-
Welcome to the Community Forums at HiveWire 3D! Please note that the user name you choose for our forum will be displayed to the public. Our store was closed as January 4, 2021. You can find HiveWire 3D and Lisa's Botanicals products, as well as many of our Contributing Artists, at Renderosity. This thread lists where many are now selling their products. Renderosity is generously putting products which were purchased at HiveWire 3D and are now sold at their store into customer accounts by gifting them. This is not an overnight process so please be patient, if you have already emailed them about this. If you have NOT emailed them, please see the 2nd post in this thread for instructions on what you need to do
Notre Dame
- Thread starter Janet
- Start date
We did go to the Louvre, but it was back in the mid to late '60s, so I don't recall that bridge, though it's possible we saw it. The only places I distinctly remember are the Champs-Élysées, and the Arc de Triomphe, probably because any non-Parisienne would make sure to see those.
Leana
Enthusiast
All the money which has been pledged for reconstruction will definitely be useful, but indeed having skilled artisans will be the key.
Fortunately in France we have organizations like the Compagnons du Devoir to maintain craftsmanship and skills and train new artisans mastering old techniques.
Hornet3d
Wise
That is indeed good news as it would be a shame if such skills were lost. Here in the UK we have the people with the skills but I am not sure there is the interest from younger people to attain such skills. There was a documentary recently about refurbishing the clock associated with Big Ben and the team doing most of the work are a couple of highly skilled people who have maintained the clock for years and they seem to have difficulty in getting people of a generation younger than them to learn the skills.
In my part of the UK there are still a great deal of thatched cottages but to have the roof repaired of replaced is difficult and costly as there are so few skilled thatchers.
Yes, main structure should be saved, though there's still lot of work before the fire is totally out.
We don't know how much is damaged yet, except than the wooden frame of the roof is totally lost and of course the spire has fallen.
We will rebuild what we can, but it will never be the same again.
So sad and I was also worried about whether it would be possible to rebuild it the same...not only through choice of the team rebuilding but also through the lack of artisans with the right skills.
I was also worried about where they were going to get the oak beams from but I saw a post online yesterday that said that they had oaks that had been planted for that purpose at Versaille...so I hope that is true.
Pen, there doesn't seem to be a credible source for oak trees having been planted more than a century ago as replacement for the Notre Dame beams. Even if they were able to find enough pockets of forest with trees old enough, it would be devastating to the environment to cut down the number of trees required to replace the oak beams.
From Ars Technica,
From Ars Technica,
The trees that made up the roof's wooden structure were cut down around 1160, and some sources estimate that the beams accounted for 13,000 trees, or about 21 hectares of Medieval forest, many of which had been growing since the 800s or 900s. "You have a stage in France where deforestation was a problem; these buildings consumed huge amounts of wood." That's according to Columbia University art historian Stephen Murray, who spoke with Ars Technica. All that wood, he said, supported an outer roof of lead—until the wood burned and the roof collapsed.
My mother mentioned that St. John's Cathedral in NYC has marble cutting programs, as it's still under construction.
Hornet3d
Wise
That was my first concern when the talked about it being rebuilt, I very much hope it is but the thought of cutting down so many oak trees bothers me. If oak trees of the size needed do exist it seems wrong to cut down something that is still healthy and almost impossible to replace. As the underside of the roof cannot be seen by the general public due to the vaunted ceilings below I wonder if there is a compromise available.
Agreed that cutting old enough oak trees down is a concern. I read (I think on face book so not sure of the credibility of the source) that they had planted oak trees specific for this purpose...in which case I wouldn't be as concerned as long as they replanted more however not sure of credibility of what I read...which is what I mentioned (eg. not sure it's true) in my original post.
However on checking google I found this How Notre Dame Can Be Rebuilt which I would have thought reasonably credible as a source. Check bottom of third paragraph...
However on checking google I found this How Notre Dame Can Be Rebuilt which I would have thought reasonably credible as a source. Check bottom of third paragraph...
I wonder if his source is the claims by a Michael that the trees planted along the paths in the Gardens at Versailles were intended for Notre Dame. The link in the Forbes article goes to a photo, not an article, which is the same photo Michael tweeted. All the references I could find regarding trees being planted at Versailles led back to those tweets by Michael. I did eventually find an article in the UK DailyMail that extensively referenced Michael's tweets, but it also included statements by experts who claim France doesn't have trees big enough to replace the beams. However, I don't believe the Daily Mail is considered a reliable source.
Bertand de Freydau had been quoted in several articles I came across stating France no longer has the trees to replace the beams. One of the articles I read went into more detail about primal forests, which are ancient forests untouched by man.
Kaya Burgess, a reporter and religious affairs correspondent at The Times of London tweeted that the Château de Versailles confirmed trees being planted at Versailles to replace the Notre Dame beams was a rumor with no basis in historical fact. But, I couldn't find any more information from the Château de Versailles about that statement.
As usual, there is a lot of disinformation or unclear information out there. Depending on the expert, there were 300 to 1,300 to 5,000 trees used to create the oak beams. (The 1,300 number is the one I've seen most ... one tree for each oak beam). Information is so readily available because of the internet, but it's so very difficult to trust it!
I'd wondered about laminated wood beams, but not being an engineer or architect, I've no idea if that's even feasible. Restoration architects have mentioned replacing the wood beams with thinner concrete beams which would in total weigh similar to what the wooden beams did as Henry Deneux used in rebuilding the Reims Cathedral. Another possibility mentioned in the same msn article is using steel beams as was done with the Collège des Bernardins (another gothic religious building) restoration.
It's rather fascinating how the trees were prepared for the roof. They started cutting the trees around 1200, which were then laid for a year with the top turned to the North to align them with the energy of the earth. The bark was then removed and the trunks immersed in a swamp for 25 years to preserve the wood from fungus and insects. The trunks were removed from the water and sawed into beams which were allowed to dry for another 25 years.
The oaks that line the paths in the Gardens at Versailles will now be used to rebuild the beams at Notre Dame, Michael believes.
'Those trees aren't decorative,' he wrote. 'They're farmed for just this purpose.'
However, a French cultural heritage expert this morning claimed that France no longer has trees big enough to replace ancient wooden beams that fell during the blaze.
Bertrand de Feydeau, vice president of preservation group Fondation du Patrimoine, told France Info radio that the wooden roof that went up in flames was built with beams more than 800 years ago from primal forests.
Speaking on Tuesday, he said the cathedral's roof cannot be rebuilt exactly as it was before the fire because 'we don't, at the moment, have trees on our territory of the size that were cut in the 13th century.'
'Those trees aren't decorative,' he wrote. 'They're farmed for just this purpose.'
However, a French cultural heritage expert this morning claimed that France no longer has trees big enough to replace ancient wooden beams that fell during the blaze.
Bertrand de Feydeau, vice president of preservation group Fondation du Patrimoine, told France Info radio that the wooden roof that went up in flames was built with beams more than 800 years ago from primal forests.
Speaking on Tuesday, he said the cathedral's roof cannot be rebuilt exactly as it was before the fire because 'we don't, at the moment, have trees on our territory of the size that were cut in the 13th century.'
Bertand de Freydau had been quoted in several articles I came across stating France no longer has the trees to replace the beams. One of the articles I read went into more detail about primal forests, which are ancient forests untouched by man.
Kaya Burgess, a reporter and religious affairs correspondent at The Times of London tweeted that the Château de Versailles confirmed trees being planted at Versailles to replace the Notre Dame beams was a rumor with no basis in historical fact. But, I couldn't find any more information from the Château de Versailles about that statement.
As usual, there is a lot of disinformation or unclear information out there. Depending on the expert, there were 300 to 1,300 to 5,000 trees used to create the oak beams. (The 1,300 number is the one I've seen most ... one tree for each oak beam). Information is so readily available because of the internet, but it's so very difficult to trust it!
I'd wondered about laminated wood beams, but not being an engineer or architect, I've no idea if that's even feasible. Restoration architects have mentioned replacing the wood beams with thinner concrete beams which would in total weigh similar to what the wooden beams did as Henry Deneux used in rebuilding the Reims Cathedral. Another possibility mentioned in the same msn article is using steel beams as was done with the Collège des Bernardins (another gothic religious building) restoration.
It's rather fascinating how the trees were prepared for the roof. They started cutting the trees around 1200, which were then laid for a year with the top turned to the North to align them with the energy of the earth. The bark was then removed and the trunks immersed in a swamp for 25 years to preserve the wood from fungus and insects. The trunks were removed from the water and sawed into beams which were allowed to dry for another 25 years.
Hornet3d
Wise
I am no expert but when there were claims that it would be rebuilt within ten years I have to say I was sceptical but five years ?
From what I can gather from what has been reported so far, even if the trees at Château de Versailles were planted to replace the beams at Notre Dame they seem to be short of the right age and therefore some degree size, of between 100 to 600 years depending on who is doing the reporting.
eclark1894
Visionary
I probably should stay out of this, but if it eases anyone's mind, any tree cut down to help rebuild Notre Dame will have another tree planted in its place.
Hornet3d
Wise
True and if it was pine it would not be much of an issue but the oaks they are talking about will take 300 years or more to reach the same point as they are now.
eclark1894
Visionary
From what I read, they're talking about using 100 year old trees and modern methods because they don't want a repeat of what has happened.
Mythocentric
Extraordinary
It seems that now is the time for other Western countries to stand up and be counted. Canada, which has a deep historical connection to France, for instance, is capable of supplying trees of the right size and maturity. Not oak necessarily, but structurally capable of serving as a suitable replacement. While the subject of this thread is, of course, Notre Dame, may I ask you all to give some thought to the other 857 (Yes! That's 857!) churches which have been attacked, many by arson, across France in the last 12 months!
Newspapers over here (Austria) said today that they are thinking about using a metal structure for the roof. One point in favour of metal would be that it's less inflammable.
Btw. this is not the first time historical buildings started to burn during renovations or maintenance work. In Vienna we had two such incidents. One threatened the national library, the biggest baroque library in Europe with priceless books and manuscripts, but it was contained before it could do any unrepairable damage. The other one destroyed a complex of historic concert halls which were only partially rebuilt. Those halls were not as famous as Notre Dame and didn't have as much meaning for Austrians as Notre Dame has for the French people but I still remember the shock I felt when I was watching the newsfeeds back then. My heart goes out to the French people who lost a national treasure
Btw. this is not the first time historical buildings started to burn during renovations or maintenance work. In Vienna we had two such incidents. One threatened the national library, the biggest baroque library in Europe with priceless books and manuscripts, but it was contained before it could do any unrepairable damage. The other one destroyed a complex of historic concert halls which were only partially rebuilt. Those halls were not as famous as Notre Dame and didn't have as much meaning for Austrians as Notre Dame has for the French people but I still remember the shock I felt when I was watching the newsfeeds back then. My heart goes out to the French people who lost a national treasure
eclark1894
Visionary
You mean less flammable... but I get your point.Newspapers over here (Austria) said today that they are thinking about using a metal structure for the roof. One point in favour of metal would be that it's less inflammable.
Btw. this is not the first time historical buildings started to burn during renovations or maintenance work. In Vienna we had two such incidents. One threatened the national library, the biggest baroque library in Europe with priceless books and manuscripts, but it was contained before it could do any unrepairable damage. The other one destroyed a complex of historic concert halls which were only partially rebuilt. Those halls were not as famous as Notre Dame and didn't have as much meaning for Austrians as Notre Dame has for the French people but I still remember the shock I felt when I was watching the newsfeeds back then. My heart goes out to the French people who lost a national treasure
Renovations tend to be a rather dangerous time for historical buildings. Quite a few churches and historical buildings have been damaged or destroyed because of fires caused during renovations. I'd imagine welding would be rather hazardous when working in tight quarters among wood that is over 600-800 (or more) years old!
Just how many 200+ year old trees are in Versailles? On December 26, 1999, Cyclone Lothar with hurricane-force winds hit the Palace of Versailles and its park causing considerable damage, with over 10,000 trees lost within two hours. Many of these were trees that were 200 years old, and 80 percent of the estate’s rare species were damaged or lost, including Marie-Antoinette’s oak, which was the oldest tree and had been planted during the reign of Louis XIV, which made it like ... 300 years old?
The following day, France was hit by Cyclone Martin. Altogether, 270 million trees (three years of French timber production) were lost throughout France. An earlier storm, in 1990, destroyed 1,800 trees.
Between wars, fires (natural and arson), earthquakes, hurricanes, polllution, development, and neglect, it's amazing any historical buildings remain. Neglect and environmental pollution threaten the Taj Mahal, which while not as old as Notre Dame, is just as historically valuable and is one of the "new" seven wonders of the world.
Just how many 200+ year old trees are in Versailles? On December 26, 1999, Cyclone Lothar with hurricane-force winds hit the Palace of Versailles and its park causing considerable damage, with over 10,000 trees lost within two hours. Many of these were trees that were 200 years old, and 80 percent of the estate’s rare species were damaged or lost, including Marie-Antoinette’s oak, which was the oldest tree and had been planted during the reign of Louis XIV, which made it like ... 300 years old?
The following day, France was hit by Cyclone Martin. Altogether, 270 million trees (three years of French timber production) were lost throughout France. An earlier storm, in 1990, destroyed 1,800 trees.
Between wars, fires (natural and arson), earthquakes, hurricanes, polllution, development, and neglect, it's amazing any historical buildings remain. Neglect and environmental pollution threaten the Taj Mahal, which while not as old as Notre Dame, is just as historically valuable and is one of the "new" seven wonders of the world.
DanaTA
Distinguished
You mean less flammable... but I get your point.
Actually, inflammable means "easily set on fire". It was a point of confusion to me when I was young, but this is the correct use of the word, and the correct word to use.
Dana
eclark1894
Visionary
I like trees as much as the next person, but with all due respect, an old tree is just an old tree. 300 years isn't how long a tree takes to mature, it's how long its lived. The wood that made up Notre Dame wasn't 200 or 300 years old when it was first built. A tree planted in 1990 or 1999 is fully matured. Some are slower than others depending on what kind and where they're grown.