Hanging on to Hanover
For over a century, the crowns of Hanover and Great Britain were worn by the same king. While the British public remained largely indifferent to Hanovarian affairs, politicians grew to resent them.
The personal union between the monarchs of Great Britain and the state of Hanover, the outcome of the Protestant Settlement signed in 1701, came to an end with the death of William IV in 1837. The foreign secretary, Lord Palmerston, was delighted:
The Hanoverian Dynasty, and German prejudices which belonged to it, and which for a century have embarrassed and impeded our march both at home and abroad will cease. The Sovereign of England will no longer be hampered by considerations belonging to the petty state of Hanover; and I believe that since the accession of George I, these German politics have more or less continually had their influence on the Councils of England.
Historians have long recognised that the Electorate of Hanover (so-called as one of eight states whose heads elected the Holy Roman Emperor) played an important role in British foreign policy under the first two Georges, the ‘German’ kings. It has been acknowledged more recently that Hanover was important to George III (r. 1760-1820), too, though he was careful to separate Hanoverian from British interests. During the Napoleonic Wars (1799-1815), however, this became impossible.
After French troops occupied Hanover in 1803 the remnants of the Hanoverian army came to England and formed the King’s German Legion (KGL), around 14,000 strong, based in Bexhill and Weymouth. The Legion served with distinction in the Peninsular War and at Waterloo. However, in 1806 the French were ousted and Hanover was occupied by Prussia. This prompted the foreign secretary, Charles James Fox, to engineer a declaration of war against Prussia, but it was unusual for the Hanoverian tail to wag the British dog in George III’s reign. There was criticism from republican and other quarters, particularly from the radical journalist William Cobbett (whose anti-Hanoverian stance culminated in a two-year jail sentence in 1810 for his condemnation of the KGL’s action in flogging militiamen in Ely). The situation was shortlived, as France reoccupied Hanover in 1807. Napoleon now abolished the Electorate (having already abolished the Holy Roman Empire) and incorporated it into the newly created kingdom of Westphalia, ruled by his brother Jérôme. Prussia now became an ally and the restoration of Hanover an aim of British foreign policy, as much as a personal wish of George III. The objective was not practical until after 1812, when Napoleon’s defeat became a real possibility, by which time the Regency was fully established.
Following his appointment as foreign secretary in 1812, Viscount Castlereagh worked closely with Count Münster, the head of the Hanoverian chancellory. Castlereagh was impressed by Hanover’s diplomatic network and this cooperation aided the foreign secretary’s strategy of establishing a firm Continental alliance to defeat Napoleon once and for all, a plan that was successful at Waterloo. French control of Hanover continued until October 1813. Napoleon’s defeat at Leipzig later that month spelt the end of the Confederation of the Rhine. Hanover’s territories were formally restored to George III, and his youngest son, the Duke of Cambridge, was appointed military governor in December 1813. He would become governor general in 1816 and subsequently, under William IV, viceroy.
Despite Castlereagh’s good relationship with Münster he was not prepared to sacrifice British for Hanoverian interests. His main aim was to ensure that France would not revive and to do this he wanted Prussia to act as a bulwark on the Rhine. Münster’s extensive territorial ambitions for Hanover were consequently subordinated to those of Prussia. Nevertheless, it did gain substantial territory, increasing in size by 20 per cent, and at the Congress of Vienna it was elevated to the status of kingdom in October 1814, though this was not so much a reward as a necessity, given that the Holy Roman Empire was not restored. With no emperor to elect, the electorate was redundant. After 1815, however, Hanover and Britain’s interests diverged.
When the Prince Regent finally became George IV in 1820 he was quick to arrange a formal state visit to Hanover, the first since 1755. His visit the following year was met with much ceremony and jubilation in the new kingdom and, surprisingly, with little criticism in Britain (despite the traditional dislike of German militarism in general and especially Hanoverian standing armies paid for by the British taxpayer). Like his father, George IV also sought to keep Hanoverian policy separate from British, as did George Canning, who was foreign secretary from 1822. This was one reason why Canning opened up foreign policy to public scrutiny through speeches and the publication of despatches – in order to counter association with the king’s ‘other’ foreign policy. Despite this separation, there was some suggestion that Hanoverian troops might be used to aid British interests in Portugal in 1824, as no British troops were available. However, there were objections from both kingdoms. After Canning’s relationship with the king, hitherto frosty, improved, he was able to be less circumspect and could take advantage of Hanover’s diplomatic network to further British foreign policy interests.
Public ignorance
Hanoverian news was generally of little interest in Britain and newspapers and periodicals often commented about the public’s ignorance of it. There were times, though, when Hanover did attract attention. Its new constitution passed almost unnoticed on its announcement in 1819, but from 1825 it became a matter of public interest in Britain over the issue of Catholic Emancipation. The addition of Catholic territories to Hanover in 1814-15 had led to the granting of toleration to Catholics there and the contradictory policy of the monarchy on this issue at home prompted even the Duke of Clarence, the future William IV, to observe ‘an inconsistency of the king refusing in Ireland what he had granted in Hanover’. Of course, the counter argument was that, whereas Hanover was ruled by hereditary right, Britain was ruled by ‘Protestant Settlement’. Despite George IV’s objections, Catholic Emancipation was eventually granted in Britain in 1829.
Hanover was prominent again in British politics at the beginning of William IV’s reign. The Great Reform Act extending the franchise had just received royal assent in early June 1832, when William IV accepted (for Hanover) Metternich’s oppressive Six Articles, which after that same month sought to limit the rights of representative assemblies later that same month. This seemingly contradictory policy prompted Palmerston to condemn the Six Articles in the Commons and make his famous declaration that constitutional states were the natural allies of England. The Times was apoplectic, declaring ‘Thank God, Hanover is no kingdom of ours’ and eagerly anticipated the end of the personal union at the death of the king. In fact, the end of the personal union seemed a possibility throughout the reigns of both George IV and William IV. Whereas George III fathered 15 children, his offspring were less productive. The Salic law operated in Hanover and consequently male heirs had precedence over female. From 1830 Princess Victoria of Kent was heir apparent to the British throne. This meant that her uncle, the Duke of Cumberland, would inherit the kingdom of Hanover. And so it came to pass on the death of William IV in 1837, much to Palmerston’s relief.
Unpopular figure
The general public was largely indifferent to this shift, though there was some satisfaction that the Duke of Cumberland, now King Ernst Augustus of Hanover, would be leaving Britain. The duke, an ultra-Tory, was unpopular in some quarters. To be fair to him, malicious accusations levelled by the Whig propaganda machine had been quite outrageous. Among other offences, he was held responsible for the suicide of Lord Graves by dint of having had an affair with his wife. It was also alleged that he had killed his valet and sired a son by his sister. The charges seem to be without foundation, but mud sticks. Moreover, Ernst Augustus remained the heir apparent to the throne of England, so the possibility of his return was a factor until Queen Victoria gave birth to a daughter late in 1840.
Ernst Augustus’ reign in Hanover was reasonably successful (his equestrian statue still stands outside Hanover station). He made a formal state visit to Britain in 1843 and, despite previous slanders, was generally well received, though relations with Queen Victoria were cool, mainly due to arguments over precedence and heirlooms. He was succeeded in 1851 by his son, George V.
In 1863-64 Britain nearly went to war with Prussia in support of Denmark over the Schleswig-Holstein question, but the ageing Palmerston had met his match in Bismarck, the Prussian Chancellor, who joked that he would have his police force arrest the British army, if it invaded. When in 1866 Prussia went to war with Austria, the Hanoverian parliament recommended neutrality but George stubbornly insisted on taking Austria’s side. Hanover was soon overrun. The last ruler of Hanover, George, died in exile in Paris in 1878 but was buried at St George’s Chapel at Windsor Castle: the royal family bond remained, even if the demise of the kingdom was of little significance to the British public.
Born Hanover, British subject
The centenary of the personal union in August 1814 had been the subject of considerable celebration, with the Prince Regent organising fêtes in three London parks. Of course, the link was still ‘live’ at that time and Hanover had just been recovered after several years of French occupation. In many ways this was a double celebration. The bicentenary in August 1914 was totally overshadowed by the outbreak of hostilities with the (relatively new) German empire, which had absorbed Hanover in 1866.
Historians have long appreciated the political significance of the personal union, but less attention has been paid to the economic and social dimension that also went with it. Some study has been made of the economic relationship: it appears that it was a rather one-sided arrangement, whereby Britain used Hanover to access the markets of Germany for its manufactures, while not granting Hanover any significant trading concessions in return. Little research has been conducted into the social relationship – though there has been some investigation into the links between Britain and the University of Göttingen, which were broken by the French occupation.
However, those of us with ancestors whose records state: ‘born Hanover, British Subject’ – my mother’s family included – have a story to investigate. Between 1714 and 1837 many Hanoverians settled in Britain and a great number did so after 1837, until immigration became an issue later in the century. In 1886 it was ruled that Hanoverians born after the death of William IV were not entitled to be British, though this ruling was designed to stem future immigration and did not affect those already residing in the United Kingdom. Understandably, the two world wars with Germany in the first half of the 20th century led many families to gloss over memories of their German ancestry; possibly the most famous incidence in this respect is the current royal family, which felt compelled to change its German name from Saxe-Coburg to the House of Windsor in 1917. Still, on this, the 300th anniversary of the personal union between Britain and Hanover, it is probably about time that the relationship can once more be explored without prejudice.
