Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historians generally depict the Italian peninsula after the Congress of Vienna as primarily under the influence of the Habsburg Empire. It is surprising, therefore, that some 150 years after the death of one of the most influential figures of the period, the Austrian Chancellor Clemens Wenzel Lothar Nepomuk Prince von Metternich (d. 1859), there is still no comprehensive study of his Italian policies, even though such a study would throw important new light on the final stage of Metternich's career at the Viennese Chancellery from 1830 to 1848. This paper addresses only a few months in this period, but it draws on the archives in Vienna, London, Moscow, Berlin, Munich, Brussels, Prague and Děčín to show that, although Metternich's Austria played a critically important role in the Italian politics, its influence in the southern part of the peninsula was considerably lower than is generally assumed. In fact, as will be shown, in this region the conservative central European monarchy had to share its influence with Great Britain and France. Nor did the two liberal powers automatically regard this area as an exclusive sphere of Habsburg influence, as became evident a quarter a century after the Congress during the so-called Sulphur Crisis in 1840, when a dispute between Great Britain and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies about the control over the production of the Sicilian sulphur led to a serious crisis that was finally solved by the mediation of France. As we shall see, Austria was excluded from the management of this crisis both because the British foreign Secretary, Henry John Temple Lord Palmerston, did not want to allow Metternich to play the role of arbitrator and because the Austrian influence over the court of Naples was in reality very weak.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".