Think of a wealthy, politically influential person or family. Today one might think of billionaires like Michael Bloomberg, the Koch brothers and George Soros, or perhaps business successes like Warren Buffet, Sam Walton, Bill Gates, or Mark Zuckerberg. In fourteenth and fifteenth century Europe one would have thought of the De Medici family. That family rose to prominence and wealth, bankrolled international businesses, loaned funds to royalty, various members married nobility, were centerpieces in large social, business, and political networks, and some became heads of state themselves. In the late eighteenth through nineteenth century, one might suggest the Rothschild family, fulfilling a similar role. In between, during the sixteenth and early seventeenth century was the time of the Fugger family. From humble beginnings, the Fugger family, based in Swabia, Germany, gained wealth, nobility and then royal titles, and bankrolled the Hapsburg and other Catholic noble families through peace and war.

Fggrs-1Families prominence comes and goes. The main line of the De Medici family has died out, although some minor branches exist today. On the other hand, the Fugger family also has survived, and in some cases thrived through to the present. This article contains a brief overview of the Fugger family history, with a focus on conditions leading up to and contemporary to the Ring of Fire.

Before diving into details, let me offer apologies, in advance, for any inaccuracies or unflattering statements about the families discussed below. Most of the information was obtained through research on the Internet, through Wikipedia, encyclopedia entries, and direct links to compiled genealogies and family trees found by Google searches. I am neither German nor Roman Catholic, and I had some difficulty when the documents found were uploaded in German text, especially in the old German printing style, which could not be cut and pasted into a translation program. Opinions stated are my own.

With that said, I will proceed. I found several instances where identities were mixed up due to the repetition of names in the family. For example, the teen-aged Count Johann Fugger of the not-yet-published “Sushi, Anyone?” story was the son of Maria Eleonore von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, and had eight sisters, and all with Maria as their given first name, distinguished from each other by combination with their middle name. Sometimes even that was not enough, as there were at least three women named Maria Jakobaea Fugger between 1560 and 1640, two alive at the same time. One was sister to the abovementioned Johann Fugger, and the other was his niece, born posthumously to his brother, Jakob, and his wife, third cousin Juliana Sidonia Fugger, daughter of cousin Trajan Fugger.

There were also two Maria Magdalena Fuggers alive in 1634. Usually, but not always, sons were given names unique to their immediate family group. That, however, also caused problems, as there were Anton and Georg Fugger descendants in Fugger von der Lilie lines from both Raymund (1489–1535) and Anton (1493–1560), both sons of Georg (1453–1506).

There were so many deaths of children before the age of five that occasionally a new baby would be given the same name as a sibling who had passed away at a young age. Some names, such as Johann, Jakob, Markus, and Georg, were so prevalent that there were several alive at the same times with the same name, distinguished only by their home estate and, in the family trees, by birth dates and parentage. When 1634 opened, there were two Georg Fugger von der Lilie alive. One was uncle to Jakob, Johann Franz, and Johann. The other, son to Markus (1529–1597), was a lawyer in San Marco (Venice) and died on January 16, 1634. Entire chapters of books, even entire books, have been written about the Fugger family, and some confused men with their uncles of the same name, and even had the same person performing two different functions in the same time period in different parts of Germany!

Both the Fugger family website and Wikipedia begin the family narrative with the arrival of Johann Fugger, son of a Johann Fugger, who appeared on the tax records of Augsburg in 1357. There are some genealogy references to other fourteenth-century Fuggers, apparently not immediate family members of this Johann. The Johann at the beginning of the well-known line was in the weaver trade. He married Klara Widolf and became an Augsburg citizen. After Klara’s death, he married Elizabeth Gfattermann. He joined the weaver’s guild, and by 1396 he was ranked high in the list of taxpayers. He added the business of a merchant to that of a weaver. The vom Reh and von der Lilie lines are descended from the second wife.

Some of Johann’s sons survived childhood. Andreas (1394–1457) and Jakob (~1398–1469), were granted the right to “arms” by the Emperor Frederick III. The line descended from Andreas, the vom Reh line, survives today, but was much less prolific than the line descended from Jakob, the von der Lilie. Andreas branched out into the goldsmith business. He and his wife, Barbara, had four sons and three daughters, but later generations resulted in a few daughters and fewer sons. Jakob married the daughter of the master of the Augsburg mint. There were disagreements over running the family firm, and it was dissolved in 1454. Later, there was also a bankruptcy in 1499 on the vom Reh line causing some disruption. Some later descendants were brought into the von der Lilie side of the business.

The von der Lilie line produced many more offspring and much of the meteoric fame and social status was due to this line. Jakob Fugger (1398–1469) and his wife, also named Barbara, had eleven children, and only three failed to reach eighteen years of age. Of the surviving boys, one, the eldest, Ulrich, married and had children, but none of his sons had sons, and the branch “daughtered out.” Of the others, only Georg (1453–1506) had sons. Of those, Markus (1488–1511) became a priest in Rome, and the other two sons, Raymond and Anton, became the main patriarchs of the family. Eventually Georg died, and then Ulrich died, and their younger brother, Jakob “the Rich” (1459–1525) took over the family firm, which by this time was one of the wealthiest in Augsburg. His marriage to Sibylla Artzt, Grand Burgheress to Augsburg, the daughter of an eminent Grand Burgher of Augsburg, raised the family status and allowed him to purchase a seat on the city council.

The Fugger family company began as a trading business. The sole surviving brother of the Fugger von der Lilie branch, Jakob “the Rich,” acted as chief officer for the firm while expanding it into new areas. The business grew from its Augsburg base, adding agents in Venice, Rome, Munich, and later Seville, Augusta, Antwerp, Krakow, Neusohl, and other cities.

The family started a long association with the Habsburgs, providing suits of clothing to the royal family, and loans to various dukes, archdukes, and emperors. Archduke Sigismund Habsburg of Tyrol borrowed 3,000 florins in 1487 (present value, PV, September, 2014 US dollars (hereafter $US) about $US 560,000), bearing no interest, but to be repaid in silver. Silver mines were under obligation to sell extracted metal to the territorial ruler at a somewhat low fixed price, then also supplying the mint, and the ruler could assign the rights to some metal production in lieu of loan repayment, with the creditor able to sell excess metal on the open market.

There were repeated loans over the next few years, using as security silver mines in Tyrol, with rights to operation as part of the repayment deal. By the end of 1489 there was a cumulative debt of 268,000 florins, with 46,000 still outstanding (PV $US 9 million). Sigismund abdicated in 1490 in favor of his nephew, Maximillian, also king of Austria, who promptly borrowed another 120,000 florins (PV $US 27 million), and obtained more loans over the next few years. By 1495 Tyrol had a net 101,213 florins outstanding debt (PV $US 18.8 million) and it has been estimated they had earned a profit of hundreds of thousands of florins over nine years (PV $US 40–78 million). Fugger interests in copper mines began and grew.

I must digress to discuss the nature of the Habsburg loans. There were two types of debt incurred; long-term notes, called juros, and short-term contracts, called asientos. The juros were debts paid back by a series of annuity payments funded by “ordinary” crown revenues, tax revenues, rents, import duties, etc. It did not include gold and silver shipments from the Americas. The revenue streams could be perpetual (or until the principal was repaid), or lifetime, often assumed to be thirty-three more years, and some of these juros stipulated that they could be sold, probably at a deep discount, on the open market. The standard interest was a bit over 7 percent per annum, but there was no guarantee you would ever get the principal back, and so it took a good fifteen years of receipts just to be repaid your original investment. The Fuggers picked up quite a lot of mortgaged property this way. The Habsburgs did not default on these loans in the sixteenth and seventeenth century, but devoted more and more of their income streams to servicing this debt.

The silver and gold from the Americas also cause a slight, but consistent inflation of 1–1.5 percent. This may be one reason the savvy Fugger contracts often asked for mining contracts rather than cash.

The asiento contracts were for a specified time, from several months to a couple of years. Standard interest was about 11.5 percent. Their debt repayment service was from “non-ordinary” income, including silver and gold ships from the New World. After the default of 1557, most of these were collateralized. Also, some notes could be converted into juros at a reduced interest rate, about 5 percent. Some of these loans were made to even out cash flow, disburse funds to military or diplomatic personnel, etc., especially in distant locations. A few German families, Fugger, Welser, and the like, and a growing network of Genoese bankers made these loans, with the Genoese gradually outpacing the German. These debt contracts were subjected to repeated halting of payment, rescheduling payments, shaving the principal, and forced conversion to lower interest juro. Some contracts were paid off. Some were rolled into new loans, creating “Pay Day Lending” in the Holy Roman Empire. On the whole, even accounting for forced loan restructuring, the asiento business was risky, but profitable. The largest risk was a contract taken out shortly before one of the “defaults.”

Younger brother Jakob “the Rich” managed to get the family elevated to nobility status in 1511, with most of the descendants of nephew Raymund becoming Freiherr and Freiin (baron and baroness), and most of the descendants of nephew Anton becoming Graf and Graefen (count and countess). Eight years later, in 1519, Jakob led a consortium of German and Italian businessmen that loaned Maximillian’s grandson, Charles V, 850,000 florins (about 95,625 oz.(t) of gold) to procure his election as Holy Roman Emperor over Francis I of France (presents and bribes to electors). The Fugger contribution was 543,000 florins, about $US 78 million. [See endnote]

Over the years the Fugger family businesses expanded, especially the banking and financing business. Due to the church limitations on interest payments on outstanding loan debts, the family was given rights to rents, income from Knights order lands, exclusive mining and/or minting contracts, and other non-cash considerations, such as collateral property or outright contracts. For example, the operation of the cinnabar (mercury ore) mines in Almaden, Spain, silver mines in Guadalcanal, and the Maestrazgo (taxes paid by lands belonging to three orders of Spanish knights) were received as payment for the “loan” to Charles V. The copper and silver mining in operations in Slovakia, Bohemia, and Tyrol and the operations in India increased the family business wealth, but by mid-1500s, the firm relinquished the Maestrazgo contracts, the Guadalcanal business, and the Slovakian and Indian businesses as profits worsened. The descendants of Raymund were paid off and removed from the main firm. Later, they formed a second firm.

The Fugger companies made some mistakes, and took out long-term loans in Augsburg to lend out to the Habsburgs for short-term loans, which were not secured by taxes, with some of the debt service to be repaid by the gold and silver shipments from America. In 1549, Anton Fugger began to pull out of much of the Spanish business, but the Habsburg family still had large outstanding loan balances, on which they stopped payments in 1557 and again in 1560. According to Drelichman and Voth, the crown carried an average total loan balance of 34.9 million ducats, valued at (2014) 2–3 billion $US, steadily increasing, with revenues slightly less than one fifth of that. The loans were concentrated among a few dozen families of lenders, the Fuggers being one of the higher balance creditors. By the end of the sixteenth century, the Fuggers’ share of the millions of ducats of outstanding long-term loans had increased to over one million ducats, over $US 185 million.

To settle the “defaults,” several times the Spanish negotiated for lower interest rates, and longer terms. A third time they stopped payments in 1575, resulting in a 38 percent write-down of the tens of millions of ducats principal, and then a fourth time in 1596. The Fugger agents were also used for crown money transfers to the Netherlands after a network of Genoese bankers refused further dealings with Phillip until he made a satisfactory settlement. While not in the network, the family participated in the moratorium on further lending. Several sources imply that the Fuggers were exempted from some of the write-downs because of their importance in managing the mercury mines. No mercury meant no silver refining.

Some lending for short-term loans, asientos, continued into the Thirty Years’ War. Between 1621 and 1626, the Fugger companies and their agents received 479,680,049 maravedis in payments for asientos, meaning average yearly loans of over 220,000 ducats ($US 8.4 million), with five years of 11.5 percent interest totaling over $US 5 million. Similar loans contracts were made over the next twelve years. In February, 1629, Hieronymus Fugger signed an asiento of 780,000 ducats (today value about 28 million US dollars), of which only about 40 percent of the yearly payments were received. The Fuggers were, however, paid that year for the mercury they had supplied.

A second Fugger company was formed, mostly by junior lines and members of the family. Initially the purpose was a trading company, but they began making loan contracts also. Luckily, in general, the family had begun to accept mortgaged estates as payment for loans, the first such being crown counties Kirchberg and Weissenhorn, and began to purchase more income-producing property and send more sons into legal and court service, not banking or trade. In 1607, the Spanish yet again defaulted on payments, and the crown declared a moratorium on all debt payments, causing losses from the long-standing leasing business in Spain. The Thirty Years’ War devastated the populace and the business climate. 1627 brought another financial crisis, and by this time the Fugger companies were somewhat strapped for ready cash. By 1647, the family was out of the mine leases in Spain, and a dozen years later, out of the Tyrol mines as well. A dozen or so years after that, the trading company was dissolved.

The current Prince Fugger Privatbank bears no direct relationship to the original family companies. Fürst Fugger Privatbank was founded when a man named Carl Friedrich Fugger-Babenhausen, descendant of Count Johann Franz Fugger of the “Sushi Anyone?” story, acquired the small bank Friedl & Dumler GmbH in 1954, and the bank received its current name only in 1994.

Why did the Habsburg family dynasty find itself continually short of funds? Many of the asiento contracts would have been inevitable, given the vastness of the empire and difficulty transporting cash regularly with irregular revenue flows. But much seems to be due to poor agricultural and business policy decisions for Spain, and near continual military action. Absolute, or near-absolute, monarchy tends to support royal behaviors which correspond to what I call “Modified Royal Toddler’s Rules.”

  1. If I bought it with my own money or made it with my own hands, it’s mine.
  2. If my father/mother/other person gave it to me, it’s mine.
  3. If my father/mother/other person bequeathed it to me, or I inherited it, it’s mine.
  4. If my father/mother/other person told me I would inherit, but did not leave clear legal title, and they died, it’s mine.
  5. If someone lent it to me for a while and I want it back, it’s mine.
  6. If I can take it from someone else, it’s mine.
  7. If I can get it through marriage, it’s mine.
  8. If it looks just like mine and is right next to mine, it’s mine.
  9. If someone gives me the money, or lends me the money to buy it, it’s mine. See rule number 1.
  10. If it is not working well, or is not profitable, you can have it.
  11. But, if you fix it, or find another way to use it, well, it’s mine again, as well as anything that grows there or can be dug from the ground.
  12. I can make you give me or lend me the money to buy it, because I am entitled, because I am Me. Maybe I will even pay you back. Again, see rule number 1.
  13. I want it and I deserve it, because I am Me, and it’s mine.

Most reasonable people would agree with rules numbers 1 through 3. The difficulty with heads of state starts with rule number 4. Like most royal families, the Habsburgs of the sixteenth century married members of the dozens of other royal families. Many married first cousins. Thus, there were sometimes several valid territorial claims when using rules number 4 and 5. Rule number 6 was always popular with someone, so defending what is “mine” was also vital. Then there was the pesky business of being “elected” Emperor. That was a very expensive business.

One might think that before the time of the Thirty Years’ War, the Fuggers would have begun to distance themselves from the increasingly reckless noble houses of Europe, but they most likely could not. They were too well associated with the Church, the Spanish and Vienna-based Habsburgs, and the military activities of the Catholic League, their finances and bloodlines too entwined. Some of the early-sixteenth century financial success resulted from close ties to the Church, both by lending to powerful clerics, often for them to purchase diocese power and right to income. The family was also prolific in supplying nuns, priests, and other administrative staff. The Fugger Company enabled repayment of a loan to the Archbishop of Magdeburg and Mainz (21,000 guilders, value of about 3.15 million $US). An agent of the Fuggers carried the cashbox during the sale of indulgences permitted by the pope to help repay the loan. The same indulgences denounced by Martin Luther in 1517. Two years later, this same archbishop was an elector and cast his vote for Charles V, after receiving funds (bribe?) from him, that were from the aforementioned huge loan, mostly from the Fuggers.

In addition, the Fugger family leased the papal mint from 1508–1524. Firmly believing that good works contribute to a place in heaven, the Fugger family started a chain of poor houses, the Fuggerei, contributed to building churches, and donated books to libraries. The supply of personnel to the Church increased during the wartime unrest. A list of Fugger surname members descended from Johann the master weaver is given below in Table I. Those in bold print were, or most likely were, alive in early 1634.

Thus, there were at least twenty-seven direct Fugger-name descendants of the first Augsburg Johann in Church service between about 1420 and 1634. This does not count the descendants of daughters who married non-Fuggers. Numerous genealogy charts listed “Provost” in professional notes. The men listed as “canon” were probably some sort of clergy, not lay canon staffers. I could find no record of marriages for them in the detailed family trees available online to the public. At the beginning of 1634, there were at least five members of Table 2 still living, and possibly as many as eleven (the death records of this period are spotty, especially when there are no surviving children), with, as future (?)nuns, two sisters of Johann of Babenhausen still young (16 and 18) during this period, and two cousins, grand-daughters of Aunt Anna von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, as children aged 10 and 14. Two priests on the list had advanced to bishop. One of Raymund’s sons, Ulrich, (1526–1584) converted to Protestant and, unpopular with the rest of the family, left the Augsburg/Ulm region to move to the Rhenish Palatinate.


Anna Andreas (1st vom Reh) Early 15th cent. Holzen Cloister Nun
Sibylla Matthaus, son of Andreas (1st vom Reh) Late 15th cent. Augsburg Nun
Marcus Jakob the Elder 1448–1478 Freising, Regensburg, Rome Canon
Marcus Georg, son of Jakob the Elder 1488–1511 Augsburg, Regensburg Canon
Felicitas Ulrich, son of Jakob the Elder 1495–1539 Augsburg Nun
Sigmund Friedrich Johann Jakob, son of Raymund 1542–1600 Regensburg Bishop
Viktor August Johann Jakob, son of Raymund 1547–1586 Passau, Regensburg, Vienna Canon
Jakob Johann, son of Anton 1567–1626 Konstanz Bishop
Helena Marx, son of Anton 1572–1618 Inzigkofen Cloister Nun
Severin Severin, a grandson of Raymund 1586–1629 Freising, Brixen Canon
Karl Albrecht Philipp Eduard, a grandson of Raymund 1587–1642 Konstanz, Salzburg Canon
Ludwig Georg, a grandson of Anton through Marx 1588–? Capuchin Friar
Maria Octavius Secundus, a grandson of Raymund 1583–1646 Kuebach Benedictine nun
Johann Jakob Severin, a grandson of Raymund 1593–? A Jesuit priest
Helena Georg, grandson of Anton through Marx 1595–1611? Milan, Santa Marta Nun
Elizabeth Georg, grandson of Anton through Marx 1598–? Milan Nun
Marx Albrecht, , grandson of Anton through Marx 1598–1625 Augsburg, Passau Canon
Anton Jakob Anton, , grandson of Anton through Marx 1610–1650 Augsburg, Passau Canon
Veronika Albrecht, , grandson of Anton through Marx 1609–? Hohenwart Nun
Sibylla Albrecht, , grandson of Anton through Marx 1610–1667 Hohenwart Nun
Maria Walburga Johannes, great-grandson of Anton by Hans 1620–1672*(Child in 1634) Salzburg Future Nun
Anna Maria Johannes, great-grandson of Anton through Hans 1624–1703*(Child in 1634) Brixen Future Abbess
Maria Euphrosina Johann, grandson of Anton through Jakob 1610–1630 Holzen Cloister Nun
Maria Jakobaea Johann, grandson of Anton through Jakob 1611–1693 St. Katharina in Augsburg Nun, Prioress
Maria Sibylla Johann, grandson of Anton through Jakob 1612–1632 St. Katharina in Augsburg Nun
Maria Margareta Johann, grandson of Anton through Jakob 1614–1656 Holzen Cloister, then Inzigkofen Future (?) Nun
Maria Maximilliana Johann, grandson of Anton through Jakob 1616–? Holzen Cloister, then Marienthal Future (?) Nun, Future Sub-Prioress

In the early years of rising fame and fortune, many marriages were made for strategic business alliances, such as two Fuggers marrying sisters in a prominent family, Fugger daughters being supplied with dowries and marrying brothers or cousins of some other important family. General Otto Heinrich’s first wife, Anna, was the fourth cousin of General Gottfried Heinrich von Pappenheim. Jakob and Otto Heinrich were second cousins to each other through their fathers, and Jakob’s mother, Maria Eleanore von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen was sister to Otto Heinrich’s Aunt by marriage, Anna. Their great-uncle Marcus Fugger (1529–1597) of Kirchheim had a daughter, Elizabeth, who, in 1589, married Wilhelm III von Öttingen, a son of Johanna von Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, aunt of Maria and Anna. A son of that union, Johann Albrecht von Öttingen, second cousin to Jakob and Otto, and grandson to Marcus Fugger, married his first cousin, (Maria) Elizabeth Fugger, and, after her death, married Maria Gertrud, General Pappenheim’s sister. In the OTL, Karl Phillip Fugger, son of Hugo and great-grandson of the first Raymund, married Ursula Marschall von Pappenheim in 1648. She was a fourth cousin twice removed of both Anna and Gottfried Heinrich.

In 1604, Ulrich von Öttingen, a younger brother of Wilhelm III, married Barbara Fugger (1577–1618), the aforementioned Hugo’s younger sister and third cousin to the aforementioned (Maria) Elizabeth. Two of the three children of a third von Öttingen brother, Wolfgang III, married Fuggers in 1624. Maria Christina, in January, married Marquard Fugger, another grandchild of Marcus Fugger, and then, about six months later, Maria Christina’s older brother Ernst married Maria Magdalena Fugger, younger sister of Maria Elizabetha, his first cousin Johann Albrecht’s wife. Later, in the OTL, a grandson and great-grandson of this union and a granddaughter of Wolfgang III married other Fuggers. Thus, members of five generations of von Öttingens married Fuggers. Other similarly entwined families were von Rechberg and Vöhlin.

As the wealth accumulated, so did the desire to keep some in the family. An astonishing number of Fuggers married Fuggers or descendants of Fuggers. With a few exceptions, the inbreeding was limited to second or third cousins, but, occasionally some were first cousins, and there were children born of two Fuggers who then went on to marry another Fugger. The following table gives a sample of how intermingled the lines became. The unions between children of Fugger daughters (different surname) with Fugger sons are usually not listed in this table, nor are unions of a Fugger with close cousins on his/her mother’s side. An example of that is Paris Fugger, great-grandson of Philipp Eduard and Magdalena von Königsegg, married Anna Eleanora von Königsegg, grand-niece of Magdalena, therefore, a Second+1 cousin.

The closeness of these relationships might have been a cause for concern. According to Canonlawmadeeasy.com and the experts at EWTN.com, second cousins and further out should be permitted to marry. They seem to be using a different computation than the table included in the Catholic Encyclopedia, section titled “Consanguinity (In Canon Law).” The following is a direct quote.

“But the canon law, in the collateral line of consanguinity, computes for marriage one series only of generations, and if the series are unequal, only the longer one. Hence the principle of canon law that in the transverse or collateral line there are as many degrees of consanguinity as there are persons in the longer series, omitting the common stock or root. If the two series are equal, the distance is the number of degrees of either from the common stock. Thus brother and sister are in the first degree, first cousins in the second degree; uncle and niece in the second degree because the niece is two degrees from the grandfather who is the common stock.”

The following paragraph is a direct quote from Wikipedia.

“Roman civil law prohibited marriages within four degrees of consanguinity. This was calculated by counting up from one prospective partner to the common ancestor, then down to the other prospective partner. The first prohibited degree of consanguinity was a parent-child relationship while a second degree would be a sibling relationship. A third degree would be an uncle/aunt with a niece/nephew while fourth degree was between first cousins. Any prospective marriage partner with a blood relationship outside these prohibited degrees was considered acceptable. Canon law followed civil law until the early ninth century, when the Western Church increased the number of prohibited degrees from four to seven. The method of calculation was also changed to simply count the number of generations back to the common ancestor. . . . The Fourth Lateran Council of 1215 decreed a change from seven prohibited degrees back to four (but retaining the same method of calculating; counting back to the common ancestor).” This means counting on one side of the line only.


Octavian Secundus Georg and Ursula von Lichten-stein Maria Jacobaea Johann Fugger and Elizabeth Northafft Second 1579
Philipp Markus and Sibylla von Eberstein Barbara Philipp Eduard Fugger and Magdalena von Königsegg Second +1* 1594
Albrecht Markus and Sibylla von Eberstein Veronika Jakob Fugger and Anna Ilsung First 1595
Anton Marcus and Sibylla von Eberstein Elizabetha Octavian Secundus Fugger and Maria Jacobaea Fugger Second +1* 1602 (2nd marriage for him)
Christoph Octavian Secundus and Maria Jacobaea Fugger Anna Katharina Raymund Fugger and Juliana von Heudorf First 1608
Hieronymus Jakob and Anna Ilsung Maria Christoph Fugger and Maria von Schwarzenberg First +1 1615
Maria Elizabetha Anton and Eliz. Fugger Johann Albrecht von Öttingen Wilhelm III von Öttingen and Elizabeth Fugger First 1622
Nikolaus Georg and Helena Madruzzo Elizabetha Octavian Secundus Fugger and Maria Jacobaea Fugger Third 1625, after his uncle Anton died (1616)
Karl Severin and Katharina von Helf-enstein Maria Elizabeth Markus Fugger and Maria Salome von Königsegg Third 1629
Jakob Johann and Maria Eleonore von Hoh-enzollern-Sig-maringen Juliana Sidonia Trajan Fugger and Regina von Freyberg Third 1632
Maximil-lian Anton and Eliz. Fugger (Maria) Franziska Georg Konrad von Törring and Anna Fugger Second 1634–1635
Leopold Hierony-mus and Maria Fugger Maria Johanna Johann Ernst Fugger and Margaretha von Bollweiler Second +1* through men,First through women 1651
*Second + 1 Means second cousins, with one in the next generation

Every single one of the marriages in Table 2 and several which occurred thereafter in the OTL were, therefore, prohibited by the Roman Catholic Church due to their law on consanguinity. Third cousins, by the calculations, are fourth degree. One can only hope that a dispensation was obtained for each. I suppose it is good that they could afford them. The custom was to obtain a fee-based dispensation. According to modern practices, dispensation is almost never granted to first cousins. Extra dispensation is required if there is more than one way to calculate degree (i.e. a child of two cousins marrying another cousin). Marrying your uncle’s widow, as did Nikolaus Fugger, was probably a definite no-no, especially as she was also a third cousin. No children came from that union. She was 41 years old, already a mother of eight, all still living at the time of the wedding. He was 29.

Europe was ravaged by plagues and famines in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. Chronic or acute diseases also affected continuing the family lines. Take for example, cousin Georg Fugger, based in Italy. His wife, Helena, a granddaughter of a female de Medici, gave birth to eighteen children, of whom one of the first ten and all of the last eight died in the same year they were born. One of these nine and two other children died 1590, the beginning of severe famine years in northern Italy. Two daughters later died in their teens. One son became a friar, and two girls became nuns, with both of them dying by age 16 in 1611. Of all the children, only one, Nikolaus, married and had children, and the only two of his to survive were female. Other branches of the family had similar fates, deaths, joining the Church, and “daughtering out.”

Most of the properties acquired by the Fugger family members and still owned in 1634 were in and around Ulm and Augsburg. Many of the castles are associated with burgs and towns. A partial list includes: Babenhausen, Boos, Kirchheim in Swabia, Kirchberg an der Iller, Pless, Markt Wald, Mattsies, Glött, Mickhausen, Wellenberg, Rettenbach, Duttenstein Castle ( near Dischingen), Oberndorf, Nordendorf, Weissenhorn, Biberbach, UnterSulmentingen (in Laupheim), Wörth (now Danauwörth, halfway between Ulm and Ingolstadt), Niederalfingen (20 miles north of Ulm, towards Schwaebish Hall), Stettenfels (about 5 miles SE of Heilbronn), Schmiechen (2 miles East of the Lech River, on the Bavarian side).

In the OTL, Swabia was devastated by the continued war. Between April 1632 to sometime in 1635, Augsburg was occupied by Swedes and between Sept., 1634 to March, 1635 the city was besieged by the Imperialists. The population dwindled from 70,000–80,000 in 1624 to 16,422 in Oct. 1635. The Ring of Fire caused disruption not only to the active fighting in the Fugger county region, but also to the disease and resulting deaths. It is most likely that some of the deaths between 1634 and 1637 OTL may be avoided due to sanitary conditions and better food.

By spring of 1634, there were five or six single young Fugger males of various ages: (1) Heinrich Raymond, great- grandson of Raymund through Georg, aged 23, (2) Johann Eusebius, son of Johann, great-great-grandson of Anton, aged 17, (3) Leopold, son of Hieronymus and great-grandson of Anton, aged 14, (4) Sebastian, great-great-grandson of Anton, aged 14, (5) Karl Phillip and brother (6) Albrecht, great-great-grandsons of Raymund through Georg, aged 12 and 10, respectively. Marcus Oktavian, great-grandson of Anton, died later that year in June, and his older brother, Maximillian, was awaiting/planning his marriage to cousin Maria Franziska von Törring. I have left them out of the list of possible temporary students in Grantville, as they would have been unlikely candidates. A third brother, Franz, age 22, was a soldier historically on record as under Wallenstein, and also unlikely to visit Grantville.

There were also several girls who may have been possible student visitors to Grantville in the next few years. There were: (1) Maria Maximilliana, daughter of Johann and great-great-granddaughter of Anton, age 18, (2) Maria Walburga and (3) Anna Maria, daughters of Marcus and great-granddaughters of Anton, aged 12–16 and 10, (4) Maria and (5) Maria Johanna, daughters of Johann Ernst and great-great-granddaughters of Anton, aged 14 and 12, and(6) Maria Johanna, daughter of Otto Heinrich and great-great-granddaughter of Anton, aged 11. Several unmarried or widowed women were available to serve as chaperones or house mothers.

I have doubts as to whether General Otto Heinrich Fugger was even in Madgeburg. His wife gave birth to a son, Johann Otto, in Munich, on Aug. 15, 1631, meaning he must have been home mid- to end of November, possibly December, 1630, the beginning of the siege. Traveling from Swabia to Magdeburg in the dead of winter would have been extremely grueling, especially if he had men with him. He was likely not there except possibly at the last month.

Son Heinrich was born, and died, sometime in 1632, so Otto must have been home sometime between September, 1631 and April, 1632 (premature?). According to Wikipedia, in early September 1631, he was on his way from Hesse to Breitenfeld with his troops. Did he rush right back to Swabia to see his wife after the battle? Jakob Fugger was married in 1632, probably no earlier than March, because his daughter, Maria Jacobaea, was born in 1633. Obviously, if Otto Heinrich was at the wedding, both another of his sons, Franz Ignaz (1633–1635), and Jakob’s daughter, Maria Jakobaea (1633–1679), were conceived during this visit.

The Wilhelm Fugger mentioned in “Turn Your Radio On, Chapter Six” was most likely the eldest son of Severin, great-grandson of Raymund. He married, but I could find no reference to children, surviving or otherwise. His brother, Karl, was married to Otto Heinrich’s first cousin, Maria Elizabeth Fugger.

The main timeline series of books and Grantville Gazette stories have addressed military matters, some technological advancements, music, police work, business, and so on. Not much has yet been written about the consequences for Imperial employees in the, hopefully non-violent, regime changes. Many of the Fuggers von der Lilie in regions now controlled by either the USE or Swedish administration served in the court system, some directly employed by the Emperor Ferdinand, or Duke Maximillian. For example, Johann Ernst, elder brother to General Otto Heinrich, held the title “President of the Imperial Chamber Court,” whatever that meant. Other relatives served in other positions in the Courts, as tax collector, Treasurer, Chamberlin, and other like titles. Others held various ministerial and councilor titles. What happens to them? Who, if anyone, now pays the salaries of staff for criminal and civil issues? What happens to the ongoing legal cases when the governmental authority is no longer the authority? What happens to outstanding loan balances still owed by the Habsburgs or other Archdukes now on the other side? Perhaps these issues will be explored in new stories.

Using an exchange rate of $36 for 1632, as per the article “Money and Exchange Rates in 1632,” by Francis Turner, and an inflation rate of 400 percent, which matches a modest inflation rate of 1.25 percent per annum between 1520–1632, as per (1) graph of “How Christopher Columbus caused inflation,” and (2) “Price Revolution” article on Wikipedia gives: One 1520 florin = $144 US 2014 dollars. 543,000 florins in 1520 would be $78 million US 2104 dollars.

One florin was 0.1125 troy ounces gold, and at $1260/oz. in September, 2014, has a present value of about $141.7 US dollars, making the loan value about 77 million dollars by this calculation.



http://gw.geneanet.org/hwember—multiple pages, extensive genealogy

Epidemics Resulting from Wars, by Friedrich Prinzing, Oxford University Press, (1916), pg. 58 [found on Google Books]

Albert of Mainz, Wikipedia article

Fugger Family and Individual Pages, Wikipedia

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04264a.htm (Catholic Encyclopedia, “Consanguinity (in Canon Law)”


Can Cousins Marry in the Church?

http://genealogy.euweb.cz/fugger/fugger1.html, database titled ”Hochadel in Deutschland”

Geneall.net/de—isolated entries, but limited linking access if not member


The Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences edited by Hugh Chisholm,(1910), Volumes 11–12 (found online) http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/FRA_GAE/FUGGER.html

Our Royal, Titled, Noble, and Commoner Ancestors & Cousins: http://our-royal-titled-noble-and-commoner-ancestors.com/


Renaissance and Reformation, Volume 1, edited by James Patrick, Marshall Cavendish (pub), (2007), pg. 87. (found online)

http://www.theodora.com/encyclopedia/f/fugger.html, from Encyclopedia Britannica, 1911


http://web.stanford.edu/class/polisci313/papers/AlvarezApril22.pdf, by Carlos Alvarez Nogal


Lending to the Borrower From Hell: Debt and Default in the Age of Philip II by Mauricio Drelichman and Hans-Joachim Voth,

Serial Defaults, Serial Profits: Returns to Sovereign Lending in Habsburg Spain, 1566–1600, by Mauricio Drelichman and Hans-Joachim Voth, (2010)

Los banqueros de Felipe iv y los metals preciosos Americanos (1621–1665), by Carlos Alvarez-Nogal, from Bank of Spain, Studies on Economics History, 1997