Talk:Defenestrations of Prague

message: : There were two incidents in the history of Bohemia, and one in the history of Czechoslovakia...
: Where is the difference? What happened between 1419 and 1618? --Nk 13:12, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  AFAICS the author has meant the two defenestrations of 1419 and 1618 as those two in the history of Bohemia, and the "defenestration" of Jan Masaryk in 1948 as that one in the history of Czechoslovakia. The paragraph is a little bit unclear. But, primarily, the incident of Masaryk's death is not normally called defenestration, AFAIAA. It could be mentioned as a sidenote, but IMHO not on the same level of importance as the defenestrations of Prague. --Mormegil 14:22, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Defenstration on Czechoslovakia

message: Actually, there are more mistakes in this page:
# The murder of Mr. Masaryk is not considered to be defenestration and unfortunately it has never been officially concluded that he was actually killed (although, I believe so; the only alternatives is that he was lead by the Communist terror to commit a suicide, which does not make much difference to me in terms of guilt).
# There is one more defenestration missing (which is quite common, most Czech histories omit it although it was the most widespread and the most bloody of them). In September 1483 ALL magistrates from all three Prague city-halls (Prague used to be separated into three independent cities then) were thrown out of the windows and killed, because they were suspected to be anti-hussites. The pogrom was also extended to some monasteries were some monks were killed and (of course :-) to the Prague Jewish Ghetto (just for fun, I am afraid).
# Actually the defenestrations in Prague were so numerous that Jerome K. Jerome wrote in “Three Men on a Bummel” (sequel to more known “Three Men in a Boat”) that the fact there had been some successful agreements concluded in Prague means that they had to be agreed upon in a basement.
At Prague Castle on May 23, 1618, an assembly of Protestants tried two Imperial governors, Wilhelm Graf Slavata (1572 - 1652) and Jaroslav Borzita Graf von Martinicz (1582 - 1649), for violating the Letter of Majesty, found them guilty, and threw them, together with their scribe Fabricius, out of the high castle windows, where they landed on a large pile of manure. They survived."
Compare with....
"They began their rebellion in grand Czech style, with the Second Defenestration of Prague in 1618. In this second defenestration, two vice-regents of the Austrian monarch and some governors of the Czech lands were thrown out of a tower window at Prague Castle. They were not killed, however, as they fell onto a pile of garbage (mostly straw) which had accumulated in the castle moat."
Radio Prague, cited at www3.bc.sympatico.ca
How many were really defenestrated that day? Were there governors? More importantly, was there horse shit, or was there none? TheMadBaron 17:47, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Multiple issues (please keep them separate and organised)

message: hi all, i've been to prague and have taken photos of (what i think) are the sites of the four defenestrations listed on the wikipedia article. the masaryk one may be a stretch, but the tourism info agent said she thought he'd been thrown into the courtyard from the northeast corner of the building. i have a picture of the building and a (not very good) glimpse into said courtyard. 
yeah, so do folks think it's a good idea to include these pictures in the article?
---
A picture of of the said window may be found at the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs' website - Czech only, but the window is indicated by a small arrow; see: http://www.mzv.cz/wwwo/mzv/default.asp?id=23286&ido=3931&idj=1&amb=1&prsl=true&pocc1=5
Vanamond
===Window height===
They were thrown from "out of the 3200 ft high windows"? That seems rather high... --153.2.246.32 (talk) 13:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. According to castles.org, it was an estimated 27 ells fall. According to sizes.com, 1 ell = 37 to 45 inches. Cited text from 17th century says it equals 5/4 yards (= 45 inches = 1143 mm). So the height of the windows wouldn't be mugh higher than 31 metres (= 102 feet). I'll fix it. 201.37.106.228 (talk) 18:02, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  pics of the windows  

message: They were thrown from "out of the 3200 ft high windows"? That seems rather high... --153.2.246.32 (talk) 13:39, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. According to castles.org, it was an estimated 27 ells fall. According to sizes.com, 1 ell = 37 to 45 inches. Cited text from 17th century says it equals 5/4 yards (= 45 inches = 1143 mm). So the height of the windows wouldn't be mugh higher than 31 metres (= 102 feet). I'll fix it. 201.37.106.228 (talk) 18:02, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Window height

message: The word 'Churmusian' is used a few times in the article. Can someone explain what this is? Googling the word 'Churmusian' yields 3 results, which all link to this article and its circulation elsewhere. --HHermans 17:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Churmusian?

message: So is pushing someone out of a window a Czech tradition or something? Brutannica 23:06, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, if he deserves it... Unfortunately, nowadays it's not considered a proper way of removing from office. But I strongly recommend to restore this tradition:-))--89.176.73.20 (talk) 11:52, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tradition?

message: I tagged both this article and Jan Žižka as contradicting each other for the following reasons:
So who exactly led the those who threw the town councillors from the  windows during the First Defenestrations of Prague? This article currently says it was Jan Želivský while the Jan Žižka article currently says it was him. Or was it the same guy? Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 12:30, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not the same... a quick google search on both men seems to indicate that Zelivsky was a priest and was involved in the defenestration... While Zizka was a Hussite general and became involved in the aftermath.  Thus I think this article is correct and the Zizka article is incorrect. Blueboar 18:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This site does a good job at clarifying the difference.  Based on that, I have corrected the Zelivsky article so as to no longer say he was the leader of the Defenestration.  Conflict resolved.  Tag removed. Blueboar 18:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction: Žižka vs. Želivský 

message: To say that he was "almost certainly" murdered may be going a little too far, given the statement in the article Jan_Masaryk to the effect that three official investigations (including one carried out after the Velvet Revolution) found that he committed suicide. 86.155.65.123 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 22:25, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Masaryk

message: The external link 'Descendants of those defenestrated' is a dead link to an AOL service that has been discontinued. I have not removed it, just noted it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.16.238.209 (talk) 18:39, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead Link 

message: I'm unsure from the way the article is written -- what is traditional in Prague?  Bribing their way into the palace or throwing catholics out windows?  I've been there and never observed either of these acts ;)   138.162.128.53 (talk) 12:49, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: (Actually "customary".)  It's also unclear who is supposed to have said or written this - the quotes suggest it's a quote from somewhere, but where?Ewx (talk) 11:57, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  As is traditional? 

message: This article makes several references to the question of which events are "called" or "referred to as" defenestrations. Who is doing the calling or referring-to? Was the name "defenestration" used at the time, or is it a more recent word used now to describe historical events? If the former, who used it (the injured side, the victorious side, or a third party?). If the latter, when was the term introduced and by whom? What are these events commonly called in Czech? mooncow 10:27, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: btw, this source -- http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=defenestration -- suggests that "defenestration" was coined in 1620 to describe the 1618 event. mooncow 10:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

text: It seems that in the original Apologia issued a day or two after the 1618 events, they were referred to simply as "throwing out of the window": 'Apologia oder Entschuldigungsschrift, auß was für Vrsachen alle drey Stände deß Königreichs Böheimb, so unter beyder gestalt den Leib und Blut des Herrn Christi empfangen ...', page 21 lines 11–12 (http://books.google.com/books?id=oftSAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA21#v=onepage&q&f=false) — "so sie [...] gewesen nach altem Gebrauch aus dem fenster geworfen" ("they [...] have been thrown out of the window after ancient custom"). So the word "defenestration" (or its equivalent in German or other applicable local language) would seem to have been coined later. mooncow 11:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who calls them "defenestrations"? 

message: First there's "killing of seven members of the city council", and then there's "judge, the burgomaster, and some thirteen members of the town council out of the window and into the street, where they were killed by the fall or dispatched by the mob", and that makes 15.
Could it be that "seven" should be "several" which is the word used Catholic Encyclopedia reference?  Masonmilan (talk) 12:07, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  First defenestration - how many dead? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Defenestrations of Prague. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140328010647/http://www.nbb.cornell.edu:80/neurobio/bionb427/readings/gould1996.pdf to http://www.nbb.cornell.edu/neurobio/BioNB427/READINGS/Gould1996.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:11, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There are several paragraphs in the First and Second Defenestration sections that do not have any citations whatsoever. —howcheng  {chat} 06:35, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article needs more references 

message: I propose that the first and second defenestrations, as two separate events, be split into two separate articles. Dallyripple (talk) 01:00, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like the least of concerns for this article, which badly lacks references. Over a third of the references on the page are in the last paragraph, which relates to neither the first or second incidents. So where does that section go? The first article would be a one reference stub, and the second would have the third section awkwardly tacked on. Don't know if that would be an improvement unless they are further developed. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 01:43, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Really, I just don't like that unrelated events share an article just because they share a name.  I think the First Defenestration is a notable event, and it's not so bad that it should start as a stub article.  The Second Defenestration section could be an OK article as it is.  The third section belongs tacked onto a Second Defenestration article even less than these events belong stitched together here.  The fact that it's referenced doesn't mean it needs to be preserved.  I have no idea where it would go; a sentence for each of the two events in the last section, on a disambiguation page, is the best thought I have.Dallyripple (talk) 03:33, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how that would be an improvement. The events share more than just a name, as they are associated with Prague and therefore take on a momentum – the second and "third" are so-named because of the earlier ones. Also the terms are used loosely, and readers searching for the term may not know which one they are looking for. Spreading the article across three pages would just make it harder to find the information. Laszlo Panaflex (talk) 04:28, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I think a good analogy here is the article on the French Revolution.  You could say that the first revolution had the same type of "momentum" in that it contributed to a revolutionary culture in France.  Readers searching for the French Revolution are probably searching for the 1789 revolution, to which the term commonly refers, just as readers searching for the defenestration of Prague are probably searching for the 1618 defenestration, to which that term commonly refers.  A reader who doesn't know which French revolution he is looking for (which, I imagine, is not much less likely than not knowing what defenestration of Prague he is looking for) is directed to a disambiguation page. Dallyripple (talk) 18:30, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed split 

message: — Assignment last updated by Shaethompson (talk) 14:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: MSU - Fossil Hunters