Tsar

Tsar (pronounced zahr)

(1) An emperor or king.

(2) Title of the former emperors of Russia and several Slavonic states.

(3) Slang term for an autocratic ruler or leader.

(4) Slang term for a person exercising great authority or power in a particular field.

1545-1555: From the Old Russian tsĭsarĭ (emperor or king), akin to the Old Church Slavonic tsěsarĭ, the Gothic kaisar and the Greek kaîsar, all ultimately derived from the Latin Caesar (an emperor, a ruler, a dictator) while the Germanic form of the word was the source of the Finnish keisari and the Estonian keisar.  The prehistoric Slavic was tsesar, Tsar first adopted as an imperial title by Ivan IV (Ivan Vasilyevich, 1530–1584 and better remembered as Ivan the Terrible, Grand Prince of Moscow and all Russia 1533-1584 & Tsar of all Russia 1547-1584) in 1547.  There’s a curious history to spelling tsar as czar.  Spelled thus, it’s contrary to the usage of all Slavonic languages; the word was so spelt by the Carniolan diplomat & historian Baron Siegmund Freiherr von Herberstein (1486–1566) in his work (in Latin) Rerum Moscoviticarum Commentarii (Notes on Muscovite Affairs (1549)) which was such a seminal early source of knowledge of Russia in Western Europe that "czar" passed into the Western languages; despite that history, "tsar" definitely is the proper Latinization.  It still appears and some linguistic academics insist the lineage means it should be regarded as archaic use rather than a mistake and, as a fine technical point, that’s correct in that, for example, the female form czarina is from 1717 (from Italian czarina and German zarin).  In Russian, the female form is tsaritsa and a tsar’s son is a tsarevitch, his daughter a tsarevna.

Nicholas II (Nikolai II Alexandrovich Romanov, 1868–1918; last Tsar of Russia, 1894-1917).  He cut an imposing figure for the portraitists but his cousin Kaiser Wilhelm II (1859–1941; German Emperor & King of Prussia 1888-1918) reckoned the tsar's mental abilities rendered him most suitable to "a cottage in the country where he can grow turnips".  Wilhelm got much wrong in his life but historians seem generally to concur in this he was a fair judge of things.

Tsar and its variants were the official titles of (1) the First Bulgarian Empire 913–1018, (2) the Second Bulgarian Empire (1185–1396), (3) the Serbian Empire (1346–1371), (4) the Tsardom of Russia (1547–1721) (technically replaced in 1721 by imperator, but remaining in use outside Russia (also officially in relation to certain regions until 1917) and (5) the Tsardom of Bulgaria (1908–1946).  So, although most associated with Russia, the first ruler to adopt the title was Simeon I (usually written as Simeon the Great; circa 865-927, ruler of Bulgaria 893-927) and that was about halfway through his reign and nobody since Simeon II (Simeon Borisov Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, b 1937; (last) Tsar of the Kingdom of Bulgaria 1943-1946) has been a tsar.  The transferred sense of "person with dictatorial powers" seems first to have appeared in English in 1866 as an adoption in American English, initially as a disapproving reference to President Andrew Johnson (1808–1875; US President 1865-1869) but it has come to be applied neutrally (health tsar, transport tsar) and use does sometimes demand deconstruction: drug tsar has been applied both to organised crime figures associated with the distribution of narcotics and government appointees responsible for policing the trade.  In some countries, some overlap between the two roles has been noted.

Comrade Stalin agitprop.

Volgograd, the southern Russian city was between 1925-1961 named Stalingrad (Stalin + -grad).  Grad (град in Cyrillic) was from the Old Slavic and translates variously as "town, city, castle or fortified settlement"; it once existed in many languages as gord and can be found still as grad, gradić, horod or gorod in many place-names.  Before it was renamed in honour of comrade Stalin (1878-1953, leader of the USSR 1924-1953), between 1589-1925, the city, at the confluence of the Tsaritsa and Volga rivers was known as Tsaritsyn, the name from the Turkic-related Tatar dialect word sarisin meaning "yellow water" or "yellow river" but because of the similarity in sound and spelling, came in Russia to be associated with Tsar.  Stalingrad is remembered as the scene of the epic and savage battle which culminated in the destruction in February 1943 of the German Sixth Army, something which, along with the strategic failure of the Wehrmacht in the offensive (Unternehmen Zitadelle (Operation Citadel) in the Kursk salient five months later, marked what many military historians record as the decisive moment on the Eastern Front.  It has become common to refer to comrade Stalin as the "Red Tsar" whereas casual comparisons of Mr Putin (Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin; b 1952; president or prime minister of Russia since 1999) don't often reach to Russia's imperial past; they seem to stop with Stalin.

Caesar (an emperor, a ruler, a dictator) was from the late fourteenth century cesar (from Cæsar) and was originally a surname of the Julian gens in Rome, elevated to a title after Caius Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) became dictator and it was used as a title of emperors down to Hadrian (76–138; Roman emperor 117-138).  The name ultimately is of uncertain origin, Pliny the Elder (23–79) suggested it came from the Latin caesaries (head of hair) because the future dictator was born with a lush growth while others have linked it to the Latin caesius (bluish-gray), an allusion to eye color.  The "probity of Caesar's" wife (the phrase first recorded in English in the 1570s) as the figure of a person who should be above suspicion comes from the biography of Julius Caesar written by the Greek Middle Platonist priest-philosopher & historian Plutarch (circa 46–circa 123).  Plutarch related the story of how Julius Caesar divorced his wife Pompeia because of rumors of infidelity, not because he believed the tales of her adultery but because, as a political position, “the wife of Caesar must not even be under suspicion”.  That’s the origin of the phrase “the probity of Caesar’s wife, a phrase which first appeared in English in the 1570s.

In late nineteenth century US slang, a sheriff was "the great seizer" an allusion to the office's role in seizing property pursuant to court order.  The use of Caesar to illustrate the distinction between a subject’s obligations to matters temporal and spiritual is from the New Testament: Matthew 22:21.

They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

Christ had been answering a question posed by the Pharisees to trap Him: Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar (Matthew 22:15–20)?  To answer, Jesus held up a denarius, the coin with which pay the tax and noted that on it was the head of Caesar, by then Caesar had become a title, meaning emperor of Rome and its empire.  It was a clever answer; in saying "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and render unto God that which is God's", Jesus dismisses the notion of believers being conflicted by the demands of the secular state as a false dilemma because, one can fulfil the requirements of the sate by a mere payment of coin without any implication of accepting its doctrines or legitimacy.  Over the years much has been made of what is or should be "rendered unto Caesar", but more interesting is inference which must be drawn: if we owe Caesar that which bears his image, what then do we owe God?  It can only be that we owe God that which bears the image of God, an impressive inventory listed in the book of Genesis and now interpreted by some Christians as "the whole universe".  To Caesar we can only ever owe money; to God we owe ourselves.

In the Old English the spelling was casere, which would under the expected etymological process have evolved into coser, but instead, circa 1200, it was replaced in the Middle English by keiser, from the Norse or Low German, and later by the French or Latin form of the name.  Cæsar also is the root of German Kaiser, the Russian tsar and is linked with the Modern Persian shah.  Despite the common assumption, "caesar" wasn’t an influence on the English "king".  King was from the Middle English king & kyng, from the Old English cyng & cyning (king), from the Proto-West Germanic kuning, from the Proto-Germanic kuningaz & unungaz (king), kin being the root.  It was cognate with the Scots keeng (king), the North Frisian köning (king), the West Frisian kening (king), the Dutch koning (king), the Low German Koning & Köning (king), the German König (king), the Danish konge (king), the Norwegian konge (king), the Swedish konung & kung (king), the Icelandic konungur & kóngur (king), the Finnish kuningas (king) and the Russian князь (knjaz) (prince) & княги́ня (knjagínja) (princess).  It eclipsed the non-native Middle English roy (king) and the Early Modern English roy, borrowed from Old French roi, rei & rai (king).

The Persian Shah was from the Old Persian xšāyaθiya (king), once thought a borrowing from the Median as it was compared to the Avestan xšaϑra- (power; command), corresponding to the Sanskrit (the Old Indic) kṣatra- (power; command), source of kṣatriya (warrior).  However, recent etymological research has confirmed xšāyaθiya was a genuine, inherited Persian formation meaning “pertaining to reigning, ruling”.  The word, with the origin suffix -iya was from a deverbal abstract noun xšāy-aθa- (rule, ruling) (Herrschaft), from the Old Persian verb xšāy- (to rule, reign).  In the Old Persian, the full title of the Achaemenid rulers of the First Empire was Xšāyaθiya Xšāyaθiyānām (or in Modern Persian, Šāhe Šāhān (King of Kings)), best as "Emperor", a title with ancient, Near Eastern and Mesopotamian precedents.  The earliest known instance of such a title dates from the Middle Assyrian period as šar šarrāni, used by the Assyrian ruler Tukulti-Ninurta I (1243–1207 BC).

Tsar Bomba: the Tsar bomb

Tupolev Tu-95 in flight (left) and a depiction of the October 1961 test detonation of the Tsar Bomb.

Царь-бомба (Tsar Bomba (Tsar-bomb)) was the Western nickname for the Soviet RDS-220 hydrogen bomb (Project code: AN602; code name Ivan or Vanya), the most powerful nuclear weapon ever detonated.  The test on 30 October 1961 remains the biggest man-made explosion in history and was rated with a yield of 50-51 megatons although the design was technically able to produce maximum yield in excess of 100.  For a long time the US estimated the yield at 54 megatons and the Russians at 58 but after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, it was confirmed the true yield was 50-51 megatons.  Only one was ever built and it was detonated on an island off the Russian arctic coast.  The decision to limit the size blast was related to the need to ensure (1) a reduced nuclear fall-out and (2) the aircraft dropping the thing would be able to travel a safe distance from the blast radius (the Kremlin's attitude to the lives of military personnel had changed since comrade Stalin's time).  No nuclear power has since expressed any interest in building weapons even as large as the Tsar Bomb and for decades the trend in strategic arsenals has been more and smaller weapons, a decision taken on the pragmatic military grounds that it's pointless to destroy things many times over.  It's true that higher yield nuclear weapons would produce "smaller rubble" but to the practical military mind such a result represents just "wasted effort".

Progress 1945-1961.

The Tupolev Tu-95 (NATO reporting name: Bear) which dropped the Tsar Bomb was a curious fork in aviation history, noted also for its longevity.  A four-engined turboprop-powered strategic bomber and missile platform, it entered service in 1956 and is expected still to be in operational use in 2040, an expectation the United States Air Force (USAF) share for their big strategic bomber, the Boeing B-52 which first flew in 1952, the first squadrons formed three years later.  Both airframes have proven remarkably durable and amenable to upgrades; as heavy lift devices and delivery systems they could be improved upon with a clean-sheet design but the relatively small advantages gained would not justify the immense cost, thus the ongoing upgrade programmes.  The TU-95's design was, inter-alia, notable for being one of the few propeller-driven aircraft with swept wings and is the only one ever to enter large-scale production.  It's also very loud, the tips of those counter-rotating propellers sometimes passing through the sound barrier.

Footage of the Tsar Bomb test de-classified and released after the dissolution of the Soviet Union (1922-1991).

The Tsar Bomb was in a sense the “ultimate” evolution of the centuries long history of the bomb although it wasn’t the end of innovation, designers seemingly never running out of ideas to refine the concept of the device, the purpose of which is to (1) blow stuff up and (2) kill people.  Bomb was from the French bombe, from the Italian bomba, from the Latin bombus (a booming sound), from the Ancient Greek βόμβος (bómbos) (booming, humming, buzzing), the explosive imitative of the sound itself.  Bomb was used originally of “projectiles; mortar shells etc”, the more familiar “explosive device placed by hand or dropped from airplane” said by many sources to date from 1908 although the word was in the former sense used when describing the anarchist terrorism of the late nineteenth century.  As a footnote, the nickname of Hugh Trenchard (1873-1956), the first Marshal of the Royal Air Force (RAF) was “boom” but this was related to his tone of voice rather than an acknowledgement of him being one of the earliest advocates of strategic bombing.

The figurative uses were wide, ranging from “a dilapidated car” (often as “old bomb”, the use based presumably on the perception such vehicles are often loud).  The bombshell was originally literally a piece of military equipment but it was later co-opted (most memorably as “blonde bombshell) to describe a particularly fetching young women.  So, used figuratively, “bomb” could mean either “very bad” or “very good” and in his weekly Letter from American (broadcast by the BBC World Service 1946-2004), Alistair Cooke (1908–2004) noted a curious trans-Atlantic dichotomy.  In the world of showbiz, Cooke observed, “bomb” was used in both the US & UK to describe the reaction to a play, movie or whatever but in the US, if called “a bomb”, the production was a flop, a failure whereas in the UK, if something was called “quite a bomb”, it meant it was a great success.

I Know Who Killed Me (2007)

I Know Who Killed Me bombed (in the traditional US sense) but in the way these things sometimes happen, the film has since enjoyed a second life with a cult-following and screenings on the specialized festival circuit.  Additionally, DVD & Blu-Ray sales (it's said to be a popular, if sometimes ironic, gift) meant eventually it generated a profit although it has never exactly become a "bomb" (in the UK sense).  However, while it now enjoys a following among a small sub-set of the public, the professional critics have never softened their view.

Simony

Simony (pronounced sahy-muh-nee or sim-uh-nee)

(1) The making of profit out of sacred things.

(2) In Christianity, the practice, now usually regarded as a sin, of buying or selling spiritual or ecclesiastical benefits such as pardons, relics, benefices or preferments.

The buying or selling of spiritual or sacred things, such as ecclesiastical offices, pardons, or consecrated objects.

1175–1225: From the Middle English & the twelfth century Old French simonie (selling of church offices; the sin of buying or selling sacred things), from the Late Latin simōnia (from Simon Magus (Σίμων ὁ μάγος in Greek, Simon Magvs in Latin), the Samaritan sorcerer (magician) who was rebuked by Peter when he tried to buy the power of conferring the Holy Spirit (Acts 8:9-24)).  The nouns simoniak & simoner (the alternative spelling was simonier) (one who practices simony) appear in documents around the turn of the fifteenth century but there’s no evidence the adverb simoniacally was in use before the mid-1700s.  Simony, simonist, simoner & simonism are nouns, simoniac is a noun & adjective, simonient is an adjective and simoniacally is an adverb; the noun plural is simonies.

Acts 8:9-24: Origin of the Church’s ban on outsourcing.

18: And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money.

19: Saying, give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.

20: But Peter said unto him, thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money.

Simon Magus, known also as Simon the Sorcerer, was one of many magicians and, with competition fierce in a crowded market, he sought to increase his stock of magic tricks, gaining thereby a comparative advantage.  What he really wanted was to be thought of as one who, by laying on of hands, could make people feel filled with the Holy Spirit (the presence of the Lord), then a desired thing.

Saint Peter to Simon the Sorcerer: "Just don't do it; just say no."

When Simon Magus saw Peter and John deliver the presence by the laying of their on baptized believers, he offered money if they would confer on him the same power.  The pious pair were aghast at the idea one could buy the gift of God and urged Simon to repent so God might forgive him.  Hearing these words made Simon fearful and he pleaded with them to pray that nothing bad would befall him.  Whether Simon was truly repentant is never made clear although he did not immediately die so God did not at once smite him in his wrath.  Others were not so fortunate but Simon was the first heretic named in the New Testament and ever since, the Church has insisted on its monopoly in matters spiritual.  However, later popes, bishops and other clergy, while noting the the ruling of Peter & John as conferring on them exclusivity of supply in such matters, their interpretation didn't extend to banning profit from the business, something which would come to have profound consequences for Church and state. 

Compared with the unfortunate Ananias and Sapphira, Simon got off lightly.  In the Book of Acts (4:32), it’s recorded the early Christian disciples did not think of their possessions as their own but as the property of the collective to be used in the name of the Lord (not now a popular piece of scripture among the more materialist Christians).  Were money received by one, it belonged to all the apostles and were one to be found cheating, there were consequences and of course there had to be because, theologically, not only was the miscreant cheating others in the clergy, they were stealing from God Himself.  In Acts (5:1-11), it’s recounted that Ananias and his wife Sapphira sold their land but, when handing the proceeds to Peter, Anania kept some of the money for himself (the modern term in the study of governance & corruption in the distribution of foreign aid would be "siphoning").

5 But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession,

2 And kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles' feet.

3 But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the price of the land?

4 Whiles it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? why hast thou conceived this thing in thine heart? thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God.

5 And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things.

6 And the young men arose, wound him up, and carried him out, and buried him.

7 And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in.

8 And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether ye sold the land for so much? And she said, Yea, for so much.

9 Then Peter said unto her, How is it that ye have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord? behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out.

10 Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost: and the young men came in, and found her dead, and, carrying her forth, buried her by her husband.

11 And great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.

A salutary warning then, rather untypical of the New Testament, something more in the spirit of the vengeful God of the Old and it remains one of the passages in scripture most of modern Christianity prefers to ignore.  The endorsement of the death penalty often attracts little criticism but the notion of sharing with others one’s capital gains from the real-estate market would likely have little appeal to the many in evangelical congregations, although, given the corporate structure, the richer of the clergy might see some attraction.

The story has long been a struggle for theologians.  Although a injunction against lying is not one of the ten commandments (although it seems implied in (8) You shall not steal & (9) You shall not bear false witness), it wasn't explicitly prohibited although Ananias and Sapphira were struck dead simply for conspiring to lie; that would seem unfair for on the night Christ was tried, Peter himself lied three times yet was not thrice struck dead and anyway, as Peter acknowledged, they were under no obligation to donate the money.  It might then seem difficult to see just what was the sin so heinous that both deserved to die but theologians most often hint at something Aristotle might have called honor, what the social media marketing experts might call the quality of authenticity.  The transgression of Ananias and Sapphira was seeking the honor of their community in a manner dishonorable, shaming themselves as mere counterfeits; phoneys.  It was not the money which mattered, it was the fake news and, as Peter said, that news came from Satan for Satan had filled (to “the brim” in some translations) the heart of Ananias.  So, it's no great theological leap to see in their conduct as transgressions of (8) You shall not steal and (2) You shall not make any idols to worship (in that money had become an object of veneration).

La Mort de Saphire (The Death of Sapphira (1652)), oil on canvas by Nicolas Poussin (1594–1665).

People lie all the time and God does not smite them in his wrath but while all men might be equal before God, not all communities are equal.  When people lie to others in their community they are lying to others, to themselves and before God; it is a sin and one day they shall be judged.  But among the disciples of Christ himself, there can be no lies for to lie there is to lie about the work of the Holy Spirit and to speak that lie to God.  There can be only one consequence and that must be death.  It's a warning to those with the conceit to seek pre-eminence among the people of God, careerists seeking recognition, influence and power in God’s Church which is wrong for it is God alone who takes us into His Church (John 6:44, 65) and Him alone who elevates and ordains individuals to offices within (1 Corinthians 12:18, 28; Ephesians 4:11); as in all things, "the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away; Blessed be the name of the Lord" (Job 1:21).  The vainglory of the self-aggrandizement of Ananias and Sapphira was the work of the mind and nature of Satan (Isaiah 14:13-14; Ezekiel 28:17) and was what made the couple willing instruments in the execution of his purposes.  Structuralists draw from the story a lesson about the authority of the hierarchical clergy and the nature of the institution of the Church.  Theologians writing their apologia (which seem always emphasise that Peter must be absolved of any responsibility) conclude the message is in everything we do we must love our neighbors as ourselves and seek not to accrue wealth, status and power.

In the early medieval church the legal position was unambiguous so the spirit was strong, even if the flesh of priests was sometimes weak, accusations of simony not uncommon, something encouraged presumably by the increasingly obvious wealth of not a few clergy.  In reaction, canon law banned what had become revenue streams derived from the supply of what had once been simple orders of service performed for events such as blessings or baptism.  Over the years many canons and edicts reinforced the sanctions, something necessitated by priests being good “black letter law” practitioners, eager to spot loopholes and eyes of needles through which money could pass.  Even papal bulls addressed the matter though it was a time of low literacy and distant channels of communications, things which helped imaginative priests hone their business model.  Famously, Gregory I (circa 540–604; usually styled Saint Gregory the Great, pope 590-604) condemned such transactions as “a simoniac heresy” but the problem was not the state of law but the efficiency of its enforcement, a familiar complaint in the modern secular world.

Despite it all, by the ninth and tenth centuries, simony had become so entrenched in the ecclesiastical structure that the very economy of the Church may have been dependent on the practices and in the eyes of the population, presumably was an accepted part of theology.  The more austere canon lawyers however found it disturbing and by the eleventh century, one of the debates between them concerned the issue of whether a priest who had gained his office by a simonical transaction (ie purchased it from a bishop) could be said to be validly ordained and this was not merely a tiresome technical point argued between lawyers: if an ordination was invalid, did this invalidate the legal effect of the rituals he’d since performed?  If so, were some marriages null & void, couples living in sin and unknowingly producing illegitimate children?  Were their baptisms valid or were there many unbaptised heathens?  That was bad enough but if so, would those who had died (and there would have been many), on that basis be sent not to Heaven but instead burn in Hell (discussions of some less unpleasant alternatives such as Limbo were not then well advanced)?

It was during the pontificate of Gregory IX (circa 1150-1241; pope 1227-1241) the sanctions were codified and it was done with a legal sledgehammer.  In issuing the Corpus Juris Canonici (literally “Body of Canon Law”) in 1234, Gregory provided the document which would provide the framework for the Church’s canon law for over 700 years and although subject to frequent refinement, it would not be replaced until 1917.  As a part of this, the matter of simony was dealt with in what might now be called “an omnibus provision”, the definitional basis for the offence so wide that just about any transaction “involving consideration” (ie money or some other benefit) might be caught in its net.

Canto XVIII, part of the eighth circle of Hell, in Divine Comedy (circa 1494), illustrated by Sandro Botticelli (Alessandro di Mariano di Vanni Filipepi; circa 1445–1510).

It’s said to have had a great reforming influence but of course the problem shifted shape rather than going away and in the fourteenth century, Dante Alighieri (circa 1265–1321) in Divina Commedia (Divine Comedy (circa 1310-1321)) detailed (not without glee) the fate of avaricious simoniacs including “clergymen, and popes and cardinals” who, dammed for “fraud” would be cast into the eighth circle of Hell, a hot, fiery place where they’d have ended up trapped for eternity in a flaming tomb, the frequent punishments including being whipped by demons, immersed in excrement and transformed into reptiles:

Rapacious ones, who take the things of God,
that ought to be the brides of Righteousness,
and make them fornicate for gold and silver!
The time has come to let the trumpet sound
for you;

Ever if not scared of lawyers, from the most humble monk to the pope himself, priests were scared of going to Hell so Dante’s words may have had some effect, even though he wrote in common Italian rather than Latin.  The lure of money though proved strong and although the sale of “indulgences” (essentially God’s forgiveness, often in bulk) was not the sole inspiration for the movement which led to the sixteenth century Protestant Reformation, it was probably the most celebrated and an indication of the way corruption tends to be hydra-headed, difficult to suppress and probably impossible to eradicate.  Still, it was the framework of canon law which provided the basis for the structures the Church of England would adopt to stamp out simony and it’s not hard to see traces of it in many of the anti-corruption statutes and institutions which exist today in many Western states.

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

Valentine

Valentine (pronounced val-uhn-tahyn)

(1) A card, message, token or gift sent by one person to another on Valentine's Day (14 February) as a mark of affection.  Historically they were usually amatory or sentimental but there are also commercially available versions (usually as cards or e-cards) which are satirical, comical or sardonic.  They were often (and perhaps still are) send anonymously but in an age when the awareness of stalking has become heightened, caution is now recommended.

(2) A sweetheart or object of desire chosen or greeted on this day.

(3) A written or other artistic work expressing affection for something or someone (the latter often a poetic or literary device).

(4) A surname and a given name, the latter variously feminine or masculine according to local convention.

(5) As Saint Valentine (circa 226-circa 269), a saint commemorated in both Western Christianity & Eastern Orthodoxy.

(6) A locality name in a number of places.

1400–1450 (in the sense of the adoption in English): From the late Middle English, from the ecclesiastical feast of Saint Valentine (14 February).  The derived forms are rarely used.  The adjective valentinesy (something characteristic of Saint Valentine's Day) can be used of some romantic act usually more associated with 14 February and does have the advantage of being a single word which does the job which would otherwise take a phrase but the only thing that can be said in favor of the noun valentining (the practice of giving and (presumably) receiving something on Saint Valentine's Day) is that it seems not yet to have become a verb.  The noun Valentinian was used to describe a member or adherent of the second century AD school of Judaizing Gnostics, founded by Valentinus (circa 100–circa 180).  Valentinus seems to have been among the most popular of the early Christian Gnostic theologians and the legend is he founded his school in Rome after being passed over for appointment to a bishopric.  The use as a name is derived ultimately from the Latin Valentinus, from valeō (I am strong, healthy) and by accepted reckoning, Valentinus (circa 780-827; pope 780) was the hundredth pope of the Roman Catholic Church ("Pontiff 100" the preferred designation among Vatican archivists); he sat on the throne of Saint Peter "for forty days and forty nights".  Valentine evolved as a unisex given name, in use for males since the late fifteenth century and it’s been given also to females although this has been rare except in France (and the Francophone parts of the old French Empire) where it’s treated as a feminine form of Valentin.  Elsewhere, the usual feminine form is Valentina.  Valentine & Valentinian are nouns & proper nouns, valentining is a noun and valentinesy is an adjective; the noun plural is valentines.

Lindsay Lohan with Saint Valentine's Day stuffed teddy bear.

The precise origins of Valentine's Day are murky.  All agree the church festivals, feasts and holidays were named after Saint Valentine but there were a number of them in early Christianity and despite much digging, no authenticated documentary evidence has emerged to confirm which one deserves credit.  Revisionist historians have linked the later tradition to the ancient Roman festival of Lupercalia, celebrated mid-February, Lupercalia was a fertility festival dedicated to Faunus (Roman god of agriculture) and the mythical founders of Rome, the brothers Romulus & Remus. A kind of pre-modern blind-date night, during the festival, young men would draw names of young women from a jar and with whomever emerged from this lucky dip they would be coupled for the duration of the festival (hopefully longer if the things worked out).  The revisionists like the idea of a link because it hints at another example of an event on the church list owing less to theology or uniquely Christian history than being a takeover of a pagan festival (a la Christmas).  On and off, for centuries, between 496 when Gelasius I (d 496; pope 492-November 496) dedicated 14 February as the feast day on which the Christian martyr Saint Valentine was to be celebrated, it remained on the list was in 1955 struck from the General Roman Calendar by Pius XII (1876-1958; pope 1939-1958), along with an array of other minor or obscure feasts which were relegated to mere “events” within the rituals of the formal ecclesiastical calendar.  However, in 2007 Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) issued the motu proprio (literally “on his own impulse”, a kind of executive decree) Summorum Pontificum (Of the Supreme Pontiffs) (described by some as “a shot across the bows of Vatican II” but really more a torpedo into the engine room) which was promulgated to permit the restoration of earlier forms of ritual (notably those conducted in Latin) but had the (perhaps unintended) effect of allowing feasts such as those of Saint Valentine to return as stand-alone events should that be the will of the local congregation.

The meme-makers feel Saint Valentine's pain.

By far the most popular version of the origin is that linked with Saint Valentine (circa 226-circa 269).  Valentine may have been the Bishop of Terni (in the modern day region of Umbria in Central Italy) but he was certainly a member of the Christian clergy and like many of them, he was persecuted by the authorities; even if not devoted pagans, many in authority did not much like trouble makers and alternative power structures (as members of the Falun Gong don’t need to be reminded).  There are different tales of just what were the activities which led eventually martyrdom including Valentine baptizing young men liable for military conscription (their status as Christians rendering them ineligible for service in the pagan army) but the preferred version is the one associated with young lovers.  It’s said Claudius II (214-270; Roman emperor 268-270) had banned marriage by young men, his rationale being single men made better soldiers, apparently because they were (1) less troubled by the thought of death and (2) more attracted to the prospect of the unlimited sexual license (rape (in the modern sense) & pillage) which was at the time one of the inducements to serve.  Valentine defied this imperial decree and in secret continued to conduct marriages for young lovers; when this was discovered, Claudius had the renegade priest arrested, brought to Rome and beheaded.  The act of execution seems sound historic fact although the circumstances, like much which appears in medieval texts, can’t be verified and while the tales of torture, prolonged beatings are plausible, it’s not certain the emperor’s displeasure was triggered by the priest joining the young in marriage; some histories suggest the execution was ordered merely because Valentine refused to deny Christ as his true savior.  Such deaths were far from uncommon.  God however may have been on the side of true love because shortly after, Claudius was struck down, killed by “a pestilence”, perhaps the Plague of Cyprian (250-270), one of the many epidemics that for centuries came and went, killing millions.

There seems not to have been any connection between Saint Valentine (or the celebrations in his name) and anything romantic until the notion appeared in the fourteenth century verse of Geoffrey Chaucer (circa 1344-1400) but the idea caught on to the extent that by the mid-fifteenth century, it was well-known and the secular practices attached to 14 February appear to have been tolerated by the Church and survived even the later puritans who disapproved of just about everything.  The fifteenth century customs are said to have begun in the circles associated with the French & English royal courts but it may simply be that the records of that class have survived better and the tales of February being the month when birds find their mates became part of the folk etymology.  The earliest known use of a valentine being “a letter or card sent to a sweetheart” dates from 1824 and the custom of sending special cards or letters on this date flourished in England in the mid-nineteenth century, declining gradually until the early years of the 1900s.  In the 1920s, modern capitalism (led by card manufacturers) revived the idea and for those selling cards, chocolates and flowers, 14 February has since provided good business and the rise of the internet has done little to blunt demand, virtual roses and chocolates just not the same.

The universal language of love.

Flowers, chocolate and stylized red hearts being the universal lingua franca when seeking courtship with a young lady, even in the People's Republic of China (PRC), Valentine’s Day (情人节, qíngrén jié) has become a thing.  The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) approve not at all of decadent Western influence and Christian saints (the only "true" saints being venerable figures like the General Secretary of the CCP) but it's good for business and adds to GDP so, simultaneously the day is tolerated and ignored.  The idea though has spread, several other days to one degree or another also marked including (1) White Valentine’s Day (白色情人节, báisè qíngrén jié) on 14 March when the tradition is for women who have a month earlier received something to respond with a gift of chocolate, (2) 520 Day (wǔ’èr línga) on 20 May; it's pronounced as wǔ èr líng which sounds like “I love you” (wǒ ài nǐ) in Mandarin and it's said to be entirely the invention of Chinese business, (3) the Qi Xi Festival (七夕节, qīxì jié) celebrated on 7 July on the lunar calendar (which occurs usually in August) and based on the romantic tale of two lovers who can meet but once a year, (4) the Lantern Festival (元宵节, yuánxiāo jié) held on the 15^th day in the lunar calendar; it has ancient origins from the days when this was one of the few occasions young women left the home, going out to light a lantern which signified they were single and willing to meet a partner and (5) Single’s Day (双十一, shuāng shíyī) on 11 November, a recent invention said originally to have been a kind of dating society created by students at Nanjing university but which was quickly co-opted by rapacious Chinese commerce; even in the PRC it was criticized for blatant consumerism (it’s by value now one of the world’s biggest on-line shopping days although analysts are cautioning the downturn in the economy and rising youth unemployment may affect sales in 2024).  Still, even with all those options, with the recent awareness of the demographic problem created by all those “leftover women” choosing to remain single and not have babies, the CCP may decide to encourage Valentine's day.  Even those who marry often can't be induced to have more than one child so the most obvious catchment for increased procreation are the young singles: Valentine's Day target market.  The CCP is better at social engineering than many Western governments and may be tempted to make Valentine's Day compulsory, penalties imposed on eligible bachelors and spinsters "at risk" (the historic term for women deemed capable of falling pregnant) found to have neither sent nor received a box of chocolates.

Hermeneutic

Hermeneutic (pronounced hur-muh-noo-tik or hur-muh-nyoo-tik)

(1) Of or relating to hermeneutics; interpretative; explanatory.

(2) That which explains, interprets, illustrates or elucidates.

(3) In theology, of or relating to the interpretation of Scripture (technically when using or relating to hermeneutics but sometimes used more loosely)

1670s: From the Ancient Greek ἑρμηνευτικός (hermēneutikós) (of, skilled in, interpreting), the construct being hermēneú(ein) (to make clear, interpret (derivative of ἑρμηνεύς (hermēneús) (an interpreter) + -tikos (–tic).  The –tikos suffix was commonly used to form adjectives.  The Greek τικός (-tikos) was derived from the noun τι (-tis) (“one who does” or “related to”).  Typically, when –tikos was appended to a word, it conveyed the sense of “being related to, characterized by, or pertaining to the base word”.  It was used also (n various contexts) to create adjectives that describe qualities or characteristics associated with the base word.  The form in French was herméneutique.  Hermeneutic is a noun & adjective, hermeneuticist & hermeneut are nouns, hermeneutical is an adjective, hermeneutically is an adverb; the noun plural is hermeneutics.

Hermeneutics is now an overarching technical term which can (despite the disapproval of some) be used to describe all or some of the theories and practices of interpretation.  The word started life in academic theology and referred to the interpretation of scripture and biblical scholarship generally but by the early eighteenth century it was used also of the analysis of literature and philosophical texts.  Hermeneutics thus began as a practice which evolved into a formal discipline, the parameters of which have changed as needs arose and can now encompass any aspect of deconstruction, understanding or transmission.  Still most associated by some with scriptural interpretation (with all the controversy that implies), in modern use, hermeneutics is applied to law, philosophy, history or any field in which information is contained in texts (and as the post-modernists told us, “text” exists in many forms beyond the written or spoken word).

Despite the impression given by some sources, the terms hermeneutics and exegesis (from the Ancient Greek ἐξήγησις (exḗgēsis) (interpretation), from ἐξηγέομαι (exēgéomai) (I explain, interpret), the construct being ἐξ (ex-) (out) + ἡγέομαι (hēgéomai) (I lead, guide)) tend not to be used interchangeably, probably because both are elements in the jargon of specialists who field them with the necessary precision.  Both are approaches to the interpretation of texts but they have distinct focuses and differing methods of operation.  Exegesis describes a critical analysis of a text, the purpose being to understand its meaning, the primary focus being the extraction of the original or intended meaning, the historical and cultural context thus a tool of exegesis, undertaken often by the interplay of linguistic analysis and historical research.  Hermeneutics (at least in modern use) casts a wider vista although it too is a discipline built around a theory of interpretation which encompasses a range of principles which can be applied to texts, symbols and any means of communication.  The essence of hermeneutics is that as well as an understanding of original meanings in the context of the time, place and circumstances of their origin, there's also the ongoing process of interpretation which can consider not only previous research but also an understanding of the way interpretation is (and has historically been) influenced by the relationship between the interpreter and the text; the effect of an interpreter's biases (conscious and not), history and culture.  Implicit is this is the need to deconstruct the biases and assumptions inherent in language.  Given all that, although the purists might not approve, the techniques and tools of exegesis can be thought of as a sub-set of those of hermeneutics.

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

The source of the word "hermeneutics" was once tangled up with a folk etymology which attributed a link to Hermes, in Greek mythology the son of Zeus and Maia.  Hermes had a troubled and eventful past which included the theft of livestock from the herd of Admetus which grazed in the (admittedly neglectful) care of his brother Apollo and the invention of the lyre which he fashioned from the shell of a tortoise with strings made from the gut of the unfortunate pair of the cattle he’d earlier sacrificed to the twelve gods.  A bit of a hustler, through a complicated series of trades and negotiations, Hermes emerged with the gift to prophesize the future and assumed the role of psychopomp (from the Latin psȳchopompus, from the Ancient Greek ψῡχοπομπός (psūkhopompós or psȳchopompós) (conductor (guide) of souls), the construct being ψῡχή (psūkhḗ) (the soul, mind, spirit) + πομπός (pompós) (guide, conductor, escort, messenger).  It was the psychopomp who was given the task of escorting the souls of the dead to Hades, the psychopomp most familiar in popular culture being the grim reaper.  It’s not clear which of these many qualities and skills have over the last two centuries so appealed to the admirals of the Royal Navy that they chose HMS Hermes as the name of a dozen-odd warships, the Admiralty website blandly noting his role as divine messenger.  That was certainly what gave rise to the old story (which for years appeared in many dictionaries) of Hermes being the etymological source of “hermeneutic”, based on his role in interpreting divine will: Nephele, Amphion, Heracles, Perseus and Odysseus all benefiting from his skills.  Lending credence to that was the observation of more than one of the philosophers of Antiquity that interpretation of text matters because the same collection of words can be used to spread lies as well as truth so the task of Hermes was an important one although, being Hermes, in some of the myths its recounted how he wasn’t above “bending interpretations” to suit his own purposes.

Hermes, Aglauros & Herse in the chamber of Herse (1573), oil on canvas by Paolo Caliari (1528–1588).  The winged staff held by Hermes was the symbol of his position as divine messenger and Caliari depicts the scene in which Hermes has come to seduce the Athenian princess Herse.  Her sister Aglauros (a jealous type), attempts to prevent him entering her chamber but with a touch of his staff he will transform her into black stone and take what he wants.  Herse is shown apparently sanguine about her sister's sad fate; perhaps it was a difficult family.  It's a rarely painted subject and is from the epic-length Metamorphoses, by the Roman Poet Ovid (Publius Ovidius Naso; 43 BC–17 AD)

The connection with the sometimes dastardly Hermes is obviously an attractive tale but etymologists have concluded the true origin of "hermeneutic" lies in forms related to the Ancient Greek ἑρμηνεύω (hermēneuō) (translate, interpret), from ἑρμηνεύς (hermeneus) (translator, interpreter), of uncertain origin.  As ἑρμηνεία (hermeneia) (interpretation, explanation), it appears in the works of Aristotle (384-322 BC) which are among the oldest surviving philosophical texts in which appears the origins of textual analysis and the theoretical underpinning of the relationship between language and logic.

Irrefragable

Irrefragable (pronounced ih-ref-ruh-guh-buhl)

(1) Not to be disputed or contested (as assertion).

(2) Not able to be denied or refuted; indisputable (as fact).

(3) That which cannot or should not be broken; indestructible (archaic and probably extinct).

(4) Of a person, someone obstinate; stubborn (obsolete except as a literary device).

1525–1535: A learned borrowing from Late Latin irrefrāgābilis (irrefragable) with the English suffix –able appended.  The suffix -able was from the Middle English -able, from the Old French -able, from the Latin -ābilis (capable or worthy of being acted upon), from the primitive Indo-European i-stem forms -dahli- or -dahlom (instrumental suffix); it was used to create adjectives with the sense of “able or fit to be done”.  The construct of irrefrāgābilis was the Latin ir- (a variant of in- (used a prefix meaning “not”)) + refragā(rī) (the present active infinitive of refrāgor (to oppose, resist; to gainsay, thwart)) + -bilis (the suffix used to form adjectives indicating a capacity or worth of being acted upon).  Because of the paucity of documentary evidence, the ultimate source of the Latin refrāgor remains uncertain, but the construct may have been re- (the prefix used in the sense of “again”) + fragor (a breaking, shattering; a crash; din, uproar (from frangō (to break, shatter), ultimately from the primitive Indo-European bhreg- (to break)), formed as an antonym of suffrāgōr, the first-person singular present passive indicative of suffrāgō (to support; to vote for).  The sixteenth century French form was irréfragable, also from the Late Latin.  The meanings related to “indestructible objects” fell from use as early as the mid-seventeenth century while the figurative sense of “someone stubborn or obstinate” endured into the twentieth and, as a literary device, probably still tempts some and for those so tempted, the better style guides help by telling us to stress the second syllable.  The spelling irrefragible is obsolete.  Irrefragable is an adjective, irrefragability & irrefragableness are nouns and irrefragably is an adverb; the noun plural is irrefragabilies.

In English, irrefragable didn’t survive in common use for no better reason than people for whatever reason preferred the alternatives (literal & figurative) including (depending on the context): undeniable, indubitable, unassailable, indisputable, unambiguous, unquestionable, irrefutable, incontestable, immutable and unanswerable.  All those synonyms convey much the same thing for most so usually, the only thing the use of “irrefragable” is likely to engender is bafflement; few people will know what it means.  That can be fun between consenting word-nerds but it otherwise tends just to annoy.  There are structuralists who claim “irrefragable” is (or at least can be) different form a word like “unquestionable” because the former should specifically be associated with logical or argumentative strength while the later can be used in any context without necessarily emphasizing the same rigorous logical support.  So, because the underpinning of the scientific method is the disproving stuff, to say a scientific theory is irrefragable does not mean it cannot be argued against or disproven or that it’s beyond doubt or uncertainty; it means only that it cannot be refuted based on the current evidence.  By contrast, in some schools of theology, many things are unquestionable, not because they can be proved or disproven but because they must be accepted as matters of faith.  In the Roman Catholic Church, this is formalized: If a pope (invoking his infallibility in matters of dogma), declares something to be thus, it is, as a matter of canon law, both irrefragable & unquestionable.  The ancient idea of papal infallibility has been invoked only once since it was codified in the proceedings of the First Vatican Council (Vatican I 1869-1870) but since the early post-war years, pontiffs have found ways to achieve the same effect, John Paul II (1920–2005; pope 1978-2005) & Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) both adept at using what was in effect a personal decree a power available to one who sits at the apex of what is in constitutional terms an absolute theocracy.  Critics have called this phenononom "creeping infallibility" and its intellectual underpinnings own much to the tireless efforts of Benedict XVI while he was head of the Inquisition (by then called the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) during the late twentieth century.

Defragable: Defragmentation in action under MS-DOS 6.22.  On a nearly full big drive (say 320 MB) on which defragmentation had been neglected for a while, the process could take literally hours.  True obsessives would add the relevant command to their autoexec.bat to start every day with a defrag, the sequence being: (1) switch on, (2) go and get coffee and (3) hope it was done upon return.

Before installable file systems (IFS) began to gain critical mass in the 1990s, disk defragmenters were something of a fetish among nerds because, at the software level, there were few quicker (a relative term) and cheaper ways to make things run faster.  Fragment was from the late Middle English fragment, from the Latin fragmentum (a fragment, a remnant), the construct being frangō (I break) +‎ -mentum, from the suffix -menta (familiar in collective nouns like armenta (herd, flock)), from the primitive Indo-European -mn̥the.  The tendency of the early file systems to increasing sluggishness was because the File Allocation Table (FAT) was an up-scaled variant of that used on floppy diskettes where the cluster sizes (the segments into which the media was divided) were small and thus less prone to fragmentation.  However, because of the arcane math which dictated how many clusters there could be under the various implementations of FAT, the only way to accommodate the increasing size of hard disk drives (HDD) was to make the clusters larger, the consequence of which was a file of 1 KB or less absorbed all of a 32 KB cluster, something both an inefficient use of space and inherently prone to fragmentation.  What defragmenters did was re-allocate files to make data both as contiguous and un-fragmented as possible.  Modern file systems (HPFS, NTFS et al) still have limits but the numbers are very big and contemporary operating systems now handle defragmentation dynamically.  Although it remains a useful system on USB pen drives and such because of the wide system compatibility and ease of use, it’s doubtful even the more nostalgic nerds have fond memories of FAT on HDDs; a corrupted FAT could be a nightmare.