Aleksandra V.

Milošević1

VIOLLET-LE-DUC,
RESTORATION OF THE PARIS CATHEDRAL 1845 - 1864
Abstract: Eugene-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc (1814-79) with Jean Baptiste Lassus begins in 1845 works on
restoration of a Paris Cathedral and construction of a new sacristy. After the death of Lassus in 1857, he
was in sole charge of the project. Confronted with degraded edifice, due to various interventions,
attempts of its modernization, vandalism and mutilation in „the Temple of Reason“, the architect adopts
maxim of evaluation for previous interventions and alterations, protecting and reproducing some as
representation of its style form, at the same time avoiding „historic falsehood“ which would certainly
lead to monument’s loss of identity. Being impossible to reproduce certain elements of Gothic
architecture that were on the edifice before mutilation, he modifies them, making his interpretation,
known through imaginative sculptures and octagonal based flèche on transept crossing, by placing, at its
foot, the statue of himself presented as Saint Thomas gazing at the edifice.

Key words: Viollet-le-Duc, cathedral, monument, restoration, reconstruction

ВИОЛЕ-Л-ДИК,
РЕСТАУРАЦИЈА ПАРИСКЕ КАТЕДРАЛЕ 1845 - 1864
Резиме: Eжен Емануел Виоле-л-Дик (1814-79) 1845. са Жан Баптист Ласусом започиње
рестаурацију париске катедрале и изградњу нове сакристије, након смрти Ласуса наставља
радове самостално. Суочен са озбиљним проблемом нарушене вредности историјског здања,
последично различитим интервенцијама и покушајима „модернизовања“, вандализације и
скрнављења у „храм разума“, примењује принцип вредновања доградњи и преправки уз очување и
репродуковање појединих као репрезената сопствене стилске форме, избегавајући „историјску
лаж“ која би неумитно довела до губљења идентитета споменика. Сходно немогућности
извођења појединих елемената који су некад чинили елементе и украсе изворне конструкције у
стилу времена градње, модификује их у одређеним границама, дајући катедрали сопствени печат
препознатљив преко имагинативних скулптура и стреле октогоналне основе на крстишту
трансепта, уз коју овековечује себе у скулптури Светог Томе окренутог према споменику чијој
лепоти се диви.

Кључне речи: Виоле-л-Дик, катедрала, споменик, рестаурација, реконструкција

1
Architect, PhD student on GAF Niš, Town Planning Institute of Niš, aleksandra.milosevic@zurbnis.rs

-1-
1. INTRODUCTION
Viollet-le-Duc, an architect, a theorist and above all a restorer, had part in both of the state institutions
formed for the conservation of historical monuments in 1830 and 1850, les Monuments historiques and
les Édifices diocésains: the former several civilian buildings and medieval churches and the latter,
cathedrals. According to Leniaud, one of the biggest lessons of the 20th century that architects learned
from Viollet-le-Duc is “to design the restoration, not as a repair but as a project that implements
understanding of an edifice” [4]. His postulate, after Vučenović, could be classified in the following
points:
 Every edifice and/or its parts need to be restored in the style they belong to;
 If the edifice was repaired with elements different from the authentic ones, the restoration needs
to be evaluated prior to the reproduction ;
 Best way of preserving the edifice is finding its original purpose [12].
Analyzing his works on monuments, upon translating the eighth volume of „Dictionnaire”, Wethered
admires this architect referring to him as „an intellectual king among men, with personal attractions of
dignity and grace benefitting a descendant of the old noblesse.“ [13]

Image 1 – Left: Viollet-le-Duc, on the right: statue of Viollet-le-Duc presenting Saint Thomas, made of hammered copper, detail

Viollet-le-Duc began his work on the Cathedral of Paris with Jean Baptiste Lassus in 1845, but after
the death of Lassus in 1857, he became the only architect in charge to the completion of this monument in
1864. This paper analyzes the work on restoration of the Cathedral, referring to the methodology applied,
explaining the successful attempt of the architect to give the spirit of romanticism to the gothic edifice by
means of modifications on medieval architecture elements linking it with 19th century.

2. BRIEF HISTORICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE CATHEDRAL TO ITS RESTORATION

The first stone of Notre-Dame de Paris was laid in 1163 on the southeastern part of Île de la Cité. The
cathedral, built in Gothic style granted spectacular dimensions to the edifice in early 13th century: 127m
long, 40m wide and 33m of vault height. It was described by Sir Banister Fletcher, quoted by Gauvard:
“the interior elevation was originally of four levels, with an arcade of columnar piers, and the Tribune,
originally covered with transverse barrel vaults, and lit by round windows, decorative oculi opening into
the tribune roof spaces, and small clerestory windows” [2]. The medieval cathedral was considered
complete by 1351.

Image 2 – Left: petition for restoration of Paris cathedral, in the middle: the letter by Prosper Mérimée, on the right: design for
the competition in 1843. Archives photographiques MAP © CMN

-2-
 In 17th century, after various attempts to modernize the cathedral, devastation culminated during the
revolution in 1789. Viollet-le-Duc noted impossibility in tracing all the devastation, “and besides, who
remembers them any more or who has heard stories about them, but a hundred times?” [11] By
appearance of Romantic Movement at the beginning of the 19th century, “Middle Ages” were finally
stopped considered barbaric and Gothic was revived. Led by Romantic enthusiasm, for Viollet-le-Duc,
French Gothic reflected not only the spirit of the nation, but also “a principle of unity”, so he presented
Gothic architecture as the “rational and perfect expression of a democratic society” [4]. Making an
inventory of all ruined medieval buildings began by the declaration of Prosper Mérimée as Inspecteur
général des Monuments historiques. In 1830, Victor Hugo published his novel ”Notre-Dame de Paris”
which became very successful. The intellectual elite of Paris raised their voices very loudly, which put the
destroyed cathedral in the focus of attention. In his novel, Victor Hugo protests: “Who replaced the old
Gothic altar by a heavy marble sarcophagus, and stupidly fixed this anachronism in stone in the
Carlovingian pavement of Hercandus ? Was it not Louis XIV, accomplishing the vow of his
predecessor?” quoted by Lonergan [6]. On May 31st in 1842, a petition for the restoration of the cathedral
was signed by Hugo, Vigny, Ingres and others.
The cathedral, as we see it today, is generally the work of Viollet-le-Duc. In 1843, when Notre-Dame
de Paris became “à la mode”, church administrators launched a competition for the general restoration of
the cathedral. Competing with Arveuf and Danjoy, the contest was won by Viollet-le-Duc and Lassus,
very young but not inexperienced architects: Viollet-le-Duc had already participated in restoration of the
church Sainte-Marie-Madeleine de Vézelay, the Citadel of Carcassonne and its Cathedral Saint-Nazaire
as well as Sainte-Chapelle together with Lassus. After the competition, in November 22nd 1843, Prosper
Mérimée responded to Lassus and Viollet-le-Duc with “Votre projet a été classé en premier ligne”.

3. RESTORATION OF THE CATHEDRAL

In 19th century, basic theories of historic preservation were framed in the dualism of the retention of
the “status quo” versus “restoration”. The term restoration as well as the activity is, stated by Viollet-le-
Duc, a creation of modern times, explaining with the example of ancient Rome that “there is no Latin
word corresponding to our restoration term in its modern sense”. The first generic concepts of restoration
appeared in France, in 18th century, evolving into doctrines which, in the beginning of 19th century,
defined restoration with great respect of the existing structure, especially after campaigns such as the one
at the Abbaye de Saint-Denis, which was concerned as disastrous. Viollet-le-Duc himself was concerned
with the dangers of restoration criticizing with Lassus „the ignorant zeal which adds, recuts, completes,
and ends up transforming an ancient monument into a new monument“ [11]. In 1839, Concerning the
Paris Cathedral, Comité historique des Arts et Monuments, led by Didron, recommended the restoration
with principle to restore what was already on the edifice without adding anything new. Didron’s attitude
was very similar to Raskin’s theory that the authenticity of historic building should be defended through
the preservation of its original matter. Comité objected to a reconstruction of the lost west portal statues
from models found on another early gothic cathedral, so it caused formation of the new comité to
reevaluate the proposed project. “Restaurer un édifice, ce n’est pas l’entretenir, le réparer ou le refaire,
c’est le rétablir dans un état complet qui peut n’avoir jamais existé à un moment donné“ [9], Viollet-le-
Duc explained his maxim in „Dictionnaire”, which Vučenović interpreted as „The act of restoration does
not only mean rebuilding the edifice but also establishing the original stylistic unity that was in previous
interventions malformed or had never been originally finished; therefore, the very meaning of “stylistic
unity” allows a restorer’s intention of creating historic replication, especially with cathedrals built over
several centuries from the Romanic period to Late Gothic or Early Renaissance.

3.1. Methodology
Faced with devastations of the monument from previous interventions as well as its modernization,
which led its historical context in danger, Viollet-le-Duc applied the principle of preservation, ”do not
restore; support, consolidate, replace, as Triumphal arch at Orange, the stone completely gnawed by new
stone, but keep their cutting mouldings or carvings” [11]. Such monument as this triumphal arch could be
left as a ruin, but the edifice with its function as it was in the Middle Ages, needs a new approach.
Particularly, he did not support essentiality of removing all extensions of the initial structure returning to

-3-
its original form, but proposed revalorization, as Crépin-Leblond interprets, “Each part, no matter in what
period it was added, in principle should be retained, consolidated and restored in the appropriate style,
and this should be done with religious discretion and total abnegation of any personal view“ [1]. Viollet-
le-Duc advocates rejecting his artistic influence on edifice elements, pointing that „it is not to make art,
but only to submit to the art of an era that no longer exists“[11]. The construction of the cathedral is
essentially compatible with its form, so the minor alteration on the construction or decoration of Gothic
architecture of Notre-Dame demands the next one and so long, resulting in a completely changed state of
the initial construction system by replacing it with a contemporaneous one, often with an extension of
form. Described alterations lead to inexorable disappearance of historical art periods and aesthetics of the
edifice, causing the edifice a loss of value and at the end its loss of identity. Nevertheless, on the
balustrade of western façade of the cathedral, Viollet-le-Duc adds chimeras with primarily visual role in
the aesthetic conception of the façade. Can it be concerned as the artistic influence? Or just a creation of a
“historic falsehood” in the name of stylistic unity?
For the conservation of materials, Viollet-le-Duc applied a method to use them in their “primitive
form” which meant the same form in which the original building element was constructed, primarily in
the historical interest rather than artistic. If such material is replaced, it would be impossible to re-
establish its original form using concrete as a reproduction of stone, being “a patch”; as well as cast iron
as a replicated element of wood. The unsuccessful attempts to substitute the original with contemporary
materials from 19th century, which could be seen on Cathedrals at Rouen, Séez or Rheims, only
strengthened the architect’s determination to use his method.

Image 3 –Plans of the cathedral: on the left, around 1230; on the right, around 1330, after Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire raisonné
de l’architecture française du XIe au XVIe siècle

In 18th century, architect Parvy advocates the simplicity of restoration which meant removing all the
elements of the construction that might show, as Viollet-le-Duc says “quelques difficultés à réparer” and
removes them in 1787. At the beginning of 19th century, the methods of restoration being used at the time
gave, according to Viollet-le-Duc “un résultat encore plus déplorable” [11] referring to the sealing,
specimens, and finally all the materials that were unsuccessfully attempted to be used as substitution for
stone. Application of such specimens, firstly, leads toward degradation of the restored building elements
and then to destruction of certain parts by application of cast iron, resulting in low durability building
elements. It was impossible to replicate removed reliefs and bas-reliefs from the original construction, in
the original style, so Viollet-le-Duc applies their modification, resulting in alteration of the original
character. Since the statues which decorated the original edifice were destroyed and there was no
documentation to grant their reproductions, the architect used copies of the statues from Early Gothic
cathedrals in Chartres, Rheims, Amiens and other French churches from that period. For restoration of the
stained glass, the same method was applied.

Image 4 – Gargouille, sketch by Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIe au XVIe siècle

-4-
3.2. Restoration works
In order to conceive the look of the cathedral from 14th century, Viollet-le-Duc uses enravings of the
original object as well as its descriptions from 17th and 19th century by Sainte-Foix, Dubreul, Leboeuf,
Gilbert i Garneray. In the winning proposal with Lassus, he argued that the cathedral of Paris, which they
described not as a church but as a ruin, demands a totally new approach of restoration, presented in
twenty-two sheets of technical drawings. New approach was quite opposed to Didron’s recommendation
as well as Schmidt’s concern that the original character of monument must be preserved, not destroyed by
an ambitious restoration. In his restoration theory, Viollet-le-Duc puts a structure into imaginary ideal
state and, in “Entretiens“, presents an ideally reconstructed gothic west façade of Notre-Dame with two
stone spires on the towers. Restoration from Viollet-le-Duc’s point of view, was not a reproduction of the
actual historical condition but a projection of contemporary principles onto the past. Namely, Viollet-le-
Duc considered the application of contemporary technological process necessary when restoring an
object, which could be seen in his later works.
Works on the restoration included restoration of the exterior of the cathedral and, for the first time, it
also included a detailed interior restoration. Authorised funds were 1,973,882.67 francs for the restoration
and 664,491.83 francs for the reconstruction of the sacristy. These funds were exceeded during the works,
which is why it was necessary to gain extra-funding. Not having been approved in 1850, it caused a
suspension of works for the next eight years, until 1859, when new three million francs were granted for
the completion of the cathedral. Although disputed, Viollet-le-Duc’s imaginativeness provided the
possibility that, as Gauvard observed, “the stones of Notre-Dame still speak to us”. [2]

3.2.1 Exterior
Damaged stones were substituted with decorative carving reproduced and remade by Adolphe
Geoffroy-Dechaume with the consent of Viollet-le-Duc. The architect copied statues of kings of Judah
and Israel from the cathedral in Chartres and placed all twenty-eight statues in a wide horizontal frieze
formed by niches in Galerie des Rois. For sculptures, Viollet-le-Duc provided preliminary drawings from
which plaster casts were made in full size and placed on the spots where statues were later set. Using this
method, fifteen sculptors produced seventy-one statue. In 1771, after many previous mutilations of the
cathedral, Jacques-Germain Soufflot expanded Porte du Jugement dernier on the western façade by
removing the trumeau and the central part of the two lintels, in order to make room for the canopy used to
cover the Holy Sacrament during processions, as shown on image 5 - left. They were replaced by a
decorated wooden arcade. During his restoration campaign on the western façade, Viollet-le-Duc restored
the portal to its original state using engravings by Bernard de Montfaucon. On four large pillars, figures
of Saint-Dennis, Judaism, Christianity and Saint Etienne were placed and at the centre of the façade, there
was a statue of the Virgin and Child between two angels. On the right and the left, there are statues of
Adam and Eve.

Image 5 – Western façade: left, before restoration around 1840, middle, competition design of Viollet-le-Duc and Lassus 1843,
right during restoration; Archives photographiques MAP © CMN

-5-
 Encountering the legacy of the 19th century, Bernard Fonquernie, an architect who worked on
restoration of the western façade in 20th century, during his analysis, finds that Viollet-le-Duc used twelve
different types of stone from 1847. Considering it a coincidence, Fonquernie researches the stone on the
façade with the result in recognition of twenty-one type. It took ten years to restore the façade, and
according to this architect, due to air pollution and exploitation of the monument, next restoration is to be
done in the first half of the 21st century. A historical fact, which Viollet-le-Duc obeyed is that he never
made an effort to “finish” towers with stone spires, even though he had considered the idea in
“Entretiens”: “the work is not yet finished-the two towers should be terminated by two spires to complete
and explain the carefully studied lines of the lower structure” [10]. However, in his project with Lassus,
he observes that by adding two spires “ce monument ne serait plus Notre-Dame de Paris” [11].
Roof is at a 55° incline. Wood used for the roof construction of choir and nave is from the trees
planted in the 8th or 9th century, but the transept structure is rebuilt by Viollet-le-Duc which consisted of
beams much larger and spaced apart than medieval beams. Attic of the Cathedral still presents storage for
original building elements, so they can be replicated during future interventions. One of his most
important restorations, often credited as “controversial”, is definitely the restoration of the original four
story elevation of the nave in the bays near transept crossing. “Cette construction provisoire” from the
previous period, as Viollet-le-Duc stated was degraded and its remediation was essential. Dilemma, that
the architect had, appeared in three questions: whether to keep existing forms of windows and repair them
as they were, considered unsightly, even in the 14th century, or to restore them according to the style of
19th century or reconstruct them as the one on the gallery. Viollet-le-Duc chooses to remove these, as he
wrote “laides ouvertures” and make a window composition correspondent with the façade. Achieving the
stylistic unity, Viollet-le-Duc moves away from historical heritage, which was later on proved with the
confirmation of the destruction of the Gothic elements. Perhaps the most destroyed were the nave side
chapels with their ancient decorative gables, niches, statues and “les gargouilles”, buttresses and
pinnacles. On both transept arms, two large rose windows, previously destroyed during the sponsorship of
Cardinal de Noailles between 1725 and 1727, were also restored. Viollet-le-Duc dismantled and rebuilt
south rose window using the original fragments, but with rotation of 15°. He solved a problem of the
damage of rose window stone construction by reinforcement of its profiles increasing their thickness
without changing the width, therefore leaving their medieval proportion.

3.2.2 Interior
It was the first time that interior of the cathedral was completely restored. The vaults were in worse
condition than expected. In addition, there were paint traces, which were partially tested, so architects
accepted that the chapel walls and some parts of the cathedral had a decoration. In certain choir chapels,
Viollet-le-Duc together with Maurice Ouradou reproduced essentially hagiographic narrations.

Image 6 – on the left, chapel wall painting and in the middle, great organ half elevation and framework, drawings by Viollet-le-
Duc; on the right: shrine for the Crown of Thorns designed by Viollet-le-Duc

Previous restoration of the choir was in the 17th century under the “Louis 13th vow”. Viollet-le-Duc
considered that it was a must to leave the existing decoration for it was wrong to destroy it by an attempt
to return it to its original state. However, he did strip the marble plaques in the rond-point. During the
restoration, Viollet-le-Duc gave great importance to liturgical metalwork and furniture décor. Medieval
art drawings were great inspiration for choir furnishing interpretations. He created a complete set of choir
furniture, designed a new choir organ woodwork and initiated a rebuilding of great organ.

-6-
4. RECONSTRUCTION

4.1. Flèche
Wooden flèche on transept crossing is the element that is, by all means, the idea of Viollet-le-Duc.
The original, dated from early 13th century, collapsed in 1772 due to a lack of maintenance, according to
certain historians, but in some literature it can be found that the same element was taken down between
1786 and 1792. However, it becomes a reason for the architect to build a second spire, in 1853, with
independent structure from the cathedral, inspired by flèche on Sainte-Chapelle. He used the existing
remains in order to interpolate a new design that gave the final height to the cathedral of 96m. The base
was octagonal supported by four transept pillars, with the construction formed of oak (chêne de
Champagne) and covered with lead as well as lead ornaments. Flèche, surrounded by four groups of
twelve apostles and four evangelists, is significantly different from the medieval, for its purpose was the
bell tower, hosting five bells. At its foot, the architect placed the statue of himself, with “right hand clasps
a measuring rule and left shading from the sun the upward gaze at the structure”. [13]
An octagonal basis construction has the advantage during wind loading because at least two transept
pillars carry the live load. In manner of aesthetics, an illusion created by the eye of the beholder increases
slenderness of flèche, piercing the sky toward God, which was the main aim in Gothic architecture of
sacral buildings.

Image 6 – Left: construction and detail of flèche; middle: the cathedral during restoration before flèche, Archives
photographiques MAP © CMN; right: new sacristy, ground floor after Viollet-le-Duc, Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture
française du XIe au XVIe siècle

5. NEW CONSTRUCTIONS

5.1. The sacristy

In 1756, Soufflot reconstructed the sacristy of Maurice de Sully flanking the palace of archbishop.
Destruction of the palace with the removal of elements of the sacristy gave the opportunity for a new
construction. Implementing the project, a problem that arouse was about different locations given by
variable solutions. Different suggestions were made about the previous location, as well as a new location
behind chevet, and architects even thought about placing the sacristy in the place of few choir chapels. In
1841, in his first project Viollet-le-Duc proposed to reuse the dismantled vestiges of hôtel de Pierre
Legendre from early 16th century in order to erect a new archdiocese on the western part of Île de la Cité.
In his second project in 1847, he proposed a larger but more conventional palace. By abandoning these
ideas, Viollet-le-Duc uses some of the elements in the construction of the sacristy, flanking it by the
cathedral on the south, surrounding a small cloister. Façade of the sacristy was built in neo-Gothic style
reviving the 13th century.

6. CONCLUSION
The term “heritage” was made in 18th century by creating a collective awareness of the conservation of
movable and immovable royal or ecclesiastical property, which should not be destroyed but proclaimed a
national treasure. The concept of care of monuments culminated during the 19th century, at the time of
The July Monarchy with the establishment of the first institutions and the appointment of the function of
general inspector. With a development of architectural theories, there are two opposing groups –

-7-
“classicists” and “gothicists” in their discussion whether the principles of Gothic or Renaissanse
met the needs of the 19th century architecture. Viollet-le-Duc’s Gothicism never propagated the
resurrection of the Middle Ages but the understanding and assimilation of its principles into
contemporary artistic efforts. He believed that logical construction is the essence of good architecture,
claiming that French Gothic reflects both a principle of unity and “marche régulière et logique” [8].
Viollet-le-Duc’s rationalist theories were accepted by many scholars such as Choisy, whose arguments
over gothic construction had a huge popularity. Nevertheless, Viollet-le-Duc was criticized as well -
Reynaud developed his theory of continuous progress, Daly criticized his restoration policies in very
pointed terms, characterizing Gothic as a tyranny born out of fetishism. In the 30s of the 20th century, an
architect Pol Abraham questioned Viollet-le-Duc’s theories having such a great impact on the next
generations of architects. However, Viollet-le-Duc is considered the last great theorist of architecture and
eventhough his restoration to an ideal condition that had never existed would not be acceptable today, his
daring perspective changed the policy of heritage, preventing its mummification in its own existence in
the modern world, following us on the path to the improved future.
Although considered too free, too personal, often being the subject of controversy and dispute,
Viollet-le-Duc, with his restorations, undoubtedly preserved many medieval edifices from deterioration,
since the architect observed, “nos monuments n’en peuvent plus et sont arrivès à leur dernière heure”.
The restoration of Paris Cathedral has always been considered controversial. Modern researches showed
that by achieving “stylistic unity” Viollet-le-Duc’s design was wrong in detail, requiring the destruction
of the significant number of authentic Gothic elements, supporting Ruskin’s opinion that considers
Viollet-le-Duc’s restorations “a destruction accompanied with false description of the thing destroyed”
[7]. On the other hand, scholars criticize Viollet-le-Duc for his restorations, according to Hanser, being
“so well that it is difficult today to know what is original and what is that he replaced” [3]. Being a
pioneer of the architectural restoration, Viollet-le-Duc was undoubtedly “the most knowledgeable expert
on Gothic architecture”.
Looking at the cathedral in the present time, we can only confirm quotation of V. Hugo after
Wethered, “assuredly the cathedral of Notre-Dame de Paris is still, at this day, a majestic and sublime
edifice (...) a vast symphony in stone – the colossal work of a man and of a nation – a sort of human
creation, of which it seems to have caught the double character – variety and eternity”. [13]

7. REFERENCES
[1] Crépin-Leblond T.: The Cathedral of Notre-Dame de Paris, Éditions du patrimoine Centre des monuments
nationaux, Paris, 2007, pp. 29-32
[2] Gauvard C., Laiter J.: Notre-Dame de Paris, cathédrale médiévale, Éditions du Chêne – Hachette Livre,
Paris, 2010, pp. 39-43, 66
[3] Hanser D.: Architecture of France, Greenwood Press Westport Connecticut, London, 2006, p. 156
[4] Kruft H.W.: A history of architectural theory: from Vitruvius to the present, Princeton Architectural Press,
New York, 1994, p. 281
[5] Leniaud J.M.: Repertoire des architectes diocésians du XIXe siècle, Ecole nationale Deschartes, Paris, 2003
[6] Lonergan W.: Historic churches of Paris, Downey & Co. Ltd., London, 1896, p. 24
[7] Ruskin J.: The seven lamps of architecture, Dover Publications, New York, 1880, p. 194.
[8] Viollet-le-Duc E.: Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XI e au XVIe siècle – Tome premier,
Librairies – Imprimeries Réunies, Paris, 1856, p. 13
[9] Viollet-le-Duc E.: Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIe au XVIe siècle – Tome huitiéme,
Librairies – Imprimeries Réunies, Paris, 1856, pp. 14-34
[10] Viollet-le-Duc E.E.: Entretiens sur l’architecture – Tome premier, A. Morel et editeurs, Paris, 1863, p. 299
[11] Viollet-le-Duc E.E. Lassus J.B.: Projet de restauration de Notre-Dame de Paris, Imprimerie de Mme de
Lacombe, Paris, 1843, pp. 2-15
[12] Vučenović S.: Urbana i arhitektonska konzervacija, tom 1 – svet Evropa, Društvo konzervatora Srbije,
Beograd, 2004, p. 42
[13] Wethered C.: On restoration by Viollet-le-Duc and notice of his work in connection with the Historical
Monuments of France, Sampson Low Marston, Low and Searle, London, 1875, pp. 84-96

-8-