‘Why Did You Go to Buda?’: The Humanist Sodality and Mantuan’s Rustic Idyll in Bohuslaus of Hassenstein’s <i>Ecloga sive Idyllion Budae</i> (1503) <sup>☆</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the late fifteenth century, the Hungarian royal court at Buda was home to a cosmopolitan community of humanists. In early modern historiography, this cultural milieu has often been interpreted as one of the new, emergent ‘centres’ of the Renaissance in East Central Europe. This article responds to this framework by shedding light on a more peripheral figure: the Bohemian poet Bohuslaus of Hassenstein. Focusing on his Ecloga sive Idyllion Budae (1503), I follow Hassenstein's journey from the Hungarian court at Buda to his homeland of Bohemia, where he used the resources of the pastoral tradition, both classical and Italian, to transplant and cultivate the values of Latin humanism. In addition to Virgil, I examine Hassenstein in dialogue with Mantuan, who published a bestselling collection of Latin eclogues, the Adolescentia, in 1498. As a case study in the popular Renaissance genre of the neo‐Latin eclogue, this article shows how the pastoral tradition empowered poets like Hassenstein to transform the cultural peripheries in which they found themselves into new centres.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".