Joseph II's memorandum "Vorschlag wegen der gleichen Ausmaß der Schuldigkeiten der Unterthanen" (1774)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is an edition of a memorandum on the duties of peasants presented by Emperor Joseph II to Maria Theresia in February 1774. It is entitled „Proposal for the Delimitation of Duties of Subjects“ and it was meant as a contribution by the co-regent to the issue of urbarial reform. It was drafted at a time when the radical reformer Franz Anton von Blanc was proposing a general rule, whereas the Bohemian Estates argued that there should be only local regulations. Emperor Joseph II supported the view of the Bohemian Estates. He drew on the theory of the utility of luxury and argued that the nobility needed to make a profit in order to be able to make some contribution to the circulation of money. This circulation was beneficial even for artisans and journeymen. Even within the frameworks of taxation, the interests of nobility, burghers and peasants were interconnected because the financial inability of one of these classes would pull down all the others. In his opinion it was impossible to issue a „general Cynossur“ (i.e. a general rule), and the Hofkanzlei, which sought to prove the impracticability of the Estates’ plan, proved only that it would be difficult to carry out. Emperor Joseph II believed that the destinies of the landlords and the subjects were interconnected, and that the regulation should bring about something positive for both of them. Based on these reflections, he preferred to support the Estates’ plan. The memorandum was addressed to his mother, Maria Theresia, who then issued the Instruction for new Urbaria, entitled Unterricht. This followed the opinions of Joseph II.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.007 |
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".