erpreted by his enemies as a conspiracy against the emperor. His
destruction was resolved on by the Duke of Bavaria and others, among
whom an Italian mercenary general, named Piccolomini, was the most
perfidious and savage. A plot was formed against him by certain
traitors among his own officers,--the names of Devereaux, Butler,
Gordon, and Leslie, to the shame of their nations, appearing in the
list.

On February 25, 1634, an entertainment was given to the whole body of
officers by Gordon, who commanded the castle of Eger, where
Wallenstein was residing. He himself being indisposed, had retired
from the table to his chamber. He was roused by loud cries proceeding
from the mess-room, where his faithful officers were being murdered by
the traitors. He opened the window to inquire the cause of the
disturbance, when Devereaux entered, with thirty Irishmen at his back.
The cowards shrank at the sight of their great general, standing calm
and stern, unarmed, and at their mercy. But Devereaux, a callous and
brutal soldier, in a moment stepped forward, and cried: "Art thou the
traitor who wilt ruin the Empire?" Wallenstein did not speak, but
opened his arms, as if to accept the blow which was aimed at his
heart. He was slain at the age of fifty-one. His wealth was chiefly
shared among his enemies.

[Illustration: Wallenstein's last banquet.]

Though undoubtedly ambitious and intriguing, Wallenstein's alleged
treachery to the emperor, whom he kept informed of all his schemes,
has never been proved, and by many recent historians is disbelieved.
He fell a victim to the jealousy of his rivals, which he augmented by
his own pride. His fall, however, reflects lasting disgrace on the
character of the Emperor Ferdinand, and was justly avenged by the
subsequent humiliation of the German Empire.

GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS[20]

By HJALMAR HJORTH BOYESEN

(1594-1632)

[Footnote 20: Copyright, 1894, by Selmar Hess.]

[Illustration: Gustavus Adolphus. [TN]]

There is a theory which has much currency nowadays, that the great
man, being a product of his century, exerts an influence upon his age
which is but vanishing, compared to the influence which the age exerts
upon him. The great man is, according to this view, personally of
small account, except in so far as the tendencies and ideas which are
fermenting in the age find their expression in him. He does not so
much shape the events as he is shaped and moulded by them.