GEN-ROYAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-ROYAL > 1999-12 > 0944744667


From: "Guy Stair Sainty" <>
Subject: Re: von und zu
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 08:04:27 -0500


----- Original Message -----
From: Glenn A. Steinberg <>
To: <>
Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 10:18 PM
Subject: Re: von und zu


> wrote:
>
> > << generally, "von" is used in the meaning "from", while "zu" can be
treated
> > as "of" ie. it indicates present holding of the manor/estate/territory.
>>
> >
> > Essentially correct, but in the meantime, and especially since the
debacle of
> > WW2, there are families and/or branches of families that make use of the
"zu"
> > while no longer having possession of the estate or territory they were
formerly
> > "zu" of.
>
> But I'm still curious. Why then is the King of Prussia referred to as
"König von
> Preussen"? Shouldn't he be referred to as "König zu Preussen"? And why
does
> Isenburg's Stammtafeln refer to everyone as "von" rather than "zu" -- even
for
> royalty and nobility that clearly very much held the the relevant
> territory/manor/estate during their lives?

Because as King he is merely ruler, not owner of the land. The "zu" denotes
actual ownership of the territory in question. The Liechtensteins, for
example, actually owned a susbtantial portion of the principality. The
families that perpetuated the use of the title, often after selling the
property, could argue their claim to do so on the basis that the law on
names and titles of 1919 required that each person take the title of their
father as the name.

This thread: