Lord

Lord (pronounced lawrd)

(1) In historic use, the master of the servants of a household; the master of a feudal manor (obsolete).

(2) A person who has authority, control, or power over others; a master or chief (now used only informally).

(3) A person who exercises authority from property rights; an owner of land, houses etc (a concept which persists in British & (some) Commonwealth land law in the title of Lord Paramount; in historical use, a feudal tenant holding his manor directly of the monarch.

(4) Informally, a person who is a leader or has great influence in a chosen profession; a magnate of a trade or profession (tobacco lords, press lords etc).

(5) In medieval Europe, a feudal superior, especially the master of a manor.

(6) In the UK peerage, a courtesy title granted to the sons of senior peers.

(7) The Lords Spiritual and Lords Temporal comprising the UK's House of Lords (always plural).

(8) In the UK, the ceremonial title of certain officials (used with some other title, name, or the like) such as Lord Chancellor, Lord Chief Justice etc.

(9) As “my Lord Bishop”, the polite title of a bishop (obsolete).

(10) In the peerage of the UK, the title informally substituted for baron, viscount, earl or marquis.

(11) The Supreme Being; God; Jehovah (initial capital letter).

(12) The Savior, Jesus Christ (initial capital letter).

(13) In astrology, a planet having dominating influence.

(14) Slang for a husband considered as head of the household (archaic except in the facetious phrase lord and master although use persists in some fundamentalist sects).

(15) In UK slang, a hunchback (obsolete).

(16) In Australian slang sixpence (the five cent piece) (obsolete).

1300s: From the fourteenth century Middle English lord and lorde, from the thirteenth century lourde and other variants which dropped the intervocalic consonant of the earlier lowerd, louerd, loverd, laford & lhoaverd, all derived from the Old English hlāford, from hlāfweard, the construct being hlāf (bread) + weard (keeper, guardian).  The term was already being applied broadly prior to the literary development of Old English and was influenced by its common use to translate Latin dominus.  The equivalent Scots form laird (lord), preserved a separate vowel development (which was the influence of the northern (Scottish & Middle English lard & laverd)), like the Old English compound hlāf-ǣta (servant (literally “bread-eater”)) and the modern English lady, from the Old English hlǣfdīġe (bread-kneader).  The Old English hlaford was a contraction of earlier hlafweard (literally "one who guards the loaves), the construct being from hlaf (bread, loaf) + weard (keeper, guardian), from the primitive Indo-European root wer- (perceive, watch out for).  The Middle English word laford entered Icelandic, where it survives as lávarður.  The modern monosyllabic form emerged in the fourteenth century and was used as an interjection from late in the century, the Lord's Prayer dating from the 1540s and although the Old English hlaford (master of a household, ruler, superior) also used to describe God (translating the Latin Dominus), the Old English drihten was much more common.

Warts & all: Portrait of Oliver Cromwell (1599–1658; Lord Protector of the Commonwealth 1653-1658) (1650), oil on canvas by Samuel Cooper (1609-1672).

The meaning "an owner of land, houses etc” dates from circa 1300, originally in the sense of “a landlord”.  As “my lord”, it was by 1540 (in England) the usual polite form when addressing a nobleman under the rank of a duke and a bishop" as was an interjection from the late fourteenth century.  As a general term of convenience used for the "peers of England" (especially those represented in parliaments), the use emerged in the mid-fifteenth century.  The Lord's Prayer was from the 1540s and the phrase "Year of our Lord" (ie AD, (translating the Latin anno domini) came into use from the late fourteenth century.  The expressions conveying a state of ignorance (Lord knows” & “Lord only knows” (both often appended with who, what, why etc)) seem first to have been recorded in 1711 although in oral use there may be a long tradition.  The phrase “drinks like a lord”, was from the 1620s, presumably an either allusion to the cost of strong drink or the habits of the gentry.

The verb lord dates from circa 1300 in the sense of "to exercise lordship, rule as a lord" and was directly from the noun, the intransitive meaning "to play the lord, domineer" emerging late in the fourteenth century, the phrase “to lord it over” first recorded in the 1570.  The interjection lordy was first noted in 1832 in imitation of African-American vernacular and was an extended form of the noun.  The noun lordling (puny or contemptible lord) was a late term of disparagement and is long obsolete.  An ancient calling, the noun warlord was coined only in 1856 and was usually considered a translation of the German Kriegsherr or the Chinese junfa.  The early fourteenth century adjective lordly originally had the sense of "haughty, imperious; of or pertaining to lords, noble” and was used as an adverb to convey “despotically” but by the 1530s was used to demote “magnificent, on a grand scale, fit for a lord”.  Lordship was from circa 1300 and was a direct translation of the Old English hlafordscipe (authority, rule, dominion (translating the Latin dominatio) and in common law developed as part of the system of land title.  As a form of address to nobles, judges etc, use emerged and was gradually formalized from the late fifteenth century.  The noun landlord (owner of a tenement, one who rents land or property to a tenant) dates from the early fifteenth century and by then Lord had been a surname for over a hundred years, best known now from the London cricket ground.  The Scottish laird (landed proprietor or hereditary estate-holder) emerged in the mid-fifteenth century, having been used a surname since the thirteenth, both forms a Scottish and northern England dialectal variant of lord.  Lord is a noun, proper noun, verb & interjection, lorded is a verb, lording is a noun & verb, lordy is an interjection and lordly is an adjective & adverb; the noun plural is lords.

Keith Miller (1919-2004), fourth Victory Test, Lord’s, August 1945.

The origin of Lord's Cricket Ground, in St John's Wood, London has nothing to do with the peerage.  It’s named after its founder, Thomas Lord (1755-1832) and is the third of three grounds he established between 1787 and 1814.  Lord was approached in 1786 by leading members of the White Conduit Club who wanted a more private venue and offered to underwrite the project so in May 1787, Lord acquired seven acres (28,000 m²) off Dorset Square for his first ground and White Conduit relocated there, soon becoming part of the new Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC).  When the lease ended in 1810, Lord secured an eighty-year lease on two fields, the Brick and Great Fields at North Bank, St John's Wood.  The second venue, now referred to as Lord's Middle ground, was built by 1809 but in 1813, Parliament requisitioned the land for Regent's Canal, thereby necessitating a further move.  Lord then moved his ground to the present site, literally rolling up the turf from the old and transplanting it to the new.

Following our Lord and Savior: Lindsay Lohan depicted as a Christ-like figure, draped in a white robe, arms outstretched, crucifixion-style, complete with crown of thorns (a nice touch), Lindsay Lohan, Purple Fashion magazine, Spring-Summer edition, 2010.

The image was one of a series by Terry Richardson (b 1965) and appeared on the cover of the spring-summer 2010 edition of the French magazine Purple Fashion, the photo-shoot featuring clothes by a number of designers including Zac Posen, Alexander McQueen & Emmanuel Ungaro but predictably it was the invocation of our Lord Jesus which attracted most interest.  A spokesman for the French Catholic League was quoted as saying "Not only is the pose inappropriate, the timing is offensive." (the magazine was released on the eve of Lent, the most sacred season in the Christian liturgical calendar).  Although Ms Lohan at the time had not much been associated with penitence and abstinence, not long before she had tweeted that she believed it's "...all about karma...what goes around comes around."  In Hinduism and Buddhism, karma is an expression which describes the cyclical nature of an individual's thoughts & actions in this and previous lives, something which decides their fate in future existences.  Noting that, The League's spokesman said "If she believes that, then it behooves her to apologize to Christians before it's too late.", adding that she is "...spiritually homeless..." and "...would benefit by converting to Christianity."  Ms Lohan did not respond to the comments.

Woolsack

Woolsack (pronounced woo l-sak)

(1) A sack intended to carry wool (sometimes wool-sack).

(2) The speaker’s chair in the House of Lords, one of a number of cloth-covered seats or divans, stuffed with wool, once used also by law lords, but best known as the seat of the Lord Chancellor and now the Lord Speaker.

(3) A reference to the historic Lord Chancellor's office.

(4) The historic name for the modern Australian wool bale.

1250-1300: Middle English compound word wool + sack.  Wool came from the Middle English wolle, from Old English wull, from Proto-Germanic wullō (cognate with the Saterland Frisian wulle, the Low German wull, the Dutch wol, German wolle and Norwegian ull.  All are thought derived from the primitive hwĺ̥hneh, thought also to have influenced the Welsh gwlân, the Latin lāna, the Lithuanian vìlna, the Russian во́лос (vólos), the Balau влас and the Albanian lesh.  All meant variously “wool, hair, fleece”.

Sack was from the Middle English sak (bag, sackcloth) from the Old English sacc (sack, bag) and sæcc (sackcloth, sacking), both from the Proto-Germanic sakkuz (sack), from the Classical Latin saccus (large bag), derived from the Ancient Greek σάκκος ((sákkos (bag of coarse cloth)).  Ultimate source is though Semitic, possibly Phoenician.  Word was cognate with the Dutch zak, the German Sack, the Swedish säck, the Hebrew שַׂק‎ ((śaq, sack, sackcloth)), the Aramaic סַקָּא‎, the Classical Syriac ܣܩܐ‎, Ge'ez ሠቅ (śäḳ), the Akkadian saqqu and the Egyptian sꜣgꜣ (to gather together).  There are sack factions among the etymologists.  Some suggest sack was originally Egyptian, a nominal derivative of sꜣq that also yielded the Coptic sok and made its way into Greek by way of a Semitic intermediary.  Others reject this view on the technical grounds that an originally Egyptian word would be expected to yield the Hebrew סַק rather than שַׂק (only they understand this stuff).  This faction posits the Coptic and Greek words are both borrowings from Semitic, with the Coptic word perhaps developing via Egyptian sꜣgꜣ.

The Horsesack

The Woolsack is the seat of the Lord Speaker in the House of Lords, the UK’s upper house although until the constitutional reforms of the twenty-first century, that was the role of the lord chancellor, an office dating at least from the Norman Conquest though references to the title appear as early as 605.  The New Labour government attempted in 2003 to abolish the office but a review determined it couldn’t be done without an act of Parliament and that was a distraction the government at the time preferred not to inflict on itself.  Instead, enabling legislation providing for the creation of the office of Lord Speaker and a redefinition of the role of lord chancellor was drafted in 2004 and, after a few squabbles, received royal assent a year later with the structural changes effected by 2006.

The Lord Chancellor (once styled as Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain) is in the UK’s order of precedence, the highest-ranking among the extant Great Officers of State, out-ranked only by certain royal personages and the Archbishop of Canterbury.  A lord chancellor is appointed by the sovereign on the advice of the prime-minister and before the acts of union which made them constituent parts of Great Britain, there were separate lord chancellors for the Kingdom of England (including the Principality of Wales) and the Kingdom of Scotland, the office of Lord Chancellor of Ireland disestablished in 1922, consequent upon the Anglo-Irish Treaty (1921) which granted Ireland a considerable autonomy which in the years to come would evolve into independence.  That the office of Lord Chancellor for Ireland existed as early as the twelfth century seems certain but whether this was something distinct from the English office is unclear and the oldest surviving records which verify a separate Irish office date from the thirteenth century.  For centuries the Irish appointee was a clergyman, usually English and while lay chancellors tended to be the rule after the Reformation (no cleric appointed after 1665), Irish-born appointments were rare before the mid-1800s.

Emulated woolsack: A pregnant Lindsay Lohan in Sandro Ona sack dress, April 2023.  Historically, crocheted garments were fashioned from wool but the outer fabric of Sandro's Ono was 100% cotton (the lining 62% viscose & 38% polyamide) illustrating what's possible with modern techniques.

Today, as minister for justice, the Lord Chancellor sits in cabinet and is responsible for the administration and independence of the courts.  In this detail things differ from the Australian practice because in the UK, both the attorney-general and solicitor-general sit in parliament, although, by modern convention, the former now does not attend cabinet except when summoned to provide advice.  New Labour’s constitutional changes not only moved the roll of presiding over the Lords to the newly-created lord speaker but also ended the lord chancellor’s roll as head of the judiciary in England and Wales and presiding judge of the Chancery Division of the High Court, these duties assumed respectively by the lord chief justice and the chancellor of the High Court.  The rationale of the changes in 2005 was to give constitutional effect to the separation of powers (in the British context a division between the legislature & executive (which passes and administers the laws) and the judiciary (which interprets and enforces the laws).  In practice, the distinction had for many years been observed but structurally, it looked very murky, the lord chancellor as a cabinet member belonging to (1) the executive, on the Woolsack as presiding officer in the Lords belonging to (2) the legislature and as a judge in the chancery division, belonging to (3) the judiciary, ruling on laws he or she had earlier participated in passing.

It was the fourteenth century Edward III (1312–1377; King of England 1327-1377) who commanded his Lord Chancellor, when in council, should sit on the wool bale which became known as The Woolsack, the king wishing to draw attention to the crucial importance of the wool trade to the economy of medieval England.  In 1938, to symbolize imperial unity, the Lords directed the Woolsack be re-stuffed with wool from throughout the empire at which point it was discovered the Woolsack was actually stuffed with horsehair.  Even when re-stuffed, because of the construction, some horsehair had to be added to ensure structural integrity, one Lord Chancellor, (Quintin Hogg, 1907–2001 who first entered parliament in 1938, Lord Chancellor 1970-1974 & 1979–1987), noting in 1986 that “wise Victorian ancestors” were responsible for the substitution.

As a body, the House of Lords was once thought a dignified place where deliberations were thoughtful and the freedom from electoral contests meant the place was less constrained by the rancour and political clatter which characterized the House of Commons although their lordships could be realists, one lamenting the prime minister seemed to think them "a bunch or disreputable old gentlemen".  It's certainly not the place it was.  That Gordon Brown (b 1951; UK prime-minister 2007-2010) in 2008 cynically ennobled a figure like Peter "Mandy" Mandelson (b 1953) to take a seat in the house, where once had sat Wellington, Palmerston and Curzon, was an indication of what standards had descended to in the twenty-first century; Boris Johnson's (b 1964; UK prime-minister 2019-2022) resignation honours list (which would once have been thought scandalous) attracted amusement rather than scorn.  It's also an institution rarely thought conspicuous for efficiency.  When selecting the two British judges to sit among the eight on the bench of the IMT (International Military Tribunal) for the first Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946) there had been a bit of a squabble in the upper reaches of the state.  The attorney-general had to the prime minister insisted they “should be persons of high legal standing and experience” and with that the FO (Foreign Office) concurred, emphasizing they needed to be “as senior as their American counterparts and that first-class men were needed given the international importance of the trial and its probable impact on international law.”  However, the Lord Chancellor’s office “preferred to believe that imminent appointments to the ICJ (International Court of Justice) at the Hague were of greater importance, and were reluctant to spare a Lord of Appeal on the grounds that without him legal business in the House of Lords would grind to halt.”  That thought appealed to someone at the FO who commented tartly: “that business there is surely often rather leisurely.”

Concur

Concur (pronounced kuhn-kur)

(1) To accord in opinion; to agree.

(2) To cooperate; work together; combine; be associated.

(3) To coincide; occur at the same time.

(4) To run or come together; converge (obsolete).

1375–1425: From the late Middle English concur (collide, clash in hostility), from the Latin concurrere (to run together, assemble hurriedly; clash, fight), in transferred use “to happen at the same time", the construct being con (the Latin prefix variation of cum (with; together)) + currere (to run).  The early meaning in English was "collide, clash in hostility," the sense of "to happen at the same time" didn’t emerge until the 1590s; that of "to agree in opinion" a decade earlier.  Ultimate root was the Proto-Italic korzō, derived from the primitive Indo-European ḱers (to run).  Related forms are the adverb concurringly and the adjectives concurring and concurrent.  Despite the rarity, the verbs preconcur, preconcurred & preconcurring, and the adjectives unconcurred & unconcurring are said to exist, at least to the extent no dictionary appears yet to have declared them obsolete or archaic.  The adjective concurrent is noted from the late fourteenth century though concurring is said (surprisingly) not to have been in use until the 1630s.  The first concurring opinion was recorded in 1720.  The sense "to coincide, happen at the same time" is from 1590s; that of "to agree in opinion" dates in English from the 1580s

In praise of the Privy Council

Concurrent is probably the most common adjectival form in general use.  Noted since the late 1300s, in the sense of “acting in conjunction, contributing to the same effect or event", it was from the Old French concurrent or directly from Latin concurrentem (nominative concurrens), present participle of concurrere.  The meaning "combined, joint" is from 1530s and in law, concurrent jurisdiction (that possessed equally by two courts and if exercised by one not usually assumed by the other) is recorded from 1767.

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

Concur is one of many synonyms for “agree” and the one most favoured by judges on appellant courts to indicate they agree with (or at least acquiesce to) a judgment written by another.  That’s good because it means there’s less to have to read.  However, some judges prefer to pen their own judgments, helpful perhaps if they wish to explore some aspect of the case not elsewhere mentioned but otherwise a duplication of effort unless their prose serves to render readable what can be turgid stuff.  Then there are the dissenting judgments, of interest to academic lawyers and historians and sometimes a source of hope to those entertaining thoughts of an appeal.  That notwithstanding, those wishing just to know the state of law with certainty might long for a system in which appellate courts of appeal issued only the majority judgment with the dissenters encouraged to submit essays or letters to the editors of legal journals.

Etching of a sitting of a Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (1846).

That only one judgment was issued was the most appealing procedural aspect of the Privy Council, until 1968 and 1986 respectively, the highest court of appeal for Australian state and Commonwealth jurisdictions.  Properly styled The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC), the Privy Council remains the ultimate court of appeal for some British Overseas Territories and Commonwealth countries.  Although the Privy Council’s decisions are mostly not binding on the UK’s domestic courts, the rulings are held to be extremely persuasive as other respected tribunals (US Supreme Court, Supreme Court of Canada etc) are regarded.  One quirk of the Australian Constitution is that, the 1986 Australia Acts notwithstanding, the High Court can issue a certificate referring certain cases to the council but none has been granted for a century and the court has long made clear there’ll be no more.  As a bit of a relic of English constitutional history and the established church, in the United Kingdom, the Privy Council retains appellant jurisdiction some domestic matters:

(1) Appeals from the Arches Court of Canterbury and the Chancery Court of York in non-doctrinal faculty causes.

(2) Appeals from the High Court of Chivalry.

(3) Appeals from the Court of Admiralty of the Cinque Ports and Admiralty prize courts.

(4) Appeals from the Disciplinary Committee of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons.

(5) Disputes under the House of Commons Disqualification Act, a role essentially similar to that the High Court of Australia (HCA) discharges as the Commonwealth’s Court of Disputed Returns.

Historically, the Privy Council dealt with cases thus referred without any known demand for multiple judgments or dissenting opinions; a fine example of judicial clarity and efficiency and one which judges in other courts never to admire, much less emulate.  Despite its exalted place in the legal hierarchy, the council has been a surprisingly flexible and informal court.  In 1949, it found, on technical grounds, the Commonwealth of Australia’s appeal in the bank nationalization case (Commonwealth of Australia v Bank of NSW [1949] UKPC 37, [1950] AC 235; [1949] UKPCHCA 1, (1949) 79 CLR 497 (26 October 1949)) couldn’t proceed but, because so many people had travelled over ten-thousand miles (17,000 km) to London (no small thing in 1949), it anyway heard the case and issued what would have been the substantive judgment.  If ever it’d been prepared to set the example of providing advisory opinions, the Privy Council would have been the best appellant court ever.  Unfortunately, In recent years, dissenting opinions have come to be issued.

Sitting of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, 18 June 1946.

M.R Jayaker, Lord Du Parcq, Lord Goddard (Lord Chief Justice), Lord Simonds, Lord Macmillan, Lord Simon, The Lord Chancellor (Lord Jowitt), Lord Thankerton, Lord Porter, Lord Uthwatt, Sir Madhavan Nair, and Sir John Beaumont.

Brougham

Brougham (prounced broo-uhm, broom-uhm or broh-uhm)

(1) In horse-drawn passenger transport, a four-wheeled, boxlike, closed carriage for two or four persons, having the driver's seat outside.

(2) In automotive use, an early designation for a car with an open driver's compartment.

(3) In automotive use, an early designation for a style of coachwork resembling a coupé but tending to be powered by an electric motor.

(4) In automotive use, a post-war designation used (mostly in the US) as a model name (more commonly a sub-name) for luxury versions of mass-produced models.

1849: The coach was named after Henry Peter Brougham, (Lord Brougham and Vaux, 1778–1868; Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain 1830-1834) who in 1839 took delivery of one in the style, built to his specifications.   Although he would sometimes prove a difficult colleague, Lord Brougham’s achievements during his political career were notable and it was while he was Lord High Chancellor the parliament passed both the first Reform Act (1832) (the first substantial building block that would build the democratic nature the British political system eventually attained in the twentieth century) and the Slavery Abolition Act (1833).  While Lord Brougham was born in Edinburgh, the surname “Brougham” is of English origin and thought derived from a place name in Westmorland (now part of Cumbria, in north-west of England).  Genealogists believe the name was originally locational, the construct from burg (fort or castle) + hām (homestead or village) and thus understood as “the homestead or village by the fort”.  Brougham Manor (purchased by Lord Brougham in 1926) and the nearby Cumbrian village of Brougham have a long association with the Brougham family.  Brougham is a noun, the noun plural is broughams (initial upper case if used as a proper noun).

The forbidding visage of Lord Brougham (left) and a mid-nineteenth century advertisement by London coach-builder W & F Thorn (right) for a Hansom Cab based on the brougham's concept, the compact dimensions ideal for European inner-cities, many with districts still built around systems of narrow streets dating from Medieval or even Roman times.

British Constitution (1844) by Lord Brougham.

A sound (though uncompromising) lawyer, Brougham’s character was something of a curate’s egg, assessments of his time in office a mash-up of terms such as “genius and eloquence” & “most learned” with “unprincipled and execrable judgement” & “notorious and reprobate figure”.  As Lord High Chancellor (1830-1834), he had a “strained” relationship with his prime minister (Lord Grey (1764–1845; prime minister of the UK 1830-1834) and on one occasion took with him on holiday to Scotland the Great Seal of the Realm (applied to symbolise the sovereign's approval of state documents), his dubious constitutional interpretation being he’d be insulated from dismissal were the seal not to hand in London to formalize the process of his axing.  In his well-regarded study British Constitution (1844), he made no mention of the novel theory and nor has anyone since.  An often less than convivial colleague, it’s telling that later in life formed a close friendship with the equally uncompromising William Ewart Gladstone (1809–1898; prime-minister 1868–1874, 1880–1885, Feb-July 1886 & 1892–1894).  To his supporters, Gladstone was the “G.O.M.” (Grand Old Man), the initialization repurposed by his detractors as “God’s Only Mistake”.

Lord Brougham’s design was very much to suit his requirements and he drew up the specifications simply because no coach was then available with the combination of features he desired.  What he wanted was a compact carriage designed to seat two in an enclosed compartment (the driver sitting outside) with a particular emphasis of ease of ingress and egress.  Some subsequent versions would, for occasional use, often include two small, foldable “jump” seats, a concept later included in the rear compartments of many limousines (the vis-a-vis arrangement in those relatively rare).  The low mass and easy manoeuvrability made the brougham ideal for urban use and the style was influential, not only widely imitated but also productive in that variations (smaller and larger) appeared and it soon became the preferred middle-class carriage of the era (think Mercedes-Benz C-Class).  It differed from the earlier Hansom Cab that was even smaller and designed to accommodate strictly two in a cabin often not enclosed, less than ideal in a London winter.  The Hansom Cab was the ancestor of the modern taxi and they were produced almost exclusively for the use by hire-operators whereas the larger, better appointed brougham was aimed also at the private market.

Harold Wilson (1916–1995; UK prime minister 1964-1970 & 1974-1976) outside 10 Downing Street with his Rover 3.5 saloon (P5B, 1967-1973, left), the 3.5 coupé with the rakish, lowered roofline (the first of the four-door breed of coupé, centre), and Lindsay Lohan with Porsche Panamera 4S (introduced in 2009 in response to the Mercedes-Benz CLS (2004-2023) that had revived the concept of the "four-door coupé", right).  Porsche doesn't use the designation "four door coupé". 

Confusingly for modern audiences, in the nineteenth century, the terms “brougham” and “coupé” often were used interchangeably.  In English, coupé (often and increasingly as “coupe”) was from the French coupé (low, short, four-wheeled, close carriage without the front seat, carrying two inside, with an outside seat for the driver (also “front compartment of a stage coach”)), a shortened form of carrosse coupé (a cut-off or shortened version of the Berlin (from Berliner) coach, modified to remove the back seat), the past participle of couper (to cut off; to cut in half), the verbal derivative of coup (blow; stroke); a doublet of cup, hive and keeve, thus the link with goblets, cups & glasses.  It was first applied to two-door automobiles with enclosed coachwork by 1897 while the Coupe de ville (or Coup de ville) dates from 1931, describing originally a car with an open driver's position and an enclosed passenger compartment.

Brougham moments

1957 Cadillac Eldorado Brougham.  Cadillac in the 1950s used "Brougham" as just a model name, the same approach as in 1916 when it had no direct relationship with the historic coach-building styles (although, in the abstract, a historian of coach-building might see some tenuous links). 

In the coach-building business, the critical part of the etymology was “a shortened form” and the coupé thus came to be understood as a “smaller” version of the original; originally this meant “shorter” but the industry soon came to use the term to apply to vehicles which were lower, lighter or in any other way down-scaled.  It’s for this reason the use of coupé (usually coupe in US use) came during the 1930s to be (sort of) standardized as a two-door version of a platform which typically appeared also in other forms.  Coupes in the US were by the later 1930s usually enclosed vehicles of a particular style (typically more rakish than two-door “sedans”) but the English clung more closely to the origin of the word by coining “fixed head coupé” (the FHC, ie what in the US would be a “coupe” of some sort) and the “drop-head coupé (the DHC, what would in other places be called a convertible or cabriolet (though not to be confused with a roadster or phaeton).

1961 Cadillac Brougham Jacqueline by Pinninfarina.

Named as a homage to the style of Jacqueline Kennedy (1929-1994; FLOTUS 1961-1963), Pinninfarina's memorable, one-off, Cadillac "Brougham Jacqueline" presented an extraordinary contrast with the 1961 Cadillac on which it was based.  Shown at the 1961 Paris Motor Show, it was a glimpse of what Lancia might have built had they been able to offer 390 cubic inch (6.4 litre) V8s.  The subsequent mishandling of the storied Lancia marque, first by Fiat and latterly the muddled minds of the Stellantis conglomerate is a tale mismanagement ranking with the worst of British Leyland's (1968-1986) many bad decisions. 

During the twentieth century, there was significant fragmentation of meaning in the terms which to coach-builders had once meant something quite specific.  By the 1960s, cars sold as coupés could have four doors and although the earliest versions of these made some concession to the etymology by being configured with a lowered roof-line, for others it was just a model name which might be indicative of sleeker lines but not always and the fate of “brougham” was more quixotic still, eventually for a time becoming the US industry’s term of choice when wanting to impart the impression of “up-market”, “luxurious” etc.  That wasn’t something out of the blue because as early as 1916 Cadillac introduced a model called “Brougham” which owed little to the obvious features of Lord Brougham’s carriage, the fully-enclosed, four-door Cadillac being now understood as a saloon, sedan or limousine depending on where one lives.  Those things which distinguished Lord Brougham’s design: (1) the enclosed passenger compartment and (2) the open section for the driver came instead to be associated with something called the "sedanca de ville" although few of these combined this with any quality of compactness.  Cadillac would from time to time flirt with the Brougham name but it’s now best remembered for what’s called “the great Brougham era”.  That term seems to have been invented by Curbside Classic, a curated website a gallimaufry of interesting content, built around the theme of once-familiar and often everyday vehicles which are now a rare sight until discovered by Curbside Classic’s contributors (who self-style as "curbivores"), parked next to some curb.  These are the often the machines neglected by automotive historians and collectors who prefer things which are fast, lovely and rare.  According to Curbside Classic, the “great brougham era” began in 1965 with the release of the LTD option for the mass-market Ford Galaxie and that approach was nothing new because even the Galaxie name had in 1959 been coined for a "luxury" version of the Fairlane 500, a trick the US industry had been using for some time.

For whatever reason, Ford’s LTD in 1965 created what would now be called a paradigm and it caught not only the public imagination but more importantly convinced them to spend their money buying one and sales were strong.  Profits were also strong because it cost Ford considerably less to tart up a Galaxie than the premium they charged for the LTD package (it was originally an option before becoming a separate model line) and the other mass-market players scrambled to respond, the most blatantly imitative being the Chevrolet Caprice and Plymouth VIP, both released within months of Ford's venture.  Of course, Ford, GM (General Motors) and Chrysler all had other brands, the purpose of which once had been to use the same platform in tarted up form so this internal corporate cannibalization is an interesting case-study in marketing and it’s worth remembering once somewhat up-market brand-names like Mercury and Oldsmobile no longer exist.  By the standards of Broughams which would follow, the “luxury” fittings of the LTD were modest enough but the trend had been started and soon what came to be called the “gingerbread” was being laid on with a trowel: faux wood (plastic), faux chrome (anodized plastic), faux silk (polyester brocade), faux wire wheels (these were at least mostly metal) and that status symbol of the age, the vinyl roof, sometimes with a wholly phoney coat of arms.  The first cars actually to wear a “Brougham” badge seem to have appeared in late 1966 for the 1967 model year and over the decades there would be literally dozens using the nomenclature, each understood as being something “more expensive” and therefore “better”.

1965 Ford LTD:

The 1965 LTD is remembered now for the extra trim and the effect on the industry but in fairness to Ford, the car benefited greatly from the redesigned chassis which included coil-spring suspension on all four wheels.  There was also much attention (Ford spoke in terms of man-years) devoted to the then novel art & science of NVH (noise, vibration & harshness) and fearlessly they advertised the thing as being quieter than a new Rolls-Royce, spending a lot of money (including buying a new Rolls-Royce) to prove exactly that Many probably thought the claim mere puffery but Ford had hired acoustic engineers who installed their equipment, ran their tests and confirmed the Ford was indeed quieter at a number of speeds.  As a piece of marketing, the extra trim proved quite an enticement and LTD buyers, although they got as standard a 289 cubic inch (4.7 litre) V8 and automatic transmission, got little else and many ticked the boxes on the option list, adding features such as power brakes, power steering, brakes, electric windows and even air-conditioning, then a rarity.  Once all those boxes had been ticked, it wasn’t uncommon for LTDs to be sold for more than the cost of many a nominally up-market Mercury and even the cheapest Lincoln could be remarkably close in price.  So it was all a matter of what one wanted from life: A "loaded" air-conditioned Ford with all the accessories, a less well-equipped Mercury or the most basic Lincoln lacking many of the well-optioned LTD's amenities? 

1994 Mercedes-Benz E 500 Limited.

The Ford Motor Company seems never to have discussed the meaning of “LTD” and the consensus is it was probably an attempt to summon in buyers’ minds the idea of “Limited Edition” and thus impart a hint of exclusivity.  Over the years there were suggestions it stood for “Lincoln Type Design”, “Luxury Trim Decor” or “Limited Trim Design” but there’s no evidence to support any of these and “LTD” came to be understood (in the US & Australia) as “a fancy Ford” of the type which would come later to be described as “blinged up”.  Among mechanics at the time, the joke was LTD stood for “Lots of Tin from Detroit” and the more erudite used “Lots of Tin from Dearborn” (Dearborn the suburb in Detroit, Michigan where Ford was headquartered).  There was also a Mercedes-Benz commonly referred to as the “E 500 Ltd” although the factory only ever used the word “Limited”.  It had been intended to offer the model as a genuine “limited edition” with a run of 500 planned but although the most expensive of the anyway costly 5.0 litre (303 cubic inch) version (500 E (1991-1993) & E 500 (1993-1995)) of the W124 sedans (1958-1995), such was the demand 951 “Limited” editions left the line.  Very much in the tradition of the old 300 SEL 6.3 (1967-1972) the E 500 probably was the company’s best ever high-performance sedan and if that wasn’t enough, the “Limited” could be optioned with the E60 package which included a 6.0 litre (364 cubic inch) V8.

1968 Holden HK Brougham (left) and 1970 Holden Premier (right).

The Holden Brougham (1968-1971) was not so much a landmark of the era as a cul-de-sac but it did indicate how quickly the “brougham” label had come to be associated with prestige and, like Chevrolet’s Caprice, the Brougham was a response to a Ford.  In Australia, Ford had been locally assembling the full-sized Galaxies for the government and executive markets but tariffs and the maintenance of the Australian currency peg at US$1.12 meant profitability was marginal, so the engineers (with a budget said to be: "three-quarters of four-fifths of fuck all") took the modest, locally made Falcon, stretched the wheelbase by five inches (125 mm), tweaked the front and rear styling (the changes, although hardly radical, resulted in a remarkably different look), added some bling (though that word was not then in use) and named it Fairlane.

The Fairlane name was chosen because of the success the company had had in selling first the full-sized US Fairlanes (nicknamed by locals as the “Tank Fairlane” because whatever its other virtues it was big) between 1959-1962 and later the smaller version (1962-1965) which Robert McNamara (1916–2009 and briefly the president of Ford Motor Company before serving as US Secretary of Defense (1961-1968) under John Kennedy (JFK, 1917–1963; POTUS 1961-1963) & Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; VPOTUS 1961-1963 and POTUS 1963-1969)) described as "the size of car Americans should be driving".  In that at least McNamara was right and what came in the 1960s to be called the "intermediates" (ie between the "compact" & "full-size" lines) proved a sweet spot in the market; the intermediates were essentially the size of the "standard" US automobile before the breed became oversized in the mid-late 1950s.  The Australia Fairlane was for decades a successful and profitable product and eventually Holden (GM's local outpost) followed the formula but not before the curious diversion of the Brougham.  For 1968, Holden chose what even at the time was thought a bizarre approach in trying to match the Fairlane; instead of a longer wheelbase (and thus more interior space), the Brougham was conjured up by extending the tail of the less exalted Premier by 8 inches (200 mm), the strange elongation a hurried and less than successful response.  Unwanted for decades when the could be bought for Aus$250, the handful of surviving Broughams became twenty-first century collectables, advertised for sale at as much as $Aus$90,000, some Holden connoisseurs (as one-eyed a crew as any) even finding a previously undetected elegance in the lines.

1958 Cadillac Series 62 Extended Length Sedan (Body Style 6239EDX, left) and 1958 Cadillac Series 62 Sedan (Body Style 6239, right).

In their defense, Holden could have pointed to a corporate precedent, the 1958 Cadillac range including the “Series 62 Extended Length Sedan”.  The Series 62 Sedan was already an impressive 216.8 inches (5.5 m) long but the Extended Length version measured an even more imposing 225.3 (5.7), the additional 8.5 inches (216 mm) all in the rear deck, creating a more capacious trunk.  There can’t have been many Cadillac buyers with that much luggage (although, impressionistically, golf club car parks did suggest there would be those for whom the ability to carry several sets of clubs might be compelling) but the new model did attract buyers, either despite or because of the healthy industry in jokes about Mafia functionaries and other figures in organized crime grateful finally to have more space to transport the bodies.  Unfortunately for Cadillac, there were only so many golfers and Mafia hit-men and despite 20,952 of the 103,455 (excluding Eldorados and “chassis only” sales) Series 62s produced in 1958 being the Extended Length Sedan (some 20%), it proved a single-season one-off which perhaps should have been a warning to Holden.

Cadillac's other take on the “long & slightly less long” of it: 1963 Cadillac Four-Window Sedan De Ville (Body Style 6239, left) and 1963 Cadillac Sedan De Ville Park Avenue (Body Style 6389, right).

Strangely, Cadillac’s next venture in rear-deck management went the other way, “short deck” versions of certain models offered between 1961-1963, the things created by removing 7 inches (178 mm) of aft bodywork, the effect more noticeable for the final season when the truncation was 8 inches (203 mm).  Demand, anyway muted, quickly declined and there ended Cadillac’s experiments with rear deck length.  There was at the time much criticism that “full-size” US cars had become too big but the “short deck” venture was most un-Cadillac like and, by international standards, the truck capacity of even the abbreviated models was still quite generous, able effortlessly to accommodate two sets of gold clubs, something which later became a de-facto standard in assessing the practicality of sports cars.  Jaguar used this feature as a selling point when the XK8 (1996-2006) was introduced because it wasn’t possible with all versions of the old E-Type (1961-1974).  For a variety of reasons, by the 1970s, there would be a smaller Cadillac and the first generation Seville (1975-1979) was most accomplished but of the even smaller Cimarron (1982–1988) there are few fond memories.  It wasn't that the Cimarron was, by the standards of its time, an especially bad car; it just wasn't "a Cadillac" as that construct was then understood.  

1967 Ford GT40 Mark III (left) and 1967 Ford GT40 Mark I (road version, right).

From 1967 there was also a more contemporary example to inspire the antipodean engineers although it’s unlikely it much caught their eye; that was the Ford GT40 (1964-1969), one of the most successful machines in 1960s sports car racing which beat not only the competition but also the attempts by the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile (the FIA; the International Automobile Federation) to legislate it into un-competitiveness,  Then (as now), the FIA was international sport’s dopiest regulatory body.  In the happy era when it was possible to make a few minor modifications and register a Le Mans race car for the road, 31 of the 105 GT40s were so configured (even a cigarette lighter was installed) but the driving experience was still very much that of a (slightly) quieter race car, the accommodation cramped, the ventilation marginal and the luggage space fit for little more than a proverbial topless bikini.  But some hardly souls bought them because there were few things on the road faster so thoughts turned to making a “more civilized” version with the creature comforts now expected.  Thus the 1967 GT40 Mark III with a slightly detuned engine, improved ventilation, a conventional, centrally mounted gear shift, sound deadening, more compliant suspension settings and even a reasonably sized ashtray to compliment the cigarette lighter.  However, only seven were built because they cost as much as a middle-class house, were still cramped (with challenging ingress and egress for all but the young or athletic) and in appearance differed in several aspects from the cheaper (Mark I) GT40 road cars still available from John Wyer (1909–1989).

Herbert von Karajan's 1967 Ford GT40 Mark III; of the seven produced, it was one of four LHD (left hand drive) versions.  The trunk would have be large enough for his conductor's baton and maybe a little more.

By virtue of the long tail, the Mark III did though have more luggage space (for soft baggage rather than suitcases) and it appealed to some, the most famous purchaser being the Austrian conductor Herbert von Karajan (1908–1989).  The Mark III was fitted with additional sound deadening and the exhaust system made the sometimes Wagnerian sound of the 289 cubic inch (4.7 litre) V8 less intrusive but inside it was no Rolls-Royce and certainly not a 1965 Ford LTD (which Ford paid acoustic engineers to prove was quieter than a Rolls-Royce Silver Cloud III) so whether Karajan ever tried to fit a radio or tape deck ("sound-systems would come later) is unlikely.  It would anyway have been better to focus on the road because even in its detuned form the GT40 Mark III could be a handful, especially to those unacquainted with the then still novel characteristics of mid-engined road cars although Karajan also for a while drove a Mercedes-Benz 300 SL Gullwing (W198, 1954-1957) so he may have been not unfamiliar with quirky handling.  Wisely, he never drove his GT40 on wet roads.  

1957 Continental Mark II (left) and 1972 Oldsmobile Ninety-Eight Regency (right).  The Continental Mark II (1956-1957) was at the time the most expensive car produced in the US and substantially "hand made" but the relative austerity of the interior compared with the various "broughams" of later decades illustrates how profoundly the manufacturers shaped consumer tastes during the era. 

By 1972, there were so many “Broughams” on the market Oldsmobile must have thought the tag was becoming a bit common so to mark the company’s 75th anniversary, they called their new creation the “Regency”.  Vague as most Americans might have been about the origin of “brougham”, most probably knew “regency” often had something to do with royalty so as an associative pointer it was good.  The Ninety-Eight Regency in 1972 was however as audacious as the LTD had half-a-decade earlier been tentative because it seemed the target was Oldsmobile’s senior stable-mate (two rungs up the ladder in the GM hierarchy), the top-of-the-range Cadillac and there was nothing in Cadillac’s showrooms which could match the conspicuous opulence of the black or covert gold “pillow effect”, tufted velour upholstery.  Each Regency was registered at Tiffany's which supplied the specially designed clock and provided the owner with a distinctive sterling silver key ring; if lost, the keys could be dropped in a mailbox and Tiffany's would return them to the owner.  Take that Cadillac.  A limited run of 2,650 75th anniversary Ninety-Eight Regency cars was built, all of them four-door hardtops and the (non-anniversary) model continued in 1973.  By 1982, Oldsmobile concluded the message needed again to be drummed into buyers and introduced the Regency Brougham.

Peak brougham: 1977 Chrysler New Yorker Brougham four-door hardtop.

The high-water mark of the great brougham era was set by the Cadillac Fleetwood Talisman (1974-1976), the Cadillac Fleetwood Brougham D'Elegance (those produced in 1988-1989) and the most expensive cars from Chrysler Corporation (the Imperials and Chrysler New Yorkers) during the last days of the full-sized cars (1974-1978).  After this, designers really could go no further in this direction and had to think of something else.