Fire damages historic chapels at Córdoba's Mosque-Cathedral
The blaze broke out shortly after 9pm on Friday in a chapel in the eastern nave of the 10th-century Almánzor section. Initial investigations suggest the cause was a short-circuit in an electric floor-sweeping machine stored in that part of the monument.
Flames spread to the adjoining 13th-century Chapel of the Annunciation, where the 19th-century altarpiece suffered the most significant damage. The roof of the chapel collapsed and the vaults of surrounding 'Moorish' arches were blackened by smoke. One column in the chapel has been shored up.
The dean Joaquín Alberto Nieva described the damage as 'very small' and said that the oldest parts of the building, including the 8th-century mihrab, were unaffected.
The Mosque-Cathedral was designated a Unesco World Heritage Site in 1984. Critics from the Plataforma Mezquita-Catedral civic group said the use of a heritage chapel as a storeroom reflected a 'dangerous lack of risk prevention' and questioned the decision to reopen so soon. The group's spokesman Miguel Santiago said that if negligence were confirmed, the fire could amount to a criminal offence against heritage.
Isidoro Moreno, an academic from Seville University specialising in the regional culture of Andalusia, called the blaze 'an unacceptable negligence of the bishopric and the cathedral chapter' and condemned the storage of potentially hazardous materials inside the monument.
The church council, which manages the site, said the use of the chapel for storage was long-standing and part of its self-protection plan, but confirmed it had acquired two nearby buildings in which it would relocate equipment.
The dean said lessons would be learned from the incident. A new fire-safety system, similar to that installed in the Notre-Dame Cathedral of Paris after its 2019 blaze, has been scheduled for installation in October.
The local council has notified Unesco and the International Council on Monuments and Sites, which advises the UN body, will visit this week to assess the damage and advise on restoration.
Audrey Azoulay, Unesco director-general, praised the rapid response of firefighters and confirmed the organisation was 'fully mobilised alongside Spain to guarantee the preservation and rehabilitation of this exceptional monument'.
The mosque, begun by the Umayyad dynasty in the late 8th century and expanded over the following two centuries, became a Christian cathedral after the conquest of Córdoba in 1236.
In the 16th century a nave and transept were inserted into the mosque's centre. Emperor Charles V reportedly told the bishop: 'You have built here what you or anyone else might have built anywhere; to do so you have destroyed what was unique in the world.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Why part-time job may not be enough for university students to meet basic standard of living
University students in England must undertake more than 20 hours of paid work a week to meet the basic standard of living, a new report has suggested. The pressures of part-time work are 'squeezing out' the other elements of a university experience such as studying, sports, societies and socialising, according to the Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi) think tank. University sector leaders have suggested that cost-of-living pressures are affecting young people's choices – with more opting to stay living at home for university and more taking on part-time work alongside their studies. Hepi has called for maintenance support to be increased so that all students can reach a 'minimum socially acceptable standard of living'. The findings come as students in England, Wales and Northern Ireland receive their A-level and Level 3 BTec results on Thursday, with many finding out if they have secured a university place. A report from Hepi, TechnologyOne and the Centre for Research in Social Policy (CRSP) at Loughborough University has suggested how much first-year students need for a 'minimum socially acceptable standard of living' that covers the basics and full participation in university life. It estimated a student in England will need around £61,000 over the course of a three-year degree, or around £77,000 if studying in London, to reach a minimum socially acceptable standard of living – all excluding tuition fees. For students in England, the maximum annual maintenance loan (up to £10,544), which is available only to people from low-income households, covers just half the costs faced by first-year students, the report said. It also found that even with the highest levels of maintenance support, students in England must work more than 20 hours per week to meet a basic standard of living. Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson has said the government is 'looking at all of the options' for how to support university students facing costs. When asked about the cost-of-living pressures facing university students, Ms Phillipson said the government recognises that there is 'still more to do' to tackle some of the disparities that young people experience. She said: 'I do want all students to be able to get the full benefits of their time at university, to be able to take up internships, study trips (and) other work experience opportunities. 'I don't want students from less well-off backgrounds to be deterred from doing that because of having to take on more hours of paid work.' Last year, the government announced that undergraduate tuition fees in England, which have been frozen at £9,250 since 2017, will rise to £9,535 for the 2025-26 academic year. It also announced that maintenance loans will increase in line with inflation in the 2025-26 academic year to help students with their living costs. The latest report from Hepi has suggested students might be expected to undertake some part-time work, such as 10 hours of paid employment a week, but the remainder should be covered by maintenance support. It has also called for maintenance support to be 'pegged to inflation' and for the household income thresholds to be increased so parents do not need to contribute to their child's living costs until they have enough money to meet a basic standard of living for themselves. Nick Hillman, director of Hepi, said: 'Maintenance support is currently woefully inadequate, leading students to live in substandard ways, to take on a dangerous number of hours of paid employment on top of their full-time studies or to take out commercial debts at high interest rates. 'We hope our results will lead to deeper conversations about the insufficiency of the current maintenance support packages, how much the imputed parental contribution should be and whether it is unreasonable to expect most full-time students to have to find lots of paid work even during term time.' Josh Freeman, one of the authors of the report, said: 'These findings demonstrate three serious risks to UK higher education: access to higher education becomes more unequal, the quality of the student experience suffers and the sustainability of the sector is put at risk. 'The harm students currently face cannot be overstated. 'Too many students are struggling to cover their basic costs, let alone participate fully in higher education. 'It is not only good policy: there is a moral imperative to give students a fair chance of succeeding and thriving in higher education.' A spokesperson for Universities UK said: 'Going to university is an investment in your future, and no-one should have their experience of higher education limited due to financial pressures. 'Universities already offer scholarships, bursaries and hardship support for students who are struggling, but this research shows that the maintenance package just doesn't go far enough. 'This is why we are calling on the government to increase maintenance support offered to students to better track inflation and living costs, so that everyone with the potential to succeed can do so, whatever their background.'
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
My view from the captain's chair aboard Britain's 65,000-ton leviathan facing down war-hungry Chinese despot: DAVID PATRIKARAKOS
When it comes to expressions of British military pride, nothing does the job quite like the HMS Prince of Wales. The flight deck of the aircraft carrier that is the flagship of the Royal Navy stretches out before me. A vast slab of grey steel more than 900ft long. From my vantage point near the stern I can see a line of F-35 fighter jet noses fan out like a row of arrows ready to pierce the sky. These supersonic, stealth combat aircraft, renowned for their 'short take-off and vertical landing' capabilities, accelerate to 170mph as they head for the elevated runway ramp that juts off the end of the carrier to generate sufficient lift to begin their climb. Once airborne, they can take out targets on land or sea using an array of firepower that includes Sidewinder missiles for air-to-air combat and 100kg Spear bombs for ground attacks. These masters of the air are housed on a 65,000-ton leviathan that carries a 1,600-strong crew. And today, I'm one of them. I'm aboard the Prince of Wales in the port of Darwin, northern Australia, having flown from London to meet Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Defence Secretary John Healey on the vessel. Lammy and Healey are here because the carrier strike group – the Prince of Wales and its escort vessels – along with 3,000 British troops, are taking part in Exercise Talisman Sabre. With more than 35,000 military personnel from 19 nations involved in the manoeuvres, it's the largest military exercise ever hosted by Australia. For the UK and our cousins Down Under, Talisman Sabre symbolises a deepening military partnership, designed for a world more dangerous and terrifying than for more than 80 years. The day begins with an inspection of the troops. In the background, a band strikes up a military tune. Lammy and Healey make their way down a row of sailors dressed in white ceremonial uniform, making small talk. Australia's Northern Territory is in the grip of a 30C heatwave made the more uncomfortable by 65 per cent humidity. Perspiration crosses my forehead. My eyes sting. My shirt becomes sticky. 'It's hot, isn't it?' Lammy says to one sailor, who's also struggling. Later, the three of us meet inside the hangar. 'The UK's Modern Industrial Strategy: Defence', reads a sign behind us. Healey makes clear how important today's proceedings are. 'It's the first time a British aircraft carrier has come to Australia since 1997,' he says. 'And it's a big day because of the global context. Where threats are increasing, allies are important, and reinforcing the deep alliance that we've had with Australia is more vital than ever.' Lammy agrees: 'I spend a lot of time on the Europe-North America relationship, particularly within the context of Nato, and here in the Indo-Pacific – it's a critical theatre. With Australia, we have had the deepest of enduring relationships. We're here to renew that relationship.' Lammy is right about the Indo-Pacific. If there is to be a major global war in the years ahead, the region will be a key battlefield. China is already challenging the US for global hegemony and this means, first and foremost, dominating what it believes is its 'backyard'. Many believe that Chinese leader Xi Jinping will launch his much-vaunted invasion of Taiwan in 2027 to coincide with the 100th anniversary of the founding of the People's Liberation Army (PLA). If that happens, the US is committed (albeit ambiguously) to Taiwan's defence. The UK and Australia will almost certainly follow suit. Neither Lammy nor Healey will comment on any possible war with China. But being in a state of readiness in this region is now clearly top of Britain's agenda. And when I speak to a senior government source, the message is clear. Britain ' challenges' China. It will continue to confront Beijing's dangerous and destabilising activity in the South China Sea: 'From the Red Sea to the South China Sea — the high seas are more dangerous than at any point in generations.' The truth of these words is plain to see. Earlier this year, the Chinese navy conducted live-fire naval exercises in the Tasman Sea between Australia and New Zealand, in the first recorded operational engagement in the area. The People's Republic tested new landing barges on ships that would be used in any amphibious assault on Taiwan, as well as cable cutters that could cut off the island's internet. It has been ratcheting up drills in the Taiwan Strait and targeting countries with which it has territorial disputes, such as the Philippines and Japan. Only yesterday, the Daily Mail reported how two Chinese vessels collided in the South China Sea while chasing a Philippine patrol boat at high speeds – just the latest in an increasing number of incidents between the two countries. The Australians have no choice but to be at the top of their game. All of which explains the urgency and importance of cementing the Western alliance in these waters. Once, Britain was at the heart of Australian security. But after the Second World War, the Aussies knew we were spent. In 1951 they signed the ANZUS Treaty with the United States, cutting Britain out of Australian defence – and leaving Churchill heartbroken. But our historic alliance has now been revived, most significantly via the 2021 trilateral AUKUS agreement, under which Britain and the US agreed to share nuclear propulsion technology with Australia with a view to cooperating on the design and build of a new generation of nuclear-powered submarines. This was the first time that America and Britain had shared such sensitive technology with anyone else. 'Today, the UK and Australia are two nations intertwined by shared goals, particularly in the Indo-Pacific,' a Foreign Office source told me. 'That means a level of integration unprecedented since the end of the British Empire.' But modern defence means reckoning with new technology that enables Davids to attack Goliaths. I have been deeply wary of Britain spending colossal sums on huge carriers that could be vulnerable to the sort of drone tech that, as I have seen first-hand in Ukraine, enabled Kyiv to destroy Russia's Black Sea fleet without any real navy of their own. It even took out Moscow's colossal flagship, the Moskva, near Odesa. And let's not forget, the Houthis of Yemen, backed by the mullahs of Tehran, have succeeded in terrorising Western cargo ships passing through the Red Sea using a range of cheap drones. Yet Healey assures me that the military fully understands these challenges. 'We learned from Ukraine how the accelerating development of technology is changing the nature of warfare,' he tells me. 'For your war fighters to have an edge in the future, you've got to harness the power of that new tech, and we are. The aircraft carrier is increasingly hybrid, with traditional fixed-wing aircraft taking their place alongside the latest in drone technology, just as the Strategic Defence Review said it should.' The proof of this is all around me. It's there as I sit in the captain's chair, surrounded byan array of winking interfaces, feeling as if I'm piloting the Starship Enterprise. But most of all, it's in the ship's hanger where I see the drones. Black circles amid a grey patina on the front of one make it resemble a human face. It almost seems to stare at me. Another drone resembles a small plane. Nearby are a couple of small D40s, Australian drones that can be launched manually or via a grenade-launcher. These so-called 'loitering' munitions buzz and swarm like lethal metallic wasps until they lock on to their target - and unload. It's clear that the British goal is to further develop capabilities that are now key to the future of war: detecting and striking adversaries autonomously. But does all this mean that the target of 5 per cent defence spending, demanded by both Donald Trump and Nato will, finally, be met? Healey cannot be clearer: 'Will we hit that target?' he replies. 'I'm absolutely confident we will. We signed up like the other 31 nations last month to that 5 per cent by 2035.' Healey is a serious man. But Britain, as we all know, is already facing financial disaster, and cannot possibly afford to put 5 per cent of GDP into defence without eye-watering sacrifices. And even if we somehow found the necessary cash, to hit the target only in a decade seems lethargic – at best. The threats we face are terrifying and imminent. Not least because Lammy correctly stresses the broader importance of this region in a global conflict. 'We see an indivisibility of security between the Indo-Pacific and the Euro-Atlantic,' he tells me. 'I have seen Iranian missiles shot into Kyiv. I've been in Beijing and challenged the Chinese about their dual-use technology [which can be used for both weapons and civilian purposes] that is shipped to Russia and fired at the Ukrainians. 'I've seen satellite images of DPRK [North Korean] troops engaged in battle on behalf of Russia against Ukraine, and of course we know that shells are making their way to Russia also from the Indo-Pacific. So the indivisibility is plain to see on a day-to-day basis.' This is spot on – as I know first-hand from my reporting across several continents. I've come under attack from Iranian technology in Kyiv, eastern Ukraine and Israel. I've seen up close the damage the Iranians have done in Baghdad and what the Russians have done in Syria. We are in the midst of a battle with an axis of enemies whose influence spans the globe. That is why the HMS Prince of Wales's presence here is so important. In a speech to the Washington think-tank The Hudson Institute last year, Lammy quoted former US National Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who warned that the West might one day face the danger of a 'grand coalition of China, Russia and perhaps Iran, an anti-hegemonic coalition united not by ideology but by complementary grievances'. 'This I think risks coming upon us,' Lammy said. Well, that day has indeed arrived. And our response must be decisive and bold. We must build a coalition of allies as resolute as the states ranged against us and it must straddle both the Indo-Pacific and the Atlantic. Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Australia — all these democracies want us there. The more alliances they have, the more strategic independence they maintain. Lammy points not just to Nato but the 'Indo-Pacific Four' (IP4), the alliance of Nato partners in the region – Australia, Japan, New Zealand and South Korea. He highlights the intelligence-sharing 'Five Eyes' group of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the UK and the US and, of course, the G7 group of developed western nations. 'Our economic and military alliances are so multilateral. Yes, this is a time of peace through strength,' he says. 'But also peace through deepening our allied partnerships with one another.' What I saw in Darwin was merely the latest iteration of something Britain has been doing for centuries: creating and managing alliances. When we fought with our Empire in the Second World War, we sat at the centre of a web of allies. It's how we defeated not only Hitler, but the German Kaiser in 1918 and before that, Napoleon. Yes, it's been a long time since Britannia ruled the waves. But we still have global soft power, highly trained armed forces and vast geopolitical and military experience. If the world is more dangerous than ever, hyper-accelerating technology is ensuring that it's also smaller than ever. To deal with it, alliances must be global – and no one forges them better than we do. The HMS Prince of Wales is more than just a floating airbase and potent weapon. It is a movable hub: both the centre and the symbol of the type of global alliances that Britain will need in order to survive and thrive in the coming decades. 'This is what you're seeing. Allies. Arming-up. Ambition. This is our strategy for the 21st century,' says my senior government source. As I walk off the ship, slowly crossing the bridge connecting it to terra firma, I recall Lammy's words about the indivisible theatre of conflict we now face. The threat is indeed global – and at its head is China. Only it has the size, strength and resources to reorder the world in its totalitarian image. In 1962, former US Secretary of State Dean Acheson notoriously observed that 'Great Britain has lost an empire and has not yet found a role.' In Darwin, perhaps I finally saw us taking on that role, and not before time. In this age of mass conflict, our future depends upon it.
The Sun
4 hours ago
- The Sun
My ex-girlfriend has moved on with new man but we still have weekly sex – I want her back
DEAR DEIDRE: MY ex has moved on with a loser boyfriend who is playing daddy to my two kids — but I'm still having sex with her every week. We were together for ten years, most of the time very happily, and our two lads are amazing. But I'd been working away a lot on a new project and, when I went home, we'd end up arguing. My partner said she felt like she was a single mum, but I believed I was doing my bit to put food on the table for the family. Eventually, the arguments got too much, so I left before she kicked me out. It broke my heart. Still, I was surprised when she took up with a new guy. I know him. He sells dodgy goods for a living, yet she insists she's happy with him. Two months ago, she rang to ask whether I'd get my old car racing set out of the loft for the boys. It was a Friday afternoon, the kids were in school and her boyfriend had gone away with mates on a stag weekend. She looked lovely in her tight T-shirt and shorts. We laughed and joked around and, when I climbed down from the loft, she was standing close to me, so I kissed her. It felt so natural. She asked if I wanted sex, which obviously I did. It was like old times. She's now making excuses for me to drop by and we always end up in bed. I'm hoping there may be a chance for us again, but when I hint at a proper reunion, she says she's enjoying life with this new guy. Relationships, jealousy and envy Last week, I went to watch the boys' football training and she was there with him. I can't bear to see them together. My project is over and I'm working nine to five again. I want her back. We are both 32. DEIDRE SAYS: Tell her how you feel and how things could change if you were back as a family unit. If you decide to give it another go, couples counselling would be a smart move to stop you returning to the same cycle of arguing. My support pack, How Counselling Can Help, explains more. If her answer is no, sort out your relationship and lay down some clear boundaries. Having sex with her is a huge distraction and keeping you tied in. If you're single, you should move on. You can still be a great dad to your boys and, if you draw up an arrangement for seeing them, you will all know where you stand. DAD SAYS I'M SAME AS CROOK BROTHER DEAR DEIDRE: THE day of my graduation is approaching and my dad is refusing to come, saying I will let him down before long. He's even said he wishes my cousins were his sons, instead of my brother and me. My brother is in prison for being part of a drug gang. Although he has done wrong, he just got caught up with the wrong crowd when he left college. He's 26 and I'm 21. Dad said to me: 'It won't be long before you go the same way.' However, I'm a hard-working student and have already put applications in to work for really good companies. There's no way I'd get involved with drugs or the criminal world. Dad has really upset me by taking this stance. There will now only be my mum and my nan at the ceremony. DEIDRE SAYS: Your dad is feeling a sense of failure as a father, but your brother is an adult and he has made his own choices. Your dad is ashamed, perhaps because he feels he could have done more to guide your brother. He had other ideas and dreams for the future of you boys – but you are fulfilling those aspirations. Encourage your dad to get help through the Prisoners' Families helpline ( 0808 808 2003). Invite him to your graduation again nearer the time but, if he still refuses, don't let him spoil your day. You will still celebrate with your mum and nan – and it will be his loss. BOYFRIEND CHEATED ON ME . . . WITH HIS MALE FRIEND DEAR DEIDRE: MY boyfriend and I were happy living together for 18 months. But last September he went out with a friend and didn't come home that night at all. He finally turned up at lunchtime the next day – complaining he needed to go straight to bed. He apologised and explained he'd drunk too much and passed out on his mate's floor. He is 29 and I'm 27. He did seem a bit distant over the next few weeks but I thought he was distracted by work. Then out of the blue he moved out to live with his parents. Initially, he said he wanted to bubble up with them to help them stay safe. I thought this seemed odd as they are both in their mid-fifties. However the last few weeks he's stopped returning my calls. Something didn't feel right so I had it out with him. He finally admitted he had sex with his male friend on that night out and admitted he is really confused and doesn't know what to do. DEIDRE SAYS: Chances are your boyfriend's sexuality will have been an issue for him for some time. People don't choose their sexuality and many are not even happy when they discover they are gay rather than heterosexual. It is best to let go now and start to focus on your own future. He has chosen to move on and now you need to do the same. HE WON'T QUIT SEEING HIS CRUSH DEAR DEIDRE: I COULDN'T have been more delighted when my neighbour said she'd sold her house and was moving – because my husband is obsessed with her. But I exploded with rage when he told me he still plans to meet up with her after she's moved. She seemed nice at first, and my husband was always going round to see her because she 'needed a job doing'. He's 61 and would act like a love-sick teenager when she messaged. He said they were 'friends' and had lots in common. To my mind, their mutual hobby was drinking to excess. Either she would pop round with a bottle of wine, or he'd go to 'do a job' – taking booze with him. In the end, I told her she wasn't welcome in my house, so my husband went to hers instead. I'm 59 and she's 54. She's attractive, so I'm no fool when it comes to what is going on. I know he fancies her, yet he says it's platonic. She has a way with men – she's been married four times. Now, my husband says she's still his friend and they're staying in touch. Should I tell him that he can't go, or just play along and accompany him on his visits? DEIDRE SAYS: Yes, why not give him the benefit of the doubt and suggest that you go along with him? If he doesn't want you there, that would suggest you are right to be suspicious. If that's the case, put your foot down, insisting on counselling to understand what's going wrong. Meanwhile, ensure your relationship is as fun as it can be – then being with you will hold more attraction than being in her company. She might be trying to tempt him but you can still make him remember why he married you. My support pack, Relationship MOT, will ensure you keep that va-va-voom in your marriage.
