Insurrection 149made a transcript during his visit many years earlier, but ‘I lent it to a
friend, who has mislaid it’.^30
It appears that when Gindely saw the document again he realised that
it did not support the inferences he had drawn from it, and hence it is
not mentioned at all in his fourth volume, published in 1880, or in his
final work, published in 1894, although in both of these he continued to
assert the conspiracy thesis. However the meeting in the tower room of
Smiˇrický’s house was no longer mentioned and Budowetz disappeared
from the trio of plotters, to be replaced by ‘ a member of the Wchynský
[Kinsky] family’.^31
Instead Gindely turned for support to the records of the trials of the
principal rebels, of which there were and are only six extant. According
to his 1880 volume, ‘the main subject of the questions put to the pris-
oners was the defenestration, and whether or not it had been planned.
Some of the prisoners confessed honestly that it had, and named as
the principal instigators Count Thurn, Albrecht Smiˇrický and a certain
Wchynský [Kinsky].’^32 Repeating this assertion in 1894, Gindely added
that these trial records ‘provide the certainty that the defenestration was
planned’, and moreover that it was agreed ‘on the day before it was
carried out’.^33
In fact three of the six men on trial, Michalowitz, Caspar Kapliˇrand
Pietipesky, confined their replies to questions about the defenestration
to saying that they were not there and knew nothing, and only
Michalowitz named anybody, saying that he had heard afterwards
that those who had seized the regents had been Smiˇrický, Berbisdorf,
Wilhelm Lobkowitz and Ulrich Kinsky.^34 A fourth, Loss, who was actu-
ally present, said little more apart from providing a few brief details of
what he had seen. He mentioned PaulRíˇcan reading out the document,ˇ
as described by Martinitz, and he noted that ‘Ulrich Kinsky was stand-
ing by the window’, but otherwise he named no-one.^35 The fifth,Ríˇˇcan
himself, was only a little more forthcoming with information about the
defenestration, as he claimed that ‘he was a long way from it, stand-
ing at the back by the door, so he did not see it with his own eyes’. He
said that he had later heard that Thurn, Smiˇrický, Kinsky and Berbisdorf
had ‘laid hands’ on the regents, while had had himself seen Smiˇrický
and Berbisdorf throw Fabricius from the window. He also named a few
more people, but merely to note that they were present, ‘along with
many others’, again much in line with Martinitz’s account. He con-
firmed that he had read out a document, which he said had been given
to him by Thurn, Fels and Ruppa, but he said nothing about a plot,