Kingdom of Bohemia - Neighbour of Bavaria in the Late Middle Ages and in the Early Modern Times
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DOCTORAL THESIS Ivana HERGLOVÁ --- KINGDOM OF BOHEMIA - NEIGHBOUR OF BAVARIA IN THE LATE MIDDLE AGES AND IN THE EARLY MODERN TIMES --- Abstract --- The thesis is dedicated to research in the field of Bavarian-Bohemian relations, mainly in the field of politics, in the 15th and early 16th century. Main interest is given to the contacts between the Kingdom of Bohemia and the four partial duchies into which Bavaria was subdivided in this period - (Lower) Bavaria-Straubing, Bavaria-Munich, Bavaria-Landshut and Bavaria-Ingolstadt. The work is divided into four large parts. The first goes on the Hussite Wars (1419-1434/36). The second part analyses Czech royal election of the year 1440 and the motives of the selected candidate, the duke Albrecht III of Bavaria-Munich, to finally decline the election. This chapter is followed by a summary of the political cooperation between Czech kings Ladislaus Posthumus (1453-1457) and George of Podiebrad (1458-1471) and the duke Louis/Ludwig IX of Bavaria-Landshut. The last chapter of the thesis describes the attempt of the Bavarian dukes (of the now reunited Duchy of Bavaria) William/Wilhelm IV and Louis/Ludwig X to become the kings of Bohemia as a part of their competition for hegemony in the middle European region with the house of Habsburg.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".