44 Wallenstein
so that she likewise lost any prospective claim to inherit after Heinrich
Georg’s death. The outstanding question was whether Albrecht Jan had
legally owned his brother’s portion or whether he was only holding
it as his guardian. If the latter it would not be forfeit, as by virtue of
his mental incapacity Heinrich Georg could be deemed neither a rebel
nor to have fled, and he would therefore still own the entail and half
of the transferable property. Wallenstein, as one of the closest and cer-
tainly at that time the best placed of the remaining relatives, applied
for his guardianship, which was duly authorised although his efforts
to have him returned to Bohemia were unavailing. Some years passed
before he could be brought back from Hamburg, following which he
lived at one of the Smirˇický properties until his death in 1630.^14
Once appointed guardian, Wallenstein entered a claim for the entire
Smirˇický family possessions on behalf of his ward, arguing somewhat
disingenuously and doubtless on legal advice that as the properties
had never been formally divided between the brothers none of them
had truly belonged to Albrecht Jan, and hence none of them were
liable to confiscation. After having Wallenstein’s claim investigated,
Liechtenstein advised the emperor that Heinrich Georg’s entitlement
to the entailed properties was indisputable, and that the part of the
claim regarding the other lands might also be arguable in court, so that
he advised seeking a compromise.^15 Wallenstein was ready enough to
abandon the full claim, an obvious negotiating position, and he set-
tled for the half to which his ward was fully entitled. In return he was
allowed to choose which estates to retain, and he was also granted a
legal dispensation allowing him to deal freely with his ward’s property
thereafter.
Although Wallenstein thus controlled more than half of the Smirˇický
lands he did not own them, and nor was he the only prospective heir on
Heinrich Georg’s death. The best claim was that of Wallenstein’s elderly
aunt, his mother’s sister. He also had two cousins, sons of his mother’s
other sister, whose claim was very similar to his own, although one of
these was disqualified as he had participated in the rebellion and sub-
sequently fled the country. Wallenstein reached an agreement whereby
his aunt and the other cousin gave up any claims, and it seems most
likely that this was done amicably on the basis of a cash payment. He
had already adopted this approach in dealing with claimants to parts of
his wife’s Moravian estates, and a financial settlement had the advan-
tage of being above board and legally enforceable. For his relatives cash
in hand – an unexpected windfall, given the circumstances – probably
seemed preferable to a disputed claim at the time of Heinrich Georg’s