the walls.
According to BBC News this morning (Radio 4) the inward pressure of the flying buttresses is a significant concern to the structural engineers and is one of the first aspects of reconstruction that will be considered.
 
  • #24
OmCheeto said:
"Ava Maria" is a song:​
The fact that the prayer was put to music was new to me too, despite having been raised catholic. However, that appears to be quite recent, as the composer was born in 1974:
http://ecclesia-cantic.fr/speaker/frere-jean-baptiste-de-sainte-famille/
 
  • Like
Likes atyy and OmCheeto
  • #25
Ophiolite said:
According to BBC News this morning (Radio 4) the inward pressure of the flying buttresses is a significant concern to the structural engineers and is one of the first aspects of reconstruction that will be considered.
Yes there is some inward pressure inwards, but, my take on it, is that if the wall masonry has been weakened so much over the years either due to neglect, weathering, and/or from the fire that it is in such a condition that it will topple over from the flying buttress, the wall is probably not worth saving, and should be destroyed and rebuilt if that the option of choice, now that national pride and heritage is of interest.

https://www.thisisinsider.com/notre-dame-was-crumbling-behttps://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/01/crumbling-notre-dame-cathedral-needs-100m-donors-avert-collapse/fore-fire-works-obstructed-by-french-govt-2019-4
http://time.com/4876087/notre-dame-cathedral-is-crumbling/
I feel for the old lady, and people of Paris/France for this tragedy.
 
  • #26
Here is a NY Times article on the fire, the fire response (including planned removal of artifacts), and the lack of sprinklers and fire walls in the attic (which was called the "forest"), the fire department's awareness of the potential for fire. It also has a nice diagram of the attic structure which makes the spread of the fire very understandable.
242026

Also the building had a lead roof.

They still think it was accidental, but the exact cause is yet to be determined.
Renovation workers had left before the fire was noticed.

I read somewhere else that the building had been laser-scanned about a year ago, which is expected to help in reconstruction.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes 256bits, Klystron, OmCheeto and 3 others
  • #27
DrClaude said:
The fact that the prayer was put to music was new to me too, despite having been raised catholic. However, that appears to be quite recent, as the composer was born in 1974:

For your edification the prayer "Hail, Mary" was put to music long before the 20th Century.

At seminary-college in the 1960's I played a popular version of "Ave Maria" attributed to Johann Sebastian Bach arranged for pipe organ. Legend has it that Bach wrote the tune after being given a penance to recite some number of repetitions of the prayer but preferred to play it on an organ. A more prosaic version notes that Bach wrote many religious songs while selling organs to churches and cathedrals.

Bach's arrangement of "Ave Maria" remains one of my favorite songs to sing in Latin and Spanish (English versions fail to scan IMO). I was taught much older versions of "Ave Maria" arranged for lute and guitar but do not remember sources.
 
  • #28
Klystron said:
For your edification the prayer "Hail, Mary" was put to music long before the 20th Century.
I didn't know of any French version. I was surprised because it seemed popular enough that people in the street (who I would assume don't all know each other) would start signing it.
 
  • Like
Likes OmCheeto and sysprog
  • #29
Klystron said:
For your edification the prayer "Hail, Mary" was put to music long before the 20th Century.

At seminary-college in the 1960's I played a popular version of "Ave Maria" attributed to Johann Sebastian Bach arranged for pipe organ. Legend has it that Bach wrote the tune after being given a penance to recite some number of repetitions of the prayer but preferred to play it on an organ. A more prosaic version notes that Bach wrote many religious songs while selling organs to churches and cathedrals.

Bach's arrangement of "Ave Maria" remains one of my favorite songs to sing in Latin and Spanish (English versions fail to scan IMO). I was taught much older versions of "Ave Maria" arranged for lute and guitar but do not remember sources.
Franz Schubert's Ellen's Song, which begins with the words "Ave Maria" is the one with the familiar vocal melody.

J.S. Bach's Prelude No. 1 in C Major was arranged as Ave Maria by Charles Gounod.
 
  • #30
pinball1970 said:
A terrible loss, I hope they can save the main structure, they managed to do it with York Minster in 1984
I visited York a long time ago in the eighties, I guess in 1984 or 1985, I don't remember, but I do think it was after the fire. I remember York as a very nice city with lots of historical sites, and I remember the York Minster very well. Here's a photo of mine from the visit:

33770663998_64eae3a261_c.jpg
 
  • Like
Likes OmCheeto, pinball1970, atyy and 1 other person
  • #31
Klystron said:
For your edification the prayer "Hail, Mary" was put to music long before the 20th Century.

At seminary-college in the 1960's I played a popular version of "Ave Maria" attributed to Johann Sebastian Bach arranged for pipe organ. Legend has it that Bach wrote the tune after being given a penance to recite some number of repetitions of the prayer but preferred to play it on an organ. A more prosaic version notes that Bach wrote many religious songs while selling organs to churches and cathedrals.

Bach's arrangement of "Ave Maria" remains one of my favorite songs to sing in Latin and Spanish (English versions fail to scan IMO). I was taught much older versions of "Ave Maria" arranged for lute and guitar but do not remember sources.

As @sysprog says, Bach did not write or arrange "Ave Maria". Bach wrote a keyboard prelude, without the Ave Maria tune. Quite a few years later, Gounod added his original Ave Maria tune on top of the Bach prelude - ingenious and beautiful.

Bach prelude:



Bach prelude + Gonoud tune


 
Last edited:
  • #32
DrClaude said:
The fact that the prayer was put to music was new to me too, despite having been raised catholic. However, that appears to be quite recent, as the composer was born in 1974:
http://ecclesia-cantic.fr/speaker/frere-jean-baptiste-de-sainte-famille/

Here's the one mentioned by you and @OmCheeto :
 
  • #33
J.S. Bach's Prelude No. 1 in C Major, from Well Tempered Clavier, was published in 1722.

Gounod's melodic superimposition thereon, leaving the Prelude mostly otherwise unchanged, was published in 1853.

In between, 'Ellen's Song', a hymn addressed to Mary, that was part of his 'Lady of the Lake' cycle, was published by Franz Schubert in 1825.

Its lyrics, which began with 'Ave Maria', were soon thereafter changed in popular versions to more closely resemble the Catholic prayer in commemoration of the Salutation and Annunciation of Gabriel the Archangel to Miriam (Mary), in which Gabriel announced to Mary that she was to become mother of a son, by the power of the Most High overshadowing her, and causing her to conceive a child, though as she said, she did not know a man, and that she was to call the child Yeshua (Jesus).

Here is Luciano Pavorotti singing the song set to Schubert's composition:

 
Last edited:
  • #34
DennisN said:
I visited York a long time ago in the eighties, I guess in 1984 or 1985, I don't remember, but I do think it was after the fire. I remember York as a very nice city with lots of historical sites, and I remember the York Minster very well. Here's a photo of mine from the visit:

View attachment 242183
Thanks for posting that picture.
Along with the things I listed previously that I didn't know about Notre Dame.

I also:
1. could not have identified a picture of it.​
Guessing a lot of really old cathedrals look alike:​
2019.04.20.old.churches.png
2. "notre" means "our" in French.​
So the church's name means "Our Lady of Paris".​
ps. Please don't yell at me about those "anno" numbers. They are very complicated.
 
  • Like
Likes DennisN and 256bits
  • #35
OmCheeto said:
ps. Please don't yell at me about those "anno" numbers. They are very complicated.
Not very complicated -- 'Anno 1161' is the expanded version of AD 1161, with the 'Domini' part of the term omitted. :oldwink:
 
  • #36
sysprog said:
Not very complicated -- 'Anno 1161' is the expanded version of AD 1161, with the 'Domini' part of the term omitted. :oldwink:
Well, if you read the wiki entry on "York Minster", you'll find that the church now, is not the same church that was built in 627.

The first recorded church on the site was a wooden structure built hurriedly in 627...
In 741, the church was destroyed in a fire.
...

Guessing the other cathedrals had similar histories.
 
  • #37
OmCheeto said:
Well, if you read the wiki entry on "York Minster", you'll find that the church now, is not the same church that was built in 627.

The first recorded church on the site was a wooden structure built hurriedly in 627...
In 741, the church was destroyed in a fire.
...

Guessing the other cathedrals had similar histories.
Apparently I misconstrued what you meant by the Anno numbers being complicated -- I agree that the associated histories are rather complicated as to what is reported to have been built when.
 
  • #38
Here is a long and very good NY Times article.
It's a forensic look at:
  • the timecourse of the fire,
  • many details of the firefighting efforts, and
  • their (not yet worked out) theories of what happened.
It also has a lot of great graphics (similar to their diagram posted above) and pictures.
It shows:
  • how the fire spread,
  • what the fire fighters did, and
  • specifically why they were afraid that the whole thing would fall down.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes DrClaude and sysprog
  • #39
Here is another longish NY Times article on the rebuilding of Notre Dame.
In this article, they are looking at how decisions they make about the restoration affect the sound in the building.
They present recordings from different places in models of different acoustic spaces showing the differences in different parts of the space and in other shapes and sizes of rooms.
I found it interesting that in older times, the laypeople area of the cathedral would not have been able to make out the words spoken (but they were in Latin then which most would not have understood anyway (speaking only French)) due to the reverberations.

Screenshot 2023-03-05 at 9.36.24 AM.png


But wait, there's more:
Here is a thread featuring a David Byrne (talking heads guy) video about the affects of different acoustic spaces on the music preformed in them.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Klystron and InkTide
  • #40
BillTre said:
I found it interesting that in older times, the laypeople area of the cathedral would not have been able to make out the words spoken (but they were in Latin then which most would not have understood anyway (speaking only French)) due to the reverberations

Not to trend to far off topic from Notre Dame cathedral, but my Latin teachers described two probable paths for Latin pronunciation. The 'Germanic' school held with hard consonants such that Marcus Cicero sounds like "Markis Kikeroo". The 'Gaulist' held that early French preserved the purist Latin in Europe, a theory supported by some modern linguists. So, French and local patois speakers may have understood more church Latin than English speakers under similar circumstances despite poor acoustics.

As an ex-Catholic I can attest that regular Catholic Mass attendees either read along in their missals during Latin sections, or simply responded to familiar cues to stand, sit and kneel.

After Vatican II symposium in 1962, most Catholic ceremonies were performed in the local vernacular. A major exception to this papal edict, nearly leading to another schism, took place in (Back on topic) France. No doubt reactionary Catholic factions in France seize on the Latin mass and related issues to support or oppose rebuilding funds for the damaged cathedral.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top