Talk:Von

References

In the article of von you removed the reference. I wish you wouldn't do that. I took this mans intellectual property and placed it here. This man should get the credit. What basis did you use to remove the reference? It is like stealing from the man! Please don't do that.WHEELER 17:27, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Von vs Zu

Could somebody make a summary of when people use "von", when they use "zu", and when they use "von und zu"? I gather that "von" means that the person's origin is from the cited noble land, "zu" means that person is the current owner of the noble title, and "von und zu" means that they are both from the land and own the title? Is that correct? David.Monniaux 18:53, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Towards the end, von rarely had any relationship to anything except a titular knighthood - roughly the same as "sir" in a British knighthood, but hereditary if it had been created as a hereditary title. Von und zu meant that the noble title actually reflected - or at least at one time had reflected - an actual feudal overlordship of some strip of land somewhere. By WWI, of course, German land was fully capitalist and feudal land relationships were little more than ceremonial where they had not already ben abolished completely. So Herr von und zu Herzogenflügelburg might well never have set foot in Herzogenflügelburg or even be clear on where it had once been, since some of these feudal holderships were no more than a few hundred acres, and the smallest ones were abolished completely during the Napoleonic reforms in Germany.

Actually, I think some of those land holdings had been fictious even when they were created by the Emperor, so even this generalisation isn't true. I'm pretty sure the Freiherr von und zu Lilienburg had never set foot in Lilienburg (which I think is a monastery in Bavaria).

I guess you could say that von is old money, and von und zu is really old money. :^)

At least that's my best recollection. I can't offer you a source for it, and I make no warranty for it. --Diderot — Preceding undated comment added 22:54, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

The way I translate it is this: 'von' alone means 'of' and 'zu' alone means 'of'. The latter would have indicated a family seat, territory or property. When used together, as in 'von und zu', a safe translation is 'of and in'. It makes sense at least in my head. -- cfvh — Preceding undated comment added 00:36, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

For Zu, as used in German, the best translation is often "at" or "pertaining to". For example: zu Hause means "at home". In the first place, von is quite rare in the first place--there just aren't that many aristocrats. But far fewer names have zu, and it does imply the greatest nobility. In this sense, greatest nobility doesn't mean the precedence of title in the way that a Duke is higher than a Count; but rather in the history and age of the family's noble status. Zu is "better" in the sense that a family entitled to use von und zu usually drops the von and keeps the zu.Pithecanthropus (talk) 01:47, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Titles

It's a bit of a nitpick, but German noble families were often untitled. This is different from the Peerages in Great Britain, to belong to which you have to have a specific titular rank--baron or higher. In the German nobility, a family could have the name von X, implying noble status, but without holding any titular rank such as Freiherr, Graf, or Baron. Many of the Junkers of Prussia fell into this category; if we were to translate the condition of an untitled German noble in the 19th century to England, the closest analogy might be the untitled gentry among whom so many Victorian novels were set.

So being "untitled" doesn't mean necessarily that a family is non-noble, particularly if they have "von" in their name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pithecanthropus (talk • contribs) 02:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Questions

What is the Wiki practice regarding the translation of "von" or "zu" in articles? I've noticed several instances wherein German/Austrian nobles, ie Prince Alfred von Auersperg (the first husband of heiress Sunny von Bulow, for instance, have had their vons and zus translated, in article titles and in text, as "of". This seems somewhat ridiculous, to translate what in many cases is now a surname rather than a noble title. Any observations/comments? Mowens35 15:59, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Surely that depends on the context. It's worth looking at, especially if the word after the "von" or zu" is a "minor" placename. I would advise addressing these on a case-by-case basis.63.82.23.2 (talk) 16:26, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Is it correct to write "von" with lowercase "v" also at the beginning of a sentence? Very often this kind of practice is seen in books, websites, and newspapers. This Wikipedia page should explicitly state whether "von" can be written in lowercase in beginning of a sentence, or is it an error (albeit a very common error). Example of potentially erroneus usage: "von Waldersee was born in Potsdam to a military family." (This sentence is from the Wikipedia entry of "Alfred Graf von Waldersee".) Please edit the "Von" page, if you know the answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.231.50.213 (talk) 13:47, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Places

Does anyone know of a map that shows which parts of Germany where von was restricted to nobles? Emperor001 (talk) 15:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

What makes you think the use of "von" was restricted in parts of Germany to the nobility? Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I read somewhere (here maybe) that in some portions of the country, only nobles could use it while in other places, anyone could. Because under the monarchies, Germany was always a group of united states (sometimes more united than others), each state had its own laws about these kind of things. Emperor001 (talk) 23:03, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

No need to speak of laws. I do not think it was ever forbidden to use "von" as part of an artist name. People just have a name which either includes von or doesn't. Then of course in the second case, they must not use it; in the first, it is colloquial to drop it. Now I hear that in the North of Germany, there still are some vons around who are not noble (similar to Dutch van). In the South, rather not. But of course, if you came to the South and were called von, you kept that, noble or not. Then also. --93.135.33.158 (talk) 20:25, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

I've been told that in the Kleverland area, surnames had to drop their Van for that reason. I was hoping to find an explanation in this article, so I think it would be relevant to add one. Rp (talk) 11:07, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Collation

The article could use a section on collation (e.g., phone book ordering). Jason Quinn (talk) 13:29, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

von in Russia

I shall appreciate if somebody corrects my mistakes and helps me to «encyclopedize» the style (given the whole contribution is appropriate). For a prompt reply from me you may switch to my Russian user page and write there in English. Thanks in advance, Cherurbino (talk) 11:52, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Titles in the Dative

Is there any particular reason why some people, like Baron vom Stein have their names clearly indicating the masculine Dative, as in "Von dem"? Is this determined by the name that follows? Are most surnames which only feature "von" actually feminine or some kind of adjective? D Boland (talk) 23:48, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

I am nearly fluent in German and have some familiarity with this. Most names don't incorporate a definite article, but a few do, including some of the names that use "von". If there is an article, and the grammatical gender of the name is feminine, then it has to be "von der" because "der" is the feminine dative definite article. An example of such a name is Charles von der Ahe, founder of the Von's grocery chain in California. There's no contraction for "von der", but for "von dem" you usually have to use the contraction "vom". In a name, "von" by itself doesn't imply feminine gender; there's simply no article so we can't tell.Pithecanthropus (talk) 01:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

ETA: According to this page, from an organization calling itself The Institute for Research on the German Nobility, the name Von der Ahe is an example the use of the particle in the name of a non-noble family. Looking at the list of bourgeois family names that use "von", one thing that jumps out at me is that many of them do use an article, either explicitly or by the masculine/neuter dative definite article contraction vom="von dem". While there do appear to be a few aristocratic names that do include the article, a good rule of thumb seems to be a name with von der, vom, or von den is not noble. To these we can add dialectical variants, which either do not occur in Standard German (like von de), or do not follow the standard declination. For example, the list I linked to shows both Von den Berg/Vondenberg and Vom Berg (both non-noble) and von Berg (noble). Like Vom Berg ("From the Mountain"), many of these names allude to generic topgraphical features--another example is Von der Heide ("From the Heath"). I suspect that in the case of names like Von der Ahe, the allusion may be to unique geographical features in specific localities.Pithecanthropus (talk) 23:35, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

von versus v.

"Ancient families distinguish themselves from newly ennobled ones by abbreviating von to v. This is also the traditional practice of nobles in North Germany"

I contest this statement. In Germany (I speak from experience as a noble), one has the right to abbreviate the von to v. regardless of the age of nobility. The distinction between von and v. is made at aristocratic balls organised by the organisation that preserves nobility (I forget what this organisation is called). All 'real' nobles are written v. and all 'false' nobles (i.e. people who do not fit the criteria for nobility, such as illegitimate or adopted children) have the von written out in full.

Compare: Josef von Sternberg ('von' was added as part of his stage name) with Wolf v. Engelhardt (member of the German nobility of the Baltic). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mensuur (talk • contribs) 16:56, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Capitalization

The original capitalization section had a very confusingly written second paragraph that was not-quite coherent:

This is in contrast to Dutch Van, which in the north (Netherlands) is capitalized when standing alone (unless part of a clause), and in the south (Belgium) is always capitalized – for instance, "A paper by Van der Waals", though "The van der Waals radius", and "The politician Eric Van Rompuy."

Seeing as I'm not a Dutch speaker and don't know the rules of capitalization in Dutch, I did the best I could to interpret what that meant. However, I'm not sure if I got it right, so will someone more familiar with the capitalization rules in Dutch look over the current version and the original excerpt above to make sure it's accurate?--98.119.111.176 (talk) 01:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the former phrasing was confusing. However, Instead of trying to clarify the situation in this article, I think it's simpler to refer to the article Van (Dutch) where it's much better explained. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:11, 7 June 2011 (UTC)