Talk:Church of Saint Sava

some comparations - with false figures
File — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orjen (talk • contribs) 16:39, 20 July 2020 (UTC) First, in the last few updates (april/may 2020), several false comparations had been made. One ist the span of the main arches in the People's Salvation Cathderal, which is given without testimony. It is close to 25 m but in fact it is below this figure. The span of the vault in the construction plan of the nave is given at 25,20 m. But this figure is not from wall to wall but instead meassured at a point at the middle of the columns. As columns of this size tend to have diameters of 1,5 m it is in this range that the overall span wall to wall must be reduced. And now comes the main problem, the vault below the dome is smaller than the same at the nave, as the supporting colums are bigger and reach further into the space below the dome. So a figure of 25 m is simply not supported by construction plans nor noted in officel figures. It exaggeratets the span to a point above 24 m which is not correct. And the biggest span is still Haghia Sophia with 31 m not St. Peter with 27 which is the figure at the beginning of the nave which lowers to 23 m as the width of the main vaults under the dome.

The next point is decoration. Saint Sava mosaic decoration has been finished up to 70-80 % in april 2020. In May 2020 a new contingent of mosaics is scheduled to arrive, which will rise its surface area to near completion 2017 saw the completion of the mosaics in the dome (1240 m²). The decoration of the People's Salavation Cathedral hasn't even started save the iconostasis as the building is still under construction and if we count that this will take as much time as it took in St Sava, it will nowhere surpass St Sava before somwhere 2025/26 or never, as there are no official numbers for the planned mosaic surface. So in fact St Sava might already at this point be the church with the biggest mosaic decoration in the world. I'd advise to be careful with figures and not to try to exaggerate the figures for the Romanian Cathedral, as they are not supported by unambiguous figures documented as they are f{{or St. Sava. St Sava's vault spasn are proofed by construction papers, the Salvation Cathedral's ar not. The latters are similar in case to St. Peter nave span as the arch span under the dome differs from the nave span. This has to be accounted for.

Found proof, the iconostasis in the People's Salvation cathedral which spans wall to wall is 23,70 m wide, so it is the nave width. The arch span under the dome is lower than that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Orjen (talk • contribs) 20:49, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello. One note: the cathedral plan (People's Salvation Cathedral) you are using is not the right plan. First of all, this is not the plan of cota zero (the floor) but the plan of of cota +10.4 m. Here you can see the plans: http://galatiul-ortodox.blogspot.com/p/catedrala-mantuirii-neamului.html The next thing: even the plan of cota zero (in the link) is an old plan. The plan of the cathedral was then changed in some respects. And the change includes the space under the dome as well (around the area of the transepts). Puldin (talk) 01:05, 24 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Hallo Puldin. I noticed this also, and have seen the floorplan of the actual building. Actually I suppose that the vaults are less than 24 m, as they've build quite massive piers which go a little further into the nave than on this old plan. For analyzing the piers it was not important to take level 0, as the piers don't narrow in vertical direction. I ve noticed also that the transepts are now wider than in this plan I've used. Mybe I do the same with the actualy executed floorplan. Depends how good the plan is. Actually I will look first in your link and than analyze the situation. Will be an interesting task. Have you calculated why the iconostasis is 23.70 m wide. It should be wall to wall. Might be that the piers of the dome take also same width. Will look someday into it. Best wishes.Orjen (talk) 17:52, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
 * p.s. checked the link, all plans are not the one's executed. Wished you gave a high resolution plan of the executed floorplan. I've one in low resolution. Might not work than.Orjen (talk) 17:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, in the link I put, old plans are shown. I mentioned this above. Still. I can give some guidelines that may be useful to you. First of all, you should keep in mind that the old plans show a cathedral with a total length (excluding stairs) of 140 meters. After the change of the plan, this length was reduced to 126 meters. The next thing. On the old plan there are 8 windows on each row (along the length of the nave). After the change of the plan this number was reduced and now there are 6 windows on each row. The next thing. In the old plan, the distance between each transept and each tower on both sides of it is greater. According to the new plan, the towers, which are located next to the transepts, are closer and almost touch the transepts. It was in this way (smaller number of windows along the nave and a reduction in the distance between the transepts and the towers located on either side of the transepts) that the total length of the cathedral was reduced from 140 m to 126 meters. I could try to show all this in a drawing based on the old plan and with explanatory lines and arrows on it. Unfortunately, I can't find a drawing of the new plan in high resolution. However, I found a drawing made by another user that might also be helpful. Here it is: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/People%27s_Salvation_Cathedral_and_Church_of_Saint_Sava_-_Profiles.pngPuldin (talk) 21:09, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

P.S. Here is a picture I quickly made now. I have shown in red which parts of the old plan have been removed and do not appear in the new plan. Around the transepts is approximate and not completely accurate: https://scontent.fsof3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/112597009_2633734213547971_4494657014840019460_o.jpg?_nc_cat=103&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=n9QW4Sv_fngAX_r8l3B&_nc_ht=scontent.fsof3-1.fna&_nc_tp=7&oh=bd7af3e604ea9f9ca00a5e3856a49671&oe=5F413026 Puldin (talk) 21:41, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

P.S. 2. This is how the new plan (the actual plan) probably looks like (approximately) (after removing the indicated parts from the old one): https://scontent.fsof3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/111297765_2633752620212797_4713319485830916302_o.jpg?_nc_cat=111&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=AVBtj_KuxSoAX-9Apyy&_nc_ht=scontent.fsof3-1.fna&_nc_tp=7&oh=d90e814def61a65aca73d4105fb1e072&oe=5F40A632 The piers in red circles (on the picture in the link above) have a different position in the new plan or have been removed at all. Most probably they have been removed at all. So, the actual plan most probably looks like that (approximately or very close to the real one): https://scontent.fsof3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/110946880_2633778500210209_3653062116180664267_o.jpg?_nc_cat=104&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=FujiIyLP8EIAX-RC1GB&_nc_ht=scontent.fsof3-1.fna&_nc_tp=7&oh=61a1675b9d2ae932ea67cd8a7349c647&oe=5F418534 Puldin (talk) 22:58, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

P.S. 3. So, here's how the respective area under the dome (the vaults and the piers) looks like: https://scontent.fsof3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/116336392_2633799670208092_4973207439859951797_o.jpg?_nc_cat=104&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=enuatFx9-EoAX-tgI3l&_nc_ht=scontent.fsof3-1.fna&_nc_tp=7&oh=9ef3be5c321bda93dbef0dd57cca8d4a&oe=5F4255C3 It is a perfect square. Here's a picture of the real interior of the cathedral (under the main dome, looking straight up): https://scontent.fsof3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p640x640/110875842_2630721913849201_3029521958729397900_o.jpg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=QYcHu4vdehkAX8tPgcH&_nc_ht=scontent.fsof3-1.fna&_nc_tp=6&oh=8d6539b61420e4baaabd0c354707b599&oe=5F3FC0BA (to the left and right of this photo are the transepts) And two photos of the nave: https://scontent.fsof3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p640x640/109703125_2630721277182598_6549637131975074613_o.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=-AVFGAukLiUAX8hjhC1&_nc_ht=scontent.fsof3-1.fna&_nc_tp=6&oh=dc50f8c25f452af5519d39a7b49dc183&oe=5F40B0A6 And the next one: https://scontent.fsof3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p640x640/110315388_2630721723849220_6238815484651554405_o.jpg?_nc_cat=105&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=lD94aHgoHFEAX-v3v99&_nc_ht=scontent.fsof3-1.fna&_nc_tp=6&oh=4b5357f8b4d810d6ac33c90c61f92593&oe=5F40A018 If you compare this (the photo of the real interior under the dome) with the plan I presented above, you can see that it matches, it looks exactly the same. Now, about the numbers. I inspected (I measured in big zoom) the plan shown above and I concluded that the part of the piers that goes into the nave, is about 52.5 cm. So, it makes about 105 cm in total (on both sides). So, the net span of the vaults is 24.15 m (25.2 m - 1.05 m = 24.15 m). There may be some variation but only of few centimeters and not more. The piers of the actual plan should be the same (in thickness) as those of the old plan. The difference between the old plan and the new plan is mainly the length of the cathedral. The width is the same. It does not make sense for the thickness of the walls and piers to be greater in the new plan. This would change the whole engineering and construction process. So I think that only the length of the building is reduced and the thickness of the walls and the piers must be the same as in the old plan (talking about the floorplan). I hope that this (everything I explained and the pictures in the links which I put above) will be useful to you. I'm interested to see the new comparative images you can make based on this. About the iconostasis. Perhaps 23.7 m is the length of its decorated (with mosaics) area. If you look closely at some photos of the iconostasis, you can see that there are some elements (white; looks like marble) that separate the decorated area from the walls on both sides. I am not sure about that. Actually, there is almost no difference between 23.7 m and 24.15 m. We may say it is approximately 24 m. Best wishes. Puldin (talk) 00:56, 25 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the information you gave. I've analyzed this too and the only problem with the old and the new plans is, the piers became more massive. They reduce the span of the main arches. If you meassure the span of the arches between the piers on the executed plan you get a lower span than was achieved in St. Sava. So 25 m is not possible and might even not be 24 m. It is still a great span but not as large as was supposed. Please control it on this map, St. Sava is 24 m - the Cathedral has smaller spans: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/People%27s_Salvation_Cathedral_and_Church_of_Saint_Sava_-_Profiles.png. Also the constructive span of the iconostasis is 23.7 m as it is a concrete stucture from wall to wall. It leans on both sides at identical piers to those under the dome. So the span of the arches = the width of the iconostasis, which is 23,7 m. We have only indirect confirmation so. And keep in mind St Peter in Rome has main vaults under the dome of only 23 m, it this has to be a benchmark than the new build ones in Bukarest and Belgrade are bigger with maybe only Hagia Sophia with 31 m having the greates span of all contemporary and former church buildings. And there is a big difference between 23.7 and 24.15 m construction wise. They don't build with such huge tolerances, not today and not in former times. The horizontal tolerance in lifting the dome of St. Sava was 5 mm - 0,005 m. Orjen (talk) 06:32, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the interesting discussion. Starting from the last. This is a completely different story. In this case, we do not discuss tolerances in the construction process, but make approximate comparisons. The goals are completely different. It is clear that in the construction process itself, the allowable tolerances are within millimeters. But again - this is a completely different discussion. For the purposes of our discussion and for such comparisons, a difference of a few centimeters is negligible. Especially considering that most sources of information on specific dimensions (length, height, width) of any building present rounded values ​​and are very rarely given to the nearest centimeter.

Furthermore. Often different numbers are given in different sources (for the same objects). This is also the case here. Both about the iconostasis of the cathedral (People's Salvation Cathedral) and about the specific dimensions of the nave of "St. Peter's Basilica" in Rome.

Let's start with the iconostasis. Some sources indicate that it is 23 meters long and 18 meters high (this one for example: https://basilica.ro/catapeteasma-catedralei-nationale-este-unica-in-lume/). However, another source states that the iconostasis is 23.8 meters long and 17 meters high (this one: https://www.orsoni.com/project/orthodox-cathedral-in-bucharest/ ). As you can see, there is a difference of about one meter in both directions (width and height). This is because the sources give only approximate values ​​and the aim is to give a basic idea, not completely accurate values. Therefore, the tolerance in this case is +/- 1 meter. And this is considered acceptable.

About St. Peter's. Same story here. It is even strange, because in the same source different values are given for the same parts of the church. In the link you have shown, two sources of information are shown and each of them indicates different values. Here is the link you put in the article: http://stpetersbasilica.info/Interior/Nave/Nave.htm#largest There are two sources of information in this link. The first is "Guide to St Peter's Basilica, © 2003" and the second is "Catholic Encyclopedia, In accordance with the calculations of Carlo Fontana". The first source says: "Nave at Entrance - 25.7m wide; Nave near Transept - 23m wide". The second source says: "Width of Nave: At Entrance - 90.2 ft (27.49 m); At Tribune - 78.7 ft (23.99 m)".

The difference between the numbers of the two sources is from 99 centimeters (near the dome) to 179 cm (at the entrance). This is a big difference. Which of the two sources is closer to the exact number? There is no way to know. Unless we enter the church with a tape measure and measure it ourselves. But even in this case we can get a deviation of at least a few centimeters if we measure twice. Therefore, we must enter with a special laser tape measure to measure to the nearest centimeter.

But such a degree of accuracy is not necessary for our discussion. It is almost impossible to specify with certainty numbers that are accurate to the centimeter. I am sure that even with regard to the numbers for "St. Sava" there is a deviation of at least a few centimeters.

Therefore. In this case, there is a simple solution: we must indicate approximate values ​​and / or averages (if two sources indicate different numbers) that are as close as possible to the assumed absolutely exact value. In this case it is the number 24. The distance between the piers (under the dome) in People's Salvation Cathedral is approximately 24 meters. The same applies to the distance between the piers in "St. Sava Church" - it is 24 meters. 23.8 m or 24 m - in practice it is the same. In real life, no one says "23.8" or "99.9", and everyone uses rounded values. And we know that the distance between the piers in People's Salvation Cathedral is at least 23.8 m (the width of the iconostasis). It may be more, but not less.

About the iconostasis (in People's Salvation Cathedral) itself. For now, we cannot be sure that the width of the iconostasis is equal to the distance between the piers of the main dome. This is just a guess, because there is no official information yet. And the second thing in this regard: for now we are not sure whether the number 23.8 m refers only to the decorated part of the iconostasis or includes the marble ornaments at both sides. In fact, the articles about the iconostasis are about the mosaics and probably the number 23.8 m refers only to the length of the part decorated with mosaics. Either way, we can summarize and simply say that the span of the vaults of the main dome is approximately 24 meters. In fact, the more difficult question in this case is about St. Peter's in Rome. There the difference in the data of the sources is bigger.

It is hard to believe that "St. Peter's Basilica" is surpassed in size, even if only in one or another indicator. It is possible that it has really been surpassed. I'm just saying it's hard to believe. In fact, I'm not sure if the builders of any new church building would dare to surpass St. Peter's Basilica, even if they could. For example: The builders (authors of the plan) of "St. Sava Church" deliberately did not want to exceed the diameter of the dome of "Hagia Sophia" in Istanbul, although they maybe could exceed it. I guess it's because of some unwritten rules in Christendom.

In fact, I'm more interested in seeing your new comparative drawings and sketches. I hope that based on the images (in the links) I posted above in the discussion (yesterday) you can make new comparative drawings that will be more accurate than the old ones. I mean the comparison of the floorplans of St. Sava and People's Salvation Cathedral - side by side and combined, as above. You can use this drawing of the floorplan of People's Salvation Cathedral as base: https://scontent.fsof3-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/110946880_2633778500210209_3653062116180664267_o.jpg?_nc_cat=104&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=FujiIyLP8EIAX-RC1GB&_nc_ht=scontent.fsof3-1.fna&_nc_tp=7&oh=61a1675b9d2ae932ea67cd8a7349c647&oe=5F418534 It is way more accurate and more suitable for comparison than the plan shown in the old comparisons.

It would be very interesting if you make the same comparison with the floorplan of St. Peter's Basilica as well. You could make a drawing that includes together the floorplans of St. Sava, St. Peter's Basilica and People's Salvation Cathedral. That would be very interesting.Puldin (talk) 23:12, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You obviously have a point here. Only we will not know which church has the wider vaults as numbers are close. For St. Sava figure's are easy to fugure out, as the late architect Pesic published precise drawings in his 1989 publication. So I'am sure on his figures. There is also a paper in a construction journal dealing with engineering of the curch with additional confirmation. Many cathedralas are today laser-meassured - some french gothic cathedrals for instance, and Hagia Sophia also. I've seen also an engineering article on the People's Salvation cathedral which I can't find now. Your plan is not good enough to work on it, as the piers have become different shape and size. I wait for a floorplan on the executed church. Until then it is not worthwhile to go into this. Wonder were the other user got his floorplan from. Best wishes.Orjen (talk) 06:02, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Why do you think that the piers (of People's Salvation Cathedral) have become different in shape and size? I see no reason for this. As for the floorplan of the executed church (People's Salvation Cathedral), it may take years until we are able to see it. If it (the current plan) appears for the public at all. Actually, I think that the actual plan (the official one) will probably never be presented to the public. The actual plan is from 2013 (the drawing of the other user says so). It would have been presented till now. So I think that if you wait to see the current plan, you will probably have to wait for a very long time. Meanwhile in the current comparison of the floorplans of St Sava and People's Salvation Cathedral which is not accurate, St Sava will continue to look smaller than the cathedral than it actually is. It is smaller but not as much as shown in the comparative drawing of the floorplans. In reality St Sava Church is much closer in size (in length) to People's Salvation Cathedral than it is presented in the comparative drawings above. So people who see the comparison may remain with a slightly wrong impression. I don't think this is in favor of St Sava Church. I'm just saying. Probably the creation of such comparative drawings is a hard work. I understand this and I respect your decision. I could also try to create such a comparative drawing but it will not look as professional as yours.Puldin (talk) 02:24, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Now old to new plan in comparison. Note that size measures are approximative mesassures for the People's Salvation CathedralOrjen (talk) 13:19, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 8 December 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Lennart97 (talk) 08:58, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Church of Saint Sava → Cathedral of Saint Sava – The current title, which has been in place for several years, is inaccurate. The native name, Hram Svetog Save does not translate to Church of Saint Sava, but rather to Cathedral of Saint Sava or Temple of Saint Sava. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 20:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This church is not a cathedral, i.e. bishop's seat – it's St. Michael's Cathedral, Belgrade. English temple is not an appropriate translation of Serbian hram, since it is used exclusively for polytheistic places of worship. That leaves "church", which is I believe the common name in English as well; Serbian Tourist Organization refers to it as such, for one. No such user (talk) 09:16, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose. Bruh... I don't know what to say... I agreed with No such user. Ничим неизазван (talk) 09:45, 15 December 2021 (UTC)