I have never been into the catacombs or other underground parts of Paris - must do one day.
Is it true that the band of oolitic limestone that starts in the Cotswolds (ie Cotswold stone),
going south through Bath area (ie Bath stone - a bit darker than Cotswold stone), then further south
becoming Portland Stone (a bit darker still) is the same band of oolitic limestone that I believe is
in evidence in Paris? If so how long does that make the North to South extent of it? Does it go much
further South than Paris? I have been intrigued about this for a while, but have never found an
authoritative answer - not that I have looked too hard mind. Geological maps of France are not so
easy to understand.
Roger
----- Original Message -----
From:
To: "Subterranea Britannica" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: 17 August 2003 16:01
Subject: [SUB-BRIT] Msg from - Secret Paris
>
> Date: Sun, 3 Aug 2003 23:25:44 -0700
> From:
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: FW: [SUB-BRIT] Secret Paris
>
> Yes, the catacombs of Paris are fascinating.
>
> Small detail: only a tiny part of them have bones. There are some 300 kms of
> tunnels in all, of which perhaps 250 metres have bones. The small section
> open to tourists, at Denfert-Rochereau, has loads of bones (that's partly
> why it's of touristic interest), hence everyone thinks of bones when they
> think catacombs.
>
> A superb book about underground Paris, with much on the catacombs, is "Atlas
> du Paris souterrain", edited by Alain Clement and Gilles Thomas. You can buy
> it at
>
http://www.amazon.fr/exec/obidos/ASIN/2840961911/qid%3D1058543714/br%3D1-6/ref%3Dbr%5Flf%5Fb%5F5/402-9314503-1432144.
> It has loads of pictures and is knowledgeably written. Worth getting even if
> you don't speak French because of the great pictures.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> Sent: Sunday, July 13, 2003 10:42 AM
> To: sub-brit
> Subject: [SUB-BRIT] Secret Paris
>
>
> Whilst in Paris a week or so back I paid a visit to the catacombs, which was
> interesting if a little macabre - I prefer my tunnels without
>
|