Molyneux

Molyneux (pronounced mol-un-ewe)

(1) A habitational surname of Norman origin, almost certainly from the town of Moulineaux-sur-Seine, in Normandy.

(2) A variant of the Old French Molineaux (an occupational surname for a miller).

(3) An Anglicized form of the Irish Ó Maol an Mhuaidh (descendant of the follower of the noble).

(4) In law in the state of New York, as the “Molineux Rule”, an evidentiary rule which defines the extent to which a prosecutor may introduce evidence of a defendant’s prior bad acts or crimes, not to show criminal propensity, but to “establish motive, opportunity, intent, common scheme or plan, knowledge, identity or absence of mistake or accident.”

(5) In philosophy, as the “Molyneux Problem”, a thought experiment which asks:”If someone born blind, who has learned to distinguish between a sphere and a cube by touch alone, upon suddenly gaining the power of sight, would they be able to distinguish those objects by sight alone, based on memory of tactile experience?”

Pre 900: The French surname Molyneux was from the Old French and is thought to have been a variant of De Molines or De Moulins, both linked to "Mill" (Molineaux the occupational surname for a miller) although the name is believed to have been habitation and form an unidentified place in France although some genealogists have concluded the de Moulins came from Moulineaux-sur-Seine, near Rouen, Normandy.  Despite the continental origin, the name is also much associated with various branches of the family in England and Ireland, the earliest known references pre-dating the Norman Conquest (1066).  The alternative spelling is Molineux.

The "Molyneux Problem" is named after Irish scientist and politician William Molyneux (1656–1698) who in 1688 sent a letter to the English physician & philosopher John Locke (1632–1704), asking: Could someone who was born blind, and able to distinguish a globe and a cube by touch, be able to immediately distinguish and name these shapes by sight if given the ability to see?  Obviously difficult to test experimentally, the problem prompted one memorable dialogue between Locke and Bishop George Berkeley (1685–1753 (who lent his name, pronounced phonetically to the US university) but it has long intrigued those from many disciplines, notably neurology and psychology, because sight is such a special attribute, the eyes being an outgrowth of the brain; the experience of an adult brain suddenly being required to interpret visual input would be profound and certainly impossible to imagine.  Philosophers since Locke have also pondered the problem because it raises issues such as the relationship between vision and touch and the extent to which some of the most basic components of knowledge (such as shape) can exist at birth or need entirely to be learned or experienced.

The Molineux Rule comes from a decision handed down by the Court of Appeals of New York in the case of People v Molineux (168 NY 264 (1901)).  Molineux had at first instance been convicted of murder in a trial which included evidence relating to his past conduct.  On appeal. the verdict was overturned on the basis that as a general principle: “…in both civil and criminal proceedings, that when evidence of other crimes, wrongs or acts committed by a person is offered for the purpose of raising an inference that the person is likely to have committed the crime charged or the act in issue, the evidence is inadmissible.”  The rationale for that is it creates a constitutional safeguard which acts to protect a defendant from members of a jury forming an assumption the accused had committed the offence with which they were charged because of past conduct which might have included being accused of similar crimes.  Modified sometimes by other precedent or statutes, similar rules of evidentiary exclusion operate in many common law jurisdictions.  It was the Molineux Rule lawyers for former film producer Harvey Weinstein (b 1952) used to have overturned his 2020 conviction for third degree rape.  In a 4:3 ruling, the court held the trial judge made fundamental errors in having “…erroneously admitted testimony of uncharged, alleged prior sexual acts against persons other than the complainants of the underlying crimes because that testimony served no material non-propensity purpose.” and therefore the only “...remedy for these egregious errors is a new trial.”

Harvey Weinstein and others.

Reaction to the decision of the appellate judges was of course swift and the opinion of the “black letter” lawyers was the court was correct because “…we don't want a court system convicting people based on testimony about allegations with which they’ve not been charged.”, added to which such evidence might induce a defendant not to submit to the cross-examination they’d have been prepared to undergo if only matters directly relevant to the charge(s) had been mentioned in court.  Although the Molineux Rule has been operative for well over a century, some did thing it surprising the trial judge was prepare to afford the prosecution such a generous latitude in its interpretation but it should be noted the Court of Appeal divided 4:3 so there was substantial support from the bench that what was admitted as evidence did fall within what are known as the “Molineux exceptions” which permit certain classes of testimony in what is known as “character evidence”.  That relies on the discretion of the judge who must weigh the value of the testimony versus the prejudicial effect it will have on the defendant.  In the majority judgment, the Court of Appeal made clear that in the common law system (so much of which is based on legal precedent), if the trial judge’s decision on admissibility was allowed to stand, there could (and likely would) be far-reaching consequences and their ruling was based on upholding the foundations of our criminal justice system in the opening paragraphs: "Under our system of justice, the accused has a right to be held to account only for the crime charged and, thus, allegations of prior bad acts may not be admitted against them for the sole purpose of establishing their propensity for criminality. It is our solemn duty to diligently guard these rights regardless of the crime charged, the reputation of the accused, or the pressure to convict."

The strict operation of the Molineux Rule (which this ruling will ensure is observed more carefully) does encapsulate much of the core objection to the way courts operate in common law jurisdictions.  The common law first evolved into something recognizable as such in England & Wales after the thirteenth century and it spread around the world as the British Empire grew and that included the American colonies which, after achieving independence in the late eighteenth century as the United States of America, retained the legal inheritance.  The common law courts operate on what is known as the “adversarial system” as opposed to the “inquisitorial system” of the civil system based on the Code Napoléon, introduced in 1804 by Napoleon Bonaparte (1769–1821; leader of the French Republic 1799-1804 & Emperor of the French from 1804-1814 & 1815) and widely used in Europe and the countries of the old French Empire.  The criticism of the adversarial system is that the rules are based on the same principle as many adversarial contests such as football matches where the point of the rules is to ensure the game is decided on the pitch and neither team has any advantage beyond their own skill and application.

That’s admirable in sport but many do criticize court cases being conducted thus, the result at least sometimes being decided by the skill of the advocate and their ability to persuade.  Unlike the inquisitorial system where the object is supposed to be the determination of the truth, in the adversarial system, the truth can be something of an abstraction, the point being to win the case.  In that vein, many find the Molineux Rule strange, based on experience in just about every other aspect of life.  Someone choosing a new car, a bar of chocolate or a box of laundry detergent is likely to base their decision from their knowledge of other products from the same manufacturer, either from personal experience or the result of their research.  Most consumer organizations strongly would advise doing exactly that yet when the same person is sitting on a jury and being asked to decide if an accused is guilty of murder, rape or some other heinous offence, the rules don’t allow them to be told the accused has a history of doing exactly that.  All the jury is allowed to hear is evidence relating only to the matter to be adjudicated.  Under the Molineux Rule there are exceptions which allow “evidence of character” to be introduced but as a general principle, the past is hidden and that does suit the legal industry which is about winning cases.  The legal theorists are of course correct that the restrictions do ensure an accused can’t unfairly be judged by past conduct but for many, rules which seem to put a premium on the contest rather than the truth must seem strange.

Rationale

Rationale (pronounced rash-uh-nal)

(1) The fundamental reason or reasons serving to account for something.

(2) A statement of reasons.

(3) A reasoned exposition of principles, especially one defining the fundamental reasons for a course of action or belief; a justification for action.

(4) A liturgical vestment worn by some Christian bishops of various denominations (now rare), the origin of which is the breastplate worn by Israelite high priests (a translation of λογεῖον (logeîon) or λόγιον (logion) (oracle) in the Septuagint version of Exodus 28)).  The French spelling (rational) of the Latin ratiōnāle was used in Biblical translations.

(5) In engineering, a design rationale is the explicit documentation of the reasons behind decisions made when designing a system; it was once used of what now would be described as a set of parameters.

1650-1660: From the Late Latin ratiōnāle (exposition of principles), nominative singular neuter of ratiōnālis (rational, of reason).  After some early inventiveness, the modern sense "fundamental reason, the rational basis or motive of anything" became standardised during the (1680s).  In the nature of such things, many rationales are constructed ex post facto.  Rationale is a noun; the noun plural is rationales or rationalia.

Prince Metternich & Dr Rudd: illustrating rationale & rational

Portrait of Prince Metternich (1822), miniature on card by Friedrich Lieder (1780-1859).

Rationale and rational are sometimes confused.  A rationale is a process variously of explanation, reason or justification of something that need not be at all rational (although many fashioned ex post facto are re-formulated thus).  To be rational, something must make sense and be capable of being understood by the orthodox, accepted methods of the time.  That something may subsequently be shown to be irrational does not mean it did not at some time appear rational; one can construct a rationale for even something irrational.  To construct a post-Napoleonic Europe, Prince Metternich (Prince Klemens of Metternich-Winneburg zu Beilstein (1773–1859); foreign minister of the Austrian Empire 1809-1848 & chancellor 1821-1848) built a rationale for the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815) that was well understood.  It was vision of a Europe, divided between the great powers, in which was maintained a perpetual balance of power which would ensure peace.  That in the two centuries since, the Congress has attached much criticism, largely for imposing a stultifying air of reaction on the continent, does not render the structure irrational nor detract from Metternich’s rationale.  Some historians have come to regard the congress more fondly and while it’s not true the consequence was a century of peace in Europe, it created a framework which meant a good number of decades in that time were notably less blood-soaked than what came before and certainly what followed.

Dr Rudd at the ceremony to be conferred DPhil, University of Oxford, September, 2022.

By 2009, Kevin Rudd ((b 1957); Prime Minister of Australia 2007-2010 & June-September 2013), having realised being prime-minister was a squandering of intellectual talent, embarked on a re-design of relationships in the Asia-Pacific, structured in a way to suit what was self-evidently obvious: he should assume regional leadership.  These things do happen when folk get carried away.  Not discouraged by the restrained enthusiasm for his good idea, Mr Rudd penned one of his wordy rationales which, to him, must have sounded rational but less impressed was just about everybody else in the region including his own cabinet and it’s difficult to recall any hint of interest from other countries.  Mr Rudd quibbled a bit, claiming his use of the word community was just diplomatic shorthand and he wasn’t suggesting anything like what the EU ever was or had become but just better way of discussing problems.  Anyway, it for a while gave him a chance to use phrases like “ongoing and continuing discussions” and “regional and sub-regional architecture” so there was that.  By 2010 the idea had been allowed quietly to die and he had more pressing problems.

Attaining the premiership was Rudd’s mistake.  Had he never achieved to position he’d probably be spoken of as “the best prime-minister Australia never had” but instead he’s among those (and of late there have been a few) remembered as the Roman historian Tacitus (circa 56–circa 120) in the first volume of his Histories (circa 100) wrote of Galba (3 BC–AD 69; Roman Emperor 68-69): "...omnium consensu capax imperii nisi imperasset" (everyone would have agreed he was qualified for governing if he had not held the office).  His background was as a senior public servant who provided advice to others so they could make decisions and he enjoyed a solid career which was clearly well-suited to his skills.  Unfortunately, when occupying the highest political office in the land, he proved indecisive and too often inclined to refer to committees matters which he should have insisted came to cabinet with the necessary documents.  His other character flaw was he seemed unable to understand there was a difference between “leadership” and “command”, unable to realise there was a difference between the structured hierarchy of the public service and the swirling clatter of politics.  His career in The Lodge (the prime-minister’s official residence in Canberra) can be recalled as the Italian historian and politician Francesco Guicciardini (1483–1540) noted of Pope Clement VII (1478–1534; pope 1523-1534): “…knowledgeable and effective as a  subordinate, he fell victim when in charged to timidity, perplexity and habitual irresolution.”  With that, the Italian writer Piero Vettori (1499–1585) concurred, writing: “From a great and renowned cardinal, he was transformed into a little and despised pope”, a sentiment familiar in the phrase repeated in militaries around the world (outstanding major; average colonel; lousy general) to describe that truism in organizational behaviour: “Everyone gets promoted to their own level of incompetence”.

That aphorism was from The Peter Principle (1970), written by Raymond Hull (1919–1985) and based on the research of Laurence Peter (1919–1990), the idea being someone who proves successful in one role will be promoted and if competent there, they will be promoted again.  However, should they fail, within the hierarchy, that is the point of their incompetence, the implication being that the tendency is, as time passes, more and more positions within a corporation will be filled by the incompetent.  The exceptions of course are (1) those competent souls who for whatever reason decline promotion and (2) the habitually successful who will in theory continue to be promoted until they reach the top and, if they prove competent there, this results in the paradox of the typical corporation being run by someone competent but staffed substantially by the incompetent.  In politics, reaching the top means becoming prime-minister, president or some similar office and as Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) described it: "...if he trips he must be sustained. If he makes mistakes they must be covered. If he sleeps he must not wantonly be disturbed. If he is no good he must be poleaxed.  In one of the more amusing recent episodes in politics, the Australian Labor Party (ALP) decided Dr Rudd had been promoted to the relevant point and poleaxed him, a back-stabbing which remains one of the best organized and executed seen in years.  Subsequently, the party concluded his replacement was even more of a dud and restored Dr Rudd to the job, a second coming which lasted but a few months but that was long enough for him to revenge himself upon the hatchet men responsible for his downfall so there was that.       

Still, after his political career (which can be thought a success because he did did reach the top of the “greasy pole” and the delivered the ALP a handsome election victory although their gratitude was short-lived (a general tendency in democracies noted (sometimes gleefully) by many political scientists)) he has been busy, even if the secretary-generalship of the United Nations (UN) (an office which is an irresistible lure for a certain type) proved elusive.  Recently he became Dr Rudd, awarded Doctorate of Philosophy (DPhil) by the University of Oxford.  His 420 page thesis, written over four years, explores the world view of Xi Jinping (b 1953; general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and paramount leader of the People's Republic of China (PRC) since 2013) and the relationship of his ideology to both the direction taken by the CCP and the links with the thoughts (and their consequences) of Chairman Mao (Mao Zedong 1893–1976; chairman of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) 1949-1976).

Dr Rudd says his thesis argues “…there has been a significant change in China’s ideological worldview under Xi Jinping compared with previous ideological orthodoxies under Deng Xiaoping, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao [and summarises] Xi’s worldview as a new form of ‘Marxist-Leninist Nationalism’”.  Dr Rudd says he preferred “Marxist Nationalism” because “the term contains within it three core propositions”: (1) “Xi’s Leninism has taken both the party and Chinese politics in general to the left” (and he defines “left” for these purposes as “…the reassertion of the power of the party over all public policy as well as elevating the position of the individual leader against the rest of collective leadership”), (2) “Xi’s notion of Marxism has similarly taken the centre of gravity of Chinese economic thought to the left” ("left" in this aspect defined as “…a new priority for party-state intervention in the economy, state-owned enterprises over the private sector and a new ideology of greater income equality”) and (3) “Xi has also taken Chinese nationalism to the right (“right” here meaning “a new assertion of Chinese national power as reflected in a new array of nationalist ‘banner terms’ that are now used in the party’s wider ideological discourse.”)  Dr Rudd views these three forces as “…part of a wider reification of the overall role of ideology under Xi Jinping. This has been seen in the fresh application of Marxist Leninist concepts of dialectical materialism, historical materialism, the primary stage of socialism, contradiction and struggle across the range of China’s current domestic and international challenges. The role of nationalism has also been enhanced within Xi’s new ideological framework. This hybrid form of Marxist Nationalist ideology is also being increasingly codified within the unfolding canon of Xi Jinping thought.” 

“Finally, the thesis argues there is a high degree of correlation between these ideological changes on the one hand and changes in the real world of Chinese politics, economic policy and a more assertive foreign policy on the other - including a different approach to Chinese multilateral policy as observed by diplomatic practitioners at the UN in New York.  The thesis concludes these changes in Xi Jinping’s ideological worldview and its impact on Chinese politics and public policy is best explained by a theoretical framework that integrates Authoritarian Resilience Theory, the realist and constructivist insights of the English School of International Relations Theory, and Foreign Policy Analysis.”  Clearly, Dr Rudd thinks the CCP has come a long way since comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) casually dismissed Maoist theory as “ideologically primitive”.

Since March 2023, Dr Rudd has served as Australian Ambassador to the United States, the announcement of the appointment attracting some speculation there may be a secret protocol to the contract, providing for him to report to the prime-minister rather than the foreign minister.  It was mischievous speculation and there has been little but praise for the solid work he has been doing in the Washington embassy.  Dr Rudd’s role attracted headlines in March 2022 when a interview with Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021) was broadcast in which the former president was acquainted (apparently for the first time) with some uncomplimentary assessments Dr Rudd had made of him including describing him “the most destructive president in history” and “a traitor to the West”.

Having doubtless heard and ignored worse over the years, Mr Trump seemed little concerned but did respond in his usual style, observing he didn’t know much about Dr Rudd except he’d heard he was “a little bit nasty” and “not the brightest bulb”, adding “he’d not be there long” if hostile to a second Trump presidency.  Trumpologists analysing these thoughts suggested the mildness of the reaction indicated the matter was unlikely to be pursued were he to return to the Oval Office, noting his habit of tending to ignore or forget about anything except actual threats to his immediate self-interest.  After taking office in 2017, when asked if he would pursue the legal action he’d during the campaign threatened against Bill (b 1946; US president 1993-2001) & crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) (mostly on the basis of crooked Hillary’s crooked crookedness), he quickly brushed it off saying: “No, they’re good people” and moving on.  It’s thought Dr Rudd won't end up in the diplomatic deep-freeze, the most severe version of which is for a host nation to declare a diplomat "persona non grata" (the construct being the Latin persōna (person) + nōn (not) + grāta (from grātus (acceptable)), the consequence of which is an expulsion from the territory and the worst fate he may suffer is not receiving an invitation to a round of golf (something unlikely much to upset him).  Others however should be worried, in a second Trump White House, there will be vengeance.

Like "diplomatic toothache" and "null & void", the phrase "persona non gratia" has become part of general language, the utility being in few words describing what would otherwise take many more.  Impressionistically, it would seem "troubled starlets" are more than most declared "persona non gratia".

Aberrant & Aberration

Aberrant (pronounced uh-ber-uhnt or ab-er-uhnt)

(1) Departing from the normal or usual course.

(2) In zoology & botany, deviating from the ordinary, natural type; an exceptional or abnormal example (which can be applied to an individual specimen or an entire species, in the case of the latter the aberrant point producing a new normative type).

(3) As a moral judgement, straying from the right way; deviating from morality or truth.

1560-1610: From the Latin aberrant (stem of aberrāns), present participle of aberrāre (to deviate), present active participle of aberrō (go astray; err), the construct being ab- (from) + errō (to wander).  The word was rare prior to the mid-nineteenth century when it became widely used in botany and zoology to describe any example deviating from the ordinary or natural type in the sense of producing something exceptional or abnormal and the seminal text in this context is of course Charles Darwin’s (1809-1882) On the Origin of Species (1859) although he and others had previously published work in this vein: “The more aberrant any form is, the greater must have been the number of connecting forms which, on my theory, have been exterminated.”  Despite the origins of the construct in Latin seeming to suggest something associated with “error”, and that does appear to have been the flavor of the original sixteenth century sense, it was always possible for the word to be used as a neutral descriptor (something differing from the norm).  Certainly, in zoology & botany, something aberrant was merely something different and of necessity there was no notion of good or bad although that certainly could be ascribed.

It was by the mid-eighteenth century that the notion of the “aberrant” became so associated with “aberrant sexual conduct” (especially homosexuality), lending the word a loading which it carries to this day and as an expression of disapprobation based on moral or religious constructs, the synonym most often appropriate in this is “deviant” (from that defined as normative) and it’s often used in conjunction with “abhorrent” or “abomination” which carries some Old Testament baggage.  Essentially, when borrowed by the moralists from the scientists, it came to mean “deviating from morality or truth”, that somewhat removed from a shrub known for its red flowers beginning to yield purple.  In some uses it is definitely neutral such as astronomy where it describes behaviour which is novel, unexpected or unique.  The synonyms (and these vary in utility according to context) historically included strange, abnormal, atypical exceptional, bizarre, different, odd, unusual, and later devious, errant, immoral, psycho, weird, deviant, flaky, mental, peculiar & queer (in senses both ancient & modern).  Aberrant is a noun & adjective, aberrance & aberrancy are adjectives and aberrantly is an adverb; the noun plural is aberrant.

Lindsay Lohan and her lawyer in court, Los Angeles, December 2011.

Aberration (pronounced ab-uh-rey-shun)

(1) The act of departing from the right, normal, or usual course.

(2) The act of deviating from the ordinary, usual, or normal type.

(3) Mental irregularity or disorder, especially of a minor or temporary nature; lapse from a sound mental state.  Most often associated in the literature with wandering; deviation and divergence.

(4) In astronomy, the apparent displacement of a celestial body due to the (5) finite speed of light and the motion of the observer with the earth.

(6) In optics, any disturbance of the rays of a pencil of light such that they can no longer be brought to sharp focus or form clear images.

(7) In photography, a defect in a camera lens or lens system, due to flaws in design, material, or construction, that can distort the image.  These are usually classified into spherical and chromatic aberrations.

1585-1595; From Late Latin aberrātiōn (stem of aberrātiō) from the Classical Latin aberrationem (nominative aberratio) and equivalent to aberrātus, noun of action from past-participle stem of aberrāre.  The meaning in Latin appears never to have shifted from a literal “wandering or straying or losing one’s way”, no figurative flourishes ever found in surviving texts.  The modern meaning in English (deviation from normative types) was in use by at least 1846.  Aberration is a noun; the verb aberrate is rare to the point of being almost unused.  Aberration & aberrationality are nouns, aberrate & aberrating are verbs, aberrational is an adjective, aberrated is an adjective & verb and aberrationally is an adverb; the noun plural is aberrations.  Except in scientific use, the verbs aberrate & aberrating are rare while abberated remains in occasional use

Until the release Broken English (1979), Marianne Faithfull’s discography had been a predictable pastiche of any number of “girl” singers of the 1960s, the music rarely original, usually melodic and pleasing but never with an arrangement which could suggest her voice could be called “interpretative”.  Faithless (1978, a repackaged re-release of Dreamin' My Dreams (1976)) was representative of her output, being inoffensive and unmemorable but Broken English was so startlingly different that some reviewers assumed it was a kind of aberration.  Subsequent material however confirmed there had been a change of direction, her troubled years resulting in a voice which was described usually as “gin soaked” and the repertoire selected to suit.  Thought aberrant at the time, Broken English proved no aberration. 

Sir Billy Snedden (1926–1987) who, at 61, breathed his last in a Travelodge at Sydney's Rushcutters Bay, in the company of a somewhat younger woman who was his son’s ex-girlfriend, an event recorded on what was perhaps the Melbourne Truth's most memorable front page.  Remarkably, despite decades of speculation, her identity has never publicly been confirmed but it's thought Sir Billy's last liaison was something habitual rather than a temporary aberration.

Politicians like the word aberration because it’s an abstract way of suggesting something “really didn’t happen” and if it did it was someone else’s fault.  When the Labor Party won the 1972 Australian general election after having spent 23 years in opposition, one of the head-kickers from the ousted Liberal Party suggested it was “a temporary aberration” and once this unfortunate filing error was fixed, things would get back to normal.  That theory needed some nuancing when the Liberals, although making some gains, failed to win the next election in 1974, the revised opinion now it was “a temporary aberration by the voters in Sydney & Melbourne”.  That comment attracted some wry comment about “politicians in denial” but the Liberals seemed to have a point when, in 1975, the two big cities also realised their mistake, the Labor administration swept from office in a landslide, an election in which, uniquely, every seat swung against the government.  There were special circumstances surrounding the 1975 election, just as there had been an unusual conjunction of electoral conditions between 1949-1972 when Labor endured their long stint in opposition.  However, the comment which attracted the most derision in the second “aberration” election was that of the Liberal leader Sir Billy Snedden who, after pondering the results, announced: “We didn’t lose the election; we just didn’t get enough seats to win”.  There was much laughter at that but actually, up to a point, Snedden had a point because there have been a number of elections where the losers gained more votes that the winners including the UK in 1951, Australia in 1961 and of course, Crooked Hillary Clinton in 2016.

Axiomatic

Axiomatic (pronounced ak-see-uh-mat-ik)

(1) Of or pertaining to the nature of an axiom.

(2) That which is self-evident or unquestionable; the obvious.

(3) Containing maxims; aphoristic.

(4) In formal logic (or any logical system), as axiomatic system, a set of axioms from which theorems can be derived by the application of by transformation rules.

(5) In mathematics, relating to or containing axioms (now less common).

1797: From the Ancient Greek ἀξιωματικός (axiōmatikós), from ἀξίωμα ((axíōma), genitive axiomatos) (a self-evident principle), the construct being axiōmat (stem of axíōma) + the suffix ikos (and the related ic).  The now less common form axiomatical was known as early as the 1580s.  The ikos suffix was from κός (kós) with an added i, from i-stems such as φυσι-κός (phusi-kós) (natural), through the same process by which ῑ́της (ī́tēs) developed from της (tēs), occurring in some original case and later used freely.  It was cognate with the Latin icus and the Proto-Germanic igaz, from which came Old English iġ (which in Modern English ultimately was resolved as y), the Old High German ig and the Gothic eigs.  The ic suffix forms adjectives from other parts of speech.  It occurred originally in Greek and Latin loanwords (metallic; poetic; archaic; public et al) and, on this model, was used as an adjective-forming suffix with the particular sense of “having some characteristics of”, as opposed to the simple attributive use of the base noun (balletic; sophomoric et al), “in the style of” (Byronic; Miltonic et al), or “pertaining to a family of peoples or languages” (Finnic; Semitic; Turkic).  The -ic suffix was from the Middle English -ik, from the Old French -ique, from the Latin -icus, from the primitive Indo-European -kos & -ḱos, formed with the i-stem suffix -i- and the adjectival suffix -kos & -ḱos.  The form existed also in the Ancient Greek as -ικός (-ikós), in Sanskrit as -इक (-ika) and the Old Church Slavonic as -ъкъ (-ŭkŭ); A doublet of -y.  In European languages, adding -kos to noun stems carried the meaning "characteristic of, like, typical, pertaining to" while on adjectival stems it acted emphatically; in English it's always been used to form adjectives from nouns with the meaning “of or pertaining to”.  A precise technical use exists in physical chemistry where it's used to denote certain chemical compounds in which a specified chemical element has a higher oxidation number than in the equivalent compound whose name ends in the suffix -ous; (eg sulphuric acid (H₂SO₄) has more oxygen atoms per molecule than sulphurous acid (H₂SO₃).  Axiomatic & axiomatical are adjectives, axiomatize & axiomatize are verbs and axiomatically is an adverb.  Clumsy forms (sometimes hyphenated) like nonaxiomatic & unaxiomatic are created as required.

In mathematics (notably in including geometry, algebra, and set theory), an axiomatic system (“deductive system” or “formal system” seem to be the more fashionable terms) is a set of axioms or postulates, which, coupled with rules of inference, can be used to derive theorems or statements from those axioms.  In mathematics, there are collections of equations which can be used to document the processes but in any form of applied logic these systems provide a rigorous foundation for reasoning and proof, using what can be reduced to a mathematical process.  In axiomatic systems, axioms are assumed to be true without proof and the rules of inference are used to derive new statements from the axioms; theorems derived from the axioms are then considered to be true, based on the validity of the axioms and the rules of inference.

Axiomatic: If crooked Hillary Clinton is using a cell phone, she will be deleting something.

In the discipline of philosophy, even those parts which are not inherently mathematical (such as formal logic), the axiomatic system works in a similar way in that a statement, proposition, or principle that is considered self-evident or universally accepted without needing to be proven.  Axioms are thus often used as the starting point for logical reasoning or the foundation upon which a system of thought or theory is built, assumed to be true and are not subject to further analysis or questioning within the context of the system they are part of.  There are a number of highly technical rules which define whether a axiomatic system can be described as “consistent” but that means that within its own terms it contains nothing contradictory.  In other words, from the elements of any axiomatic system, it’s not possible to be either proven or disproven. This differs from one labeled “independent” in that that status is defined by them not being proven or disproven from other axioms in the system.  An axiomatic system is labeled “complete” if for every statement, either itself or its negation is derivable from the system's axioms (implicit in which is that every statement is capable of being proven true or false).

Not axiomatic: The real Lindsay Lohan and Take Two Interactive’s alleged doppelganger in Grand Theft Auto V (GTA5).

Lawyers too like the word “axiomatic”, possibly because concepts like “foreseeability” and “causation” are such an essential part of their training.  The use though exists within different parameters to that of mathematics.  In Lindsay Lohan vs Take Two Interactive Software Inc et al (APL-2017—00027 and APL-2017-00028 (November 2017)), the New York Court of Appeals held that a certain section of an act “categorically excludes works of fiction, a protected category of expression beyond the narrow scope of the statutory phrases advertising and trade”, noting the US Supreme Court (USSC) had “reversed course to recognize First Amendment protections for fiction”.  The Court of Appeal explained that after the USSC “limited Section 51 claims for fictionalization” to factual works that place persons in a false light, subsequent case law both isolated the commercial interest protected by the right of publicity and recognized “the right of publicity does not attach” where “it is evident to the public that the events so depicted are fictitious.”  The judgment noted with approval the decision of the California Supreme Court which “famously” recognized fiction writers may “more persuasively be able to more accurately express themselves by weaving into the tale persons or events familiar to their readers”, adding “correctly”, that “the choice is theirs”.  “This categorical protection is now axiomatic”.  Once can see what the judges meant and of course they were correct but what can be held to be “axiomatic” in law can differ from the same thing in mathematics because in the world of numbers, there is no superior court able to rule 2+2=5.  Their position is more akin to the philosophers who for centuries until 1697 could regard as inviolate the axiom to “all swans are white and all non-white birds are not swans”.

Crossbody

Crossbody (pronounced kraws-bod-ee or kros‐bod-ee)

(1) Of or noting a type of bag, distinguished by a long shoulder strap intended to be worn diagonally across the body.  A crossbody purse or crossbody wallet is a variation on the theme.

(2) In professional (ie choreographed) wrestling, a term covering several aerial moves in which one competitor launches themselves from a height (sometimes using the ring’s ropes or corner-posts to gain altitude) landing horizontally or diagonally across their (often already) prostrate opponent's torso, forcing them to the mat if they were standing.

Early 1950s: The construct was cross + body.  As a prefix, cross was from the Middle English cros- & crosse- (relating to a cross, forming a cross, in the shape of a cross or “X”), developed from the noun and influenced by “across”.  Body (the spelling bodie is long obsolete) was from the Middle English bodi & bodiȝ, from the Old English bodiġ (body, trunk, chest, torso, height, stature), from the Proto-West Germanic bodag (body, trunk), from the primitive Indo-European bhewd (to be awake, observe).  It was cognate with the Old High German botah from which the Swabian gained Bottich (body, torso).  Although as late as the sixteenth century, “body” was used in the now archaic sense of the “section of a dress or gown extending from the neck to the waist but excluding the arms” the idea of the crossbody was a reference always to “the body” in the sense of the physical structure of a human form, in this case the torso, the line extending from a shoulder to around the opposite hip.  The alternative spelling is cross–body.  Crossbody is a noun & adjective; the noun plural is crossbodies.

The cross-prefix has widely been used for similar or analogous purposes such as the crossbow, (an early, mechanized version of the bow and arrow), the cross-bolt (a means of adding additional structural rigidity to the main bearings in an internal combustion engine by adding locating bolts at a 90^o angle to those mounted vertically) and cross-purposes (a conversation in which two or more are talking while misunderstanding each other's plans, intentions or meanings) and the cross-stitch (in needlework or embroidery, a double-stitch which forms a cross.  Many other uses such as cross-country, cross-dresser, cross-cultural et al, are different in that they don’t involve the “X” shape or (of necessity) anything in a diagonal.

Bill Clinton & Monica Lewinsky, the White House, February 1997, one of the photographs of the 1990s.

Monica Lewinsky (1973) was the young intern of whom in 1998 Bill Clinton (b 1946; US president 1993-2001) infamously remarked “I did not have sexual relations with that woman… Miss Lewinsky.”  Had that been something said in a county court in a remote flyover state of a consensual encounter between two obscure private citizens, defense counsel may have succeeded in arguing that for there to be “sexual relations” one must have “sex” and what transpired had not crossed the accepted definitional threshold.  In 1998, there probably were still places where such distinctions were maintained but because what happened happened in the White House between the chief magistrate of the United States and an intern a quarter century younger, Monicagate played out.  As presidential scandals go there have certainly been worse and as Harold Macmillan (1894–1986; UK prime-minister 1957-1963) replied when woken in the middle of the night to be told a member of his cabinet was in the midst of an affair with a young lady “with both a present and a past” who was also enjoying the affections of a Soviet spy: “Well at least it was with a woman.”  That the liaisons with the Russian were arranged at the behest of MI5 (the UK's internal security organization) is one of the many details which made the Profumo Affair (John Profumo (1915–2006)) one of the century's juiciest scandals although, some of the files containing "sensitive" information about members of the English establishment remain embargoed until 2046. Even then, few expect to see unredacted papers. 

Bill Clinton and crooked Hillary Clinton, the Hamptons, 2021.

A youthful indiscretion is one thing but an indiscretion with a youth is something else and whether crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) ever forgave her husband only she knows but she didn’t leave him so there was that.  She had her own reasons to stay which may or may not have involved forgiveness but the conventional political wisdom remains that had the US constitution allowed it, Bill Clinton would probably have enjoyed a comfortable victory in the 2000 presidential election so enough of the US population either forgave him or were indifferent in the matter.  Monica Lewinsky fared not as well, being as unprepared for what ensued as just about anyone in her position would have been and it’s remarkable she coped as well as she did.  However, now 50, Ms Lewinsky has survived and in February 2024 emerged as the face of women’s fashion label Reformation’s latest campaign, one focused on corporate workwear and, in concert with vote.org, encouraging women to “use their voice” in the upcoming election and given the extent to which recent court decisions have encouraged an influential faction in the Republican Party to mount further assaults on the rights of women, their vote has the potential to be decisive in contests for both houses of Congress.

Monica Lewinsky's photoshoot for Reformation’s You’ve Got the Power campaign. 

The “You’ve Got the Power” campaign slogan thus has a dual meaning, referencing both the exercise of the franchise and the “power dressing” of the wardrobe (good taste prevailed and no electric blue dresses were featured) although big shoulder pads didn’t make a return which would have disappointed some but the corporate staples red (here described as “scarlet”) and black were prominent.  The range was conservative as befits the target market but seems to have been well-received and serious students of such things especially appreciated the inclusion of an irregular polka-dot in black & white.  Ms Lewinsky certainly looked good and while photographers have tricks to play with lighting and angles, there’s little to suggest much post-production editing was done; she looked a youthful, elegant 50.  One piece which attracted attention was the “Monica” bag which came with both a fitted top-handle and a longer strap, allowing it to be carried on the shoulder or as a crossbody.

Reformation’s "Monica" crossbody bag in black (left) and topo (right).

The Monica crossbody bag is available in topo or black.  Topo is a Spanish word meaning “mole” (both (1) in zoology as the small mammal and (2) in the jargon of espionage a “sleeper agent” who infiltrates an organization, usually to spy) and as a dark brownish-grey colour (ie an approximation of the colour of a mole's skin (hence the familiar "moleskin"), it’s the equivalent of the English taupe, from the French taupe, from the Latin talpa (mole).  In the circumstances, “talpa” presumably was more appealing to the marketing department than “moleskin” although “black” was refreshingly simple.  Reformation’s Monica (as in the crossbody bag) web page recommended the topo hue worked well paired with their “Lysander” dress, available in “selene” (the rather fetching polka-dot) or “midnight” (a dark blue close to navy and far enough removed from the shade of dress Ms Lewinsky made famous not to attract comment).  How fashion houses come up with product names is often mysterious.  Lysander was from the Ancient Greek Λῠ́σᾰνδρος (Lúsandros) and is a (now rare) male given name although in the US there has in the twenty-first century been a modest resurgence.  In the Greek, the name was used to denote “liberator” and it became entrenched in English probably because William Shakespeare (1564–1616) used it in the comedy, A Midsummer Night's Dream (1596), a romp in which Lysander found himself under Puck's spell after running away with his beloved Hermia, enduring a half-dozen cases of mistaken identity before being reunited, marrying in a triple ceremony (all of which sounds curiously modern in a Netflix sort of way).  What Reformation may have had in mind was Lysander (circa 454-395 BC), the Spartan admiral who liberated his people from the hegemony of Athens, his most famous victory being the sinking of the Athenian fleet at the Battle of Aegospotami (405 BC), the engagement which ended the Peloponnesian War.  Presumably, the thinking at Reformation was the name of an admiral from Antiquity was enough of a connection with navy blue although that tradition of use in navies began many centuries later.  There was also the Westland Lysander, a World War II (1939-1945) era communications & support aircraft used by the British Army and best remembered for (1) its role in smuggling spies and saboteurs into occupied Europe and (2) the unusual use of the wheel spats as mounting points for machine guns and ordnance such as 250lb (115 KG) bombs.  In production in the UK & Canada between 1936-1943, it was an uncelebrated but versatile platform which provided invaluable service in the clandestine operations run by the UK’s remarkably large number of agencies concerned with dirty tricks and other murky business.  It’s not likely Reformation thought much about the aircraft.

The Monicagate (1998) effect: The decline of the use of the name Monica in the US

Monica is a female given name and the variants in other European languages include Monique (French & Dutch), Mónica (Spanish Portuguese & Italian), Mônica (Brazilian Portuguese), Monika (Polish, Slovak, Slovine, Lithuanian, Croatian, Finnish, German & Indian, Czech, Bulgarian, Latvian, Finnish, Swedish, Norwegian & Danish), Moonika (Estonia), Mónika (Hungarian) and Mònica (Catalan).  The origin is obscure but may be from a Phoenician, Punic or Berber dialect, the oldest known instance being as the name of the mother of Saint Augustine of Hippo (354–430) although it has also been associated with the Ancient Greek μόνος (monos) (alone, only, sole, single).  It was Monica who converted Augustine to Christianity and in gratitude the Church also canonized her.  The Latin name Monica was from monere (to advise), an inflection of moneō, from the Proto-Italic moneō, from the primitive Indo-European monéyeti, causative from men- (to think); it was etymologically unrelated to later forms.  As an English name, it has been in use since the mid-eighteenth century while in the US, popularity peaked in the mid-1970s before beginning a gradual decline which became a precipitous plummet after 1999, something it seems reasonable to attribute to “the Monicagate effect”.

Lindsay Lohan with crossbody bags: At the LLohan Nightclub pop-up event, Playboy Club, New York, October 2019 (David Koma crystal-embellished cady midi dress with asymmetric hem, Valentino Rockstud 110mm pumps and Chanel mini tweed bag with crossbody strap from the Spring/Summer 2015 runway collection) (left) and with Louis Vuitton Louis Vuitton Le Coussin BB Bag (with a detachable crossbody strap), arriving at JFK Airport, August 2022 (right).

Creature of habit: Audrey Hepburn carrying her crossbody purse, Rome, 1971.

The crossbody bag in one form or another would have existed about as long as there have been bag-like creations for holding stuff because the design offers the advantage of transferring the weight to the shoulders (alternating if required) and leaving the user inherently "hands free".  Although for centuries a feature of military webbing, as a packaged piece of fashion, the industry usually credits the "design" of the product to Robert Sakowitz and later refinements to his daughter Bunny (she added the game-changing zipper!), the latter acknowledging a debt to the eighteenth century cross-body "strap bags".   The mix of thoughtful detailing, practicality and high prices meant that in the 1950s it soon became a a fashion staple and Audrey Hepburn (1929–1993) using one in her portrayal of the modern young spinster Holly Golightly in Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961) cemented it's place.  It's never left and a crossbody bag is merely one worn across the body with the strap extending diagonally from one shoulder to the opposite hip but the utility come from (1) hands-free convenience, (2) security & stability while affording ease of access to multiple compartments and (3) the ability to optimize weight distribution.  The crossbody method can be applied to bags of various sizes and there are even crossbody wallets and small purses and while such things might sound merely decorative, men tend often forget it's not uncommon for a woman's entire outfit to include not one pocket and in an era when it's become possible to carry only one's phone, a lipstick and a small can of mace; practicality need no longer be big.

The Monica 560

France's finest ever: 1963 Facel Vega Facel II.

In the fashion business there have been a number of products named “Monica” and it’s likely this often was for no reason other than it was thought appropriately feminine and pleasing to use.  There is also an automotive footnote, the Monica 560 a French-built luxury car which was the last of the first generation of trans-Atlantic hybrids which, combining elegant European coachwork with robust, powerful, very cheap (and very thirsty) US-sourced drive-trains, flourished between the mid-1950s and the first oil shock two decades later.  It’s often said the Monica was an attempt to resurrect the much lamented Facel Vegas (1954-1964) but the founder was more nostalgic still, the industrialist Jean Tastevin (1919-2016) recalling the pre-war Delahayes, Bugattis Delages & Buccialis, French cars which ranked with the world’s finest.  However, when in the late 1960s Monsieur Tastevin surveyed the scene, even the more expensive French cars, whatever their other virtues (some of which were admittedly well concealed), were under-powered and although in many ways sophisticated, lacked the power and refinement of the British, US & European competition.  His core business was the large conglomerate Compagnie française de produits métallurgiques (CFPM) which specialized in building freight rail wagons, his imaginative business model including leasing them, a form of vertical integration which provided a stable revenue stream during periods of diminished demand.  

One of the valve cover castings for a Martin V8 installed in a prototype Monica.

With this industrial capacity and financial infrastructure, he reasoned building a car to compete with the other speciality builders (and he included in that the upper-range Mercedes-Benz, Jaguars and such) was within CFPM’s capacity and in that he may have been correct but a combination of bad decisions, bad luck and bad timing doomed the project.  The first mistake was to try to match Maserati & Ferrari in the use of a bespoke engine rather than the US V8s pragmatically adopted by Jensen, Bristol, Iso, Monterverdi and others; Tastevin wanted a thoroughbred, not a bastard.  What was available was a V8 designed by the gifted English engineer Ted Martin (1922-2010) and it was in many ways outstanding being robust, compact, powerful and light.  Convinced, Tastevin bought the rights along with the collateral contract under which Rolls-Royce agreed to handle the production, the prestige of a “Rolls-Royce-built engine” another thing which appealed.  Unfortunately, Monsieur Tastevin subsequently demanded of Rolls-Royce they guarantee the power output of each unit, an underwriting the company declined on the basis that as a manufacturing and assembly contractor of something they’d not designed and tested, they were not prepared to guarantee someone else’s work.  His contract well-written, Ted Martin kept the money and Tastevin had to find another engine.

The first (left) and second (centre) Monica prototypes and the Amiot 143M (1931-1944), a French five-seat reconnaissance bomber (right).

By early 1968, that was still to happen and prototypes were built with the Martin V8.  There was progress in that the chassis and most of the underpinnings were in close to their final form but the all-important styling was still a work in progress although that is being charitable, the appearance of the early prototypes in the tradition of some of the inter-war bombers built for the French Air Force which to this day remain among the ugliest aircraft ever to fly.  The English were involved in the appearance of the early cars so blame can be shared and it wasn’t until the Italian carrozzeria Vignale became involved, something like the final, sleek form emerged although the work would be brought to fruition by others because Vignale subsequently was shuttered.  One thing which was deemed right as soon as the decision was made was the car’s name: Madam Tastevin’s name was Monique.

The Monica stand, Paris Motor Show, 1972.

The Monica made its debut at the Paris Motor Show, late in 1972 and impressed many with the look of its jewel-like V8 and sumptuous interior although the price raised a few eyebrows, costing as much as two Citroën SMs, then the most expensive car produced in France.  In the way of such things, the sales projections were optimistic, suggesting as many as 500 Monicas annually even though the market for big, expensive four-door saloons had become crowded; not only were specialists like Iso, Monterverdi and De Tomaso offering fully-developed and well-established models with reliable US V8s, Jaguar’s V12-powered XJ12 had set a dynamic benchmark at an extraordinarily low price and Mercedes-Benz were rumoured to be preparing a 7.4 litre (452 cubic inch) version of their epoch making S-Class (W116) (post-oil shock, eventually it would in 1975 surface as the 450 SEL 6.9).  Still, in 1972, generally, there was faith in the future.

1973 Monica 560 interior.  The engine was from the US, the leather & burl walnut was English, it was styled in Italy and the gearbox was German (or from the US if automatic).  It had a "French flavor". 

There optimism was still in the air in 1973 (the oil wouldn’t stop flowing until October) but by then the hunt was on for a new engine.  The contractual squabble with Rolls-Royce was one thing but by then, it had anyway finally occurred to Tastevin’s inexperienced team that the Martin V8, an enlarged racing engine, was never going to possess the characteristics needed in a luxury car.  It was noisy, at its best with a manual gearbox and at anything but high revs (where it needed to operate to produce the required power), somewhat rough.  In the early 1960s the Maserati Quattroporte had been much the same and it sold well but then there were few alternatives and the world had moved on; what buyers now wanted was the turbine-like smoothness of the XJ12 or the effortless torque of the big-displacement V8 hybrids.  The 3.4 litre (209 cubic inch) Martin V8 was a vibrant thing which would have been entertaining in a sports car but it wasn't what the target market now expected in a luxury saloon.  Tastevin’s original plan had been to build a high-performance sports car and the switch to four-door coachwork came early in the development process.  Of all the hybrids built in the era, the Monica was the only one never offered as a coupé. 

One of the few: 1974 Monica 560 Berlina.

Surrendering to the inevitable, Tastevin phoned Detroit and arranged to purchase a batch of Chrysler’s 340 cubic inch (5.6 litre) (LA) V8s, one of the best of the small-block engines of the era and equally adaptable either to the company’s TorqueFlite automatic transmission or the ZF five-speed manual which still had real appeal for some.  Although by then somewhat detuned from its peak during the muscle car years, the 340 could be run in Europe without most of the power-sapping anti-pollution gear insisted on by US regulators (things were different then) and the performance was sparkling; in deference to Europeans for whom cubic inches were mysterious, the car was named the Monica 560.  In 1974, the finished product was ready for sale although inflation meant the already high price had risen by over 50% since 1972 and the four-fold increase in the price of oil in the wake of the embargo had punished demand for fast, thirsty, cars, especially those from a previously unknown manufacturer.  By late 1974, many of the makers of the trans-Atlantic hybrids were either closed or in the throes of what would for most be a not long-protracted demise.  After 17 Monicas were sold in a few months, it was obvious the math was wrong and in February 1975, the company’s closure was announced, one of many such press-releases that year and while a handful of uncompleted chassis were brought to a finished state by a contracted third party, it’s never been clear how many.  Had the Monica 560 been brought to market in 1968 or 1969, it might have enjoyed some years of modest suggest although there’s no reason to believe it would have weathered the winds of change brought by the 1970s any better that the others which fell victim.