192 Wallenstein
information we have received we perceive that the enemy is not inclined
towards peace’. On 21 September Trauttmansdorff was still enthusiastic
and optimistic about the negotiations, but three days later he too saw
the writing on the wall, noting to Wallenstein that ‘I fear that the busi-
ness with Oxenstierna will have to be carried out by Your Princely Grace
with the sword, and not by us with words or the pen’.^24
Wallenstein was disappointed and angry, but although accounts of his
conduct at this and other crucial points suggest uncontrolled outbursts
of rage there was nevertheless an underlying logic to his approach. On
this occasion he decided to bring matters to a head by declaring his
objective in unmistakeable terms. Franz Albrecht was again Arnim’s
emissary, and he wrote an account of his discussions with Wallenstein
of 25 and 26 September 1633 (although he did so seven months later,
after the general’s death and when he himself was a prisoner of the
Imperialists).
The duke of Friedland asserted that all troops of foreign potentates,
whether Spanish, French, Swedish or from Lorraine, and all foreign-
ers who did not belong in the Empire, must be expelled in order to
restore it to its state during the time of the Emperors Rudolph and
Matthias. ... When I asked to know and write down the specific terms
of the peace he would not agree, instead insisting that both armies
should march immediately into the Empire, directly against the
Swedes, who at that time were the nearest, to remove them.Franz Albrecht took this message back to Arnim, returning on the fol-
lowing day to say that the latter had no authority to make peace on
those terms, but proposed instead that they should make a separate
peace and leave the question of Sweden to be settled afterwards. To this
Wallenstein replied ‘with great vehemence that it could not be, and
that his sole condition was that we should join with him to march into
the Empire and attack the Swedes, and likewise the French and Spanish
should we encounter them there. Moreover he absolutely insisted that
he should have the command.’ Finding no agreement, Wallenstein
politely took his leave of Franz Albrecht, commenting that he would
honour the remaining days of the truce, which had previously been
extended, but would then know how to proceed.^25
The Protestant side viewed this as flagrant bad faith on Wallenstein’s
part. Oxenstierna and John George of Saxony complained that he could
not be trusted, and that no reliance could be placed on anything negoti-
ated with him, while Arnim expressed the same opinion to the elector of