Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

John W. Kitz-3

All,

 

I'd appreciate some direction for or experience with the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor in particular in relation to entering compounded last names, such as e.g. Raitz von Frentz, Kytz von Fliesteden or Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan. In these examples I have so far chosen to set the origin for the first part of the last names in these examples, i.e. Raitz and Kytz, to 'patrilineal'.

 

However, I'm undecided how to best set the origin for the second, third and any subsequent parts of a last name, should they exist. On the one hand there is something to be said for setting the origin to 'location' on the other hand there is something to be said for setting it to 'feudal' and possibly there is a case to be made for setting it to some other, either default or custom, value.

 

Suggestions, comments, anybody?

 

Regards from the Netherlands, Jk.



--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

Patrick Gerlier

I have the same interrogation.

There is a general agreement for the first part, being generally "patrilineal" in continental Europe. In case of a child born out of marriage without known father, we have "matrilineal".

For parts prefixed with "von" and "zu", we can either tag it "patrilineal" once it is considered as definitively inherited from the original ancestor who received the title, or refer to it as "location" (von -- if I remember correctly the nuance) or "feudal" (zu -- corresponding to an area under the jurisdiction of the name bearer without personal property, again if I'm right).

In some areas, authority is not hereditary., it is an office granted by the sovereign which can be passed to any other individual.

The situation seems however to be simple for aristocrats compared to ordinary people. The "family" surname is passed from generation to generation. Sometimes to avoid ambiguity, a nickname is added. It can be the name of the hamlet (thus "location" origin is obvious), the job ("occupation" origin), a physical characteristic (I've seen "poil blanc" = white hair, "rosset" = red complexion), wife's family name or even first name of father or grand-father, relationship to a "famous" relative with same name and first name (e.g. "nephew").

When such a name component pops up, you can record the origin as a "contemporary" fact.

But, what when this component is transmitted and inherited generation after generation? It loses its contextual meaning to simply become part of the patrilineal legacy.

I think there is no simple answer to your question. You have to develop a convention  (and state it explicitly somewhere) and stick to it to be consistent.

If you're interested in onomastics, maybe you'll emphasize detailed origin, such as occupation (in French, names ending -ier are a clue to occupation-origin), location (frequently preceded by of de von da, sometimes merged with and contracted into the place name), personal choice ("taken" origin).

If you emphasize family relationship, you'll restrict yourself to patrilineal, matrilineal, inherited et al. categories.

Like you, I'd like to adhere to some general convention.

Patrick

Le 20/10/2019 à 13:56, John W. Kitz a écrit :

All,

 

I'd appreciate some direction for or experience with the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor in particular in relation to entering compounded last names, such as e.g. Raitz von Frentz, Kytz von Fliesteden or Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan. In these examples I have so far chosen to set the origin for the first part of the last names in these examples, i.e. Raitz and Kytz, to 'patrilineal'.

 

However, I'm undecided how to best set the origin for the second, third and any subsequent parts of a last name, should they exist. On the one hand there is something to be said for setting the origin to 'location' on the other hand there is something to be said for setting it to 'feudal' and possibly there is a case to be made for setting it to some other, either default or custom, value.

 

Suggestions, comments, anybody?

 

Regards from the Netherlands, Jk.





--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

John W. Kitz-3
Patrick, and others,

On 2019-10-20 14:40, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
> I have the same interrogation.
>
> There is a general agreement for the first part, being generally
> "patrilineal" in continental Europe. In case of a child born out of
> marriage without known father, we have "matrilineal".

I use matrilineal too when the name of the father is known. That is to
say that I base my decision whether to use matrilineal on the
information on the birth certificate, provided that the birth is
recorded in a civil status register, not on the answer to the question
if the child was born outside of marriage AND the father is unknown. If
a birth occurred during times in which those didn't exist yet, it may
not always be as obvious.

> For parts prefixed with "von" and "zu", we can either tag it
> "patrilineal" once it is considered as definitively inherited from the
> original ancestor who received the title, or refer to it as "location"
> (von -- if I remember correctly the nuance) or "feudal" (zu --
> corresponding to an area under the jurisdiction of the name bearer
> without personal property, again if I'm right).

This is the main reason for my question; setting the name origin to
location suggests just that, setting the origin to feudal suggests that
the name's origin dates back to feudal times. In many cases both is
true, i.e. an addition to a last name like von Frentz, zu Schlenderhan
or von Fliesteden, may date back to feudal times AND may have its origin
in some location, may it be the name of a town or village or the name of
some building, like i.e. Schlenderhan Castle.

The distinction that you are making, i.e. the German word 'von'
indicating a location as origin and the German word 'zu' the feudal era
as origin, IMHO is not correct.

E.g. in the case of the last name Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan, to
the best of my knowledge the additions 'von Frentz' AND 'zu
Schlenderhan' have both been derived from a location, i.e. a village
named Frenz (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenz_(Inden)) respectively a
building and surrounding land named Schlenderhan Castle
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Schlenderhan). If either or both
of the additions to the last name Raitz date back to feudal times or not
I, at this time, do not known, but seems less relevant with regards to
setting the value of the origin of those parts, since one can only set
one, not two.

I.e. one has to choose between location and feudal, while in fact in
this or other cases both may be true, which is one of the reasons for my
initial post on this topic to this list.

> In some areas, authority is not hereditary., it is an office granted
> by the sovereign which can be passed to any other individual.

This another reason for my initial post on this topic to this list.

At which point are certain additions of a last name still deemed granted
and thus, by the same token, revocable and at which point are those
parts deemed hereditary?

> The situation seems however to be simple for aristocrats compared to
> ordinary people. The "family" surname is passed from generation to
> generation.

To the best of my knowledge the same is true for the family name part of
compounded names like the ones I used as an example, i.e. in this case
Raitz or Kytz / Kitz and many others.

> Sometimes to avoid ambiguity, a nickname is added. It can
> be the name of the hamlet (thus "location" origin is obvious), the job
> ("occupation" origin), a physical characteristic (I've seen "poil
> blanc" = white hair, "rosset" = red complexion), wife's family name or
> even first name of father or grand-father, relationship to a "famous"
> relative with same name and first name (e.g. "nephew").
>
> When such a name component pops up, you can record the origin as a
> "contemporary" fact.
>
> But, what when this component is transmitted and inherited generation
> after generation? It loses its contextual meaning to simply become
> part of the patrilineal legacy.
>
> I think there is no simple answer to your question. You have to
> develop a convention  (and state it explicitly somewhere) and stick to
> it to be consistent.

I tend to disagree with you on that, in the sense that I suspect the
developers of software like Gramps have given thought to use cases like
these during the design of the software. Or in other words I assume
thought has gone into deciding with default values for the origin of a
name Gramps would be shipped with.

> If you're interested in onomastics, maybe you'll emphasize detailed
> origin, such as occupation (in French, names ending -ier are a clue to
> occupation-origin), location (frequently preceded by of de von da,
> sometimes merged with and contracted into the place name), personal
> choice ("taken" origin).
>
> If you emphasize family relationship, you'll restrict yourself to
> patrilineal, matrilineal, inherited et al. categories.

That is what I have done up to now, but compounded names consisting of
multiple parts, like the ones I've given as an example, have only
recently turned up as part of my research. By the same token I only
since quite recently have a need to store names such as these in Gramps
and I'd prefer do that in accordance with some best practice used by
many professional and amateur genealogists alike, rather than use one of
my own.

> Like you, I'd like to adhere to some general convention.
>
> Patrick
> Le 20/10/2019 à 13:56, John W. Kitz a écrit :
>
>> All,
>>
>> I'd appreciate some direction for or experience with the use of the
>> 'origin' field in the Name Editor in particular in relation to
>> entering compounded last names, such as e.g. Raitz von Frentz, Kytz
>> von Fliesteden or Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan. In these
>> examples I have so far chosen to set the origin for the first part
>> of the last names in these examples, i.e. Raitz and Kytz, to
>> 'patrilineal'.
>>
>> However, I'm undecided how to best set the origin for the second,
>> third and any subsequent parts of a last name, should they exist. On
>> the one hand there is something to be said for setting the origin to
>> 'location' on the other hand there is something to be said for
>> setting it to 'feudal' and possibly there is a case to be made for
>> setting it to some other, either default or custom, value.

Suggestions, comments, anybody?

Regards from the Netherlands, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

StoltHD
I have always thought that both "von" and "zu" was a part of a location originated name... so in English it would be something like "Raitz from Frentz under Schlenderha". or more telling " Raitz from the village Frentz under the Castle Schlenderha" ?

The direct translation of "zu" to Norwegian, that also is a germanic language is "til", and in this context the will have the meaning of "belong to" not only "to".

Under any circumstances I would have split the name in 3 part... and for both the "additional names" (location/feudal/surename) I would have set the prefix, then if I get new information, I can easily change any of them from one type to another...

The rest of your discussion is really interesting... :-)

jaran

man. 21. okt. 2019 kl. 12:37 skrev John W. Kitz <[hidden email]>:
Patrick, and others,

On 2019-10-20 14:40, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
> I have the same interrogation.
>
> There is a general agreement for the first part, being generally
> "patrilineal" in continental Europe. In case of a child born out of
> marriage without known father, we have "matrilineal".

I use matrilineal too when the name of the father is known. That is to
say that I base my decision whether to use matrilineal on the
information on the birth certificate, provided that the birth is
recorded in a civil status register, not on the answer to the question
if the child was born outside of marriage AND the father is unknown. If
a birth occurred during times in which those didn't exist yet, it may
not always be as obvious.

> For parts prefixed with "von" and "zu", we can either tag it
> "patrilineal" once it is considered as definitively inherited from the
> original ancestor who received the title, or refer to it as "location"
> (von -- if I remember correctly the nuance) or "feudal" (zu --
> corresponding to an area under the jurisdiction of the name bearer
> without personal property, again if I'm right).

This is the main reason for my question; setting the name origin to
location suggests just that, setting the origin to feudal suggests that
the name's origin dates back to feudal times. In many cases both is
true, i.e. an addition to a last name like von Frentz, zu Schlenderhan
or von Fliesteden, may date back to feudal times AND may have its origin
in some location, may it be the name of a town or village or the name of
some building, like i.e. Schlenderhan Castle.

The distinction that you are making, i.e. the German word 'von'
indicating a location as origin and the German word 'zu' the feudal era
as origin, IMHO is not correct.

E.g. in the case of the last name Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan, to
the best of my knowledge the additions 'von Frentz' AND 'zu
Schlenderhan' have both been derived from a location, i.e. a village
named Frenz (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenz_(Inden)) respectively a
building and surrounding land named Schlenderhan Castle
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Schlenderhan). If either or both
of the additions to the last name Raitz date back to feudal times or not
I, at this time, do not known, but seems less relevant with regards to
setting the value of the origin of those parts, since one can only set
one, not two.

I.e. one has to choose between location and feudal, while in fact in
this or other cases both may be true, which is one of the reasons for my
initial post on this topic to this list.

> In some areas, authority is not hereditary., it is an office granted
> by the sovereign which can be passed to any other individual.

This another reason for my initial post on this topic to this list.

At which point are certain additions of a last name still deemed granted
and thus, by the same token, revocable and at which point are those
parts deemed hereditary?

> The situation seems however to be simple for aristocrats compared to
> ordinary people. The "family" surname is passed from generation to
> generation.

To the best of my knowledge the same is true for the family name part of
compounded names like the ones I used as an example, i.e. in this case
Raitz or Kytz / Kitz and many others.

> Sometimes to avoid ambiguity, a nickname is added. It can
> be the name of the hamlet (thus "location" origin is obvious), the job
> ("occupation" origin), a physical characteristic (I've seen "poil
> blanc" = white hair, "rosset" = red complexion), wife's family name or
> even first name of father or grand-father, relationship to a "famous"
> relative with same name and first name (e.g. "nephew").
>
> When such a name component pops up, you can record the origin as a
> "contemporary" fact.
>
> But, what when this component is transmitted and inherited generation
> after generation? It loses its contextual meaning to simply become
> part of the patrilineal legacy.
>
> I think there is no simple answer to your question. You have to
> develop a convention  (and state it explicitly somewhere) and stick to
> it to be consistent.

I tend to disagree with you on that, in the sense that I suspect the
developers of software like Gramps have given thought to use cases like
these during the design of the software. Or in other words I assume
thought has gone into deciding with default values for the origin of a
name Gramps would be shipped with.

> If you're interested in onomastics, maybe you'll emphasize detailed
> origin, such as occupation (in French, names ending -ier are a clue to
> occupation-origin), location (frequently preceded by of de von da,
> sometimes merged with and contracted into the place name), personal
> choice ("taken" origin).
>
> If you emphasize family relationship, you'll restrict yourself to
> patrilineal, matrilineal, inherited et al. categories.

That is what I have done up to now, but compounded names consisting of
multiple parts, like the ones I've given as an example, have only
recently turned up as part of my research. By the same token I only
since quite recently have a need to store names such as these in Gramps
and I'd prefer do that in accordance with some best practice used by
many professional and amateur genealogists alike, rather than use one of
my own.

> Like you, I'd like to adhere to some general convention.
>
> Patrick
> Le 20/10/2019 à 13:56, John W. Kitz a écrit :
>
>> All,
>>
>> I'd appreciate some direction for or experience with the use of the
>> 'origin' field in the Name Editor in particular in relation to
>> entering compounded last names, such as e.g. Raitz von Frentz, Kytz
>> von Fliesteden or Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan. In these
>> examples I have so far chosen to set the origin for the first part
>> of the last names in these examples, i.e. Raitz and Kytz, to
>> 'patrilineal'.
>>
>> However, I'm undecided how to best set the origin for the second,
>> third and any subsequent parts of a last name, should they exist. On
>> the one hand there is something to be said for setting the origin to
>> 'location' on the other hand there is something to be said for
>> setting it to 'feudal' and possibly there is a case to be made for
>> setting it to some other, either default or custom, value.

Suggestions, comments, anybody?

Regards from the Netherlands, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

Patrick Gerlier


Le 21/10/2019 à 18:28, StoltHD a écrit :
I have always thought that both "von" and "zu" was a part of a location originated name... so in English it would be something like "Raitz from Frentz under Schlenderha". or more telling " Raitz from the village Frentz under the Castle Schlenderha" ?

The direct translation of "zu" to Norwegian, that also is a germanic language is "til", and in this context the will have the meaning of "belong to" not only "to".
There is a subtle difference between "von" and "zu". I have seen names like "Schmidt von und zu Dorf", i.e. the location is mentioned only once with both prepositions without repeating the location, which hints at a different semantic significance (perhaps, birth location and administrative office).

Under any circumstances I would have split the name in 3 part... and for both the "additional names" (location/feudal/surename) I would have set the prefix, then if I get new information, I can easily change any of them from one type to another...

This is exactly how it should be done: one line per main name component in the name editor. There is a field called "prefix" for "von", "de", "van", "y", etc. I suppose that in my special case I would put there "von und zu".

There is one case in which I am not satisfied. Compound names may be linked with a hyphen, like "Dupont-Durand". When I store the hyphen in the prefix field, I'd like that this non-alphabetic character would be written in the reports without spaces around. Is is formatted as if it were a plain word "Dupont - Durand". Minor, but it would be nicer without the spaces.

The same goes for elision: the Duke d'Orléans leads to "d' Orléans" or Dutch name T'Kind de Roodenbeke" ends up as "T' Kind de Roodenbeke" (T' is abreviation for het).

Maybe a feature request could ask for space suppression when a non alphabetic character is met in a prefix. Thus if it at the head of the prefix, space before is suppressed, and if at tail, space after is also.


The rest of your discussion is really interesting... :-)

jaran

man. 21. okt. 2019 kl. 12:37 skrev John W. Kitz <[hidden email]>:
Patrick, and others,

On 2019-10-20 14:40, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
> I have the same interrogation.
>
> There is a general agreement for the first part, being generally
> "patrilineal" in continental Europe. In case of a child born out of
> marriage without known father, we have "matrilineal".

I use matrilineal too when the name of the father is known. That is to
say that I base my decision whether to use matrilineal on the
information on the birth certificate, provided that the birth is
recorded in a civil status register, not on the answer to the question
if the child was born outside of marriage AND the father is unknown. If
a birth occurred during times in which those didn't exist yet, it may
not always be as obvious.

> For parts prefixed with "von" and "zu", we can either tag it
> "patrilineal" once it is considered as definitively inherited from the
> original ancestor who received the title, or refer to it as "location"
> (von -- if I remember correctly the nuance) or "feudal" (zu --
> corresponding to an area under the jurisdiction of the name bearer
> without personal property, again if I'm right).

This is the main reason for my question; setting the name origin to
location suggests just that, setting the origin to feudal suggests that
the name's origin dates back to feudal times. In many cases both is
true, i.e. an addition to a last name like von Frentz, zu Schlenderhan
or von Fliesteden, may date back to feudal times AND may have its origin
in some location, may it be the name of a town or village or the name of
some building, like i.e. Schlenderhan Castle.

The distinction that you are making, i.e. the German word 'von'
indicating a location as origin and the German word 'zu' the feudal era
as origin, IMHO is not correct.

E.g. in the case of the last name Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan, to
the best of my knowledge the additions 'von Frentz' AND 'zu
Schlenderhan' have both been derived from a location, i.e. a village
named Frenz (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenz_(Inden)) respectively a
building and surrounding land named Schlenderhan Castle
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Schlenderhan). If either or both
of the additions to the last name Raitz date back to feudal times or not
I, at this time, do not known, but seems less relevant with regards to
setting the value of the origin of those parts, since one can only set
one, not two.

I.e. one has to choose between location and feudal, while in fact in
this or other cases both may be true, which is one of the reasons for my
initial post on this topic to this list.

> In some areas, authority is not hereditary., it is an office granted
> by the sovereign which can be passed to any other individual.

This another reason for my initial post on this topic to this list.

At which point are certain additions of a last name still deemed granted
and thus, by the same token, revocable and at which point are those
parts deemed hereditary?

> The situation seems however to be simple for aristocrats compared to
> ordinary people. The "family" surname is passed from generation to
> generation.

To the best of my knowledge the same is true for the family name part of
compounded names like the ones I used as an example, i.e. in this case
Raitz or Kytz / Kitz and many others.

> Sometimes to avoid ambiguity, a nickname is added. It can
> be the name of the hamlet (thus "location" origin is obvious), the job
> ("occupation" origin), a physical characteristic (I've seen "poil
> blanc" = white hair, "rosset" = red complexion), wife's family name or
> even first name of father or grand-father, relationship to a "famous"
> relative with same name and first name (e.g. "nephew").
>
> When such a name component pops up, you can record the origin as a
> "contemporary" fact.
>
> But, what when this component is transmitted and inherited generation
> after generation? It loses its contextual meaning to simply become
> part of the patrilineal legacy.
>
> I think there is no simple answer to your question. You have to
> develop a convention  (and state it explicitly somewhere) and stick to
> it to be consistent.

I tend to disagree with you on that, in the sense that I suspect the
developers of software like Gramps have given thought to use cases like
these during the design of the software. Or in other words I assume
thought has gone into deciding with default values for the origin of a
name Gramps would be shipped with.

> If you're interested in onomastics, maybe you'll emphasize detailed
> origin, such as occupation (in French, names ending -ier are a clue to
> occupation-origin), location (frequently preceded by of de von da,
> sometimes merged with and contracted into the place name), personal
> choice ("taken" origin).
>
> If you emphasize family relationship, you'll restrict yourself to
> patrilineal, matrilineal, inherited et al. categories.

That is what I have done up to now, but compounded names consisting of
multiple parts, like the ones I've given as an example, have only
recently turned up as part of my research. By the same token I only
since quite recently have a need to store names such as these in Gramps
and I'd prefer do that in accordance with some best practice used by
many professional and amateur genealogists alike, rather than use one of
my own.

> Like you, I'd like to adhere to some general convention.
>
> Patrick

Suggestions, comments, anybody?

Regards from the Netherlands, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org




--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

StoltHD
I Agree with you in that the nonealfabetic character should be handles as you describe, I think you sould make a feature request for that, I can not enough about this to explain why...

Regarding the "von unt zu", in Norwegian that "Fra og til", ie. english "from and belonging to", but I don't know the Locations you mention, so I don't know if that make any sence. It does in Norwegian, if the "from place" and the "belonging to" have the same name, so instead of writing "Schmidt von Dorf zu Dorf" its shortened to just "Schmidt von und zu Dorf", but this is just wild guesses, since I do not know enough about European naming standard...

In Norwat we would have used just the Patronomicon and the place, i.e. "Schmidt Dorf" if Dorf is a "farm" and it most often got changed when they moved, we didnt use the location part when from villages and cities...



Jaran

man. 21. okt. 2019 kl. 19:01 skrev Patrick Gerlier <[hidden email]>:


Le 21/10/2019 à 18:28, StoltHD a écrit :
I have always thought that both "von" and "zu" was a part of a location originated name... so in English it would be something like "Raitz from Frentz under Schlenderha". or more telling " Raitz from the village Frentz under the Castle Schlenderha" ?

The direct translation of "zu" to Norwegian, that also is a germanic language is "til", and in this context the will have the meaning of "belong to" not only "to".
There is a subtle difference between "von" and "zu". I have seen names like "Schmidt von und zu Dorf", i.e. the location is mentioned only once with both prepositions without repeating the location, which hints at a different semantic significance (perhaps, birth location and administrative office).

Under any circumstances I would have split the name in 3 part... and for both the "additional names" (location/feudal/surename) I would have set the prefix, then if I get new information, I can easily change any of them from one type to another...

This is exactly how it should be done: one line per main name component in the name editor. There is a field called "prefix" for "von", "de", "van", "y", etc. I suppose that in my special case I would put there "von und zu".

There is one case in which I am not satisfied. Compound names may be linked with a hyphen, like "Dupont-Durand". When I store the hyphen in the prefix field, I'd like that this non-alphabetic character would be written in the reports without spaces around. Is is formatted as if it were a plain word "Dupont - Durand". Minor, but it would be nicer without the spaces.

The same goes for elision: the Duke d'Orléans leads to "d' Orléans" or Dutch name T'Kind de Roodenbeke" ends up as "T' Kind de Roodenbeke" (T' is abreviation for het).

Maybe a feature request could ask for space suppression when a non alphabetic character is met in a prefix. Thus if it at the head of the prefix, space before is suppressed, and if at tail, space after is also.


The rest of your discussion is really interesting... :-)

jaran

man. 21. okt. 2019 kl. 12:37 skrev John W. Kitz <[hidden email]>:
Patrick, and others,

On 2019-10-20 14:40, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
> I have the same interrogation.
>
> There is a general agreement for the first part, being generally
> "patrilineal" in continental Europe. In case of a child born out of
> marriage without known father, we have "matrilineal".

I use matrilineal too when the name of the father is known. That is to
say that I base my decision whether to use matrilineal on the
information on the birth certificate, provided that the birth is
recorded in a civil status register, not on the answer to the question
if the child was born outside of marriage AND the father is unknown. If
a birth occurred during times in which those didn't exist yet, it may
not always be as obvious.

> For parts prefixed with "von" and "zu", we can either tag it
> "patrilineal" once it is considered as definitively inherited from the
> original ancestor who received the title, or refer to it as "location"
> (von -- if I remember correctly the nuance) or "feudal" (zu --
> corresponding to an area under the jurisdiction of the name bearer
> without personal property, again if I'm right).

This is the main reason for my question; setting the name origin to
location suggests just that, setting the origin to feudal suggests that
the name's origin dates back to feudal times. In many cases both is
true, i.e. an addition to a last name like von Frentz, zu Schlenderhan
or von Fliesteden, may date back to feudal times AND may have its origin
in some location, may it be the name of a town or village or the name of
some building, like i.e. Schlenderhan Castle.

The distinction that you are making, i.e. the German word 'von'
indicating a location as origin and the German word 'zu' the feudal era
as origin, IMHO is not correct.

E.g. in the case of the last name Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan, to
the best of my knowledge the additions 'von Frentz' AND 'zu
Schlenderhan' have both been derived from a location, i.e. a village
named Frenz (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenz_(Inden)) respectively a
building and surrounding land named Schlenderhan Castle
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Schlenderhan). If either or both
of the additions to the last name Raitz date back to feudal times or not
I, at this time, do not known, but seems less relevant with regards to
setting the value of the origin of those parts, since one can only set
one, not two.

I.e. one has to choose between location and feudal, while in fact in
this or other cases both may be true, which is one of the reasons for my
initial post on this topic to this list.

> In some areas, authority is not hereditary., it is an office granted
> by the sovereign which can be passed to any other individual.

This another reason for my initial post on this topic to this list.

At which point are certain additions of a last name still deemed granted
and thus, by the same token, revocable and at which point are those
parts deemed hereditary?

> The situation seems however to be simple for aristocrats compared to
> ordinary people. The "family" surname is passed from generation to
> generation.

To the best of my knowledge the same is true for the family name part of
compounded names like the ones I used as an example, i.e. in this case
Raitz or Kytz / Kitz and many others.

> Sometimes to avoid ambiguity, a nickname is added. It can
> be the name of the hamlet (thus "location" origin is obvious), the job
> ("occupation" origin), a physical characteristic (I've seen "poil
> blanc" = white hair, "rosset" = red complexion), wife's family name or
> even first name of father or grand-father, relationship to a "famous"
> relative with same name and first name (e.g. "nephew").
>
> When such a name component pops up, you can record the origin as a
> "contemporary" fact.
>
> But, what when this component is transmitted and inherited generation
> after generation? It loses its contextual meaning to simply become
> part of the patrilineal legacy.
>
> I think there is no simple answer to your question. You have to
> develop a convention  (and state it explicitly somewhere) and stick to
> it to be consistent.

I tend to disagree with you on that, in the sense that I suspect the
developers of software like Gramps have given thought to use cases like
these during the design of the software. Or in other words I assume
thought has gone into deciding with default values for the origin of a
name Gramps would be shipped with.

> If you're interested in onomastics, maybe you'll emphasize detailed
> origin, such as occupation (in French, names ending -ier are a clue to
> occupation-origin), location (frequently preceded by of de von da,
> sometimes merged with and contracted into the place name), personal
> choice ("taken" origin).
>
> If you emphasize family relationship, you'll restrict yourself to
> patrilineal, matrilineal, inherited et al. categories.

That is what I have done up to now, but compounded names consisting of
multiple parts, like the ones I've given as an example, have only
recently turned up as part of my research. By the same token I only
since quite recently have a need to store names such as these in Gramps
and I'd prefer do that in accordance with some best practice used by
many professional and amateur genealogists alike, rather than use one of
my own.

> Like you, I'd like to adhere to some general convention.
>
> Patrick

Suggestions, comments, anybody?

Regards from the Netherlands, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org




--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

John W. Kitz-3

Patrick, Jaran, and others,

 

Thanks for your suggestions. All considering I decided against using feudal, for one since I think is easier to determine if a name or a portion thereof is derived from a location than it is to determine exactly when a name or a portion thereof first came into being. I just finished reworking the names for which I already used feudal as the origin, fortunately there weren't that many.

 

As for the use of "von" and "zu"; based on what little I have come across such names to date, it is my understanding that names or additions to names of the form "von <some location>" many times came into being when a family member came to be the Lord of a Lordship, while additions to names of the form "zu <some location>" may be indicative of the expansion of such a Lordship, e.g. as the result of what in German is referred to as "Heiratspolitik", something like marriage politics in English.

 

Thanks for your thoughts on this, regards, Jk.

 

From: StoltHD [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, 22 October, 2019 00:15
To: Patrick Gerlier
Cc: Gramps users
Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

 

I Agree with you in that the nonealfabetic character should be handles as you describe, I think you sould make a feature request for that, I can not enough about this to explain why...

Regarding the "von unt zu", in Norwegian that "Fra og til", ie. english "from and belonging to", but I don't know the Locations you mention, so I don't know if that make any sence. It does in Norwegian, if the "from place" and the "belonging to" have the same name, so instead of writing "Schmidt von Dorf zu Dorf" its shortened to just "Schmidt von und zu Dorf", but this is just wild guesses, since I do not know enough about European naming standard...

In Norwat we would have used just the Patronomicon and the place, i.e. "Schmidt Dorf" if Dorf is a "farm" and it most often got changed when they moved, we didnt use the location part when from villages and cities...

 

 

Jaran

 

man. 21. okt. 2019 kl. 19:01 skrev Patrick Gerlier <[hidden email]>:

 

Le 21/10/2019 à 18:28, StoltHD a écrit :

I have always thought that both "von" and "zu" was a part of a location originated name... so in English it would be something like "Raitz from Frentz under Schlenderha". or more telling " Raitz from the village Frentz under the Castle Schlenderha" ?

The direct translation of "zu" to Norwegian, that also is a germanic language is "til", and in this context the will have the meaning of "belong to" not only "to".

There is a subtle difference between "von" and "zu". I have seen names like "Schmidt von und zu Dorf", i.e. the location is mentioned only once with both prepositions without repeating the location, which hints at a different semantic significance (perhaps, birth location and administrative office).

 

Under any circumstances I would have split the name in 3 part... and for both the "additional names" (location/feudal/surename) I would have set the prefix, then if I get new information, I can easily change any of them from one type to another...

This is exactly how it should be done: one line per main name component in the name editor. There is a field called "prefix" for "von", "de", "van", "y", etc. I suppose that in my special case I would put there "von und zu".

There is one case in which I am not satisfied. Compound names may be linked with a hyphen, like "Dupont-Durand". When I store the hyphen in the prefix field, I'd like that this non-alphabetic character would be written in the reports without spaces around. Is is formatted as if it were a plain word "Dupont - Durand". Minor, but it would be nicer without the spaces.

The same goes for elision: the Duke d'Orléans leads to "d' Orléans" or Dutch name T'Kind de Roodenbeke" ends up as "T' Kind de Roodenbeke" (T' is abreviation for het).

Maybe a feature request could ask for space suppression when a non alphabetic character is met in a prefix. Thus if it at the head of the prefix, space before is suppressed, and if at tail, space after is also.

 

The rest of your discussion is really interesting... :-)

jaran

 

man. 21. okt. 2019 kl. 12:37 skrev John W. Kitz <[hidden email]>:

Patrick, and others,

On 2019-10-20 14:40, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
> I have the same interrogation.
>
> There is a general agreement for the first part, being generally
> "patrilineal" in continental Europe. In case of a child born out of
> marriage without known father, we have "matrilineal".

I use matrilineal too when the name of the father is known. That is to
say that I base my decision whether to use matrilineal on the
information on the birth certificate, provided that the birth is
recorded in a civil status register, not on the answer to the question
if the child was born outside of marriage AND the father is unknown. If
a birth occurred during times in which those didn't exist yet, it may
not always be as obvious.

> For parts prefixed with "von" and "zu", we can either tag it
> "patrilineal" once it is considered as definitively inherited from the
> original ancestor who received the title, or refer to it as "location"
> (von -- if I remember correctly the nuance) or "feudal" (zu --
> corresponding to an area under the jurisdiction of the name bearer
> without personal property, again if I'm right).

This is the main reason for my question; setting the name origin to
location suggests just that, setting the origin to feudal suggests that
the name's origin dates back to feudal times. In many cases both is
true, i.e. an addition to a last name like von Frentz, zu Schlenderhan
or von Fliesteden, may date back to feudal times AND may have its origin
in some location, may it be the name of a town or village or the name of
some building, like i.e. Schlenderhan Castle.

The distinction that you are making, i.e. the German word 'von'
indicating a location as origin and the German word 'zu' the feudal era
as origin, IMHO is not correct.

E.g. in the case of the last name Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan, to
the best of my knowledge the additions 'von Frentz' AND 'zu
Schlenderhan' have both been derived from a location, i.e. a village
named Frenz (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenz_(Inden)) respectively a
building and surrounding land named Schlenderhan Castle
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Schlenderhan). If either or both
of the additions to the last name Raitz date back to feudal times or not
I, at this time, do not known, but seems less relevant with regards to
setting the value of the origin of those parts, since one can only set
one, not two.

I.e. one has to choose between location and feudal, while in fact in
this or other cases both may be true, which is one of the reasons for my
initial post on this topic to this list.

> In some areas, authority is not hereditary., it is an office granted
> by the sovereign which can be passed to any other individual.

This another reason for my initial post on this topic to this list.

At which point are certain additions of a last name still deemed granted
and thus, by the same token, revocable and at which point are those
parts deemed hereditary?

> The situation seems however to be simple for aristocrats compared to
> ordinary people. The "family" surname is passed from generation to
> generation.

To the best of my knowledge the same is true for the family name part of
compounded names like the ones I used as an example, i.e. in this case
Raitz or Kytz / Kitz and many others.


> Sometimes to avoid ambiguity, a nickname is added. It can
> be the name of the hamlet (thus "location" origin is obvious), the job
> ("occupation" origin), a physical characteristic (I've seen "poil
> blanc" = white hair, "rosset" = red complexion), wife's family name or
> even first name of father or grand-father, relationship to a "famous"
> relative with same name and first name (e.g. "nephew").
>
> When such a name component pops up, you can record the origin as a
> "contemporary" fact.
>
> But, what when this component is transmitted and inherited generation
> after generation? It loses its contextual meaning to simply become
> part of the patrilineal legacy.
>
> I think there is no simple answer to your question. You have to
> develop a convention  (and state it explicitly somewhere) and stick to
> it to be consistent.

I tend to disagree with you on that, in the sense that I suspect the
developers of software like Gramps have given thought to use cases like
these during the design of the software. Or in other words I assume
thought has gone into deciding with default values for the origin of a
name Gramps would be shipped with.

> If you're interested in onomastics, maybe you'll emphasize detailed
> origin, such as occupation (in French, names ending -ier are a clue to
> occupation-origin), location (frequently preceded by of de von da,
> sometimes merged with and contracted into the place name), personal
> choice ("taken" origin).
>
> If you emphasize family relationship, you'll restrict yourself to
> patrilineal, matrilineal, inherited et al. categories.

That is what I have done up to now, but compounded names consisting of
multiple parts, like the ones I've given as an example, have only
recently turned up as part of my research. By the same token I only
since quite recently have a need to store names such as these in Gramps
and I'd prefer do that in accordance with some best practice used by
many professional and amateur genealogists alike, rather than use one of
my own.

> Like you, I'd like to adhere to some general convention.
>
> Patrick

Suggestions, comments, anybody?

Regards from the Netherlands, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org

 



--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

John W. Kitz-3

Patrick, Jaran, and others,

 

I forgot; assuming I'm correct names of the form "von <some location> zu <some other location>" should be understood to mean something like "from <some location> to <some other location>" to indicate the geographic area over which the family had some form of authority. In addition, with regards to any issues that you might have getting a compounded name to print with hyphens, spaces and what not exactly positioned were you'd like them. From previous post on this list it is my understanding that Gramps provides for the possibility to define one's own default name format in order to print names on reports in a manner that suits your needs.

 

I hope this helps, regards, Jk.

 

From: John W. Kitz [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, 22 October, 2019 01:25
To: 'Gramps users'
Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

 

Patrick, Jaran, and others,

 

Thanks for your suggestions. All considering I decided against using feudal, for one since I think is easier to determine if a name or a portion thereof is derived from a location than it is to determine exactly when a name or a portion thereof first came into being. I just finished reworking the names for which I already used feudal as the origin, fortunately there weren't that many.

 

As for the use of "von" and "zu"; based on what little I have come across such names to date, it is my understanding that names or additions to names of the form "von <some location>" many times came into being when a family member came to be the Lord of a Lordship, while additions to names of the form "zu <some location>" may be indicative of the expansion of such a Lordship, e.g. as the result of what in German is referred to as "Heiratspolitik", something like marriage politics in English.

 

Thanks for your thoughts on this, regards, Jk.

 

From: StoltHD [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Tuesday, 22 October, 2019 00:15
To: Patrick Gerlier
Cc: Gramps users
Subject: Re: [Gramps-users] Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

 

I Agree with you in that the nonealfabetic character should be handles as you describe, I think you sould make a feature request for that, I can not enough about this to explain why...

Regarding the "von unt zu", in Norwegian that "Fra og til", ie. english "from and belonging to", but I don't know the Locations you mention, so I don't know if that make any sence. It does in Norwegian, if the "from place" and the "belonging to" have the same name, so instead of writing "Schmidt von Dorf zu Dorf" its shortened to just "Schmidt von und zu Dorf", but this is just wild guesses, since I do not know enough about European naming standard...

In Norwat we would have used just the Patronomicon and the place, i.e. "Schmidt Dorf" if Dorf is a "farm" and it most often got changed when they moved, we didnt use the location part when from villages and cities...

 

 

Jaran

 

man. 21. okt. 2019 kl. 19:01 skrev Patrick Gerlier <[hidden email]>:

 

Le 21/10/2019 à 18:28, StoltHD a écrit :

I have always thought that both "von" and "zu" was a part of a location originated name... so in English it would be something like "Raitz from Frentz under Schlenderha". or more telling " Raitz from the village Frentz under the Castle Schlenderha" ?

The direct translation of "zu" to Norwegian, that also is a germanic language is "til", and in this context the will have the meaning of "belong to" not only "to".

There is a subtle difference between "von" and "zu". I have seen names like "Schmidt von und zu Dorf", i.e. the location is mentioned only once with both prepositions without repeating the location, which hints at a different semantic significance (perhaps, birth location and administrative office).

 

Under any circumstances I would have split the name in 3 part... and for both the "additional names" (location/feudal/surename) I would have set the prefix, then if I get new information, I can easily change any of them from one type to another...

This is exactly how it should be done: one line per main name component in the name editor. There is a field called "prefix" for "von", "de", "van", "y", etc. I suppose that in my special case I would put there "von und zu".

There is one case in which I am not satisfied. Compound names may be linked with a hyphen, like "Dupont-Durand". When I store the hyphen in the prefix field, I'd like that this non-alphabetic character would be written in the reports without spaces around. Is is formatted as if it were a plain word "Dupont - Durand". Minor, but it would be nicer without the spaces.

The same goes for elision: the Duke d'Orléans leads to "d' Orléans" or Dutch name T'Kind de Roodenbeke" ends up as "T' Kind de Roodenbeke" (T' is abreviation for het).

Maybe a feature request could ask for space suppression when a non alphabetic character is met in a prefix. Thus if it at the head of the prefix, space before is suppressed, and if at tail, space after is also.

 

The rest of your discussion is really interesting... :-)

jaran

 

man. 21. okt. 2019 kl. 12:37 skrev John W. Kitz <[hidden email]>:

Patrick, and others,

On 2019-10-20 14:40, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
> I have the same interrogation.
>
> There is a general agreement for the first part, being generally
> "patrilineal" in continental Europe. In case of a child born out of
> marriage without known father, we have "matrilineal".

I use matrilineal too when the name of the father is known. That is to
say that I base my decision whether to use matrilineal on the
information on the birth certificate, provided that the birth is
recorded in a civil status register, not on the answer to the question
if the child was born outside of marriage AND the father is unknown. If
a birth occurred during times in which those didn't exist yet, it may
not always be as obvious.

> For parts prefixed with "von" and "zu", we can either tag it
> "patrilineal" once it is considered as definitively inherited from the
> original ancestor who received the title, or refer to it as "location"
> (von -- if I remember correctly the nuance) or "feudal" (zu --
> corresponding to an area under the jurisdiction of the name bearer
> without personal property, again if I'm right).

This is the main reason for my question; setting the name origin to
location suggests just that, setting the origin to feudal suggests that
the name's origin dates back to feudal times. In many cases both is
true, i.e. an addition to a last name like von Frentz, zu Schlenderhan
or von Fliesteden, may date back to feudal times AND may have its origin
in some location, may it be the name of a town or village or the name of
some building, like i.e. Schlenderhan Castle.

The distinction that you are making, i.e. the German word 'von'
indicating a location as origin and the German word 'zu' the feudal era
as origin, IMHO is not correct.

E.g. in the case of the last name Raitz von Frentz zu Schlenderhan, to
the best of my knowledge the additions 'von Frentz' AND 'zu
Schlenderhan' have both been derived from a location, i.e. a village
named Frenz (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frenz_(Inden)) respectively a
building and surrounding land named Schlenderhan Castle
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Schlenderhan). If either or both
of the additions to the last name Raitz date back to feudal times or not
I, at this time, do not known, but seems less relevant with regards to
setting the value of the origin of those parts, since one can only set
one, not two.

I.e. one has to choose between location and feudal, while in fact in
this or other cases both may be true, which is one of the reasons for my
initial post on this topic to this list.

> In some areas, authority is not hereditary., it is an office granted
> by the sovereign which can be passed to any other individual.

This another reason for my initial post on this topic to this list.

At which point are certain additions of a last name still deemed granted
and thus, by the same token, revocable and at which point are those
parts deemed hereditary?

> The situation seems however to be simple for aristocrats compared to
> ordinary people. The "family" surname is passed from generation to
> generation.

To the best of my knowledge the same is true for the family name part of
compounded names like the ones I used as an example, i.e. in this case
Raitz or Kytz / Kitz and many others.


> Sometimes to avoid ambiguity, a nickname is added. It can
> be the name of the hamlet (thus "location" origin is obvious), the job
> ("occupation" origin), a physical characteristic (I've seen "poil
> blanc" = white hair, "rosset" = red complexion), wife's family name or
> even first name of father or grand-father, relationship to a "famous"
> relative with same name and first name (e.g. "nephew").
>
> When such a name component pops up, you can record the origin as a
> "contemporary" fact.
>
> But, what when this component is transmitted and inherited generation
> after generation? It loses its contextual meaning to simply become
> part of the patrilineal legacy.
>
> I think there is no simple answer to your question. You have to
> develop a convention  (and state it explicitly somewhere) and stick to
> it to be consistent.

I tend to disagree with you on that, in the sense that I suspect the
developers of software like Gramps have given thought to use cases like
these during the design of the software. Or in other words I assume
thought has gone into deciding with default values for the origin of a
name Gramps would be shipped with.

> If you're interested in onomastics, maybe you'll emphasize detailed
> origin, such as occupation (in French, names ending -ier are a clue to
> occupation-origin), location (frequently preceded by of de von da,
> sometimes merged with and contracted into the place name), personal
> choice ("taken" origin).
>
> If you emphasize family relationship, you'll restrict yourself to
> patrilineal, matrilineal, inherited et al. categories.

That is what I have done up to now, but compounded names consisting of
multiple parts, like the ones I've given as an example, have only
recently turned up as part of my research. By the same token I only
since quite recently have a need to store names such as these in Gramps
and I'd prefer do that in accordance with some best practice used by
many professional and amateur genealogists alike, rather than use one of
my own.

> Like you, I'd like to adhere to some general convention.
>
> Patrick

Suggestions, comments, anybody?

Regards from the Netherlands, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org

 



--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

Patrick Gerlier


Le 22/10/2019 à 01:39, John W. Kitz a écrit :

Patrick, Jaran, and others,

 

I forgot; assuming I'm correct names of the form "von <some location> zu <some other location>" should be understood to mean something like "from <some location> to <some other location>" to indicate the geographic area over which the family had some form of authority. In addition, with regards to any issues that you might have getting a compounded name to print with hyphens, spaces and what not exactly positioned were you'd like them. From previous post on this list it is my understanding that Gramps provides for the possibility to define one's own default name format in order to print names on reports in a manner that suits your needs.

This customization controls the level of details of what you want to include as the report name and in which order the components are written. It does not address spacing. My case is complex because it is "contextual" spacing: if a word begins or ends in a non alphabetic character, space(s) next to this special character should be suppressed.

 

I hope this helps, regards, Jk.




--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

Patrick Gerlier
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3


Le 22/10/2019 à 01:24, John W. Kitz a écrit :

Patrick, Jaran, and others,

 

Thanks for your suggestions. All considering I decided against using feudal, for one since I think is easier to determine if a name or a portion thereof is derived from a location than it is to determine exactly when a name or a portion thereof first came into being. I just finished reworking the names for which I already used feudal as the origin, fortunately there weren't that many.

 

As for the use of "von" and "zu"; based on what little I have come across such names to date, it is my understanding that names or additions to names of the form "von <some location>" many times came into being when a family member came to be the Lord of a Lordship, while additions to names of the form "zu <some location>" may be indicative of the expansion of such a Lordship, e.g. as the result of what in German is referred to as "Heiratspolitik", something like marriage politics in English.

I don't think so but an advice of an expert in German conventions is needed.

The reason I don't see "zu" as an extension is the fact I met names of the from "Schmidt zu Stadt" without mention of a "von Ort" (don't look for significance in my example Stadt=city, Ort=location). When both "von" and "zu" are used, they are always associated with "und"=and.

As I already mentioned in a previous post, status of the lordship is different with von/zu. In one case, it is a personal property (inherited and transmitted), in the other one it is an office bestowed upon by some superior authority (then why sometimes "Schmidt von und zu Stadt"?, claiming double authority on the county?).

Your suggestion of Heiratspolitik is a good track. The husband then manages his wife's estate but doesn't own it, thus the "zu".

Regards,
Patrick


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

John W. Kitz-3
In reply to this post by Patrick Gerlier
Patrick,

On 2019-10-22 09:51, Patrick Gerlier wrote:

> Le 22/10/2019 à 01:39, John W. Kitz a écrit :
>
>> Patrick, Jaran, and others,
>>
>> I forgot; assuming I'm correct names of the form "von <some
>> location> zu <some other location>" should be understood to mean
>> something like "from <some location> to <some other location>" to
>> indicate the geographic area over which the family had some form of
>> authority. In addition, with regards to any issues that you might
>> have getting a compounded name to print with hyphens, spaces and
>> what not exactly positioned were you'd like them. From previous post
>> on this list it is my understanding that Gramps provides for the
>> possibility to define one's own default name format in order to
>> print names on reports in a manner that suits your needs.

>  This customization controls the level of details of what you want to
> include as the report name and in which order the components are
> written. It does not address spacing. My case is complex because it is
> "contextual" spacing: if a word begins or ends in a non alphabetic
> character, space(s) next to this special character should be
> suppressed.

Ah, I understand. At one point I had a need to use the option to
customize the name format to deal with patronymic, rather than
patrilineal or matrilineal names. So far I have had no need to deal with
names that require more elaborate custom settings of the name format.
That is I have a few names in my data that contain e.g. hyphens, but to
date that hasn't yet posed a problem on any of the reports. However it
may at some point in the future, e.g. if I were to conclude that it
would be better so separate the parts that together comprise the
hyphenated name(s).

I don't quite understand the issue you're trying to describe, since off
the top of my head I can't imagine a last name or part thereof that ends
with a non-letter character. And if there are, are the number of
possibilities that big that you can't solve the issue by setting the
origin of such parts to some custom value and in addition make use of
the option to customize the default name format to have those specific
names printed on reports in a manner that you prefer?

Regards, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

Patrick Gerlier

Le 22/10/2019 à 11:40, John W. Kitz a écrit :

> Patrick,
>
>
>>  This customization controls the level of details of what you want to
>> include as the report name and in which order the components are
>> written. It does not address spacing. My case is complex because it is
>> "contextual" spacing: if a word begins or ends in a non alphabetic
>> character, space(s) next to this special character should be
>> suppressed.
>
> Ah, I understand. At one point I had a need to use the option to
> customize the name format to deal with patronymic, rather than
> patrilineal or matrilineal names. So far I have had no need to deal
> with names that require more elaborate custom settings of the name
> format. That is I have a few names in my data that contain e.g.
> hyphens, but to date that hasn't yet posed a problem on any of the
> reports. However it may at some point in the future, e.g. if I were to
> conclude that it would be better so separate the parts that together
> comprise the hyphenated name(s).
>
> I don't quite understand the issue you're trying to describe, since
> off the top of my head I can't imagine a last name or part thereof
> that ends with a non-letter character. And if there are, are the
> number of possibilities that big that you can't solve the issue by
> setting the origin of such parts to some custom value and in addition
> make use of the option to customize the default name format to have
> those specific names printed on reports in a manner that you prefer?

To my knowledge, there are no names starting or ending in non
alphabetical names, at least names using Latin alphabet (or Greek and
Cyrillic). My concern is only with the "linkage" between main components
of names. This "linkage" is commonly stored in the "prefix" field of the
name editor.

This is where the prefix can be non-alphabetic: a hyphen, double hyphen
(briefly introduced by a change in Code civil in France but cancelled to
separate birht name from spouse name) or quote to denote elision (e.g.
d'Orléans instead od d'Orléans, or T'Kind instead of Het Kind in
Dutch).  I don't know if possessive case like Donovan's may occur in the
UK, in which case I'd put 's as a suffix (though "suffix" in Gramps is
for Junior, Senior, II, etc.).

Regards,
Patrick




--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

John W. Kitz-3
In reply to this post by Patrick Gerlier
Patrick,

On 2019-10-22 10:36, Patrick Gerlier wrote:

> Le 22/10/2019 à 01:24, John W. Kitz a écrit :
>
>> Patrick, Jaran, and others,
>>
>> As for the use of "von" and "zu"; based on what little I have come
>> across such names to date, it is my understanding that names or
>> additions to names of the form "von <some location>" many times came
>> into being when a family member came to be the Lord of a Lordship,
>> while additions to names of the form "zu <some location>" may be
>> indicative of the expansion of such a Lordship, e.g. as the result
>> of what in German is referred to as "Heiratspolitik", something like
>> marriage politics in English.
>
> I don't think so but an advice of an expert in German conventions is
> needed.

I'm sure you'll have noticed that in the above excerpt from one of my
earlier emails on this topic I used various words to indicate a level of
uncertainty, simply because I'm not sure. But that was the reason for my
initial post on this topic in the first place, as I stated in the
subject text "to seek direction regarding the use of (...)".

Another explanation that I would deem plausible is that a compounded
surname of the form "family name von <some location> zu <some other
location>" might have come into being when the Lord of Lordship <some
location> lived at <some other location>.

In the case of a compounded surname like e.g. "Raitz von Frentz zu
Schlenderhan" this may have meant that "<some first name> Raitz" (Lord
of, in German: Herr von) "Frentz" (lived at, in German: zu)
"Schlenderhan" (Castle).

The above example resulting in the name in Gramps being entered
comprised of <some first name>, surname: Raitz, origin patrilineal,
additional surname: "Frentz", prefixed with "von", origin location,
additional surname: "Schlenderhan", prefixed with "zu", origin location.

> The reason I don't see "zu" as an extension is the fact I met names of
> the from "Schmidt zu Stadt" without mention of a "von Ort" (don't look
> for significance in my example Stadt=city, Ort=location). When both
> "von" and "zu" are used, they are always associated with "und"=and.

I don't understand the logic you are applying here.

In the example you provide could the name have come into being because a
person named "<some first name> Schmidt" (lived in, in German: zu)
"Stadt"?

In addition why would you favor treating such a name as one single
surname "Schmidt zu Stadt" with the origin set to ma- or patrilineal as
opposed to as a compounded surname of the form "Schmidt" (with the
origin set to pa- or matrilineal) and "Stadt" prefixed with "zu" with
the origin set to location?

> As I already mentioned in a previous post, status of the lordship is
> different with von/zu. In one case, it is a personal property
> (inherited and transmitted), in the other one it is an office bestowed
> upon by some superior authority (then why sometimes "Schmidt von und
> zu Stadt"?, claiming double authority on the county?).

Again I'm not familiar with the example you provide, but for the sake of
discussion let's assume a King gave you a Castle that from that point
onward became your family's possession that could be passed down to down
to your descendants through inheritance for generations to come,
provided there were children to which the castle could be left after the
current owner passed away.

Also for the sake of discussion let's assume that same King at some
later point in time gave you the rights to (enforce) some authority over
some geographic area outside the land and walls of the castle, which
typically also entailed you to be able to use some title. The King may
have decided to grant the rights to enforce some form of authority and
to use of some title with restrictions, as a result of which these
rights may not be transferable to your descendants or only provided
certain conditions are met, e.g. these rights may only be transferable
to male or female descendants.

Could this be an example in which it would be appropriate for you to use
both "von" and "zu". I.e. prior to the first act of the King coming into
force you went by the name Patrick Schmidt, entered in Gramps as
firstname: Patrick, surname: Schmidt, origin: ma- or patrilineal.

Following the first act of the King you went by the name Patrick Schmidt
zu Castle, entered in Gramps as firstname: Patrick, surname: Schmidt,
origin: ma- or patrilineal, second surname: Castle, prefixed with "zu",
origin: location.

Following the second act of the King you went by the name Patrick
Schmidt von/zu Castle, entered in Gramps as firstname: Patrick, surname:
Schmidt, origin: ma- or patrilineal, second surname: Castle, prefixed
with "von/zu", origin: location.

I emphasize that I not an expert in all things concerning German
(feudal) names, and am merely writing the above as an IMHO plausible
explanation within the context of our discussion on this topic.

> Your suggestion of Heiratspolitik is a good track. The husband then
> manages his wife's estate but doesn't own it, thus the "zu".

I don't know, but doubt if that has anything to do with it. If you were
to read the German Wikipedia article on Heiratspolitik
(https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heiratspolitik), in English sometimes
referred to as Marriage of state
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_state) or Marriage of
convenience (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_convenience),
you'll notice that particularly in ancient times marriage was a way to
enlarge one's possessions and/or influence or authority.

>  Regards,
> Patrick

Regards, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

John W. Kitz-3
In reply to this post by Patrick Gerlier
Patrick,

On 2019-10-22 11:55, Patrick Gerlier wrote:

> Le 22/10/2019 à 11:40, John W. Kitz a écrit :
>> Patrick,
>>
>>
>>>  This customization controls the level of details of what you want to
>>> include as the report name and in which order the components are
>>> written. It does not address spacing. My case is complex because it
>>> is
>>> "contextual" spacing: if a word begins or ends in a non alphabetic
>>> character, space(s) next to this special character should be
>>> suppressed.
>>
>> Ah, I understand. At one point I had a need to use the option to
>> customize the name format to deal with patronymic, rather than
>> patrilineal or matrilineal names. So far I have had no need to deal
>> with names that require more elaborate custom settings of the name
>> format. That is I have a few names in my data that contain e.g.
>> hyphens, but to date that hasn't yet posed a problem on any of the
>> reports. However it may at some point in the future, e.g. if I were to
>> conclude that it would be better so separate the parts that together
>> comprise the hyphenated name(s).
>>
>> I don't quite understand the issue you're trying to describe, since
>> off the top of my head I can't imagine a last name or part thereof
>> that ends with a non-letter character. And if there are, are the
>> number of possibilities that big that you can't solve the issue by
>> setting the origin of such parts to some custom value and in addition
>> make use of the option to customize the default name format to have
>> those specific names printed on reports in a manner that you prefer?
>
> To my knowledge, there are no names starting or ending in non
> alphabetical names, at least names using Latin alphabet (or Greek and
> Cyrillic). My concern is only with the "linkage" between main
> components of names. This "linkage" is commonly stored in the "prefix"
> field of the name editor.

I guess in that case you'll have to try and find out if Gramps treats
the prefix to some surname as an integral part of that surname or as
something separate. If Gramps were to treat is as an integral part of
the surname, I'd refer you to my suggestion to solve the issue you
describe by using one or more custom values for origin in conjunction
with one or more custom name formats. If you have a lot of trailing
non-letter characters this may be impractical solution, but if you only
have a limited number of options to deal with I'd give it a try to see
if it might solve the issue you described, provided that I understood it
correctly.

> This is where the prefix can be non-alphabetic: a hyphen, double
> hyphen (briefly introduced by a change in Code civil in France but
> cancelled to separate birht name from spouse name) or quote to denote
> elision (e.g. d'Orléans instead od d'Orléans, or T'Kind instead of Het
> Kind in Dutch).

Please note that writing the Dutch "het" as "t'" (i.e. with a trailing
apostrophe, is incorrect. The apostrophe ought to be placed before the
"t" like so "'t", since your leaving or eliding the letters "he" BEFORE
the letter "t".

> I don't know if possessive case like Donovan's may
> occur in the UK, in which case I'd put 's as a suffix (though "suffix"
> in Gramps is for Junior, Senior, II, etc.).
>
> Regards,
> Patrick

Regards, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

John W. Kitz-3
Patrick,

> On 2019-10-22 11:55, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
>> Le 22/10/2019 à 11:40, John W. Kitz a écrit :

---- 8< ----

>> This is where the prefix can be non-alphabetic: a hyphen, double
>> hyphen (briefly introduced by a change in Code civil in France but
>> cancelled to separate birth name from spouse name) or quote to denote
>> elision (e.g. d'Orléans instead of d'Orléans, or T'Kind instead of Het
>> Kind in Dutch).
>
> Please note that writing the Dutch "het" as "t'" (i.e. with a trailing
> apostrophe, is incorrect. The apostrophe ought to be placed before the
> "t" like so "'t", since you're leaving or eliding the letters "he"
> BEFORE the letter "t".

For completeness sake I'd like to add that in modern languages like
Dutch, English, Flemish, French, German, etc., as far as I know, the
general rule is that the apostrophe always replaces any characters that
are being left out or elided e.g. when:

o two words are concatenated, such as in the case of are and not in
aren't or you and are in you're;
o as you mentioned in the case of the possessive like Patrick's or
Hans';
o in abbreviations of sorts such as in the Dutch 't kind (English: the
child) or in the Dutch 's morgens, 's middags, 's avonds (derived from
older Dutch des morgens, des middags and des avonds, in which the
letters "de" are elided, English: in the morning, in the afternoon, in
the evening);
o or in the French examples you gave;

I'm not aware on any exceptions to that general rule in any of the
languages you mentioned, so I'd imagine it ought to be possible to
address most if not all such cases within the possibilities and
limitations of Gramps.

>> I don't know if possessive case like Donovan's may
>> occur in the UK, in which case I'd put 's as a suffix (though "suffix"
>> in Gramps is for Junior, Senior, II, etc.).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Patrick

Regards, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

John W. Kitz-3
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3
Patrick,

I just stumbled onto these examples: Wilhelm Graf von Limburg und Herr
zu Broich und Liedberg and Wilhelm Graf von Neuenahr und Herr von
Bedburg, Rösberg und Limburg.

Which seem to render most of our little discussion void.

The long short of it might just be that there are no clearly defined
rules, such as in the case of elision, for the use or words such as
"von" and "zu" in compounded German names.

Maybe there are German natives on this list who'd care to comment on
this.

Regards, Jk.

On 2019-10-22 12:55, John W. Kitz wrote:

> Patrick,
>
> On 2019-10-22 10:36, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
>> Le 22/10/2019 à 01:24, John W. Kitz a écrit :
>>
>>> Patrick, Jaran, and others,
>>>
>>> As for the use of "von" and "zu"; based on what little I have come
>>> across such names to date, it is my understanding that names or
>>> additions to names of the form "von <some location>" many times came
>>> into being when a family member came to be the Lord of a Lordship,
>>> while additions to names of the form "zu <some location>" may be
>>> indicative of the expansion of such a Lordship, e.g. as the result
>>> of what in German is referred to as "Heiratspolitik", something like
>>> marriage politics in English.
>>
>> I don't think so but an advice of an expert in German conventions is
>> needed.
>
> I'm sure you'll have noticed that in the above excerpt from one of my
> earlier emails on this topic I used various words to indicate a level
> of uncertainty, simply because I'm not sure. But that was the reason
> for my initial post on this topic in the first place, as I stated in
> the subject text "to seek direction regarding the use of (...)".
>
> Another explanation that I would deem plausible is that a compounded
> surname of the form "family name von <some location> zu <some other
> location>" might have come into being when the Lord of Lordship <some
> location> lived at <some other location>.
>
> In the case of a compounded surname like e.g. "Raitz von Frentz zu
> Schlenderhan" this may have meant that "<some first name> Raitz" (Lord
> of, in German: Herr von) "Frentz" (lived at, in German: zu)
> "Schlenderhan" (Castle).
>
> The above example resulting in the name in Gramps being entered
> comprised of <some first name>, surname: Raitz, origin patrilineal,
> additional surname: "Frentz", prefixed with "von", origin location,
> additional surname: "Schlenderhan", prefixed with "zu", origin
> location.
>
>> The reason I don't see "zu" as an extension is the fact I met names of
>> the from "Schmidt zu Stadt" without mention of a "von Ort" (don't look
>> for significance in my example Stadt=city, Ort=location). When both
>> "von" and "zu" are used, they are always associated with "und"=and.
>
> I don't understand the logic you are applying here.
>
> In the example you provide could the name have come into being because
> a person named "<some first name> Schmidt" (lived in, in German: zu)
> "Stadt"?
>
> In addition why would you favor treating such a name as one single
> surname "Schmidt zu Stadt" with the origin set to ma- or patrilineal
> as opposed to as a compounded surname of the form "Schmidt" (with the
> origin set to pa- or matrilineal) and "Stadt" prefixed with "zu" with
> the origin set to location?
>
>> As I already mentioned in a previous post, status of the lordship is
>> different with von/zu. In one case, it is a personal property
>> (inherited and transmitted), in the other one it is an office bestowed
>> upon by some superior authority (then why sometimes "Schmidt von und
>> zu Stadt"?, claiming double authority on the county?).
>
> Again I'm not familiar with the example you provide, but for the sake
> of discussion let's assume a King gave you a Castle that from that
> point onward became your family's possession that could be passed down
> to down to your descendants through inheritance for generations to
> come, provided there were children to which the castle could be left
> after the current owner passed away.
>
> Also for the sake of discussion let's assume that same King at some
> later point in time gave you the rights to (enforce) some authority
> over some geographic area outside the land and walls of the castle,
> which typically also entailed you to be able to use some title. The
> King may have decided to grant the rights to enforce some form of
> authority and to use of some title with restrictions, as a result of
> which these rights may not be transferable to your descendants or only
> provided certain conditions are met, e.g. these rights may only be
> transferable to male or female descendants.
>
> Could this be an example in which it would be appropriate for you to
> use both "von" and "zu". I.e. prior to the first act of the King
> coming into force you went by the name Patrick Schmidt, entered in
> Gramps as firstname: Patrick, surname: Schmidt, origin: ma- or
> patrilineal.
>
> Following the first act of the King you went by the name Patrick
> Schmidt zu Castle, entered in Gramps as firstname: Patrick, surname:
> Schmidt, origin: ma- or patrilineal, second surname: Castle, prefixed
> with "zu", origin: location.
>
> Following the second act of the King you went by the name Patrick
> Schmidt von/zu Castle, entered in Gramps as firstname: Patrick,
> surname: Schmidt, origin: ma- or patrilineal, second surname: Castle,
> prefixed with "von/zu", origin: location.
>
> I emphasize that I not an expert in all things concerning German
> (feudal) names, and am merely writing the above as an IMHO plausible
> explanation within the context of our discussion on this topic.
>
>> Your suggestion of Heiratspolitik is a good track. The husband then
>> manages his wife's estate but doesn't own it, thus the "zu".
>
> I don't know, but doubt if that has anything to do with it. If you
> were to read the German Wikipedia article on Heiratspolitik
> (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heiratspolitik), in English sometimes
> referred to as Marriage of state
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_state) or Marriage of
> convenience (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_convenience),
> you'll notice that particularly in ancient times marriage was a way to
> enlarge one's possessions and/or influence or authority.
>
>>  Regards,
>> Patrick
>
> Regards, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

Patrick Gerlier
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3
John,


> For completeness sake I'd like to add that in modern languages like
> Dutch, English, Flemish, French, German, etc., as far as I know, the
> general rule is that the apostrophe always replaces any characters
> that are being left out or elided e.g. when:
>
> o two words are concatenated, such as in the case of are and not in
> aren't or you and are in you're;
> o as you mentioned in the case of the possessive like Patrick's or Hans';
> o in abbreviations of sorts such as in the Dutch 't kind (English: the
> child) or in the Dutch 's morgens, 's middags, 's avonds (derived from
> older Dutch des morgens, des middags and des avonds, in which the
> letters "de" are elided, English: in the morning, in the afternoon, in
> the evening);
> o or in the French examples you gave;
>
> I'm not aware on any exceptions to that general rule in any of the
> languages you mentioned, so I'd imagine it ought to be possible to
> address most if not all such cases within the possibilities and
> limitations of Gramps.
>
I realised yesterday, after your remark on my mistake about t' versus 't
(though I have started to learn Dutch for 2-3 years and I bet that a
friend of mine 't Kind de Roodenbeke is designated as T'Kind … in French
official records) that my handling my request is much more difficult
than I had thought at first.

The hyphen case is quite easy and I believe ther is no fancy about it in
European languages.

Apostrophe case is not clear cut. When it represent elision to avoid a
hiatus as in French "de Orléans" >> "d'Orléans", it can be considered as
a suffix and my "algorithm" may apply.

However in Dutch "'s morgens", "'s" has value of an isolated word and
space before it cannot be suppressed.

When I have time, I'll experiment, considering only hyphen and
apostrophe, within my very limited knowledge of Python.

Regards and thanks for the examples,
Patrick




--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the 'origin' field in the Name Editor.

Patrick Gerlier
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3

Le 23/10/2019 à 12:03, John W. Kitz a écrit :

> Patrick,
>
> I just stumbled onto these examples: Wilhelm Graf von Limburg und Herr
> zu Broich und Liedberg and Wilhelm Graf von Neuenahr und Herr von
> Bedburg, Rösberg und Limburg.
>
> Which seem to render most of our little discussion void.
>
> The long short of it might just be that there are no clearly defined
> rules, such as in the case of elision, for the use or words such as
> "von" and "zu" in compounded German names.
>
> Maybe there are German natives on this list who'd care to comment on
> this.
>
> Regards, Jk.
>
In your examples, the title/rank is explicitly given: Graf (Count) and
Herr (Lord). But anyway a German expert is definitely needed.

Patrick




--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the

GRAMPS - User mailing list
In reply to this post by John W. Kitz-3
The lack of clarity in handling this has been an aggravation for centuries.

I find it annoying the my surname, in addition to the usual variant spellings that affect everyone, has the issue of multiple 'standard' cataloguing & printing handling. This makes scripting searches far more complex.

I'm of a 'McCullough' line. 'Mc' is generally thought of as the Scots-Irish version of Scottish "Mac" or "son of" prefix. Alternately claimed to be indicative of bastardry heritage or merely a bastardized variant.

In America, the standard set of pre-printed name index/sorting tabs/cards actually had a separate "Mc". But I actually found instances of OCD clerk wars fighting over re-filing. One faction filing according to the "it's there, why not use it" pragmatists versus Alphabetizing true-believers that "Mc" isn't part of the alphabet & must never be used.

Likewise, some clerks were sure ”Mc” was an abbreviated "Mac" and filed as though it had been spelt out. Others were equally confident that Mc & Mac were not part of the actual Surname and so alphabetized according to the remainder of the surname.

Meanwhile, the printed variants included using a superscript lower-case 'c', an underlined raised lower case 'c', a lower-case 'c' (even in all caps listings), a space after the 'Mc', no space between, substituting a single apostrophe or space after the 'M' for BOTH 'Mc' & 'Mac'.  

Thus, even with something simple, we're compelled to stir in complexity.

-Brian

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 5:04, John W. Kitz
Patrick,

I just stumbled onto these examples: Wilhelm Graf von Limburg und Herr
zu Broich und Liedberg and Wilhelm Graf von Neuenahr und Herr von
Bedburg, Rösberg und Limburg.

Which seem to render most of our little discussion void.

The long short of it might just be that there are no clearly defined
rules, such as in the case of elision, for the use or words such as
"von" and "zu" in compounded German names.

Maybe there are German natives on this list who'd care to comment on
this.

Regards, Jk.

On 2019-10-22 12:55, John W. Kitz wrote:

> Patrick,
>
> On 2019-10-22 10:36, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
>> Le 22/10/2019 à 01:24, John W. Kitz a écrit :
>>
>>> Patrick, Jaran, and others,
>>>
>>> As for the use of "von" and "zu"; based on what little I have come
>>> across such names to date, it is my understanding that names or
>>> additions to names of the form "von <some location>" many times came
>>> into being when a family member came to be the Lord of a Lordship,
>>> while additions to names of the form "zu <some location>" may be
>>> indicative of the expansion of such a Lordship, e.g. as the result
>>> of what in German is referred to as "Heiratspolitik", something like
>>> marriage politics in English.
>>
>> I don't think so but an advice of an expert in German conventions is
>> needed.
>
> I'm sure you'll have noticed that in the above excerpt from one of my
> earlier emails on this topic I used various words to indicate a level
> of uncertainty, simply because I'm not sure. But that was the reason
> for my initial post on this topic in the first place, as I stated in
> the subject text "to seek direction regarding the use of (...)".
>
> Another explanation that I would deem plausible is that a compounded
> surname of the form "family name von <some location> zu <some other
> location>" might have come into being when the Lord of Lordship <some
> location> lived at <some other location>.
>
> In the case of a compounded surname like e.g. "Raitz von Frentz zu
> Schlenderhan" this may have meant that "<some first name> Raitz" (Lord
> of, in German: Herr von) "Frentz" (lived at, in German: zu)
> "Schlenderhan" (Castle).
>
> The above example resulting in the name in Gramps being entered
> comprised of <some first name>, surname: Raitz, origin patrilineal,
> additional surname: "Frentz", prefixed with "von", origin location,
> additional surname: "Schlenderhan", prefixed with "zu", origin
> location.
>
>> The reason I don't see "zu" as an extension is the fact I met names of
>> the from "Schmidt zu Stadt" without mention of a "von Ort" (don't look
>> for significance in my example Stadt=city, Ort=location). When both
>> "von" and "zu" are used, they are always associated with "und"=and.
>
> I don't understand the logic you are applying here.
>
> In the example you provide could the name have come into being because
> a person named "<some first name> Schmidt" (lived in, in German: zu)
> "Stadt"?
>
> In addition why would you favor treating such a name as one single
> surname "Schmidt zu Stadt" with the origin set to ma- or patrilineal
> as opposed to as a compounded surname of the form "Schmidt" (with the
> origin set to pa- or matrilineal) and "Stadt" prefixed with "zu" with
> the origin set to location?
>
>> As I already mentioned in a previous post, status of the lordship is
>> different with von/zu. In one case, it is a personal property
>> (inherited and transmitted), in the other one it is an office bestowed
>> upon by some superior authority (then why sometimes "Schmidt von und
>> zu Stadt"?, claiming double authority on the county?).
>
> Again I'm not familiar with the example you provide, but for the sake
> of discussion let's assume a King gave you a Castle that from that
> point onward became your family's possession that could be passed down
> to down to your descendants through inheritance for generations to
> come, provided there were children to which the castle could be left
> after the current owner passed away.
>
> Also for the sake of discussion let's assume that same King at some
> later point in time gave you the rights to (enforce) some authority
> over some geographic area outside the land and walls of the castle,
> which typically also entailed you to be able to use some title. The
> King may have decided to grant the rights to enforce some form of
> authority and to use of some title with restrictions, as a result of
> which these rights may not be transferable to your descendants or only
> provided certain conditions are met, e.g. these rights may only be
> transferable to male or female descendants.
>
> Could this be an example in which it would be appropriate for you to
> use both "von" and "zu". I.e. prior to the first act of the King
> coming into force you went by the name Patrick Schmidt, entered in
> Gramps as firstname: Patrick, surname: Schmidt, origin: ma- or
> patrilineal.
>
> Following the first act of the King you went by the name Patrick
> Schmidt zu Castle, entered in Gramps as firstname: Patrick, surname:
> Schmidt, origin: ma- or patrilineal, second surname: Castle, prefixed
> with "zu", origin: location.
>
> Following the second act of the King you went by the name Patrick
> Schmidt von/zu Castle, entered in Gramps as firstname: Patrick,
> surname: Schmidt, origin: ma- or patrilineal, second surname: Castle,
> prefixed with "von/zu", origin: location.
>
> I emphasize that I not an expert in all things concerning German
> (feudal) names, and am merely writing the above as an IMHO plausible
> explanation within the context of our discussion on this topic.
>
>> Your suggestion of Heiratspolitik is a good track. The husband then
>> manages his wife's estate but doesn't own it, thus the "zu".
>
> I don't know, but doubt if that has anything to do with it. If you
> were to read the German Wikipedia article on Heiratspolitik
> (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heiratspolitik), in English sometimes
> referred to as Marriage of state
> (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_state) or Marriage of
> convenience (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_convenience),
> you'll notice that particularly in ancient times marriage was a way to
> enlarge one's possessions and/or influence or authority.
>
>>  Regards,
>> Patrick
>
> Regards, Jk.


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Looking for direction re. the use of the

Dave Scheipers
Hi Brian

I too thought that the Mc and Mac variations gave a clue to either
Scot or Scots-Irish.  What I found was that Mc was just an
abbreviation of Mac.  Of course now, with 'official' documents,
someone's surname has become one or the other.

Within Gramps, I have used the Group As function to bring all the
surnames under the one Mc (Mac) listing. I thought to have it Mac (Mc)
but more names used the Mc variation, or at least more clerks were
lazy and used the Mc variation.

Here is a posting detailing what I mean describing my use of the Group
As function.

https://gramps-project.org/wiki/index.php/Grouping_Surnames

Dave

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 7:31 AM Emyoulation--- via Gramps-users
<[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> The lack of clarity in handling this has been an aggravation for centuries.
>
> I find it annoying the my surname, in addition to the usual variant spellings that affect everyone, has the issue of multiple 'standard' cataloguing & printing handling. This makes scripting searches far more complex.
>
> I'm of a 'McCullough' line. 'Mc' is generally thought of as the Scots-Irish version of Scottish "Mac" or "son of" prefix. Alternately claimed to be indicative of bastardry heritage or merely a bastardized variant.
>
> In America, the standard set of pre-printed name index/sorting tabs/cards actually had a separate "Mc". But I actually found instances of OCD clerk wars fighting over re-filing. One faction filing according to the "it's there, why not use it" pragmatists versus Alphabetizing true-believers that "Mc" isn't part of the alphabet & must never be used.
>
> Likewise, some clerks were sure ”Mc” was an abbreviated "Mac" and filed as though it had been spelt out. Others were equally confident that Mc & Mac were not part of the actual Surname and so alphabetized according to the remainder of the surname.
>
> Meanwhile, the printed variants included using a superscript lower-case 'c', an underlined raised lower case 'c', a lower-case 'c' (even in all caps listings), a space after the 'Mc', no space between, substituting a single apostrophe or space after the 'M' for BOTH 'Mc' & 'Mac'.
>
> Thus, even with something simple, we're compelled to stir in complexity.
>
> -Brian
>
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 5:04, John W. Kitz
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Patrick,
>
> I just stumbled onto these examples: Wilhelm Graf von Limburg und Herr
> zu Broich und Liedberg and Wilhelm Graf von Neuenahr und Herr von
> Bedburg, Rösberg und Limburg.
>
> Which seem to render most of our little discussion void.
>
> The long short of it might just be that there are no clearly defined
> rules, such as in the case of elision, for the use or words such as
> "von" and "zu" in compounded German names.
>
> Maybe there are German natives on this list who'd care to comment on
> this.
>
> Regards, Jk.
>
> On 2019-10-22 12:55, John W. Kitz wrote:
> > Patrick,
> >
> > On 2019-10-22 10:36, Patrick Gerlier wrote:
> >> Le 22/10/2019 à 01:24, John W. Kitz a écrit :
> >>
> >>> Patrick, Jaran, and others,
> >>>
> >>> As for the use of "von" and "zu"; based on what little I have come
> >>> across such names to date, it is my understanding that names or
> >>> additions to names of the form "von <some location>" many times came
> >>> into being when a family member came to be the Lord of a Lordship,
> >>> while additions to names of the form "zu <some location>" may be
> >>> indicative of the expansion of such a Lordship, e.g. as the result
> >>> of what in German is referred to as "Heiratspolitik", something like
> >>> marriage politics in English.
> >>
> >> I don't think so but an advice of an expert in German conventions is
> >> needed.
> >
> > I'm sure you'll have noticed that in the above excerpt from one of my
> > earlier emails on this topic I used various words to indicate a level
> > of uncertainty, simply because I'm not sure. But that was the reason
> > for my initial post on this topic in the first place, as I stated in
> > the subject text "to seek direction regarding the use of (...)".
> >
> > Another explanation that I would deem plausible is that a compounded
> > surname of the form "family name von <some location> zu <some other
> > location>" might have come into being when the Lord of Lordship <some
> > location> lived at <some other location>.
> >
> > In the case of a compounded surname like e.g. "Raitz von Frentz zu
> > Schlenderhan" this may have meant that "<some first name> Raitz" (Lord
> > of, in German: Herr von) "Frentz" (lived at, in German: zu)
> > "Schlenderhan" (Castle).
> >
> > The above example resulting in the name in Gramps being entered
> > comprised of <some first name>, surname: Raitz, origin patrilineal,
> > additional surname: "Frentz", prefixed with "von", origin location,
> > additional surname: "Schlenderhan", prefixed with "zu", origin
> > location.
> >
> >> The reason I don't see "zu" as an extension is the fact I met names of
> >> the from "Schmidt zu Stadt" without mention of a "von Ort" (don't look
> >> for significance in my example Stadt=city, Ort=location). When both
> >> "von" and "zu" are used, they are always associated with "und"=and.
> >
> > I don't understand the logic you are applying here.
> >
> > In the example you provide could the name have come into being because
> > a person named "<some first name> Schmidt" (lived in, in German: zu)
> > "Stadt"?
> >
> > In addition why would you favor treating such a name as one single
> > surname "Schmidt zu Stadt" with the origin set to ma- or patrilineal
> > as opposed to as a compounded surname of the form "Schmidt" (with the
> > origin set to pa- or matrilineal) and "Stadt" prefixed with "zu" with
> > the origin set to location?
> >
> >> As I already mentioned in a previous post, status of the lordship is
> >> different with von/zu. In one case, it is a personal property
> >> (inherited and transmitted), in the other one it is an office bestowed
> >> upon by some superior authority (then why sometimes "Schmidt von und
> >> zu Stadt"?, claiming double authority on the county?).
> >
> > Again I'm not familiar with the example you provide, but for the sake
> > of discussion let's assume a King gave you a Castle that from that
> > point onward became your family's possession that could be passed down
> > to down to your descendants through inheritance for generations to
> > come, provided there were children to which the castle could be left
> > after the current owner passed away.
> >
> > Also for the sake of discussion let's assume that same King at some
> > later point in time gave you the rights to (enforce) some authority
> > over some geographic area outside the land and walls of the castle,
> > which typically also entailed you to be able to use some title. The
> > King may have decided to grant the rights to enforce some form of
> > authority and to use of some title with restrictions, as a result of
> > which these rights may not be transferable to your descendants or only
> > provided certain conditions are met, e.g. these rights may only be
> > transferable to male or female descendants.
> >
> > Could this be an example in which it would be appropriate for you to
> > use both "von" and "zu". I.e. prior to the first act of the King
> > coming into force you went by the name Patrick Schmidt, entered in
> > Gramps as firstname: Patrick, surname: Schmidt, origin: ma- or
> > patrilineal.
> >
> > Following the first act of the King you went by the name Patrick
> > Schmidt zu Castle, entered in Gramps as firstname: Patrick, surname:
> > Schmidt, origin: ma- or patrilineal, second surname: Castle, prefixed
> > with "zu", origin: location.
> >
> > Following the second act of the King you went by the name Patrick
> > Schmidt von/zu Castle, entered in Gramps as firstname: Patrick,
> > surname: Schmidt, origin: ma- or patrilineal, second surname: Castle,
> > prefixed with "von/zu", origin: location.
> >
> > I emphasize that I not an expert in all things concerning German
> > (feudal) names, and am merely writing the above as an IMHO plausible
> > explanation within the context of our discussion on this topic.
> >
> >> Your suggestion of Heiratspolitik is a good track. The husband then
> >> manages his wife's estate but doesn't own it, thus the "zu".
> >
> > I don't know, but doubt if that has anything to do with it. If you
> > were to read the German Wikipedia article on Heiratspolitik
> > (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heiratspolitik), in English sometimes
> > referred to as Marriage of state
> > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_state) or Marriage of
> > convenience (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage_of_convenience),
> > you'll notice that particularly in ancient times marriage was a way to
> > enlarge one's possessions and/or influence or authority.
> >
> >>  Regards,
> >> Patrick
> >
> > Regards, Jk.
>
>
> --
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org
>
> --
> Gramps-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
> https://gramps-project.org


--
Gramps-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gramps-users
https://gramps-project.org
12