Quote:
Originally Posted by xelasnave
I suppose it would be rebuilt even if there were only two stones left standing.
But then one wonders why if everything has to be built afresh is there any point.
The questions that present...
Replace old with new materials and method or build it again exactly as it would have been done 800 years ago...use steel or wood...the window glass? make it like they did originally or use modern methods...or make the ruins safe and treat them as a reminder of how it once was...
Its a funny thing..I am not religious and think spending time energy and money on religious building to be an absolute waste and yet for this building I find myself leaning to rebuild it using ancient tools methods and materials.
And who will pay..the church? Mmmm was it insured? If not why not?
Should the world fund the fixup or only the church.
And how much money to repair it...heck if broad band cost billions you could think it could be more than that☺
Alex
|
Alex, it cannot be rebuilt as it was originally, the old growth oak forests that provided all that lovely timber are long gone. Reading yesterday suggested over 13,000 oak trees were felled for the original construction phase, most in the roof. Secondly, there would not be enough timber craftsmen to complete the job as it was done originally. Most likely is a modern reconstruction, using most fireproof materials like steel. However, before that can be considered there has to be a structural engineering study to determine just how stable the remaining structure is, and what needs to be done to stabilise it first. Ancient stone mortars maybe useless now as binding material in say the towers or upper walls that might have to support the new structure. At least they seem to getting a lot of financial support from people with money.
Of concern is the silence from the Vatican, which has massive wealth reserves. At the very least the Vatican security people should be very worried about a fire there.