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