Duel Vincke – Bismarck

The duel Vincke-Bismarck was with pistols being transmitted duel between Georg von Vincke and Otto von Bismarck , the on March 25, 1852 at Lake Tegel took place. Both duelists came from the same social class and were well known to one another. However, in the years of revolution and reaction, from 1847 to 1851, they gained opposing points of view that made them hostile. Bismarck was put on the defensive by Vincke in a public emotional political debate; he had to defend himself against accusations of being indiscreet on delicate diplomatic matters. An anecdote about a burning cigar provided the occasion for mutually insulting remarks, which led to the duel, in which, however, both opponents were unharmed.

The duel in the 19th century

In the 19th century , the duel was not just a code of conduct , but an integral part of power-political disputes. Making a personal opinion general was not just a question of majority and consensus building, but the opinion leader was expected to defend it at the risk of his life. In contrast to the court battle of the Middle Ages, from which it must have developed, the focus was not on the matter - the cause could be futile - but on the attitude of the representative.

In Prussia and also in other German states, the invitation to duel as well as participation and cooperation were legally a criminal offense. However, even working-class politicians like Ferdinand Lassalle felt obliged to this code of honor . In the thirty years from 1882 to 1912, the criminal statistics of the German Reich showed 2,111 criminal cases against duelists. The number of unreported duels is likely to have been significantly higher. In general, it depended on the social position to what extent participation in a duel was perceived as compelling for a personality. The duelists had to face the background of personal and social views in order to save their reputation and thus their political career. The loss of honor was catastrophic for officers , while other classes were less sensitive. From a religious and moral point of view, a duel also remained a dilemma with regard to the Ten Commandments (you should not murder) .

prehistory

Georg von Vincke, 1848

Otto von Bismarck around 1860

From Bismarck's point of view, he and Georg von Vincke had long been rivals. He despised a man of blood who he believed was betraying his class by shackling his monarch. Vincke, on the other hand, was Bismarck's fiercest parliamentary opponent in the early years. In the beginning there was a remarkable agreement: They came from the same class - old noble families - and were both loyal to the king, loving to their fatherland, professing Prussians, Göttingen corps students , lawyers and Protestants . Both were also “hotheads” with a pronounced sense of honor and duty. Both pursued the goal of life: preservation of the Prussian state and its crown. Despite these similarities, there were also differences that prevented the two characters from working together fruitfully in the long term.

The member of the Prussian state parliament Georg von Vincke, son of Ludwig von Vincke , was the offspring of the noble von Vincke family from the Ostenwalde estate with a state-supporting and liberal attitude. His eloquence made his political ascent easier and more elegant than Bismarck. He corresponded more to the zeitgeist, and his polished rhetoric, in contrast to Bismarck's fistulous voice , penetrated all of Germany. For him it was about the unity of Germany and not about Prussia. But the subjunctive dominated his speeches , and even contemporaries found it difficult to understand where Vincke was and what he wanted. He definitely lacked the determined power orientation and the passionate ambition that Bismarck possessed.

Bismarck, on the other hand, appeared stiff and brittle and there was always something brutal about all of his measures. His flow of speech was slow and complicated with complex sentence structures. A stenographer for the Reichstag later commented: Bismarck spoke with "an almost womanly weak voice, which, especially when he was haunted by his nervous affections, was interrupted once or twice in every sentence by a thunderous throat". Tormenting pauses that seemed embarrassing, in which he seemed to be searching for words, alternated with jerky sentences at high speed, which in turn were interrupted by clearing his throat. In return, his speech impressed with its accurate, expressive choice of words: no aesthetic rhetoric, no sophism , but a quick wittedness that was understood by friend and foe. Bismarck's greatest strength was a permanent political home in this turbulent time of upheaval: the Lutheran unity of throne and altar , from which Friedrich Julius Stahl developed the basic program of the Conservative Party . Vincke, on the other hand, left all options open and did not want to commit in advance to wait for the development. Therefore, he was unable to advance his ideas in a targeted manner. He won no lasting friends from the large number of his sympathizers, was unable to forge alliances, or make out any real opponents.

The increasing contrasts from 1847 to 1851

It must be said in advance that this constructive opposition is not based on a mutual and mutual alienation process. Exactly the opposite is the case here: It is a process of becoming familiar in dealing with and against each other politically, even of intimacy. This also shows Bismarck's deep dismay with which he reacted to Vincke's private indiscretion. He had told him the story of the burning cigar in private, which the accomplished Bismarck would hardly have done if he hadn't trusted him. The better you get to know and appreciate each other , the more understandable the antipodal position towards and against each other becomes . This finally makes collaboration impossible because it would amount to an inner loss of identity and an outer loss of face. The only basis during this time is mutual respect.

United State Parliament 1847

The first opposing meeting took place in the United Landtag , the assembly of the eight Prussian provincial parliaments , in April 1847 in Berlin. Vincke and Bismarck were among the 231 members of the Knighthood Curia. The city curia had 182 and that of the rural communities 124. Vincke stood on the "legal ground" and demanded the "periodicity" of the state parliament, that is, the constitutional monarchy . In England and the Netherlands he saw the models for the further development in Prussia as well as in Germany: not the revolutionary upheaval, but the continuous further development based on the existing legal system. The United State Parliament passed the agreement clause on the initiative of Georg von Vinckes . A future national assembly and constitution had to come about through agreement with the crown, which had equal rights to it. His much-noticed speech ended with the words: “Law must remain law!” On May 17, 1847, Bismarck took the floor and stated that they had fought against Napoleon in order to get rid of foreign rule and not to fight for a constitution . A nation ultimately makes itself implausible if it liberates itself and then presents constitutional paragraphs to its sovereign in the sense of a bill to be paid. He defended the divine right of the Prussian crown, which would make a comparison with English conditions, which Vincke had tried, superfluous. The speech was "violent", as he wrote it to his wife. It caused such commotion in the meeting that Bismarck had to interrupt it and read the newspaper in the stands until it was quiet again. Vincke replied that at least he did not believe that bringing about the future constitution of Germany through armed force was the right way to promote German unity.

“The speeches of the East Prussian Saucken-Tarputschen , Alfred Auerswald , the sentimentality of Beckerath , the Rhenish-French liberalism of Heydt and Mevissen and the rumbling vehemence of the Vincke's speeches were repugnant to me, and even when I read the negotiations today, they do it they give me the impression of an imported phrase template. "

- Bismarck in thoughts and memories

Even then, Bismarck shows himself to be a power politician who also accepted the perversion of the law in order to defend the privileges of the established Prussian monarchy. In the discussion about the rule of law and the struggle for consensus , he sees the crucial mistake that his opponents have committed and is ready with blood and iron to enforce what, in his opinion, could not be achieved through speeches and majority decisions. Accordingly, he appeared as a militant spokesman for the conservative minority loyal to the king against Vincke and the liberals. His friends soon only called him the "Vinckenfänger" and he liked to be called a Vincke-hounder because this increased his publicity.

Revolution 1848

Vincke advised the king in the critical days of March 1848 . He, who had opposed the outrageous insults of the young Bismarck in that session of the United Diet, called on the King to end the violence. After all, one cannot restore order with soldiers by destroying them. But he refused to join the Prussian State Ministry himself. When Bismarck was proposed as minister in November 1849, King Friedrich Wilhelm IV energetically rejected him . In a marginal note he noted: "Red reactionary, smells of blood, to be used later." Or "Only to be used when the bayonet is unrestricted." Although the king was desperately looking for a head of government that seemed suitable to him, he did not bother Bismarck. Bismarck must have been particularly struck by the fact that the king, whose interests he defended so vehemently, rejected him. Vincke, on the other hand, had refused four times to accept the king's request for an office and to stand ready for the ministry: he did not want to represent the king's interests. According to Bismarck, Vincke is said to have described himself to him as unsuitable for political office.

"Georg von Vincke replied to my probing that he was a man of the red earth, inclined to criticism and opposition and not to a ministerial role."

- Bismarck in thoughts and memories

Nonetheless, the violence on the public streets and Vincke's support for the king form the consensus that allows the two opponents to come together for a short time. On April 2, 1848, Bismarck wrote to his wife Johanna that he was much calmer than he was, and with Vincke now one heart and one soul. Vincke tried to win Bismarck and the Conservatives to renounce the king. The “ grape prince ”, who was in exile in England, was to renounce the throne in writing beforehand. The Princess of Prussia would then take over the government for the Crown Prince . Bismarck visited Princess Augusta on March 23, 1848 in the Potsdam City Palace . There are only two completely diametrical versions of this conversation. Bismarck claims that Augusta surprised him with the news that Prince Wilhelm was on the run to England and that she, Augusta, wanted her son to be proclaimed King of Prussia. But this refused her request as high treason. Augusta, who later became Empress, claimed that in the March days of 1848, shortly after the departure of Prince Wilhelm of Prussia for England, Bismarck had appeared to her on behalf of Carl von Prussia to obtain authorization to use both the name of the to use absent heirs to the throne as well as his son for a counter-revolution , through which the decisions already made (freedom of speech, freedom of the press, constitutional promises etc.) of the king with regard to his legitimacy and his sanity would be denied. According to the historian Erich Eyck , the confidante Georg von Vincke is the only one who could have judged the truth of the Bismarck statement.

“A quarter of a century later, Bismarck declared his conversation with Augusta to be the real cause of the duel. But if the conversation had gone the way Bismarck himself describes it, it would not have been a reason for him to be angry with Vincke because he knew about it. If, on the other hand, one takes Augusta's account as a basis, he must have been embarrassed to remember his defeat in the Potsdam City Palace, and it is easy to understand that he felt deeply averse to the man who was perhaps her only confidante. "

- Erich Eyck in Spiegel December 12, 1956

Neither of the two was a member of the Prussian National Assembly , Bismarck for political reasons, Vincke for national reasons. But then he became a member of the Frankfurt National Assembly, which Bismarck hated . Here, in accordance with his principle of continuous legal development, he denied popular sovereignty and thus the sovereignty of the National Assembly and professed himself as a monarchist and as a representative of Prussia. He demanded the unity of Germany through the creation of a national union. Therefore he was one of the spokesmen of the conservative faction of the Café Milani and had influence in parliament and in the state parliament. Bismarck defiantly joined the Junker Parliament and tried to gain influence over the king. But in December the latter imposed the Prussian constitution with which, from opposing points of view, neither Vincke nor Bismarck could be satisfied.

Prussian Landtag 1849

Both were elected to the second chamber of the Prussian House of Representatives provided for by the new constitution on February 5, 1849 , Vincke for Aachen and Bismarck for the Havelland. On April 2, Bismarck approved Vincke's motion in the Chamber, urging the king to meet the people's expectations and to accept the proposed crown. But just one day later, on April 3, 1849, Friedrich Wilhelm IV rejected the German imperial crown . When the Prussian Prime Minister Friedrich Wilhelm Graf von Brandenburg was warned in plenary to respect public opinion, he responded with the words: “Never, never, never!” That was the end of the consensus and the chamber split. In the debate on April 21, 1849, Vincke Bismarck threw an anti-Diluvian, i.e. H. antediluvian posture. Vincke was less affected by the current trend than by the consistent pursuit of his constitutional view, induced to switch from the political camp of the conservatives, which he represented in the Frankfurt National Assembly , to the left-liberal camp of the Prussian state parliament, where he had a political camp in Friedrich Harkort Friend found. This increased the tension between him and Bismarck to an irreconcilable opposition. Vincke continued to work for the Paulskirche constitution passed in the National Assembly . Much to Bismarck's annoyance, the Second Chamber adopted the Imperial Constitution during this debate. The situation for Bismarck could only be saved with the help of the king: on April 27, the king dissolved the chamber and illegally declared the mandate of the Prussian MPs in the Frankfurt National Assembly to be over. Nevertheless, Vincke met with other liberals in the Gotha post-parliament to discuss the Prussian plan to found a more conservative Erfurt Union as a small German nation-state.

Erfurt Union Parliament and the end of Union politics in 1850

In March 1850, the two of them were elected to the Erfurt Union Parliament , which made one last attempt under Prussian direction to bring about German unity. In a speech on April 18, Bismarck called for the establishment of Fideicommissen to defend the privileges of the nobility. On April 25, he fought against a central political power that was preventing smaller countries from gaining independence, while defending the Prussian constitution. The Union constitution was adopted at the request of Vincke. The constitutionals and liberals fail because of their own disagreement, but also because of the foreign policy circumstances: Austria and Russia did not want a Germany unified by Prussia; the era of reaction was dawning. In his letters to his wife, Bismarck complained that he did not have a say and commented on the attacks of the liberal Heinrich von Gagern against Vincke with undisguised glee.

Austria and Prussia came to the brink of war in the autumn crisis of 1850 . With the help of Russian pressure Austria succeeded in forcing Prussia to give up the Union. Vincke remarked that the army could never be waged into a war if the honor and interests of the country did not stand by and the country could not be ordered home if it was engaged in such a cause. Bismarck, who perceived it as a call to disobedience, replied that the army would always remain the king's army and would seek its honor only in obedience.

In the end, Bismarck defended the Olomouc puncture before the second chamber on December 3, 1850 , which was a disgrace even for the conservatives. In this speech he confessed that the only healthy foundation of a great state was "state egoism" and not romanticism. A Prussian no to the Austrian demands would be popular, but would not be a convincing reason for war. Prussian honor could not be violated by backing away from Austria, but only by backing away from the liberal opposition in the Chamber. At the same time he protested against all democratic tendencies and sought the Prussian honor in the fact that Prussia kept away from any shameful connection to democracy.

In the Bundestag and the Prussian Landtag in 1851

Vincke's power in the Prussian House of Representatives dwindled. In his opposition to the President of the State Ministry and Minister of Foreign Affairs Otto von Manteuffel , he used the slogan: "Get rid of this ministry". On March 8, 1851, he applied for a committee to investigate the state of the country. It is important to check whether the government has preserved the honor of the country and protected the law. In the end, only 41 MPs voted to consider the motion, while 228 voted to move on to the agenda. Bismarck cannot hide the joy that the “pompous proposal” is “ignored” with “contempt”.

Four days later, Bismarck wrote to his wife with satisfaction while sitting on the disciplinary committee:

"My darling, it is real proof of how much Vincke has fallen down, how boring and unimportant what he says is that I am writing to you again to the rumble and murmur of his Westphalian tongue instead of listening to him and refuting him. "

- Bismarck on March 12, 1851 in a letter to his wife

The great ideological dispute between the two rivals gave way to petty questions of style. Vincke often referred Bismarck to the parliamentary custom of quoting him without naming him or only naming the deputies according to their place of election. On March 11, 1851, he reprimanded Bismarck for using the word "warlord", which Bismarck then called a melodious expression.

On August 18, 1851, Bismarck succeeded in gaining the king's confidence in an office who, with great hesitation and with the promise of resigning if he was not up to the task, sent him to the Bundestag in Frankfurt . The only task he trusted him was to thwart the quorum of this revived institution that was unwanted by Prussia and to publicly compromise its reputation. It was therefore impossible for the choleric and diplomatically rumbling Bismarck to smash political china. Bismarck promised the monarch that he, Bismarck, had the courage to obey if his majesty only had the courage to command.

The trigger

Now that Bismarck had politically outpaced his rival Vincke, he was no longer prepared to endure this “unpolishedness” and wanted to “seriously confront” him as a debate speaker in the Prussian state parliament. But Vincke also seemed to have changed his mind. So far he had always appealed to reason in the arguments with Bismarck, insisted on the law and pointed out Bismarck's anachronism. But the dispute between him and Bismarck in the last five years, from 1847 to 1852, seemed to prove his adversary right. He, who had wasted all possibilities of political shaping by questions of principle and law, now saw how the awkward-looking and initially far less talented Bismarck had found his way.

Initially, this seems to be a conflict that, due to serious causes, ignites around a trivial cause. But the occasion was by no means that meaningless. First of all, it must be taken into account that four years after the revolution, political attention was particularly high in Berlin. In contrast to the debates in the Bundespalais in Frankfurt, Bismarck stepped into the public spotlight. Political friends also had high expectations of the leaders on both sides. This public pressure, along with the loss of prestige, made it impossible to decide whether the duelists were just trying to save their honor or their political career .

Word battles from March 20-22, 1852

The cast off white horse from Bronzell ridden for the nineteenth time by the school rider von Vincke.

L'Enfant terrible , or instructiver lesson, to become a little Demetrius in twelve hours .

When Bismarck returned to Berlin from Frankfurt in mid-March 1852, "because the handling of important questions where every vote counted," called him back from his mission as a member of parliament, he never got tired, friend and foe of his first diplomatic attempts to teach in detail. There he was able to announce the first point success against Austria with the “burning cigar”. In the struggle for the favor of the state parliament, Bismarck was defeated by the eloquent rival. On March 20, the second Prussian Chamber held a discussion on the salary budget of the troops and their increase. Friedrich Harkort stated that the population of the big cities of Prussia should be given great praise for this. But if one stripped the urgent need for all sham reasons, the real reason here was the government's distrust of its own people. It would be better to reconcile oneself with the just wishes of the people, that would be the best increase in military strength and the cheapest. Bismarck replied that the Prussian officer class and the loyal elements of the Prussian people stood in opposition to the democracy of the big cities. That is why he once again announces his opinion, which he had published in the Kreuzzeitung in 1848 , that the true Prussian people cannot be found in the big cities.

“If the honorable Member has repeated the statement that the government mistrusts the people, I can tell him that I do mistrust the population of the big cities as long as they are guided by ambitious and lying demagogues, but that I do there not find the true Prussian people. Rather, if the big cities should arise, the latter will know how to bring them to obedience and should it wipe them from the earth. "

- Bismarck on March 20, 1852 before the second chamber of the state parliament

This expression caused an uproar in the Liberal Group. Harkort's reply that the armed forces represented a lot more aristocracy than the manufacturing industry and that ordinary citizens e.g. B. were not accepted into the regiment of the Gardes du Corps , Bismarck replied that doing business in the army was honorable, but not as lucrative as setting up factories and continuing them with royal support and thanking the government for this by attacking them numbers. MEP Harkort took this statement to himself and protested that he had never received any support. Bismarck replied that he would prove to him the hints he had made to him here privately with the requested evidence. Vincke replied to Bismarck that he should come up with new jokes instead of telling the old joke for the fifth time that they would meet again at the border, and wished he would be happier in his diplomacy than he was in his jokes. Whether he is already thinking of a diplomatic retreat, as with Olomouc , or whether he wants to use the soldiers as in the "Battle of Bronnzell". Bismarck replied that he was far from joking. However, anyone who, like Vincke, if he counted correctly, now leads the tired trumpeter white horse from Bronnzell to mock the army for the nineteenth time , has no right to complain about worn jokes. On the other hand, Vincke replied that if he considered the Prussian army near Bronnzell to be a worthy object of joke, then he did not envy his joke.

Bismarck's sentence generated an incredible response in the media. The Spenersche Zeitung of March 21, 1852 described that after this sentence there had been a long series of "personal remarks" between Vincke, Bismarck and Harkort, who tried to outdo each other in their irritability. In the end, there was a provocation that was difficult to misunderstand. The Prussian newspaper can only hear a lively Bravo in the Chamber. In the conservative party, one becomes aware of the impact of the speech. In the Vossische Zeitung of March 23, there appears a retraction after the shorthand report on the 46th session, according to which he did not say: “I do not trust the people, at least not in the big cities”, but “I have no suspicions against the people, but only against the population of some large cities. ”This is all the more surprising since the Kreuzzeitung , which is close to him, wrote on the same day that Bismarck replied: The government does not and he does not distrust the Prussian people. He just doesn't trust the populations of some large cities as long as they are guided by ambitious and lying demagogues. But they do not form the Prussian people; if they want to rebel again, they will rather know how to obey them, and should it wipe these cities from the face of the earth. The Kladderadatsch of March 28, 1852 dedicates practically the entire edition to this sentence. It opens the front page with an ironic feature section : “The true Prussian people will know how to tame the big cities, and should they wipe these cities off the face of the earth! What did he say? Did he say destroy? - Yes, he said destroy! - Woe ”and notes ironically that even Prussia's capital would soon be in ruins, it no longer needs to be represented in Frankfurt.
Bismarck uses the Sunday between the chamber meetings to honor his verbal promise to Harkort. In doing so, it becomes clear to him that the orally indicated delicate information was confused with his brother. Nevertheless, Bismarck sees no reason to apologize.

“Berlin March 21, 1852
Ew Highly Born ,
in fulfillment of the promise I made in yesterday's chamber meeting , I take the liberty of making the most devoted communication that I am among the many to individual manufacturers when I made the statement that gave you cause for a personal comment Royal support provided preferably that which in spring 1849 from the Kgl. Disposition fund for the maritime trade in the contract of 25,000 thalers in state debt has been granted to Mr. Harkort and about the instigation and modalities I would be able to provide more precise details, if so desired, which I would be able to provide for the possible relationship to the credit of a commercial house Grandstand not held suitable. If Ew. Well born to tell me yesterday the kindness that it is not you but your brother who is the recipient of that loan, I cannot find a moment in this circumstance which could make the meaning of the statement I made appear incorrect. In the event that Ew. Honestly, consider it necessary to send or receive further information on this subject from me, I will willingly comply with your wishes. I take this opportunity with pleasure, Ew. Honestly to express the assurance of the excellent respect with which I have the honor of being Ew. Highly honored servant "

- v. Bismarck

Prussian House of Representatives in Palais Hardenberg on Dönhoffplatz

On March 22nd, the Second Chamber continued its debate on the military budget. In this context it was about the approval of 100,000 Reichstalers for the "military restoration" of Hohenzollern Castle . Vincke asked for evidence of the individual grants, as is customary in earlier budgets. He applied for an extraordinary and the cancellation of the 100,000 thalers because he could not see the importance of a post that was only equipped with 150 men. Should the entire castle guard be formed so that His Majesty the King could represent the cradle of his ancestors as a worthy testimony to the greatness of his family, he and his friends would be happy to give their vote. He also referred to the tight budget situation and the necessary road construction and other military emergencies; whereas, if he took the standpoint of the cities of Sigmaringen and Hechingen , it was gratifying, since the day before yesterday he had heard from an influential member that the intention was to wipe out entire cities in the event that occurred. (Laughter) He also heard from the same well-known diplomat that the war was not unlikely in six months. If such an “honored man”, who always “fearfully” perceived the necessary discreet restraint, had publicly expressed the danger of war from the stands of this house, the danger of war must be greater than previously assumed. Bismarck countered the general outburst of amusement that he had not asserted "it is not unlikely that there will be a war in 6 months". He said literally: "It is possible that, despite the peaceful disposition of all European powers, within six months the MP from Aachen will have the opportunity to prove his war science skills in another field". (No, no from the left) He believed that he had spoken of the possibility of war, that he had not violated diplomatic considerations at all, as if he were now expressing his firm conviction that there would be war or peace within 6 months . (Laughter) This passage in the Vossische Zeitung was also shown in the same issue as follows: “So far, the military talents of the applicant have remained unknown to me. However, it is possible that these gentlemen, despite the peaceful disposition of all European powers, will have the opportunity within here and 6 months to use their war science skills in another field. ”But Vincke continued teasing and provocatively stated:

“I can only assume that the personally irritable tone, which the Honorable Member had no reason to, since I gratefully acknowledged his achievements, is only due to injured modesty because I called him a well-known diplomat. So, in order to satisfy him, I want to formally withdraw this statement, since everything I know about his diplomatic achievements is limited to the well-known burning cigar. "

- Vincke on March 22, 1852 before the second chamber of the state parliament

According to Bismarck, he told Vincke this story "as something very unimportant" at his express request in private as something "fun" and under the seal of secrecy. The President reprimanded this tone of the MP von Vincke and asked to remain within the limits of parliamentary decency. The deeply hit Bismarck countered from the speaker's platform:

“I would have liked the Member of Parliament von Vincke to abstain from making unnecessary references to my person. Since he did not do it, because he presented my statements in what I think was a distorted manner, I am obliged to reply to him. If the representative for Aachen says that I spoke to him in an irritable tone, I must deny this. I may find an opportunity to speak to him in that tone. His last statement crosses the line, not only of diplomatic but also of that private discretion which I thought I could expect from a man of good upbringing. "

- Bismarck on March 22, 1852 before the second chamber of the state parliament

The President Maximilian von Schwerin-Putzar repeatedly expressed his regret that the debate had taken such a turn and then let it break off. Vincke then said that he did not regret her, as she would give him cause to speak to the MP in the same tone or "I will expect this irritated tone of Mr. von Bismarck." His motion was rejected and the next session open Set at 10 a.m. on March 23.

The MP from Aachen - the constituency represented by Vincke - had hardly committed any indiscretion, as Bismarck himself had adequately spread the anecdote, but Bismarck felt that he was being honored by a "man of honor". He, one of his class, had compromised him in public: After all, a diplomat is someone who weighs and chooses his words carefully. After his thoughtless sentence with the big cities, the words “Bismarck” and “well-known diplomat” must have sounded like “goat” and “gardener”, which contributed to an enormous amusement. How much he had gotten into trouble is shown by the means to which he now sought refuge: denying Vincke good upbringing meant that he was unworthy of his class. This was now a monstrous reproach and, since Bismarck had made it public, it was not to be passed over for Vincke.

The background to the burning cigar

Federal Palace

This is an old anecdote and Harry Graf Kessler suspects that it was set by Bismarck himself and that it was either misrepresented or distorted over time. Bismarck acted as the Bundestag envoy - according to the royal instructions - because of the re- emerging dualism against Austria in the Bundestag . According to the legend, there are several versions that always pursue the same motive: The Austrian diplomats smoke cigars and Bismarck follows suit to emphasize Prussia's equality:

• “Bismarck was in opposition to Friedrich von Thun and Hohenstein , the Austrian envoy who presided over the Frankfurt Bundestag. Both fought over petty protocol issues; So one day Bismarck pulled a cigar out of his pocket in the session room of the Bundestag, where previously only the chairman had smoked, and demonstratively asked Thun for a fire. "
• “Count Thun Hohenstein was the only one who allowed himself to smoke in the conference room of the military committee of the Frankfurt Bundestag. Since Bismarck had no intention of granting the Austrians special privileges, he began to smoke a cigar at the next meeting. The next time the Bavarian envoy followed suit, until finally even non-smokers smoked for reasons of prestige. "
• When Bismarck visited the Austrian diplomat Bernhard von Rechberg for the first time, he found him writing and smoking a cigar. Without further ado he lit a cigar, sat on the sofa and waited for Rechberg to greet him. Since Rechberg was in Constantinople at this time, it could be confused with Count Thun Hohenstein. This incident would come close to a diplomatic affront , in any case it would be against etiquette .

Media echo from March 23 to 24, 1852

The meeting room of the 2nd Chamber in 1868, where the customs parliament also met.

The Chamber Debate of March 22, 1852 received a lot of attention in the press landscape in Berlin, but also in Germany. The big daily newspapers in Berlin sent their editors to the meeting, who, sitting in a special journalist's platform, had to inform their readers about the events on the following day; hence the representation of the end of the chamber meeting, the trigger for the duel. They are extremely important for the further course of events because they make it impossible for both politicians to withdraw their words without publicly losing face, or to go backwards.

• The Spenersche Zeitung of March 23, 1852 reports in detail. It also gives the objections of Treplin and von Prittwitz (abbreviated). Vincke's last statement sounds like a demand: he will speak to Bismarck in the tone just described.

• The Berliner Nationalzeitung of March 23, 1852 is also detailed. Even Prittwitz's objection is dealt with in detail. The note from President Graf von Schwerin is also mentioned. But here it sounds as if Bismarck is the demanding one, because Vincke is prepared to hear the tone.
• The Vossische Zeitung of March 23, 1852 is also detailed. Treplin and Prittwitz are only presented in abbreviated form. Here it seems as if the duel has already been decided, because Vincke remarks that the debate now gives him reason to talk to Bismarck in the same tone.
• The Preussische Zeitung of March 23, 1852 only deals indirectly with the event and notes personal comments from both sides with great irritation.
• The Constitutionelle Zeitung of March 23, 1852 goes into Vincke's statement, mentions Bismarck's statement as a reply and Vincke's reply as a renunciation.
• The most detailed is the depiction of the Kreuzzeitung from March 24, 1852. Treplin's objection is not mentioned at all, instead the verbal battle is described in detail; the reactions in the chamber are also shown. Here too, Vincke makes the impression of being called upon when he states in his last statement that he will expect the tone of Mr. Bismarck. It should also be noted here that the representation in the Kreuzzeitung appears with a time delay of two days. It can therefore take account of the reports in the other newspapers in its presentation of events. Bismarck himself was with Ludwig Friedrich Leopold von Gerlach on the evening of March 23, 1852 , where he also met Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach , the two editors of the Kreuzzeitung.
• The official stenographic report, however, was not published until April 1852. The objections of Treplin and von Prittwitz are not mentioned.

The Challenge March 23-24, 1852

General
Superintendent Carl Büchsel (around 1850)

Although Bismarck wrote in his letter to his mother-in-law there that he was challenged by Vincke on the next day by the cartel carrier Mr. von Saucken-Julienfelde, it is more likely that Bismarck took Vincke's last statement as an invitation to challenge him, i.e. his to formally respond to public demand. So that Vincke had indirectly demanded Bismarck through his public statement and Bismarck was forced to demand formally. Bismarck unquestionably admits to having insulted and sees Vincke as the rightly demanding one. Vincke confirmed this through his second , August von Saucken-Julienfelde , on the following day, on March 23, 1852, in a pistol duel on four bullets according to Bismarck, or on two bullets at 15 paces according to Bodelschwingh. For Vincke this was nothing special; he had often called for parliamentary opponents. Bismarck initially wanted to fight the deal with Vincke in a less dangerous saber duel. The pistol duels usually ended 29% fatally. Because of his corps student experience he was a good fencer on the racket , but previously he had only participated in saber games and pistol duels as a second and referee. During the three semesters of his stay in Göttingen, Bismarck beat no fewer than 25 lengths and was defeated only once. All his life he interpreted the blow he received as the result of a blow that was not in accordance with the commentary. Also Vincke was extended fencer Corp and Student 1833 already because of a duel offense to imprisonment convicted. But the concession proposed by Bismarck's second and brother-in-law Oskar von Arnim-Kröchlendorff was rejected by Saucken-Julienfelde. Ludwig von Bodelschwingh , a corps brother of Vincke, was appointed as an impartial witness . Bismarck had previously consulted with his friends Alexander von Uhden , General von Gerlach , Eberhard zu Stolberg-Wernigerode ; everyone said it had to be. Vincke must have been surprised by Bismarck's reaction there, because he then asked for a 48-hour delay, which Bismarck allowed.
Bismarck sought support not only from his political friends, but also from faith. But Carl Büchsel , the general superintendent, firmly refused the duel and refused the Lord's Supper and spiritual assistance. Hans Hugo von Kleist-Retzow said in an interview with Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach that Bismarck's behavior was justified; Vincke must be punished in this "just war". But unlike his brother General Gerlach, who also wrote about an emergency and a just war, Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach asked whether Bismarck was complicit, since he had screwed himself up to dueling with Harkort and Vincke. At least Büchsel should not have been burdened with such a decision. In fact, the conflict of conscience seems to have been greater with Büchsel than with Bismarck, who at no time was in doubt that he had to face himself. The only question he was left with was whether he should shoot Vincke. Therefore, he received Büchsel's admonition to refrain from the duel for moral-Christian reasons with indignation and demanded assistance and no instruction. Bismarck saw in the refusal of the Lord's Supper an injustice, and Büchsel himself was an unbelieving priest for him. But since, according to the Confessio Augustana, it is not the faith of the dispenser but the faith of the recipient that matters, there was no reason for him to withhold the Lord's Supper. It remains unclear why the Lord's Supper was so important to Bismarck. It must have been clear to him that his attitude was incompatible with Christian moral theology. It seems like he is trying to force the grace of God on his side. He withheld the coming duel from his wife, who was pregnant with their future son Wilhelm von Bismarck in Frankfurt am Main ; His letter, however, indicated his displeasure with the whole situation: He was heartily tired of this sterile squabble, where one had to be annoyed about all kinds of foolishness, and was longing for the boring but polite debates in the Federal Palace. Harkort also felt offended by Bismarck and did not want to let the matter rest. Bismarck's flimsy declaration that he had been mistaken for something was not enough for him. Vincke's political friend wrote his reply letter as a second request to Bismarck:

"Berlin March 23, 1852
Ew. Well born,
dear letter from yesterday, in my humble opinion, the case is not settled, because after the debate went on I was accused of ingratitude in relation to advances received from the state treasury. I expect more detailed proof of this! The assumption is also incorrect: that I am aware of such a negotiation; first I heard it from your lips. If my relatives do business in the maritime trade, I am not personally responsible for it; whether now Ew. Honored as a steward of the Budget Commission, giving more information about it or not, can probably not have any influence on my cause. Sincerely yours, Ew. Highly honored servant "

- Friedrich Harkort

Bismarck, on the other hand, wrote to his wife in his letter of March 24, 1852 that he had spent the previous evening with Leopold Gerlach . The day after tomorrow they will meet again if it is God's will that the snow let him through. It will probably be more of a Christian act of grace than an insight that ultimately made Büchsel turn back to hold an hour of prayer with Bismarck and Eberhard zu Stolberg-Wernigerode. Ludwig Gerlachs notes in his diary:

“On a note from me, Bismark came to me from Büchsel, who decided to give him Holy Communion. It was very subdued, almost depressed; earlier he had often had it; now in faith and as husband and father he feels differently; his wife is awaiting her delivery. "

- Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach, diary of March 24, 1852

Vincke expected the worst. On the evening of March 24th, he wrote his wife an emotional farewell letter. In it he remembered the turmoil that was still ahead of the country and the House of Busch , where he was born and where he also wanted his grave. Tomorrow he would take a serious walk to shoot himself with Bismarck. The next day, before they left for Tegel, he gave Bodelschwingh a key to his desk and asked him to deliver the papers to his wife in the event of his death and to inform her carefully about the incident and its outcome.

The duel on March 25, 1852

Attendants and position

Bodelschwingh reports of the same people present, only Lieutenant Colonel Karl von Vincke-Olbendorf was Vincke's second and Saucken-Julienfelde was his witness. Bismarck's second was Count Eberhard Stolberg and his brother witnessed it. According to Bismarck's description, the positions were as follows:

position

More impartial		Ludwig von Bodelschwingh
Duelists	Otto von Bismarck		Georg von Vincke
Seconds	Oskar von Arnim-Kröchlendorff		August von Saucken-Julienfelde
Witnesses / spectators	Eberhard zu Stolberg-Wernigerode	Bernhard von Bismarck	Karl Friedrich von Vincke

Bismarck group

• 

  Bismarck (1847) as a duelist

• 

  Bismarck's second and brother-in-law von Arnim-Kröchlendorff

• 

  Count Eberhard zu Stolberg-Wernigerode as a party witness

• 

  Bernhard von Bismarck, uninvolved spectator and brother of Bismarck

Vincke Group

• 

  Vincke (1848) as a duelist

• 

  Vincke's second from Saucken-Julienfelde

• 

  Vincke's cousin, the impartial witness from Bodelschwingh

Course of events

When the two groups met on March 25, 1852 at 8 a.m. at a place on the lake shore in Tegel designated by Bodelschwingh, the weather was spring-like with clear sunshine, although a large amount of snow had fallen in the last few days. With Bismarck, his second Oskar von Arnim-Kröchlendorff, his brother Bernhard von Bismarck as an uninvolved spectator and Eberhard zu Stolberg-Wernigerode as a witness had appeared. Vincke accompanied von Saucken-Julienfelde as a second, von Bodelschwingh as a referee and his cousin Major Vincke as a witness. After his failed attempt at reconciliation, Bodelschwingh stated that the demand seemed too harsh for the insult he had fallen, so that one shot per side would be sufficient. Both sides agreed. Saucken-Julienfelde asked for Vincke whether they would abandon the duel if Bismarck declared his regret. Bismarck refused this. It must be noted here that for Bismarck in particular, the waiver would have had more consequences than for Vincke. As an arch-conservative, he represented precisely the canon of values ​​that were expressed and defended by the duel. A renunciation would have exposed him not only to incredulity, but even to ridicule. Now the precise dueling pistols were loaded. One of them was overloaded after Bismarck, so that it was initially not available. Therefore, one turned to less precise pistols, which were intended for seconds. According to Bodelschwingh, the ramrod broke because the bullets were too thick for the barrel; then short-stocked pistols were used. The two duelists took their positions. At the command of Bodelschwinghs, both shot at each other and were missing. The actual duel should have started around 10 o'clock; Bodelschwingh described it like this:

"I loaded the pistols, the opponents were put face to face and I told them that on my command: 'One' to raise the pistols, on my command: 'Two' to aim and before the command: 'Three', to shoot down. I added that I will give them enough time between 'two' and 'three'. - A few seconds after the command 'Two' both shots were fired, almost simultaneously, at least I couldn't tell which of the two had shot first. Both opponents were unharmed. Herr von Bismarck walked quickly up to Herr von Vincke and held out his hand. Complete reconciliation took place on the battlefield. "

- Bodelschwingh

Bismarck, on the other hand, described:

"God forgive me the grave sin that I did not immediately recognize his grace, but I cannot deny it, when I looked through the steam and my opponent stood upright, a feeling of discomfort prevented me from getting into the general cheering, the Bodelschwingh Let tears shed join in; I was annoyed at the reduction of the demand, and I would have liked to continue the fight. But since I was not the offender, I couldn't say anything; it was over and everyone shook hands. "

- Bismarck in the letter to his mother-in-law of April 4, 1852

The result

1861: "You shouldn't have me" The Munich Punch made fun of Vincke's public-shy character. The statement is an allusion to the Rheinlied by Nikolaus Becker

1863: The statement: “Law remains law” , reminds us of the words of Vincke from his speech to the united state parliament in April 1847 with regard to the Prussian reforms , although its author already disagreed and did not support the letter of protest

The liberal Berliner Nationalzeitung of March 26, 1852 reported succinctly and ironically in its morning edition under the heading “Berliner Nachrichten”: “As is said, a duel between two well-known chamber members took place this morning, which was engaged as a result of the parliamentary or non-parliamentary debate that had recently taken place was. As it is added, the duel would have gone like many chamber debates, ie nothing would have come of it. ”The Kreuzzeitung, which is close to Bismarck, indirectly reported the result of the duel by announcing on March 27, 1852:“ This side of the Bundestag envoy, go. Legation Council v. Bismarck-Schönhausen, will return to his post in Frankfurt this evening. ”And the Kladderadatsch could not deny an ironic swipe at the duel on March 28, 1852:“ According to a not unlikely rumor, the second chamber should be from a certain side The urgent request will soon be made to abolish the previous rules of procedure, which have proven useless in practice, and to replace them with the venerable Halle Comment , which has proven itself through age and tradition . ", or as a mock advertisement:" To the honored members of the Herrclub am Dönhofsplatz I recommend my assorted stock of naughty scale pistols for the shooting exercises that begin in spring . The armorer of Lorzing "

There has been much speculation as to whether both duelists were absent on purpose or whether the pistols were tampered with by outsiders. Also, no surgeon is mentioned in the reports , which could have fatal consequences so far outside Berlin. Bodelschwingh thought that was impossible. Both adversaries had closed their lives through letters and regulations. Bismarck is also said to have been very excited before and after the duel. On March 25th, Vincke informed his wife Helene Sophie Berta von der Schulenburg on Gut Ostenwalde near Oldendorf about the duel and its happy outcome. Since Bismarck had accused him of a lack of education, there was of course nothing left for him. But he hoped the duel would also lead to a better relationship and more respect between left and right in the Chamber. In the chamber debate on March 27, 1852, he declared with regard to the Prussian civil servants' duty of loyalty that courage and loyalty were abstract concepts for him that could be understood to mean many things. Bismarck also reported to his wife Johanna von Puttkamer on March 25th that she should not believe the newspaper gossip that he had a dangerous relationship with Vincke and Harkort; all that has now been eliminated; then he gave her his word and would rather keep something quiet than lie to her. Amazingly, both of them expressed relief at the outcome in their letters, not a word about satisfaction or honor.

Political Berlin was dissatisfied: both the liberals and the conservatives were hoping to lose an eloquent opponent. King Friedrich Wilhelm IV. , Who had gone to Moers to celebrate an anniversary at the time, had the exit reported by telegram on the way . Just one month later, on April 21, 1852, he expressed the expectation in a billet that, with Bismarck's help, the redesign of the First Chamber and the “dirty intrigues” of the “association of repentant sheep from the right and stout goats from the left would succeed “Could be overcome. But Bismarck had grown tired of the "chamber air". In a letter to his wife in May, he wrote that there was something demoralizing about it. The people would become vain at the "gymnastics and parade ground of mind and tongue" and produce themselves in the stands, like in a "toilet piece" in front of the audience. Whenever he comes there from Frankfurt uninhibited, it is for him as if a sober person got drunk. Much to the king's annoyance, he refused re-election in his constituency, Havelland, in the fall of 1852. Nevertheless, he summoned him to the Prussian mansion on November 21, 1854 , where he did not speak up.

In summary, the duel was very useful for the aspiring Bismarck. It has given him support in his conservative circles, confidence in the king and respect in his political opponents. Vincke, on the other hand, had allowed himself to be lured into a field on which he could only insist but not gain anything. Bismarck renounced the parliamentary debate for the next ten years, leaving it to Vincke as well. He further developed his diplomatic career in Frankfurt, St. Petersburg and Paris. In the new era , from 1858 to 1861, the "Vincke Fraction" was the largest in the House of Representatives. In the elections of 1858, the 158 MPs made up 58% of the Chamber, i.e. an absolute majority. During this time, Vincke, as chairman of the Vincke parliamentary group, was at the zenith of his political influence for the last time. The interior minister Maximilian von Schwerin-Putzar or the finance minister Robert von Patow , but also the influential Alfred von Auerswald were his group colleagues. When 19 members of the parliament split off in February 1861 to form the Forckenbeck parliamentary group, named after Max von Forckenbeck , this marked the beginning of a process of erosion. In the autumn of 1862, when Bismarck was appointed Prussian Prime Minister, he returned to the House of Representatives; but this time as head of government.

When Bismarck commented on the constitutional conflict in the Chamber on January 27, 1863 , he argued that constitutional life was a series of compromises which, if thwarted, would lead to conflict. Conflicts, however, are questions of power that those in power have to implement in their favor. This was no longer answered by Vincke, but by his parliamentary colleague Maximilian von Schwerin-Putzar by stating: “Power has priority. So far, the size of Prussia and the recognition of the royal family have been based on the principle of law before power. Justitia fundamentum regnorum! That is the motto of the Prussian kings, and it will stay that way. ” However, this high ethical position was critically questioned by contemporaries. Ferdinand Lassalle stated in his letter to the Vossische Zeitung: “But what does ... the pious jubilation with which the Chamber gave the declaration of Count v. Schwerin accepted that in the Prussian state "law precedes power"? Pious wishes for children and nothing more! Because it would only have a more solemn meaning with men who were determined to put power behind the law! ” When a protest resolution against Bismarck's constitutional breach was passed in the 2nd Chamber in January 1863 , Vincke voted with the remnants of the old liberals even against the majority. Vincke did not get involved in a power struggle with Bismarck again. For him, the duel was the culmination and the end of a long struggle with an outmoded political system that had found its personal reincarnation in Bismarck . Pierre Bourdieu declared the sacredness of the protection of honor as a necessary basic condition of the duel. The sense of honor can only have meaning for those who are concerned with "sacred things". People who do not have such a thing therefore do not need a feeling of honor, because in this sense they would be invulnerable.

It is an irony of history that the man who opposed Bismarck's striving for power in 1847 by continuously developing and developing the existing legal system was unable to even do so in 1863, because of the indignant majority of the second chamber of the breach of law to connect. In 1852, Vincke either only defended his private understanding of law and honor, or he abandoned his former convictions, or he had given up. Only in the later Kulturkampf did Vincke take a different opinion. Unlike Abraham Lincoln , who had to fight a duel with James Shields on a river island near Alton on September 22, 1842 , Bismarck subsequently became less prudent in public and more moderate in dealing with his political opponents. Here, too, he used his ability to be satisfied as a nobleman to intimidate his political opponents. For his part, on June 3, 1865, Bismarck challenged the deputy Rudolf Virchow to a duel; However, he refused on the grounds that a duel is not a contemporary type of discussion. This duel also arouses lively media interest, but also a lot of response from the population. After Vincke in his early days, there was only one man in Prussia whom Bismarck took so seriously, Ludwig Windthorst . The duel as a historical event is at best still appreciated by the historians of the 19th century. It is not even mentioned in their Bismarck biographies by the West German historian Lothar Gall and the East German historian Ernst Engelberg . In retrospect, Bismarck himself described the outcome of the duel as “ God's grace ” “with calm blood” .

swell

• Otto von Bismarck: Thoughts and Memories . Complete edition in one volume. Cotta, Stuttgart 1959.
• Herbert von Bismarck (ed.): Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. Volume 1: Letters. 6th edition. Cotta, Stuttgart et al. 1919, pp. 293-297.
• Jakob von Gerlach (Ed.): Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach. Notes from his life and work 1795–1877. 2 volumes. Railway, Schwerin 1903.
• Eduard von der Hellen (ed.): Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. Selected and with an explanatory appendix. Cotta, Stuttgart 1941, there: Appendix 80, p. 303.
• Wilhelm Böhm: Prince Bismarck as a speaker. Complete collection of Bismarck's parliamentary speeches since 1847. Volume 1: The delegate Bismarck-Schönhausen 1847-1852. Spemann, Berlin 1885, google books .

literature

• Georg Koeppen: Bismarck. His time and his work. Described to the German-Americans. Brumder, Milwaukee WI 1899, full text , (Reprint: Salzwasser Verlag, Paderborn 2012, ISBN 978-3-86382-922-3 ).
• Otto Remmert: If Vincke's ball had hit Bismarck fatally ... In: Hagener Heimatkalender. Vol. 1, 1960, ISSN  0440-0690 .
• Lothar Gall : Bismarck. The white revolutionary. Propylaeen, Frankfurt am Main et al. 1980, ISBN 3-549-07397-6 .
• Edward Crankshaw: Bismarck. A biography. List, Munich 1983, ISBN 3-471-77216-2 .
• Ernst Engelberg : Bismarck. Original Prussians and founders of the empire. Siedler, Berlin 1985, ISBN 3-88680-121-7 .
• Josef Cornelissen: Heyde house near Unna. A Westphalian aristocratic residence in its eventful fate. (= Analyzes and opinions. Vol. 35). City director - i-Punkt, Unna 1998, ISBN 3-927082-37-6 .
• Hans-Peter Goldberg: Bismarck and his opponents. The political rhetoric in the Imperial Diet. (= Contributions to the history of parliamentarism and political parties. Vol. 112). Droste, Düsseldorf 1998, ISBN 3-7700-5205-6 . (At the same time: Tübingen, University, dissertation, 1993).
• Manfred Luda : At the birth of parliamentarism. MP from the County of Mark in Stormy Times (1848–1849). Mönnig, Iserlohn 1998, ISBN 3-933519-04-7 .
• Hans-Joachim Behr: “Right must stay right”. The life of Freiherr Georg von Vincke (1811–1875). (= Studies and sources on Westphalian history. Vol. 63 = Contributions to Märkische history. Vol. 1). Bonifatius, Paderborn 2009, ISBN 978-3-89710-435-8 .

Web links

• Vincke's speech at the United State Parliament in April 1847 in ZEIT
• The description of the duel
• Kladderadatsch of March 28, 1852
• Daily mirror

Remarks

1. ↑ Spenersche Zeitung , of Sunday March 21, 1852: Mr. von Bismarck-Schönhausen followed up on the previous speaker’s statement, who reproached the administration for not paying enough attention to old and experienced staff officers. If one were to reproach the government, it could only be the opposite. He declared himself against the motion of Herr von Vincke, which had no motives, and remarked that his opinion that the patriotism of the applicant would prevent him from doing his annoyance at the expense of an institute had been removed by the Minister of War's apology. They spoke of the spirit of the Prussian people. The big cities are not the Prussian people, at least not as long as they are under the leadership of lying demagogues. The spirit of the Prussian people is different, it will be preserved, and it should also wipe out the great cities from the earth. (Bravo and hissing)
   After a long series of personal remarks between Mr. von Vincke, von Bismarck and Harkort, who tried to outdo each other in irritation and ended with a provocation that is difficult to misunderstand, Vincki's motion is voted by name with 168 against 177 Votes rejected.
2. ↑ If there was talk of a distrust of one's own people, this was justified insofar as the big cities were always haunted by demagogic and lying leaders; these cities are not to be regarded as the Prussian people. If these great cities should ever attempt to rise again, the true Prussian people would know how to force and control them. (Lively Bravo) see: Preussische Zeitung , March 21, 1852.
3. ↑ On Title XX., Mr von Vinke requests that the application of 100,000 thalers for the military construction of Hohenzollern Castle be deducted from the budget. He denies the usefulness of this building, both from the military and from the state police point of view. If it was a question of rebuilding the castle as the residence of His Majesty the King, he might have gladly approved such a proposal. Alone, this purpose was not mentioned in the reports, and it should also be considered whether the financial situation of the country would allow such an expenditure, which he could hardly accept for the moment. Apart from other considerations, he was guided by the thought of the likelihood of a European war, which, according to the statements made by a well-known diplomat in the last session, despite the diplomatic reluctance he still observed, must be much closer than one previously believed. (Bravo) Mr Treplin asks that the motion be rejected without debate, out of consideration for today. (Birthday of His Royal Highness the Prince of Prussia)
   Mr. von Prittwitz gives Mr. von Vincke some factual explanations and also asks that the application be rejected.
   In a personal remark, Herr von Bismarck protests against the interpretation which Herr von Vincke gave his statement at the last meeting. When he spoke of the possibility of war, he had just as little violated discretion as he did now by expressing the definite conviction that in 6 months we will have either war or peace. (Laughter)
   Herr von Vincke: The statements of Herr von Bismarck were understood by all of his (Vincken's) political friends as well as by him. The irritable tone of the previous speaker was probably a result of hurt modesty, as he called him a well-known diplomat. He was now completely withdrawing the expression, since nothing of the diplomatic achievements of Herr von Bismarck had been known to him, other than the story of the burning cigar.
   Herr von Bismarck: The tone in which he spoke was not an irritable one. Perhaps later on he will have the opportunity to speak irritably to Herr von Vincke.
   Herr von Vincke: He himself would speak to Herr von Bismarck in the tone he just described.
   Mr. von Vincke's application is rejected and the position approved. ( Spenersche Zeitung , from March 23, 1852, according to current writing)
4. ↑ Von Vincke applied to deduct the above sums from the budget, since a crew of 150 men would not be able to withstand one against the Württemberg army, for which, God would protect, a general uprising would break out in southern Germany. The fortification of the Hohenzollern is also not a good prospect for the cities of Hechingen and Sigmaringen, since recently the military reinforcements proposed by a member worthy of note from the mouth of an official member should serve to occasionally wipe the cities off the ground. (Shout on the right: only the big cities) The speaker is very pleased with this shout in the interests of Hechingen and Sigmaringen. Incidentally, if one wanted, as the memorandum issued by the government on this subject seems to indicate, in which it states that the expansion of Hohenzollern Castle is particularly important to His Majesty and the castle as a residential palace, he and his friends would willingly do this to meet if suggested by any part of the Chamber. Given the state's financial situation, he cannot submit such a request himself. As far as the military expansion is concerned, however, time should now be saved for the Minister of War, as a well-known diplomat recently deviated from official secrecy to declare in the Chamber that we will have a European war within 6 months,
   Treplin hopes that the Chamber will approve the position without discussion with regard to today (birthday of the Prince of Prussia).
   von Prittwiz made a few remarks in order to prove the professionalism of the military fortifications. Vinckes' fears that the artillery set up on the Hohenzollern should be used to coat the cities of Hechingen and Sigmaringen, the MP tried with great delight of the right to refute by stating that the first city is a quarter mile there, the second five or six miles away.
   Von Vincke replied that the cannons could easily be brought out on the road, which is said to cost 6,000 thalers.
   von Bismarck-Schönhausen assured that he was used to the fact that his words sound different to the deputy von Vincke from the way he said them. He said the other day that despite the undeniably peaceful mood of all Europeans, a war was possible, and thus not violated official secrecy any further than when he said: within 6 months we will either have war or peace. (Great amusement on the right)
   von Vincke replied that he had given the previous speaker no cause for this irritable tone. Perhaps, out of offended modesty, he feels troubled by the expression "distinguished diplomat"; then the expression should be withdrawn, especially since nothing of the member's diplomatic achievements came to his attention except the burning cigar.
   In the interests of the Chamber, the President wished that this type of personal comment would be avoided.
   von Bismarck: If he is irritable, he should speak in one tone; Perhaps the MP von Vincke, who does not seem to know only about diplomatic discretion but also about discretion in general, will have the opportunity to get to know this tone.
   von Vincke is prepared to hear this tone.
   The motion of the aforementioned MP to delete the item of 100,000 thalers is rejected and the debate is postponed to 11 a.m. tomorrow. End 3 1/2 a.m. ( Berliner Nationalzeitung , March 23, 1852, according to current spelling.)
5. ↑ von Vincke wanted, as in earlier budgets, proof of the individual grants from the funds for exceptional needs of the fortress. His application is rejected. He also applied for an extraordinary to cancel the 100,000 thalers for the expansion of the Hohenzollern castle. He denies the importance of a post of only 150 men, which will probably not say much to the Württemberg army itself; if it were only for police purposes, the position belongs to the Ministry of the Interior. Even then, spending 160,000 thalers to secure perhaps 20,000 guilders would be disproportionate. Such an occupation would not help much against a movement in southern Germany itself, because the cities of Sigmaringen and Hechingen could be dangerous such a neighborhood, especially since there have recently been threats to eradicate the cities altogether. He also does not foresee what a route has to do with the Infantriebesatzung. Should there be a castle guard here, if his Majesty the King intends to rebuild the cradle of his ancestors as a worthy testimony to the greatness of the family, he and his friends will of course be happy to vote if the financial situation allows it at all. But he did not share the finance minister's sanguine hope that the remaining administration would cover the desicits, and in this regard he referred above all to the necessary road construction, the emergencies, etc. Since also recently here by a well-known representative of diplomacy, of course so certainly with all the diplomat incoming reserve, it had been described as "not unlikely" that major military power developments might be necessary in the near future, so he asked to keep the necessary resources together.
   Treplin asks, in consideration of today, the birthday of a son of that glorious tribe, to approve the position without debate.
   von Prittwitz proves the military necessity of the individual buildings.
   von Bismarck denies the expression “it is not unlikely that there will be war in 6 months”. He said literally: "It may be possible that, despite the peaceful disposition of all European powers, the MP from Aachen will have the opportunity within 6 months to prove his war science ability in another field." (No, no from the left) He thinks by speaking of the possibility of war, by not having violated diplomatic considerations, any more than when he now expresses his firm conviction that we will have war or peace within 6 months. (Laughter) He thinks that the statement was only misinterpreted in the excitement it caused the Honorable Member for Aachen. He did not want this effect, which could cause the previous speaker to separate from his funds.
   Von Vincke: As far as that statement is concerned, it was understood not only by him, but by this whole page (on the left) as he first reproduced it. Incidentally, he did not understand the tone of personal irritation in the previous speaker's answer, it came from hurt modesty, for example, as he called him a “well-known diplomat”. In this case he would be happy to take back the epithet, especially since only the burning cigar has become known of his diplomatic effectiveness.
   von Bismarck replied that his tone, if irritable, was completely different, and that the previous speaker might find another opportunity to hear the same.
   The President repeatedly expressed his regret that the debate had taken such a turn and asked that it be canceled.
   von Vincke: I don't regret it, because it will give me the opportunity to speak to the honorable Member in just such a tone.
   Vinckes' proposal is then rejected and, after the next title has been dealt with, the discussion is postponed until 10 a.m. tomorrow. ( Vossische Zeitung , March 23, 1852, according to current writing.)
6. ↑ Deputy von Vincke requests: For Title XX. Ordinarium to express the expectation that the evidence attached to the previous budget of the payments made from the fund "fixed grant for extraordinary needs of the fortress" will be attached after this year after this year. The request is discarded. Extraordinary: 769.556 Reichstaler.
   Deputy von Vincke wants to deduct the amount of 100,000 Reichstalers for the military construction of Hohenzollern Castle from the budget by only voting for the sum with all his heart if he wishes to rebuild the castle into the residence of His Majesty the King To restore the greatness of our sex; but he does not consider the militaristic aims to be so urgent to approve such a sum. He is of the opinion that there are more urgent needs than the military construction of Hohenzollern Castle and therefore points out the many chausses, the emergencies that broke out in individual parts of the country, needs that have not been satisfied with the current financial situation can be.
   MEP Treplin asks, considering today, to vote on this motion without debate and to approve it.
   Member of Parliament von Prittwitz gives some factual explanations and proves the necessity of the position.After the
   end of the debate, there are again personal comments between the Members of Parliament from Bismarck-Schönhausen and von Vincke, prompted by comments from the Leztern in relation to the speech by the Member of Parliament von Bismarck yesterday. The remarks are of great irritation, so that the President asks that such things be avoided.
   The motion of the deputy from Vincke is rejected by a large majority, but the position is approved. ( Preussische Zeitung , from March 23, 1852, according to current spelling.)
7. ^ The title XXI. Extraodinariarium 769,556 thalers requested by Vincke: at Titel. XX .. Extraodinarium to deduct the amount of 100,000 thalers from the budget for the military construction of Hohenzollern Castle.
   von Vincke: Here too, the commission is very incomplete. At least neither by your report nor by the government's memorandum have I been able to convince myself that this is a military purpose. But if this is not the case, I don't know how this sum of 100,000 thalers will end up on the military budget. Everywhere there is only talk of the police's interest in re-fortification; but 150 men, as the report says, will not keep the principalities in order if the whole of southern Germany is on fire - and we should spend 100,000 thalers to save 10-20,000 guilders in an emergency? There is no question of a military position - as can already be seen from the fact that there is no mention of a gun position - I was, casually speaking, very dear to me because of the cities of Hechingen and Sigmaringen, as the Bundestag envoy recently told us that " At that moment, the cities would have to be destroyed. ”But the fact that the military purpose alone could justify expenditure now, I have to deduce from the recent words of the same speaker who, despite his diplomatic position, assured us that we would have a European one in six months Have war.
   Treplin declares against the application.
   von Prittwiz gives some information about the building in Hohenzollern.
   von Vincke corrects several statements.
   von Bismarck claims that he recently described the war as "not unlikely"; he just said "it is not impossible". He said nothing more than that in 6 months we would have war or no war. The speaker expressed himself in an irritated tone about his misfortune to be so often misunderstood by the representative for Aachen.
   von Vincke states that the Bundestag envoy said the words about the imminent outbreak of war as he quoted them, as he quoted them. He then marveled at the irritable tone that the previous speaker had struck, and believes that this was due to the recognition of his reason, which he had recently given to his diplomatic talents. He wanted to reassure the Bundestag envoy about this; he knew nothing more of his successes than the famous visit with the cigar.
   - After a reply by MP Bismarck and a resignation from MP von Vincke, MP Wegner and the government commissioner take the floor. Vincke's application is then rejected and the title approved; also title XXI. The session ended at 3 1/2 a.m. Next meeting Tuesday at 11 a.m. (Constitutionelle Zeitung of March 23, 1852, according to current spelling.)
8. ↑ The deputy von Vincke has also introduced an amendment to this, in which he calls for the deduction of these 100,000 thalers. He defends the same by arguing: This is a very significant sum which, moreover, I do not find suitable for the military budget. We have been told that the castle is to be furnished for 150 men; but what can 150 men do? Even against the Württemberg army they would be of no use. It is said that the conditions in southern Germany are very shaken and I agree with this view, but what kind of resistance can the 150 men put up there under such circumstances and for a mere refuge, the sum demanded is probably not in line with them. Now yesterday we were told by a venerable member of the right wing of this House that the cities should be wiped out from the ground, and so it may be the intention to razor the cities of Sigmaringen and Hechingen from Hohenzollern Castle. (Shout: “Big cities!”) - I gratefully accept this cry in the interest of the small cities. - If it were a work to restore the ancestral castle of our glorious ruling house worthily, I ask you, who among us would not happily approve the funds? Who would not agree that these 150 men find shelter there as a kind of castle guard? Now, however, I am all the less voting in favor of the approval of these 100,000 thalers because the day before yesterday we heard from a well-known diplomat with the necessary diplomatic backing that, although I have to admit that we had no idea of ​​this danger, maybe within 6 months into a European war. (Laughter, left)
   MP von Prittwitz: However, the point in question is only intended to serve as a refuge; as such, however, only Hohenzollern Castle could be conveyed as the most suitable. But if anything else can contribute to the reassurance of Herr von Vincke, I just want to reply to him that, as far as the razing of the cities of Sigmaringen and Hohenzollern from the castle is concerned, this will not be very possible, since one city is almost one and the other 5-6 miles from her. (Laughter)
   Member of Parliament von Bismarck-Schönhausen: I have often had the misfortune of being misunderstood by the Member of Parliament von Vincke, and so I am not surprised that I have to complain this time too, especially since he has my words in one Seems to have heard excitement. On Saturday I only stated that the governments of Europe are so peaceably minded at this moment that circumstances might arise which in six months will require us to use the military talent of the MP for Aachen in a field other than this one close. And with that I have just as little violated my official secrecy as if I had claimed that within 6 months we would either have war or - peace. (General amusement)
   MP von Vincke: I do not understand that I should be the one who always misunderstands Herr von Bismarck. All my friends around me understood him as much as I did. Incidentally, if the honorable Member speaks of an irritable tone, which I am supposed to have adopted, he might like to relate it to the expression “distinguished diplomat” and I am more than happy to withdraw this term. The development of his diplomatic talent seems to have been limited to the conscious “burning cigar”. (Laughter on the left, noise on the right)
   The President reprimands the tone of the MP von Vincke and asks to remain within the limits of parliamentary decency.
   Member of Parliament von Bismarck: If my tone is more irritable, it is different and it can very easily happen that I speak once with the Member of Parliament for Aachen in the same. But as far as the burning cigar is concerned, I believe that Herr von Vincke knows just as little about diplomatic discretion as he does about anyone else. (Bravo right)
   The President repeated his request for moderation.
   Member of Parliament von Vincke: I will expect this irritated tone from Herr von Bismarck. (Lively unrest)
   Vincke's amendment is then rejected and the position accepted; compare for service and garrison administration 2450008 thalers, which postpones the debate. The session ended at 3 1/2 a.m. Next meeting: Tuesday at 11 a.m. ( Kreuzzeitung , dated March 24, 1852, according to current spelling.)
9. ^ President: The Member of Parliament von Bismarck-Schönhausen has the floor for a personal comment. Member of Parliament from Bismarck-Schönhausen (vom Platz): The Member of Parliament for Aachen said beforehand that I had said in my speech the day before yesterday that it was not unlikely that we would have war in six months. It is true that I am somewhat used to the fact that my words reach the honorable Member in a different way than I know they emerged from my mouth, and I believe that no one will consider the versions given by the honorable Member of what I have said as authentic. But since I would very much regret if the honorable Member were to part with his fund prematurely as a result of his view of what I said, I would like to correct his comment by saying that I did not say that there would be a war in six months' time I really did say that despite the undoubtedly peaceful disposition of all European powers, it was not impossible that in six months from here we would be able to use the honorable Member's military talents for Aachen on another Field than the local one. (Great concern) President: Quiet, please. Member of Parliament von Bismarck-Schönhausen: I believe that by making this statement I have not violated the discretion that my office imposes on me, any more than by adding that I am firmly convinced that in six months we will either have war or peace. (Laughter) President: Allow me to take the floor ... Mr von Vincke has the floor on a personal point. Deputy Baron von Vincke: First of all, I am very grateful to the honored member that he does not want to see me as an authentic reporter on his many statements. I would be really busy to control everything. The only thing I notice is that all of my friends think they understand it just as much as I do, and that it seems to me an inexplicable misunderstanding that it was generally understood that way on this side of the house (on the left). Incidentally, I can only assume that the personally irritable tone, which the honorable Member had no reason to, as I gratefully acknowledged his achievements, is only due to injured modesty because I called him a well-known diplomat. Therefore, in order to satisfy him, I will formally withdraw this statement, since everything I know about his diplomatic achievements is limited to the well-known burning cigar.
   President: Gentlemen! I have to give the floor to Mr von Bismarck-Schönhausen on a personal remark. However, as the leader of the meeting, you must allow me to request that the personal discussion not be continued in this way. Member of Parliament von Bismarck-Schönhausen: Nobody recognizes this truth more than I do, and I would have liked the Honorable Member for Aachen to abstain from making unnecessary reference to my person. Since he did not do it, because he made my statement in what I believe to be a distorting way, I am compelled to reply to him. If the honorable Member for Aachen says that I spoke to him in an irritable tone, I have to deny this. I may find an opportunity to speak to him in that tone. His last utterances cross the line not only of diplomatic but also of that private discretion which I thought I could expect a man of good upbringing to observe. (The MP von Vinke wanted the floor on a personal comment) President: There must be an end to personal comments. Deputy Baron von Vinke (from the square): I am now completely through and am pleased that the shot of the reply gives me cause to speak to the honorable Member in the tone he has just described. President: I repeat my request; Today's personal remarks are based on discussions that took place at the previous meeting. I sincerely ask you, in the interests of the cause, to refrain from such kind of discussion in the future.
   (Bravo) Stenographic reports on the negotiations of the chambers convened by the Supreme Ordinance of November 4, 1851, Second Chamber, Volume Two, From the thirtieth session on February 27 to the fifty-eighth session on March 29, 1852, Druck und Verlag der Deckerschen Secret Ober-Hofbuchdruckerei, 1852, p. 910.

Individual evidence

1. ↑ Fundamental to the duel in the 19th century: Ute Frevert : Ehrenmänner. The duel in civil society (= dtv 4646 dtv science ). Deutscher Taschenbuch-Verlag, Munich 1995, ISBN 3-423-04646-5 .
2. ^ According to the current Prussian general land law . Wording and comment: [1]
3. ↑ Ute Frevert: Men of Honor. The duel in civil society. Beck, Munich 1991, ISBN 3-406-35117-4 , p. 15 (also: Bielefeld, University, habilitation paper, 1989).
4. ^ ^{A b} Edward Crankshaw: Bismarck. 1983, p. 55.
5. ^ Lothar Gall: Bismarck. The white revolutionary. 1980, p. 73.
6. ↑ to Vincke's denomination
7. ↑ Hans-Peter Goldberg: Bismarck and his opponents. 2004, p. 134.
8. ↑ ^{a b c d e f g h i j k l m} Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 296.
9. ↑ On this Rüdiger Hachtmann : Berlin 1848. A political and social history of the revolution. Dietz, Bonn 1997, ISBN 3-8012-4083-5 , pp. 291-295 (also: Berlin, Technical University, habilitation paper, 1995).
10. ↑ Ernst Engelberg: Bismarck. Original Prussians and founders of the empire. 1985, p. 246.
11. ↑ ^{a b} Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 88.
12. ↑ ^{a b} Otto von Bismarck: Thoughts and Memories. 1959, p. 20.
13. ↑ Manfred Luda: At the birth of parliamentarism. 1998, p. 208.
14. ↑ Edward Crankshaw: Bismarck. 1983, p. 66.
15. ^ Friedrich Wilhelm IV. , Note on Bismarck's name on a list of ministerial personalities in 1848, according to Bismarck: Thoughts and Memories. Chapter Two: The Year 1848. IV. P. 30 books.google ; s. also https://www.projekt-gutenberg.org/bismarck/erinner1/erinner1.html and http://www.zeno.org/nid/20002731541 (there in the notation Bayonet ).
16. ↑ Otto von Bismarck: Thoughts and Memories. 1959, p. 50.
17. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 100.
18. ^ ^{A b c d e f} Hermann von Petersdorff, Bernhard von Poten :  Vincke, Georg Freiherr von . In: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie (ADB). Volume 39, Duncker & Humblot, Leipzig 1895, pp. 743-752.
19. ↑ Der Spiegel , December 12, 1956 .
20. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 163.
21. ↑ Bismarck: The great speeches. Edited and introduced by Lothar Gall. Severin and Siedler, Berlin 1981, ISBN 3-88680-007-5 , p. 43 ff.
22. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 225.
23. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 226.
24. ↑ Otto von Bismarck: Thoughts and Memories. 1959, p. 78.
25. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 295.
26. ↑ ^{a b} Kladderadatsch , March 28, 1852.
27. ^ Wilhelm Böhm: Prince Bismarck as a speaker. Complete collection of Bismarck's parliamentary speeches since 1847. Volume 1: The delegate Bismarck-Schönhausen 1847-1852. 1885, p. 211.
28. ↑ Horst Kohl : The political speeches of Prince Bismarck. Volume 1: The speeches of the MP von Bismarck-Schönhausen in the United State Parliament, in the German Parliament in Erfurt and in the Second Chamber of the Prussian State Parliament. 1847-1852. Cotta, Stuttgart 1892, p. 413.
29. ^ Wilhelm Böhm: Prince Bismarck as a speaker. Complete collection of Bismarck's parliamentary speeches since 1847. Volume 1: The delegate Bismarck-Schönhausen 1847-1852. 1885, pp. 210-212.
30. ^ Vossische Zeitung , March 22, 1852.
31. ^ Georg Koeppen: Bismarck. His time and his work. 1899, p. 121.
32. ^ Vossische Zeitung , March 22, 1852.
33. ↑ ^{a b c d} Vossische Zeitung , March 23, 1852.
34. ↑ Kreuzzeitung , March 23, 1852.
35. ^ Kladderadatsch , March 28, 1852.
36. ↑ a title to which Harkort is not entitled
37. ^ Bismarck yearbook. Vol. 3, 1896, ZDB -ID 280308-2 , p. 67.
38. ↑ Woodcut "The session building of the Customs Parliament". In: Die Gartenlaube , 1868, No. 20, p. 309.
39. ^ Prussian budget for 1852: Income: 97001021 thalers, expenditure 99434735 thalers; Ordinary positions: 96151982, current positions: 3282752 see: Preußisches Wochenblatt , April 3, 1852, p. 224.
40. ^ Georg Koeppen: Bismarck. His time and his work. 1899, p. 122.
41. ↑ This Mösch wants to be a Düplomat and knows nothing at all. Uech tell Uhnen, in six months there would still be jugs but autumn. Zwickauer. See: Kladderadatsch , March 28, 1852.
42. ^ Vossische Zeitung. dated March 23, 1852.
43. ^ ^{A b} Wilhelm Böhm: Prince Bismarck as a speaker. Complete collection of Bismarck's parliamentary speeches since 1847. Volume 1: The delegate Bismarck-Schönhausen 1847-1852. 1885, p. 212.
44. ↑ ^{a b} Kreuzzeitung , March 24, 1852.
45. ↑ ^{a b} Harry Graf Kessler reports in his diary from 1889–1937, p. 236, from January 1, 1894, of a meeting with Bismarck in Oberau .
46. ^ Rainer Brunst: Three light trails in the history of Germany. Rhombos-Verlag, Berlin 2004, ISBN 3-937231-32-3 .
47. ↑ ^{a b} Manfred Luda: At the birth of parliamentarism. 1998, p. 202.
48. ↑ ^{a b} Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 294.
49. ↑ "Bismarck sent the opponent his reply in the form of a challenge to a gun fight with pistols" see: Georg Koeppen: Bismarck. His time and his work. 1899, p. 123.
50. ↑ The result of the discussion was a request that Herr von Bismarck sent to his parliamentary opponent ... See: Heinrich Ritter von Poschinger: Fürst Bismarck and the parliamentarians. Volume 2: 1847-1879. Trewendt, Breslau 1895, p. 13.
51. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 296, note. In general, pistol duels required a maximum of three bullets. See Honorary Comment .
52. ↑ ^{a b c} Manfred Luda: At the birth of parliamentarism. 1998, p. 203.
53. ↑ Birgit Aschmann (Ed.): Feeling and Calculation. The influence of emotions on politics in the 19th and 20th centuries (= historical communications. Supplement 62). Steiner, Stuttgart 2005, ISBN 3-515-08804-0 , p. 155.
54. ↑ see Otto von Bismarck as a student
55. ↑ Otto Plant: Bismarck. Volume 1: The founder of the empire (= Beck series 1785). Beck, Munich 2008, ISBN 978-3-406-54822-2 , p. 56.
56. ^ Kösener corps lists. 1910, ZDB ID 90022-9 , 69, 174; 185, 329.
57. ↑ v. Arnim was a member of the Corps Saxo-Borussia Heidelberg , cf. Kösener corps lists. 1960, ZDB -ID 90021-7 , 66, 156.
58. ↑ Member of the Corps Littuania , cf. Kösener corps lists. 1910, 139, 25.
59. ^ Kösener corps lists. 1910, 69, 138.
60. ↑ Büchsel had refused to give Bismarck Holy Communion ... I cannot find that right, he is in a position to defend himself against emergency and to just war. General von Gerlach, diary of March 23, 1852 in: Jakob von Gerlach (Ed.): Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach. Notes from his life and work, 1795–1877. Volume 2. 1903, p. 746.
61. ↑ ^{a b} Jakob von Gerlach (Ed.): Ernst Ludwig von Gerlach. Notes from his life and work, 1795–1877. Volume 2. 1903, p. 746.
62. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, pp. 296-297.
63. ↑ ^{a b c} Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 293.
64. ↑ Harkort takes over the title that Bismarck also gave him, the correct salutation for a Legation Councilor would be Excellency
65. ^ Bismarck yearbook. Vol. 3, 1896, p. 68.
66. ↑ Hans-Joachim Behr: “Law must remain right”. The life of Freiherr Georg von Vincke (1811–1875). 2009, p. 352.
67. ↑ Bismarck in a letter to his mother-in-law of April 4, 1852, Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, pp. 292-296.
68. ^ Member of the Corps Saxonia Leipzig , cf. Kösener corps lists. 1910, 154, 201.
69. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 296, is not mentioned in Bodelschwingh
70. ↑ St.A Osnabrück, Dep. 45b, Vinke-Ostenwalde No. 99 For records of Louis von Bodelschwingh, see also [2] .
71. ↑ The Munich punch makes fun of Vincke, who does not want to be photographed: When the lithographers and photographers stormed him, he exclaimed: “No, they shouldn't have me!” At a photographer who once took him he even had the glass plate destroyed, with the comment that since the great amendment people in Germany have had a lot of negative ideas about him anyway. Munich punch from March 3, 1861.
72. ↑ Kladdaradatsch, Feb. 8, 1863.
73. ^ Berliner Nationalzeitung , March 26, 1852.
74. ↑ Kreuzzeitung , March 27, 1852.
75. ^ Kladderadatsch , March 28, 1852.
76. ↑ Georg Koeppen states that Vincke's father-in-law, Count Werner von der Schulenburg-Wolfsburg, had advised him in vain to refrain from the duel. Bismarck said a prayer before the duel, which Vincke, who shot first, was so impressed that he would have deliberately missed, whereupon Bismarck, as an accurate shooter, also missed, see: Georg Koeppen: Bismarck. His time and his work. 1899, p. 124.
77. ↑ ^{a b} Manfred Luda: At the birth of parliamentarism. 1998, p. 205.
78. ↑ State Archives Osnabrück, Dep. 45b, Vinke-Ostenwalde No. 99 Notes from Louis von Bodelschwingh.
79. ^ Ostpreußische Zeitung (Königsberg), April 1, 1852.
80. ↑ Otto von Bismarck: Thoughts and Memories. Stuttgart 1959, pp. 113-117.
81. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 297.
82. ↑ Herbert von Bismarck: Prince Bismarck's letters to his bride and wife. 1919, p. 298.
83. ^ Bernhard Vogel, Dieter Nohlen , Rainer-Olaf Schultze: Elections in Germany. Theory, history, documents 1848–1970. de Gruyter, Berlin et al. 1971, ISBN 3-11-001732-6 , p. 287.
84. ↑ Quoted from: Lothar Gall: Bismarck. The white revolutionary. 1980, p. 279.
85. ↑ Ferdinand Lassalle in a letter to the Vossische Zeitung , cf. Ferdinand Lassalle: Speeches and Writings (= Reclam's Universal Library 1192). Edited by Hans Jürgen Friederici. Reclam, Leipzig 1987, ISBN 3-379-00103-1 , February 7, 1863.
86. ↑ Pierre Bourdieu: Draft of a theory of practice on the ethnological basis of Kabyle society (= Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft 291). Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1979, ISBN 3-518-07891-7 , p. 35.
87. ↑ James E. Myers: The Astonishing Saber Duel of Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln-Herndon Building Publishers, Springfield IL 1968, p. 37.
88. ↑ Petra Lennig: The refused duel: Bismarck against Virchow. DHM digital copy (PDF; 15 kB)
89. ↑ Edward Crankshaw: Bismarck. A biography. List, Munich 1983, p. 113.

This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on December 17, 2012 .