Having worked as a guide and educator at my local cathedral restoration works for almost a decade, I find the news from Paris almost too horrific to contemplate.

This picture, posted by journalist Alexandre Fremont, shows the extent of the devastation, while also illustrating how a cathedral roof fire has the potential to wreck the overall structure. I'm not familiar with the exact nature of the 19th century restoration work carried out on the uper levels of Notre Dame, but most or all of the roof will likely have been carried on an open framework of massive wooden beams. Once a fire gets hold of these it is very difficult to put out, since the wood will be tinder dry after decades (or centuries), there are no natural or artificial firebreaks, and there is plenty of oxygen available to fan the flames. Falling embers and burning beams will almost inevitably cause the fire to spread to the interior, consuming furniture, decorations and any major structures inside (such as organs and similar). It also makes it very dangerous to send firefighters or security personell inside, either to fight the fire from below, or evacuate artworks or people. Shards from the large stained glass windows, which will collapse, crack, or even explode, from the heat only adds to the hazard.

As if this was not bad enough, the burning roof beams slots into the masonry and stonework in the upper parts of the walls. This means that in addition to the intense heat already generated by the burning roof, the fire will also enter the stone walls themselves. Although stone doesn't burn, it cracks and deforms when exposed to heat and flames, which in turn impacts their load-bearing ability. Thankfully, the Paris fire dept now says that they think the main structure, including the two western towers, has been saved. However, the extent of the damage to the walls, including whether parts of them have to be torn down and replaced altogether, will not be known for some time to come. Only a thorough inspection by experts will reveal whether the walls left standing will be able to take the weight of a new roof, or whether parts of them will have to be dismantled and rebuilt.

It is a tradegy of epic proportions. The only small rays of light appear to be that at least some of the artifacts normally housed inside were either rescued or had been removed at an earlier stage due to the ongoing renovations, and that the there is only one (at least reported thus far) injured person.

That said, my thoughts are with the cathedral staff, sapeurs pompiers and other members of the French security services still engaged in fighting the fire. They have a long night ahead of them. I wish them all the luck and strength in the world.

edit: Thankfully pictures posted by the Guardian newspaper appears to show that most of the inner vaulted ceiling has withstood the inferno above, and thus protected much of the interior.

Whenever a disaster like this strikes it makes me think of Belloq’s line in Indiana Jones and the Lost Ark, “We are simply passing through, but this is history!”

In this case it’s extremely true. Notre Dame des Paris isn’t just a cathedral or a landmark, it’s 800 years of Parisian history in one building. Even as an American in 21st Century Florida, I have a connection to her, as my 19th Century forebearers worked as carpenters during the restoration.

That does bring an actual question. The 19th Century restoration was mainly to fix the damage done during the Revolution: how did they know what things looked like or did they just make their best guess? How much of what’s been lost today is from before then?

Norte Dame has been partially destroyed and restored in the past (I remember a huge effort in the 19th century which rebuilt the steeple, which was lost today). Norte Dame is also rather unique in that we have a lot of reference material (including an Assassin's Creed walk through!) describing how it looked pre-2019-fire, which should help with the restoration process. How has modern technology changed how buildings and art works are restored? What would we expect to see as the French government rebuilds the cathedral?

A number of places were destroyed and rebuilt during WWII, my main example being Marienburg/Malbork castle.

How are these structures rebuilt? Do they do it completely with era appropriate techniques and materials or do they streamline it with machine cut stone and factory made glass, etc etc?

Could anyone discuss the notion that Victor Hugo's Notre Dame De Paris (what we've titled The Hunchback of Notre Dame in English) was really as much, if not more, about establishing the Cathedral itself as an important figure than it was about the characters in the story. Also, whether it sort of began and/or gave impetus to the concept of historical architecture/architectural preservation as a thing of importance and value? I've seen some opinions to that effect, but I'm curious about the historians perspective.

It's not exactly history in the academic sense, but as I was walking down towards Notre-Dame after leaving my lecture in Saint-Germain-des-Pres this evening, I couldn't help but think of Kenneth Clark. When he made Civilisation 50 years ago, he could have chosen to start anywhere--the Acropolis, the Coliseum. He chose Notre-Dame de Paris. What we lost today is hard to put into words, it's so much more than just a church or a cultural site. It's the physical embodiment of the highest heights of Western civilisation.

Being a part of the crowd outside was a truly moving experience. I was there for around an hour and forty-five minutes. A lot of people cried, the mood was quite sombre. But something happened that was even more powerful. At first it was only a small group of nuns, but slowly more and more people joined in singing hymns. At the end I have to imagine there may have been thousands of us all quietly singing together, with no prompting whatsoever. The only analogy I can come up with for the feeling there is that it must have been something like what it felt like to be in Manhattan on September 11.

I'm going to take advantage of the light moderation to talk about the wooden roof. I'm not an expert on medieval architecture, but what I heard being discussed today was that each of these wooden beams was hewn from one tree, and altogether it made up 12 acres of medieval forest. Does anyone know how accurate this story is?

Has anyone in our community worked with the cathedral's archives? Aside from the obvious and incalculable value of the cathedral's built and artistic heritage, what aspects of the historical record are under threat?

When words fail... Sharing a playlist of Gregorian chants and classical music recorded in Notre-Dame, for remembrance.

He therefore turned to mankind only with regret. His cathedral was enough for him.

Victor Hugo, The Hunchback of Notre-Dame

The Cathedral, "Hours of Étienne Chevalier", mid-15th century painting

As a historian, I'm mindful that many of the buildings that modern people take as a sign of antiquity are 19th or early 20th Century reconstructions, that the reality of premodern architecture is that it usually burned down and was abandoned. Our romanticism about the built past is substantially a result of the way that 19th Century nationalism came to think about the value of older material culture.

But that is not much help when it comes to having actual feelings--this is only a vague reminder that there is a wider or more complicated context to keep in mind against my own profound sadness at seeing such an old and beautiful place be so badly damaged. Our sentiments may come from somewhere that is not eternal or natural, but we still feel them deeply.

In 2009 I had the privilege of performing in Notre-Dame de Paris with the touring Canberra Grammar Chamber Choir. One of the pieces we performed there, and the one I remember best from the tour, was Palestrina's Sicut Cervus , performed in the link below by the Westminster Choir.

We also sang with the Westminster Cathedral Choir in 2007 & 2009 at Westminster Abbey, and I was incredibly envious of them because they were far better choristers than we were. So, here's their recording, rather than mine.

Sicut Cervus

^^^edit: ^^^Per ^^^PM ^^^here's ^^^our ^^^recording ^^^too ^^^I ^^^guess, ^^^but ^^^boy ^^^howdy ^^^it ^^^_really_ ^^^does ^^^not ^^^hold ^^^a ^^^candle. ^^^https://vimeo.com/6195430

The most unique experience I've had in a cathedral was watching the sunset through the stained glass rose windows at Notre Dame. When were the rose windows that were destroyed today installed, and by whom? How is the restoration process for the windows likely to proceed?

This site (in French) was posted a while ago in the TIL subreddit. Just the pictures of the internal structure show why it burned so intensely. Everything looks like an expertly laid campfire but 1000 times the size

http://www.notredamedeparis.fr/en/la-cathedrale/architecture/la-charpente/

Not a question, but I’m so glad they’re going to be able to save the organ. A lot of people don’t realize that there are pipes in that thing that are 800 years old and never had to be replaced. When you listen to that organ, it might not mesh the best but it has seen nearly all of the history of Western Music.

As a chorister and church singer I’m heartbroken that the Leonin and Perotin manuscripts were lost.

EDIT: I meant replaced, not retuned.

If you’re so inclined, here is the officially-sanctioned place to donate to repair and rebuilding efforts. The Fondation du Patrimoine is roughly equivalent to the UK’s National Trust, and it’s the place major French media outlets (E.g., Le Monde) have been recommending in response to reader questions.

https://don.fondation-patrimoine.org/SauvonsNotreDame/~mon-don

The site is in French, but Google Translate does a great job with it. Additionally, it’s denominated in Euros, so be aware that your credit card may levy a foreign transaction fee (in the US, typically 3%, unless you have a card that does not charge such fees).

I chipped in €30. Every little bit helps. I want France to be overwhelmed by the world’s outpouring of support.

How much trouble, from a cost and public-support angle, is rebuilding even going to be?

Wikipedia says that, pre-fire, a full restoration would have cost $185 million. A rebuild of this magnitude must cost way more than that. Where is that money going to come from (when supposedly they had trouble even coming up with $7 million for the current work)? What kind of push-back from the public will there be in spending that much money on the cathedral?

Lots of talk of how the cathedral's been restored in the past seems to ignore how much the political and religious climate has changed in France since those previous times.

I remember walking into that Cathedral in 2005 and being overwhelemed with a sense of amazement. The "rose" stained glass front and center, the awe of ritual happening even then for my tourist self.

A cold, chilly day. I recall it well. Stepping into that stoned-clad building, with two towers standing over me, was amazing. Getting into the back of the vestibule and seeing all the candles lit, even though it was like many a cathedral I had seen before, was unique.

Today hurt. It hurt because, despite all the "we'll rebuild it" talk, it isn't going to be quite the same. At least in my lifetime.

Edit: I also realize this wasn't a question and I apologise. Taking the "lightly moderated" to heart I guess.

With regard to Gothic cathedrals in general: why did they take so long to build compared to other buildings of similar scale, Hagia Sophia for example?

Saw some discourse on Twitter about whether Notre Dame, and I guess cathedrals in general, should be seen as monuments to God or monuments to "Western Civilization". Am very interested in the subtleties of this conversation, and was unsure about where I could post about it, so here I am. What do yall think? Personally I really don't know if you can separate the two, as "Western Civilization", or "Western Europe", or "Chrisendom", or whatever you want to call it was so built upon the idea of the Christian Religion and the Christian God. I don't know if I sound dumb right now!

I'd like to say first this is a horrible thing to happen. I do have a question though. With the fire doing this much damage will it give historians an opportunity to find out anything new about it? Like were there any spots where people have said I wonder whats there but can't get to it?

It's very early to ask something like this, but which lessons will other keepers of old monuments draw out of this disaster? Preventing fires is already an important topic even though it's often difficult to realize in old buildings. Will there possibly be additional pressure to do even more against such accidents?

Old cathedrals are often constantly in a state of renovations so construction work will always pose a risk to the building.

In November of 2018, I was lucky to go to mass in Notre Dame for Armistice Day. I got to experience a French mass with one of the archbishops of France and one from Germany. I have a video somewhere of the entrance walk if anyone's interested, I could try to upload it

I am mostly concerned with the state of the original stained glass. Do we know how much of that (including the famous "rose") has been damaged?

I read/saw in news reports that the cathedral housed artifacts such as a crown thought to be part of the crown of thorns Jesus wore on the cross, a nail and a piece of wood from the cross. As a former Catholic, now atheist, I have always been skeptical of the authenticity of such objects. Is there any effort to make historical documentation of these artifacts? For example, was the crown taken by someone whose name/identity was established and is there a “chain of custody” in any way?

It seems like so many religious artifacts are of dubious authenticity. They always seem to “appear” in the Middle Ages with a vague backstory. But that’s just my amateur opinion.

My friend and I were just discussing the Disney HoND remake this morning (before we found out) and I was thinking how incredible it was that Hugo basically saved 600 years of French history with that story. Absolutely shocking to come home and find this out. Since we know the structure of the building survived, are there any estimates yet for the time/cost of repairs needed?

They will rebuild it, The french are proud as f*ck, one french billionaire already pledged 100M alone for restoration.

Incredibly sad day for Paris, France and the world.

I’m curious about the cathedral during WW2. Was there much damage to the building and if not how did it escape? Who cared for it during the war? Were any of the art and relics moved for protection during the occupation of France?

Windsor Castle, Glasgow School of Art, Cutty Sark and now Notre Dame - all big fires and all during restoration work. Are there any obvious risks (and, for that matter, obvious regulatory changes) that are around restoration and what can be done to mitigate them?

Notre Dame is not the first building to have suffered greatly, and sadly it won't be the last. But it is a symbol, a symbol of France and her people. And her people will not accept it remaining a burnt out ruin. As with any notable historic structure, it's not the age of the stone or glass that is important, but the structure itself and what it represents. That is why it was built to begin with, and why it will be rebuilt and shall one day stand tall in glory once more.

Everything born in time ends in time.

I'm curious to know what kind of help France could expect from the Catholic Church, if any. Is there any modern history of the Catholic Church contributing to restoration efforts of major churches? Say, after WWI or WWII when so many cathedrals were damaged across Europe?

Supposing the cathedral is so damaged that it would have to be demolished and built again, when was the last time a monument like that was lost and which monument was that?

35 years ago, York Minster was struck by lightning and caught fire. I only remember the fire itself dimly - I was 6 - but I do remember the rebuilding, the careful cleaning and reassembling of all 40,000 pieces of the iconic Rose Window, the TV kids' show running a competition to design new bosses to go in the roof.

This was the third major fire in the Minster - in the 1830s, a man called Jonathan Martin deliberately set a fire, which gutted the old choir, and led to the Minster uniquely having its own Police force. A second fire happened during the repair work.

The replacement neo-gothic choir stalls, just like the Blue Peter roof bosses are now woven into the fabric of the Minster, part of its story.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-28112373

My understanding is that the stained glass windows were replaced in the 1960s? Is this true? If so, what happened to the original (or at least "older") windows?

I am super bummed! I am going to Paris in a month and Notre Dame was at the top of my list to see......

Is there any photographic evidence as to the state of the rose windows?

Do they know the cause of the fire? My guess is faulty wiring or some kind, due to the ongoing reconstruction and those kind of things have always plagued historical archives somehow

I'm just beside myself watching it burn. An absolute shame.

Who owns the structure? Is it the State or the Church?

Given that Notre Dame de Paris has faced two major restorations in the past (and was actually through the start of its third major restoration), how are the prospects for the post-fire reconstruction looking? Especially in terms of bringing it to its Gothic period appearance. As sad as this incident may be, I think it's a fantastic opportunity to do a more rigorous work that's truer to the building's original design, and it's also an opportunity to help educate new artisans, architects and historians on how to conduct successful restoration work.

Notre Dame de Paris is the main location in French iconic author Victor Hugo's novel called... Notre Dame de Paris. It's one of my favorite works of literature and if you haven't read it yet, what are you waiting for? You'll like it, I promise.

And just in case you can't invest in a novel right now, Disney has adapted the story into a animated movie that covers it in a simplistic manner.

There's also another favorite adaptation of mine, which is a 1928 silent cinema movie. It's available on YouTube: https://youtu.be/--WcYK0VQh8

Hearing the news really broke my heart. I hope my boy Quasimodo is fine.

Things are looking a little better than they were yesterday. It looks like at least one of the rose windows survived, along with the altar, pulpit, and organ. A few important artifacts (like the crown of thorns) were rescued, and some others had actually been removed for restoration.

Serious props go to the French firefighters - as bad as it is it could have been much worse if it weren't for their effort.

Someone on twitter said there is a forest of oaks at Versailles that was grown specifically to provide replacement beams in case the roof needed to be replaced. Is this accurate? What is the likelihood that they rebuild using modern, fire resistant materials?

I’ve been thinking about the restoration that’s to come and wondering if this fire means that restorers should recreate the roof with modern materials instead. I mean with the wood “Forest” roof destroyed it’s going to be incredibly difficult to source 13,000 old growth oak trees to rebuild it as it was. Would it be acceptable to replace the beam framework with steel to ensure that this kind of fire couldn’t happen again?

The same with the roof itself. It’s one thing to repair a lead roof, but to replace it could be dangerous to the health of workers. Would it be acceptable to replace the roof with some other type of metal provided its physical appearance is as close to the original as possible?

I’m just wondering mostly where the line is for authentic vs practical restoration when it comes to major works like this. Are modern updates acceptable when you’re doing it for safety concerns? Or should be try to replicate the original no matter what?

History person here,

when I see this, I just get sad. Sad that’s it’s burning, sad that a symbol of France is going away. Glad to hear it was only the roof, and the front is still intact, but it’s not enough. Not really concise sentences here but I’m actually glad it wasn’t an attack. In this day and age, people have been attacking major locations. I’m both happy and sad. Happy that this wasn’t an attack and almost everything old in that building has been saved. Sad since it’s on fire and crumbling

Here's a live webcam feed of what remains of the cathedral for anyone interested. It looks better than I was expecting. Restoration seems inevitable

Apart from the structure itself, what kind of artifacts are inside which will be lost to the fire?

I’m assuming that there he a lot of documentation that exists for a place of such prominence as is the case with Norte Dame: archeological records, architectural inspection records, photographs (both archival and amateur), etc.. my hope is that there is enough information there so that it can be rebuilt/restored close to its original state. Perhaps fixing other structural integrity issues that no doubt exist in the building this old.

I found out about this event at the dentist, worst day I've had in a while.

It has been suggested that oak trees were planted at Versailles specifically in case the Notre-Dame cathedral was destroyed.

There's sceptical discussion in the replies about whether this is true, but I'm wondering whether anyone who knows a bit more about this might be able to confirm/deny?

Did the Nazi general that refused Hitler's order to burn the Paris churches down ever face any punishment for insubordination?

Could anyone tell me how long it's been since regular services were unable to be conducted at Notre Dame (and particularly Holy Week/Easter Services)? Did the Nazis allow services to be held when they occupied Paris?

After the French Revolution the Cathedral passed from the Catholic Church to the "Cult of Reason". What was the Cult of Reason exactly and which were their practices? Is there any artistic remain of this cult?

It'll be rebuilt. It's gone in flames earlier. It's been rebuilt everytime. That's all that can be done.

I often hate seeing modern appliances inside historical buildings, but this incident makes a pretty good case for have some type of modern sprinkler/fire retardant system in historical buildings with wooden structures.

Seems they had pretty good fire warning systems, and received one warning twenty some minutes before a second warning, which is when the fire was actually discovered.

How many wars has that thing survived?

What relations does the Notre Dame have to the story of the Hunchback of Notre Dame? Sorry, I never got a chance to read it so I would like to know what the similarities and inspirations are.

In Amsterdam, the 'old church' was for a long time the only building made of stone and therefor considered permanent. People could rent a safe in the church to store their documents in should their home burn down. At a certain point even the city's archives were stored there.

They saved all the artworks and holy stuff before it got destroyed so that's nice atleast

I felt sick when the scale of the damage became apparent last night. I feel so sorry for those locals who were attached it. Today, the news is a little more hopeful.

How would they have fought a fire at a building of similar size of Notre Dame around the time it was built?

what was likely destroyed?

Who owns Notre-dame?

Why is the Notre-Dame burning down so significant? To me (who granted knows absolutely nothing about history), it just seems like a cathedral burning down. What makes this one so important?

Sorry for the dumb question, i don't have any knowledge on this stuff.

So sad :/

Does/did the Dedo gargoyle really exist?

What is closest comparison to this cathedral in terms of rebuilding?

That is, what is the grandest cathedral that had to be rebuilt?

Though I am neither French nor Catholic, I was quite saddened when I heard this news today. Notre Dame is more than just a marvel of France and Catholicism, it is a marvel of the human race.

That being said, as the day progressed and the fire dwindled, it brought me great hope to hear that the structure seems to be intact, and that damage to the building may not be nearly as monumental as we feared earlier today. So then I started hearing about the fears regarding all the historical artifacts inside the cathedral; the nails and wood from the cross Jesus was crucified on, the countless paintings, statues, and gargoyles, and the crown of thorns.

So that brings up my question. While I'm very far from an expert on the topic, I don't find it all that hard to believe that Jesus Christ was an actual person. Did he actually walk on water or turn water into wine? I very much doubt it. Was he actually crucified? Maybe, I've no idea. Do my question for you all is specifically in regards to the artifacts related to him; the nails and the wood from the crucifix, and the crown of thorns. Where did these artifacts come from? Is there any actual, scientific evidence that dates the artifacts in Notre Dame to the biblical ages? Or is their story little more than just some guy hundreds of years ago making a prosperous claim about some random nails he found, and the Catholic Church latching on to his unsubstantiated claim?

TL;DR What's the deal with the nails and wood that are claimed to have come from the cross Jesus was nailed to? And what about the crown of thorns?

Hopefully I am not too late too the party,

But over time the Cathedral has seen multiple renovations and various restorations, and notably with The Hunchback of Notre-Dame, influencing the surge of the desire to preserve Gothic architecture, but what other factors influenced this and why?

The Burning of Notre-Dame, in pictures

https://www.vox.com/world/2019/4/15/18311852/notre-dame-cathedral-fire-spire-collapse-photos-pictures-paris-france

Did Le Stryge get destroyed?

What is the basic relevance in the current age outside of being really old and being beautifully made?

Am I alone in feeling while a tragedy, I’m not upset beyond comprehension? Surely the art and cathedral can be restored to former beauty, and it wasn’t there to be a monetary benefit, but as pure art as it was owned by the state. Sure, maybe it detracts a bit that you’re not looking at the real thing, but does it truly matter?