Reader John Olsen has contributed a rare European museum review, this one of the Danish steam frigate Jylland, one of the ships that falls between the introduction of steam and steel.
Steam frigate Jylland, permanently drydocked in Ebeltoft, Denmark.
Introduction
Launched in 1860, the Danish frigate Jylland (Jutland)1 was third in a series of four planned ships. Whereas her two older sisters Niels Juel and Sjælland were built with sails only, Jylland was built from the outset with a steam engine to supplement the sails. Niels Juel and Sjælland were later rebuilt to include a steam plant, while a fourth ship, the Peder Skram, was completed as a larger, and armored, evolution of the Jylland, based on lessons from the famed 1862 battle of Hampton Roads. Jylland herself would make her claim to fame at the Battle of Heligoland Bight,2 during the 1864 war between Denmark and an alliance of Prussia and Austria.
Location and getting there
The museum is located in the relatively small town of Ebeltoft, on the Djursland peninsula. The nearest major city is Aarhus, second-largest city in Denmark, approx. 45 min. drive to the west of Ebeltoft. The capital and biggest city in Denmark, with a well-connected airport, is Copenhagen, from which Ebeltoft can be reached in 3-4 hours of driving. If you aren’t already in the vicinity of Ebeltoft, consider staying a couple of nights in e.g. Aarhus to experience some of the other attractions in the area, depending on your tastes.3
- If you’re staying in Copenhagen, there’s also the option to drive to Odden, just over an hour west of Copenhagen, and take the ferry directly to Ebeltoft. The ferry ride is approx. 1 hour; from Ebeltoft ferry terminal, the museum is only a 10 minute drive.
- The museum is open most days, except Mondays, with opening hours varying over the year.
- For the best experience, try to visit in the main season (end-June to end-August): There will be more guides/hosts around to offer tours and answer questions, and more activities for children. During winter season, parts of the ship may be covered by scaffolding due to maintenance, and a temporary roof will cover the top deck, making for a more subdued experience.
Map of Denmark, from Google Maps, with location of the Jylland museum highlighted. Djursland is the “nose” protruding from the Jutland peninsula. Copenhagen (København) has the best flight connections, with Billund and Aarhus also having a selection of European routes.
The ship
Laid down in 1857 and launched in 1860, Jylland was the third ship in a class of four planned. Unlike her two earlier sisters, she was fitted from the outset with a steam engine, allowing her to reach a max. speed of 14 knots under steam. Her coal supplies were adequate for 1,500 nm at full steam, and her screw could be raised, to reduce friction when under sail. Armament consisted of approx. 40 cannons of various types and sizes. A crew of 400-430 men was required to man her.
The main claim to fame of Jylland occurred during the 1864 Battle of Heligoland Bight. The 1864 war was fought over the status of the duchies Schleswig, Holstein and Lauenborg, and saw Denmark face Prussia and Austria. In an era of evolving nationalism, the German-dominated duchies were a poor fit in the increasingly Danish-oriented state. The duchies had already been the subject of the 1848-1851 war, where German-minded rebels unsuccessfully tried to secede from Denmark. However, war would break out again in 1864. At Heligoland Bight, a 3-ship Danish squadron, blockading the north German coastline, held off a 5-ship Austro-Prussian squadron attempting to break the Danish blockade. The two-hour battle ended when the Austrian flagship Schwarzenberg had to break off due to fires, leading the whole squadron to seek refuge in neutral waters. The battle was hailed as a victory in Denmark, with the opposing squadron forced to abandon their attempted break-out, and suffering heavier casualties. Regardless of naval strength, Denmark lost the war on land and had to turn over the three duchies, which would become part of the unified German state in 1871. Only after WWI would the northern part of Schleswig vote to reunite with Denmark.
Painting on display at the museum, showing a scene from the Danish frigate Niels Juel, during the 1864 Battle of Heligoland Bight.
Another painting on display at the museum, showing the Danish squadron engaging the Austrian-Prussian squadron.
Following the war, Jylland conducted several training cruises, as well as deployments to the West Indies (where there was a Danish colony at the time) and two cruises with the royal family to Iceland (at the time a dependency of Denmark) and Russia. She spent the last 20 years in navy service as an accommodation ship, before being initially sold for scrap in 1908. This was followed by decades in various states of neglect, until funding had been raised to open the present-day museum in 1994.
The museum
This review is based on my latest visit, during the summer of 2024. Access to the site is via the museum building, where tickets are sold. There’s also a small giftshop, and a museum section with various exhibits on the ship’s history, pieces of equipment, the war of 1864 and stories from crew members. Everything is in Danish, English, and German. If you’re an English speaker, the museum staff should be able to answer your questions – Danes are generally good at English (although not as good as many of us like to think).
The museum tries to target regular people, i.e. not the typical Naval Gazing audience. Even so, there are some nicely done exhibits for the more technologically/historically adept visitors. In the museum building, I personally enjoyed the recreation of a section of the hull, complete with cannon holes, and a short video describing the test shoot against the recreated hull section. It gave a good impression of the kind of damage a cannonball can do. Another exhibit gave a description of the weapons of the era. Interestingly, the most advanced cannons on the ship were 1760’s bronze cannons, modified with rifling to fire grenades. Conversely, the standard pistol in use at the time was of the single-shot, front-loading type, at a time when revolvers were in use during the Civil War.
Replica ships’ side, with multiple penetrations from a 2013 “live action” test.
Standard rifles and officer’s uniform on display inside the museum.
Moving outside, visitors have a short walk to the dry-docked frigate. Access to the ship is quite easy, with wheelchair access enabled thanks to ramps and elevators. Visitors have full access to almost all parts of the ship, including having the option to walk around the hull down in the dock. Only the masts are off limits. In front of Jylland, two of the original boats have been restored and are in the water.
Easy access to the ship or the drydock from the starboard side.
Two of the original boats from Jylland are tied up in front of the ship.
Inside Jylland, there are various full-scale recreations around the ship with key pieces of equipment and mannequins to give an idea of life aboard the ship. E.g. there’s a gun crew “in action”, another set of crewmembers having a meal, there’s a doctor doing an amputation, etc. A large part of the officer’s quarters are furnished as per the period when the ship was used as a royal yacht, i.e. with chairs and tables for the royal family of the time.
Getting ready to fire one of the smoothbore cannons.
Enjoying a meal.
Informational video on the basics of amputations, then and now.
Day cabin for the royal family, as it would have appeared in the 1870’s.
Especially the lower two decks of the ship feel a bit empty, though. The original steam plant was removed more than a century ago. The first time I visited the ship, in 2007, there were talks of installing a replica plant instead, but those plans obviously haven’t materialized. Where the active duty ship would have been crammed with provisions, ammunition, coal, etc., there’s only a mostly empty space today. Even most of the various walls that would have subdivided the ship are gone.
Where the steam engine should’ve been. With a whoppin’ 400 hp, the Jylland steam plant had less power than many modern cars. Note the diagonal bracing structure on the inside of the hull. The grey steel rods are modern additions (as is the hole in the hull, in case anybody’s wondering).
For a better idea of what the ship would’ve felt like 150 years ago, there’s a nicely-done model in the museum, with the decks displayed individually, allowing a look inside the cramped interiors of the ship. Still, I don’t think it’s reasonable to criticize the museum for that – given the size of the ship, and the need to stick to a museum budget, it is difficult to stuff enough items onboard to properly convey how cramped the ship would’ve been back in the day. More modern warship museums have an easier time here, as the interiors are usually sub-divided into numerous small compartments, but most of the museum ships I’ve seen also have empty spaces that they’re unable to fill out.
Exploded view of the interiors of Jylland, as she would have appeared in service. Notice the screw at the rear of the ship; above it there’s a “well” into which the screw could be retracted when the ship was moving under sail.
Some museums cater to an audience strongly interested in history, and/or technology. The Jylland museum, instead, directs a lot of its informational energy towards families. It tries to tell a story about life for the crew onboard, and gives a not-too-detailed account of key technical aspects. I personally would’ve liked to see more informational posters around the ship, with a bit more details, though. Instead, the museum offers you to download an app, which allows you to enter the number posted at different locations around the ship – after which, you’ll get to listen to a narration relevant to the part of the ship you’re in. I didn’t try it on Jylland, mainly because I’ve tried it in other museums, and frankly, I’ve disliked the experience every time. I’m a fast reader, so being
forced to digest information at talking pace, and not having the option to skim a text to determine if it’s worth my time, is beyond my patience. Also, I don’t like walking around in a museum with a phone to my ear; to me, it ruins a little bit the social aspect of going there with somebody else. Still, I acknowledge that it’ll work for some people and it’s probably an easier and cheaper way for the museum to update their exhibit.
The good and the bad
The good:
- Jylland herself – she’s a beautiful ship, and there’s not a lot of mid-19th century warships still in existence. She’s not floating, nor is she as pristine as e.g. USS Constitution (which benefits from being in commission); e.g. the paint looks weathered and worn in many places, but active preventative maintenance is constantly ongoing.
- Almost unlimited access to roam the ship.
- A few selected full-scale recreations around the ship with key pieces of equipment and mannequins to give an idea of life aboard the ship.
- Decent summaries about the context of the 1864 war and life on the ship.
- The museum is nicely laid out, with a few selected exhibition pieces to give a bit more background to the story of Jylland.
- If you’re there with less naval-minded visitors, they’re going to find the exhibits easily digestible, and kid-friendly.
The bad:
- Accessibility. Location is likely going to be an issue for you, unless you were planning to visit this part of Denmark anyway, and there’s really only a few months a year you’d really want to visit the ship, even if it’s open all year.
- I suspect the level of technical and military information is going to feel a bit inadequate to any recurring reader of Naval Gazing. The target audience for the museum is very much families with younger children – which, admittedly, would be a bigger potential clientele than naval buffs making their way to Ebeltoft. For people more interested in the technology, the historical context of the 1864 war, the Heligoland Bight battle, etc., you’ll need to look for information elsewhere.
The verdict
If you happen to be in the general area, I’d recommend any naval buff to visit the ship – depending on your level of naval interest, you should be able to easily spend 3 hours+ there. The main drawback is really the location, which will be putting off a lot of potential visitors.
1 bean: No, not that Jutland. ⇑
2 bean: No, not that Heligoland Bight. Man, this seems to be happening a lot. ⇑
3 Fun fact: J.R.R. Tolkien was fluent in Danish and studied ancient Danish history. Many of the location names from his books can be found on a map of Djursland, such as Isgaard (Isengard), Hjelms Dyb (Helm’s Deep), Eskerod (Esgaroth), and more. ⇑
Comments
You are jumping the gun by a few years there. : )
'An alliance of the the two German Great Powers, Austria & Prussia'
perhaps?
Ike, you're correct; nice catch - That should've been "Prussia and Austria-Hungary".
@John Olsen
To be picky, the "-Hungary" was only added after the 7 Weeks War (2 years down the road).
The Hungarians were granted a bunch of privileges after the defeat to try to stabilize and rebuild the empire.
OK, all fixed.
Were port lids that close around the gun (as seen here and on USS Constitution, as opposed to ones that can only close with the gun run in, as on HMS Victory) used in actual service?
What I can easily find suggests that they were so used, but were still opened to fire the gun. (Plausibly because they only close with the gun in one position, which might not be pointed at the enemy.)
At a guess, having the out-of-combat position be guns run out gives more available deck space, and possibly faster response to surprise attack. (This might have been a risk during night/fog, and at least the French kept guns loaded when not in use, suggesting that it was considered a significant risk.) When the weather becomes rough enough that you need to close the port lids to keep waves out, closing them around run-out guns is plausibly faster, and with less risk of a gun breaking away and damaging whatever it rolls into, than running the guns in then closing solid port lids.
However, if you close the port lids between shots (i.e. with the guns run in) to protect the loaders from small-caliber fire, these lids provide less protection than solid lids. Possibly making them something that only made sense relatively late, after rates of fire became high enough that the port lids were normally left open in battle because closing and opening them would take too much time.
I don't think Constitution used those. The guns are run out on open ports.
I'd be skeptical that they'd see much service use, for the simple reason that putting iron things outside the hull tends to lead to corrosion, and while that's fine for an anchor, it's less fine for a gun. (Of course, you could replace the gun more frequently, which is a much cheaper thing to do in the 1850s than it would have been half a century earlier.) Also, you now have two seams instead of one, and one of those seams can't fit as tightly, because the gun isn't fixed and is pretty heavy. And keeping a gun loaded long-term when the muzzle is sticking out the side? That seems like an excellent way to get a misfire. It might be an adaptation to her later training/cruising role, where you'd want to maximize interior space and don't expect to make use of the guns.
Constitution's are mostly open in that photo, but they're also clearly two-part lids with a hole. However, the evidence that her original port lids were like that is less clear.
I agree that the disadvantages you mention all exist; I don't know how important they were.
The instruction in question does unambiguously specify leaving the guns run out and loaded (with tompions in, which will at least help keep water out of the barrel), but it's from 1815 France, so plausibly might be intended for short voyages and/or a bad idea.
It also mentions half-ports, but only mentions closing them with the gun run in. Other pictures suggest that French ships with split port lids existed but weren't the norm.
Tompions will definitely help with that. But yeah, if we're talking about France in 1815, then we can expect all sorts of weirdness relative to the RN given how those two operated.
I checked Brian Lavery's Wooden Warship Construction, but it makes no mention of two-part lids. The most obvious answer is that the British cared more about watertightness, as they frequently spent more time in worse seas than almost anyone else, whereas the French, Americans and Danes were willing to accept the extra leaks. I'll look through Chapelle's The American Sailing Navy later to see if he has anything to say.
Also SMS Kaiser, with a contemporary photo showing split port lids but not whether they close around the gun. Possibly also her Italian opponents, and probably not all the US original 6.
Couldn't find anything in Chapelle, although in fairness, that's a very dense book with a less than amazing index. Unfortunately, I don't have that much else on the pre-steel American navy.
How do you get the tompions out while the gun is run out? Can't imagine you'd want to clear them by firing the gun.
The only reason I can think of to run the guns out is to maximize available space on the gundeck, and then you have to run the guns in as part of clearing for action, then run them out again after removing the tompion.
I'm mildly surprised they would leave the guns loaded, even with a tompion in, because I understood gunpowder to be corrosive enough to iron so as to discourage that even for land warfare pieces.
I guess bagged charges present less of a problem with powder in contact with chamber while a gun is loaded, though
Those instructions say you do take the tompion out with the gun run out but don't say how. Having to sit on top of the gun to do it, while unsafe by modern standards, plausibly wouldn't be a worse falling hazard than having to climb up the rigging to set the sails.
And yes, they're bagged charges. (They call them 'cartridges' but that seems to have been standard usage before the brass cartridge was introduced.)