Decimal outline: ## I. Introduction

   Generations of the 19th and the first half of the 20th centuries knew Wallachia as a beautiful, romantic, and forested region, with flocks of grazing sheep on grassy slopes, shepherds' huts, neat villages nestled in the valleys, and stylistically pure wooden cottages dotting the hillsides. Greater attention was devoted to sheep breeding and pastoral production, including dairy farming, cheesemaking, and some folk crafts. The almost untouched state of this sophisticated folk culture, along with the distinct lifestyle, work, and thought of the highlanders, had a profound impact. The people were known for their simplicity, modesty, devoutness, warmth, and friendliness.
   This idyllic view, however, could not penetrate the essence of the matter; it remained superficial, historically incomplete, and thus distorted.
   The Wallachian uprisings were often mentioned only briefly and with evident reservations, as if they were an unpraiseworthy chapter in the region's past. These long-lasting uprisings, tenacious struggles against the Emperor, the Church, and feudal lords—especially the courageous appearance of rebels armed and allied with the Emperor's enemies—led to the suppression and downplaying of these historically significant events. Researchers at the time, limited by their perspective, could not explain these specifically Wallachian processes, nor could they identify the objective causes and explanations for these events.
   Even the eminent historian Matouš Václavek (1842-1908), who was well-acquainted with the history and traditions of the Wallachian people, downplayed these events and unjustly accused the highlanders of treason against the Emperor, the Catholic Church, and the nobility. As a historian, he seemingly failed to recognize that his view aligned with the ideology of the feudal class, which was fundamentally hostile to the interests of the people. Today, we understand that his perspective on this important matter was erroneous and is now objectively considered untenable. We advocate for an objective, scientific stance that positively assesses the people's struggles as an effort to establish a fairer social order. The Wallachian endeavors, struggles, and sacrifices are in harmony with the impartial knowledge of our time, and we strive for an objective evaluation without suppressing or exaggerating any aspect.
   It is particularly important for our understanding to consider the contemporary perspective of J. A. Komenský (1592-1670), who spoke about these events—which shook nearly half of Moravia—though only briefly. Komenský viewed the Wallachian uprisings from an international, European perspective. Perhaps as the only Czech scholar of his time, he correctly understood their significance during the uprising and paid tribute to the heroism of the people of eastern Moravia. Similar assessments were made by important Western historians, such as the chronicler Theatrum Europael by Ph. von Chemnitz (1605-1678), and other writers who sought to understand the Wallachian efforts and struggles.
   From the 17th to the 19th centuries, views that rejected the Wallachian uprisings were generally accepted in Moravia without critical scrutiny. However, we acknowledge the contributions of historical works and a few Catholic historian-priests who, drawing on sources now often unavailable, recorded many events and occurrences that might otherwise have been forgotten. The Jesuit historian Jan Schmidl (1693-1762), Pilař-Moravec at the end of the 18th century, Beda Dudík (1815-1890), and others highlighted the significance of the Wallachian uprising.
   Only in a modest body of work has historical material been collected and evaluated in piecemeal fashion, paving the way for a more pronounced historical approach. It is fair to say that preparatory historical work is far from complete.
   Contemporary historians rightly perceive the uprisings of the eastern Moravian peasants in the region known as Wallachia since the Thirty Years' War as a typical and concrete process of resistance. These armed struggles, or "rebellions" in feudal legal parlance, were manifestations of the people's efforts to secure freer forms of life, as they experienced when they were temporarily liberated from landlord and religious oppression in 1619. Although the Wallachian rebels could not articulate their aspirations in a written program, they expressed them through their actions, which were characteristic of the anti-feudal resistance of the Czech people, particularly resonant in Wallachia.
   We can responsibly assert that, in our homeland, no other popular movement—save for the Hussite revolutionary movement—has enriched national history with such dramatic events and a tragic conclusion over a quarter of a century as the peasant rebels fighting under the name "Valachů" (a term first used in 1627). Their defiance, especially after the Battle of White Mountain, illustrates the Wallachian people's ability to integrate themselves into the great international war games according to their strength, economic capabilities, and fighting prowess, even in the difficult conditions of the post-White Mountain era. They never relinquished their weapons willingly. Only in the fateful January of 1644, when they were abandoned by their allies and friends amidst a changing international situation, were the popular forces overwhelmed by superior might, and the rebels, known for their loyalty and unique military prowess, were exterminated and eliminated from further battles.
   In this limited treatise, we can only trace the most fundamental evolutionary lines of the rich, varied, and complex history of the eastern Moravian people's struggle, set against the backdrop of major historical and international changes during the Thirty Years' War. We accompany these lines with succinct, striking testimonies from the period to foster an understanding of the contemporary mindset and a selection of pictorial documents, albeit with regret that they largely represent the ruling class. Contemporary illustrative material from the rebels' camp likely did not survive.
   Our answers to many questions from the history of the Wallachian uprisings are not always definitive; in some cases, they are of a discussion nature. Our understanding of objective historical facts is continually evolving, expanding, and deepening. Erroneous views are corrected, and new insights are gained each year. However, much study and work remain to ensure that the picture of Wallachian history is truthful, objective, and aligned with the new approach to historiography.
   
## II. The Geographical Environment of Wallachia and its Influence on Work Style, Life, and Beliefs 

   Natural conditions co-determine and influence, but do not directly determine, the development of historical processes. The features of the geographical region—its mountainous and foothill character, the influence of altitude with a harsher climate, a shorter growing season, and a significant amount of rainfall—predetermined Wallachia as a typical fodder region with favorable conditions for raising "Valašský dobytek" (originally goats and sheep, later dominated by sheep breeding alone). Occasional periods of drought disrupted these favorable conditions, bringing poverty and hunger, and driving people out of the mountains into begging and emigration.
   The fundamental hardship of living conditions was primarily manifested in the lack of fertile land, especially arable land, which created generational poverty throughout the period of late feudalism. It was not until the beginnings of capitalist industrialization in the 19th century that the people found partial relief. The hard work of combining agricultural production with pastoralism was often not commensurate with the effort expended. The seemingly beautiful and romantic region also harbored evil qualities; it was unusually poor and could not fully sustain its people for centuries. Even for the life of a modest peasant, there was little land. Poverty was one of the distinctive features of the peasant people, affecting the formation of their lifestyle, their system of beliefs, their entire way of thinking—even fostering a radical mindset, incompatible with the feudal order.
   Wallachian agriculture also suffered from occasional floods from both the Bečva River and its ferocious mountain tributaries. Arable land was also lost to these floods, which, especially in Vsetín, meant that a meager harvest could not always be secured. Matouš Václavek, a connoisseur of Wallachia at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries, wrote: "... more fertile land was found only by the Bečva River. The rest consists of slopes, peaks, hills, all depressions and valleys... poverty and misery are at home in most places here. Poverty upon poverty..."
   During the Thirty Years' War, the situation was similarly dire: "... one sheaf (of grain) is rarer for us than ten elsewhere, because we have difficult livelihoods and our fields are infertile... hard work is often in vain..." lamented peasants from the Vsetín region in 1643.
   The harvest in the fields was not enough to feed a family. Bread, even in past centuries, was considered a rare, festive food. Potatoes—referred to as "the bread of the poor"—appeared in the castle kitchen in 1764, but the people were initially distrustful of this new crop. Meat was only an occasional addition to the Wallachian peasant's kitchen. Widespread poaching sometimes diversified the menu. "Dojivo," i.e., milk and dairy products, and vegetables were the mainstays of their diet.
   The inventory of the cottage was often supplemented by a Wallachian "obuch" (club), and during times of war, a captured rifle. From childhood, Wallachians had a deep fondness for firearms. Despite feudal law prohibiting commoners from possessing firearms, and hunting with a rifle being a privilege of the lords, the mountainous area, with its impassable terrain, already lay beyond the full control of the authorities, enjoying a lower level of security.

### The Importance of the Forest

   The overwhelming dominance of vast border forests over farmland was particularly striking in this region. Here, a characteristic positive relationship between the people and the forest developed—a relationship more pronounced than in any other region of the Czech lands. In stark contrast, among the neighboring Hanák people, this relationship was sharply negative; the forests lost their significance for the fertility of the land. The attachment and positive relationship to the mountainous, almost deserted forests along the Hungarian-Slovak border, the domestic processing of wood for the production of various kinds of domestic and agricultural tools, and the construction of typical wooden houses, or cottages, are integral features of these people. They lived in very elongated villages nestled in the valleys, usually following the course of a stream, with cottages arranged more loosely according to the formation of the terrain and the scarcity of fertile land.
   The influence of the forest on the material base and social superstructure emerges as an exceptionally powerful, deeply influencing factor. This influence extends to the development of distinctive psychological characteristics among the highlanders. The forest was sometimes also strictly protected by the property rights of the feudal landlords, with the nobility often closely monitoring or attempting to monitor forestry practices to prevent the unauthorized felling of timber.
   In less accessible valleys, often by the water, small, sometimes itinerant, aristocratic glassworks operated, some with just a single crucible. From the heaps of ashes left over from the burned wood, an important byproduct—potash, or "salajka"—was produced for use in glassmaking as well as for other purposes. Through these means, the nobility sought to economically exploit the otherwise underutilized vast wood reserves.
   The poverty of the people, especially evident in the Vsetín region, coupled with the scarcity of resources, hunger, and hardship, fostered ingenuity not only in the diverse processing of wood and leather but also in the production of village-made cloth and linen. These conditions also nurtured the development of a sophisticated folk culture, expressed through folk songs, fairy tales, legends, dances, and folk art.

### Efforts to Expand Fertile Land

   Not far above the area of older villages, a struggle to acquire new, much-needed land to improve nutrition gradually developed from the 16th century. A stream of colonists from overpopulated lower areas advanced into the less economically developed higher areas. According to B. Peroutka, the expansion of farmland took place in two basic forms. Primarily at the expense of forest land by felling trees in the immediate vicinity of the villages, where there was no need to build new dwellings. "Ujimiska" arose on the edge of the forest and in the forest, a characteristic name for the designation of new plots that the villagers "ujmuli" (took possession of), i.e. took into their lease for a fee as landlord property, recorded by the nobility so that the fee could be collected. Their establishment, often with an apiary, pushed the lower band of forests back by felling. With the increase in the population, livestock breeding also expanded.
   The second form of clearing colonization - even with differences on individual estates - is younger. Peasant-pastoral homesteads, clearings, and homesteads or their smaller groups arise in higher areas on grassy slopes, in places further away from the villages. In this way, the settlement area expanded considerably, as some studies attest, usually, however, only after the Thirty Years' War, especially in the 18th century. Some mountain villages were also founded after this time. The process of colonization did not reach the furthest areas, the "zadní hory" (back mountains), already in the very band of the Moravian-Slovak border. There, sheep breeding was concentrated with pastoral, dairy, and cheesemaking production. Here, even in the first half of the 19th century, the shepherds lived a very simple life, "as in biblical times". Already from this explanation, the basic knowledge arises that the "Valašská" uprisings are primarily and mainly the work of peasants, settled in villages, as sources testify in the "Soupisech Valachů" (List of Wallachians) from 1644.

### The Question of Religious Differentiation

   intensified social conflicts to a significant degree. This historical fact cannot be denied, already for the simple reason that it represented a differentiating ideology of the countryside and the ruling class in the 17th century. The vast majority of Wallachia appears before the Battle of White Mountain as consciously non-Catholic (Czech Brethren and Evangelical), apart from the Catholic mountain episcopal estate of Hukvaldy and some other estates.
   However, the struggle was not waged over doctrinal articles, over a set of teachings, over church rituals, or over theological religious problems. The Catholic camp of the nobility and the non-Catholic Wallachian peasants were divided by a deep ideological gulf of political-religious orientation. The Catholic minority subscribed to the ideology of the Habsburgs, to the aggressive policies of the papacy, and to the Counter-Reformation. The non-Catholic orientation was directed against manifestations of Habsburg absolutism, against church policy and its interference in political affairs in Moravia, known as a classic land of religious freedom and tolerance, which was already being undermined in a harsher manner on some estates even by Cardinal Ditrichštejn himself during the pre-White Mountain period. Questions of economic and political nature appear in the sources, despite their concealment in some cases, as fundamental.

### The Nature of the Estate Management of the Landowning Nobility

   The older, originally natural economy with the development of financial management is gradually being replaced by a more modern system of monetary economy, which has many advantages for the landlord. This system is much better suited to the more demanding and also growing needs of aristocratic life, especially from the second half of the 16th century. The level of social and cultural life increased through the travels of young noblemen abroad for studies and the expansion of their political and cultural horizons. The aristocratic landowner therefore demanded more and permanently flowing cash from his subjects. However, the overall productivity of the combined agricultural-pastoral production did not fundamentally change, it did not increase with the growing demands of the nobility.
   Many townspeople (craftsmen, merchants, etc.) in Valašské Meziříčí (called Meziříčí pod Rožnovem) maintained auxiliary agriculture so that their dependence on the city market did not become fundamental. The policy of the nobility was to be financially successful as well by multiplying monetary income without necessary investments in a simple administrative way, the overall revenue of the estate would be increased. Relations between the nobility and the people on the Vsetín estate, as an estate long considered the poorest, were especially tense.

### Deepening the Conflicts Between Landlords and the Peasant People

   The economic and social status of the people before the Battle of White Mountain steadily deteriorated. From the second half of the 16th century, preserved sources attest to significant struggles between the landlords and the peasants. Especially in periods of drought, the people lived between poverty and hunger. The landowners viewed their estates from a purely economic standpoint of Renaissance nobleman-entrepreneurs. They sought to rapidly increase the profitability of their mountain estates. It was their primary financial interest. The peasants rightfully defended themselves. The religious differentiation, which gained increased significance in these relations, served as a certain support for them. The elimination of religious conflicts, the gathering of all non-Catholic peasants in one Catholic fold, should have positively influenced the peasantry in favor of imperial and papal policies and prevented possible manifestations of discontent and "rebellions".
   The economic-religious oppression of Catholic landlords already created tense relations and manifestations of "rebellion" before 1620. Zdeněk Kavka in Brumov tried to extract the maximum from his subjects and forced them to "agree" to increased landlord demands, but the subjects defended themselves in vain in the provincial court, where representatives of the landlords sat. Kavka provoked disputes over the non-Catholic church, prohibited non-Catholic services, and organized Jesuit missions. On the Vizovic estate, he had a manor mill built, and three mills in Vizovic "came to their ruin". He did not allow his subjects to keep bees and punished "beekeepers" until they sold their beehives. He prohibited the grazing of goats, the extraction of timber from large forests for sale, the going into the forests for oak bark, necessary for the production of tanning agents. He forced clothmakers with imprisonment to participate in the manor hunts. His approach to his subjects was outrageous. In 1582, Zdeněk Kavka was treacherously shot dead at Zádveřice. The murder of this hated landlord caused general unrest among the people and gave rise to further incentives for struggle.
   Later owner of Vizovic, Emerich Dóczi, an immigrant from Hungary, of a fierce, violent, and cruel nature, extorted money from his subjects, increased their obligations, and burdened them with all kinds of feudal oppression and exploitation similar to Kavka. He maximized his income from the estate even at the cost of unlawful behavior and obvious injustices. Perhaps a unique outburst of popular anger erupted during the revolt of the subjects in the village of Jasenná, when the subjects ambushed Dóczi, who was out hunting, and... "... drove Dóczi with clubs, obuchs (Wallachian clubs) as far as the town of Vizovic, tore his clothes off him, and slashed him..."
   They also killed the manor bailiff, injured the bailiff, and broke into the manor prison, from where they released the prisoners.
   The Vsetín and Lukov estates were taken over with the help of legal practices and Jesuits by Albrecht of Wallenstein, and the demands of the frivolous Jan Adam of Vickov were rejected by the court. Both Wallenstein and Kavka were new Catholics. Both were from Bohemia and both did not understand the people in Wallachia. Wallenstein entrusted the spiritual administration of the estates to the Olomouc Jesuits and put an end to religious freedom. He also increased the demands for monetary rent and transformed the feudal obligations of his subjects into monetary payments. The subjects complained, and Karel the Elder of Žerotín warned Wallenstein in 1613 against his intention to enforce obedience by force: "... it does not belong to anyone other than the king or the provincial governor in his place (in the province) to proceed militarily against disobedient (subjects)..."
   Before Žerotín's warning decision, Wallenstein backed down from the resistance of his subjects and freed Vsetín in 1613 to an unprecedented extent from the usual feudal obligations for a monetary annual rent.
   Only in the case of the non-Catholic Žerotín family in Valašské Meziříčí do reports not speak of struggles between the subjects and the nobility before the Battle of White Mountain.
   The geographical term "Wallachia" as a geographical region is probably not known in the pre-White Mountain period, we have not yet found it in documents. In reality, this term could refer to the higher regions of the Carpathian part of Moravia with the Wallachian shepherds. We believe that even though the concentration of the peasant people and the growth of social consciousness had not yet progressed, this process may have already begun to develop.
   
### The Thirty Years' War

   The anti-Habsburg defenestration (throwing of the governors from the windows of Prague Castle) and the tighter organization of the anti-imperial and imperial camps manifested themselves in Moravia with a delay. The Moravian Catholic camp was represented by the bishop of Olomouc and Cardinal František of Ditrichštejn (1570-1636), a Spaniard by his mother, who was brought up in a Jesuit, reactionary environment abroad. As the "king of Kroměříž", he ruled over enormous episcopal and private estates, among which Mikulov in southern Moravia was particularly well known. Even before the Battle of White Mountain, the Cardinal strived for the recatholicization of his subjects, although not the principle of "whose land, his religion" was valid in Moravia, but the principle of religious freedom and tolerance. Until his death, the Cardinal unsuccessfully fought against the rebellious movement of the eastern Moravian people. The Moravian Catholic camp made up only a minority of the population, but decided with the support of international reaction, mainly with the help of Spanish power, to wrest power from the hands of the non-Catholic majority under favorable international circumstances.
   The non-Catholic camp (Evangelicals and Czech Brethren) generally opposed the reactionary, feudal-Catholic absolutism of the Spanish persuasion, but was not imbued with the desired militancy. Its leading and influential representative, Karel the Elder of Žerotín (1564-1636), lord of Přerov and other estates, was not a man of action. His tendency to compromise on essential matters and to unhealthy pacifism caused the Moravian non-Catholics to be pushed out of government positions even before the Battle of White Mountain, and the reactionary elements gained the upper hand in the country. Many Catholic priests realized that: "... Hussitism is too deeply rooted in the minds of the people" (around 1590).
   Due to the overly cautious Žerotín, the Moravian non-Catholic side did not support the rebellion of the Estates in Bohemia in time during the ensuing struggles between the feudal lords. The Moravian rural people instinctively appreciated these struggles as battles within the feudal ruling class, and the feudal lords of both directions did nothing to gain the support of the people with concessions for their political and thus military plans. This nobility organized relatively weak military forces in Moravia under the leadership of the rebellious provincial governor Ladislav Velena of Žerotín (1579-1638), a relative of Karel the Elder of Žerotín, the leader of the anti-imperial Estates since the coup in Brno at the beginning of May 1619.
   The Brno coup significantly loosened the feudal order in the country. It is very likely that the Wallachian peasants also freed themselves from some of their subject obligations and perhaps completely refused to fulfill their feudal obligations on the estates of Catholic lords in Wallachia.
   Catholic landlords flee from Wallachia before the wrath of the people. Ditrichštejn and Karel of Žerotín are interned, the Jesuits are expelled from the country, and in the autumn of 1619, Gabriel Bethlen's Transylvanian army, an ally of the anti-Habsburg Estates, stands in Pováží. In January 1620, Frederick of the Palatinate ("Winter King") arrived in Moravia to receive homage (a pledge of loyalty and obedience) from the Moravian Estates.
   Wallenstein, as an imperial colonel, was punished for treason against the Estates by the confiscation of Vsetín and Lukov and was forever banished from the country. Jan Adam of Vickov (1588-1628), called Lord Čejkovský after the southern Moravian estate of Čejče, took over his estates. He also gave weapons to his subjects in June 1620, which had originally been collected at Lukov by Wallenstein: one cannon on wheels, 136 muskets, 6 drums, 840 iron balls. This is the first official report that the Wallachian peasants were armed. Only the situation on the Meziříčí estate remains somewhat politically unclear due to the fickle and volatile politics of Jetřich of Žerotín, who alternately leaned towards the imperial and anti-imperial camps.
   The anti-imperial nobility in Moravia, with their patents (public letters), turned to the landlords and cities, urging them to take a unified anti-imperial course. Thus, the rulers turned again to the rulers and no longer cared about the opinions of the people, as was the established custom under feudalism.
   In the first days of February 1620, Polish Catholic Cossacks "Lisovčíci", known for their exceptionally rapid movements and unusual aggressiveness, rushed through the outskirts of Wallachia, hurrying to the aid of the Emperor in Vienna, threatened by the rebellious army. They caused considerable fear and damage in Moravia. They were sent by the Emperor's brother-in-law, the Polish king. On September 18, 1620, the raid and violent death of Jan the Elder of Vrbno, known as a devout and zealous Catholic, alarmed Wallachia. The widow of the deceased stated that her husband was killed "by robbers and bandits".
   The participation of Wallachian forces in the Battle of White Mountain is not documented by known sources, it is likely that these forces did not reach the White Mountain battlefield. The two-hour Battle of White Mountain on Sunday, November 8, 1620, at noon, the surrender of Prague, the flight of the king, and the small-mindedness of the leaders of the rebellious non-Catholic nobility marked a fateful turning point and a major milestone in the history of the Czech nation and a longer, very difficult continuation of struggles with the Habsburgs. Therefore, the idea of the White Mountain plain was rightly associated with the idea of unspeakable misfortune that cruelly affected not only the defeated nobility, but also the cities and especially the broad masses of people in the countryside.
   At White Mountain, "the Czechs succumbed mainly because the masses of common people were already subdued by slavery". So, František Palacký correctly assumed, essentially.
   The social base of the noble rebellion gradually narrowed instead of expanding to all social classes with an anti-Habsburg orientation. The main culprit for the tragic end of the "Czech rebellion" was the nobility, which jeopardized the very existence of the Czech nation with the White Mountain tragedy. Leading figures of the Estates rebellion fled, others, in small-mindedness, bowed and tried to obtain mercy from the imperial court with pleas and negotiations. All the weight of the subsequent many years of burdens with accommodation, feeding the army, destruction, and the fighting that every war brings, rested primarily and almost solely on the cities and the rural people, whom the rebellious nobility disdainfully despised. The main thing was not yet lost if the non-Catholic nobility had decided to continue their resistance instead of surrendering to the Emperor. With the help of foreign allies, their further resistance could have been promising. The fall of Prague and the flight of the "Winter" King led to small-mindedness and the collapse of the leading anti-Habsburg side.

## III. The First Uprising

   The tragic outcome of the Battle of White Mountain became a significant turning point in the history of the mountain people in eastern Moravia.
   After some hesitation and waiting, the victorious general Buquoy's troops began to occupy Bohemia and penetrate into Moravia to secure its southeastern part from Bethlen's army and especially the estates of Wallenstein and Cardinal Dietrichstein. The advance of the imperial mercenaries, recruited perhaps throughout Western Europe, was accompanied by all sorts of atrocities. Their advance and the spreading news raised serious fears of the victors' revenge.
   It is impossible to determine the exact date when the people of Wallachia rose up. According to one report, it was already in December 1620. A powerful popular resistance movement spread particularly in January 1621. The return of the landowners and their authorities to their estates could have been a trigger. The first spontaneous armed clashes took place between the people and the imperial mercenaries, who were probably sent to the estates of large feudal lords who remained loyal to the emperor (e.g., Dietrichstein, Wallenstein, Kavka, Dóczi, and others).
   Of the two aforementioned political sides, the vast majority of the Wallachian people sided with the radical anti-Habsburg side, rejecting the conciliatory policy of Karel st. of Žerotín. Bethlen's army was already in Pováží.
   Ondřej Sivý (1594-1664?), a scribe, citizen, and rifleman from Meziříčí, inclined towards the nobility, noted in his chronicle about the actions of the imperial mercenaries after the Battle of White Mountain:
   "They plundered the cities and beat the people. Then, coming to Moravia for the winter, they did the same there... People with children fleeing their cruelty in the mountains, many children froze to death around Holešov, Bystřice (under Hostýn) and elsewhere around Brno."
   He describes the common behavior of undisciplined, looting, and violent soldiers. Important reports are about the fights of the Wallachian rebels, for whom O. Sivý, as a townsman, had no sympathy. They are of significant importance:
   "December 2 (1620) The Wallachians went to (Wallenstein's castle) Lukov and killed many (imperial) soldiers.
   In the year of the Lord 1621, January 5 - The Wallachians from Vsetín invaded Malenovice. They killed soldiers. January 8, they invaded Vizovice again, taking much silver and money. On January 12, they invaded Zlín and Lukov again. They took a lot everywhere. Then they went wherever they could, beating and murdering imperial soldiers. In Meziříčí, they gave orders, they had the keys to the city (city gates). Then even the people of Rožnov went with them. They had their own captains, some Galda, Macháč, the reeve of Hovězí. Captains from Meziříčí region: the reeve of the village of Viča (Vidče), Vanduch, the reeve of Lhota. They mostly went to the bishop's estates, looting and taking whatever they found. They did strange things for several years. No one dared to say anything to them, he would immediately be in danger of his life. They were so evil. They killed a man for a word, and also murdered many people, even innocent ones." Sivý clearly speaks of imperial soldier-mercenaries, of the people's battles with them. He factually writes about the outbreak of popular resistance. However, the wealthy townsman is not inclined towards the Wallachians in his writings. The Wallachian people, for the first time in their rich history, began to intervene in the fate of eastern Moravia with their own forces and defend it from the forces of the victors of White Mountain in both offensive and defensive battles. They also looted, as was the custom of war at the time. They could not be an exception given their poverty.
   The growing popular movement, undoubtedly fueled by the anti-Habsburg nobility, was also joined by Slovak Wallachians and peasants, mainly from the large Rákóczi estate in neighboring Pováží. Thus, on the strategic land bridge from Moravia to Hungary (Slovakia), a strong connecting link in the anti-Habsburg fighting unity began to be created for the first time, very important for future events of international significance.
   Jetřich of Žerotín (?- after 1637), the lord of Meziříčí, after the Battle of White Mountain, quickly and timely defected to the imperial side. As a direct witness, he wrote to Cardinal Dietrichstein, the new imperial plenipotentiary administrator of Moravia:
   "... I do not hide the fact that the Wallachians from the Vsetín estate, joining many others, have in recent times invaded Malenovice, Lukov and Vizovice, where they shamefully beat the imperial people of our most gracious lord and caused great damage. I have written to the Wallachians concerned, asking them to desist from their undertaking. To which writing I cannot get any answer from them so far, but they are gathering more and more, adding Wallachian subjects from other estates to themselves, as well as my Wallachian subjects joined them and declared in resolute that they want to defend themselves to the death and do not want to pay any attention to my admonitions and orders, that I myself am not sure of my life... Of which Wallachians there are already 5,000 together and day by day more Wallachians and Slovaks are joining them..." (February 8, 1621).
   The uprising spread. The rebels from Vsetín also attracted the Wallachian peasants of Meziříčí, Brumov, Lukov, Zlín, Vizovice, and others. It came to general uprisings of the people. The anti-Habsburg and anti-feudal movement, limited to Catholic landowners, was taking on a general character. The rebels were beating imperial soldiers, ruthless mercenaries-adventurers. Even the cavalry units of Bethlen's forces from Pováží penetrated into eastern Moravia through the Wallachian region in order to destroy the imperial penetrating forces in joint battles with the rebels.
   However, the rural rebels did not yet have support in any fortified city. Their attack on Meziříčí in March 1621 was already a larger military operation by rural people who had no war experience yet. However, the source reports are not without contradictions on this point. What is certain is that the rebels took control of the city of Jetřich of Žerotín.
   "The Wallachians rose up and said that they would not let the (imperial) army into Meziříčí, so the people of Meziříčí fled the city..." wrote Mikuláš Drabik, a friend of Comenius, a restless priest. At the beginning of March, before the onslaught of the imperials, they probably had to retreat to the mountains for a while.
   On March 8, 1621, the imperial general Dampierre occupied the city with 2,000 mercenaries; they arrived with a large number of camp followers and women, as was the usual accompaniment of mercenary forces. The leadership of the rebels, of unknown composition, perhaps in cooperation with some returning emigrants, decided that the city should be captured. The rebels, united with the Slovak forces, first camped near the village of Veselá, then moved to the Štěpánov hill. They divided their forces into two parts with the aim of capturing the castle, penetrating through it into the city and conquering the Rožnov gate, so that the enemy's defensive forces would be divided. They set fire to the barns on the outskirts of the city. While the attackers were destroying the gate and other entrances to the castle, the imperial commander of the city, with the help of the cavalry, used a similar maneuver. Cavalry rode out of the Krásenská gate, divided into two offensive streams, and attacked the attacking rebels from their uncovered rear. Musketeers then fired on the attacking rebels from the simple city walls.
   "And when the Wallachians saw that the cavalry was surrounding them on both sides, they began to flee. When they reached the field, the cavalry (those) who had not fled closed them in (surrounded them), whereupon, being closed in, they defended themselves from both sides. The shooting was such that they could not be seen for the smoke. And so the Wallachians, being defeated there, those who could, fled to the village of Křivý and to the barns and wherever they could hide. Here the cavalry surrounded the whole village again and sent for musketeers (infantry) and trumpeters. The musketeers immediately arrived and set fire to the barns in Křivý, so that whoever did not want to come out had to burn, and whoever ran out was killed. Thus, more than 300 of them were murdered on the field in Štěpánov, for they lay in the field like sheaves..."
   This is how an unknown scribe from Meziříčí, not entirely sympathetic to the rebels, recorded in his memoirs.
   Other actions of the rebels were more successful. Prince Jan Jiří Krnovský, fighting against the emperor, bloodily destroyed the Spanish garrison in nearby Nový Jičín. Wallenstein expected a general uprising of the people in Moravia, claiming that he did not have enough troops to occupy the passes on the Moravian-Hungarian (Slovak) border to defend against Bethlen. With powerful actions, the rebels also captured the cities of eastern Moravia, Hranice, attacked Lipník, captured officials loyal to the emperor and Catholic priests, blocked the way for the Neapolitan infantry guarding the road through the Jablunkov Pass, and plundered the castle of Brumov belonging to the hated Kavka. The Neapolitans and Spaniards barely managed to escape their onslaught from Meziříčí. The danger to the imperials in eastern Moravia grew to such an extent that Dietrichstein requested that the papal infantry of the Aldobrandini regiment not be sent to defend Hungary, but left to defend Moravia.
   In a narrow gorge of the Morava River near Napajedla, the rebels crossed to the western bank of the Morava, their groups already appeared in the Chřiby Mountains with the support of the subjects of the Velehrad monastery, which itself carried out Wallachian colonization in the mountainous parts of its estate. The Wallachians joined forces here.
   Calls from both camps echoed into the fighting. Ferdinand II in vain warned the inhabitants of Moravia against the calls of Jan Jiří Krnovský, who asked the population to remain in anti-Habsburg resistance and not obey the emperor. Ladislav Velen of Žerotín responded to the imperial patents with his own patents, urging steadfastness, perseverance, and loyalty to Frederick (the Winter King) and promising the speedy liberation of the country.
   Jan Adam of Víckov directed the actions of the rebels in accordance with the plans of the emigration. Under the leadership of the lord of Víckov (the lord of Čejkovice), Holešov, the property of the Catholic lord and zealous servant of the emperor and the church, Zdeněk Popel of Lobkovic, fell on September 22, Hranice on October 12, and the imperial garrison at Helfštýn Castle surrendered. Even the city of Lipník opened its gates on October 18. The rebels controlled the area of eastern Moravia. However, their military forces were not sufficient to capture the Uherské Hradiště fortress, even with the help of the betrayal of the imperial officer Jan Blekta of Outěchovice, who was executed as punishment. An attempt to capture Olomouc on November 12 was repelled by the garrison.
   Perhaps never during the Thirty Years' War did the rebels have more realistic hopes for the success of their anti-Habsburg actions than in 1621, with the exception of 1623. However, the end of the promising year brought an unexpected, almost tragic end. The Transylvanian prince Bethlen, as an ally of the anti-Habsburg nobility, ended hostilities and reconciled with the emperor on January 6, 1622. The successes achieved so far on the anti-Habsburg front were lost in a short time, and the anti-Habsburg front collapsed.
   The year 1622 and the following years. - In 1622, instead of large-scale operations, a small, cruel war broke out. The landowners, driven out by the people, returned to their estates and restored the feudal order with the obligations of the subjects. The treacherous Jetřich of Žerotín in Meziříčí and his followers roamed the Wallachian mountains and in the summer, probably by betrayal, captured 32 leading rebels, "rioters", of unknown names and origins, most of whom perished by hanging on a large lime tree in front of the Olomouc city gates, only two were pardoned. On April 12, 1623, the captured "Wallachian captain" was quartered by the executioner, and 12 other Wallachians perished with him by hanging.
   The captured Vsetín group was imprisoned by the Vsetín clerk Petr Čišvic. They included Václav Galda, the magistrate in Meziříčí, Martin Macháček, of unknown origin, and Matyáš, the reeve from the village of Hovězí. They were accused that: "... they opposed their authorities with other enemies and rebels of H[is] M[ajesty] the E[mperor] and helped to plunder and destroy our dear homeland..."
   The final verdict of the Olomouc court of November 10, 1622, read: "Galda and Macháček, although they deserved the stake (roasting alive) and the wheel (breaking on the wheel), are to be hanged with a rope..." So they were undoubtedly hanged in Vsetín.
   After the lost battle in eastern Moravia, the noble emigration left the country. The first mass executions - especially of the leaders of the uprising, village elders, especially the reeves - were supposed to intimidate the people and break their anti-Habsburg resistance and any intentions of joining forces with the emperor's foreign opponents in the future and rebelling against the authorities. Even feudal law evaluates their offenses as an anti-Habsburg struggle and not as the actions of robbers or ordinary bandits.
   The year 1623. - The petty war and unrest in Wallachia also changed the structure of the population, which had been settled for centuries. At the beginning of 1623, when the international situation did not allow for the development of a wider uprising, smaller radical groups of well-organized "freemen" emerged. Perhaps for the first time they are recorded in the sources in 1622. However, they did not form isolated groups, they also received wider support from those who disagreed with the post-White Mountain regime.
   The cardinal warned against them on January 14, 1623: in the Brumov, Vizovice, Vsetín, Meziříčí, and other unspecified estates "lying in that upper region..."
   "... some godless, disobedient, and rebellious freemen and perhaps even settled subjects dare to incite and gather others, and day by day they attack and try to attack their other faithful and peaceful neighbors... from such a small spark a great fire can ignite..."
   He forbade any contact with the freemen in order to completely isolate them from the rest of the population and ordered them to be lured into a trap, captured, and tied up and delivered to the nearest imperial city, Olomouc or Uherské Hradiště. The cardinal's order could hardly have had any real effect. At the end of January, the freemen raided Fryšták, looted the spoils, and set fire to the buildings of officials loyal to the emperor.
   Even the aforementioned executions could not suppress the new popular movement with the arrival of spring.
   Who were the "freemen" and what is their place in the social structure of the Wallachian people? They could only have arisen temporarily under the conditions of Wallachia in direct contradiction to feudal law, and it is necessary to fundamentally distinguish them from the privileged concept of a freeman as established in feudal society as the owner of a smaller estate. Wallachian freemen, a temporary social class in the period of loosening of the feudal order during the war unrest, are essentially former subjects who broke free from obedience, refused to fulfill their obligations, and became in reality, not legally, "free", living on their own without lords and oppression. There was no power that could bring them to traditional obedience and loyalty to the authorities. Freemen are therefore a popular movement for social, property, and personal freedom, for the clear violation of the existing, but loosened feudal order, and therefore in the eyes of the ruling class they appear as a dangerous attempt to threaten it in its very essence. They fundamentally refused to take note of the function of the feudal order and disregarded the principles of private property of the emperor's allies. It should be explicitly stated that one of the important functions of the feudal state consisted precisely in ensuring the exploitation of the rural population by the small class of landowners. Care for the people was completely alien to the feudal lords of the 17th century. The ruling party in Moravia deliberately equated the struggles of these freemen with ordinary robbers and bandits. To Dietrichstein, they were the personification of all evil. Chroniclers record their anti-feudal acts, but do not evaluate them.
   When the people of Kudlov from the Zlín estate refused to fulfill their obligations to the authorities, their administrator wrote about them that: "...they got used to freedom and liberty and wanted to live as freemen". The freemen from Nový Jičín boasted that they had no master over them.
   From the summer, especially from the beginning of September 1623, the country's attention turned to the new military campaign of Gábor Bethlen, who, due to a lack of heavy weapons, did not dare to attack the more important imperial fortresses in Moravia. The unrealistic hopes of the emigration saw his army already standing before Prague. The military situation allowed the Wallachian people and the emigration to act with greater freedom. According to rather fragmentary reports, the cities of Hranice, Nový Jičín, and Valašské Meziříčí opened their gates to the already known opponent of the emperor, Prince Krnovský.
   It was not possible to suppress the storm of the subjects. Jan Kavka in Brumov and General Albrecht of Wallenstein therefore decided to sell their Wallachian estates, because due to the resistance of their subjects, they had not brought any profit for years. Especially the people of Vsetín put up all sorts of resistance to Wallenstein. Wallenstein got rid of the mountain estate with the rebellious people. However, the subjects opposed the new lord, Zdeněk Žampach of Potštejn and na Hodoníně, who owned Vsetín in the years 1623-1634, with the same militancy. Žampach's actions soon provoked unrest. There was no hope of their lasting suppression.
   On the edge of Wallachia, the imperial court concentrated Polish cavalry forces under the command of Stanisław Koniecpolski. Due to insurmountable difficulties with supplies and accommodation in the plundered region, part of the army was sent deeper into Wallachia. The rebels attacked these militarily unsecured units and inflicted losses on them, later the Poles camped between Holešov and Přerov, and there were plenty of opportunities for mutual fighting. The cardinal asked in vain for several companies of musketeers and dragoon squadrons to bring the rebels to obedience. But even in other parts of Moravia, the rural population rebelled in a similar way to the Wallachians.
   The actions of the lord of Víckov, to obtain financial resources for Bethlen through diplomatic channels from the Dutch estates, despite a very friendly reception, were unsuccessful. And Bethlen, lacking sufficient support for his troops, was forced to conclude a definitive peace with the emperor in May 1624. In its conditions and provisions, there was no longer any mention of the return of confiscated estates to emigrants, nor of religious freedom.
   The hands of the imperials were freed, especially in eastern Moravia, when the anti-Habsburg front collapsed again. Forced Counter-Reformation was launched again, combined with economic and social oppression and severe hardships brought about by the war and especially by the rampage of hungry and undisciplined soldiers, which caused "great suffering to the people and curses..."
   Hranice dared to submit a request to the cardinal, who was leading the entire Counter-Reformation campaign, to grant religious freedom. However, their religious obstinacy was reproached, and stricter orders were issued in this matter.
   The Wallachian villages were hardly touched by the orders and decrees of the all-powerful governor. The people of Vsetín rebelled almost permanently against Žampach, who asked the cardinal to punish them. Of course, the cardinal recognized the need to punish the disobedient, unyielding, and defiant people. He expressed his opinion in a letter dated January 6, 1625:
   "... We are not a little surprised that the people of Vsetín do not want to at least once alleviate their evil intentions and submit to the proper obedience to Y[our] G[race]. Therefore, we consider it best to use an armed hand and military force against them..."
   Due to the bad situation of the imperials, it had to remain only with words. The people of Vsetín did not lay down their arms and did not reconcile with the new authority. They were just waiting for a suitable domestic and, more likely, international opportunity for open combat. The plundering and extortionate intentions of Mr. Žampach caused serious unrest in Vsetín.
   Dietrichstein turned his attention to the activities of non-Catholic priests and began to more systematically force subjects, by his orders and patents, to conform to their lord in religion, so that one of the serious disagreements between lords and subjects in the countryside would disappear. As soon as the landowners began to restore their feudal rights during the period of partial calm, he took advantage of these violent efforts. On November 30, 1624, the cardinal issued a patent ordering, "to settle the disagreements of human minds and the uprisings against the authorities that usually result from them", that non-Catholic priests immediately cease their activities and leave Moravia within two weeks under penalty of death. Dietrichstein blamed them too one-sidedly for the popular anti-Habsburg storms in Wallachia: "... through such evil and misled people, the previous heinous rebellion was suppressed..."
   The non-Catholic rebels were not at all afraid of the implementation of this patent. In Vsetín, Vizovice, Lukov, Zlín 1 and other estates and properties, the people stood up for their preachers, and the general visitations with the control of religious and church conditions in Vsetín and Liptál could only be carried out in 1625 with military assistance, 4 years after the Battle of White Mountain. The people fed and hid preachers in mountain and foothill estates, regardless of Dietrichstein's patents.

## IV. The Second Uprising

   In December 1625, the long-prepared anti-Habsburg coalition with the economically advanced states of Europe was finally agreed upon. Western European allies were making ambitious operational plans and gained a new ally in the Danish king Christian IV. The Habsburg Empire was to be crushed by the pressure from the north by Danish forces and from the southeast by Bethlen's army. The Danish troops occupied the northern parts of Moravia and were to join forces with Bethlen's troops. In non-Catholic Wallachia, they were welcomed as liberators of the country from oppression of all kinds, especially from the hated imperial contributions. Catholic priests and allies of the Habsburgs fled to safer places.
   Comenius also secretly stayed in southeastern Moravia at the beginning of the summer of 1626 in order to be able to improve the model of his excellent map of Moravia with more precise geographical data, which he dedicated in 1627 to the leader of the rebellious Moravian estates, Ladislav Velen of Žerotín.
   The Danes hurried after Bethlen. However, his position was not easy, even though he became related to Frederick of the Palatinate by marriage. It was not until the end of August 1626 that he set out from distant Transylvania. The new period made the supply situation of his army easier. Financial and military aid from the West was not coming, he was also waiting for the consent of the Ottoman Porte in Constantinople and for the arrival of the dreaded Turkish and Tatar auxiliary troops in Moravia. That's why he was heading for southern Slovakia. The Danish corps also marched there when they did not find the Transylvanian army in Moravia, as agreed.
   Wallenstein, once lord of Vsetín and Lukov, organized the imperial army in Germany and pursued the Danes by rapid marches along the route they themselves were hurrying along to join Bethlen.
   Both campaigns caused upheavals in Wallachia. Jan Adam of Víckov, who was active as a diplomat in anti-Habsburg services and as an envoy of Frederick of the Palatinate (the Winter King), prepared the people for the new situation. He was also among the leading officers of the Danish corps commanded by General Mansfeld.
   Dietrichstein, in his capacity as plenipotentiary governor of Moravia, was seriously concerned by this, and informed the emperor of the dangerous situation in eastern Moravia, that the Wallachians from Vsetín and Bystřice pod Hostýnem (owned by the returning emigrant Václav Bítovský of Bítov) had some "associations" with the rebellious Hungarians from the camp of Bethlen. He pointed out the need to militarily secure the crossings from Pováží to Vsetín (through the Lyská Pass) and to Těšín (through the Jablunkov Pass).
   In this situation in Wallachia, pre-White Mountain conditions were being restored. The rural and urban population breathed more freely. The cities of eastern Moravia surrendered. Even Bítovský appeared in Meziříčí to negotiate with the "Slovaks". It is possible that here, as in the nearby Hranice estate, neighbors from many towns and villages were collecting money to support the Danish army. The Wallachians in the mountains were on the move.
   The arrival of Wallenstein at the beginning of September 1626 meant a new upheaval. His soldiers everywhere drove out the returning non-Catholic clergy from the parishes. They were also expelled from the parish in Meziříčí. Wallenstein and his army advanced after the Danes to Hungary. In the uncertain situation, the operations of both enemy forces meant the collapse of the original plan to attack Vienna.
   It was not only the Wallachian people who rebelled against the emperor, but also the rural people in Bohemia. Heavy war burdens, contributions, the quartering of soldiers, war unrest and crop failures aroused general discontent, as did the violent Counter-Reformation. Resistance manifested itself almost everywhere, usually until the arrival of military punitive detachments (in Kouřim, Čáslav, Hradec Králové, and Chrudim). In May 1625, a major uprising broke out in Upper Austria.
   At the time of the loosening of imperial power, profound social, military, property, and religious changes of short duration took place in Wallachia. With the Danish army came a detachment of Czech-Moravian emigrants with a strength of about 500 men, who probably took control of Wallachia and the adjacent areas in northeastern Moravia after the departure of the Danish and Wallenstein's armies to Slovakia. In Meziříčí, the emigrant leaders Ladislav Velen of Žerotín and Jan Adam of Víckov and the aforementioned Václav Bítovský of Bítov, later captured by Wallenstein, imprisoned in the Špilberk prison in Brno and executed in Brno in March 1628, resumed their activities. Even the aforementioned treacherous Jetřich of Žerotín in Meziříčí rejoined the anti-Habsburg camp.
   The restoration of the pre-White Mountain state took place very quickly, especially when important cities in eastern Moravia joined the uprising. These were mainly Hranice, Meziříčí, and partly also Lipník with the important castle of Helfštýn on the very edge of Wallachia. Apparently, the fulfillment of the ultimate war goal, the destruction of everything that the Battle of White Mountain brought, was approaching. The imperials did not have enough free forces to cope with the extremely unfavorable situation at its very beginning.
   In Meziříčí, contemporary scribes are very reticent about the revolutionary events. They pass over the manifestations of anti-Habsburg resistance in silence. At the end of September 1626, this city opened its gates to the lord of Víckov, but in the summer months of 1627 the imperial army appeared to conquer the city and punish it for treason against the emperor... The townspeople were not convinced that they had done wrong. They feared fighting for the city, punishment and the soldiers. They decided to repeat their tactics from the critical years of 1605 (raids of the Hungarian Bocskai troops into Moravia) and 1621 in order to avoid a dangerous invasion of the only insufficiently fortified city. They left Meziříčí and left it to its fate, preferring to lose less of their property than their lives and freedom.
   "... they all left the city again from Krásno before the imperial people, not wanting the city to be burned down..." wrote the scribe Ondřej Sivý in his memoirs.
   However, we know from other reports that the significant events in Meziříčí did not take place without heavy fighting or the deliberate destruction of townspeople's houses. It must have come to more serious combat or punitive actions. Otherwise, 56 houses could not have been destroyed. The executions of an unknown number of Wallachians, about whom no more detailed reports have probably been preserved, are also somehow related to the resistance in Meziříčí. The subdued townspeople sent the imperial commander Rudolf Colloredo 500 thalers as a ransom, i.e. a ranc, so that the city would be spared from being burned down, which clearly confirms that they were guilty from the imperial point of view; on top of that, the city had to feed the imperial garrison. Before the end of August of the same year, 1 heavy Croatian cavalry and one banner of infantry arrived in the city and remained there for two months. After them came other imperial military units and behaved as if they were in a conquered city.
   "...Those... what great hardship and inconvenience they caused, it would be a lot to write about. And so for the third time in a short period of years the city was turned to nothing and we lost our property and possessions..." a scribe from Meziříčí of unknown name noted in his memoirs.
   Bethlen's policy, seemingly difficult to understand, deserves a brief explanation. Before the unexpected conclusion of peace with the emperor in December 1626, Bethlen did not receive the promised aid from his western allies. His military strength depended on the support of the Transylvanian cities and Hungarian feudal lords from a small territory in western Hungary, when Hungary was actually held by the conquering Turks. A serious obstacle to his efforts was also the backwardness of arms production in his countries, which was not enough to arm his considerable forces. Therefore, his military power relied on the rapid movements of light cavalry, which, however, could not fully replace the well-armed and trained imperial infantry. His operations were also significantly complicated by the necessary consent of the Ottoman Porte in Constantinople, which influenced his fundamental decisions in the field of foreign policy and warfare.
   Bethlen's treaty with the emperor also meant a heavy blow to further plans of Wallachian resistance, it brought new and severe disappointment, but not defeatism. When Bethlen left the anti-Habsburg coalition, for some time there was even consideration of a plan to transfer the anti-Habsburg armies through Moravia and Bohemia so that they could establish contact with the Upper Austrian rebels. The plan was already unrealizable. Therefore, the Danish military commissioner Joachim Mitzlaf led the remnants of the Danish army through the Jablunkov Pass to northeastern Moravia and Silesia (Opava) and thus partially eased the situation of the rebels.
   As late as mid-January 1627, the Wallachian forces of the lord of Víckov captured Holešov and took the grain and malt stored in the castle to Lukov. The spring months passed in relative peace.
   Even in the spring of 1627, the Danes in northern Moravia and Opava, together with the Czech-Moravian emigrants, waited in vain for the promised arrival of Bethlen. The Danish army was left to its fate until the final conclusion with the fall of Opava to the imperial power in July 1627.
   Reinforced by new fresh units, the imperial army was able to turn its full attention to the rebellious cities in eastern Moravia with the arrival of the summer months. In mid-August, the troops of the imperial general Marradas occupied Holešov, and the retreating Wallachian garrison of 20 men was killed near Přilepy. For two months, Marradas' detachments rode out "to plunder the mountains...".
   Perhaps even Vsetín or part of it was burned down at that time, as the center of the anti-Habsburg rebels, and thus also paid for the actions of the rebels from the villages.
   All in all, the city of Lipník was spared. It was donated by the emperor, together with the estate, to Cardinal Dietrichstein, who established a large land holding in eastern Moravia with the donated Hranice. Lipník did not open its gates even to the pressing rebels. The townspeople cautiously welcomed and entertained the lord of Víckov and his entourage, but did not let the Wallachian armed forces into the city. It was certainly a manifestation of distrust of the uprising and also a possible aspect of their policy towards the events of the following year. That is why Lipník avoided the serious consequences that befell nearby Hranice.
   This city, a confiscation also donated to the cardinal, opened its gates to the rebels on September 28, 1626. In the critical summer of 1627, it waited in vain for the promised arrival of military aid. Even the desperate defense of the city was no longer very successful, and on July 11, 1627, the imperial commander Lorenzo del Maestro, of Italian origin, captured the city. The townspeople, for their betrayal of the emperor and the cardinal's authority, fell body, life and property to the victors. After bloody executions on the square in Hranice, theatrically staged like once on Old Town Square in Prague, on October 17, 1627, 7 leading citizens were beheaded, 4 hanged, many imprisoned and expelled. Inhuman justice brought two boys under the executioner's sword in Hranice. One of them shot the imperial trumpeter who was calling on the besieged city to surrender; the second allegedly advised how Helfštýn Castle could be blown up together with the imperial garrison. Two women were also sentenced for slanderous words against God, the Virgin Mary, the emperor, and the cardinal, one of whom was drowned in a basket. The executions took place in the ordered presence of the peasantry from the cardinal's Hranice estate, as Martin Zikmundek, an eyewitness to these events, noted in detail. The unprecedented and long-remembered bloody spectacle in Hranice undoubtedly filled the people and the rebels with horror, but even medieval cruelty could not shake the people's minds and turn them away from further struggles. However, it also provided powerful incentives to continue the increased resistance, as soon as the changed situation allowed it.
   Cardinal Dietrichstein, after 7 years of vain efforts to destroy the Wallachian rebels, finally celebrated a kind of victory, even though he did not defeat them by military force, nor did he manage to disarm them. However, he called on the representatives of the Wallachian villages to surrender, because the enemies of the emperor and those who fought against him: "were already subdued by a mighty hand and instruments of war and brought to obedience..."
   At the emperor's request, the cardinal called on the Wallachian highlanders to be loyal and obedient and warned them against the futility of further fighting. Breaking the spirit of defiance and resistance in the Wallachian mountains seemed like an impossible task.
   Therefore, the imperial authorities and the cardinal himself chose a different, non-combat path. They preferred to be satisfied with promises of obedience from Wallachian towns and villages. Surely their leaders recognized the temporary failure of the struggle due to the unfavorable international situation. Pressure was certainly also used for Wallachia to quietly abandon further fighting in the less than hopeful conditions of foreign aid.
   After the subjugation of the aforementioned towns of eastern Moravia and Helfštýn Castle, the representatives of the municipalities signed, at the end of October 1627, more or less identical reversions (documents with written commitments) in which they confessed that they had succumbed to the temptations of the emperor's enemies and thus violated their obligated loyalty and obedience, that under the name of Wallachians" they committed hostile acts against God, the emperor and the hereditary authorities, so that they deserve severe punishment on their necks and property. The emperor allegedly magnanimously forgave them these offenses on the condition that they remain loyal and obedient in the future, that they show remorse for themselves and their descendants, that they promise and commit to desisting from further acts against the emperor, their native country, and the hereditary authorities, and further that they will no longer associate with any enemy of the emperor, the country or their authorities, that they will not tolerate rebels, instigators, or freemen among themselves, but will capture them and deliver them to be punished.
   The concrete content of the reversions essentially summarizes a list of the basic anti-Habsburg acts and offenses of the peasant-rebels, who are listed here under the code name: "They fought under the name of Wallachians".
   That is, under the real name of Wallachians, breeders of small Wallachian cattle and shepherds. Not under the real name of Wallachian peasants. This is a matter of fundamental importance.
   For the future, an exceptionally important conclusion of the reversion turned out to be: If they themselves or their descendants violated these commitments:
   "then we renounce the lives, property, wives and children and all mercy and we are to be completely destroyed and ruined by sword and fire without any mercy or sparing..."
   Reversions, as important promises of the Wallachian people, were to be read on the rebellious estates every year during the renewal of village offices. The representatives granted the cardinal a provisional pardon on December 1, 1627, and in a more precise stylization they emphasized pleading humility and submission. They also restored to the Wallachians the freedom to move freely around the country and to practice their trades. The final written act of pardon was to be issued by the cardinal, who, however, probably no longer dealt with this settled matter, considering it to be definitively closed.
   However, the broad strata of the Wallachian people did not acknowledge the content of the reversions, neither for the present nor for future generations. Promises of loyalty and obedience, made through village offices and in official wording, did not correspond to the mindset of the armed mountain people. They were forced by the extremely unfavorable conditions of the international situation in the autumn of 1627. The cardinal's commissioners, sent to the Wallachians, left an exceptionally important question completely unresolved: the disarmament of the people. Surely it would not be easily and without resistance feasible. To keep the weapons from the war years meant for the tough and unyielding highlanders the possibility of rekindling the uprising as soon as the situation was favorable for a new popular uprising with hope for success. The open struggle subsided, but popular anger and resistance against the reactionary forces manifested itself in special, specifically Wallachian forms of struggle against the representatives of feudalism.
   The overall balance of the two years 1626 and 1627 (in reality only 15 months) brought unique successes in eastern Moravia at the beginning of this second uprising. But the lack of international cooperation caused the fundamental failure of the great plans and essentially the catastrophe of the uprising. The rebellious cities were subdued by military force and excluded from further possibilities of anti-Habsburg resistance. On behalf of the rural rebels, representatives of the villages pledged their obedience. The noble emigration, as one of the components of the uprising, associated with foreign aid, never returned to Wallachia as an organized component in the future, it dissolved in the difficult conditions of unsuccessful and hopeless emigrants. Perhaps with the only exception of the secret stay of the former lord of Meziříčí, the aforementioned Jetřich of Žerotín, who, according to some indications, in the following years was looking in vain for a connection with the Wallachian rebels, whom he had betrayed several times.
   It should also be said that in Dietrichstein's imagination, the rebels were only rioters, robbers, the Wallachian rabble, etc. In direct contradiction to the cardinal's belittling and insults is the brief testimony of J. A. Comenius on these important matters:
   "In Moravia, the inhabitants of the Vsetín estate and throughout those mountains (they are called Wallachians) have so far [until 1632, i.e. the year of publication of Comenius's book] defended themselves with weapons that they have neither been brought to apostasy nor been defeated by arms, although several times Germans, Italians, and Polish Cossacks, invading through the narrow gorges in those mountains for their destruction, tried to do so. That's why the Moravian mountains have served as a refuge more than once."
   Comenius's appreciation of the Wallachian struggles reflects a highly positive, almost modern, attitude towards popular struggles in Wallachia. This unique and precious testimony, stemming from knowledge of the international situation and the significance of the rebels, is a friendly but also objective voice, which in its weight overshadows the isolated, dry reports of domestic scribes and the hateful pronouncements of the angry cardinal on the rebels. Comenius's short lines undoubtedly capture more poignant events and stories, about which Comenius could have been informed during his secret stay in Moravia and later draw from the information of the Bohemian Brethren priests from the Wallachian region and from Slovak Pováží.
   We must not be misled by the fact that the cardinal looked at the stubborn and unyielding "rebels" through the hostile eyes of their arch-opponent and enemy and titled them with unflattering expressions. Of course, he only had derogatory terms for the non-Catholic fighting Wallachians, not for the handful of Catholic Wallachians from his estates, especially from Hukvaldy. During the war, they committed similar acts as the anti-imperial rebels. However, both were far surpassed in cruelty and violence of all kinds by the imperial mercenaries and Polish Catholic Cossacks during the war.
  
### They Fought "Under the Name of Wallachians"

   During the first and second uprisings, the Wallachian region significantly differed from the neighboring regions, e.g. from Haná and from Moravian Slovakia. The significance of its distinctiveness, given by geographical conditions, which were significantly reflected in the greater defensive capability of its inhabitants, undeniably grew. The significance of its armed and hitherto undefeated people, who refused to reconcile with the emperor, even though the enemies of the Habsburgs on the edge of the mountainous area laid down their arms or were forced to do so by military force and also punished, played a unique role.
   Joint struggles, victories, suffering, poverty and hunger, and also the joy of spoils in restless war times, blurred the differentiation of the people according to individual estates and individual class components and common interests, and helped to form a new, higher social awareness of popular unity in the past and in the future.
   Under the new conditions of this unification process, a new geographical name for this distinctive region is born, its name begins to penetrate even into European countries: Wallachia. According to current knowledge, we first encounter it in England in 1627. It probably summarizes the unfortunate experiences of foreign mercenaries from their battles with the Wallachian people, i.e. with a name derived from the original name of Wallachians - shepherds and breeders of Wallachian cattle in the Carpathians. Comenius perhaps does not yet know the term Wallachia, nor does he indicate it on his map. However, he knows the inhabitants, the Wallachians, well as a brave people, invincible in their mountains, and not a limited economic term for a small group of mountain shepherds.
   It is undeniable that the mass of Wallachian rebels could not have been made up only of the aforementioned simple shepherds - Wallachians, but of the peasant people from mountain and foothill villages, often led by their reeves. Peasants and servants formed the main supporting force of long-term uprisings, as evidenced by the important historical document "Registers of Wallachians", created after the defeat of the rebels in 1644. However, it is very likely that during the war, even small groups of real Wallachians - shepherds - showed their fighting and looting spirit, but contemporary sources essentially do not distinguish them from the village people of Wallachians - rebels.

### Wallachian Freemen

   A contemporary source characterization of this specific Moravian social component has not been preserved. This layer, however, must be fundamentally distinguished from the feudal social and legal concept of a freeman, as a designation of a free person in feudal society (e.g. a miller, the owner of a small farm, etc.). Thus, the word "freeman" had two meanings in Moravia, an official, legal one, and a special one in Wallachia, only for this region.
   A more precise characterization of this special component presents certain difficulties for historical research. However, we believe that it is necessary to identify as freemen those subjects who, during the period of loosening of the feudal order during the war, broke free from subservient obedience and loyalty, from the rights of the feudal lord and his authority, and wanted to live on their own, without lords, without exploitation, as free people. This term, however, is documented from an earlier period, from the mid-16th century, when the term "freemen" refers to people who cut down trees in the forest without the permission of the authorities. František Hrubý saw in the freemen only free Wallachians - shepherds who were not subject to anyone, who in the worsened conditions of difficult-to-control areas gained personal freedom. Freedom, however, not guaranteed by feudal law, i.e. freedom acquired by essentially illegal acts.
   The example of the inhabitants of the village of Kudlov in the Zlín region is instructive, about whom their administrator complains to Dietrichstein that:
   "...these people [from Kudlov] from the beginning of the rebellion [1620] want to enjoy their freedom and for ten years they cannot be brought to any serfdom or obedience, but they want to remain free like other freemen and rioters..." (End of December 1629.)
   Other freemen from Nový Jičín boasted in writing that they had no master over them.
   The terms "freeman" and "robber" are close, but not identical. Sources attribute to robbers acts of predominantly looting nature during wartime. However, as soon as the power of the authorities consolidated during the period of calm, reports of freemen gradually disappear. In such periods, larger groups of "fellowships" of robbers emerge. During uprisings, they also retreat and merge with the general popular uprising. The ruling class, relying on power and its class law, considered freemen, just like robbers and rebels, to be rioters, robbers, and rabble, and also dealt with them without apparent differences according to their law.
   The influence of a small group of emigrants in popular uprisings until 1627 cannot be historically denied. It had an overview of the development and prospects of the international situation and tried to coordinate the rebel actions with military actions of an international nature (Prince Krnovský, Bethlen, and later the Swedes) and, of course, to use the combat results for its own class interests and goals: primarily obtaining confiscated estates and restoring the estate state. This would actually mean the restoration of the seriously disturbed validity of the feudal order in Wallachia and the restoration of the feudal obligations of the people. The rebels remained armed and ready in their mountains, while the emigrants fled abroad as soon as the international situation turned unfavorable for them.
   In the anti-Habsburg relations of the Wallachian people after 1627, in the period after the reversions, we do not find any substantial changes, only the forms of struggle changed.
 
## V. Difficult Years from 1628 to Mid-June 1642

   The old discontent continued to simmer beneath the seemingly calm surface of people's lives. According to the opinion of the imperial court and the ruler of Moravia, Dietrichstein, the ideological unity between the ruling class and the exploited class of subjects should be fundamentally restored by the re-Catholicization of the country and the restoration of the original religious unity. By accepting the Catholic faith, the defiant forces of Wallachian society were to be gradually and permanently suppressed, and the new orientation of the people towards the imperial, Catholic-Church, and lordly program was to reorient the people towards devotion to the ruling Catholic class.
   The one-sided solution of the religious question in favor of the Catholic confession was supposed to allow for one state religion and with only one Catholic church. Dietrichstein was the leading and passionate representative of this reactionary idea in Moravia. The Counter-Reformation patent of Emperor Ferdinand II of March 23, 1628, was supposed to force the subjects to renounce the non-Catholic faith. They were not allowed to emigrate like the nobility or townspeople, because they represented a precious and exceptionally needed workforce for every authority, which not only did not have to be paid, but on the contrary, which also fed their oppressors.
   The patent also sharply turned against non-Catholic priests (preachers, ministers) and attributed to them greater importance than they actually had: "...so that he [Dietrichstein] would not only drive out all the preachers who incite, from whom all this evil [rebellion] comes and who were the greatest originators of this heinous, highly harmful rebellion", from the country. Due to the lack of domestic Catholic priests in the non-Catholic country, clergy from Poland were to help in the spiritual administration. Jesuit missionaries also embarked on this less than successful work.
   Nobles and townspeople who did not want to convert could sell their estates and houses under rather unfavorable conditions and emigrate. Many townspeople left Meziříčí for Lednice and Púchov in Slovakia, and there the emigrant clothiers also founded a clothier's guild and a Moravian community in Púchov. These emigrants also lived in Trenčín, Skalica, and many other Slovak towns, waiting for a turnaround in political and military matters and mainly for their return to their homeland.
   In Wallachia, it was not safe from robbers, as evidenced by the example from the Zlín region: "...in this corner between the Wallachians near the mountains and from the robbers in frequent invasions from Hungary, it lies dangerously nearby..." [December 28, 1629] The estate could not be sold for a long time.
   The re-Catholicization process was taking place in Vizovice. After several years of their work, Jesuit missionaries found that the people were harsh and corrupted by "Calvinist" preachers, who, on top of that, kept a Protestant preacher on the estate. The Jesuits erected crosses with instruments of torture at crossroads, and the people supposedly worshiped them. It is possible to believe this, because in these symbols they saw the original biblical side of religion, deformed by further development. Thus, they gained the mistaken notion that they had eradicated non-Catholic religious beliefs.
   However, the most serious situation developed again in Vsetín, and this without any religious components. In this poorest region of Wallachia, the subjects boldly opposed the authorities under Zdeněk Žampach of Potštejn and na Hodoníně, who replaced the predatory Wallenstein. In the years 1623-1634, this lord showed his power to the subjects very harshly, but with little success. He insisted on the fulfillment of servile obligations with threats, enforced payments and serfdom with imprisonment and the executioner. The bold people of Vsetín did not allow themselves to be intimidated again, they renounced their obedience when their complaints to Cardinal Dietrichstein were unsuccessful. Žampach, in order to get rid of this estate with rebellious people "advantageously", falsely stated a higher value of the alleged servile payments than corresponded to the records in the land registers. This would mean for the subjects that the future authority could also enforce the recorded obligations. The subjects refuted the lord's accusation that they owed their lord anything, they rightfully defended themselves against new burdens, and Žampach, losing hope that he would break the several years of resistance of the people of Vsetín, retreated like Wallenstein and got rid of the estate by selling it.
   The new lord of Vsetín, the Hungarian cardinal-primate and archbishop of Esztergom, Péter Pázmány, owned the Vsetín estate in the years 1634-1637. Out of fear of the penetration of Turkish power on the middle Danube, like many other Hungarian magnates, he secured his capital by buying an estate in neighboring, safer Moravia. This highest church dignitary in Hungary (limited to Slovakia and the western part of Hungary) became famous as a consistent fighter for the re-Catholicization of Hungary. On the Vsetín estate, he soon encountered spontaneous resistance as soon as he began to exercise the rights of the authority. The subjects, led by their reeves, unanimously stood up for their economic rights and rejected the overloading of obligations as resolutely as they did against Žampach. According to Karel st. of Žerotín, they even refused to recognize the high church prince as their lord. This was already an open peasant rebellion, usually punishable by severe imprisonment and even death.
   The reeves continued to resist the authorities. They ignored the summons to appear at the castle. The lord's clerk Urményi had to go to the marketplace after them and listen to their threats that they would rather move out than burden themselves with new servile burdens. The lordly officials believed, partly rightly, that they had found the reasons for the fundamental and firm resistance in conscious non-Catholicism. Pázmány decided to break the spirit of anti-feudal resistance with radical Counter-Reformation. The investigation, ordered by Dietrichstein at Pázmány's instigation, caused some surprise. Since the Battle of White Mountain, six preachers had been secretly active in Vsetín. They performed their usual priestly duties outside the church, which belonged to the Catholics in Vsetín. They lived off the tithes of the people, relied on older Hussite traditions, traveled around the countryside and beyond Wallachia, gathered people in the villages, preached, baptized, and married in houses.
   Other non-Catholic preachers, expelled from the country by imperial and Dietrichstein decrees, coming from nearby Slovak Pováží, were received with sympathy. Pázmány strived, "so that the banished wolves do not return to slaughter the sheep" and Dietrichstein fully approved of this activity and warmly recommended to Pázmány that: "cleanse the sheepfold in Vsetín..." and expel the non-Catholic preachers and replace them with reliable Catholic ones. He gave the lord of Vsetín full power in this matter and was glad that the people of Vsetín, in his eyes "rough and wild" people, came from the power of Žampach, a religiously lukewarm lord, into the hands of a lord so religiously zealous. The people of Vsetín did not bow to the practices of both powerful cardinals.
   The more moderate Dietrichstein established a noble commission, later called the "Wallachian Commission", headed by Jan, Count of Rottal, in Napajedla, and entrusted it with settling this serious dispute for Vsetín and the neighboring restless estates. The reeves, as representatives of the villages, did not allow themselves to be lured into the Vsetín castle, perhaps sensing the lord's trap and betrayal, and forced negotiations at tables on the ground floor of the mighty older castle tower. They rejected the compromise proposal to reduce feudal servile obligations in exchange for a new promise of loyalty and obedience to the authorities. They persisted in their further resistance even later, and according to the commissioners, they were "stubborn and unyielding..."
   Pázmány, instead of the expected profits, encountered unsolvable disputes. He did not want to use military force against the subjects. However, he gave them the usual "last warning" to reconsider the whole dispute. He wrote to Dietrichstein that he could easily bring the "Vsetín heretics", as rebellious subjects, to obedience if he did not have to take his high church office into account. However, he self-confidently demanded compensation for the damage and expenses caused by the rebellion. The essence of the dispute between Pázmány and the subjects had a distinctly economic and not a religious character.
   In 1637, Wallachia suffered a disaster. An unprecedented drought hit this fodder-producing area to such an extent that the conditions gradually took on a critical character in the winter and especially in the spring months of 1638:
   "In the year 1637, such hardship occurred after Christmas tothat people had nothing to give to cows and cattle, so that they were grinding leaves from willows wherever they could get them, and they were arguing a lot about them. And in Lower Hungary, as well as in Moravia, they were tearing thatch (straw roofing) from cottages and cutting chaff from it, which caused cattle to die from plague... There was also a very great drought in the spring..." we read in the memoirs of a townsman from Meziříčí.
   From winter, a terrible guest, hunger, was pushing into the Wallachian cottages. The critical situation was worsening. The activities of robber gangs were activated to an unprecedented extent and worsened the overall situation of the people. The starving population with numerous sick people was usually simply left to their fate, especially when it came to the hated rebels. It was hard to live in the mountains during a natural disaster and without any help.
   The new representative of the anti-Wallachian struggle became the aforementioned Jan, Count of Rottal (1605?-1674), lord of Napajedla and other estates. After Dietrichstein, he was the representative of offensive, Catholic and anti-popular politics. He was able to gradually use war upheavals and conditions in central, wealthy Moravia to expand his estates. He joined the anti-Wallachian struggles organically as a representative of the "Wallachian Commission".
   It was already known to the Brno provincial and central Vienna imperial governments that the rebels were supported by secret non-Catholics even from the ranks of lords and knights, as well as lordly officials. However, non-Catholic tendencies were still alive and current. The emperor, in his patents, very sharply warned against positive relations with the rebels and threatened severe punishments on the body, property, and life. So it could not have been just simple rioters, "robbers", and bandits, as officials liked to report. Even after a very long time, 18 years after the Battle of White Mountain, these tendencies had not yet been eradicated. The older generation still adhered to them regardless of their class affiliation. By secretly supporting the militant popular movement, they also strengthened their subjective and collective hopes for a possible upheaval in the country, until the war was definitively ended. This concerted effort could only temporarily bring the two class-opposed camps closer together in their ultimate goals.
   When, at the end of the winter of 1638, the irreconcilable rebels of Vsetín started a new open anti-Habsburg revolt (we read nothing about religious motives in the sources), the emperor and the provincial authorities decided to subdue them once and for all by military force. There was no other remedy. On February 24, 1638, it was decided in Vienna that: "...the rebellious and disobedient Wallachians of Vsetín... should be attacked by surprise, the leaders captured, and punished with death as a deterrent example..." The language of the imperial words was clear and unambiguous. In mid-March, military preparations for the punitive expedition were completed. Extensive instructions were issued to its commander, Colonel Jindřich Halbich. He was to maintain the secrecy of the entire action and carry it out as quickly as possible, to seize the village of Hovězí, as the center of the leading rebels, above all. In the event that the rebels did not surrender and put up armed resistance, the colonel was to respond with fire as well. The imperials knew that the rebels were already at least partially armed. Halbich was especially warned not to allow the rebels to unite across the entire Vsetín estate, including with rebels on neighboring estates. The authorities saw only the future in the failure to fulfill this official requirement: "...indescribable chaos and extraordinarily harmful and irreparable consequences from the general uprising of the people..."
   If the punitive expedition was attacked during the approach march, the colonel was to organize a retreat under the protection of the Vsetín castle, fortify himself there and constantly report on the situation.
   The forces of the punitive expedition consisted of 130 musketeers, who formed the quality military core of the expedition. They were joined by perhaps a thousand men of the regional or provincial militia, i.e. a paramilitary unit of poorly armed and not always disciplined subjects under the command of former officers or lordly officials.
   The punitive expedition ended quite differently than the officially devised instructions envisaged. On the fateful day of March 24, 1638, the expedition, carrying death to the rebel leaders and fire to their villages, advanced without the necessary military security through the winding valley of the Rokytnice stream, an unclear place that was cleverly chosen for the well-prepared and surprising action of the rebels.
   Using tactics that the military authorities did not anticipate, the rebels attacked the unsecured advance column from the hillside with great drumming and war cries. The musketeers, helpless and surprised, fled in confusion across the stream or laid down their arms at the feet of the victors without firing a shot. The militia fighters probably joined the victors. All captured were magnanimously released, including their commanders. It was not an act well considered by the rebel command. They only had to leave their weapons on the spot. It was an unexpected disaster, a disgrace and humiliation for the imperial arms. And that from the village rebels.
   The humiliating end of the punitive expedition caused serious concern to the imperial court and an investigation into this blatant failure. The emperor especially regretted the loss of irreplaceable weapons, which the rebels had seized.
   For the rebel movement, Rokytnice meant more than a victorious battle, both in terms of the moral consolidation of the movement and in military and political terms. The authorities came to the conviction that it was not, is not, and will not be easy to defeat the people of Vsetín. The court war council did not have any free military forces to try again to quell the uprising. Therefore, it was not possible to implement the proposal of the provincial governorship in Moravia that 600 musketeers directly attack Vsetín and the mountain villages from Meziříčí, subdue the rebels, and burn down the villages.
   The authorities rightly expressed certain concerns about further possible developments, especially that the victorious people of Vsetín would not drag other dissatisfied subjects from nearby estates into the active rebel camp. The instructions given to Colonel Halbich pointed to this possibility. Instead of using military force, the authorities therefore also considered settling the hostilities through peaceful and non-violent means. In particular, they tried to ensure that the rebels were not deprived of hope of imperial forgiveness, in exchange for appropriate rebel guarantees. As far as the sources show, the people of Vsetín did not show any interest in the lord's promises.
   However, the rebels did not take advantage of their undeniable success, they did not attack the neighboring and nearby estates at such an opportune time in order to join forces with their people. They were probably only satisfied with a freer and freer position than the subjects on neighboring estates had.
   Military action with the establishment of a defensive and protective military cordon on the edge of Wallachia against the penetration of rebels and their ideas into other regions of Moravia could hardly achieve the desired goal. It had to remain only on paper.

### Wallachian Robbery

   After the victory at Rokytnice, the activities of robbers in the new conditions acquired unprecedented vigor, greater effectiveness, and made the mountain and foothill areas and neighboring areas less safe. The authorities, in their defenseless position, could only resign themselves to it.
   Organized and certainly also unorganized groups of the Wallachian people completely disrupted the legal, political, and property order. Attacks on travelers from the leading Moravian estates multiplied. Various gangs even crossed the western bank of the Morava River to the property of the Velehrad monastery and probably established a connection with the Wallachian group that had been deliberately settled on this estate before. However, many groups pursued a higher military and political goal. They fought against imperial military units and sought battles with them. The last days of the robbers' short lifespan usually ended with criminal trials in Olomouc or Uherské Hradiště, interrogation under torture law and humiliating executions.
   Two main groups of robber gangs: The first group was led by Ondruška, the son of the reeve of Leskovec, i.e. a wealthy peasant and a representative of the authorities in the village, on the Vsetín estate, he allegedly took up "this robber's bread..." in 1632 and became the "captain" of 22 Wallachian and an unknown number of Slovak robbers from as far away as the scattered settlements near Myjava, i.e. also from a poorer region of Slovakia. In addition to ordinary acts of robbery, his gang dared to attack an imperial military detachment commanded by a captain, and captured its weapons and luggage. From September 1628 to March 1640, many members of this group were captured by border guards and executed after a court decision in Olomouc. Ondruška was tortured with pincers and executed. Later, the last members of Ondruška's gang also perished.
   The second group was led by the "captain" Adamčík (also written as Adam Čik), but the history of this significant gang is less known from official sources, sometimes even quite mysterious and not without internal contradictions. This group waged not a defensive, but a small offensive war. We only know isolated and unconnected facts from its history. Already in 1629, the province offered a reward of 500 gold coins for Adamčík's head, a high price for his capture. Adamčík and members of his gang undertook raids into what was then the Brno region and threatened leading representatives of the provincial government and nobility. He also attacked a detachment of 60 imperial cavalrymen, many of whom fell in battle. It was a bold act. According to other reports, Adamčík was captured. He allegedly promised that he would give up his robber activities. He was supposedly pardoned and released from prison together with his companion Urban on bail. This means that a person from higher estates had to vouch for Adamčík. In March 1641, however, he was captured again near Trnava in Slovakia, and an unclear report speaks of him during the popular uprising of 1643.

### What Robbery Meant in the Social Development of the Wallachian People
   
   The general form of this anti-feudal struggle manifested itself in numerous and different forms, perhaps throughout the entire Carpathian region. Its problems are only being clarified by modern study. The romantic, idealistic concept of the older kind is already completely receding with its historically unfounded views of robbers as the ideal of popular awareness, and the critical historical concept, based on the study of historical material, is gaining increasing significance.
   In Moravia, on the Moravian-Slovak border, and not without closer mutual contact and influences, a specific Moravian, or more precisely, Wallachian form of these essentially anti-feudal struggles developed, as a small, sometimes even cruel war, developing on older traditions, especially after the Battle of White Mountain. However, its activity extended into the 18th century.
   The special and generally favorable geographical conditions of Wallachia greatly facilitated robbery, as in no other Moravian region. For an objective understanding of the significance of robbery, it is necessary to realize the standpoint of feudal society, which considered the feudal order with serfdom and the subservience of the peasant people to be a divine order, unchanging, i.e. eternal. Therefore, all elements fighting against this principle were deliberately belittled, suppressed, and placed on the level of robbers and bandits, and they were also very strictly and exemplarily cruelly punished by feudal law to deter others.
   In the positive attitude of the Wallachian people towards robbery, we find certain first signs of a different legal concept, as it has been preserved especially in folk epics and songs as a struggle for people's "truth" (justice), for people's views, especially in the area of property rights, which were too one-sidedly appropriated in the centuries-old historical development by the ruling class - the landowners. According to the law, they owned the land, the extraction from forests and waters, and the proceeds of obligatory feudal payments and corvée labor, provided free of charge to the authorities. The majority of this landowning nobility in Wallachia adhered to the militant and intolerant Catholic religion and Catholic worldview, which unilaterally supported the feudal order, to which the internal organization of the church also corresponded. The landowners, as already mentioned above, found themselves in direct conflict with the religious views of their subjects, which only exacerbated class antagonisms.
   From historical sources, it is not always possible to separate robbery from individual and collective looting and violence, from banditry. Therefore, not every anti-feudal act belongs in the realm of robbery. Perhaps the only differentiating element of both groups, often without a noticeable transition, is probably only the question of relations to the interests, property, and rights of the village collective. By limiting robbery to an isolated part of the mountainous area, one can also explain the unsuitability of this form of anti-feudal struggle in the fight of the peasantry in unprotected, difficult-to-defend, and easily controlled parts of Moravia.
   In feudal society, robbery caused the Wallachian people to have a bad reputation. During anti-Habsburg uprisings, it merged with the open uprising of the people, in times of relative peace it usually appears as an independent form, as evidenced by numerous source testimonies. The people themselves undoubtedly idealized the activities of robbers, perhaps also because their activities did not affect their meager property, especially cattle, and helped to optimistically arouse the people's hopes for better justice in the future.
   Not only domestic elements, but also foreigners, vagrants, beggars, and legally persecuted individuals concentrated in robber and bandit groups, who also contributed significantly to the belittling and suppression of the rebel camp.
   
### The Establishment of the Anti-Robbery Protective Corps of Mountain Border Guards and its Function
   
   The self-confidence of the victorious people grew after the victory at Rokytnice. Wallachia became even more beyond the control of the authorities, so new forms of defense against active Wallachian opponents were sought. Therefore, in the spring of 1638, the institution of border guards was hastily established, composed of loyal "Wallachians, even though the authorities were aware of how difficult it is to distinguish between "loyal" and other, usually rebellious, Wallachians. A similar organization with a similar function was established earlier in the region of the Slovak Carpathians. The Moravian organization of border guards, with some interruptions, lasted for almost two centuries, an eloquent testament to the peculiarity of the conditions in Wallachia.
   Border guards, a not very numerous armed corps, became a specific organization to fight Wallachian robbery and banditry, as a tacit admission by the authorities that Wallachians can only be successfully fought by Wallachians again. In April 1638, with the emperor's consent, the province first hired 100 border guards. Quite numerous sources with reports mostly of an administrative nature have been preserved about their history.
   The activities of the border guards did not meet with understanding from the people, who were aware of the dubiousness and anti-people nature of this feudal institution. This is the only way we can explain why at the very beginning of the uprising in 1642 they resolutely did away with the border guards. It is also remarkable that folk art expressions - songs, dances, legends, fairy tales and folk art - celebrate robbers as heroes of the people and mourn the end of their lives, but generally remain silent about border guards, seeing in their activities an expression of the lords' efforts to destroy anti-feudal popular efforts.
   Even recent historiography, which romantically conceived the struggles of the Wallachian people, forgot that border guards were primarily a feudal and anti-people institution, which protected the social order with which the people no longer agreed, but did not have enough strength to overthrow it.

## VI. The Third Uprising during the Swedish Occupation of Northeastern Moravia

   Swedish military forces had been fighting in the anti-Habsburg camp since 1630. At the beginning of the summer of 1642, Field Marshal Lennart Torstenson (1601-1651) was approaching from Silesia into the Odra valley towards the Olomouc fortress with accelerated movements. After the lost battle on June 9, 1642, near Holešov, the Habsburg detachments retreated under the protection of the Uherské Hradiště fortress.
   On the same day, the whole of eastern Moravia, as well as the imperial court in Vienna, was stirred by the news of an unprecedented act by the rebellious people of Meziříčí, who near Jablůnka, i.e. already on the Vsetín estate, attacked a column of wagons with a military escort belonging to the magnate and imperial colonel Jan of Wintz. There were no dead or wounded, and the colonel's family was not harmed. The loot was unimaginably large, unique, and downright fairytale-like for the rebels. Lady Polyxena Wintzová, a widow shortly after the event, according to detailed lists of lost items, estimated the value of the loot at 159,893 gold coins. Of that, she lost 10,000 ducats in cash, then jewels worth 18,000 gold coins, expensive noble clothes, wagons with horses, etc. The later "poor widow" tried in vain to recover the loot and punish the perpetrators.
   It is one of the largest and most remarkable acts of robbery during the Thirty Years' War, which probably stimulated the imagination of the Wallachian people for generations. Folk tradition judged the act as an anti-Habsburg act:
   "The city of Olomouc was besieged by the Swedish people, on that day the Wallachians robbed Wintz in Jablůnka, when he was riding with the imperial treasury..."
   The organizers of the ambush and curious onlookers, during the rush of people, dismantled the unprotected treasure in confusion, and many valuable items ended up with Jewish merchants in nearby towns.
   In mid-June 1642, the Swedes captured Olomouc, which was well supplied, without a fight, by agreement. It was the result of their surprisingly fast operation. Only seemingly calm, but simmering beneath the surface, the resistance of the Wallachian countryside reacted with elemental and unrestrained revolutionary enthusiasm: 
   "The Wallachians are all publicly up in arms and are causing considerable damage to the people on the estates (landowners and their officials), so that their lords cannot be safe in front of their own subjects..." reported the Uherské Hradiště regional captain Sérenyi on June 18, 1642. The free Wallachians turned against their lords and unpopular collaborators. The news of the fall of Olomouc had the deepest impact in Vsetín: "That Wallachia was up in arms and most of all the people of Vsetín..." says the aforementioned captain's report from June 27, 1642.
   With the arrival of the Swedes, the people severed the last threads of subservient obedience, which had already been so disrupted in previous times. The border guards were immediately forbidden to perform their service under the threat of being cut to pieces and expelled from the estates. According to the report of the administrator of the Vsetín estate, Urményi, the people wanted to immediately join forces with the Swedes during their further expected advance or wait for further events.
   Wallachian robbery, hitherto of rather local significance, manifested itself very widely. The robbers were the first to emerge as radical fighters not only in Vsetín, but also in Meziříčí, in the seemingly more Catholic Brumov, and on the edge of Wallachia, even before relations with the Swedish garrison in Olomouc became clear.
   Amidst the constant uncertainty and confusion in eastern Moravia, Rottal tried to extract as much as possible for the dubious imperial cause. He wanted to organize Wallachian defenders against the Swedes and to protect the Habsburg Empire. However, the prepared and numbered mobilization plan had to remain only on paper. The Wallachian forces against the Swedes were to be led by the magnates of eastern Moravia.
   No important member of the past anti-imperial uprisings came from the noble emigration anymore. They were already dead. The townspeople were hesitant: after so many vain hopes, upheavals, and final failures, they avoided the uprising and waited for further developments. The people took power themselves, without the nobility, without the townspeople, with firm faith in international aid and with full conviction of ultimate success. They joined the fight with enthusiasm, without reservations and any pre-determined conditions. The enthusiastic young Wallachian generation knew what could be achieved by fighting. Under the new conditions of development, it was as if the commitments in the reversions (promises) from 1627, which had passed 15 years ago, had been forgotten.
   Upon entering the European conflict in 1630, the Swedish troops excelled over other armies in their national character. Swedish soldiers maintained good discipline, looting and drunkenness were forbidden under penalty of death. Without a noticeable difference in ranks, soldiers and officers wore simple uniforms. However, during the long-lasting wars, the flower of the Swedish army was eliminated in battles. The army was gradually subject to a loosening of discipline and the growing influence of foreign professional mercenaries of non-Swedish origin. They sought in war a source of cheap sustenance and in looting security for life after the war. During the prolonged war and regular shortages, they did not shy away from violence of all kinds. Generally speaking, they behaved in a disciplined manner towards the people in Wallachia.
   "... when about 400 Swedish soldiers were riding to Lukov, there was great fear and people were running away, but they did not harm the people in any way", we read in the Holešov Chronicle.
   However, they were far less kind to the towns, where they suspected their secret enemies and later harshly extorted various payments and levies from them with threats (especially burning).
   The imperials needed far more forces than the besieged garrison defending itself in the fortress to tighten the ring around besieged Olomouc. Due to unsecured supplies, both armies were increasingly looting, plundering the fertile Haná region and extorting not only food and fodder, but also various war services. The Swedes were particularly concerned about securing the harvest during the harvest season.
   After looting the nearby Haná region, Swedish foraging detachments also penetrated into the edge of the mountainous Wallachian region and extorted confessions as to where cattle, grain, and other supplies and various valuables were hidden. Villagers from foothill and lowland areas sought a safe haven for themselves and their property, especially their precious cattle, with the solidarity of the Wallachian people in the mountains and forests. On this occasion, there was a rapprochement between the rebels and the Swedes.
   The second path was initiated later by direct negotiations with the garrison command in Olomouc, with Colonel Georg Paykull. Perhaps non-Catholic priests were facilitating this official path, perhaps the remnants of the Czech-Moravian emigration fighting in the Swedish army, and later Comenius himself, were pointing out the importance of the rebels. Negotiations were already underway in January 1643 with Wallachian representatives. The cautious and experienced leaders of the Wallachian villages probably delayed the process of establishing these contacts, which, according to feudal law, were of a highly treasonous nature in connection with the enemy of the emperor. Behind their backs, or with their tacit consent and knowledge, the Wallachian youth eagerly longed for an open alliance with the Swedes and for fighting by their side. They were also brought together by the fact that the Swedes adhered to the non-Catholic religion, and the rebels saw them as their anti-Habsburg friends and allies.
   It was probably the youth, servants, and people without property who had nothing to lose who began to support the Swedes in the first phase, supplying the reduced garrison in Olomouc with fresh, very precious food: butter, cheese, the very necessary and also expensively paid salt and salted herring (probably transported from Pováží), poultry, game, veal, etc., as contemporary reports say. Food was carried to Olomouc b by "...disobedient peasants of Vsetín..."
   Already at the end of January, the first and not very effective measures were taken from the imperial side against the Wallachian foot transports in the Meziříčí and Nový Jičín regions, where supposedly 50 men with food passed through daily. In April, 600 men of heavy Croatian cavalry and fast light Hungarian cavalry were transferred to Přerov to patrol the surrounding estates, but especially at the exits from the mountainous area.
   
### The Alliance of the Wallachian Rebels with the Swedes

   In the second phase of mutual Wallachian-Swedish contacts, representatives of the rebels already appear and, without the nobility and townspeople, negotiate with the Swedes - let's say at a certain international level. A reliable report from the imperial camp states that on February 18, 1643, a group of 250 men from Vsetín, well armed to defend themselves against attacks by the controlling imperial cavalry, arrived in Olomouc. They brought food to the Swedish garrison, and the commander of the city, Colonel Paykull, received them with due military honors. On this occasion, the Wallachian group bought a lot of tin, copper, and other metals from the Swedish war spoils at cheap prices, as material for Wallachian craftsmen working for the Swedish army.
   The commanders of both sides pledged themselves with mutual gifts. One of the Wallachian captains of an unspecified name, who is called a colonel in Swedish sources, wrote to Field Marshal Torstenson and presented him with a valuable hunting rifle. The Field Marshal returned the favor with a silver dagger, spurs, and a gold-embroidered ribbon. On his orders, the Swedish war treasury paid out 7,000 Rhine thalers so that the Wallachians could better provide themselves with the necessary things.
   The share of Wallachian aid to the Swedish army in Moravia was steadily increasing. In the presence of Torstenson in the military camp near Tovačov, on June 22, 1643, more than 500 armed rebels arrived. They again brought precious food and, at the Field Marshal's call, became an organic part of the Swedish army. Torstenson himself wrote about this matter.
   It is likely, although not specifically proven by historical sources, that Comenius himself, a persistent political anti-Habsburg fighter, stood behind these actions. He probably wanted to draw the attention of the international public to the active participation of Wallachian forces in the Swedish army through military actions, and also to the problem of the Czech nation in the last years of the Thirty Years' War, when, due to general fatigue, people were already talking about a general peace. Comenius, who was also active in Sweden, sent a special letter to the Swedish Chancellor Axel Oxenstierna and was also received twice by the Chancellor in audience in August 1643. He received a general courteous assurance that Swedish policy would strive to restore the Czech rights and freedoms lost after the Battle of White Mountain.
   Even the delusional Bohemian Brethren priest and emigrant, Comenius's friend, Mikuláš Drabik, who resided on the Rákóczi estates in Hungarian-Slovak Púchov, prophesied how the armies coming from the north (the Swedes) and from the south (the Transylvanian armies of Rákóczi) would destroy the Habsburg Empire in the near future. The political character of the prophecy significantly influenced the thinking of the people. During the Swedish occupation, non-Catholic priests activated their political activities, they too saw the Protestant Swedes as religious and political friends, and fueled the spirit of defiance and resistance. Their activity is undeniably a powerful tool of anti-Habsburg politics, even though it could not at all have been the main and predominant force of the Wallachian uprising. The people's plans were directed by concrete historical facts towards more penetrating economic and political-social changes than religion could determine, as will be explained further.
   According to a report from the imperial army headquarters, the Wallachian rebels performed various other services for their Swedish allies in addition to supplies. With their good knowledge of the routes in the confusing, wooded, mountainous terrain and in Pováží, they performed reconnaissance services. Their dangerous guard duty during the armed escort of food transports (convoys) also seems to be significant. Other sources testify to their excellent participation in Swedish war activities, especially during the capture of the fortified, well-prepared, and supplied episcopal Kroměříž, which fell into the hands of the Swedes in June 1643. Who set fire to this beautiful and magnificent city with huge supplies and thus thwarted Torstenson's plans to build Kroměříž into a strong support of Swedish occupation power in central Moravia, even the Catholic city council could not find out after years, even though it would have liked to attribute the destruction of the city to the Wallachian attackers, who were the first to penetrate into the city after the start of the battle. Perhaps Torstenson himself became convinced that the imperials intentionally destroyed Kroměříž by fire so that the Swedes would not get their hands on various war supplies.
   Wallachian-Swedish cooperation also developed in the area of craft production and mutual trade. In June 1643, Torstenson complained about the lack of money in the army, so he could not procure cavalry saddles, pistols, and other war necessities "from Wallachia and elsewhere..." Deliveries from Wallachia included clothing, cloth, and footwear, because clothmaking, shoemaking, and leather tanning were among the old Wallachian domestic crafts. The rebels were not only intermediaries, suppliers, but also manufacturers of military equipment and, to some extent, weapons, simple firearms for their Swedish ally.
   Swedish state policy and military strategy counted on the war participation of György I Rákóczi, the Transylvanian prince and successor to the anti-Habsburg struggles of Gábor Bethlen. However, Rákóczi, too, was unable to decide to openly side with the Swedes under the treaty for reasons of foreign and domestic policy. Wallachian transports were gaining increasing importance in plundered and starving Moravia, especially in the Haná region. Groups of rebels of up to 150 men went to Olomouc in transports, first on foot with knapsacks on their backs, and finally augmented by several dozen wagons with a regular defensive escort of 200 to 300 armed guards.
   Imperial Croatians pursued these transports, and according to a contemporary report, Colonel of Vrbno even captured a Slovak transport.
   "There is no news here at this time, only that the Wallachians of Vsetín and Meziříčí, of whom there were up to 220, and who were transporting food to the enemy camp on 40 and some wagons, were attacked by a strong imperial party (detachment), who beat them all and took away the food..."
   writes Uherské Hradiště to the royal free town of Skalica in Hungarian-Slovak on July 23, 1643.
   The name Wallachia, as the name of the mountainous region inhabited by the fearless, brave, and armed people of the Wallachians, aroused astonishment in the political and military world. In a large German chronicle of that time, they moved so far from historical reality that in an attempt to understand these struggles, they wrote about the rebels:
   "The Wallachian nation (Nation) is fighting against His Roman Imperial Majesty to preserve general freedom, together with its neighbors..."
   we read in Theatrum Europaei, vol. 5, 1651. It is not the concept of an alleged nation, but the concept of fighting effort that makes this concept close to Comenius in its positive assessment of popular resistance.
   The derogatory view of domestic city officials towards Wallachians is represented by the magistrate of Uherské Hradiště from May 1643:
   "...Praise be to God, there is nothing so dangerous to fear from the enemy people in Moravia, if only the Wallachian rabble would want to calm down once..."
   According to their capabilities and strength, the rebels made the situation difficult for the imperial army in Moravia and the towns loyal to the emperor. Even with their small and elusive actions behind enemy lines, they caused great damage, according to the testimony of the imperial general Zikmund Myslík of Hiršov. They were not dissuaded from their alliance with the Swedes even by promises, warnings, threats, war atrocities, and mutilation inflicted by the imperials on helpless prisoners.
   
## VII. The Defeat of the Rebels on January 26, 1644
   
   From the autumn of 1643, the rebels in Wallachia were expecting the great day when György I Rákóczi would launch anti-Habsburg operations, the Swedish and Transylvanian armies would join forces in Wallachia and form a united front with the main attack on imperial Vienna. They were disappointed again. However, the agreed basic operational plan could not be implemented at the desired time and on the desired scale. Rákóczi, limited in his operational freedom by the Ottoman Porte and imperial generals, could not take advantage of the favorable circumstances. However, the main obstacle was created by the Danes, who, fearing the growing Swedish dominance in the Baltic Sea, unexpectedly went over to the imperial camp. This in fact also decided the fate of the uprising.
   The position of the Swedish forces in northeastern Moravia gradually became very critical. Torstenson had to fundamentally change his military dispositions and weaken or even completely withdraw the advanced Swedish garrisons in Moravia. In September 1643, the Swedes evacuated Lukov, Holešov after burning down the castle, also abandoned the Žerotín Přerov, then Tovačov and destroyed many military facilities that could serve the imperials. They retreated from Moravia and left only selected garrisons, especially in Olomouc and Fulnek.
   The situation was becoming threatening for the rebels, hopeful for the imperials. The weakening of the Swedish military power in Moravia created a situation that the imperials had been waiting for with impatience for years, just like the lords on the rebellious estates, which due to the resistance of the people did not bring them any profit. From the late autumn of 1643, it was only a matter of time before the imperial forces would be able to carry out the anti-Wallachian "blow with an armed hand and military force", as Dietrichstein once threatened. The power of the "stubborn" rebels was to be definitively broken.
   Legally and politically, the matter was clear. From the point of view of the legal order, the rebels fundamentally violated the most essential foundations of feudal society, in particular they disregarded feudal ownership. From a political point of view, they broke perhaps all the promises and oaths contained in the reversions of 1627, especially the alliance with foreign enemies of Vienna.
   The main initiative in the preparations for the destruction of the rebels belonged to Jan, Count of Rottal. The Vienna government fully agreed with his proposal that: "...the rebellious Wallachians should be brought to imperial obedience or completely exterminated..."
   Further imperial instructions also warned neighboring estates of the seriousness of the planned actions with the aim of cleansing Moravia of the evil perpetrated by the rebellious people. Even the new owner of Vsetín after the Cardinal, his relative Mikuláš Pázmány, insisted through the Hungarian archbishop Lippay that the favorable situation should not be neglected and that the rebels should be attacked urgently while it was still winter. He also interceded for the inhabitants of the town of Vsetín, who he said did not all agree with the uprising.
   Rottal was instructed from Vienna to gather, in agreement with General Christoph Adolf von Buchheim (died 1657), military forces with a multiple superiority of 4,000-5,000 men and to have also prepared about 300 Wallachians from the Hukvaldy episcopal estate. It was officially reminded again that the attacked should not receive help from the Swedish allies in Olomouc or from Transylvanian friends from the Lednice estate in Pováží. Domestic traitors and collaborators were already reporting that the captain in Vsetín (probably Ferenc Hodosi of Lednice) was commanding 250 armed Wallachians of Rákóczi and that he was preparing an invasion of Moravia, perhaps as a counterattack against the punitive expedition, and that the grain still stored in Vizovice had been transported by the captain to the Vsetín center, ground, and baked into bread.
   The rebels again rejected the last imperial offer of pardon and reconciliation with corresponding new feudal obligations, probably in mid-January 1644. They did not want to submit to the imperials and trusted in the success of their defense in the mountainous terrain of their homeland.
   At a meeting on January 14, 1644, at the post office in Kroměříž, Rottal already agreed with General Buchheim on a specific plan for the punitive expedition. The attack was to be led by three separately marching military columns from Meziříčí with Colonel Wellisch, from Holešov by General Buchheim, and from the more distant Uherský Brod via Valašské Klobouky under the command of Rottal. Their common goal was to attack the rebel center in Vsetín in a concentrated manner. These military forces, dispatched for the attack, consisted of Hungarian and Silesian units, i.e. foreign military units, but also of the Moravian provincial militia and the aforementioned Wallachians from Hukvaldy and Brumov. Uherské Hradiště provided the punitive and extermination expedition with two cannons with the necessary accessories. In his plans, the conscientious Rottal did not forget about a large group of executioners to carry out the sentences of the extraordinary criminal military court on the spot. All preparations were kept secret, as far as possible, even from some authorities.
   The operational plans of the imperials are essentially well known and clear. But the intentions of the rebels are not. The Swedish command in Moravia knew from reconnaissance activities that in January General Buchheim was dispatched with his corps to the Hungarian (Slovak) border. The rebel command in Vsetín certainly did not remain without news of the movements of the imperials and their real intentions. The Wallachian defense had not yet been tested on such a large scale against a well-organized and armed army, led by experienced officers, with a large numerical superiority rapidly advancing in three directions on Vsetín. Previous battles had taken place rather in small and medium-sized actions.
   We believe that the leaders in the rebel headquarters underestimated the numerical strength of the imperial troops and their striking power, that they did not prepare their defense thoughtfully, and especially that they did not echelon it in depth and did not build their rear with the necessary reserves against the advancing superiority, so that the element of surprise could be ruled out. The real defensive intentions of the rebels are not known from the known sources. The winter period was not very favorable for the Wallachian defense. It favored the concentrated attackers advancing from the valleys more than the rebels scattered throughout the snowy mountain villages. It is also necessary to consider that a significant number of rebels had already been eliminated from action by previous fighting and that the Wallachian youth in particular suffered considerable losses of life in the defense of transports and other combat actions.
   The three imperial columns, carrying death to the rebels and fire to their villages, were delayed in their advance by some defensive actions by the rebels and were already destroying some villages known to be rebellious.
   Reports of the decisive final battle before Vsetín on January 26, 1644 differ to some extent, especially in the numerical data. Their common basis is the report of Colonel Wellisch, not preserved in the original, but adopted by Buchheim and partly also by Rottal. The overall, time-coordinated operational plan was not adhered to due to a communication failure. The imperial Colonel Wellisch, operating with his corps and cannons from Meziříčí, even before joining Buchheim's and Rottal's corps, defeated the main force of the rebels, who put up resistance at a place not precisely determined today before Vsetín on January 26, 1644. General Buchheim reported to the emperor:
   "Most Serene, Most Gracious Emperor and Lord! On His Majesty's most gracious order to personally go against the Wallachians, I set out on January 25, 1644 (from Prostějov) and arrived in Holešov, from where I announced my arrival to the Count of Rottal in Valašské Klobouky and to Colonel Wellisch in Meziříčí, so that all three of us would concentrate on Vsetín on January 27. Colonel Wellisch, as he himself announced, due to a misunderstanding of Rottal's correspondence, arrived here (in Vsetín) with his cannons already on the 26th (of January). On the way, he encountered 700 Wallachian rebels, as well as a certain number of (Swedish) musketeers from Olomouc, the commander of Vsetín and 40 hired musketeers from Lednice, dressed in the uniform of the army of the Transylvanian prince. These (military forces), by the grace of God, were happily defeated and crushed by his bravery and movements. The rebel leaders, the commander of the Transylvanian aid, and two Swedish ensigns fell with most of the soldiers and with a large number of Wallachians..."
   This is the description of the battle in the German report from Vsetín dated February 4, 1644, from the War Archive in Vienna.
   In the Hungarian report of January 28 of the same year, found by Prof. Josef Macůrek, Rottal probably incorrectly states the number of rebels as 250 and further reports that the rebels are hiding in the mountains and allegedly want mercy. He has not yet given them an answer, but demanded the surrender of 100 of the most zealous rebels, and he says he is willing to pardon the rest.
   According to the above number of non-Wallachian soldiers from foreign aid, only insignificant detachments of allied troops fought before Vsetín on the side of the rebels.
   The lost battle near Vsetín eliminated the defeated rebels from further anti-Habsburg activities, and thus also from participation in the anti-Habsburg history of eastern Moravia on a larger scale. Defiant Wallachia, resisting promises and threats, was thus defeated and no longer had the strength for more significant resistance. The imperial generals, irritated for years by the harmful actions of the rebels, got rid of the tenacious and indestructible enemy in their rear.
   Perhaps the awareness of invincibility in their own homeland, the still vivid memories of the victory at Rokytnice in 1638, the coming aid from Lednice and a certain number of Swedish soldiers in Vsetín, and perhaps the expectation of further aid, also the accelerated marches of the imperials and the destruction of villages during their passage through the army, perhaps the unpreparedness of their own defense and the unexpected numerical superiority of the imperial forces and perhaps other circumstances unknown to us created favorable conditions for the final defeat of the rebels. The lack of more detailed data and reports from the rebel camp still prevents a final judgment.   
   The victors wreaked havoc on the Wallachian villages. Villages were burned down, cattle looted, people killed, and women and children taken prisoner. General Buchheim did not neglect to thank God for his victory and asked him to grant him further success in the fight against the enemies of the emperor.
   The captured rebel leaders, unknown by name and fate, were handed over to the court martial in Olomouc. The victorious commanders ordered the surviving rebels to be captured and brought in for interrogation and punishment.
   It was a difficult task in the difficult winter conditions. It was necessary to overcome not only the winter, the snow, the impassable terrain, but above all the fear of the people of the "Vsetín wolves," whom the imperials feared.
   The captured rebels were relentlessly interrogated according to the cruel provisions of the "terrible" Roman-German imperial law under torture.
   The "Registers of Wallachians" as a Historical Source for the Study of Wallachian Uprisings
   The extensive and uniquely preserved criminal trial files of the rebels from 1644, called the "Registers of Wallachians," provide exceptionally valuable information about the structure of the defeated rebellious people and, indirectly, about its previous activities.
   It is an exceptionally valuable historical source for the knowledge of the history of the Wallachian people in the 17th century. In a way, it is also a unique historical document of international importance for the study of popular uprisings during the Thirty Years' War. The "Registers of Wallachians" have been preserved in the State Regional Archive in Olomouc.
   The court martial, which met in Olomouc from February 4 to June 20, 1644, interrogated a total of 189 Wallachians from 33 villages. 180 were from the Vsetín estate, 9 from neighboring estates. A relatively large number of rebels, 57, escaped the investigation. They lived for the most part as emigrants on the Rákóczi estates in Pováží, mainly in the town of Lednice and its surroundings.
   According to the "Registers of Wallachians," the social structure of the rebels was as follows:
   Peasants: 124, of which 12 were reeves
   Cottagers: 56
   Servants: 9
   The age of the rebels:
   Under 20 years old: 16
   20-30 years old: 69
   30-40 years old: 50
   40-50 years old: 30
   50-60 years old: 18
   Over 60 years old: 6
   According to these lists, the vast majority of those questioned were young people up to the age of 40. It is also necessary to note that there are no women among those interrogated.
   The "Registers of Wallachians" do not answer the question of the participation of women in the uprisings, nor the role of children and the elderly. There is no information on these important issues in the preserved sources.
   The investigation focused on the following offenses:
   Why did the rebels rebel against their lord?
   When did the rebellion begin and who were its organizers and leaders?
   What was the extent of the rebels' participation in the uprising?
   Who was in contact with the Swedish garrison in Olomouc and who organized and guarded the transport of food to Olomouc?
   How did the rebels cooperate with the Swedes in other military actions?
   What were the relations of the rebels with the people on the Lednice estate in Pováží?
   Who made weapons and other military equipment for the Swedish army?
   Who hid weapons from the punitive expedition of 1638, and where are these weapons now?
   Where are the looted valuables from the Wintz convoy hidden?
   Who supplied the Swedes with the gunpowder they urgently needed?
   The "Registers of Wallachians" also provide extensive material for the study of the history of the Wallachian village and its inhabitants, of their family and property relationships, of the economic and social structure of the Wallachian village, and of the Wallachian crafts. We can also indirectly learn about the forms of anti-feudal resistance of the Wallachian people, which was never completely defeated by the ruling class, but which was repeatedly brutally suppressed. The "Registers of Wallachians" provide a profound testimony to this struggle.

## The Executions of the Rebels

   After the investigation was completed, the final verdict was issued. Death sentences were pronounced on 34 of the interrogated. The sentences were carried out with medieval cruelty in the usual places of execution, in Olomouc and Uherské Hradiště. The condemned were hanged, broken on the wheel, beheaded, or quartered.
   The executions, theatrically staged as a "deterrent example" for the surviving rebels and the rest of the Wallachian people, undoubtedly achieved their goal. The open struggle against the Habsburgs ceased.
   The sentences of other rebels included long-term imprisonment in the Špilberk prison in Brno, in Olomouc, or in other prisons, corporal punishment, branding with hot iron, cutting off limbs, etc.
   The "Registers of Wallachians" end with a list of 32 rebels who were still at large. High rewards were offered for their capture.

## The Significance of the Wallachian Uprisings in the Development of the Wallachian People

   The Wallachian uprisings after the Battle of White Mountain were a unique manifestation of anti-feudal resistance. They were carried out with great perseverance and courage against a numerically and militarily superior enemy. They were not just isolated local events, but were part of a broader anti-Habsburg movement in the Czech lands and in Europe.
   The uprisings were ultimately unsuccessful. They did not lead to the overthrow of the Habsburg rule, nor did they bring about any significant social or economic changes. However, they did have a profound impact on the development of the Wallachian people.
   The uprisings strengthened the sense of national identity and solidarity among the Wallachian people. They also contributed to the preservation of the Wallachian language and culture. The uprisings left a lasting mark on the collective memory of the Wallachian people and have been celebrated in folk songs and legends ever since.
   The Wallachian uprisings were a testament to the courage and determination of the Wallachian people. They were a reminder that even in the face of overwhelming odds, the people were willing to fight for their freedom and their rights.

## VIII. The Destruction of Wallachia

   Rottall, the leading representative of the punitive expedition, divided the captives into two basic groups. He dealt with the vast majority of rebels in a bloody manner already in Wallachia, using all the possibilities of the deterrent criminal law against the rebellious and disobedient subjects. The rebels, if they did not fall or escape, were disarmed with the help of the army, local traitors and farmers, and the re-emerged portáš (armed guards). They awaited execution in the prison of the Vsetín castle, and were executed in the nearby areas of the Brdy and Díly mountains in a number that has not been precisely determined.
   The total number of those executed on the estates of Vsetín, Vizovice, Lukov and Zlín amounted to 141 men, with 36 fallen in battle. However, this number does not correspond to the actual number of Rottall's victims. The "Wallachian Lists" from 1644 only list the holders of individual homesteads, according to the heads of individual families. Therefore, the loss of life among the young Wallachian men, who participated in the uprising with great zeal, is not stated. Thus, the estimates, which are far higher, are closer to reality. The imperial camp estimated the number of executed at 300 (according to Rottall's report), and that at a time when the executions were not yet over. This is a serious shortcoming of the "Wallachian List".
   Rottall punished the defeated and captured harshly, as was customary in peasant uprisings. Five fojts (mayors) representing Wallachian villages lost their lives at the hands of executioners. Fojt Martin from Janová was quartered alive, two fojts from the Lukov estate were broken on the wheel (the executioner first broke their limbs with a mallet), Jan Vrátný from the Lukov estate was impaled alive, Mikuláštík from Liptál had his tongue torn out by the executioner, and 15 rebels were quartered alive. Every thirteenth settled farmer, listed in the manorial lists, paid for their participation in the anti-Habsburg uprising with a humiliating death.
   The wrath of Rottall, as the emperor's plenipotentiary commissioner, was also directed against the families of the rebels and people uninvolved in the uprising. Wallachia was plundered by the imperial army and also burned, partly or completely, as we read in the "Wallachian Lists". The villages of Janová (all burned down), Ústí (all burned to the ground and left in ruins), as well as Seninka and Liptál were completely destroyed by fire, while the villages of Zděchov, Lhota, Pržno and Jablůnka were half burned down.
   The mass and graduated punishments and the destruction of villages were intended to forever stifle the rebellious older tradition in the surviving population and thus suppress the self-confidence of the people, who from the Battle of White Mountain until the fateful January days of 1644 remained undefeated and accustomed to living in greater freedom than the peasant people settled on more fertile land. The Wallachian people were never to rise up against the Habsburgs, the Church, and the Catholic landowners again. Therefore, the size and number of punishments were to correspond, in the eyes of the ruling class, to their social importance.
   Not all defeated rebels remained in their cottages after the unsuccessful defense. From some villages, fearing punishment, the vast majority of the population fled to neighboring Slovakia. In Všemina, on the Lukov estate, 24 out of 29 settled farmers and cottagers fled, leaving only 4; in Neobuza, only 5 out of 18 remained. The town of Slušovice was abandoned by all the cottagers, as was Hrobice. On the rebellious estates, the number of settlers fell to a quarter. Several hundred people emigrated with their families and children, probably because some villages had been reduced to ashes by the army.
   The peasants in Wallachia were particularly fond of weapons, especially firearms: "Many of us from the aforementioned town of Slušovice and from the villages have been handling rifles since childhood and youth..." says a document from 1644. It could be said that during the Thirty Years' War, a young generation armed with firearms, forbidden to the peasantry, grew up in Wallachia. The best equipped were the Vsetín rebels, who had 340 confiscated rifles, i.e. more than half of the secured weapons, which, apart from those issued by the lord of Víckov, were acquired by the rebels during the capture of the punitive expedition at Rokytnice in 1638 and later as war booty during the Swedish occupation.
   Rottall's terror and massacre, aided by class-oriented law, was intended to exterminate all those who had transgressed and fallen into his power. Even the conditions of life were to be destroyed or restricted by the burning of villages. However, Rottall also enriched himself from the misery of the defeated people in their time of helplessness and transferred the population to some of his estates with uninhabited farmsteads. Their estates were again taken over by expelled foreigners, more or less fervent Catholics. Even the originally non-Catholic Žerotín branch in Meziříčí converted to Catholicism; Balcar (Baltazar) of Žerotín, a participant in the anti-Habsburg uprising of 1626, on the advice of Karel Sr. of Žerotín, as the first Žerotín in the 17th century, converted to the Catholic faith in order to save the family property.
   The representatives of towns and villages had to sign new commitments and oaths of allegiance, as dictated by the victor, similar to the reversals of 1627, which pointed out the main offenses: association with the emperor's enemies and aiding them in battle, tolerating the hostile activities of non-Catholic priests coming from Hungary (Slovakia). Among the promises: they would duly pay the imperial contributions and other levies, they would not keep any weapons, and if any were found, they would hand them over to the authorities, they would capture the fugitive leaders of the uprising and non-Catholic priests and deliver them, dead or alive, to the authorities, and finally, that they would not take revenge on those persons who punished them in the imperial service. By oath, they promised loyalty and obedience, expressed remorse and allegedly repented of their rebellion.
   However, these new promises from 1644, like those from 1627, were not an expression of true popular sentiment, but an act forced upon the defeated and defenseless.

### The Fate of the Top Leaders of the Uprising at the Brno Court

   The hasty trials and swift executions were followed by the Brno court, where Rottall sent 21 leaders of the uprising. The question of the real leaders of the uprising has not been resolved and is one of the least known aspects of the uprising. The court records from the Brno investigation have not yet been found, as most of Rottall's archive was destroyed by human barbarity, and only a small part was saved by the educated, historically-minded farmer František Skopalík (1822-1891) at a distant paper mill.
   From dry accounting records, we now know that 21 rebels were executed in Brno. These prominent people from the uprising were led in ropes and chains to the prison of the Brno town hall. Those who were no longer able to walk due to fatigue and weakness were allegedly hanged on trees along the way. The last executions of the rebels took place in Brno.
   "...there one could see so many people broken on the wheel and impaled, and many brave heads nailed to the gallows..." as recorded by P. Začkovič in his Latin chronicle, which is not always entirely reliable.
   Only about one, or possibly two, of the leading rebels are the records exceptionally more eloquent and specific. They mention a Valach Jura Kovařík, "son of Jan Kovář", called Schmidt in German. A contemporary chronicle describes both Kovářs, father and son, as two ardent proponents of an alliance with the Swedes. Both allegedly organized Wallachian youth to fight alongside their Swedish allies against the imperials. A not entirely reliable and verifiable report states that one of the Kovářs converted to the Catholic faith at the Brno court and thus achieved clemency. If this report is credible, it means that it was not the father Jan Kovář who perished on the Brno scaffold, but his sick son Jura Kovařík, called Kovařík. In some contemporary reports, this Kovařík is also mentioned with the nickname of the not very successful imperial general Gallas. After the battle, General Buchheim also captured "the son of the Wallachian general", who called himself Gallas. The question of the general and specific knowledge of the social origin of the Wallachian leaders awaits clarification by further study of sources, less so from widespread legends that do not correspond to historical reality. The "Wallachian Lists" also occasionally mention the names of those executed in Brno without more detailed information.

### The Plundering of the Villages of the Slovak Allies by Buchheim

   What remained was to militarily resolve the connection of the Moravian rebels with the neighboring people on Rákóczi's Lednice estate, from whom the rebels received military aid in their last battle. Before the start of the punitive expedition to Vsetín, both Rottall and Buchheim were informed by the intelligence activities of their organs about the military preparations taking place on this estate. Before January 20, 1644, scouts detected extraordinary activity and troop concentrations at Lednice. The general wrote to the administrator of the estate and commander of Lednice Castle, the aforementioned Ferenc Hodoši, supreme captain, asking for an explanation of these preparations, the significance of which he surely guessed. However, no answer came from Lednice. Buchheim must have already known about the conclusion of an alliance treaty between the Swedes and Rákóczi, even though military action could not yet be launched.
   Rottall also knew that the former commander (?) of Vsetín, whose name is not given, "together with the robber Kovář from Hovězí" was hiding in Lednice Castle. For this reason too, Buchheim set out for Lednice with considerable forces, with 500 German cavalrymen, a unit of 1,000 musketeers (infantry) and 300 Valachs from the partly Catholicized Brumov estate, in order to resolve the whole matter militarily and decisively, but without provoking Rákóczi to open battle. The prince of Transylvania officially maintained neutrality towards the emperor. According to valid military principles, even the last remnants of the rebels who had found refuge at Lednice after the battle near Vsetín were to be destroyed.
   However, the rather extensive correspondence between Hodoši and Buchheim does not lead to any reliable conclusions. Two non-Catholic clergymen also found refuge in the castle, the well-known Mikuláš Drabík, a friend of Comenius, whose testimony about the critical days before the gates of the castle has been preserved. The identity of the second is not reliably ascertainable, and the trail of the Vsetín commander during the uprising also disappears.
   One of the Kovářs, probably the father, also found refuge in Lednice Castle, working as a blacksmith. The Kovář family is reliably documented in the land register of the village of Hovězí near Vsetín. Jan Kovář is attested as the mayor of this village in the troubled period of 1637-1638. Jura Kovář is very likely the son of the aforementioned Jan Kovář, also referred to as "son of Jan Kovařík". Hodoši, faced with the unexpected superiority of Buchheim's army and the zealous general, used delaying tactics so that he would not have to hand over the fugitive, along with others, to certain death by the imperial court. The general escalated his threats and placed an artillery battery in firing position 20 paces from the castle gate and another 10 paces from the chapel in the outer bailey. At the end of the dramatic negotiations with the uncompromising general, the brave Hodoši avoided handing over Kovář and other fugitives by referring to the emperor's decision. The correspondence testifies to the diplomatic skill of the brave and undaunted captain of the castle, in the face of the serious and easily carried out threats of the determined general.
   Kovář, father or son, managed to escape from the castle, as did Drabík. We do not know where and when Jura Kovář the son was captured. He was imprisoned in Brno. One official source speaks of his illness as epilepsy. Jura Kovář (Kovařík, Schmidt) ended his life on the Brno scaffold, probably in August 1644.
   The result of Buchheim's difficult campaign to Lednice was only the plundering of Rákóczi's estate, the future enemy of the emperor. The Slovak people of the Lednice estate paid dearly for their alliance with the Moravian people, for Buchheim gave the estate to his soldiers to plunder. On February 5, 1644, Buchheim left Wallachia with the greater part of his troops, leaving behind, at Rottall's request, smaller military detachments, which he needed to ensure peace, for he wanted "...to put a bridle on the so often rebellious Wallachia

### Wallachia after its Destruction 

   To the bundle of Buchheim's and Hodoši's letters is attached a chronologically last German report of a completely different character, with a hardly legible signature (Georg Halwich?) of a higher military official. The writer probably came from Buchheim's staff and commented on the events of the last bloody days in a brief, non-military, human way. His report is an important historical source on the final conclusion of Rottall's bloody action in Wallachia and its wider surroundings.
   According to the writer (February 12, 1644), besieged Olomouc was still being secretly supplied, as the military measures to cut off access were inadequate, and the peasantry ignored warnings, prohibitions and threats. The imperials used unprecedented, barbaric means and exterminated entire families. 12 peasants were hanged, along with their wives and children. The fear that gripped the rural people led to a reduction in the secret supply of food to the besieged city, and a shortage began to be felt in Olomouc.

### The Wallachian people accepted the executions of the rebels

   "...partly with indignation, partly with calmness, and according to Rottall's report, in those days 300 Valachs were executed by impalement, quartering, beheading and hanging, which has no end, and more are being brought in every day. Horrendum auditu, nefandum dictu (horrible to hear, terrible to tell)." (See picture on page 46.)
   We can call the lost battle near Vsetín, after 24 years of people's semi-freedom and freedom from the feudal order and after mostly successful battles with the imperials, the Wallachian White Mountain. Its dark shadow fell over the region of subdued popular resistance for three centuries. Everything that had been victoriously won several times over during the lifetime of one generation, as partial war successes, was irretrievably and definitively lost and humiliated. And this was not the fault of the brave peasantry, always loyal to foreign allies and friends, when there were no domestic allies and friends.
   Everything in Wallachia changed rapidly and gradually. The power of the returning Catholic landlords grew. Even the new lord of Meziříčí, Balcar (Baltazar) of Žerotín, atoned for his participation in the uprising of 1626 and 1627, and with the consent of Karel Sr. of Žerotín, in order to save the family property, joined the ranks of the Catholic feudal lords. He was the first Žerotín to abandon the Bohemian Brethren faith in the 17th century and began to serve the Catholic Church and the emperor, the goals of the Counter-Reformation, and political, economic, cultural and religious oppression.

### The Importance of the Catholic Religion
   
   This religion, controlled by an international church, was to become the only permitted religion in the country before 1620. This goal was achieved gradually, and the Catholic religion became officially the only state-sanctioned religion. The Catholic Church acquired the importance of a state institution. Therefore, even church visitations (inspections of church and religious work) were carried out in suspect villages in Wallachia with military assistance. The activities of the Catholic Church, with its medieval ideals of education and politics, its uncompromisingly defined relationship to the ruling class, its religious intolerance and its participation in secular rule, were to be completely restored. More intensive religious education and Jesuit missions, as well as theatrically staged conversions of individual non-Catholic priests in church during public appearances before former believers, were to be an effective and persuasive weapon. The priests were to publicly renounce their original non-Catholic religion in church and publicly confess the Catholic faith. Both the authorities and the Bishop of Olomouc (and former general) Archduke Leopold Wilhelm saw to the strict observance of the new oaths and promises made by the subjects. We do not read that these and other actions had any deeper impact on changing the minds of the people, who undoubtedly realized that the conversions were forced by pressure from the authorities, imprisonment and harsh living conditions after the defeat of the uprising.
   Religion, however, significantly influenced the social consciousness of the people. The social function of religion was extremely advantageous for the material and class interests of the feudal lords, especially in the area of educating their subjects in loyalty and obedience to their lord and master. This traditional class interest was realized for centuries.
   For both the rural and urban population, religion offered an interpretation of the meaning of life, had a powerful influence on the emotional sphere, and to a certain extent became a co-determining factor in the area of thought and feeling, in mutual relations. This significance of religion cannot be scientifically denied. Thus we understand why the Catholic feudal lords had a vital interest in the unity of religious views with their subjects.
   Nor could the participation of non-Catholic priests in the uprising be considered a unilaterally progressive element; the priests, because of their dogmatically rigid views, could not go as far as the rebels, especially in matters of property. The idealistic standpoint prevented the priests from developing a more radical movement of the poor peasants in Wallachia, who were dissatisfied with the existing feudal order.
   Only prophecies in times of war acquired greater and wider significance, especially among the common people. Their importance cannot be denied or underestimated, for they had a powerful influence on the people. Even J. A. Comenius himself did not escape their powerful influence.

### Comenius' Tragic Grief over the Peace of Westphalia

   The general weariness of the warring countries had led to years of negotiations to end the war that had devastated much of Europe. Comenius, disturbed by the news of the exclusion of the Czech nation from the peace negotiations, addressed the Swedish chancellor Oxenstierna in a touching letter, still moving today, more than three centuries later, by the force of expression with which he expressed the premonition of future national disaster. At the last moment, in October 1648, he appealed in vain to the Swedish statesman not to abandon the Czech nation, and reminded him in vain:
   "...what Your Highness, through me and others, has declared, that we shall not be abandoned. So sad it is now to hear that we are being abandoned, nay, that we have already been abandoned at the Osnabrück peace negotiations. In the name of many I write this, and moved by their sighs, I cast myself again at your knees, and through you also at the knees of the most illustrious Queen... and I beg and adjure you, for the sake of the wounds of Christ, that you do not utterly abandon us..."
   The Peace of Westphalia of October 24, 1648, was more or less satisfactory to both warring camps. It definitively buried for three centuries the hopes of the Czech nation and the small group of the defeated Wallachian people. It also completed the personal tragedy of J. A. Comenius. Gradually, the hopes of the non-Catholic priests in the Váh region and the remnants of the emigration, who had been waiting in vain for almost 30 years for a turnaround in political and military affairs and for their return to their homeland, were extinguished. The Peace of Westphalia became the final milestone of the Thirty Years' War. It was not until the summer of 1650, after the payment of wages and war indemnities, that the last Swedish garrisons left our devastated country. In June 1650, Catholic priests in Vsetín and elsewhere in Wallachia and other towns held celebratory thanksgiving services with processions to the sound of bells. It was a sad celebration of the tragic end of the Valachs and indeed for the entire Czech people. The Peace of Westphalia and the departure of the Swedes definitively consolidated everything that the Battle of White Mountain and the subsequent period had brought.
   Vsetín Castle according to a drawing from 1805. The defensive wall with loopholes built in front of the castle gives the misleading impression that the building has two floors.

## IX. Conclusion

   According to contemporary accounts, the East Moravian peasants fought "under the name of the Valachs", originally shepherds and breeders of small livestock, and of sheep and goats in the higher altitudes. During the war, however, this term was extended from the pastoral population to the entire rural population of eastern Moravia, semi-pastoralists and farmers, but not the urban population. Under this name, in some periods, a part of the urban population and even burghers, e.g. from Meziříčí, also appeared in the anti-Habsburg struggles.
   These armed people fought for new forms of economic and political life, for greater social justice and religious freedom on the side of the anti-Habsburg camp after the Battle of White Mountain. The differentiation between the breeders of Wallachian cattle in the higher altitudes and the farmers in the mountain valleys in the first years of the war does not yet disappear completely, but it becomes less distinct. It would therefore be more correct to speak of peasant uprisings in Wallachia. These constitute a specific long-term Moravian historical problem, which has not yet been completely objectively resolved.
   It can be said that the generation of the population during the Thirty Years' War continued the tradition of struggle of their grandfathers and fathers from the mid-16th century, in connection with the increasing oppression by the large landowners. The subsequent years further exacerbated this urgent problem of an economic nature. The people learned that they had to fight for their rights. This is why Wallachia, in the period after 1620, quickly transformed itself into a base and concentration area for anti-Habsburg actions. The development accelerated by the war strengthened the awareness of belonging to a higher social group that united people with identical interests. The lower classes, oppressed by the authorities and the social order, concealed their anti-Habsburg activities with the actions of the mountain shepherds, although in the vast majority of cases, it was the peasants, led by their fojts, who fought under this name, as the "Wallachian Lists" from 1644 clearly show.
   The Wallachian uprisings in the first half of the 17th century disrupted feudal relations so profoundly that groups of people not subject to anyone could exist in this area, resisting the feudal order even in periods when insurgent activity was suppressed. How else are we to explain the existence of "free men" and robbers?
   The imperial court, the court war council, the Church and the feudal lords hated the Wallachian people for their generational indomitability, their resistance and the disrespect they showed for the property of the ruling class. The rebels, on their own initiative, did indeed throw off the yoke of the Catholic feudal lords, but they did not take a similarly principled stand against the few non-Catholic landowners who became their leaders during the first and second uprisings. Only in a few places did they "take over" conquered estates, e.g. Brumov. As a militarily organized group, they were able to defend themselves for a generation without any signs of disintegration. It was not until 1644 that they were defeated and destroyed, literally exterminated, by superior force. The bad reputation of the Wallachian people in the eyes and written records of the ruling class is easily explained and understandable given the fundamental contradiction between the two opposing and deeply differentiated classes. Comenius did not allow himself to be misled by official and unofficial reports downplaying the fighting spirit of the Wallachian people, he practically identified with the people's interests, and therefore he evaluates the activities of the Valachs as fundamentally positive.
   The Wallachian peasants, with their limited resources and intellectual development in a geographically limited area, could not overcome the centuries-old foundations of feudal society, but they did undermine them with their efforts. They showed that life without landlord oppression was possible, with religious freedom.
   The formation of the Wallachian people as a specific settlement group went through an exceptionally rapid process in the years 1620-1644. In the midst of mighty struggles, a strong popular social consciousness was forming, and further development probably already tended towards the formation of a Wallachian ethnographic area.
   In the course of history, this people appears to us as one of the last representatives of active, determined anti-Habsburg resistance and open struggle, in some places of a purely warlike character. Even their futile efforts ultimately delayed the deterioration of the situation of the rural population during the period of the consolidation of the second serfdom (1620-1781). It cannot be denied that the Wallachian rebels, through their struggles, significantly enriched the history of the Czech nation at a time when its national future for three centuries was being decided. There is no doubt that their name achieved far greater renown abroad than in their own country during the Thirty Years' War.
   By their deeds, the Valachs wrote a glorious, though unfortunately still incompletely known, chapter in Czech history during the Thirty Years' War, and they also deserve mention in general history.
   There is already an extensive literature and numerous scholarly works on the history of the Wallachian people, as is the case with no other ethnic group of the Czech nation. After a period of insufficient understanding of the efforts and struggles of these peasant people and their deliberate denigration, the Valachs are being fully historically rehabilitated. The history of these mountain and foothill people has already been incorporated into general Czech history as its specific Moravian link in a consistent and persistent struggle. The history of the Valachs is being further explored until many questions are finally answered. It can be said that despite the differences in age and the ideologies and views conditioned by them, and despite profound social changes and a new methodological approach to historical processes, we stand essentially close to the views on the Wallachian struggles expressed by Jan Amos Comenius, a great contemporary of these turbulent and exciting events.