Talk:Saxe-Lauenburg

Coat of arms
The image of the coat of arms should contain more information about when this symbol was / is used. During the Danish reign 1815-64, the arms simply featured a red shield with a golden horse's head. I can't see if this image is Hanoverian, Prussian or a current version. Valentinian (talk) / (contribs) 19:47, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

From Denmark to Prussia
How exactly did the King of Prussia come to replace the King of Denmark as duke? I mean, I'm guessing this has something to do with the Schleswig War in 1864, but why didn't Prussia simply annex the duchy as it did Schleswig? --Jfruh (talk) 16:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Three questions on Saxe-Lauenburg, two and a half answers
There are several questions. 1) Why and how did Denmark succeed in 1815 to gain Saxe-Lauenburg in personal union? 2) Why did Denmark not annex Saxe-Lauenburg into its neighbouring Duchy of Holstein between 1815 and 1864? 3) Why did Prussia not annex Saxe-Lauenburg in 1864?

1) I don't know. Denmark strived at extending its influence to the area of the rich merchant cities Hamburg and Lübeck, but why did not British Hanover succeed at the Congress of Vienna and regained Saxe-Lauenburg, since it was under Napoleon's influence that Prussia conquered Saxe-Lauenburg in 1803. Therefore Prussia's claim, being based on the deposed Napoleon, was weak at the Congress of Vienna. 2) Holstein and Saxe-Lauenburg were constituent states of the German Confederation and without gaining a majority of all its members no state could be dissolved or merged into another. 3) In 1864 the members of the German Confederation, who commissioned their fellow members Austria and Prussia to conquer Schleswig and Holstein, agreed to leave Saxe-Lauenburg to Prussia, however, only in personal union. Thus Saxe-Lauenburg remained a constituent state of the German Confederation, which could not be merged at will with Prussia. Prussia could not merge Saxe-Lauenburg into Schleswig, since Schleswig has no common border with Saxe-Lauenburg and neighbouring Holstein was under Austrian occupation between 1864-1866. Schleswig was under Prussian occupation. But after the Prusso-Austrain war in 1866, when the Austrians were expelled from Holstein, the German Confederation fell apart and the two duchies of Schleswig and Holstein were conquered war area and annexed by Prussia without further discussions. The duchy of Saxe-Lauenburg was not at war and Prussia would have to overthrow the legal government there, staffed with Lauenburgian aristocrats and ruled by the Lauenburgian Estates of the Realm. Thus Saxe-Lauenburg was incorporated only after the estates decided to do so in 1876. Maybe this was due to the fact, that an ever-rising number of costly tasks were charged on the States of the German Empire (1871), such as schools etc., establishment of modern jurisdiction etc. etc. Since there was no distinct regnal family eager to maintain its function - as in so many other micro-states of Germany - the merger was quite possible and not opposed by the Duke, being the Prussian king.

(corrections as to occupants in Holstein and Schleswig)Ulf Heinsohn (talk) 08:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Furthermore: Saxe Lauenburg as one of the successor states of the Duchy of Saxony of Henry the Lion had a very high prestige. In German for Saxe and Saxony the same term Sachsen is used. The House of Wettin spread the name Sachsen to all its possessions, making the term so inflationary among names of landscapes and duchies (all the Saxe-…) and even three modern states of Germany bear the term Saxony as part of their names, including the 1946 newly created Lower Saxony. That is also why Bismarck was granted the title, after it had become regnally void. It still had prestige, suited for the most honourable.

Best wishes Ulf Heinsohn This was really my entry, I was slow and did not notice, I was kicked out. Best wishes Ulf Heinsohn Ulf Heinsohn (talk) 22:32, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S.
When the Lauenburgian estates negotiated the terms of the merger they reached very preferential conditions. In Prussia there were tasks charged onto the state (jurisdiction, tax collection), tasks charged onto the province (health care, sanatories) and tasks charged onto the districts (local administration, local traffic premises), with Saxe-Lauenburg becoming a district. Each of these tasks included the pertaining premises like buildings etc. On the merger Prussia agreed that not only those premises, which belonged to typical district tasks would become the property of the future district, but also most other premises to be used in future by the provincial or state administration became property of the future district. Thus the new district became very rich in terms of real estate, in future partly rented out to province and state. Further the estates negotiated that not the ordinary Prussian district constitution would become valid, but a distinct Lauenburgian constitution, which included the continued existence of the estates as ruling body of the district. If personal union with Prussia would have meant absolutist rule, then all these preferential agreements would not have been possible, the representatives of Lauenburgian statehood made the merger as preferential as possible for them and Lauenburg.

Best wishes Ulf Heinsohn (talk) 22:46, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Duchy of Lauenburg
Shouldn't we rename this Duchy of Lauenburg? After it left the House of Ascania it seems to have been just that. I believe only the Ascanians and the Wettins have the title Duke in/of Saxony and therefore prefix some of their territories with "Saxe". Seven Letters 20:20, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Claims by an impostor
It seems that someone is determined to intrude unsourced claims into this article.

One Sid Halpern of Manchester, UK, calls himself "HRH Prince Frederick of Saxe-Lauenberg", alleging that he is somehow the heir of this duchy. Apart from the fact that he cannot spell the name of his pretended dynasty, he is clearly not the heir (indeed, he has no known connection with the Ascanians or with Lauenburg). The issue of the last Duke's elder daughter became extinct with less than a century; the younger daughter left issue and the current heir-of-line, via Louis-Philippe, King of the French, is the Archduchess Margherita of Austria-Este, nee Princess of Savoy Aosta (born 1930). Today's 'Independent on Sunday' has an interesting article on the matter, in which Mr Halpern cites this Wikipedia article in support of his own pretension. 86.142.244.252 (talk) 19:32, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

PS the Independent article may be viewed here:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/news/is-football-fan-a-german-prince-or-a-brazen-imposter-2247058.html#

86.142.244.252 (talk) 19:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

I have again undone the fake claims inserted on 2 July by the fraudster who calls himself "Prince Frederick" and persists in vandalising this article. 81.132.13.213 (talk) 18:47, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I have once again removed the fake claims inserted by the fraudster who persists in vandalizing this article. MAR 109.154.186.87 (talk) 08:32, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Duchy of Saxony
Was the territory of Lauenberg actually part of the original duchy? In looking at the maps it seems that both Lauenberg and Wittemburg were outside the original stem duchy thus the Ascanians were only given the title Duke of Saxony, not the lands except for their own Ahnhalt possessions, so they created a new duchy out of territory they received from elsewhere. 164.51.226.98 (talk) 14:57, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * NM. Looked again.  It was just inside the border.  164.51.226.98 (talk) 15:10, 21 February 2019 (UTC)