Go, Captain, Greet the Danish King 93own possessions in mind, but now these were pledged to such an extent
that he could not withdraw again.
Nevertheless by the late autumn of 1626 his position as the emperor’s
general was precarious, not because there was any serious wish to
remove him, although there were rumours and gossip, but more
because he might be driven to turn resignation from a private threat
into a public reality, whether because of his own temperament or as a
result of the increasing volume of criticism at court. There the credit he
had gained from the victory at Dessau was soon overshadowed by Tilly’s
success at Lutter, while detractors ignorant of or determined to ignore
the strategic realities complained about Wallenstein’s delay in following
Mansfeld south and his failure to bring either him or Bethlen to battle.
And why, they asked, could a winter offensive not be mounted to finish
both off once and for all, a prospect unfeasible at the best of times but
out of the question with an army exhausted from long marches, wasted
in strength by illness and inadequate provisions, and unpaid into the
bargain. With all the main enemies off the scene some even started to
wonder whether the army was necessary.
Wiser heads looked further and saw Sweden, France, England and
Holland waiting in the wings. First Harrach and then Eggenberg came
to realise that Wallenstein might actually withdraw from his command,
a prospect which could entail the disintegration of the army, which
was held together principally by his credit as both its general and its
paymaster.^22 A meeting was arranged between the three men, for which
Eggenberg, making a considerable gesture, travelled out from Vienna to
Harrach’s castle at Bruck an der Leitha, some 30 miles east of the city.
A private conference took place on the evening of 25 November, the
exact substance of which no-one other than the three principals knows
or knew – although many thought that they did.
The reason for that was an anonymous memorandum purport-
ing to describe the discussions, which was sent within a few days to
Maximilian of Bavaria. Historians have concluded that the author was
Count Valeriano Magni, an aristocratic Italian-born Capuchin monk
who had been raised in Bohemia and had long been acquainted with
Wallenstein. Magni seems to have been fascinated by intrigue for its
own sake, and he had earlier been Maximilian’s emissary in his clandes-
tine contacts with France, but by 1626 he was the confessor and trusted
adviser of Cardinal Harrach, archbishop of Prague and Wallenstein’s
brother-in-law.^23 It is possible that the cardinal may have been at Bruck
at the time of the conference, and that Magni may have acted as secre-
tary for part of the discussions. On the other hand he may have learned