Austria's Schleswig Policy

Renáta Raáb

Description

This is the first monograph devoted to the diplomatic history of Austria's Schleswig policy in the 1848-52 period. The Hungarian historian has used mainly unpublished sources, written in Danish, German, French, and Hungarian to trace Austrian and Hungarian connections to the First Schleswig War and the intricacies of Austro-Danish diplomatic relations throughout the period. The book first sets out the basic problem of the Schleswig conflict within the Danish monarchy and the Prusso-Austrian contention for hegemony in Germany, and then examines how the Hungarian Revolution and War of Independence of 1848/49 was connected to the First Schleswig War. Finally, it explores Austria's efforts at consolidation after gaining the upper hand in Germany. The main protagonist of the book, however, is not Austria, Denmark, Germany or Hungary, but the common past of Europe. What makes the writing unique is the way it connects European diplomatic history with the history of Central and Eastern Europe, Scandinavia and the province of Schleswig-Holstein.

Sujets

• Histoire
• Harmattan Littérature

Informations

• Publié par: L'Harmattan
• Date de parution: 11 octobre 2019
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9782140132469
• Langue: Français
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 11 Mo

Extrait

R E N ÁTA R A Á B

AUSTRIA’S SCHLESWIG POLICY –

L’Harmattan Hongrie

C K Collection dirigée par Enikő Sepsi

ISSN 9

R ENÁTA R A Á B

AUSTRIA’S SCHLESWIG POLICY 1848–1852

Károli Gáspár University of te Reformed Curc in Hungary L’Harmattan Publishing • Éditions L’Harmattan

Budapest • Paris 9

Publising Director: Enikő Sepsi, Ádám Gyenes, Xavier Pryen

Series Editor: Enikő Sepsi

Károli Gáspár University of te Reformed Curc in Hungary Kálvin tér 9. H9 Budapest, Hungary T: + 9

L’Harmattan Kiadó Kossut Lajos utca . H Budapest, Hungary

L’Harmattan France 7 rue de l’Ecole Polytecnique 7 Paris

he publising of te book was supported by te Ministry of Human Capacities.

Cover: Otto Bace, Soldaternes jemkomst til Købenavn, 9 Danis Soldiers Return to Copenagen, Oil on canvas, Credit: Det Nationalistoriske Museum på Frederiksborg Slot, Poto: Kit Weiss

Translator: Alan Campbell

© Renáta Raáb, 9 © Károli Gáspár University of te Reformed Curc in Hungary, 9 © L’Harmattan Publising, 9 © Éditions L’Harmattan, 2019

ISBN 977

Volumes may be ordered, at a discount, from

L’Harmattan Könyvesbolt  Budapest, Kossut L. u. . Tel.: +7979 armattan@armattan.u websop.armattan.u

www.amazon.fr

CONTENTS

I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

M’ D  18141848 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Austria and te German Confederation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 he German Confederation and its mecanism of operation . . . . . . . . . . 7 he emergence of PrussoAustrian dualism. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  he hird Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  he Danis Monarcy and te emergence of te Scleswig question . . . . . .  Denmark at te Congress of Vienna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  he istorical background of te Scleswig question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 National antagonisms intensify witin te Danis Monarcy . . . . . . . . .  Denmark at te centre of PrussoAustrian rivalry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Antagonism between te Danis Monarcy and te German Confederation . .  Austria’s patronage of Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Metternic and te federal decision of 7 September  . . . . . . . . . . . 

A   DG   184850 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Revolutions in Austria and Denmark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Austria, Prussia and te Frankfurt parliament . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Revolution and transition in Copenagen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 he DanisGerman war up to te Malmö armistice  August  . . . . .  Intervention by Prussia and te German Confederation. . . . . . . . . . . .  he Marc ministry and te diplomats of te old system . . . . . . . . . . . .  ‘Strictly’ neutral Austria. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. . . . . Scleswig and te great powers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Vrints’s peace plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  he danger of Austria drifting into war . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Danis international relations between te signing of te Malmö Convention and te Danis ultimatum  Marc 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  he inauguration of te joint government in te ducies . . . . . . . . . . .  Cange of government in Austria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Peclin’s mission to Vienna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Scwarzenberg opposes te termination of te Malmö armistice . . . . . . 7

•  5 •

C

From te resumption of te DanisGerman war until te Berlin armistice  July 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Furter armistice talks in London and Berlin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Austrian attempts to prevent escalation of te Scleswig war . . . . . . . .  he Hungarian question in AustroDanis diplomacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Hungary in te Habsburg Empire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 he Hungarian transformation of  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Hungary’s long war . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Hungary and te 9 Berlin peace talks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Klapka and te question of te Hungarian officers in Hamburg . . . . . . . 9 he Danis question in te  Hungarian press . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Danis officers figting on te Austrian and Hungarian sides . . . . . . . .  he use of analogies in Danis diplomacy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 he Italian debate in Hungary and Denmark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  he Peace of Berlin  July  and te London Protocol  August  . . 7 he question of a constitution for Germany7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . he failure of te Prussian plan for union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Talks in Berlin and London,  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Danis diplomatic efforts in Vienna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Scwarzenberg’s policy of postponement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Austria’s reluctant compromise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Austria and te London Protocol. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 he ratification of te  July peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  he suppression of te ScleswigHolstein movement . . . . . . . . . . . . 

T     D  185128 J 1852. . . he Dresden Conference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Federal execution in Holstein . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Occupation of Holstein by Prussian and Austrian forces . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Sponneck’s Vienna mission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 he ‘Tillisc tyranny’ and te Regenburg language regulations. . . . . . . 79 Scwarzenberg’s action against EiderDanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  he failure of te Sponneck project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  Cange of government in Copenagen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Blume becomes foreign minister . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 he AustroPrussoDanis agreements of  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97 Frederick VII’s manifesto of  January  and te fall of EiderDanism . . . 99

S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  L   . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

•  6 •

INTRODUCTION

he Austrian istorian Fritz Fellner once declared tat Czec, Polis, Hungarian and Croatian istorians ave never been able to write ‘Austrian istory’, because ‘only German nationals [witin te Habsburg Empire] considered  temselves Austrian’. Weter or not Fellner was rigt, istorians from oter nationalities of te former empire  even Hungarians, Croatians or Poles  may occasionally encounter a topic of Austrian istory tat obliges tem to take te risk. All te more so if  as in te present case  te topic is one tat Austrian istoriograpy as ignored. In taking up tis callenge, owever, we must put aside te sligtly tendentious istorical training of te Monarcy’s grievanceridden successor states and  like wellscooled Metternician bureaucrats  rise above te multinational mass of te Habsburg Monarcy, focusing on te events temselves and te interests of wat was at tat time a unified state and a great power of Europe. Here, I adopt tis attitude towards a particular segment of Austria’s foreign policy: te andling of te Scleswig question between  and . he reader may be curious as to wy a Hungarian as cosen to take te standpoint of te Austrian Gesamtmonarcie in tis somewat unattractively complex subject. Firstly, aving completed my 999 degree dissertation, written primarily on te basis of Danis press articles, I wanted to find out weter its main conclusion  tat te Hungarian Revolution and War of Independence of /9 ad a significant impact on te emergence of Danis politics  could be substantiated from contemporary diplomatic arcive documents. Or was it only a press reaction tat affected te political views of te public but ad no practical influence on official Danis diplomats and politicians? Hungarian sources from /9 ave little to offer in answering tis question, because te Kingdom of Hungary, a component of te Austrian Empire, did not manage to assert its own foreign policy or set up diplomatic representation during its attempt at independence. Lajos Kossut of Hungary and František Palacký of Boemia  as well as te Croatianborn Baron Jellačić and te

  Fritz Fellner: Die Historiograpie zur österreiciscdeutscen Problematik als Spiegel der nationalen Diskussion, in Österreic und die deutsce Frage im 9. und . Jarundert, Wien, Verlag für Gescicte und Politik, 9, .

•  7 •

INTRODUCTION

AustrianGerman Franz Scuselka  were represented in Copenagen by te Austrian minister Baron Vrints. Consequently, te route to understanding te international, and specifically Nortern European, context of Hungarian events of /9 lies troug a study of Austrian and Danis diplomatic dispatces and instructions, important sources for Boemian, Polis, Italian and Hungarian  as well as Austrian  istory. Links between te Hungarian Revolution and te hree Years’ War Treårskrigen or, in German istoriograpy, te ScleswigHolstein uprising, , would not be enoug in temselves, owever, to justify te coice of topic. Wat Hungarian and Austrian istorians ave always failed to grasp is tat te Scleswig question was not a marginal problem or te story of a periperal province, but te alpa and omega of te German question, and it actively involved all of te great European powers. As Eric Marcks as  put it, ‘ere, all European power converged.’ he multidimensional Scleswig question, because of geograpy located at te exit of te Baltic Sea and te simultaneous presence of dynastic, constitutionallaw and nationality factors, engaged te diplomatic attentions of te great European powers trougout te nineteent century. he affairs of te Ducy of Scleswig and te hree Years’ War tat was fougt for its possession must terefore be approaced from a European perspective. Among te attitudes to te Scleswig question and to te German question in general taken by te European powers, Austria’s as a special zest and piquancy. Austria often found itself in a contradictory position on te issue owing to its dual capacity as a German and a European power. It was te only member of te Concert of Europe, apart from France, to ave no direct geostrategic interests in te region, unlike Russia, Great Britain and Prussia. Austria terefore found te Scleswig question onerous, but recognized tat to maintain its position as first presidential power of te German Confederation against te constant callenge of Prussia, it could not avoid getting involved in an issue of suc importance for German national development. ‘Woever grasps te initiative in te Scleswig question will unite Germany,’ is a  statement from an article of te Viennese newspaperPresseof  May  . In te matter of te integrity of te Danis monarcy, Austria, constrained by German considerations, was unable to be as resolute and fortrigt as were Russia, Great Britain, France and even Prussia, wic in  openly made more of its Germanness tan of its role as a European power. Metternic eloquently expressed Austrian diplomatic restraint in te Scleswig question in a andwritten marginal note to a dispatc from is minister in Copenagen,

  Eric Marcks: Die europäisce Mäcte und die er Revolution,Historisce Zeitscrift,, 9, 79.   Paul Mectler:Die öffentlice Meinung in Österreic zur scleswig-olsteiniscen Frage 1863- 64,Neumünster, Karl Wacoltz Verlag, 9, 9.

•  8 •

INTRODUCTION

Maximilian heobald Josep Vrints von Treuenfeld, of  July 7: ‘Count [Heinric] ReventlowCriminil [foreign minister of Denmark] is correct in attributing significance to our silence in tis case… in respect of te Open  Letter… we wis only to listen.’ his silence, signifying a neutral stance, free of any vociferous, positive, definite political attitudes, pervaded Austrian Scleswig policy rigt up to . It is tis quality tat makes a study of Austrian Scleswig policy so difficult, silence and restraint being difficult for a researcer to track down. hat te apparently marginal Scleswig question was actually decisive in Austria’s istory emerges clearly from a comment by its foreign minister, Karl Ferdinand BuolScauenstein, wen defending imself and criticizing is successor, Count Joann Bernard Recberg: ‘In 9, after two defeats in battle, we lost a province, and in , after two victories in  battle, we lost te wole of Germany.’ Also true of te subject as a wole is a comment by te autor of Russia’s Scleswig policy: it is te intersection of European diplomatic istory wit te istory of Central and Eastern Europe and Scandinavia and te provincial istory of ScleswigHolstein tat gives  te subject its beauty, but also its callenging complication. his book as a complex objective. Beyond te Hungarian connections, it sets out to follow te course of Austrian and Danis diplomatic relations step by step; to present from te aspect of Scleswig question and its symbiosis wit German unity te events of PrussianAustrian rivalry; and to illuminate Austria’s opes and options and te effect of its Scleswig policy on te pan German question. Considering tat te hree Years’ War is not well known in eiter Hungary or Austria, te book also attempts  inasmuc as te Austrian connections wit te diplomatic istory of war allows  to fill tis gap and present te main course of events. he start and end points of te period are almost selfdefining. Bot monarcies were swept into civil war by te events of Marc , and tere was a rapid political transformation in bot places. Wereas te elimination of internal opponents and te restoration of te unified state effectively reaced completion in Austria by autumn 9, enabling te empire to recover its strengt and regain its leading German role after te Prussian callenge, te preMarc  unity of te Danis state was restored only at te end of January , largely troug te good offices of Scwarzenberg, te Austrian prime minister and foreign minister. he pacification of Scleswig and Holstein

  Joann Albrect von Rantzau ed.:Europäisce Quellen zur Scleswig-Holsteiniscen Gescicte im 19. Jarundert. Akten aus dem Wiener Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarciv 1818- 1852,Breslau, Hirt Verlag, 9, Veröffentlicungen der ScleswigHolsteiniscen i, Universitätsgesellscaft,  Scriften der Baltiscen Kommission zu Kiel, , .   Quoted in Fritz Fellner: Österreic und die scleswigolsteinisce Frage, inDer deutsc- dänisce Frieden von 1864,Kiel, ScleswigHolsteiniscer Heimatbund, 99, .   Randolf Oberscmidt:Russland und die scleswig-olsteinisce Frage 1839–1853,Frankfurt a. M, Peter Lang, 997, .

•  9 •