Dogmatic

Dogmatic (pronounced dawg-mat-ik or dog- mat-ik)

(1) Relating to or of the nature of a dogma or dogmas or any strong set of principles concerning faith, morals, etc., as those laid down by a church; doctrinal.

(2) Asserting opinions in a doctrinaire or arrogant manner; opinionated; forcibly asserted as if authoritative and unchallengeable

(3) In science (historically, especially medicine) the practice of pursuing the profession based on assumptions rather than empirical observation.

(4) Of a person, one prone to dogmatic statements.

1595-1605; From the French dogmatique, from the Late Latin dogmaticus and the Hellenistic Ancient Greek δογματικός (dogmatikós) (didactic), from δόγμα (dógma) (dogma), the construct being dogmat (stem of dógma) + ikos or ic.  In the 1680s, it came to be applied to persons, writings etc, "disposed to make positive assertions without presenting arguments or evidence" the use by 1706 extending to matters "pertaining to or of the nature of dogma".  The use of variations of the derived form antidogmatic (antidogmatical, antidogmatically etc) have apparently been in decline since the nineteenth century; "dogmatical" was attested from circa 1600.  The most frequently used related word is dogma (opinion, tenet (literally "that which one thinks is true"), from the Latin dogma (philosophical tenet), from the Ancient Greek δόγμα (dógma) (opinion, tenet), from δοκέω (dokéō or dokein) (I seem good, think); in the seventeenth & eighteenth century it was treated as Greek, with the plural dogmata; the ultimate root was the primitive Indo-European root dek- (to take, accept).  Dogmatic is a noun & adjective, dogmaticalness, dogmatism & dogmatician are nouns, dogmatical is an adjective, dogmatize is a verb and dogmatically is an adverb; the noun plural is dogmatics but the more commonly used is dogmatisms.

The suffix -ic 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).

Karl Barth, Kirchliche Dogmatik

Bedside table reading.

Those not content with a discursive existence and who think it might help to keep the same train of thought for a decade odd might care to read Kirchliche Dogmatik (Church Dogmatics) by Swiss Protestant theologian Karl Barth (1882-1968).  In English translation a fourteen-volume work of some six-million words and published between 1932 and 1967, Barth's purpose was to recover the proclamation of the word of God as the place where God's message of salvation meets sinful man.  Pope Pius XII (1879-1958; pope 1939-1958), a fair judge of such things, is said to have thought Barth the most important theologian since Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274).

Kirchliche Dogmatik explored four themes: revelation, God, creation, and atonement (or reconciliation) although Barth’s intention had been to complete the work by addressing the doctrines of redemption and eschatology.  That he died before being able to finish the project led to something of a theological cult in the 1970s as others speculated how Barth might have discussed such things and structuralists, from a number of disciplines, differed on whether the Dogmatics should be considered an unfinished work.  Perhaps wisely, nobody has ever attempted to write these final volumes.  Nine-thousand pages in German, a pleasing thousand fewer in English, Dogmatics is probably more readable in the digital age, hypertext links assisting those new to the densely referenced and highly technical language in which it’s written.

Albert Speer (1905–1981; Nazi court architect 1934-1942; Nazi minister of armaments and war production 1942-1945), who claimed to have read all the volumes, noted both the conceptual and textual difficulties; sentenced to imprisonment for twenty years by the International Military Tribunal (IMT) which in 1945-1946 sat at Nuremberg to try the leading Nazis in the first and best-known of thirteen such trials, more than most he had time to devote to the task.  In 1959, by the time he'd finished a sixth volume, he noted: “There is much that I still cannot comprehend, chiefly because of the terminology and the subject.  But I have had a curious experience.  The uncomprehended passages exert a tranquilizing effect.  With Barth's help I feel in balance and actually, in spite of all that's oppressive, as if liberated.”  Speer continued: “I owe to Barth the insight that man’s responsibility is not relieved just because evil is part of his nature. Man is by nature evil and nevertheless responsible.  It seems to me there is a kind of complement to that idea in Plato’s statement that for a man who has committed a wrong ‘there is only one salvation: punishment.’  Plato continues: ‘Therefore it is better for him to suffer this punishment than to escape it; for it sustains man’s inward being.’”

Guilty as sin: Speer in the dock at Nuremberg, 1946.

Those passages didn't appear until the publication of Speer's Spandauer Tagebücher (Spandau: The Secret Diaries) (1975), some eight years after Barth's death so he was never able to comment on the idea of his work lending a sense of liberation to someone who would have been hanged had the concealed evidence of the extent of his complicity in the war crimes and crimes against humanity been brought before the court.  Speer's rationalization that an authority as venerated as Plato could be interpreted as saying in serving his sentence he "paid his debt to society" is wholly consistent with both the approach he took at the trial (admitting the "collective guilt" of the regime of which he was a part while denying personal responsibility for any indictable offence) and his successful and lucrative post-war career as an author and celebrity.  Some six months before his observations on Barth, in another context he had noted: “Some time ago I noted that we always read such sentences too late.  That was wrong. What I meant was: We understand them too late.”  By the time he died it does seem likely he understood his guilt but the evasions and denials never ceased.

Signature

Signature (pronounced sig-nuh-cher or sig-nuh-choor)

(1) A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

(2) The act of signing a document.

(3) In music, a sign or set of signs at the beginning of a staff to indicate the key or the time of a piece.

(4) In broadcasting, a song, musical arrangement, sound effect, etc., used as a theme identifying a program.

(5) Any unique, distinguishing aspect, feature, or mark.

(6) In computing, as digital signature, any one of a number of attempts to create a mechanism whereby a digital object can have the same unique identifying characteristic as a physical signature in ink; in cryptography, data attached to a message certifying the message originated from its claimed source; in email and some other variations of communication, test, images or other objects collectively appended usually at the end of a message, analogous with a traditional signature on a letter.

(7) In digital forensic analysis, as digital signature, a term used to refer to any collection of characteristics which can be used as an identifier of origin, intent etc;

(8) The part of a prescription for pharmaceuticals instructing the patient the frequency and quantity in which a drug should be administered (US only).

(9) As an adjective, something intended to be emblematic of an institution or individual (signature dish signature cocktail, signature scent etc).

(10) In printing, a sheet of paper printed with several pages that upon folding will become a section or sections of a book; such a sheet so folded.

(11) In mathematics, a tuple specifying the sign of coefficients in any diagonal form of a quadratic form.

(12) In medicine, a resemblance between the external character of a disease and those of some physical agent (obsolete).

1525-1535: From the Old & Middle French signature, from the Medieval Latin signātura, future active periphrastic of the verb signāre (to sign), the construct being signum (sign), + -tura, feminine of -turus, the future active periphrastic suffix.  The first use with a link to English appears to have been as a kind of document defined in Scottish law.  The Medieval Latin signatura, was, in Classical Latin a rescript (the matrix of a seal).  The meaning "one's own name written in one's own hand" is from 1570s, which replaced the early-fifteenth century “sign-manual” in this sense.  The use in musical notation in which composers used "signs placed it the beginning of a staff to indicate the key and rhythm" was noted first in 1806.  Signature began to be used in the generalized sense of "a distinguishing mark of any kind" as early as the 1620s.

Non est factum

Historically, in contract law a signature was binding on the party who signed and obliged the performance of the specific terms of the contract.  Even if someone could prove they signed because of their own misunderstandings or in an act of carelessness even to the point of gross negligence, courts would still usually enforce the contract but a notable exception was the doctrine of non est factum.  Translated literally from the Latin as "it is not my deed", it’s available as a defense where a person has been induced to sign something in circumstances where the contents of what was signed differ fundamentally from what the person was led to believe.  Where a plea is upheld, the court can set aside the contract (void ab initio).  Special circumstances must exist for the defense to succeed: it does not cover a claim where someone either misunderstood or failed to read the terms and conditions.

An octuple of Lindsay Lohan signatures on Lohanic merchandise. 

It’s novel in that it differs from other aspects of contract law such as the provisions which permit judges to strike-out particular clauses or even entire contracts if their enforcement is held to be “unconscionable”.  Non est factum is available even where terms and conditions can be reasonable such as the sale of a property for fair value; it hinges instead on the state of mind of the signee and the circumstances under which a signature was induced.  Typically, courts are most sympathetic to “innocent victims”, those who through no fault of their own (those illiterate, deaf, blind or suffering some other relevant incapacity) could not understand the document they were signing and relied upon another for advice.  Such is the reverence in contract law for the sanctity of the signature, a heavy evidential onus of proof is laid upon a claimant for non est factum to succeed; it’s a rare and exceptional defense.

The signature dish

Noted chefs and great restaurants often have signature dishes, not necessarily unique to them but something with which they’re famously associated.  Countries and regions also have signature dishes, sometimes advertised and promoted and sometimes just a link which develops over time.  There can even be disputes if the origin of something is thought a source of pride; there are factions in both Australia and New Zealand which lay claim to the pavlova. 

Minnesota Hotdish.

Despite the name, the concept of the Minnesota’s signature hotdish didn’t originate there and, with variations, is popular across the Upper Midwest region of the United States.  As a dish, such is the simplicity in preparation and adaptability in content that something recognizably close has probably been a feature of human cuisine for as long as the technical means of production has been available.  Anything of the hotdish type contains usually a starch, a meat, canned or frozen vegetables with canned soup as the binding agent; cooked in the one flat dish, it’s served heated.  The distinguishing characteristic of the classic Minnesota hotdish is the use of mushroom soup but beyond that, there’s much variation, inventiveness encouraged by the many hotdish completions in the region.  As well as the traditional beef base, tuna, turkey and chicken are used, pasta is often replaced by rice or potatoes and vegetarian versions have appeared.  The critical aspect seems to be the texture, while a Minnesota hotdish won’t entirely maintain the shape when sliced, it should have sufficient integrity for the potatoes or breadcrumbs to stay atop and not sink into the mix.

Hubert Humphrey, Cardinal Terence Cooke (1921–1983; Archbishop of New York 1968-1983) President Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; US president 1963-1969) & Richard Nixon, twenty-third Alfred E Smith dinner, New York, 16 October 1968.  Cardinal Cooke was a less controversial figure than his predecessor (Cardinal Francis Spellman (1889–1967; prelate of the US Catholic Church & Archbishop of New York 1939-1967)).

Hubert Horatio Humphrey (1911–1978) served as a senator for Minnesota (1949-1964 & 1971-1978) and as US vice president (1965-1969).  He was the Democrat Party’s nominee for president in 1968, his candidature something of a rush-job after LBJ's abrupt decision not to seek re-election.  As part of the 1968 campaign, his wife’s Minnesota hotdish recipe was published, unusual today in that it didn’t include the potato gems which usually now sit atop the concoction.  Mrs Humphrey’s culinary campaign contribution wasn’t decisive, her husband, although running Republican Richard Nixon (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974) close in the popular vote (Nixon (31,783,783 votes; 43.4%), Humphrey (31,271,839; 42.7%)), lost the electoral college (Nixon, 32 states & 301 votes, Humphrey 13 states & 191 votes).

Mrs Humphrey’s Ingredients

4 tablespoons shortening
2 green bell peppers, sliced
1 medium onion, chopped
1 lb (500 g) ground beef
1½ half teaspoons salt
¼ teaspoon pepper
2 eggs
2 cups whole kernel corn
4 medium tomatoes, sliced
½ cup dry bread crumbs
Butter

Mrs Humphrey’s Instructions

(1) Put shortening in skillet; lightly fry green peppers, onion and ground beef for 3 minutes or until partially done. Salt and pepper. Remove from heat; stir in eggs and mix well.

(2) Place 1 cup corn in casserole. Top with layer of meat mixture and layer of sliced tomatoes.

(3) Repeat until corn, meat mixture and tomatoes are used.

(4) Cover casserole with crumbs. Dot with bits of butter.

(5) Bake at 375º F (190º C) for 1 hour or until heated thoroughly.

It can be finished in a grill to add something to the cheese.  Serve with a side salad and rolls.

Hitler's signature

Becoming tremulous: Hitler’s signature: 1933-1945.

Between 1943-1945, Adolf Hitler's (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) handwriting suffered and, towards the end, it took some effort even to etch his name, a process which happened in conjunction with a physical decline noted in many contemporary accounts.  The reason for this deterioration has been discussed by doctors, historians and popular authors, most recently in 2015 by Norman Ohler (b 1970) in Der totale Rausch: Drogen im Dritten Reich (The Total Rush: Drugs in the Third Reich), published in English in 2017 as Blitzed: Drugs in Nazi Germany.  Blitzed is a study of the use of methamphetamine stimulants in German society, the military and Hitler himself during the Nazi years with a focus especially on the relationship between the Führer and his personal physician, Dr Theodor Morell (1886–1948) who prescribed and administered a variety of drugs and vitamins between 1936-1945.  It’s the use of opioids and psychoactive drugs that is of most interest.

A best seller, Ohler wrote a lively work in a jaunty style which made his book readable but did attract criticism from the academic and professional historians never happy with journalistic trespassing on their carefully trimmed turf.  While there’s always sensitivity to authors injecting elements of humour and pop-culture references into anything about Hitler and the Third Reich, these essentially stylistic objections matter less than the substantive concerns about presenting as proven fact inferences drawn from incomplete or inconclusive sources.  That critique of scholarship should be noted but Blitzed needs to be read as just another text interpreting the documents of the era and in that, if read in conjunction with other accounts of the time, Ohler’s thesis is in places compelling while sometimes contradicted by multiple other sources.  The argument that the drugs had no effect Hitler’s decline and increasingly erratic behavior were due to stress and the onset of Parkinson’s disease is as dogmatic a position as many accuse Ohler of taking.  There are interesting aspects in the accounts from 1943-1945: the unexpected way Hitler’s physical tremors briefly vanished in the aftermath of the explosion during the assassination attempt in July 1944 and the various clandestine analysis of Morell’s preparations, some of which revealed a strong opioid and some harmless concoctions with barely a pharmacological effect.  While clearly not a conventional work of history, Blitzed seems a valuable contribution.

Patient & doctor: Hitler and Dr Morell.

The fault in Blitzed is probably that habitual journalistic tendency to exaggeration.  That stimulants were widely available and demonstratively popular in Germany doesn’t mean the entire workforce, every hausfrau and all servicemen in the Wehrmacht were habitual or even occasional users of amphetamines although, given the documentary evidence and the observational accounts of behavior, the case for Hitler’s addictions (or at least dependence) is stronger.  Critics felt also compelled to run the usual objection to anything which could be constructed as some sort of exculpatory argument; the idea that being stupefied by psychoactive drugs could somehow absolve individual or collective guilt.  Among those who lived the Nazi experience, long has been established the guilt to one degree or another of the many and the innocence of a few.  That said, there seems little doubt the rapidity of the Wehrmacht's advances in 1939-1940 was at least partially attributable to the soldiers being supplied amphetamines which enabled a heightened level of alertness and performance for sometimes thirty hours without need for sleep.  It was a most effective force multiplier.  Other factors, notably (1) the revolutionary approach to deploying tanks as armored spearheads, (2) the used of dive-bombers, (3) the ineptness of the Allied response and (4) luck were likely of greater significance but the speed did make its contribution.

Tremulous

Tremulous (pronounced trem-yuh-luhs)

(1) Of persons, the body etc, characterized by trembling, as from fear, nervousness, or weakness.

(2) Timid; timorous; fearful.

(3) Of things, vibratory, shaking, or quivering.

(4) Of writing, done with a trembling hand.

(5) Faltering, hesitant, wavering

1605–1615: From the Latin tremulus (shaking, quivering), from tremere (to shake, quake, quiver, tremble), from tremō (I shake).  It was cognate with the Ancient Greek τρέμω (trémō) (tremble).  In Latin, the construct was trem(ere ) + -ulus (the Latin adjectival suffix).  In music, the tremulous effect is the tremolo, an 1801 coining from the Italian tremolo, from the Latin tremulus.  The quaver is from the early fifteenth century quaveren (to vibrate, tremble, have a tremulous motion), probably a frequentative of the early thirteenth century cwavien (to tremble, shake, be afraid) which is perhaps related to the Low German quabbeln (tremble), and possibly of imitative origin.  The meaning "sing in trills or quavers, sing with a tremulous tone" is noted from the 1530s; the related forms are quavered & quavering.  In optics, a tremulous light is a shimmer (1821) and in physiology, a shiver (1727), from shiver, "the shivers" in reference to fever chills dating from 1861.  Tremulous is an adjective, tremulously is an adverb and tremulousness is a noun; the noun plural is also tremulousness.

Becoming tremulous: Hitler’s signature: 1933-1945.

Between 1943-1945, Adolf Hitler's (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) handwriting suffered and, towards the end, it took some effort even to etch his name, a process which happened in conjunction with a physical decline noted in many contemporary accounts.  The reason for this deterioration has been discussed by doctors, historians and popular authors, most recently in 2015 by Norman Ohler (b 1970) in Der totale Rausch: Drogen im Dritten Reich (The Total Rush: Drugs in the Third Reich), published in English in 2017 as Blitzed: Drugs in Nazi Germany (Penguin, ISBN: 9780141983165).  Blitzed is a study of the use of methamphetamine stimulants in German society, the military and Hitler himself during the Nazi years with a focus especially on the relationship between the Führer and his personal physician, Dr Theodor Morell (1886–1948) who prescribed and administered a variety of drugs and vitamins between 1936-1945.  It’s the use of opioids and psychoactive drugs that is of most interest.

A best seller, Ohler wrote a lively work in a jaunty style which made his book readable but did attract criticism from the academic and professional historians never happy with journalistic trespassing on their carefully trimmed turf.  While there’s always sensitivity to authors injecting elements of humour and pop-culture references into anything about Hitler and the Third Reich, these essentially stylistic objections matter less than the substantive concerns about presenting as proven fact inferences drawn from incomplete or inconclusive sources.  That critique of scholarship should be noted but Blitzed needs to be read as just another text interpreting the documents of the era and in that, if read in conjunction with other accounts of the time, Ohler’s thesis is in places compelling while sometimes contradicted by multiple other sources.  The argument that the drugs had no effect Hitler’s decline and increasingly erratic behavior were due to stress and the onset of Parkinson’s disease is as dogmatic a position as many accuse Ohler of taking.  There are interesting aspects in the accounts from 1943-1945: the unexpected way Hitler’s physical tremors briefly vanished in the aftermath of the explosion during the assassination attempt in July 1944 and the various clandestine analysis of Morell’s preparations, some of which revealed a strong opioid and some harmless concoctions with barely a pharmacological effect.  While clearly not a conventional work of history, Blitzed seems a valuable contribution.

Hitler and Dr Morell.

The fault in Blitzed is probably that habitual journalistic tendency to exaggeration.  That stimulants were widely available and demonstratively popular in Germany doesn’t mean the entire workforce, every hausfrau and all servicemen in the Wehrmacht were habitual or even occasional users of amphetamines although, given the documentary evidence and the observational accounts of behavior, the case for Hitler’s addictions (or at least dependence) is stronger.  Critics felt also compelled to run the usual objection to anything which could be constructed as some sort of exculpatory argument; the idea that being stupefied by psychoactive drugs could somehow absolve individual or collective guilt.  Among those who lived the Nazi experience, long has been established the guilt to one degree or another of the many and the innocence of a few.  That said, there seems little doubt the rapidity of the Wehrmacht's advances in 1939-1941 were at least partially attributable to the soldiers being supplied amphetamines which enabled a heightened level of alertness and performance for sometimes thirty hours without need for sleep.  It was a most effective force multiplier.  Other factors, notably (1) the revolutionary approach to deploying tanks as armored spearheads, (2) the used of dive-bombers, (3) the ineptness of the Allied response and (4) luck were more significance but the speed did make a contribution.

Not tremulous: Lindsay Lohan and block capitals, Los Angeles, 2010.

Graphology (the analysis of handwriting to determine personality traits) did once enjoy quite wide acceptance in many places including being admissible as evidence in some courts but has in recent years come to be regarded as at least scientifically dubious while other condemn the whole thing as a pseudoscience deserving about the same status as astrology.  However, there are aspects of it which seem helpful in comparing the differences in the handwriting of individuals at various times and anyway, it's often fun to read, even if only to confirm our prejudices.  During Lindsay Lohan’s court appearances, she was known to take notes so, when the opportunity presented itself, a photographer snapped an image and it was provided to graphologist Bart Baggett (b 1969; founder of the Handwriting University, a distance learning school) who wrote an analysis.  He’d actually assessed her handwriting when younger and the style adopted then was different from the all block printing exhibited in 2010.  While he cautioned he wasn’t convinced the sample could provide any insight “…into her psyche” the change between the two was interesting:

”Despite her youth and tendency to find trouble I did see a high level of intelligence in her handwriting.  But, intelligence does not always translate into good behavior or emotional stability.  I will say this: the handwriting shown on this page is not that of an erratic, scattered drug addict.  It is the handwriting of a focused individual; with a high degree of perfectionism.  The straight baseline reveals an overall anxiety at things not going right; someone who loves order and structure.

In graphology, anytime somebody consistently blocked prints it’s seen as a huge (but common) defense mechanism.  Often this is a positive defense mechanism such as extreme masculinity.  I would say most individuals would find it difficult to distinguish between this handwriting and that of a military strategist or perhaps even an engineer who clock prints everything.  The one thing graphologists do agree on is that when someone only block prints, they don’t want people to know their most innermost thoughts and feelings, they are putting up a shield and protecting their intimacy.  Therefore you can bet she now has some major trust and privacy issues and has a guard up.  Who would blame her for having guard up, considering everything that you write is published and everywhere you go someone is snapping a picture of you? I think I would become a block printer too.”

Ineffable

Ineffable (pronounced in-ef-uh-buhl)

(1) Incapable of being expressed or described in words; indescribable; indefinable; inexpressible.

(2) Not to be spoken because of its sacredness; too great or intense to be expressed in words; declared as unutterable.

1400–1450: From the late Middle English ineffable (beyond expression in words; too great for words, inexpressible; unspeakable), from the fourteenth century Old French ineffable (which in modern French endures as ineffable), from the Latin ineffābilis (unutterable), the construct being from in- (not; opposite of) +‎ effor (utter) +‎ -bilis (-able), the antonym therefore effābilis (speakable; able to be expressed), from effārī (utter), from fārī (to say; speak), from the primitive Indo-European root bha (to speak, tell, say).  The old English antonym was effable which is archaic and probably extinct except as a literary or poetic device.  Ineffable & ineffaceable are adjectives, ineffability & ineffableness are nouns and ineffably is an adverb.  Although it sounds paradoxical, it can make sense when ineffable is used as a (non-standard) noun so the noun plural can be ineffables.

The meaning "that may not be spoken" is from 1590s and the noun ineffables was for some time a jocular euphemism for "trousers", source of the companion “unmentionables” which survived into the twentieth century to refer to underwear in a similar sense.  The noun ineffably (unspeakableness) dates from the 1620s.  The adjective effable gained its currency in the seventeenth century because of the use in legal jargon to impart "that may be (lawfully) expressed in words" and although long archaic it does still sometimes appear in literary efforts good and bad.

In Christianity, at times the very name of God was held to be ineffable because it was something too sacred to be uttered by earthly lips.  Adonai was an Old Testament word for God (used as a substitute for the ineffable name), from the Medieval Latin, from the Hebrew Adhonai (literally my lord"), from adon, from the Ancient Greek Ἄδωνις (Ádōnis). + -ai (the suffix of the first person).  Jehovah was used in William Tyndale's (1494–1536) transliteration of the Hebrew Tetragrammaton YHWH (using the vowel points of Adhonai).  The full name being too sacred for utterance, it appears in four places in the King James Version (KJV 1611) where the usual translation the lord would have been inconvenient and was taken as the principal and personal name of God.

Portrait of Pope Leo X and his cousins, cardinals Giulio de' Medici and Luigi de' Rossi, oil on canvas by Raphael (1483–1520).  Leo X got a bit of fun out of life.

The history of the vowel substitution is an example of the sometimes haphazard way in which language evolved in the Medieval period.  It was a loose aggregation of Jewish scribe-scholars called the Masoretes (בַּעֲלֵי הַמָּסוֹרָה in the Hebrew and romanized as Baʿălēy Hammāsōrā, literally “Masters of the Tradition”) who between the fifth and tenth centuries, working out of Palestine and Babylonia, first made the vowel substitution.  Various factions of the Masoretes codified systems of pronunciation and grammatical guides in the form of diacritical notes (the niqqud) on the biblical text in an attempt to standardize the pronunciation, paragraph and verse divisions.  Their work is best remembered for the chanting, defined by the cantillation (the intonation of a sentence, by way of marks which are read as sequences of musical pitches) of the Tanakh (the Hebrew Bible), used by Jewish communities worldwide.  The Masoretes made the vowel substitution a direction to substitute Adhonai for “the ineffable name”.  That was fine but in the West, scholars took it literally as just another word to translate which yielded JeHoVa, the first instance apparently in the writings of the Italian theologian Petrus Galatinus (1460-1540) who held clerical office under Pope Leo X (1475–1521; pope 1513-1521), one of the four Medici popes and remembered (fondly by a few) for his observation “God has given us the papacy, let us enjoy it” and although historians have their doubts he ever uttered the words, his conduct while on the throne of Saint Peter made clear if he didn't say it, he should have.

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

In modern use the concept of ineffability takes various forms.  There is the idea of what is taboo (that which is by social consensus or convention forbidden to be uttered) which is a shifting set of ideas, subjects and individuals; depending on this and that in one era they may not be mentioned while at other times they may not be criticized.  There’s the notion of it as the indescribable (which can apply equally to extremes of pain and joy) which is really a terms of emphasis which indicates there is not adjective or other word available to encapsulate something so extreme.  In science it describes (actually more “refers to”) those phenomena which may exist but be yet undiscovered because the limitations of language mean it’s not possible even to imagine their existence; the classic Rumsfeldian unknown unknowns, which, upon becoming known become known and sometimes, retrospectively understood known unknowns.

Tomb of Pius IX in the Vatican.

Ineffabilis Deus (Ineffable God) was a statement of dogma issued in 1854 by Pope Pius IX (1792–1878;pope 1846-1878), confirming the long-held belief in much of the Church that the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, was born of an immaculate conception and thus entered the world free of original sin.  Leo’s statement came five years after the circulation to the bishops of the exploratory Ubi Primum (On The Immaculate Conception), a document which might now be called a green paper, seeking as it did their opinion on the matter.   It was their positive reaction which encouraged the publication of Ineffabilis Deus, now recognized as an instance of the doctrine of papal infallibility that was something which would not formally be defined and constitutionally enshrined until the First Vatican Council (1869–1870 and now often referred to as Vatican I).  Papal infallibility is sometimes misunderstood and is actually limited in its application to the times at which when pope speaks ex cathedra (literally “from the chair”): matters of faith and doctrine.  So, like many wise dictators, Pius followed the practice of Catherine the Great (Catherine II, 1729-1796; Empress of Russia 1762 to 1796) who while appearing dictatorial, took care to ensure soundings were taken and her edicts were issued only when she was sure they would be obeyed.  Leo likewise sounded out the bishops.

In the triple crown, laying down the law: Dream of Innocent III and the Confirmation of the Rule (1452) by Benozzo Gozzoli (1421-1497), San Francesco Gallery, Montefalco, Italy.

Still, it’s a potent authority to possess in an absolute theocracy and as the Ayatollahs in Iran are discovering, has its limitations if imposed beyond the limits the people will accept and they’d do well to recall the shrewd observation of one pope that “when one is infallible, one has to be careful what one says”.  What was codified at Vatican I (in Pastor aeternus (literally “Eternal Shepherd” and the First Dogmatic Constitution of the Church of Christ)) really wasn’t new in that historians have cited several instances in medieval theology and although noting alluding to the concept appears to exist in ancient texts, there’s no known discussion of the idea that even a bishop might sometimes be wrong until the Council of Antioch (264) but the sense of the Church’s enduring permanence of rightness does for centuries seem to have been thought implicit.  The theological basis of a pope’s authority come from several Biblical texts, most notably Matthew 16: 18-19 in which is described the delegation of authority Christ passed to St Peter, something which the early Christians held was inherited by his successors.  Of subsequent political interest was that authority in some sense also accrued to Rome because Peter was held to be the its first bishop and was there martyred, things of real significance in the centuries which followed when alternative “popes” in other places contested the rights to power and devotion.  However, although the patriarchates of Antioch and Alexandria both staked apostolic claims, they fell to Islam while Constantinople, although a military and political power, had no apostolic tradition.  Contested though it sometimes was, Rome’s primacy was established early and it endured although, this did seem to encourage a bit of mission creep, Innocent III (1160–1216; pope 1198-1216) going further than most in asserting ultimate authority in matters temporal as well as spiritual, his omnibus claim of ratione peccati (by reason of sin) probably leaving nothing of the affairs of man beyond a pope’s reach.

Pope Nicholas III in triple crown.

Interestingly, historians regard the emergence infallibility in a recognizably modern form owes much to a legal device.  After Pope Nicholas III (circa 1225–1280; pope 1277-1280) arranged for the worldly goods of Franciscans to be assigned to the papacy so the monks might live in the poverty their vows demanded, one legally-minded Franciscan expressed concern an anti-pope (there were fakes from time to time) might misuse this confiscatory power.  He therefore argued that infallibility existed but that each edict was absolute and no pope could go back on the utterances of his predecessors. So papal, bound by precedent, infallibility was not sovereignty because a pope was bound by the statements of his predecessors.  Squabbles followed, sometimes essentially about money and sometimes the apparently abstract issue involving the authority to create saints, something actually of real significance because of the importance the cults of saints had assumed in the numbers of adherents (and thus their money) the various orders could attract.  More seriously, the Western Schism (1378-1417) introduced what some held to be heretical: that the Church should not be ruled by a sovereign pope, authority instead vested in Church councils, the intellectual rationale being that while a single pope could be in error, the collective of a council could not.  From this can be traced the beginnings of the idea that papal infallibility was defensible (and perhaps even desirable) if limited to matters of faith and morals.  However, there is nothing in the papers left by the Council of Trent (1545-1563) from which it would appear even an inference could be drawn about infallibility and the rise of science and the Enlightenment in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries hardly provided fertile ground to pursue the matter.

Pope Pius XII while Apostolic Nuncio to Germany (1920–1930), leaving the presidential palace in Berlin after celebrations marking the 80th birthday of Generalfeldmarschall Paul von Hindenburg (1847–1934; Reichspräsident (1925-1934) of Germany 1925-1934), October 1927.

Yet it was in the nineteenth century, as modernity began to intrude even on the Church that the notion was asserted and embedded in the constitution.  Without any explicit precedent in theology or canon law, Pius IX decreed the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception of Mary to be infallible and this seems to have been the definitional marker used at Vatican I which declared a pope was infallible when speaking ex Cathedra on matters of faith and morals.  Still, even that may have been a double-edged sword for although, by the mid-nineteenth century the matter of Mary’s initial sinfulness was probably of interest to a relative few, Pius IX’s Syllabus Errorum (Syllabus of Errors (1864)) which was a strident attack of much that was liberal and modern was controversial; the council may have decided that the limits of infallibility were as importance as its existence.  Tellingly, the only other statement issued ex Cathedra came in 1950 when in his bull Munificentissimus Deus (The most bountiful God) Pius XII (1876-1958; pope 1939-1958) defined the doctrine of the Assumption of Mary.

Pope Benedict XVI in Mercedes-Benz ML 430 Popemobile, driving through Via Condotti before a prayer at the statue of the Virgin Mary during the annual feast of the Immaculate Conception at Piazza di Spagna (Spanish Steps), Rome, 8 December 2012.

No pope has since spoken ex Cathedra although during the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II, 1962-1965), in his encyclical Lumen Gentium (literally “Light of the Nations” (1964) and an update to the Dogmatic Constitution of the Church of Christ) Paul VI (1897-1978; pope 1963-1978) did stretch the definition a bit by defining papal infallibility as that spoken by a pope on a matter of faith and morals either ex Cathedra or in an ecumenical council.  Among Vatican-watchers, there does seem now a view the Holy See has embarked on a strategy of “Infallibility by stealth”, imposing doctrinal orthodoxies and shutting down debate by clever phraseology.  Still, technically, it remains an authority unused since 1950 and Benedict XVI (b 1927; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus since), always at his happiest dancing on the head of a pin, was often at pains to differentiate between his solemn (but not infallible) pronouncements made as pope and anything else he’s ever said.  The modern popes would appear more aware of their own fallibilities than their predecessors.

Renaissance

Renaissance (pronounced ren-uh-sahns, ren-uh-zahns, ren-uh-zahns, or ri-ney-suhns)

(1) As “the Renaissance”, the description of great revival of classical art, literature, and learning in Europe, the conventionally dated between the fourteenth & seventeenth centuries, marking the transition from the medieval to the modern world.

(2) The period during which this revival occurred.

(3) Of or relating to this period.

(4) The forms and treatments in art, architecture, literature and philosophy during the period even if not including elements suggesting a revival of classical forms; extended widely (furniture, wallpaper etc).

(5) Used loosely, any sustained or dramatic revival in the world of art and learning, notably the so-called “Chinese Renaissance” (1917-1823) associated with the “New Culture movement”.

(6) A renewal of life, vigor, interest, etc; a rebirth or revival (used of people, institutions and ideas).

(7) Relating to furnishings or decorations in or imitating the style of the Renaissance, in which motifs of classical derivation frequently appear.

(8) Used sometimes ironically, a reference to any of the adaptations of the architectural styles associated with the Renaissance in foreign architecture (some playful, some ghastly), either as isolated detailing or entire buildings.

Late 1860s (as renascence since circa 1840): In the sense of “the great period of revival of classical-based art and learning in Europe that began in the fourteenth century”, the word was from the French renaissance des lettres (revival of the arts), from the Old French renaissance (literally “rebirth”, usually in a spiritual sense), from renastre (to grow anew (of plants)) (which exists in Modern French as renaître (be reborn), the construct being renaiss- (stem of renaistre (to be born again), from the Latin renāscī (be born again, rise again, reappear, be renewed) (the construct being re- (used in the sense of “again”)) + nāscī (be born again, rise again, reappear, be renewed) + -ance.  In the Old Latin, gnasci was from the primitive Indo-European root gene- (give birth, beget).  The suffix -ance was an alternative form of -ence, both added to an adjective or verb to form a noun indicating a state or condition, such as result or capacity, associated with the verb (many words ending in -ance were formed in French or by alteration of a noun or adjective ending in –ant).  The suffix -ance was from the Middle English -aunce & -ance, from the Anglo-Norman -aunce and the continental Old French -ance, from the Latin -antia & -entia.  The –ence suffix was a word-forming element attached to verbs to form abstract nouns of process or fact (convergence from converge), or of state or quality and was from the Middle English -ence, from the Old French -ence, from the Latin –entia & -antia (depending on the vowel in the stem word).  The Latin present-participle endings for verbs stems in -a- were distinguished from those in -i- and -e- and as the Old French evolved from Latin, these were leveled to -ance, but later French borrowings from Latin (some of them subsequently passed to English) used the appropriate Latin form of the ending, as did words borrowed by English directly from Latin, thus diligence, absence etc.  There was however little consistency, English gaining many words from French but from the sixteenth century the suffix –ence was selectively restored, such was the reverence for Latin.  The use in a historical context has a specific, limited definition but in a general sense the synonyms include rejuvenation, renewal, resurgence, revitalization & revival.  The related forms are the Italian rinascenza & rinascirnento.  Renaissance is a noun & adjective and renaissancey is an adjective; the noun plural is renaissances.

Although the use of the word Renaissance was a nineteenth century thing, the significance of what had happened in Europe centuries earlier had long been studied by historians and a term to describe the period (“the revival” or “revival of learning”) was in use by at least 1785.  Use extended (with a lower-case “r”) in the 1850s to the resurgence of just about anything long been in decay or disuse (especially of learning, literature, art).  The term “Renaissance man” was in use by 1885 and initially meant literally “a man alive during the Renaissance” but by the turn of the century it was being used to refer to the sort of “idealized man” imagined as an exemplar of the virtues and characteristics of those described by the historians who seems to see as much perfection in them as they did in the worthies of the Classical age.  The use to refer to those alive with such excellent qualities (humanism, scholarship, varied attainments, freedom of thought and personality) dates from the late 1940s and, perhaps surprisingly, “Renaissance man” didn’t wait for second-wave feminism (1960s-1980s) bur appeared almost simultaneously.  Technical terms (neo-Renaissance, Renaissance revival, Renaissance festival, Renaissance fair, anti-Renaissance, post-Renaissance, pre-Renaissance, pro-Renaissance etc were created as required.

Just about any sort of revival can be styled “a renaissance”.

The spelling renascence is slightly older, in texts since circa 1840 and purely French while the later renaissance emerged during the late 1860s and was Latinate, associated with historical scholarship.  The spelling renaissance has long been preferred but without the initial capital either can be used of anything suggesting a sense of revival or rebirth.  Some style guides suggest the use with the capital letter should be restricted to the flowering of European culture which began in Italy in the fourteenth century but others acknowledge such a use is appropriate also for certain other defined epochs such as the so-called “Chinese Renaissance” (1917-1823) associated with the “New Culture movement”.  The revival of interest in the texts of Classical authors resulted in many words from Greek & Latin being absorbed into English and this had the effect of many French loan-words acquired over the centuries being re-spelled on the models of the forms from Antiquity.  The relationship between renascence & renaissance is an example of that phenomenon, happening in the mid-nineteenth century.  However, the older form did retain its charms for some and the English poet (and what would now be called a “social commentator”) Matthew Arnold (1822–1888) preferred “renascence” and created something of a fashion (ie an affectation) for the word among those who fancied themselves “Renaissance men”.

The ideas of the Renaissance is understood as marking the end of the Middle Ages but unlike some dramatic act (such as the fall of the Western Roman Empire), there’s no exact date on which one era ended and the other began but nor does it make sense to speak of a period between the two, thus the long practice vaguely to refer to the Renaissance “beginning late in the fourteenth century an continuing even until the sixteenth” (by which time it had reached even barbaric lands like England).  As the scholarship of the period (especially of the visual art) grew, historians refined things by distinguishing between the early, middle, high and late Renaissance, again not exactly delineated but defined more by recognizable evolutions in architectural & artistic style.  From the beginning though, what was obvious was that the Renaissance was something admirable, an return to the imagined perfection of the Classical age and thus a contrast with the unlamented Middle Ages (the so-called “medieval period” and, more revealingly, known as also as the “Dark Ages”) which were regarded by historians as priest-ridden, backward, superstitious, uncultured, ignorant, narrow and inhibited by a dogmatic theology which crushed and punished thought.  The Renaissance was extolled as learned, civilized, broadminded, progressive, enlightened and free-thinking.

Scuola di Atene (School of Athens, 1509-1511), fresco by Raphael (Raffaello Sanzio da Urbino, 1483–1520) on a commission from Julius II (1443–1513; pope 1503-1513) Stanza della Segnatura (Stanze di Raffaello), Palazzi Pontifici (Apostolic Palace), Vatican City.  Julius II was a Renaissance pope with all that implies and while they all did things in their own way, their general philosophy was best summed up in a phrase attributed to Leo X (1475–1521; pope 1513-1521), one of the four Medici popes and remembered (fondly by a few) for his observation “God has given us the papacy, let us enjoy it” and although historians have their doubts he ever uttered the words, his conduct while on the throne of Saint Peter made clear if he didn't say it, he should have.  The “High Renaissance” was the period between the 1490s and 1520s and although the art historians usually don’t claim the period of necessity produced the finest works, it remains an orthodoxy that much of what was created best represents what might be called the “cultural zeitgeist”.  Raphael’s School of Athens depicted a gathering of philosophers, scholars and artists, with Aristotle (right) and Plato (left) in the centre, walking among a clutter of figures, most in animated discussion about obviously serious matters while the odd solitary figure sits quietly reflecting.  As an image, critics would now say the artist was laying the message on “with a trowel” but he certainly encapsulated the era’s idealized view of the Classical world.

Scholarship as early as the nineteenth theory (which would now be classed as “revisionist”) challenged the tradition views of Antiquity, the Middle Ages and the Renaissance and the notion of several renaissances, each succeeding the other and gaining a kind of momentum from its predecessor(s) and some even suggested the beginning of the era could be regarded as somewhere in the twelfth century, something quite plausible of the architecture though perhaps not of the painting but vernacular literatures were developing, there was some interest in the Latin classics, Latin poetry and Roman law and Greek philosophy and scientific understandings were being translated.  Tellingly too, Arab scientific discoveries were becoming and the first European universities were being founded so which the influence of the Church remained strong, it was a time not devoid of intellectual and creative activity but then neither was the Middle Ages wholly barren of such things.  One charming irony about the extraordinary art and architecture which appeared in Italy during the Renaissance was that the loveliness stands starkly in contrast to the appalling moral character of the patrons who commissioned much of it, some of the popes and cardinals, the latter in the era having gained such squalid reputations that the word “cardinal” was long used as an insult in Rome.  Historians tell these tales with some relish.