Report and Answer to the Bavarian-Anhalt Secret Chancellery

Report and Answer

...that they had entered into an alliance or correspondence with the Bohemians in a certain measure. Furthermore, it is quite absurd to claim that everything between the Union, the States The States General of the United Netherlands, and the Bohemians is dedicated to a single foundation against Austria. For what does the Union have to do with Austria, or Austria with the Union? Or what sovereignty or superiority does Austria have to claim over the Union? The United Members believe they have his Imperial Majesty as their head, but by this line of reasoning, they would owe Austria not only good neighborliness, but also some appearance of subjection and vassalage original: aliquam speciem subjectionis, & vasallagii. This is absurd to say original: absurdum dictu, and the Austrian ministers original: ministri Austriaci themselves would never say it, much less wish to maintain it.

If the Compiler The author of the pro-Imperial document being refuted had wished to take and interpret the words of Von Plessen Volrad von Plessen, a leading counselor to the Elector Palatine candidly original: candidè, he could have easily perceived that the words: "The claims of the Bohemian Estates, the Protesting Union in Germany, and the United States in the Netherlands are all dedicated to one foundation," could have no meaning other than that the States, the Union, and the Bohemians have a common cause and common foundations original: causam communem, & fundamenta communia.

The common cause is the preservation of religion and liberty original: Causa communis ist conservatio religionis & libertatis; the common foundations original: Communia fundamenta are the ancient freedoms and privileges. The States [of the Netherlands] have until now knightly defended theirs with the sword against Alba The Duke of Alba, known for his harsh suppression of the Dutch Revolt and other Spaniards. The members of the Union possess the Religious and Secular Peace A reference to the Peace of Augsburg (1555), which legalised Lutheranism in the Empire alongside many other ancient freedoms. Who is the person who can blame them for desiring to maintain themselves within these rights to the best of their ability? What a significant, magnificent Letter of Majesty The Majestätsbrief of 1609, which granted religious freedom to Bohemian Protestants (to say nothing of other ancient freedoms) the Bohemians have from their King, Emperor Rudolf! Every Protestant would have to be a mere "mouth-Christian" Someone who is Christian in name only and an atheist and Epicurean in their heart, if they did not grant and wish for the Bohemians to be able to remain by the mentioned Letter of Majesty and their freedoms. What reason, then, did the Compiler have to interpret and explain the aforementioned words of Von Plessen so maliciously original: sinistrè?

For the conclusion and appendix original: Pro conclusione vnd appendice, he [the Compiler] adds on page 36 another limping consequence original: claudicantem consequentiam; a logical non-sequitur and argues thus original: & sic argumentatur: Von Plessen has knowledge of the Union's secrets, especially what has been negotiated with the States in Holland, with the Bohemian Estates, with the Turkish vassal and rebellious Hungary Likely referring to Gábor Bethlen, Prince of Transylvania, who fought against the Habsburgs (where he was an ambassador), as well as with the Duke of Bouillon in France and with the Crown of England. Therefore original: Ergo, the Union is dedicated against his Imperial Majesty and Austria, etc. Which is exactly the same kind of argument as: The staff stands in the corner: Therefore the Pope is [in Rome] original: Baculus stat in angulo: Ergo Papa est; a traditional phrase used to mock a logical argument that does not follow from its premises.