Talk:Charles Bridge

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Charles Bridge article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Bridges and Tunnels Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bridges and Tunnels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of bridges and tunnels on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Bridges and TunnelsWikipedia:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsTemplate:WikiProject Bridges and TunnelsBridge and Tunnel articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Czech Republic High‑importance

	Czech Republic portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Czech Republic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Czech Republic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Czech RepublicWikipedia:WikiProject Czech RepublicTemplate:WikiProject Czech RepublicCzech Republic articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 9, 2006 and July 9, 2007.

Image[edit]

This is a photograph taken from the house of mirrors on Petrin hill showing the defence of the bridge against the Swedes in the 30 year war.A small aside to add flavour to the history of this beautiful bridge.

Defending the bridge

Collieman 16:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Language[edit]

This article could do with a clean-up of the language - I think a lot of it was written by non-English speakers, and though it's clear what is meant, the English could be improved. Ben Finn 13:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question[edit]

What is a pseudo-gothic light?

Comment[edit]

Just a note to "Its construction started in 1357 under the auspices of King Charles IV": Charles' title as the Czech King was actually Charles I. and not Charles IV. This refers to the title as a "Holy Roman Emperor". So it should be King Charles I. or Emperor Charles IV.

Some modern legends about Charles Bridge[edit]

Royal astrologers and numerologists specified a precise moment for Charles IV to personally assist in the laying of the foundation stone as 9 July 1357, at 5:31 am. This minute can be enumerated as 135797531. This palindromic sequence of ascending and descending odd digits is carved out on the Old Town bridge tower. [1]

According to the chroniclers, the construction works began on 1357 in June or July (the precise date is not certain). The hypothesis of the precise date and time of 9 July 1357, at 5:31 am was proposed by Czech astrologist Zdeněk Horský in 1979. This hypothesis was presented as fact in most of Czech media in 2007. Also there is no indication that Charles IV personally assisted in the laying of the foundation stone

Zdeněk Horský was a respected astronomer and historian, not an astrologer. See here: [[2]]

Also, the palindromic sequence is not carved on Old Town bridge tower. It was chosen as logo for the Museum of Charles Bridge which opened in 2007. It is housed in the former monastery of the Knights of the Cross with the Red Star and the logo can be seen above the entrance. --Jvs.cz (talk) 15:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the pattern of 135797531 holds, it would make more mathematical sense that construction of the bridge started on September 7th than on July 9th. That would indicate a numerical readout that goes down from the thousands of years (1) to single years (7), then to the month (9), day (7), hour, tens of minutes, single minutes (5,3,1). While modern European convention has the day number preceding the month number, I am not sure if this was the case in the 14th century or if there was any convention back then. And did the years in Prague back them begin in January or in March? If they began in the latter, as was the case in much of Europe back then, 9/7 would correspond to November 7th- too cold at 50 degrees latitude to start construction of a bridge. And what about accurate clocks? Prague was quite technologically advanced and had the astronomical clock, but that was not placed until 1410. I am not sure what existed in 1357. Chroniclers much closer to the time of construction than Horsky was placed the start of construction in June or July, so we can rule out September or November. The palindromic association was not mentioned until 1979, more than 600 years after the start of the construcion. If construction had indeed started at a palindromic time, it would have been recorded way before Horsky. My verdict: Horsky was just trying to earn brownie points by claiming something, and 135797531 is a myth. -Kedem Spears 2021.9.1.19.30- UTC

In popular culture section[edit]

As one of Prague´s landmark, the Bridge is featured in hundreds films and boooks, as well as in many video games or television shows. Current list is just very random and unsourced per WP:IPC#List content. I propose to delete that section now. --Jklamo (talk) 21:43, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the proposal for deletion. --Jvs.cz (talk) 08:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image layout[edit]

While I generally agree that galleries should be limited, this is a subject where images enhance the article, as the bridge is a work of art that cannot be adequately described without visual support. Similarly, making the images smaller, by adding the 'upright' parameter, takes away from that visual enhancement. I would re-add the gallery, while perhaps cutting some of the less significant images. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 15:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. On my monitor with the current layout, the images extend past the end of the article text. Jyamine (talk) 08:45, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]