236 Wallenstein
by killing the offenders, and as such they were not to be punished but
rewarded as liberators of the fatherland.
Nevertheless, the commission continued, there were considerable dif-
ficulties in holding any kind of posthumous trial. Friends of the accused
and other interested parties would have to be allowed to make repre-
sentations as in normal legal proceedings, as though the issue were in
doubt, which would be in contradiction of what had already been done:
‘Hence Your Imperial Majesty’s reputation and the honour of those who
carried out the executions would suffer considerably.’ Moreover the
exchequer would face problems over the confiscations which had taken
place. Nor could a simple declaration of guilt be issued, despite Wallen-
stein’s ‘incontestable notoriety’, as although a number of the accusa-
tions against him were undoubtedly true, they said, notably the plans
for depriving the emperor of his lands and distributing them to others,
unfortunately there was no actual proof to hand. Hence they could not
be repeated in a declaration, but nor could they be omitted, as they
had already been publicised, and their absence would cause widespread
doubts and speculation because of the implication that, at least on
those points, Wallenstein might have been innocent. Better therefore to
rely on the original patents as the final word on the subject.
Meanwhile Ferdinand and his confidants were exploring an alterna-
tive route to counter criticism by using the press, which soon published
versions of the accounts of the principal officers involved. Gordon’s
relatively simple text had been amended, probably by Piccolomini, and
it is noteworthy that the records clerk in Vienna marked Leslie’s consid-
erably longer manuscript as the account ‘which he brought with him’.^27
Three-quarters of this is devoted to reporting in detail the incriminating
things which Wallenstein and Ilow allegedly said, while the planning
and actions of the three officers who were responsible for their assas-
sination are much more briefly outlined. This was what they wanted
to hear in Vienna and it suited Leslie to oblige them, both in order to
help his case for a large reward and to enable him to skate around some
potentially much more difficult questions. Wide circulation of these
and other versions of the events at Eger in the flysheet press followed,
but in relation to Ferdinand’s need to demonstrate Wallenstein’s guilt
they were in the last analysis only hearsay.
Some more substantial evidence was required, but it was not to be
found. Piccolomini had hurried to Eger as soon as he heard of the
murders, and as the first of the higher command to arrive he had
made arrangements for the custody of the documents in Wallenstein’s
chancery. Three days after the general’s death Gallas wrote to the