Jump to content

Talk:Chartres Cathedral

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 September 2019 and 28 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hfarris1998.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Per the request of JNW on August 22, 2007 to discuss valid links here, I am recommending http://sacred-destinations.com/france/chartres-cathedral.htm as a useful external link. It includes a detailed article, map and large photo gallery. HVH 10:21, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having no response, I've gone ahead and added the link suggested above. HVH 13:53, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dedication date: Oct 17 or Oct 24?

[edit]

These two sites:

both give October 17, 1260 as the cathedral dedication date. The Wikipedia article states October 24. Does anyone have a reference for the 24th date? — Eoghanacht talk 15:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ark of the Covenant

[edit]

What carvings are in this Cathedral that says that the Ark of the Covenant ended up in Ethiopia?

Pitt images ?

[edit]

Why are the Pitt images descrobed as 'collection partially claiming copyright for PD items'? What is in PD then? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 15:34, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This was due to a misunderstanding of the copyrights claimed by the website. I checked into it recently, and Pitt doesn't claim any of the PD-tagged images are theirs. So the characterization of the site was removed. -- SCZenz 02:39, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]

I have added some references (Adams, Houvet, Delaporte, Male) which may be of help. Adams is a dense book, very famous. Has been through many editions. Houvet was guardien of the Cathedral in the early 20th century and photographed virtually every piece of statuary in the building, as well as the chief architectural features. Emile Male was a famous art historian on the Middle Ages. His book on the Cathedral, trans. from French, is a combination of nice, modern photos and solid text. Andrew

The article is enthusiastic and interesting, that's nice! It would be nice though to add references, so we can learn more, and know where we can learn more about this or that specific event. Cheers! Lapaz 00:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

? Chartres is a proper noun. It doesn't mean anything to my knowledge (not to be mistaken with "Charte", which means something like "charter" if i translate well). Lapaz 18:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, it obviously meant something at one time, but whatever it meant has been lost to antiquity. C'est la vie! Wahkeenah 18:46, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
According to the article on Chartres itself, "The name "Chartres" derives from "Carnutes"." That should help. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 14:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pilgrimage to Chartres

[edit]

Chartres remains a pilgrimage site today. For the past 24 years a pilgrimage has been undertaken on Pentecost weekend from Notre Dame de Paris to Notre Dame de Chartres. Approximately 15,000 people walk from Paris to Chartres (~ 105 kilometers) over three days. For the past 14 years the pilgrimage has been sponsored by the association Notre-Dame de Chrétienté. Daily Mass is said during the three days according to the 1962 Ordo (the Tridentine Mass). Per the official booklet for the Our Lady of Guadalupe Chapter of the U.S.A., "A call to conversion, a public act of reparation to the Sacred Heart, this pilgrimage is a homage to Christ the King and to the Most Holy Virgin Mary."

Is this information incoporated into the article?--Balthazarduju 18:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Without sources supporting the importance of it, it should not. Lapaz 19:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

it's a catholic church... catholic pilgrimages to it are obviously important enough to be worth inclusion. 193.188.46.254 (talk) 05:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its not just a pilgrimage in the way santiago de compostela is a place of modern pilgrimage, (which i notice has its own article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Way_of_St._James, the pilgrimage galvanises the traditional youth and catholic scout movements. To have over 10,000 people walking from Paris to Chartes in 3 days is a feat in itself. It takes place on one of the most important Catholic holidays, Pentecost. The pilgrimage itself mirrors the growth of the traditional movement. When it first started they were refused permission to say mass in the tridentine rite, now they pack both Notre Dame in Paris and Chartres, with large television screens, with the latest Motu proprio Summorum Pontificum support for the pigrimage has grown. The last day of the pilgrimage which finishes in Chartres is a bank holiday.

Thus, the Cathedral is an important symbol for the pilgrims and for the wider traditional movement (there are also representatives from society of Pius X who walk from chartres to Sacré Couer). A mention should be made given its significance, on the other hand maybe i'll just go write an article on the pilgrimage itself when i find more cited references "I also believe the Chartes pilgrimage is far more important - perhaps the most important event in the Church. Though relatively few in number, those marching to Chartres are truly dedicated to Christ and His Church" http://www.seattlecatholic.com/article_20020812_The_Spirit_of_Chartres.html

--Fredbobhurst (talk) 11:09, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redundancy

[edit]

IMHO the first paragraph should be removed as the same more detailed information appears in later paragraphs. Some specific facts like the square footage should be kept. What do you think? --Tatoeba 02:49, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crusade

[edit]
the Sancta Camisia. The relic had supposedly been given to the Cathedral by Charlemagne who received it as a gift during a crusade in Jerusalem.

There weren't crusades in Charlemagne's time. Should it be "a pilgrimage" or is the legend anachronistic?

Corn...

[edit]

...is the dominant cereal grain of a country. It is still used that way in Europe. What we Americans call corn is properly called "Indian corn" and is called "maize" in Europe, to avoid confusion with other grains they already call corn. Wahkeenah 02:04, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"It is still used that way in Europe". Oh really ? In france ? In France, wheat is "ble" ( with an accent ) and corn/indian corn/maize is called mais ( with a french umlaut on the 'i' ). In France, cows have corns.Eregli bob (talk) 13:47, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Writing style

[edit]

"There are few architectural historians who have not waxed lyrical about its soaring aisles and delicate carving." This kind of lyrical writing does clearly not belong to an encyclopedic article. It should be more to the point. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.35.236.103 (talk) 18:02, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The writing style is too baroque and at times it borders on POV and OR, especially when it endlessly praises the 'glorious beauty of the art'. I think that it definitely needs sources, but I don't think that we should necessarily remove all unsourced material yet either. I don't doubt that most historians and other art buffs who would praise the artwork, but I think that we need to leave those appraisals up to them. It's not wikipedia's place to make value unsourced value judgments on any subject. If no one objects, I'll make some rewrites in a few days, since I'm currently in the midst of doing a school assignment on Chartres Cathedral and don't really have time. Dc2011 (talk) 03:04, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
More to the point, it sounds like it was lifted from someplace. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 18:56, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I added the {{peacock}} template to the article. At the very least, someone was so moved by the cathedral they decided to write what would best belong in a documentary produced by the cathedral itself, but more likely as has been said was taken from somewhere. I don't have the time to fix it, so hopefully someone will get around to it now. --MPD T / C 21:03, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm thinking of rewriting the Mona Lisa article to say, "The Mona Lisa is a portrait of a middle-aged woman, painted by Leonardo DaVinci." Anything beyond that would be... peacock. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:27, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The second paragraph is probably a little over the top, but I would hope we could keep something of its exuberance while toning it down just slightly (and citing a source or two). It paints a vivid picture which captures the spirit of the architecture in its setting, which is actually kind of refreshing in a WP article. Rivertorch (talk) 05:11, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"[T]here are few architectural historians who have not waxed lyrical about its soaring aisles and delicate carving." Really? Among all the architectural historians in the world, including historians of Soviet architecture from the Cold War, historians of temple complexes in ancient Persia, historians of bridges in Los Angeles, and historians of the Sydney Opera House, 'few' have managed to avoid waxing lyrical about a particular cathedral in France? Listen, I love Chartres just as much as the next Middle Ages nut, but not everyone is a Middle Ages nut. This article is in dire, dire, DIRE need of some perspective. --Hapax (talk) 22:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of travel guide tone IMO - but not a bad article - I think I worked out the peacock terms enough to remove the template.

--Scott Free (talk) 03:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Catholic bias?

[edit]

Reverted because it is certainly not obvious that the existing language presents anti-Catholic bias. Therefore will you please explain why you find it so? (You propose to delete three separated fragments of sentences. Do you mean that all three present the same problem?)--Jbeans (talk) 09:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Templar/Porch Nonsense

[edit]

I have removed (unsourced, of course) nonsense about Templars, excavations, and the Ark of the Covenant from the section on the Porch. Where do they get this stuff? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.108.70.239 (talk) 19:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

I have found three books that mention Chartres in detail. The Expected One by Kathleen McGowan. The book of Love Also by Kathleen McGowan. The Rose Labyrinth by Titania Hardie.CaraElaine512 (talk) 14:10, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for bringing this to the talk page first. Popular culture sections often get out of control, filled up with trivia and the like. An essay, WP:IPC, offers some guidance. My take on it is that you are, of course, free to add what you've found to the article (and others are free to revert). Three questions, though: (1) Are the books in question notable, with their own Wikipedia articles that can be linked? (2) Do they only "mention Chartres in detail" or is Chartres a major component of their settings, plots or themes? (3) Are people who arrive at this article looking for information about the cathedral likely to appreciate finding out about these books? If the answer to all three is "yes", then you have an excellent case for adding them. (Btw, please italicize the titles.) Rivertorch (talk) 18:14, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I should be more specific. The Expected One and The Book of Love are connected. You can't have one without the other. Chartres is the Main plot area in The Book of Love and it describes the whole building in detail. The Rose Labyrinth Partially describes it and is a plot area, but its minor. I honestly don't know if they have sites on wiki, I haven't checked yet. CaraElaine512 (talk) 10:48, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added Huysmans' novel La cathédrale to this section because it includes much informed research on the art of Chartres Cathedral and the art's underlying symbolism.helio 17:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

John James influences?

[edit]

I notice that somebody called Gothic99 (no user page) has added two sections - 'The Master Masons' and 'The Nine Masters', characterised by rather flowery prose and an uncritical quoting of the views of John James. Given that this user's other contributions include an item relating to psychotherapy that mentions JJ's clinic in Australia I can't help wondering whether Gothic99 might be the great man himself - or someone closely associated with him. Either way I think these sections need toning down a bit as I don't know any art historians apart from Dr James who accepts this over-precise chronology - and the arbitrary naming of anonymous masters ('Scarlet', 'Olive', etc) is extremely old-hat. What does everyone else think? StuartLondon (talk) 12:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Missing Wheelbarrow

[edit]

This may be unpopular... but i've removed the bit about the windows containing the first known depiction of a wheelbarrow. It used to read:

"The windows also present the first European wheelbarrow." for which it gives the ref "{{cite episode |transcripturl=http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi377.htm |title=Wheelbarrow |series=The Engines of Our Ingenuity |serieslink=The Engines of Our Ingenuity |number=377 |airdate=1990 |credits=John H. Lienhard |network=NPR |station=KUHF-FM Houston} "

Problem is that I can't actually find this alleged wheelbarrow!. Mr Leinhard, who is given as the source just makes a passing reference to it in his script from a popular history of science radio show - and gives no indication of where it is (which window) or where the info comes from. All the google searches on wheelbarrows in the chartres windows just point back to this WP article. All of which makes me think perhaps this is one of those self-perpetuating myths. There are plenty of hand-barrows carried by a man at each end (for example in the Charlemagne window) but I can't find one with a wheel. If anyone can tell me which window contains the wheelbarrow, or can come up with a more reliable source then I shall be delighted to put it back in the article together with details of the context. StuartLondon (talk) 11:03, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Rewrite

[edit]

I have just finished rewriting several sections of this article in an attempt to weed out some of the more fanciful stuff (what is it about Chartres that makes it such a magnet for eccentrics?), give it a bit more structure and bring it more in line with current academic opinion. I do however recognise that since I'm more used to explaining the cathedral to a specialist audience of art history undergrads, the tone and level of detail may be inappropriate for WP. So... to those of you more familiar with WP and its style, please dive in there and change it as you see fit. There are lots of copy-edit corrections to make - and when I get time (!) I'll try to upload some pictures of the roof space and from recent trips up the scaffolding - but generally speaking, I'm finished here. Cheers, Stuart. StuartLondon (talk) 16:08, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Architect's name

[edit]

It should be noted somewhere in the article (in the lede or within the first few sentences of the section on the present edifice) that the name of the main architect of this glorious building remains unknown - there have been attempts to identify him of course. This is not always the case with medieval buildings; there are a number of fortresses, halls, palaces and churches where we know the name/s of the architect/s (no, there was no conscious desire to remain anonymous out of humility) but with Chartres he remains nameless. And it is beyond question that there was a single main architect with real artistic vision and unusual technical skills behind this cathedral; it is a major work within the high Gothic style and most of it was built within 25 years - quite rapidly for a Gothic cathedral. The question "Who designed it?" is one that keeps cropping up in the minds of people visiting it or reading about it. 83.254.154.164 (talk) 04:16, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Where has it cropped up in reliable secondary sources? Elizium23 (talk) 02:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

1836 fire

[edit]

"In 1836, the old lead-covered roof, with its complex structure of timber supports (known as 'the forest') was destroyed by fire". After the Notre-Dame de Paris fire, it would be interesting for comparison if there were a bit more of that 1836 Chartres Cathedral fire to read here. Gestumblindi (talk) 00:54, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was an accident due to plumbers. See also the paintings by Pernot and Fournier des Ormes, Le Passant (talk) 13:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Paper vs. Article

[edit]

As was mentioned in the section "2010 Rewrite", much of the language used was more appropriate for a "specialist audience of art history undergrads", and quite a bit of that remains. Any sentence or phrase that attempts to lead the reader to a conclusion that isn't explicitly stated in a reliable source is a form of original research and synthesis. These are especially visible in sentences and phrases like "one must..." or "one can..." which are not appropriate for Wikipedia. That kind of wording is far more appropriate for textbook chapter or academic paper (which could be used here as a reliable source). There are also several pont-of-view terms, usually descriptors, which should be avoided. Any descriptor that is opinion should either be placed in proper context (such as who said it and why their opinion matters) or within a direct quote, immediately followed by the supporting citation. Any outstanding claim must also have a reference, especially ones that claim this building is the "only one" or anything similar. See WP:NPOVT. --JonRidinger (talk) 02:09, 26 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some restructuring

[edit]

I believe the beginning of the article needs a bit of restructuring, to match the other articles on major cathedrals. The article should begin with the construction of the cathedral, rather than with the social context, though it can certainly mention the previous cathedrals on the same site. The social context can be placed later in the article. (see Notre Dame de Paris, Amiens Cathedral, Beauvais Cathedral, Reims Cathedral, etc. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 15:01, 28 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

World War II Edit

[edit]

Hello,

For a class assignment, I have chosen part of the Chartres Cathedral to be the topic of my Wiki Project. I will be adding more information to the section regarding World War II. My bibliography includes:

  1. Rabel, Claudia. 2016. "A Virtual Renaissance for the Manuscripts of Chartres Damaged During World War II." What do we lose when we lose a library? Issue 1: 161-166. Accessed October 22, 2019. https://www.unesco.de/sites/default/files/201808/2015_What_do_we_lose_when_we_lose_a_library_0.pdf.
  2. Barone, Michael. 2014. "The American Hero Who Saved Chartres Cathedral." The Examiner. Accessed October 22, 2019. http://libproxy.uwyo.edu/login/?url=https://search-proquest-com.libproxy.uwyo.edu/docview/1560381663?accountid=14793.
  3. Footitt, Hilary, and John Simmonds. France: 1943-1945. New York: Homes & Meier, 1988. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hfarris1998 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you have any advice or suggestions. Thanks! Hfarris1998 (talk) 04:00, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the heads-up! I fixed some formatting. Elizium23 (talk) 04:26, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have finished editing this portion of the Chartres Cathedral article. Let me know what you think of it, thank you!Hfarris1998 (talk) 21:48, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What about the organ?

[edit]

I am dumbfounded that this article about a cathedral has no mention of its organ. A quick google search yields plenty of plausible sources; amongst the better ones there is an article in the Musical Times ([1]) about the various instruments which were present in the Cathedral throughout its history. 173.179.105.16 (talk) 01:51, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this suggestion; you're absolutely right, the organ was overlooked. I've added some text based on the French Wikipedia article, and on the source you cited. Can you verify if this text is correct? Is the number of tuyaux the number of pipes or the number of possible notes? It seems awfully large. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk)
French "jeux" translates as "stop" and "tuyaux" is indeed literally "pipes". In short, every stop is a set of pipes with a similar timbre and at a given pitch (8' is same pitch as on a piano, 4' one octave higher, ...). Considering each stop is one set of 60ish pipes (depending exactly how many notes are on the manuals, obviously less on the pedals, more if it is a mixture - see Organ stop#Mixtures); that seems about what one would expect (and yes, that's a rather large organ). The number of stops I see, though, is closer to 70 ([2]; [3]) than to 50... 173.179.105.16 (talk) 03:35, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cathedral Dimensions

[edit]

The Cathedral dimensions presented are really unclear in this article, and the dimensions are absolutely wrong, as the largest cathedral in surface area in France is Notre Dame d'Amiens which has a surface area of 7700 square meters, making the unbelievable claim of a 10k square meter surface area unrealistic and impossible, I've been trying to find the dimensions myself and I'm having trouble due to the complex nature of the cathedral's architecture and would appreciate a more seasoned individual more suited to the task could help me out here Historybuffedmasters (talk) 18:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chartres_Cathedral&oldid=1226287621"