the second schleswig war
TRANSCRIPT
The Second Schleswig War: Bismarck or National Sentiments?
Katherine Weiss
29 April 2014
History 489
Weiss
The Second Schleswig War: Bismarck or National Sentiments?
The area of Schleswig-Holstein has been a point of contention for countless
centuries. As one American correspondent in Dresden aptly wrote, “The strife between the
people of the Duchies and the Crown of Denmark is well nigh a thousand years old.”1 It may
appear as an inconsequential area and point of issue today, but the Schleswig wars had
lasting consequences in creating the German state that led to WWI and WWII. Schleswig-
Holstein’s close proximity to Denmark and Prussia led to a mixed culture of people,
resulting in a minority population of Germans in Schleswig, and a minority population of
Danes in Holstein. Nationalistic sentiments within these areas fermented with the budding
national consciousness that was flooding Europe in the 1840s. The First Schleswig War in
1848 did little to solve the issues, however, and would only enflame the issues that led to
the Second Schleswig War.
At the time of the Second Schleswig War, Minister President Otto von Bismarck was
at the head of Prussian politics. From a historical vantage point, it might appear that
Bismarck was the one who engineered the war. In fact, Bismarck even believed in his own
exaggerated role and, “would later claim that the whole campaign was in his head from the
beginning; that he already planned the annexation of the duchies when he took office in
1862.”2 However, when examining the issue closely it is clear that while Bismarck helped
maneuver the treaties that ended the war to help further the German unification cause, the
war itself cannot be accredited to Bismarck. The national sentiments within Schleswig and
Holstein were strong enough that had the Prussian government not intervened there
would have been an internal conflict, and possibly even a civil war in Denmark. The Second
1 R.W.R., "Prussia and Denmark," New York Times, March 01, 1861.2 A.J.P. Taylor, The Struggle for Mastery in Europe 1848-1918, (London: Oxford University Press, 1954), 143.
1
Weiss
Schleswig War is a product of the legal issues concerning the duchies and the national
sentiments within Denmark and the duchies; Bismarck’s part in the war had little to do
with his strong political maneuvering ability and more to do with the happenstance of
being in office at an opportune moment.
Schleswig and Holstein have been areas of debate and unrest for centuries. Though
often uttered within the same breath, Schleswig and Holstein are two separate duchies that
were connected to multiple entities. The history between Denmark and the two duchies
dates back many centuries. Schleswig was particularly an important area because of its
close proximity towards the Danish border. Schleswig was included when the three lands
of Denmark formed the Danish kingdom in the 9th century, but Schleswig remained under
its own rule. Holstein became a county of the Holy Roman Empire in the early 12 th century.
Throughout the century, the rule of Holstein changed hands several times. However,
Holstein was ruled almost exclusively by Germans up to the 15th century. The areas
developed separately, albeit amidst war and conflict over who was to rule the territories.
Beginning in the 14th century, Schleswig and Holstein grew closer due to wars and
marriages.
King Christian I was officially elected as Duke of Schleswig and Holstein in 1460. It is
important to note that the treaty that declared this unification stated that Schleswig and
Holstein must remain ‘forever undivided.’ The specifics of this union are what allowed
room for dispute. While Christian was King and Duke of Schleswig, it was still administered
as an independent duchy.3 The duchies would not be incorporated in a common
constitution with Denmark. After the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire, Holstein 3 LeeAnn Iovanni, "World Bibliographical Series," Denmark Revised Edition, Vol. 83, ed. Robert G. Neville, John J. Horton, Robert A. Myers, Ian Wallace, Hans H. Wellisch, Ralph Lee Woodward, Jr. (Santa Barbara: Clio Press, 1999), xxiv
2
Weiss
became officially incorporated under the Danish crown. In 1815, however, Holstein was
allowed to join the newly formed German Confederation. Holstein was still a duchy of
Denmark, but it was connected to Prussia as well, a clear conflict of issues. It was at this
time that the political issues with Schleswig-Holstein were added to the already developed
opposing national sentiments. Because of its close proximity to Prussia, Holstein was
largely German, while Schleswig was predominately Danish. While these differing
nationalities will be addressed later, it is important to understand where these differences
often manifested themselves, and it was evident in the diverging political factions.
Within Denmark, Schleswig, and Holstein, several political parties made their views
heard. The most prominent parties were the national, or Schleswig-Holstein party, and the
Eider-Danes. The Schleswig-Holstein party looked towards a unified German state that
would include Schleswig. The Eider-Danes had their focus on incorporating Schleswig with
Denmark, with little concern for what happened to Holstein. Some of the more radical
Eider-Danes had a broader dream of a pan-Scandinavian state.
The Schleswig-Holstein party had a reason to hope when King Frederik VII came to
the throne. Although King Frederik was married three times, none of the marriages
produced any children. This became problematic because within the duchies the old law of
male succession still applied. When it became known that there would be no heir, the
Eider-Danes were very distressed and in 1848 they attempted to force the government’s
hand with a royal proclamation that, “declared that the succession in Schleswig was the
same as that in the kingdom.”4 As to be expected, this caused uproar amongst the German
population. Holstein looked to the German Confederation for help, but due to the 1848
4 Lawrence D. Steefel, The Schleswig-Holstein Question, (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932), 7.
3
Weiss
revolutions across Europe, the diet at Frankfurt did not have enough time to come up with
a solution.
The political issues became increasingly arduous with the passing of the 1849 and
1863 constitutions, and the international agreements in 1851 with the First Schleswig War.
Unlike many of the other 1848 European revolutions, Denmark’s transition from
absolutism was bloodless. It was the 1849 constitution that ended any possible revolution.
The 1849 constitution limited the power of the monarch and created the first Danish
parliament, but still divided Denmark into three parts. The constitution did not apply to
Schleswig and Holstein, and Holstein was still allowed to be a part of the German
Confederation. The 1851 international agreements that ended the First Schleswig War
culminated with The Treaty of London of May 8th, 1852, which stipulated several things. It
first acknowledged that Prince Christian would be King Frederik’s successor. The treaty,
later known as the ‘London Protocol,’ solidified that Schleswig and Holstein would be equal
in their connection to Denmark. While the constitution and agreements kept the duchies in
their original position, it was not a solution. The national sentiments between the Danes
and Germans in both Schleswig and Holstein were strong enough that the people could not
be expected to coexist peacefully. There were still conflicting political parties like the Eider-
Danes and the Schleswig-Holstein party.
King Frederik’s successor was King Christian IX. Two days before King Frederik had
died, a new constitution had been passed. However, King Frederik was unable to sign it
before his death. This put King Christian in a challenging position. The constitution
integrated Schleswig into the Danish kingdom, which was a clear violation of the London
Protocol. Bismarck could not have foreseen whether or not King Christian would sign it.
4
Weiss
King Christian knew that signing this constitution would add to the existing complications
with the duchies. It would be naïve to think that the king did not anticipate the
consequences of his signature. However, the significant question was what consequences
would result. The King, along with others in Europe doubted that there would be fighting.
The King also believed that other European countries would come to Denmark’s aid. In the
end, King Christian felt compelled to sign it, lest he alienate many influential Danes. This in
turn gave Prussia and the German Confederation the legal opportunity they had been
waiting for. The constitution effectively ignored the provisions made with the London
Protocol. A resolution was passed that called for the occupation of Holstein. However, even
though Prussian forces occupied Holstein, there was still doubt that there would be a war.
Just seven days before the war broke out a correspondent in London wrote that he was
still, “very loath to give up [his] conviction that there will be no fighting.”5 On February 1,
1864, Prussian troops crossed into Schleswig. The Second Schleswig War had officially
started. Politics were clearly the validation and justification for war, but there would not
have been a call to such measures had there not been previous unrest within the areas.
The political groups that caused these issues were largely formed based upon
nationality. The Kingdom of Denmark was Danish in nationality. It is in the duchies
Schleswig and Holstein that nationality becomes more of an issue. Schleswig was
comprised of a large population of Danes, but in southern Schleswig there was a small
population of Germans. Similarly, Holstein was comprised largely of Germans, but held a
small population of Danes in the northern area of the duchy. Because the duchies were
5 Monadnock, . "Our London Correspondence. Denmark." New York Times, January 23, 1864.
5
Weiss
fought over so much in the early centuries, a large majority of the inhabitants did not begin
to identify with their nationalities until the 1830s.
The differing nationalities caused problems not just in politics, but also in language
and culture. In the early 12th century, Schleswig uniformly followed many of the same
administrative rules as Denmark. In turn, the law and administrative offices used Danish as
their language. In the 13th and 14th century, the most important municipal laws were
written in Danish.6 The last time Danish was used to write a law was in 1335, although
personal documents and letters can still be found written in Danish. Early rulers over
Schleswig recognized that language played a big part in shaping the laws and culture, and
most importantly, the nationality of the area. The early formations of Schleswig affected the
populace into the 1800s, where the large majority of the citizens preferred Denmark to the
German Confederation. This is not to say, however, that there was no German influence in
Schleswig. When Schleswig came into the hands of German Princes in the early 15th
century, Low German replaced Danish. “Low German now became the language of the court
and government… New laws and edicts were given in low German.”7 Modifications like
these affected the everyday language. Danish, “was expelled from public life in South
Jutland [Schleswig].”8 The language and subsequently culture from Holstein found its way
into Schleswig. This is one of the roots of conflict between the people of Denmark,
Schleswig, and Holstein. When King Christian I was named Duke of Schleswig and Holstein
in the mid 15th century, the contact between the duchies increased. This has been
6 Carl Ferdinand Allen, On nationality and language in the Duchy of Sleswick or South Jutland, (Copenhagen: Printed in Thieles Office: 1848), 23.7 Carl Ferdinand Allen, On nationality and language in the Duchy of Sleswick or South Jutland, (Copenhagen: Printed in Thieles Office: 1848), 31.8 Carl Ferdinand Allen, On nationality and language in the Duchy of Sleswick or South Jutland, (Copenhagen: Printed in Thieles Office: 1848), 23.
6
Weiss
previously discussed in terms of politics, but it also affected the everyday life of citizens.
Many German nobles from Holstein immigrated into Denmark and Schleswig. When the
nobles immigrated they attempted to silence the Danish populations. It is not surprising,
then, that disputes arose between the nationalities that would later lead to war.
In order to understand the situation completely, the revolutions within Europe in
the first half of the 19th century must be addressed. Denmark was not immune to the
nationalist revolutions that were spreading across Europe in the 1830s and 1840s. While
the struggle between Schleswig, Holstein, and Denmark began hundreds of year’s prior, it
was this sweeping European nationalistic fervor that finally gave the people a way to
address the grievances that had plagued them. In addition to Nationalist revolutions,
people were fighting for representation. Often times the problems coincided and it was the
nationalist groups who were fighting for representation. King Frederik VII was able to
avoid any outright revolutionary activity by abolishing absolutism and creating the first
Danish parliament. Nonetheless, King Frederick VII was unable to escape the national
sentiments that lingered with Schleswig and Holstein. It may have appeared to the King
that he had quelled any unrest, but the nationalist fervor gave the populations within
Schleswig and Holstein a new hope to finally find a way to settle their disputes.
As previously discussed, this fervor manifested itself into the political realm. The
nationalist issues in the Second Schleswig war did not just involve Danes and Germans,
however, and the repercussions of national fervor would carry into the war itself. During
the war there would be mutinies within the Austrian armies because Hungarians, “Had
agreed to pass over to the Danes, to join them in fighting the common enemy of their
7
Weiss
nationality.”9 At this point in time Bismarck was a representative in the Prussian
legislature, the Vereinigter Landtag. Bismarck did not cause or instigate any of the
governmental actions taken with the Schleswig and Holstein, and the German
Confederation at this time.
It is helpful to examine Bismarck’s views as a child, while he was at university, and
in the government positions preceding his appointment to prime minister in order to fully
comprehend his decisions later in life. While children’s views may differ from their parents,
it is important not to discount the influence parents have on their children’s views and
perceptions of the world. Otto von Bismarck was born on April 1, 1815 in Schönhausen,
Germany. Bismarck’s father and mother came from opposing backgrounds. His father,
Ferdinand von Bismarck, provided Bismarck with a rich background of the Prussian landed
gentry. His mother, Wilhelmine Mencken, was far more educated than his father and
passed on her intelligence and above all the, “the insatiable ambition to escape from the
narrow confines of the life of a Prussian country noble.”10 Thus, from birth Bismarck was
given two diverting schools of thoughts to choose from. As evident of his later words,
Bismarck esteemed the Prussian traditions, and held on to the naturist side his father
provided. However, he did not discard all of his mother’s traits. It was from his mother that
Bismarck acquired his liberal views.
At the young age of six, Bismarck was sent off to boarding school. Life at boarding
school was shockingly different than the simplicity of his boyhood in the country. Bismarck
is cited saying, “The Plamann Anstalt ruined my entire childhood.”11 Bismarck’s disdain for
9 New York Times , "Extracts From our Foreign Files. The Danish Question. Germany and the proposed conference.," April 17, 1864.10 Volker Ulrich, Bismarck The Iron Chancellor, (London: Haus Publishing , 2008), 8.11 Volker Ulrich, Bismarck The Iron Chancellor, (London: Haus Publishing , 2008), 9.
8
Weiss
the stiffness of boarding school contributed to his attitudes in political office, later in life.
When Bismarck went to university at Göttingen, he rarely attended lectures unless it was
the historian Arnold Heeren. Bismarck was attracted to Heeren because of their similar,
“moderate and practical liberalism and the disdain for ideology.”12 It was at Göttingen that
Bismarck adopted his practical approach to politics. While Bismarck favored moderate
liberalism, he was not inclined to the liberal party. These early years undoubtedly formed
Bismarck’s viewpoints and outlook on life. In college Bismarck did not join the national-
liberal burschenschaft. This fraternity held views that coincided with Bismarck’s
intellectual outlook. Instead, Bismarck chose an aristocratic club. Bismarck’s choice would
be reflected in his later years in political office when he opposed liberal parties. Even with
Bismarck’s choice to take the road less traveled, he did not seem to like anything. He
disliked and was unimpressed by everything around him. In 1836, after his time at
University, Bismarck entered into civil service.
While in civil service, Bismarck held a variety of meaningless jobs in which he
determined that he wanted to be more than, “a mere cog in the bureaucratic machine.”13 It
was after sitting in the Vereinigter Landtag for two months in 1847, that Bismarck
determined politics was where he should be.14 Bismarck had finally found something that
interested him. Eventually Bismarck would be appointed as Prussian prime minister in
1862. Bismarck’s first war was the Second Schleswig War. In a letter written to Count
Robert von der Goltz, a Prussian ambassador, he would write that in regards to the Danish
question, “From the very beginning I kept annexation steadily before my eyes, without
12 Bruce Waller, Bismarck, (Malden : Blackwell Publishers Inc., 1997), 3.13 Volker Ulrich, Bismarck The Iron Chancellor, (London: Haus Publishing , 2008), 18.14 Volker Ulrich, Bismarck The Iron Chancellor, (London: Haus Publishing , 2008), 27.
9
Weiss
losing sight of the other gradations.” 15 Bismarck would later hold himself in higher regard
than Emperor William, saying that William, “could not have been guided into the path that
led to the Danish war,”16 insinuating that Bismarck maneuvered Prussia into war with
Denmark. Bismarck did in fact play a part in the beginnings of the Second Schleswig War,
however it is a gross exaggeration to say that he ‘guided’ Prussia into war with Denmark.
It is helpful to examine the direct influence Bismarck had on the war. Bismarck’s
influence on the war with Denmark began when he was appointed as Prussian ambassador
to the Russian Empire in 1861. His position as ambassador would later lead Bismarck to
positions of higher power. At this time, tensions between Prussia and Denmark were
fermenting. A Dresden correspondent for the New York Times chastising the Prussian diet
for, “threatening Denmark that, unless she redressed the wrongs of Holstein, somebody
would do something,”17 and then failing to take action for over three months. However, it
would be three more years until the tensions exploded. A new monarch, King Wilhelm,
came to power in 1861. The new King had many problems with the Prussian parliament
(diet), specifically with a strong liberal opposition. Bismarck was appointed as Minister
President of Prussia on September 23, 1862. The Prussian diet had a budget crisis that King
Wilhelm I believed only Bismarck could solve. It would be more appropriate to say that the
King believed Bismarck would do the king’s will. In Bismarck’s first year in office, there
were much more pressing issues than Denmark and the duchies. In February of 1863,
Bismarck was forced to deal with rebellions in Poland against Russian rule. The
Alvensleben Convention was a treaty between Russia and Prussia to settle the issues. The
15 Otto Von Bismarck, and A.J. Butler, Bismarck The Memoirs Volume II, (New York: Howard Fertig, 1966), 11.16 Otto Von Bismarck, and A.J. Butler, Bismarck The Memoirs Volume II, (New York: Howard Fertig, 1966), 12.17 R.W.R.. "The Trouble Between Prussia and Denmark." New York Times, June 4, 1861.
10
Weiss
specifics of the treaty led both Prussian politicians and Western powers to question
Bismarck’s recent appointment by the King. Austria seized this opportune time to
restructure the German Confederation in a way that would be more beneficial to Austria.
So, in the fall of 1863, as Danish parliament was drafting the November Constitution,
Bismarck was presenting his counterproposals to Austria. The way Bismarck approached
this issue again angered politicians, particularly those in the liberal party. This was
revealed in the general elections in October, and the liberal opposition gained a majority in
parliament. However, because the German unification question was still at the front of
many people’s minds, the successful unification wars would prove to be Bismarck’s legacy,
rather than the Bismarck’s actual policies, which many did not agree with. The Schleswig-
Holstein issue appeared to be the only hope Bismarck had to rectify the missteps during his
first year in office.
When King Christian IX signed the constitution on November 18, 1863 the German
population was in an uproar. The discontent was not limited to the Germans in Holstein.
Within Prussia, anger raged among the Germans. It was clear to the governments in Austria
and Prussia that action had to be taken. A Federal Execution was decreed by the diet at
Frankfurt, and on January 8, 1864, Hannoverian and Saxon forces completely occupied
Holstein with no dispute by the Danes. At this time, it was still speculated if Denmark
would receive aid from any other European countries. With the Alvensleben Convention
Russia was undoubtedly going to stay out of the conflict, as they were indebted to Prussia.
France was similarly unlikely to enter the conflict because of its involvement in Mexico and
the yet again unsurprising tensions with Great Britain. Prussia and Austria were given a
great advantage when it was clear Denmark would not have help from any other European
11
Weiss
countries. Bismarck decided to approach the war as a matter of upholding the London
Protocol rather than following along with the nationalist movement. This was a practical
move, “because any ‘national’ solution would inevitably have set a dangerous precedent for
the multinational Hapsburg state.”18 As Minister President of Prussia, Bismarck was at the
head of politics. While the diet at Frankfurt was making the decisions, Bismarck was seen
as the man in charge. After a failed ultimatum by Prussia and Austria to Denmark, the
Hannoverian and Saxon troops made their way to occupy Schleswig.
The effects of the Second Schleswig War were long lasting. The Gastein Convention
ended the war with the Treaty of Vienna. It was decided that Austria would rule Holstein,
and Prussia would rule Schleswig under a joint administration. Bismarck’s influence on the
peace treaty with Austria was far greater than the war itself. Bismarck looked at Schleswig
and Holstein as a political playing card. However, he did not take into account the
population of Schleswig that did not want to be a part of any type of German unification.
While most of the area Germany conquered during the unification process was returned
after WWI, Schleswig was not. It was only after an overwhelming majority of votes by the
population that Northern Schleswig returned to Denmark in 1920. Holstein has remained a
part of Germany since the Austro-Prussian war. The Second Schleswig War played a large
part in beginning the first and second world wars and is the first of the “German unification
wars”. The peace treaty between Prussia and Austria was a pretext for the Austro-Prussian
war, which led to a more unified German state.
Knowing that Schleswig and Holstein were not always a part of Denmark, it is not
surprising that there would be issues involving control of the duchies. Schleswig and
18 Volker Ulrich, Bismarck The Iron Chancellor, (London: Haus Publishing , 2008), 57.
12
Weiss
Holstein developed separately and were unlikely to merge fully with Denmark. Although
many tried to connect Schleswig and Holstein closer through politics, their nationalistic
differences were too strong to ever reconcile the differences. In addition, the legality of the
duchies was problematic from the start, with Schleswig and Holstein only partially
connected to Denmark and not under the Danish common constitution. It would be
thoughtless to discount Bismarck’s part in the war; however it would be equally as careless
to accredit the whole war to Bismarck. Bismarck is undoubtedly an important figure in
German history; his childhood molded him into the “iron and blood chancellor.” That being
said, Bismarck was still young when the nationalistic waves swept across Europe into
Schleswig-Holstein. Bismarck did not coerce Prussia or Denmark into war; he merely took
advantage of an already perilous situation. Because the political situation at the time
pleased very few people, the Kingdom of Denmark was bound to explode with all the
tremendous amount national fervor within Schleswig and Holstein, leading to an inevitable
outcome, war.
13
Weiss
BibliographyPrimary Sources:
Bismarck, Otto Von, and A.J. Butler. Bismarck The Memoirs Volume II. New York: Howard Fertig, 1966.
New York Times , "Extracts From our Foreign Files. The Danish Question. Germany and the proposed conference. ," April 17, 1864.
Monadnock, . "Our London Correspondence. Denmark." New York Times, January 23, 1864.
R. R.W.. "Prussia and Denmark.." New York Times, March 01, 1861.
R.W.R.. "The Trouble Between Prussia and Denmark." New York Times, June 4, 1861.
Secondary Sources:
Adriansen, Inge, and Jens Ole Christensen. The Second Schleswig War 1864: prelude, events and consequences. Sønderborg: Sønderborg Slot ;, 2013.
Allen, Carl Ferdinand. On nationality and language in the Duchy of Sleswick or South Jutland. Copenhagen: Printed in Thieles Office, 1848.
Embree, Michael. Bismarck's first war the campaign of Schleswig and Jutland 1864. Solihull: Helion, 2006.
Iovanni, LeeAnn. World Bibliographical Series. Denmark Revised Edition. Vol. 83. Edited by Robert G. Neville, John J. Horton, Robert A. Myers, Ian Wallace, Hans H. Wellisch, Ralph Lee Woodward, Jr.. Santa Barbara: Clio Press, 1999.
Jespersen, Knud J. V., Ivan Hill, and Christopher Wade. A history of Denmark. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004.
Mowat, R. B.. A history of European diplomacy, 1815-1914,. London: E. Arnold, 1922.
Steefel, Lawrence D. The Schleswig-Holstein Question. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932.
Taylor, A.J.P. The Struggle for Mastery in Europe 1848-1918. London: Oxford University Press, 1954.
Ulrich, Volker. Bismarck The Iron Chancellor. London: Haus Publishing , 2008.
Waller, Bruce. Bismarck . Malden : Blackwell Publishers Inc., 1997.
14