3 ms·

Nice animation, but I bear in mind that stuff that is presented like this is really just hearsay - we don't really know that it was built as presented. It coul

Nice animation, but I bear in mind that stuff that is presented like this is really just hearsay - we don't really know that it was built as presented. It could well have been built as shown - its a plausible hypothesis. But it is also plausible that the bridges were only built in the 18th century. Or maybe they were built 100's of years earlier. With any historical claims, we should have access to the source to be able to confirm. On the wiki page that was posted we read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Bridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Bridge "Throughout its history, Charles Bridge has suffered several disasters and witnessed many historic events. Czech legend has it that construction began on Charles Bridge at 5:31am on 9 July 1357 with the first stone being laid by Charles IV himself. This exact time was very important to the Holy Roman Emperor because he was a strong believer in numerology and felt that this specific time, which formed a palindrome (1357 9, 7 5:31), was a numerical bridge, and would imbue Charles Bridge with additional strength.[4]" Where 4 is: "Frucht, Richard (2005). Eastern Europe : an introduction to the people, lands, and culture. 1. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. pp. 251. ISBN 9781576078013." https://archive.org/details/easterneuropeint0000unse/page/251 https://archive.org/details/easterneuropeint0000unse/page/25... When you search that book on archive.org though, there are no references to "1357", "5:31", "numerology". There is a single reference to "numerical" but this relates to 1944. So we have a paragraph in wiki, that has some very specific information, that it claims is from a book that doesn't seem to contain that info. This is to say that 'we' don't know anything about this bridge - the sources do not check out. I was hoping to get a little further than this. I wanted to track the primary or secondary source for this claim about the bridge build date. But I couldn't even get that far. What should one conclude, when the detailed information being provided does not check (or should that 'Czech') out?

TeMPOraL 6y ago
> This exact time was very important to the Holy Roman Emperor because he was a strong believer in numerology and felt that this specific time, which formed a palindrome (1357 9, 7 5:31), was a numerical bridge, and would imbue Charles Bridge with additional strength. This smells like horse manure, not just because it's unlikely anyone measured time that precisely in 1357, but also the Y/D/M date notation looks distinctively American.
- kentonv 6y ago
  Americans use M/D/Y, not Y/D/M. The reason ISO recommends Y/M/D as a universal date format is because just about everyone agrees on how to interpret it -- no one expects Y/D/M. Not that this makes the claim any more believable.
- spenczar5 6y ago
  Even more smelly is the precision of “5:31 AM.” I am not sure hour:minute was a clear and universal concept in 1357. At the time, “canonical hours” were used (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_hours https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_hours ); they corresponded to night watches and bell tolling times, and certainly weren’t notated like “5:31.”
yread 6y ago
You can find better references in the czech version of the wiki article https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlův_most https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlův_most Basically, it is just a hypothesis by some astronomist. Contemporary chronicler recorded just the year that the construction was started
- feralimal 6y ago
  Actually, if you find a better version of that book than the one on archive.org, you can see this info on page 251. I'm just looking now... Not sure why this isn't found in archive.org's search.
  - feralimal 6y ago
    In the book, it says: "Charles BridgeAmong the best-known architectural features of Prague is Charles Bridge (Karl¿v most). Known as PragueBridge until 1870, it spans the Vltava River and the Kampa Island between the Lesser Town and the OldTown. It is one of the oldest stone bridges in Europe and the second oldest in the republic (the oldest inPísek, Bohemia, was built in the thirteenth century).The first bridge crossing the Vltava in Prague was wooden anddated from the tenth century. The Judith stone bridge, built 1158–1160, spanned the river until a disastrous floodwashed it away in 1342. Charles IV commissioned Petr Parlérˇ to erect a new bridge; being somewhat superstitious,the king broke ground for the bridge in 1357 on 9 July at 5:31 A.M., thus creating a date and time that, if given com-pletely in numbers, is a perfect palindrome: 1–3–5–7–9–7–5–3–1. The sandstone bridge, stretching 516 meters with sixteen arches, was completed in 1402.Thirty statues adorn thebridge (the originals for most are in the Lapidarium of the National Museum). In 1683 Charles Bridge received itsfirst baroque sculpture, that of St. John Nepomuk, the work of Matthias Rauchmüller and Jan Brokoff. The bronzerelief at the base of the statue depicts the false legend that Jan Nepomuk would not tell Václav IV the secrets of thequeen’s confession, so Václav IV had him cast into the Vltava from the bridge (a bronze cross in the bridge parapetmarks the alleged spot). Other baroque masters who sculpted works for the bridge included Ferdinand MaximiliánBrokoff, Michal Josef Brokoff, and Matyá≥Bernard Braun. In the classical era, Josef Max, Emanuel Max, and otherssculpted several statues. Karel Dvorˇák completed the most recent statue, that of the missionaries Cyril and Method-ius, in 1938. On the Lesser Town side of the bridge are two towers.The first is a remnant of the Judith Bridge that was rebuiltin 1591. The taller Gothic tower was completed in 1464, and a Gothic gateway links the two towers. On the OldTown side of the bridge stands a single Gothic tower decorated with saints, the builders, and skillfully executed rep-resentations of Charles IV and his son,Václav IV. Also embellishing the tower are the coats of arms of the Bohemiankingdom.The roof is the design of Josef Mocker from the late nineteenth century. A portion of the Old Town Towerfacade and the bridge was damaged during a Swedish bombardment in 1648." Ok - so now, I can see where the wiki claim is from. But, where is this source in the history book from? My problem is that this is presented as true, but I want to know where the sources are. The book "EASTERN EUROPE" by RICHARD FRUCHT, was written in 2005. Obviously we are not dealing with a primary or secondary source. But what is the source Frucht is using? Is it just a story Frucht or someone else made up? We don't know.
fanf2 6y ago
At that time clocks did not have minute hands so they would not have been able to measure time that precisely.
- feralimal 6y ago
  That's one part of it. But where is this claim even from? Where are the sources?

TeMPOraL 6y ago

> This exact time was very important to the Holy Roman Emperor because he was a strong believer in numerology and felt that this specific time, which formed a palindrome (1357 9, 7 5:31), was a numerical bridge, and would imbue Charles Bridge with additional strength. This smells like horse manure, not just because it's unlikely anyone measured time that precisely in 1357, but also the Y/D/M date notation looks distinctively American.

kentonv 6y ago
Americans use M/D/Y, not Y/D/M. The reason ISO recommends Y/M/D as a universal date format is because just about everyone agrees on how to interpret it -- no one expects Y/D/M. Not that this makes the claim any more believable.
spenczar5 6y ago
Even more smelly is the precision of “5:31 AM.” I am not sure hour:minute was a clear and universal concept in 1357. At the time, “canonical hours” were used (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_hours https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canonical_hours ); they corresponded to night watches and bell tolling times, and certainly weren’t notated like “5:31.”

yread 6y ago

You can find better references in the czech version of the wiki article https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlův_most https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karlův_most Basically, it is just a hypothesis by some astronomist. Contemporary chronicler recorded just the year that the construction was started

feralimal 6y ago
Actually, if you find a better version of that book than the one on archive.org, you can see this info on page 251. I'm just looking now... Not sure why this isn't found in archive.org's search.
- feralimal 6y ago
  In the book, it says: "Charles BridgeAmong the best-known architectural features of Prague is Charles Bridge (Karl¿v most). Known as PragueBridge until 1870, it spans the Vltava River and the Kampa Island between the Lesser Town and the OldTown. It is one of the oldest stone bridges in Europe and the second oldest in the republic (the oldest inPísek, Bohemia, was built in the thirteenth century).The first bridge crossing the Vltava in Prague was wooden anddated from the tenth century. The Judith stone bridge, built 1158–1160, spanned the river until a disastrous floodwashed it away in 1342. Charles IV commissioned Petr Parlérˇ to erect a new bridge; being somewhat superstitious,the king broke ground for the bridge in 1357 on 9 July at 5:31 A.M., thus creating a date and time that, if given com-pletely in numbers, is a perfect palindrome: 1–3–5–7–9–7–5–3–1. The sandstone bridge, stretching 516 meters with sixteen arches, was completed in 1402.Thirty statues adorn thebridge (the originals for most are in the Lapidarium of the National Museum). In 1683 Charles Bridge received itsfirst baroque sculpture, that of St. John Nepomuk, the work of Matthias Rauchmüller and Jan Brokoff. The bronzerelief at the base of the statue depicts the false legend that Jan Nepomuk would not tell Václav IV the secrets of thequeen’s confession, so Václav IV had him cast into the Vltava from the bridge (a bronze cross in the bridge parapetmarks the alleged spot). Other baroque masters who sculpted works for the bridge included Ferdinand MaximiliánBrokoff, Michal Josef Brokoff, and Matyá≥Bernard Braun. In the classical era, Josef Max, Emanuel Max, and otherssculpted several statues. Karel Dvorˇák completed the most recent statue, that of the missionaries Cyril and Method-ius, in 1938. On the Lesser Town side of the bridge are two towers.The first is a remnant of the Judith Bridge that was rebuiltin 1591. The taller Gothic tower was completed in 1464, and a Gothic gateway links the two towers. On the OldTown side of the bridge stands a single Gothic tower decorated with saints, the builders, and skillfully executed rep-resentations of Charles IV and his son,Václav IV. Also embellishing the tower are the coats of arms of the Bohemiankingdom.The roof is the design of Josef Mocker from the late nineteenth century. A portion of the Old Town Towerfacade and the bridge was damaged during a Swedish bombardment in 1648." Ok - so now, I can see where the wiki claim is from. But, where is this source in the history book from? My problem is that this is presented as true, but I want to know where the sources are. The book "EASTERN EUROPE" by RICHARD FRUCHT, was written in 2005. Obviously we are not dealing with a primary or secondary source. But what is the source Frucht is using? Is it just a story Frucht or someone else made up? We don't know.

fanf2 6y ago

At that time clocks did not have minute hands so they would not have been able to measure time that precisely.

feralimal 6y ago
That's one part of it. But where is this claim even from? Where are the sources?