Showing posts sorted by date for query Eminence. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query Eminence. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Thursday, October 24, 2024

Consigliere

Consigliere (pronounced kawn-see-lye-re)

(1) A member of a criminal organization or syndicate who serves as an adviser to the leader (associated historically with legal advisors in the Italian Mafia and similar structures in other places).

(2) In modern use, an advisor or confidant.

(3) A surname of Italian origin (originally occupational).

1969 (in common use in English): An un-adapted borrowing of the Italian consigliere (councilor) (the feminine form consigliera), from consiglio (advice; counsel), from the Latin cōnsilium (council) from cōnsulō, the construct being con- (from the preposition cum (with), from the Old Latin com, from the Proto-Italic kom, from the primitive Indo-European óm (next to, at, with, along).  It was cognate with the Proto-Germanic ga- (co-), the Proto-Slavic sъ (with) and the Proto-Germanic hansō.  It was used with certain words to add a notion similar to those conveyed by with, together, or joint or with certain words to intensify their meaning) + sulo (from the primitive Indo-European selh- (to take, to grab)). + -ium (the –ium suffix (used most often to form adjectives) was applied as (1) a nominal suffix (2) a substantivisation of its neuter forms and (3) as an adjectival suffix.  It was associated with the formation of abstract nouns, sometimes denoting offices and groups, a linguistic practice which has long fallen from fashion.  In the New Latin, as the neuter singular morphological suffix, it was the standard suffix to append when forming names for chemical elements).  Consigliere is a noun, the noun plural is consiglieri or (in English) consiglieres.

Because of the way Google harvests data for their ngrams, they’re not literally a tracking of the use of a word in society but can be usefully indicative of certain trends, (although one is never quite sure which trend(s)), especially over decades.  As a record of actual aggregate use, ngrams are not wholly reliable because: (1) the sub-set of texts Google uses is slanted towards the scientific & academic and (2) the technical limitations imposed by the use of OCR (optical character recognition) when handling older texts of sometime dubious legibility (a process AI should improve).  Where numbers bounce around, this may reflect either: (1) peaks and troughs in use for some reason or (2) some quirk in the data harvested.

Consigliere entered general use in 1969 when it appeared in the novel The Godfather by Mario Puzo (1920–1999), the first of what became a series of five (not wholly sequential and the last co-authored) works revolving around a fictional Italian-American Mafia family.  Use spiked after 1972 when the first of three feature film adaptations was released.  Advisors and confidants of course exist in many parts of society but the significance of the use of “consigliere” is the historic baggage of it being associated with mafiosi (in the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure anyone a part of a criminal (mafia-like) association formed by three or more individuals).  So it’s a loaded word although in Italian there are notionally innocuous forms including consigliere comunale (town councillor), consigliere delegato (managing director) and consigliere d'amministrazione (board member).  It Italian, the related forms include the adjective consigliabile (advisable, the plural being consigliabili), the transitive verb consigliare (to advise, to suggest, to recommend, to counsel), the noun & verb consiglio (advise, counsel; council (in the senses of "an assembly", the plural being consigli)) and the adjective (and in Latin a verb) consiliare (board; council (as la sala consiliare used in the sense of "council chamber")

So a consigliere is a trusted advisor or counselor, historically associated with the Italian Mafia but later also with organized crime in general though the suggestion of a link with things Italian (not necessarily Sicilian) remained strong.  Within organized crime, not all consiglieri were legal advisors although in fiction that does seem to be a common role but all in some way offered “behind the scenes” strategic guidance.  Consigliere can be used metaphorically in a non-criminal context but because of connotations, if the individuals involved have some Italian ancestry, there can lead to accusations of “ethnic stereotyping” and the best neutral descriptors are probably adviser (or advisor) or councillor (counselor in US use) and there are also specific versions such as “legal counsel” “political advisor” etc.

Consulente di moda Kim Kardashian (left) with the client Lindsay Lohan (right).  The consulente di moda (fashion advisor) is a specialized fork of the consiglieri and before she became one of the internet’s more remarkable installations, Kim Kardashian (b 1980) was a “personal stylist” & “wardrobe consultant”, her clients including Paris Hilton (b 1981) and Lindsay Lohan (b 1986).

There are similar terms with their own connotations.  "Camarilla" describes a small, secretive group of advisors or influencers who manipulate decisions behind the scenes and is often used in a political context; notable members can be described as an “éminence grise”.  The term "grey eminence" was from the French éminence grise, (plural eminences grises or eminence grises and literally “grey eminence” and the French spelling is sometimes used in the English-speaking world).  It was applied originally to François Leclerc du Tremblay (1577–1638), also known as Père Joseph, a French Capuchin friar who was the confidant and agent of Cardinal Richelieu (1585–1642), the chief minister of France under Louis XIII (1601–1643; King of France 1610-1643).  The term refers to du Tremblay’s influence over the Cardinal (cardinals in the Roman Catholic Church enjoying the honorific “your eminence”), and the colour of his habit (he wore grey).  Aldous Huxley (1894–1963) sub-titled his biography of Leclerc (L'Éminence Grise (1941)): A Study in Religion and Politics and discussed the nature of both religion & politics, his purpose being to explore the relationship between the two and his work was a kind of warning to those of faith who are led astray by proximity to power.  Use of the term éminence grise suggests a shadowy, backroom operator who avoids publicity, operating in secret if possible yet exercising great influence over decisions, even to the point of being “the power behind the throne”.

In this a gray eminence differs from a king-maker or a svengali in that those designations are applied typically to those who operate in the public view, even flaunting their power and authority.  Probably the closest synonym of the grey eminence is a “puppetmaster” because of the implication of remaining hidden, and although never seen, the strings they pull are if one looks closely enough.  The svengali was named for the hypnotist character Svengali in George du Maurier’s (1834–1896) novel Trilby (1894); Svengali seduced, dominated and manipulated Trilby who was a young, half-Irish girl, transforming her into a great singer but in doing so he made her utterly dependent on him and this ruthlessly he exploited.

From the New York Post, 23 October 2024.

So given all that it was interesting in October 2024 to note the choice of words made by elements of the Murdoch press in reporting the latest legal setback suffered by Rudy Giuliani (b 1944), a politician and now disbarred (struck-off) attorney who first achieved worldwide fame was the mayor of New York City (1994-2001) at the time of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.  That later would be turned into infamy with antics such as his later (unintended) cameo in a satirical film and his role as legal counsel to MAGA-era (Make America Great Again) Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021), notably his part in the matter of Dominion Voting Systems v Fox News (Delaware Superior Court: N21C-03-257; N21C-11-082) which culminated (thus far) in Fox settling the matter by paying Dominion some US$790 million, the alternative being to continue the case and allow more of Fox’s internal documents to enter the public domain.

In choosing to describe Mr Giuliani as Mr Trump’s “consigliere”, a person or persons unknown within the Murdoch press presumably pondered which noun to use and there certainly were precedents for others to appear, the corporation’s outlets at times having previously described him as “Mr Trump’s personal attorney”, “Head of the Trump legal team” and even “Donald Trump’s cybersecurity advisor”, the last engagement perhaps one of the less expected political appointments of recent decades.  What of course made the use “consigliere” interesting was (1) Mr Giuliani being the son of parents who both were children of Italian immigrants and (2) Mr Trump being a convicted felon so those not of a generous nature might suspect the New York Post was doing a bit of “ethnic stereotyping”.  However, it’s not a unique use because Mr Giuliani has been described as Mr Trump’s “consigliere” by publications which exist at various points on political spectrum including the New York Post (2016), Aljazeera (2018), the Washington Blade (a LGBTQQIAAOP newspaper) (2019), The Economist (2019), the Washington Post (2019), The Nation (2022), Vanity Fair (2022) and Salon.com (2023).  Whether the connotations of the word have become strengthened since Mr Trump gained his unique status as a convicted felon can be debated but the thoughts of the now homeless Mr Giuliani presumably are focused elsewhere.

Friday, March 1, 2024

Simony

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

It’s said to have had a great reforming influence but of course the problem shifted shape rather than going away and in the fourteenth century, Dante Alighieri (circa1265–1321) in Divina Commedia (Divine Comedy (circa 1310-1321)) detailed (not without glee) the fate of avaricious simoniacs including “clergymen, and popes and cardinals” who, dammed for “fraud” would be cast into the eighth circle of Hell, a hot, fiery place where they’d have ended up trapped for eternity in a flaming tomb, the frequent punishments including being whipped by demons, immersed in excrement and transformed into reptiles:

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

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

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

Friday, October 27, 2023

Eminence

Eminence (pronounced em-uh-nuhns)

(1) A position of superiority; high station, rank, or repute.

(2) The quality or state of being eminent; Prominence in a particular order or accumulation; esteem.

(3) In topography, a high place or part; a hill or elevation; height.

(4) As a color, a dark or deep shade of purple.

(5) In anatomy, a protuberance.

(6) In the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, a title used to address or refer to a cardinal (in the form “eminence”, “your eminence”, “his eminence” or “their eminences”).

(7) As “gray eminence” (the usual spelling of éminence grise), a “power behind the throne”.

1375–1425: From the late Middle English eminence (projection, protuberance (and by the early fifteenth century a “high or exalted position”)), from the Anglo-French, from the Old French eminence, from the Latin ēminēntia (prominence, protuberance; eminence, excellence; a standing out, a distinctive feature, most conspicuous part), the construct being equivalent to ēmin- (base of ēminēre (to stand out) + -entia (-ence) (the noun suffix), from eminentem (nominative eminens) (standing out, projecting (and figuratively “prominent, distinctive”)), from an assimilated form of the construct ex- (out) + -minere (related to mons (hill), from the primitive Indo-European root men- (to project).  The adjective eminent dates from the early fifteenth century and was used in the sense of “standing or rising above other places; exceeding other things in quality or degree” and was from the thirteenth century Old French éminent (prominent) or directly from the Latin eminentem.  From the 1610s, it came be used of those “distinguished in character or attainments”.  The noun pre-eminence (also as pre-eminence) was known as early as the twelfth century and then meant “surpassing eminence; superiority, distinction; precedence, a place of rank or distinction”.  It was from the Late Latin praeeminentia (distinction, superiority), from the Classical Latin praeeminentem (nominative praeeminens), the present participle of praeeminere (transcend, excel (literally “project forward, rise above”)) the construct being prae (before) + eminere (stand out, project).  The alternative for eminency is listed usually as archaic or obsolete.  Synonyms include conspicuousness, distinction, prominence, renown, celebrity, note & fame in the context of status and elevation or prominence when applied to topography.  Eminence & eminency are nouns, eminently is an adverb and eminent is an adjective (and a non-standard noun); the noun plural is eminences or eminencies.

The use in anatomy is to describe certain protuberances including (1) hypothenar eminence (plural hypothenar eminences) (the ulnar side of the human hand; the edge of the hand between the pinky and the outer side of the wrist, (2) ileocecal eminence (plural ileocecal eminences) (the ileocecal valve), (3) median eminence (plural median eminences) (part of the inferior boundary for the hypothalamus in the human brain and (4) frontal eminence (plural frontal eminences) (either of two rounded elevations on the frontal bone of the skull (known also as the “tuber frontale”).

Extract from xona.com's color list.

As a name for a deep or dark shade of purple, name eminence has been in regular use since the nineteenth century and there have always been variations in the shades so described; on the color charts of different manufacturers, this continues.  In digital use however, eminence as a shade of purple has been (more or less) standardized since 2001 when xona.com promulgated their influential color list.  Although “eminence” is the form of address for a cardinal in the Roman Catholic Church, it’s presumable this has no relationship with the color eminence because cardinals wear red and it’s the monsignors who don a purple which does look like the shade typically described as eminence.  As far as is known, the name “monsignor” has never been applied to any shade.  Monsignor is one of the honorary titles Popes for centuries granted to priests within their Papal Court and there were many degrees of these, conferred usually on priests worked closely with the Holy Father in Rome.  Over time, the use of monsignor was expanded and could be granted to priests beyond Rome on the recommendation of a bishop.  Recently, Pope Francis (b 1936; pope since 2013) has restricted this, returning to the older ways and this will have please some bishops, not all of whom were anxious to see too much purple in their diocese.  The monsignor’s purple (which most would probably call a magenta) was connected to the tradition in the Roman empire to vest new dignitaries with a purple toga and in medieval heraldry the color symbolized justice, regal majesty and sovereignty although not so much should be made of this in the context of the Vatican’s choices in ecclesiastical fashion: Originally, it was never envisaged monsignors would wander far from the Holy See.

Pope Francis passes the coffin (casket) at the funeral of Cardinal George Pell (1941-2023), St Peter’s Basilica, the Vatican, January 2023.  Within the Roman Curia (a place of Masonic-like plotting & intrigue and much low skulduggery), Cardinal Pell's nickname was “Pell Pot”, an allusion to Pol Pot (1925–1998, dictator of communist Cambodia 1976-1979) who announced the start of his regime was “Year Zero” and all existing culture and tradition must completely be destroyed and replaced.  

Until the sixteenth century bishops wore green and this use persists on the traditional coat of arms that each bishop chooses when elected.  In the 1500s, the switch was made to “amaranth red,” named after the amaranth flower although, despite the name, the actual hue is more like fuchsia but, being similar to a purple, church historians maintain there’s some symbolic value linking with the bishop being charged to govern his local diocese.  Technically, the Holy See describes the color worn by cardinals as “scarlet” and their eminences are described as “princes” of the church although part of the mystique of the place is that the red symbolizes the blood they’re all supposed to be prepared to spill to defend the pope.  When the Pope places the biretta (the hat with 3 or 4 stiffened corners worn as part of liturgical dress) on top of the cardinal’s head, he says, “(This is) scarlet as a sign of the dignity of the cardinalate, signifying your readiness to act with courage, even to the shedding of your blood, for the increase of the Christian faith, for the peace and tranquility of the people of God and for the freedom and growth of Holy Roman Church.”  As a title of honor within the church, eminence was in use as early as the 1650s although apparently since the 1720s, the honorific has been exclusive to cardinals.

Cardinal Richelieu (1636), oil on canvas by Philippe de Champaigne (1602–1674) (left) and Engraving of Francois Leclerc du Tremblay (circa 1630) by an unknown artist.

The term gray eminence was from the French éminence grise, plural eminences grises or eminence grises (literally “grey eminence” and the French spelling is sometimes used in the English-speaking world).  It was applied originally to François Leclerc du Tremblay (1577–1638), also known as Père Joseph, a French Capuchin friar who was the confidant and agent of Cardinal Richelieu (1585–1642), the chief minister of France under Louis XIII (1601–1643; King of France 1610-1643).  The term refers to du Tremblay’s influence over the Cardinal (who bore the honorific of Eminence), and the colour of his habit (he wore gray).  Aldous Huxley (1894–1963) sub-titled his biography of Leclerc (L'Éminence Grise (1941)): A Study in Religion and Politics.  Huxley discussed the nature of both religion & politics, his purpose being to explore the relationship between the two and his work was a kind of warning to those of faith who are led astray by proximity to power.

Use of the term éminence grise suggests a shadowy, backroom operator who avoids publicity, operating in secret if possible yet exercising great influence over decisions, even to the point of being “the power behind the throne”.  In this a gray eminence differs from a king-maker or a svengali is that those designations are applied typically to those who operate in the public view, even flaunting their power and authority.  Probably the closest synonym of the gray eminence is a “puppetmaster” because of the implication of remaining hidden, and although never seen, the strings they pull are if one looks closely enough.  The svengali was named for the hypnotist character Svengali in George du Maurier’s (1834–1896) novel Trilby (1894).  Svengali seduced, dominated and manipulated Trilby who was a young, half-Irish girl, transforming her into a great singer but in doing so he made her utterly dependent on him and this ruthlessly he exploited.

The brown eminence

Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) followed by his "brown eminence", Martin Bormann (1900–1945).

Bormann attached himself to the Nazi Party in the 1920s and proved diligent and industrious, rewarded in 1933 by being appointed chief of staff in the office of Rudolf Hess (1894–1987; Nazi Deputy Führer 1933-1941) where he first built his power base.  After Hess bizarrely flew to Scotland in 1941, Hitler abolished the post of Deputy Führer, assigning his offices to Bormann and styling him Head of the Parteikanzlei (Party Chancellery), a position of extraordinary influence, strengthened further when in 1943 he was appointed Personal Secretary to the Führer, a title he exploited to allow him to act as a kind of viceroy, exercising power in Hitler’s name.  Known within the party as the der brauner Schatten (the brown shadow) which was translated usually as “Brown Eminence” (an allusion to an éminence grise), he maintained his authority by controlling access to Hitler to whom his efficiency and dutifulness proved invaluable.  The "brown" refers to the Nazi's brown uniforms, a color adopted not by choice but because when the cash-strapped party in the 1920s needed uniforms for their Sturmabteilung (The SA, literally "Storm Division" or Storm Troopers and known as the "brownshirts"), what were available cheaply and in bulk was the stock of brown army clothing intended for use in the tropical territories the Germans would have occupied had they won World War I (1914-1918).  Bormann committed suicide while trying to make his escape from Berlin in 1945 although this wasn't confirmed until 1973.

Lindsay Lohan's inner eminence on film.


Lindsay Lohan (2011) by Richard Phillips & Taylor Steele.

Screened in conjunction with the 54th international exhibition of the Venice Biennale (June 2011), Lindsay Lohan was a short film the director said represented a “new kind of portraiture.”  Filmed in Malibu, California, the piece was included in the Commercial Break series, presented by Venice’s Garage Center for Contemporary Culture and although the promotional notes indicated it would include footage of the ankle monitor she helped make famous, the device doesn't appear in the final cut.

At the festival, co-director Richard Phillips (b 1962) was interviewed by V Magazine and explained: Lindsay has an incredible emotional and physical presence on screen.  “[She] holds an existential vulnerability, while harnessing the power of the transcendental — the moment in transition. She is able to connect with us past all of our memory and projection, expressing our own inner eminence.

Directed by: Richard Phillips & Taylor Steele
Director of Photography: Todd Heater
Creative Director: Dominic Sidhu
Art Director: Kyra Griffin
Editor: Haines Hall
Color mastering: Pascal Dangin for Boxmotion
Music: Tamaryn & Rex John Shelverton
Costume Designer: Ellen Mirojnick

Tuesday, August 22, 2023

Sovereign

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

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

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

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

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

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

(6) Supreme; preeminent; indisputable.

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

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

(9) A large champagne bottle with the capacity of about 25 liters, equivalent to 33 standard bottles.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Norway – Monarchy still going.

Bulgaria – Monarchy overthrown in 1946.

Portugal – Monarchy overthrown in 1910.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Denmark – Monarchy still going.

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

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

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

1963 Jaguar S-Type 3.8.

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

1968 Daimler Sovereign.

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

1967 Daimler Sovereign.

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

1976 Daimler Sovereign two door.

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

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

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

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

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

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