"I understand the historical context, but the history is gone."
Balderdash.
Much of what was destroyed in the fire was itself replacements of original materials.
Many of the beams supporting the roof that burned were later replacements for beams that had rotted or become damaged.
The spire that was destroyed? An 1840s creation by Viollet-le-Duc, which replaced... nothing. There had never been a spire at that location until then.
The organ? It's been replaced many times over the centuries. The original organ was small and installed in the late 1300s, over 100 years after the cathedral was completed. That organ was replaced with a larger one in the 1400s, which itself was replaced in the 1730s. The current organ, which used pieces of the 1730s organ, was installed as part of Viollet-le-Duc's restoration and dedicated in 1868. That organ itself has been modified many times since.
The stained glass? Much of it was damaged by the fire, but survived and can be restored. But not all of it is original, either. The west rose window, which was created in the mid 1200s, was entirely removed and an entirely new window installed, again as part of Viollet-le-Duc's restoration work.
The south rose was damaged multiple times over the centuries and was also extensively rebuilt.
Much of the rest of the stained glass in the cathedral was installed over a period of centuries, including some in the 20th century.
Yes, much of the interior vaulting was damaged or destroyed, but the walls and the bell towers survived relatively unharmed. Those ARE original to the structure, so your claim that the history of Notre Dame is simply wrong.
Cathedrals aren't one and done, built and remaining in a static state. Most continue to evolve for the simple reason that time is not kind.
