Talk:Heinrich von Veldeke

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Heinrich von Veldeke[edit]

This article is called Heinrich von Veldeke (the German version of his name) while the poet's given name is Heinric (or modern: Henderik) van Veldeke (not von). Also in scholarly works his name is usually referred to as Hendrik van Veldeke, for instance in A Literary History of the Low Countries, on page 8 he is referred to as Hendrik van Veldeke all the time. https://books.google.nl/books?id=N1SgcVffQ_MC&pg=PA8&dq=hendrik+van+veldeke&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiz-oGCtIXNAhWEuRQKHa9GBHg4FBDoAQghMAI#v=onepage&q=hendrik%20van%20veldeke&f=false

Also in An Introduction to Middle Dutch in Chapter 4 the authors speak only of Hendrik van Veldeke: https://books.google.nl/books?id=vTO55_qF5bgC&pg=PA34&dq=hendrik+van+veldeke&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiz-oGCtIXNAhWEuRQKHa9GBHg4FBDoAQgvMAU#v=onepage&q=hendrik%20van%20veldeke&f=false

Same goes for Medieval Dutch Literature in Its European Context: https://books.google.nl/books?id=jCsCVly3IQoC&pg=PA304&dq=hendrik+van+veldeke&hl=nl&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiM59X7tYXNAhXHuRQKHUtqBqY4FBDoAQg_MAg#v=onepage&q=hendrik%20van%20veldeke&f=false

As a matter of fact, there's not a single scholarly work in the English language that I could find where the authors refer to Hendrik van Veldeke in the German equivalent.

Could someone please change the title of the article since it's clearly wrong and it suggests Hendrik's native language (by birth) was German, which is absolutely not true. C.Gesualdo (talk) 23:09, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

First of all, you changed his name in bold at the top of the article, but the way you changed it gives him two Dutch names (i.e. "Hendrik van Veldeke (aka: He(y)nric van Veldeke(n), Dutch Hendrik van Veldeke"). If you must make bold changes, at least change the second one to the German version. Second, there is an entire section of this article devoted to his name, and if you read it, you'll see evidence that although English language scholars are split on the subject, most of them prefer the German name. If you couldn't find any sources that use the German name in your search of Google.NL, that's your problem. After all, Google Books is not the only source in the world. Try checking a library. – PeeJay 15:44, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Lol! I wonder how many books on Dutch literature (or Van Veldeke) you have (or read). In any case, he came from Belgium, from a Dutch speaking area. His native language was Dutch, so in that light there's no reason to refer to him with the German version of his name. Secondly, this sentence is complete nonsense: 'the form "Heinrich von" is more commonly encountered in English', as works on Dutch literature refer to him as Hendrik van Veldeke and works on German literature to Heinrich Von. This is of course logical since you're writing on a poet who is referred to in a particular way. But why favor the German way over the Dutch? Like I said, he was born in Belgium and his mother tongue was Dutch. Why refer to his name by any other language then his original name? C.Gesualdo (talk) 16:02, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps the majority of scholarly literature on this individual is written from the German perspective. If German sources outnumber Dutch and Belgian sources, those are the ones that take primacy here. And besides, the dude lived in the 12th century, when borders were far more poorly defined; his place of birth may be in Belgium these days, but where it was back then would have been an entirely different country altogether. – PeeJay 16:59, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Where did I say that his place of birth is the point? My point was that his place of birth was in a LANGUAGE AREA that was DUTCH and not German! It's for that reason relevant that he was born in modern day Belgium, because the language that they spoke there was Dutch. Why then refer to 'the dude' with a German name? Because German scholars wrote more on his work? Is that the argument? Give me a break. Apart from the fact that it's logical that there is more German literature on his work because the German language is simply far bigger, it's of course complete nonsense to take the amount of scholarly work as a criterion to refer to a person. The point is: he was born in a Dutch language area & wrote his first poems in Dutch, it's therefore ridiculous to refer to him as Heinrich von Veldeke. What a nonsense! C.Gesualdo (talk) 22:03, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Whatever your opinion is, you're going to have to find a consensus for these changes before you implement them in the article. – PeeJay 22:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
The same goes for you. I gave you arguments & sources. The only thing you have is your big mouth. C.Gesualdo (talk) 23:52, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Until you find a consensus, the status quo should remain. If you revert again, I will report you for edit warring and disruptive editing. – PeeJay 10:10, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I had meant to get back to this discussion earlier, but got side-tracked by other matters. As has at least been admitted, one of the claimed starting points for the change is flat out wrong. It is self-evidently the case for anyone who cares to look that most scholarly wrtiting about HvV refers to him as Heinrich. There are even English-language articles in the Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik which refer to him as Heinrich - the Dutch editors of that journal clearly do not see a need to "correct" it to a Dutch form. The overwhelming majority of non-experts who consult this article will be familiar only with the German form of his name.

Regardless of where he was born, the fact is that he worked for a significant part of his life for German-speaking patrons and his major work was published under the name of Heinrich. If you notice, most writers are listed on WP under the name on their major published works, not on their birth or baptismal name. The suggestion that it is "ridiculous" for the "J.K.Rowling" article to be called that rather than "Joanne Rowling" shows how vacuous this argument is. Irish writers who published mainly in English don't get covered in WP under the Irish form of their name, hoever well attested. Whatever his parents called him, Veldeke provably worked under the name Heinrich von Veldeke, and it cannot be wrong to to refer to him as such.

There is also the fact that those who insist on a Dutch form of his name, can't seem to make up their mind on what it should be, Henryc, Henryk, Hendryk. He does not name himself in the text of Servatius, so evidence for the Dutch form of his name, as far as I can see, goes back no further than the compiler of the earliest complete Servatius manuscript in about 1470, who spells it Heynrijck - why is this not the correct form for those who insist on Dutch? The German form of his name is attested as early as the start of the 13th century (i.e. within 20 years of his death) and, more to the point, in the writings of one of his literary contemporaries, Gottfied, and in the earliest surviving MSS of his work.

I'm with PeeJay2K3 on this: any further changes not supported by concensus are to be treated as deliberate breaches of WP policy. --Pfold (talk) 10:38, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I completely disagree with you. First of all, you're wrong when you say that 'his major work was published under the name of Heinrich.' 'Publishing' with regard to medieval literature is of course very controversial, since medieval literature is relying on manuscripts. However, most of his major works, that's to say: his poems, the life of St. Servatius and even the Eenasroman were written in a Dutch language; his native language. Secondly, you wrote: 'he worked for a significant part of his life for German-speaking patrons'. Apart from the fact that this is not very relevant if he wrote most of his works in a Dutch language, most of the people who resided at for instance the court of Kleef spoke Dutch probably better than German. But apart from that, it's also simply not true: nobody knows where Van Veldeke exactly worked. We know he wrote his early poems and the Servatius in Maastricht and we know that he eventually visited some places in Germany. But when? For how long? Nobody knows. The translations (!) of virtually all of his works in German suggest that he never really was a German, let alone a German poet in the sense that it was his first language. Finally, there was no definitive way of writing names in the middle-ages. For instance, William Langland's name is in some manuscripts written as: Willielmi de Langlond. Nevertheless everyone refers to him with the modern spelling: William Langland. Everybody today in Belgium and the Netherlands writes Hendrik van Veldeke, also in scholarly literature. The Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik is exactly what I already talked about: German scholarly work on Van Veldeke of course refer to him as Heinrich von Veldeke. But that wasn't his native name and that's not how Dutch and even English literature is referring to Van Veldeke! Also this sentence is wrong on so many levels: 'Veldeke provably worked under the name Heinrich von Veldeke, and it cannot be wrong to to refer to him as such'. The fact that you marked 'worked' already suggests that you know very well that these poets weren't 'working' under names as we know it today. You're projecting modern elements of writing on medieval literature. Van Veldeke didn't 'worked' under a specific name, so it makes no sense to change his name in his native language to a German one. C.Gesualdo (talk) 18:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
You keep repeating the same argument, and are getting nowhere. Time to move on. --Pfold (talk) 00:04, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Have you got problems reading? Or is it just too painful to admit that you're wrong? First of all, I was not repeating my arguments, I was explaining them to you. And secondly, I was predominantly correcting your erroneous and uninformed arguments. I stated for instance that:
1. In contrast to what you wrote, Van Veldeke wrote his major works in a Dutch language, not a German one.
2. There's absolutely no evidence that Van Veldeke 'worked' under Heinrich von Veldeke. This is something you're completely making up.
3. You're projecting modern writing practices on medieval literature (your comparison with J.K. Rowling is laughable).
4. It's a practice to refer to writers in their native language and there happens to be agreement over the fact that in Belgium and the Netherlands we refer to him as Hendrik van Veldeke, just as in the vast majority of English or Dutch studies on his work.
Give serious arguments or please shut up about it. C.Gesualdo (talk) 20:56, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
No, it's WP practice to follow the normal practice of the language of the article. The overwhelming majority of writing on Veldeke in English calls him Heinrich, a fact you seem unable to accept. Your repeated attempt to insist on a Dutch form are nothing more than breaches against WP:NPOV, some form of misguided nationalism, perhaps. You are the one who's edit warring, you are the one who should shut up - your suggested change has been repeatedly rejected by two other editors. --Pfold (talk) 21:35, 27 July 2016 (UTC)