Loafer

Loafer (pronounced loh-fer)

(1) A person who loafs about; a lazy idler; a lay-about.

(2) A name for a moccasin-like, laceless, slip-on shoe, worn by both men and women.

(3) In some south-western US dialects, a wolf, especially a grey or timber wolf (often in the compound form “loafer wolf).

1830: The construct was loaf + -er.  Loaf was from the From Middle English lof & laf, from the Old English hlāf (bread, loaf of bread), from the Proto-West Germanic hlaib, from the Proto-Germanic hlaibaz (bread, loaf), of uncertain origin but which may be related to the Old English hlifian (to stand out prominently, tower up). It was cognate with the Scots laif (loaf), the German Laib (loaf), the Swedish lev (loaf), the Russian хлеб (xleb) (bread, loaf) and the Polish chleb (bread).  It was used to mean (1) a block of bread after baking, (2) any solid block of food, such as meat or sugar, (3) a solid block of soap, from which standard bar (or cake) of soap is cut or (4) in cellular automata, a particular still life configuration with seven living cells.  The origin of “use your loaf” meaning “think about it” in Cockney rhyming slang was as a shortened form of “loaf of bread” (ie “use your head”).  The –er suffix was from the Middle English –er & -ere, from the Old English -ere, from the Proto-Germanic -ārijaz, thought most likely to have been borrowed from the Latin –ārius where, as a suffix, it was used to form adjectives from nouns or numerals.  In English, the –er suffix, when added to a verb, created an agent noun: the person or thing that doing the action indicated by the root verb.   The use in English was reinforced by the synonymous but unrelated Old French –or & -eor (the Anglo-Norman variant -our), from the Latin -ātor & -tor, from the primitive Indo-European -tōr.  When appended to a noun, it created the noun denoting an occupation or describing the person whose occupation is the noun.  Loafer & loafing are nouns & verbs, loafed, loafering & loafered are verbs and loaferish is an adjective; the noun plural is loafers.

The use to describe “a lazy idler” was first documented in 1830 as an Americanism which may have been short for landloafer (vagabond), similar (though not necessarily related) to the obsolete nineteenth century German Landläufer (vagabond) or the Dutch landloper.  Etymologists suggest landloafer may have been a partial translation of a circa 1995 loan-translation of the German Landläufer as “land loper” (and may be compared with the dialectal German loofen (to run) and the English landlouper) but this has little support and most regard a more likely connection being the Middle English love, loove, loffinge & looffinge (a remnant, the rest, that which remains or lingers), from Old English lāf (remainder, residue, what is left), which was akin to Scots lave (the rest, remainder), the Old English lǣfan (to let remain, leave behind).  One amusing coincidence was that in Old English hlaf-aeta (household servant) translated literally as “loaf-eater” (ie, one who eats the bread of his master, suggesting the Anglo-Saxons might still have felt the etymological sense of their lord & master as the “loaf-guard”.  The expression "one mustn't despair because one slice has been cut from the loaf" describes a pragmatic reaction to learning one's unmarried daughter has been de-flowered and is said to be of Yiddish origin but no source has ever been cited.  In modern idomatic use, the derived phrases "a slice off a cut loaf is never missed" and "you never miss a slice from a cut loaf" refer to having enjoyed sexual intercourse with someone who is not a virgin, the idea being that once the end of a loaf (the crust) has been removed, it's not immediately obvious how many slices have been cut. 

The loafer is a style, a slip-on shoe which is essentially a slipper designed as an all-weather shoe for outdoor use.  They’re available in a wide range of styles from many manufacturers and this image is just a few of the dozens recently offered by Gucci.  In the old Soviet Union (the USSR; 1922-1991), there were usually two (when available): one for men and one for women, both (sometimes) available in black or brown.

The verb loaf was first documented in 1835 in US English, apparently a back-formation from the earlier loafer and loafed & loafing soon emerged.  The noun in the sense of “an act of loafing” was in use by 1855.  What constitutes loafing is very much something subjective; a student underachieving in Latin might be thought a loafer by a professor of classics but the “hard working, much published” don who in his whole career never lifted anything much heavier than a book would probably be dismissed as “a loafer” by the laborer digging the trench beneath his study.  A “tavern loafer” was one who spent his hours drinking in bars while a “street loafer” was a synonym for a “delinquent who hung about on street corners”.  Loafer as a description of footwear dates from 1937 and it was used of lace-less, slip-on shoes worn on less formal occasions (essentially slippers designed for outdoor use, a popular early version of which was the “penny loafer”, so named because it featured an ornamental slotted leather band across the upper where a coin was often mounted.  The use in some south-western dialects as “loafer” or “loafer wolf” to describe a grey or timber wolf is based on the American Spanish lobo (wolf), reinterpreted as or conflated with loafer (idler).

Rowan Williams (b 1950; Archbishop of Canterbury 2002-2012) admiring Benedict XVI’s (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) red loafers, Lambeth Palace, September 2010.

When in 2013 announced he was resigning the papacy, there was much discussion of what might be the doctrinal or political implications but a few fashionistas also bid farewell to the best-dressed pontiff for probably a century and the one Esquire magazine had named “accessorizer of the year”.  In recent memory, the world had become accustomed to the white-robed John Paul II (1920–2005; pope 1978-2005) who would don colorful garments for ceremonial occasions but never wore them with great élan and eschewed the use of the more elaborate, perhaps influenced by Paul VI (1897-1978; pope 1963-1978) whose reign was marked by a gradual sartorial simplification and he was the last pope to wear the triple tiara which had since the early Middle Ages been a symbol of papal authority; briefly it sat on his head on the day of his coronation before, in an “act of humility”, it was placed on the alter where, symbolically, it has since remained.

The pope and the archbishop discuss the practicalities of cobbling.

Benedict’s pontificate however was eight stylish years, the immaculately tailored white caped cassock (the simar) his core piece of such monochromatic simplicity that it drew attention to the many adornments and accessories he used which included billowing scarlet satin chasubles trimmed with crimson velvet and delicate gold piping and others woven in emerald-green watered silk with a pattern of golden stars.  Much admired also was the mozzetta, a waist-length cape, and the camauro, a red velvet cap with a white fur border that around the world people compared with the usual dress of Santa Claus, X (then known as twitter) quickly fleshing out the history of the Coca-Cola Corporation’s role in creating the “uniform” although there was some exaggeration, the Santa-suit and hat familiar by at least the 1870s although Coca-Cola’s use in advertizing did seem to drive out all colors except red.  On popes however, the red velvet and white fur trim had been around for centuries though it fell from fashion after the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II; 1962-1965) and was thus a novelty when Benedict revived the style.

The pope farewells the archbishop.

Not all (including some cardinals) appreciated the papal bling but what attracted most attention were his bright red loafers, a style of shoe which popes have been depicted wearing since Roman times and the Holy See was forced to issue a statement denying they were hand-crafted by the high-end Italian fashion house Prada.  In their press release, the Vatican’s Press Office reminded the world the red symbolizes martyrdom and the Passion of Christ, the shoes there to signify the pope following in the footsteps of Christ.  Rather than a fashion house, the papal loafers were the work of two Italian artisan cobblers: Adriano Stefanelli and Antonio Arellano and Signor Stefanelli’s connections with the Vatican began when he offered to make shoes for John Paul II after noticing his obvious discomfort during a television broadcast.  Signor Arellano had a longer link with Benedict’s feet, having been his cobbler when, as Joseph Ratzinger, he was the cardinal heading the Inquisition (now called the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF)) and as soon as Benedict’s surprise elevation was announced, he went immediately to his last and made a pair of red loafers for him (he’s an Italian size 42 (a UK 8 & a US 9)).  Upon his resignation, as pope emeritus, he retired the red loafers in favor of three pairs (two burgundy, one brown) which were a gift from a Mexican cobbler: Armando Martin Dueñas.  Pope Francis (b 1936; pope since 2013) has reverted to the austere ways of Vatican II and wears black shoes.

Channeling Benedict: Lindsay Lohan in red loafers, September 2016.

Heresy

Heresy (pronounced her-uh-see)

(1) Opinion or doctrine at variance with the orthodox or accepted doctrine, especially of a church or religious system.

(2) The maintaining of such an opinion or doctrine.

(3) In Roman Catholic canon law, the wilful and persistent rejection of any article of faith by a baptized member of the church.

(4) Dissent, iconoclasm, dissension.

1175–1225: From Middle English heresie from Old French heresie and Late Latin haeresis (school of thought, philosophical sect) derived from the Greek haíresis (act of choosing, derivative of haireîn (to choose)).  Source of the Greek was haireisthai (take, seize), middle voice of hairein (to choose) of unknown origin but likely derived from the primitive ser (to seize), thought also to be the root of both the Hittite šaru and the Welsh herw, both best translated as “booty".  The modern meaning emerged from the use by early Christian writers who used the literal translation from the Latin (sect or doctrine) to convey their disapproval of unorthodox thoughts or ideas.  The Greek word was used in the New Testament in reference to the Sadducees, Pharisees, and even the Christians, as sects of Judaism, but in English bibles it usually is translated as sect.   The meaning "religious belief opposed to the orthodox doctrines of the Church" evolved in Late Latin and was adopted for non-religious use as early as the late fourteenth century.

The Church of England Rejects Heresy Courts Proposal

Lindsay Lohan offering salvation to a heretic, (Machete (2010)).  The revolver is a Smith & Wesson Model 500 (8.38" barrel; .50 Magnum load)

In mid-1999, in a rare moment of clarity, the Church of England flirted, after a gap of one-hundred and fifty years, with the re-introduction of heresy trials to deal with clergy accused of deviation in matters of doctrine or ritual.  The last heresy trial was in 1847, when the Bishop of Exeter (Henry Phillpotts (1778–1869; Anglican Bishop of Exeter 1830-1869) accused the Reverend George Cornelius Gorham (1787–1857) of being unsound on the doctrine of "baptismal regeneration", Mr Gorham not agreeing a person was cleansed of original sin at baptism and born again into Christ.  Although the Court of Arches agreed with the bishop, on appeal, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council overturned the ruling which caused a (very Anglican) controversy about whether a secular court should be able to rule on matters of doctrine (as opposed to law or procedure).  Since then clergy and bishops have been (more or less) free to deviate from doctrine without punishment and the Right Reverend David Jenkins (1925-2016), a former Bishop of Durham (1984-1994), famously raised a few eyebrows when he discussed his heterodoxic view on the virgin birth and bodily resurrection of Christ.  The new disciplinary procedure for clergy was to include offences against "doctrine, ritual and the ceremonial" because those who profess atheism or deny the doctrine of the Trinity or the Incarnation “should be disciplined”.

Heretic crooked Hillary Clinton being burned at the stake (digitally altered image).

Although not as well known as other inquisitions, in England, in the sixteenth century Reformation during the reign of Henry VIII (1491–1547; King of England (and Ireland after 1541) 1509-1547), about 60 heretics were executed.  Heresy laws were repealed in 1547, but reintroduced in 1554 by Mary I (1516–1558; Queen of England and Ireland 1553-1558 & Queen of Spain 1556-1558), under whom about 290 heretics were burned at the stake after the restoration of papal jurisdiction.  Executions of some 180 religious opponents continued under Elizabeth I (1533–1603; Queen of England & Ireland 1558-1603) but on grounds of treason rather than heresy although the offence remained on the books.  To the condemned, it must have seemed a tiresome technical distinction.  The last execution of a "heretic" in England occurred in 1612 although technically that was for the offence of blasphemy.  Puritanical, if not quite to the end but certainly for as long as they could, there was one later execution in Scotland in 1697 when Thomas Aikenhead (circa 1676-1697) was accused, inter alia, of denying the doctrine of the Trinity.  In a example of Scottish judicial modernization, Mr Aikenhead was hanged rather than burned at the stake although they retained blasphemy as a capital offence until 1825. 

Unfortunately, after mulling over things for half-a–decade, the General Synod of the Church of England rejected the revival of a heresy court and didn’t, even more regrettably, consider bringing back burnings at the stake.  It seems there were fears the court could be used to enforce a traditionalist view, targeting clergy, who for example, support same-sex marriages or gay clergy, both now apparently matters of greater theological importance than a belief in the resurrection.  That does seem strange given it’s the central tenet of Christianity but that’s clearly become view from both the General Synod and Lambeth Palace.  In an address to the synod, displaying his flair for simultaneously changing the subject and answering a different question than the one asked, then Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams (b 1950; Archbishop of Canterbury 2002-2012), said it was important for the church “…to be able to speak out against issues like Apartheid.  The question I think we ought to be asking is whether this does or does not serve the integrity or credibility of the church in the long run.  I believe that such a measure can serve the integrity and credibility of the church if we do indeed step back in this way.  It is over twenty years since the World Alliance of Reform Churches declared that the theological justification for Apartheid was a heresy.  It would be, I think a very incredible and inadequate Christian church which did not have the resource to say something like that.”

Pope Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) and Cardinal George Pell (1941-2023) discuss the fate of heretics.

Primate

Primate (pronounced prahy-meyt or prahy-mit)

(1) In the ecclesiastical hierarchy, an archbishop or bishop ranking first among the bishops of a province or country (in this context usually pronounced prahy-mit). Primate is a title or rank bestowed on some archbishops in some Christian churches and can, depending on tradition, denote either jurisdictional authority or mere ceremonial precedence.

(2) In zoology, any of various omnivorous mammals of the order primates (including simians and prosimians), comprising the three suborders anthropoidea (humans, great apes, gibbons, Old World monkeys, and New World monkeys), prosimii (lemurs, loris, and their allies), and tarsioidea (tarsiers), especially distinguished by the use of hands, varied locomotion, and by complex flexible behavior involving a high level of social interaction and cultural adaptability: a large group of baboons is called a congress which, to some, makes perfect sense.

(3) A chief or leader (archaic).

1175-1225: In the sense of "high bishop, preeminent ecclesiastical official of a province" having a certain jurisdiction, as vicar of the pope, over other bishops in his province, primate is from the Middle English primate & primat, from the Old French primat and directly from the Medieval Latin primatem (church primate), a noun use of the Late Latin adjective primas (of the first rank, chief, principal) from primus (first).  The meaning "animal of the biological order including monkeys and humans" is attested from 1876, from the Modern Latin Primates, the order name (linnæus), the plural of the Latin primas; so called for being regarded as the "highest" order of mammals (the category originally included bats, representing the state of thought in biology at the time).

As an adjective, prime dates from the late fourteenth century in the sense of "first, original, first in order of time" from the Old French prime and directly from the Latin primus (first, the first, first part (figuratively "chief, principal; excellent, distinguished, noble") from the Proto-Italic prismos & priisemos, superlative of the primitive Indo-European preis- (before), from the root per (beyond; before; forward), hence the sense "in front of, before, first, chief".  It was the source also of the Italian and Spanish primo and thus a doublet of primo.  The meaning "of fine quality; of the first excellence" is from circa 1400.  The meaning "first in rank, degree, or importance" was first noted in English circa 1610 whereas in mathematics (as in prime number), it wasn’t in the literature until the 1560s.  The prime meridian (the meridian of the earth from which longitude is measured, that of Greenwich, England) was established in 1878.  Prime time which originally was used to describe "spring time" is attested from circa 1500.  The use in broadcasting in the sense of a "peak tuning-in period" dates from 1961.

Some endangered primates.

As a noun prime referred to the "earliest canonical hour of the day" (6 am), from the Old English prim and the Old French prime or directly from the Medieval Latin prima "the first service" from the Latin prima hora (the first hour (of the Roman day)), from the Latin primus ("first, the first, first part").  In classical Latin, the noun uses of the adjective meant "first part, beginning; leading place".  The noun sense "apostrophe-like symbol" exists because the symbol ′ was originally a superscript Roman numeral one.  By extension, "the first division of the day" (6-9 am) was an early-thirteenth century form whereas the sense of "beginning of a period or course of events" is from the late fourteenth.  From the notion of "the period or condition of greatest vigor in life" there came by the 1530s the specific sense "springtime of human life" (taken usually to mean the ages around 21-28 (the division of live in seven-year chunks a noted motif in English) is from the 1590s and at about the same time, prime came to mean "that which is best in quality, highest or most perfect state of anything".

The use as a verb dates from the 1510s, an invention by the military to describe the process (fill, charge, load) required before a musket or other flintlock weapon could be discharged, the assumption being this was derive from the adjective.  From this by circa 1600 evolved the general sense of "perform the first operation on, prepare something for its intended purpose” (applied especially to wood to make ready for painting)".  To prime a pump is noted from 1769 and meant to pour water down the tube to saturate the sucking mechanism which made it draw up water more readily.  This was later adopted in public finance and economics to describe what is now usually called fiscal stimulus (the idea being a little government money attracting more private investment.  The suffix -ate was a word-forming element used in forming nouns from Latin words ending in -ātus, -āta, & -ātum (such as estate, primate & senate).  Those that came to English via French often began with -at, but an -e was added in the fifteenth century or later to indicate the long vowel.  It can also mark adjectives formed from Latin perfect passive participle suffixes of first conjugation verbs -ātus, -āta, & -ātum (such as desolate, moderate & separate).  Again, often they were adopted in Middle English with an –at suffix, the -e appended after circa 1400; a doublet of –ee.

Lindsay Lohan and a large primate, King Kong premiere, Loews E-Walk and AMC Empire 25 Theaters, New York City, December 2005.

The Roman Catholic Church

In the Roman Catholic Church, a Primate is almost always an Archbishop though the title is occasionally bestowed on the (Metropolitan) bishop of an Episcopal see who has precedence over the bishoprics of one or more ecclesiastical provinces of a particular historical, political or cultural area.  Also sometimes created are primates where the title is entirely honorific, granting only precedence in on ceremonial occasions and, in the case of the Polish Primates, the privilege of wearing cardinal's crimson robes (though not the skullcap and biretta).  The Vatican likes the old ways and many primates are vested not in the capitals of countries but in those places which were the centres of the country when first Christianized.  For that reason there still exists the Primate of the Visigothic Kingdom, and the Primate of the Gauls.

Some of the leadership functions once exercised by Primates have now either devolved to presidents of conferences of bishops or to Rome itself.  Modern communications as much as reform of canon law have influenced these developments and most changes were effected between the publication of the Code of Canon Law in 1917 and the late twentieth-century implementation of Vatican II’s more arcane administrative arrangements.  Rome has never seemed quite sure how to deal with England.  Unlike in the secular US, where the Holy See’s grant of precedence to the Archbishop of Baltimore dates from 1848, the Archbishop of Westminster has not been granted the title of Primate of England and Wales but is instead described as that of Chief Metropolitan.  Rome has never exactly defined the implications of that though it has been suggested the position is “…similar to that of the Archbishop of Canterbury.”  Most helpful.

If the position in England remains vague, that of some of the orders is opaque.  The loose structures of the Benedictine Confederation made Pope Leo XIII (1810–1903; pope 1878-1903) exclaim that the Benedictines were ordo sine ordine (an order without order), something about which he subsequently did little.  The Benedictine Abbot Primate resides at Sant'Anselmo in Rome and takes precedence of all other abbots and is granted authority over all matters of discipline, to settle difficulties arising between monasteries, to hold a canonical visitation, exercise a general supervision for the regular observance of monastic discipline.  However, his Primatial powers permit him to act only by virtue of the proper law of the autonomous Benedictine congregations, most of which does not exist.  Charmingly, the Benedictine Order appears still to operate as it’s done for the last few centuries, untroubled by tiresome letters from Rome although other orders have embraced modern ways.  The Confederation of Canons Regular of St Augustine democratically elects an Abbot Primate, though his role, save for prerogative reserve powers, is ceremonial.

The Church of England

Some endangered Primates at the Lambeth Conference, London, 1930.  The once almost exclusively white, male and middle class world of Anglican bishops has in recent decades become increasingly black, evangelical and even female.  It seems likely it may also become increasingly gay.  Although rarely spoken of, it's an open secret the Anglican church in England depends for its operation on its many gay clergy and it may be it will require only the natural processes of generational change for gay bishops to become an accepted thing.  Before that, a state of tolerance or peaceful co-existence may be next step.

Anglican usage styles the bishop who heads an independent church as its primate, though they always hold some other title (archbishop, bishop, or moderator).  In Anglicanism, a primate’s authority is not universally defined; some are executives while others can do little more than preside over conferences or councils and represent the church ceremonially.  However, the when the Anglicans convene a Primates' Meeting, the chief bishop of each of the thirty-eight churches that compose the Anglican Communion acts as its primate, though they may not be that within their own church.  For example, the various United Churches of the sub-continent are represented at the meetings by their moderators though they become primates for the purposes of Anglican conferences.  Primates are thus created for photo-opportunities.

Winds of change: Primates at the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON), Jerusalem, 2018.

In both the Churches of England and Ireland, two bishops have the title of primate: the archbishops of Canterbury and York in England and of Armagh and Dublin in Ireland.  The Archbishop of Canterbury, considered primus inter pares (first among equals) of all the participants, convenes meetings and issues invitations.  The title of primate in the Church of England has no direct relationship with the ex-officio right of twenty-six bishops to sit in the House of Lords; were the church to do away with the title, it would not at all affect the constitutional position.

The Orthodox Church

In the Orthodox Church, a primate is the presiding bishop of an ecclesiastical jurisdiction or region.  Usually, the expression primate refers to the first hierarch of an autocephalous or autonomous Orthodox Church although, less often, it’s used to refer to the ruling bishop of an archdiocese or diocese.  In the first hierarch, the primate is the first among equals of all his brother bishops of the jurisdiction or diocese of which he is first, or primary, hierarch, and he is usually elected by the Holy Synod in which he will serve.  All bishops are equal sacramentally, but the most important administrative tasks are undertaken by the bishop of the most honored diocese.  The primate of an autocephalous church supervises the internal and external welfare of that church and represents it in its relations with other autocephalous Orthodox churches, religious organizations, and secular authorities.  During liturgical services, his name will be mentioned by the other bishops of the autocephalous church and the primate mentions the names of the other heads of autocephalous Orthodox churches at Divine services.

The liturgical duties vary between jurisdictions but, normally, the hierarch is responsible for such tasks as the consecration and distribution of the Holy Chrism and providing the diocesan bishops with the holy relics necessary for the consecration of church altars and holy antimins.  To this may extend other administrative duties including convening and presiding over the meetings of the Holy Synods and other councils, receiving petitions for admission of clergy from other Orthodox churches, initiating the action to fill vacancies in the office of diocesan bishops, and issuing pastoral letters addressed to the bishops, clergy, and laity of the Church.  He will also advise his brother bishops, and when required, submits their cases to the Holy Synod. He has the honor of pastoral initiative and guidance, and, when necessary, the right of pastoral intervention, in all matters concerning the life of the Church within the structure of the holy canons.

Sovereign

Sovereign (pronounced sov-rin (U), sov-er-in (non U) or suhv-rin)

(1) A monarch; a king, queen, or other supreme ruler.

(2) A person who has supreme power or authority.

(3) A group or body of persons or a state having sovereign authority.

(4) A gold coin of the United Kingdom, the value set at 22s 6d in the fifteenth century and re-valued to £1 sterling; it was removed from circulation after 1914.  In UK slang, “sov” (“sovs” the more commonly used plural) endures among certain classes to describe £1 sterling.   

(5) Belonging to or characteristic of a sovereign or sovereign authority; royal.

(6) Supreme; preeminent; indisputable.

(7) In clinical pharmacology, of a medicine or remedy, extremely potent or effective (archaic).

(8) A former Australian gold coin, minted 1855–1931, with a face value of £1 Australian.

(9) A large champagne bottle with the capacity of about 25 liters, equivalent to 33⅓ standard bottles.

(10) Any butterfly of the tribe Nymphalini, or genus Basilarchia, as the ursula and the viceroy.

(11) In regional UK, slang, a large, garish ring.

1250-1300: From the Middle English soverain (alteration by influence of reign) & sovereyn, from the Old French soverain (sovereign, lord, ruler (noun use of the adjective meaning "highest, supreme, chief")) (which exists in modern French as souverain), from the Vulgar Latin superānus (chief, principal (and source also of the Italian soprano & sovrano and the Spanish soberano)) from the classical Latin super (over; above) from the primitive Indo-European uper (over).  The spelling was influenced by folk-etymology association with reign and Milton spelled it sovran, perhaps a nod to the Italian sovrano and scholars caution that though widely accepted, the link to the Vulgar Latin superānus is unattested.  The now obsolete medical sense of “remedies or medicines potent in a high degree" was from the fourteenth century.

In law, there are strands of meaning:  In a constitutional monarchy, a king or queen can be known as the sovereign while the state itself is sovereign and sovereignty is said often to reside in some elected assembly which, being representative of the people, can be said to derive it from them.  The noun sovereignty emerged in the late fourteenth century to designate "pre-eminence".  It was from the Anglo-French sovereynete, from the Old French souverainete, from soverain and referenced "authority, rule, supremacy of power or rank".  The modern meaning as “sovereign state” which is defined literally as "existence as an independent state" is from 1715 and remains an exact meaning, the state of statehood a binary in that a state is either independent (and thus sovereign) or not.  Attempts therefore by sub-state entities like defined regions of federal states to asset sovereignty under the guise of state’s rights are usually doomed to fail either because, like the Australian states, they were non-sovereign colonies prior to federation or have always been part of a larger whole.  That is not to say that powers and authority cannot be shared and some heads of it may exclusively be vested in a sub-national construct but that is a constitutional arrangement within a sovereign state; sovereignty is indivisible.  The concept of “personal sovereignty” invoked by those resisting such thing as COVID-19 related face-mask or vaccine mandates is drawn from the theories of natural law but has no basis in positive law.

Lindsay Lohan, Vanity Fair photo shoot, Marina del Rey, California, October 2010.  The location was the Sovereign, a motor yacht built in 1961 for the film star Judy Garland (1922-1969).

The noun suzerain (sovereign, ruler) dating from 1807, was from French suzerain, from the fourteenth century Old French suzerain (noun use of the adjective meaning "sovereign but not supreme") from the adverb sus (up, above) on analogy of soverain.  The Old French sus is from the Vulgar Latin susum, from the Classical Latin sursum (upward, above), a contraction of subversum, from subvertere.  It was the French suzerain which vested the English sovereign it’s meaning in the political sense.  In international it came to mean a “dominant nation or state that has control over the international affairs of a subservient state which otherwise has domestic autonomy”, a sense similar but different from “client state” or relationships such as those of Moscow to the states of the former Warsaw Pact.  Historically the suzerain was the feudal landowner to whom vassals were forced to pledge allegiance.

In May 1910, European royalty gathered in London for the funeral of Edward VII and among the mourners were nine reigning kings.  This is believed the only photograph ever taken of nine sovereign kings and would be the last gathering of the old European order before the Great War.  The photograph circulated widely in both monochrome and sepia tones and recently has been colorized.  Notable absentees include Tsar Nicholas II of Russia (overthrown in 1917), Victor Emmanuel III of Italy and Emperor Franz Joseph (died in 1916, the dual monarchy abolished and the empire dissolved in 1918) of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.

Standing, left to right: King Haakon VII of Norway, Tsar Ferdinand of the Bulgarians, King Manuel II of Portugal and the Algarve, Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany and Prussia, King George I of the Hellenes and King Albert I of the Belgians.

Seated, left to right: King Alfonso XIII of Spain, King George V of the United Kingdom and King Frederick VIII of Denmark.

Norway – Monarchy still going.

Bulgaria – Monarchy overthrown in 1946.

Portugal – Monarchy overthrown in 1910.

Germany – Monarchy extinct since the act of abdication in 1918.

Greece – Monarchy overthrown in 1924, restored in 1935, overthrown in 1973.

Belgium – Monarchy still going and notably more predictable than the local parliamentary politics in that while it’s often not possible for the politicians to agree on who should be prime-minister, the line of succession to the throne is not disputed.

Spain – Monarchy overthrown in 1931, re-established in 1975 and still going (with the odd scandal).  One quirk of Spanish constitutional history and one about which not all lawyers agree (political scientists and historians finding the arguments either tiresome or amusing) is that despite the proclamation of a republic in 1931, between then and 1975 when the monarchy was said to have been restored, Spain may anyway have continued to be a monarchy because, whatever the outcome on the streets or later Franco's battlefields, there may never have been executed the necessary legal mechanism of dissolution.

When the king (Alfonso XIII 1886–1941; King of Spain 1886-1931) went (with a fair chunk of his nation's exchequer) into exile in 1931, he departed the soil but did not abdicate which most regard of no constitutional significance, the subsequent declaration of the Second Spanish Republic thought sufficient and most agree this abolished both monarchy and kingdom, sovereignty residing with the republican state which General Franco (1892-1975; Caudillo of Spain 1939-1975) took over in 1939.  In curious twist however, in 1947 Franco re-established Spain as a Kingdom which he ruled as head of state of the Kingdom of Spain through the Law of Succession.  A sovereign kingdom thus but without a king on the throne on which, figuratively at least, Franco sat until peacefully he died in 1975.  A king then returned to the kingdom because, again amending the Law of Succession, Franco appointed Alfonso XIII's grandson, Juan Carlos I de Borbón (b 1938; King of Spain 1975-2014, styled Rey Emérito (King Emeritus) since) as his successor and he assumed the throne in 1975, the nature of the new, constitutional monarchy, promulgated in 1978 after a referendum.  Despite the fine technical points raised, most agree Spain was a republic 1931-1947, the kingdom was restored in 1947 and monarchical rule has existed since 1975, its constitutional form assumed in 1978.  Sovereignty was probably vested successively in the republic (1931-1939), Franco personally (1939-1975), Juan Carlos personally 1975-1978 and the Spanish state since.    

United Kingdom – Monarchy still going though not without the odd squabble at the margins.  Although having undergone the occasional change in dynastic management, it has since the ninth century existed continuously except for the uncharacteristic republican interregnum (1649-1660).  Territorially, it has been a shifting jigsaw, comprised of various permutations of all or part of England, Ireland, Scotland & Wales, the odd temporary European augmentation and of course the colonies, territories and Dominions linked to the old British Empire and the still extant Commonwealth.  The relationship between the monarchy and the Commonwealth varies from state to state and even in those independent states where the UK monarch remains the head of state, sovereignty in almost all cases resides wholly somewhere in the local political construct.

Dating from 21 April 1926, a two-part prediction was made by Henry "Chips" Channon (1897-1958), a US born resident of the UK who became a member of parliament (1935-1958) and in his last years, a knight of the realm (although the peerage he coveted eluded him.  In the way of such things, in many ways he became more English than many Englishmen.  On the day of the birth of the future Queen Elizabeth II (1926-2022; Queen of the UK 1952-2022) he noted in his diary that he expected the child to become "Queen of England and perhaps the last sovereign".  Channon thought the Prince of Wales (Prince Edward 1894–1972; briefly (in 1936) King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom & Emperor of India), whom he knew, to be so temperamentally unsuitable for the role of king he would either renounce his claim to the throne or abandon it once crowned.  His first part of the prediction proved accurate although he was diffident about the second and the monarchy has thus fare endured.  Channon's diaries, published in the 1960s (in heavily redacted form) were amusing enough but the (mostly) unexpurgated editions (in three volumes 2021-2022) are as juicy as any published in the past century.

Denmark – Monarchy still going.

That early in the twenty-first century a dozen European nations (Andorra, Belgium, Denmark, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom & Vatican City (the pope the only absolute sovereign and the city-state a theocracy)) remain monarchies would have surprised some.  In 1948, the already embattled (and soon to be overthrown) King Farouk (1920–1965; King of Egypt 1936-1952) gloomily predicted that soon only five kings would remain: "The King of England and the kings of hearts, clubs, diamonds and spades".  While prescient about his own fate, he was wrong in that but while there are certainly fewer than there were, the institution, while on paper a pretty silly basis on which to depend for a head of state, has proved durable in those cases where royal families have been sufficiently adaptable to evolve into reliable ciphers and become frequent, if sometimes unscripted, content providers for pop culture platforms.

End of the Jaguar 3.8 era.  Jim Clark and Jack Sears in the Ford Galaxie 427s ahead of Graham Hill and Roy Salvadori in Jaguar 3.8s, Guards Trophy Race, Brands Hatch, 1963.

A blend of the ancient and modern which characterized much of what Jaguar produced until well into the twenty-first century, the Daimler Sovereign was the final evolution of the Jaguar 2.4, introduced in 1955 as the “small” car of the range and known retrospectively as the Mark 1 after 1959 when a revised model was released as the Mark 2.  The bigger-engined versions of the Mark 2 were the outstanding sports saloons of their day and dominated production car racing until the new generation of fast Fords, the Lotus Cortina, the Mustang and, somewhat improbably, the big Galaxies began to prevail but, as road cars, the power delivered by the 3.8 litre XK-Six was probably close to the limit of the platform’s capability.  This was addressed in 1963 when a version of the more capable independent rear suspension introduced in 1961 on the Mark X and E-Type (XK-E) was grafted to a slightly enlarged structure and released as the S-Type.  The new sophistication was appreciated but the unusual combination of styling techniques was less admired, the front and rear generally felt discordant and tellingly, the Mark 2 was not discontinued and continued to sell well.

1963 Jaguar S-Type 3.8.

The aesthetic objections were noted and in 1966, a new nose, reminiscent of that on the Mark X, was grafted on to the S-Type and the result, while clearly not modernist in the manner of a contemporary like the NSU Ro80, was generally acknowledged to be more harmonious.  The new model, acknowledging the fitment for the first time in the platform of the 4.2 litre XK-Six, was called the 420 and, in a (brief) attempt to create a naming convention with some familial relationship, the big Mark X was re-named 420G and the Mark 2 became the 240 or 340 depending on engine capacity, the 3.8 litre version discontinued although a few were built to special order (albeit still badged as 340s).  Strange as it seems, for a number of reasons, the 240, 340, S-Type and 420 all remained available until all were replaced by the XJ6, introduced in 1968.  Only the 420G received a stay of execution, the flagship lingering until 1970 by which time production had slowed to a trickle.

1968 Daimler Sovereign.

Launched simultaneously in 1966 with the 420 and around 7% more expensive was the Daimler Sovereign.  The Sovereign was essentially the 420 with all the Jaguar’s optional extras fitted as standard, a higher grade of timber and leather for the interior fittings and the traditional details distinguishing the marquee, most notably the elegant fluting atop the grill and the rear number plate valance.  Unfortunately, unlike the earlier Daimler version of the Mark 2 (later named 250 to align with the 240 & 340) which was powered by Daimler’s fine 2.5 litre V8, the Sovereign was mechanically identical to the 420, the opportunity to create something special by using the 4.6 litre version of the V8 not taken, the same mistake which may have doomed the Mark X and 420G to their indifferent sales performance; although excessively large for many markets, a V8 Mark X would have been ideal in the US.  Nonetheless, although nothing more than a fancy Jaguar, it was a success and despite the higher price, Sovereign sales totaled more than six-thousand, the 420 managing only four-thousand odd more.

1967 Daimler Sovereign.

The 420-based Sovereign continued to be offered well into 1969 because the high demand for the XJ6 meant there was not immediately the capacity to produce a Daimler version of the new car.  It was finally retired in 1969 (the last survivor of the platform introduced in 1955) when an XJ6-based Sovereign was released in 2.8 and 4.2 litre versions, notionally replacing the Mark 2-based 250 and the previous Sovereign respectively.  Jaguar continued to use the Sovereign name on the six-cylinder Daimlers until 1983 when they were re-badged simply as “Daimler” although the name would for years be applied to various up-market XJs, especially in overseas markets where others held the trademark to the Daimler name.  When equipped with the Jaguar's 5.3-litre V12, the Sovereign was named Double Six, a revival of a name Daimler used between 1926-1938 for an earlier twelve cylinder model.  The Sovereign name was the choice of the Jaguar board; although the chairman had suggested “Royal” it seemed he was persuaded Sovereign was a better fit.

1976 Daimler Sovereign two door.

Most memorable of the Sovereigns were the elegant coupés offered between 1975-1977; the factory insisting they were a “two door” and not a coupé.  The vinyl-roof, one of the many unfortunate aspects of style which so afflicted the 1970s, attracted criticism even at the time of release, the suspicion being it might have been glued on to hide some rather obviously hasty welding used to create the lovely roofline, a expedient Plymouth adopted in 1970 for the Superbird and Ford Australia repeated on the Landau three years later.  However, it transpired the necessity was not the finish of the sheet metal but the inability of the paints of the era to accommodate the slight flexing of the roof caused by using the same gauge of steel on the pillar-less coupé as the saloon which was a little more rigid.  With the availability of modern paints, many have since taken the opportunity to ditch the vinyl and allow the lovely lines to appear unspoiled.  Being produced under the ownership of British Leyland, predictability, roof-flex wasn’t the only flaw.  The sealing of the frameless windows was never perfected so wind noise is more intrusive than the saloon and, over time, the heavy doors will sag, Jaguar using the same hinges as those which supported the saloon’s smaller, lighter pressings.  

Picture of the sovereign on a 1963 mock-up of the proposed Australian Royal.

Royal as a name seemed not to be popular in other places (although Chrysler did use it for a while and it's applied to a few alcoholic beverages), earlier rejected in the antipodes as the name for a new legal tender.  In early 1963, Robert Menzies (1894–1978; Prime-Minister of Australia 1939-1941 & 1949-1966) had said Australia would adopt a decimal currency and later in the year it was announced its name would be “the royal”.  Said to be the preferred choice of the prime-minister himself, cabinet had been persuaded, presumably because the other suggestions including "kwid", "champ", "deci-mate", "austral" and "emu", were thought worse.  Proving that social media isn’t necessary for public opinion to become quickly known, within days the derision expressed was enough to convince the government to change.  The cabinet documents (released in 1993 under the (then) thirty-year rule) recorded the treasurer telling the cabinet “…royal had been a terrible mistake” and in September, it was announced the pound would be replaced by the Australian dollar; it was introduced on Valentine’s Day 1966.

Currency matters had troubled Menzies before.  He’d been much criticized in 1952 when, upon Elizabeth II’s accession, the inscription FD abruptly was omitted from Australian coins.  FD (Defender of the Faith (the Latin Fidei Defensor (feminine Fidei Defensatrix)), had been in use since 1507 when the title "Protector and Defender of the Christian Faith" was granted by Pope Julius II (1443–1513; pope 1503-1513) to James IV of Scotland (James VI and I (1566–1625) King of Scotland as James VI (1567-1625) & King of England and Ireland as James I (1603-1625)) and had been inscribed on all English (and subsequently UK) coins minted since the Medici Pope Leo X (1475–1521; pope 1513-1521) in 1521 conferred it on Henry VIII (1491–1547; King of England (and Ireland after 1541) 1509-1547).  A grateful Leo had been most impressed by Henry’s book Assertio Septem Sacramentorum (Defense of the Seven Sacraments), a powerful assertion of both the sacramental nature of marriage and the supremacy of the pope, his words at the time celebrated in Rome as the "Henrician Affirmation".  Although Henry would go on to interpret the marriage ritual, papal authority and the defense of the faith in his own way, FD nevertheless remains on the UK's to this day.  There, it is not without constitutional significance, the sovereign, Queen Elizabeth, being supreme governor (ie the titular head) of the Church of England, the nation's established (ie the official state) church.  

A year is a long time in politics: the 1953 & 1954 Australian florins.

In the Australia of 1952, then a country still marked by the sectarian divide between Catholic and Protestant, there was much outrage, Anglicans calling it an affront to Her Majesty and their church and nothing but a cynical ploy by a (Presbyterian) prime-minister to curry favor with Roman Catholics in search of their votes.  Surprisingly to some, prominent among the affronted was the former high court judge, Dr HV Evatt (1894–1965; leader of the opposition 1951-1960) who, although condemned by the right-wing fanatics of the day as the “arch defender of the godless atheistic communists” was a staunch Anglican who proved a doughty opponent of the change.  It at the time was quite a furore with questions in parliament, strident editorials, letters (of outrage) to the editor (the social media of the era) and ecclesiastical denouncements from a number of reverend and very reverend gentlemen.  Menzies relented and intervened personally to ensure the mint secured Fidei Defensor dies in time for a commemorative florin (the modern 20c coin, then often referred to as "two bob") to be struck for the 1954 royal visit.