Danish visions of the Scandinavian union (1809–1810): a genealogy of the rhetoric and pragmatics of justification

ABSTRACT

Although nation and empire – as well as the organicist and universalist visions mirroring them – are usually put in opposition to each other, this article argues that the two can create synergistic alliances. The attempt of the Danish dynastic union proposal to Sweden in 1810 sheds light on the repertoire of rhetoric and arguments the state could harness to substantiate its potential to rule over diverse populations. First, the paper demonstrates how the trope of Scandinavian kinship was formulated in the Danish public debate during the transitional period, or what Koselleck calls Sattelzeit. Then, the article shows how this language was embedded into power relations and configured to reinforce the imperial aspirations of the Nordic amalgamation, meaning the fusion of the Scandinavian nations. The core sources I consult are the pamphlets published to advertise union-building and the documents stored in the folders of the Royal Archive in Copenhagen (Rigsarkivet).

KEYWORDS:

• Scandinavian union
• international relations
• political rhetoric

Acknowledgments

This article is an output of a research project implemented as part of the Basic Research Program at the National Research University Higher School of Economics (HSE University). I am thankful to Alexander Semyonov, Ruth Hemstad and Feliks Levin for their insightful comments on the earlier drafts of the manuscript. I also thank two anonymous reviewers whose suggestions helped improve this manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Quoted in: de Castro, The Inconstancy of the Indian Soul, 1–2.

2. See for example how the history of 19^th-century Scandinavia is presented as a continuous drive towards nationalization and homogenization: Kouri and Olesen, The Cambridge History of Scandinavia, 946–92.

3. When I finished writing this paper, I discovered a brilliant recent volume on kinship in international relations. I was happy that its editors shared my interest in kin and its many forms in the global politics: Andersen and de Carvalho, ‘The Family of Nations.”

4. Since the 16^th century, the Kingdoms of Denmark and Norway were united by a personal union, which modern literature typically refers to as Denmark-Norway. In this paper, I use this term when I want to stress the fact that the boundaries of the public debate or political participation were wider that the national ones.

5. Bregnsbo and Jensen, Det danske imperium; Bregnsbo, ”Frederik VI, det danske imperium, Norge og krigen 1807–1814,” 125–43; Østergaard, ”National-Building and Nationalism in the Oldenburg Empire,” 461–509.

6. More on this approach see it: Gerasimov, Kusber, and Semyonov, Empire Speaks Out; Stoler and Cooper, Tensions of Empire.

7. Kumar, “The Idea of Empire,” 1–36.

8. Koselleck, Futures Past, 236. See also: Horstbøll, “Enevælde, opinion og opposition,” 35–53; Evju, Ancient Constitutions and Modern Monarchy.

9. Hårdstedt, “Decline and Consolidation,” 213–26.

10. Norway was governed more autonomously because of the war conditions, and the ruling commission was a new official body established there in August 1807: Sveriges krig åren 1808 och 1809, vol. VI, 1–2 (Kongl. boktryckeriet P. A. Norstedt & söner, 1915), 33.

11. Christian August to Frederik VI, 24-04-1809, in Meddelelser fra Krigsarkiverne, bd. 4 (København, 1890), 216; See as well: Hemstad, ”‘Fra ”det Förenade Scandinavien” til ”den Skandinaviska Halfön’,” 47–79.

12. Alm, ”Kring märkesåret 1809,” 2–13.

13. H. Arnold Barton, “The Swedish Succession Crises of 1809 and 1810,” 309–33; and Friis, “Frederik den Sjette og det andet svenske Tronfølgervalg 1810.”

14. Charles XIII to Frederik Christian, 10-07-1810, in Danmarks Breve. Visited 22/12-2019, https://danmarksbreve.kb.dk/catalog/%252Fletter_books%252F002207868%252F002207868_000-L002207868000016. See also: Hjelholt, “3. Frederik Christians stilling til det andet svenske Tronfølgervalg.”

15. It was well-known for the king that Frederik Christian was regarded as the most appropriate candidate in Sweden: RA, DUA, S-1869, Niels Rosenkrantz to Frederik VI, 10-07-1810, 1 (Lists are usually not numbered in Danish archival materials, but I count or name specific pages for easier access).

16. RA, DUA, S-2153, Frederik VI to Niels Rosenkrantz, 17-07-1810.

17. Frederik VI to Charles XIII, 18-07-1810, in Danmarks Breve. Visited 22/12-2019, https://danmarksbreve.kb.dk/catalog/%252Fletter_books%252F002207868%252F002207868_000-L002207868000019; The original in French is stored in: RA, DUA, S-2153, Script de lettre au Roi de Suede: ‘Elle connoit trop bien l’historie du Nord pour ne par être persuade qui la desunion entre des nations qui ont tant d’affinites, même religion, même langue originaitement, des moeurs et des habitudes, qui sont presque les mêmes a eté la cause de leurs malheurs, de leur foiblesse. […], pour mettre fin à jamais à la dissension entre des Peuples qui sont, au font, des frères […]’.

18. Bodensten, ”Scandinavia Magna: en alternativ nordisk statsbildning 1743,” 61–75.

19. Koselleck, Futures Past, 26–42.

20. Holm, Danmark-Norges udenrigske historie under franske revolution og Napoleons krige fra 1791 til 1807, 145–62; Rasmus Glenthøj and Morten Nordhagen Ottosen rather parallel the development of two spheres but hardly provide any reasons for recalibrated mutual visions: Glenthøj and Ottosen, 1814 – Krig, nederlag, frihed, 27.

21. Glenthøj and Ottosen, Experiences of War and Nationality in Denmark and Norway, 1807–1815.

22. The king’s letter was the most exemplary, but the ‘naturality’ of the future union was as well stressed in other documents as a matter of justification before Napoleon: RA, DUA, S-2153, Oversætning af Grev Ruth mig gjørt Pro Memoria, 1: ‘[…] foreningen af de 3 Riger som naturlig.’ However, the archival materials mostly point to geopolitical and dynastic concerns.

23. And here I follow only one avenue among many. More on the range of possible loyalties and identities, both national and cosmopolitical see in: Feldbæk, “Kærlighed til fædrelandet. 1700-tallets nationale selvforståelse.”

24. Krefting, Nøding, and Ringvej, Eighteenth-Century Periodicals as Agents of Change.

25. For the debate see: Haakonssen and Horstbøll, Northern Antiquities and National Identities.

26. Hont, “The Permanent Crisis of a Divided Mankind,” 173–5.

27. See, for example: Ludvig Holberg, Almindelig Kirke-Historie (København, 1740); Ludvig Holberg, Den Jødiske Historie. Tomus I, (København, 1742); Ludvig Holberg, Danmarks Riges Historie, (København, 1735).

28. Peter F. Suhm, Om de nordiske Folks ældste Oprindelse, (København, 1770), 22, 25, 34. Either were in kinship (slægtskab) or established kin relations (beslægtede).

29. Ibid., 25–29, 315.

30. Ibid., 41, 44, 73, 78.

31. Ibid., 1.

32. Ibid., 48. Peter F. Suhm, Forsøg til et Udkast af en Historie over Folkenes Oprindelse i Almindelighed, som en Inledning til de Nordiske Folkes i Særdeleshed (København, 1769), 79–100.

33. Peter F. Suhm, Critisk historie af Danmark, (København, 1774), T. 1, 87-142.

34. Peter F. Suhm, ”Tanker om de Vanskeligheder, som møde ved at skrive den gamle Danske og Norske Historie” i Skrifter, som udi det Kiøbenhavske Selskab af Laerdoms og Videnskabers elskere, ere fremlagte og oplaeste (København, 1760), 1–50.

35. Gerhard Schøning, Norges Riiges Historie, (København, 1771), 7–18.

36. Suhm in earlier writings claimed that Æsir first populated the North but later agreed with Schøning. Gerhard Schøning, Afhandling om de Norskes og endeel andre Nordiske Folkes Oprindelse (Sorøe, 1769), 95.

37. Suhm, Critisk historie af Danmark, T. 1, 3.

38. Peter Friderich Suhm, ”Nærværende 18de Seculi Character. Del 4” i Det Trondhjemske Selskabs Skrifter, Deel 4, (Trondheim, 1768), 103. Schøning, Norges, 19–25. More about Schøning on this matter: Larsen, “Gerhard Schøning, Gothicism and the Re‐evaluation,” 61–84.

39. Frederik Vilhelm Wedel Jarlsberg, Chronologisk-Historisk Tabel over den ældre og nyere Scandinavisk-Dansk Historie, (København, 1780). I focus primarily on the organicist conceptualizations of the common Nordic identity, but there were also peculiar examples of a civic one elaborated by Tyge Rothe: Horstbøll, “Northern Identities and National History – Paul-Henri Mallet,” 207–26.

40. On the imaginative geography see: Hemstad, “Fra ‘det Förenade Scandinavien’,” 47–79.

41. See more on the interpretations of the Bible in: Ilany, In Search of the Hebrew People. See also a brilliant work by Håkon Evju on Suhm’s and Schønings’s historical views: Evju, Ancient Constitutions and Modern Monarchy, 95–115.

42. Schøning, Norges Riiges Historie, 14–21.

43. Note the tense in: Peter F. Suhm, Om de nordiske Folks, 315: ‘de Tydske og Nordiske have været Brødre […]’.

44. Brotherhood ties were established by cosmopolitical and religious explanations as well: Peter F. Suhm, Blandende Tanker (København, 1791), 22: ‘alle Mennesker ere Brødre … ’.

45. Most often, of course, as relatives by descent and rarely as consanguineal ones.

46. August Gottlieb Spangenberg, Leben des Herrn Nicolaus Ludwig Grafen und Herrn von Zinzendorf, T. 7, (1775), 1952, 1998; Johann Hegner, Fortsetzung von David Cranzens Brüder-Historie, (Barby, 1791), 112; Johann Hegner, Fortsættelse af David Cranzes Brødre-Historie (Grønland, 1791).

47. This usage might have been borrowed from Friedrich Klopstock, a German writer, who was extremely popular in Denmark in the 1770s–1780s. Friedrich Klopstock, Deutsche Gelehrtenrepublik, (Hamburg, 1774), 243. Brotherly peoples in one state: Thomas Thaarup, “Prolog og Almuesang ved Kronprindsens Hjemkomst 1788,” in Efterladte Poetiske Skrifter, (København, 1822), 481. Fyens Stifts Kongelig allene privilegerede Adresse-Avis og Avertissements-Tidende, 13-02-1802.

48. Rasmus Nyerup, Bernstorffs Eftermæle, I (København, 1799), 45.

49. See more on friendship of nations: Evgeny Roshchin, Friendship Among Nations: History of a Concept (Manchester University Press, 2020), 165–74.

50. Kjærgaard, “The Rise of Press and Public Opinion in Eighteenth‐century Denmark – Norway,” 215–30. It also must be noted that even after the censorship restrictions were installed in 1799, the Danish-Norwegian public sphere preserved the heterogeneity of possible enunciations: Ringvej, “Communicative Power and the Absolutist State. Denmark-Norway c. 1750–1800,” 303–16.

51. See recent outline of the public debate in Denmark: Munck, “Public debate, politics and print. The late Enlightenment in Copenhagen during the years of the French Revolution 1786–1800.”

52. Christian H. Pram, ”Prolog ved Kongen af Sverrigs Nærværelse …, ” Minerva, bd. 4, 1787: 116. As well quoted in Julius Clausen, Skandinavismen: historisk fremstillet (København, 1900), 4.

53. Peter F. Suhm, ”Over Hans Majestet Kong Gustav III af Sverrigs formodentlige Ankomst til København” in Monumenter, 1787: 8–15.

54. Vozgrin, ”Sudba Shlezvig-Golshteynskogo Naslediya Rossiyskikh Imperatorov,” 60–76.

55. And in Norway – ’a lingonberry war’: Georg Apenes, Tyttebærkrigen: det norske felttog i Sverige 1788, (Aschehoug, 1988), 50–74.

56. ‘Historien – Fædrelandet,’ Minerva, bd. 3, 1788: 151–2.

57. Skandinavisk Museum, ved et Selskab, bd. 2, (København, 1798), 122–34.

58. Frederik Sneedorff, Samlede skrifter, bd. 2 (København, 1795), 296. These lectures were read in 1791, just a year before his speech on the unification.

59. See: Jens K. Høst, Forsøg til et Udsigt over de skønne Videnskabers Skiæbne i Sverige (København, 1794).

60. Nordia, bind 1, (København, 1795), 1-6, 51–7.

61. van Gerven, ”The Copenhagen Question of 1800,” 45–72.

62. Conrad, Smagen og det nationale, 99–106.See also more on romanticist visions of political community as a family and of family love as such: Gorodeisky, “19th Century Romantic Aesthetics”; and Beiser et al., The Early Political Writings of the German Romantics, i–xxviii.

63. See, for example: Nikolaj Grundtvig, Nordens Mytologi, (København, 1808); Julefesten, (København, 1809); Saga om Nor og hans Æt (København, 1809). Sometimes, the brothers could be turned into sisters: Dana, Svea, and Nora.

64. Rix, “Introduction: Romanticism in Scandinavia,” 395–400.

65. Grundtvig often mentioned Suhm in his diaries as a source of inspiration: Nikolaj Grundtvig, Af Grundtvigs Dagbøger, 26, 57. https://tekster.kb.dk/text/adl-texts-grundtvig01val-shoot-workid54944.

66. See note 19 above.

67. Rasmus Nyerup, Det danske Sprogs Retskrivningstheorier, fremstillede i chronologisk Orden (Kjøbenhavn, 1805), 18. Julius Clausen, Skandinavismen, 6–14.

68. Friis, ”Frederik den Sjette og det andet svenske Tronfølgervalg 1810,” 286–315. The union should have been blessed by Napoleon himself. Both Danish and Swedish representatives asked the emperor to approve the corresponding candidatures, and he ambiguously accepted both.

69. The pamphlets were printed in Denmark in July 1810 and while the goal was to distribute them in Sweden, they were available for purchase in Denmark as well.

70. Jens Kragh Høst, Erindringer om mig og mine samtidige, (København, 1835), 88.

71. See for other cases of the shifting boundaries of political participation: Bregnsbo et al., Scandinavia in the Age of Revolution, 267–342.

72. Habermas, Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit.

73. Horstbøll, ”Enevælde, opinion og opposition,” 35–53.

74. Høst, Erindringer, 84.

75. Rasmus Nyerup, a famous linguist and Nordic enthusiast translated his pamphlet.

76. Høst, Erindringer, 86–8.

77. Ringvej, “Communicative Power and the Absolutist State: Denmark−Norway c. 1750−1800,” 303–15.

78. Neither Hildor B. Arnold nor Aage Friis in their admirable papers examine them in detail. Ruth Hemstad investigates them with regards to rhetorical territorial claims: Hemstad, “Fra ‘det Förenade Scandinavien’,” 47–79. See also: Holger Berg, Indledning til Er Nordens Forening ønskelig? Grundtvigs Værker, http://www.xn–grundtvigsvrker-7lb.dk/tekstvisning/1430/0#{%220%22:0,%22v0%22:0,%22k%22:0.

79. Selby noted that peasants were generally indifferent towards the election: RA, DUA, S-2153, Selby to Rosenkrantz, 20-07-1810, 1. Høst, Erindringer, 84.

80. N.F.S. Grundtvig, Er Nordens Forening ønskelig? Et Ord til det svenske Folk (København, 1810), 1:Feindlich ist die Welt und falsch gesinnt! Es liebt ein jeder nur sich selbst, ünsicher, los und wandelbar sind alle Bande, die das leichte Glück geflochten – Laune lösst, was Laune knüpfte –Nur die Natur ist redlich![…]Wohl dem, dem die Geburt den Bruder gab, ihn kann das Glück nicht geben! Anerschaffen ist ihm der Freund, und gegen eine Welt voll Kriegs und Truges steht er zweifach da!

81. Ibid., 3–4.

82. Grundtvig, Er Nordens Forening, 9–26. Most recent analysis of Grundtvig’s conceptualizations of the Nordic history and identity has been provided by Møller, ”Grundtvig, Danmark og Norden,” 99–120. However, here I do not intend to separate Grundtvig from the whole campaign.

83. These works were even printed under one cover: Nordens Forening, (Copenhagen, 1810).

84. A. Nielsen, [Andreas Gjerlew], Nordens Gjenforening, (København, 1810), 10. The naming of the pamphlet is characteristic, as it calls for the Reunion of the North, referring rather to the ancient coexistence, than to the Kalmar union.

85. A. Nielsen, [Andreas Gjerlew], Nordens, 25.

86. [Jens Kragh Høst], En Verdensborgers Stemme i et stort Anliggende, (København, 1810), 2–6.

87. Ibid., 14.

88. Ibid., 13.

89. [Anonym], Noget om Ørebroes Riksdag. Julius 1810., 12.

90. Ibid., 18.

91. [Anonym], En Dansk Mands velmeente Opfordring til det svenske Folk (København 1810), 10–12.

92. [Christian Friedrich Rühs], Till Skandinavierne, 2–7.

93. [Frederik Moltke], Aux Suedois: par un habitant d’Altona, 5–7.

94. [Ernst Schimmelmann], Ueber die Vereinigung der drei nordischen Reiche. Aus den nachgelassenen Papieren eines durchreisenden Schweden, 2: ‘In den Augen des Weltbürgers den kein Vorurtheil blendet […]‘.

95. Ibid., 4.

96. Ibid., 3: ‘Wenn jene Epoche unglücklich und verderblich war, so lag dies nicht an der Idee der Vereiningung selbst, es lag an den Zeiten, die ihr nicht günstig waren […].‘ The memory of the Kalmar union still surfaced in the opinions in Sweden: RA, DUA, S-2153, Selby to Rosenkrantz, 20-07-1810, 1–2; Selby to Rosenkrantz, 25-07-1810, 2.

97. In this, the pamphlets were much more explicit and radical than official instructions to the Danish envoy in Stockholm, Dernath and baron Selby: RA, DUA, S-2153, Votre Majesté, 12-07-1810; RA, DUA, S-2153, Instruction p. le Baron de Selby, 13-07-1810.

98. Hont, “The Permanent Crisis of a Divided Mankind,” 192–210. Federalism of Ancient Greece and America was regarded fragile in the Scandinavian case as well: [Anonym], Noget om Ørebroes Riksdag. 4–5.

99. RA, DUA, S-2153, Oversætning af Grev Ruth mig gjort Pro Memoria, paragraphs 4–7.

100. RA, DUA, S-1869, Niels Rosenkrantz to Frederik VI, 11-07-1810, 6. Again repeated in: RA, DUA, S-2153, Niels Rosenkrantz to Frederik VI, 12-07-1810 (I); Pro-Memorie 12-07-1810; Selby to Rosenkrantz, 20-07-1810. It was also conspicuous in the correspondence from Sweden: M. von Dernath to Frederik VI, 17-07-1810, in: Utdrag ur danska diplomaters meddelanden från Stockholm 1807–1808, 1810 och 1812–1813 ed. by Christian Anker (Stockholm, 1897), 75–6.

101. RA, DUA, S-1869, Niels Rosenkrantz to Frederik VI, 11-07-1810, par. 6: ’[…] Vedligeholdelse af de nødvendigste og billigste Love … hvilke bør være svenske Mænd nok.’

102. Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice, 40–1.

103. For example: [Anonym], En Dansk Mands, 1: ’det er ikke Eders, det er hele Nordens Sag, der skal forhandles i det store Mode … ’.

104. Hont, “The Permanent Crisis of a Divided Mankind,” 173–5.

105. [Jens Kragh Høst], En Verdensborgers, 11–13; [Christian Friedrich Rühs], Till Skandinavierne, 5-7. A. Nielsen, [Andreas Gjerlew], Nordens Gjenforening, 15–17, 19. [Anonym], En Dansk Mands, 5–6. Another example of political economy analysis that targeted the goals of rapprochement was Christian Pram, Om Befolkningen i Skandinavien og dens Tilvæxt i Tidsløbet 1769–1800, (København, 1809). There he measured the amount of food each province of the Scandinavian kingdoms contributed to the overall (!) subsistence of its inhabitants.

106. Bourdieu emphasizes that kin strategies are determined by material and symbolic interests. Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice, 36–41.

107. As German cosmopolitical traditions were the most established, it is not surprising to see these references. Moreover, in 1809 there were several articles published in German journals that called for the unification of the Scandinavian states. See, for example, the critical note – later republished in other newspapers – in Münchener politische Zeitung, 22.02.1810: ‘In der Minerva und in den Nordischen Miszellen von 1809 stehen einige gehaltvolle Aufsätze, deren Tendenz, Ansichten und Hoffnungen begleitet von mehrern Untersuchungen, Betrachtungen und Folgerungen dahin gehen, die Möglichkeit, Wahrscheinlichkeit und Nützlichkeit der Vereinigung der drey Kronen von Dänemark, Norwegen und Schweden unter Einem Haupte, unter Genehmigung und Verbindung mit Frankreich, durzuthun und zu beweisen.‘

108. Selby pointed to the example of Holstein where privileges were preserved under the Danish sceptre as an argument for the fortunate unification with Sweden: RA, DUA, S-2153, Selby to Rosenkrantz, 25-07-1810 (II), 2.

109. Frazer, The Enlightenment of Sympathy, 136–69.

110. More on the dialectic of the cosmopolitan and the imperial: Burbank and Cooper, Empires in World History.

111. [Anonym], Noget om Ørebroes Riksdag, 7.

112. Örebro Tidning, 18-08-1810.

113. Christian August to Frederik VI, 12-05-1809, in Meddelelser fra Krigsarkiverne, bd. 4 (København, 1890), 230. Here Christian August stressed that the fusion of nations is most desirable: ‘det større Maal at amalgamere disse Nationer, at forene dem til én Nation, uafhængig af hver fremmed Magthavers Bydende, vil befordres for mere end et Aarhundrede.’

114. In his comments to the letters concerning Swedish succession crisis: Briefwechsel des Herzogs Friedrich Christian zu Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Augustenburg mit König Friedrich VI. von Dänemark und dem Thronfolger Prinzen Christian Friedrich, ed. by Hans Schülz (Leipzig, 1908), 520.

115. N. 4 Schreiben des Herzogs Friedrich Chriſtian von Augustenburg an König Friedrich VI von Dänemark in Gustav Droysen, Die Herzogthümer Schleswig-Holstein und das Königreich Dänemark, Aktenmässige Geschichte der dänischen Politik seit dem Jahre 1806, (Perthes, 1850), 306. The letter is not dated, but it is clear from the text that it was written after July 20.

116. Broers, The Napoleonic Empire in Italy; Wachtel, “L’acculturation,” 124–46; Knud Fabricius also points to examples of Napoleonic France as a possible provider of homogenizing patterns, though in another case: Fabricius, “Det slesvig-holstenske Kancelli og Reskriptet af 15. December 1810,” 27–47.

117. For example, see: Fyens Stifts Kongelig allene privilegerede Adresse-Avis og Avertissements-Tidende, 11-12-1809.

118. A.C. Gjerlew to H.C. Ørsted, 22-03-1808, Danmarks Breve. Visited 06/02-2020, https://danmarksbreve.kb.dk/catalog/%252Fletter_books%252F002053861%252F002053861_X00-L002053861X000054.

119. Aage Friis, ”Holstens Indlemmelse i Danmark i Aaret 1806,” 10–43. Brandt, Geistesleben und Politik, 325. Symptomatically, in 1807 another Nordic enthusiast and prominent philosopher, Niels Treschow, deduced the logic of contemporary multinational empires and the establishment of vast states as part of the drive of progress destined to result in a globally shared cosmopolitanism within the borders of one state: Niels Treschow, “Nogle Betragtninger over de Sporgsmaale: Er en almindelig og evig Fred ønskelig? Er den ogsaa muelig?” in Det skandinaviske litteraturselskabs Skrifter, bd 1. 1807; On the future life of ‘amalgamation’ policy in Scandinavia see: Hemstad, Propagandakrig: Kampen om Norge i Norden og Europa 1812–1814 and her recent comparative paper: Ruth Hemstad, “The United Kingdoms of Norway and Sweden and the United Kingdom of the Netherlands 1814–1830,” 76–98.

120. This attempt was blocked by the administration of the Duchy. Fabricius, ”Det slesvig-holstenske Kancelli og Reskriptet af 15. December 1810.”

121. By 1814, the hopes for the ‘danification’ of the duchy were abandoned, and Holstein was incorporated in the newly established German Confederation: Frandsen, Holsten i helstaten.

122. Electing the Danish king for many Swedes was synonymous to becoming a mere province of Denmark: RA, DUA, S-2153, Selby to Rosenkrantz, 20-07-1810, 2.

123. Same could be said about the attempt of Holstein incorporation. See documents collected in: Aktstykker og Breve vedrørende Holstens Indlemmelse i Danmark i Aaret 1806, ed. by Aage Friis (København, 1905) and the documents at the Danish archive: RA, DUA, S-1590.

124. N.F.S. Grundtvig, ”Om Nordens videnskabelige Forening” i Brage og Idun, et nordisk Fjærdingsårskrift, 1. årgang, 1. halvbind, 17.

125. Grundtvigs’s speech was published in: Carl Bagge, Berättelse om Studenttågen 1845, (Upsala, 1856), 121.

126. Ibid., 121–3.

127. It should be mentioned that Denmark was a colonial empire: Weiss, “Danmark og kolonierne (Denmark and the Colonies) – Reflections about the New Magnum Opus in the Colonial History of Denmark,” 252–55.

128. As noted in: Niels Treschow, Moral for Folk og Stat, (København, 1810), 57.

129. Koselleck, Futures Past, 155–91.

130. Ruth Hemstad, ”Fra ’det Förenade Scandinavien’,” 57. Frederik Sneedorff, Wigten af de tre nordiska rikens förening (Stockholm, 1810).

131. Høst, Erindringer om mig og mine samtidige, 30, 84.

132. See note 112 above.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Evgenii Egorov

Evgenii Egorov is post-graduate student and research assistant at the Department of History, Higher School of Economics, Saint-Petersburg. He holds his BA in Area Studies from St. Petersburg State University of Telecommunications and MA in History from the Higher School of Economics in Saint-Petersburg. His current PhD research focuses on the perception of the Pan-Scandinavian ideas in the Russian Empire and especially in the Grand Duchy of Finland.