his study traces the changing portrayals of Maria Theresa in the writings of the most important Czech historians (F. M. Pelcl, W. W. Tomek, J. Kalousek, B. Rieger, J. Svátek, J. Pekař and J. Prokeš) up until the end of the First Republic. It also considers the works of popular chroniclers, the French historian E. Denis, and school textbooks. The author shows that from the end of the 18th century to the 1930s Czech historiography presented an image of Maria Theresa as an exceptionally capable ruler whose wide-ranging reforms brought considerable progress in many different spheres of life both in Bohemia and the monarchy as a whole. From the outset, however, there was also criticism of various aspects of her policies that were perceived as inimical to the Czech nation. First there was Germanization, especially in the education system; then, from the 1860s, the centralizing tendency of administrative reforms that threatened the (albeit limited) autonomy of the Czech state and opened the door to dualism. This criticism was especially abrasive in the works of J. Kalousek, B. Rieger and J. Svátek. Some even pointed to an actively hostile attitude on the part of the empress towards the Czech Lands. As the proliferation of factual evidence consolidated the positive image of the great monarch, critical assessments became more objective, though they never disappeared altogether. It is worth noting that, with few exceptions, the positive importance of absolutist enlightenment reforms for the emergence of the modern Czech nation-state was often overlooked., Eduard Maur., and Obsahuje bibliografické odkazy
The last Luxembourgs (especially Sigismund) in the consciouness and political practice of the crown of Bohemia in the Podiebrad-Korwin-Jagiellon period or an attempt to revision some myths of (not only) Czech historiography.