Doily

Doily (pronounced doi-lee)

(1) A small ornamental mat, historically in embroidery or of lace (the style later emulated in plastic or paper), placed under plates, vases etc.  In addition to any decorative value, their function is to protect surfaces (such as timber) from spills and scratches.

(2) A small napkin, intended to be used for the dessert course (archaic).

(3) A visually similar circular piece of lace, worn as a head-covering by some Jewish & Christian women.

(4) A wool fabric (obsolete).

Circa 1714:  The small, decorative mats were named after the linen drapery on London’s Strand, run by the Doily family in the late seventeenth century.  They were doubtless one of many products offered in the shop (and probably a minor line) but for whatever reason they were the one which picked up the name and remain admired by some while dismissed by others as kitsch.  Doily is a noun (and historically an adjective); the noun plural is doilies.

Traditionally, most doilies were circular in shape and white or beige but many which were bleached white became beige or grey after repeated launderings.  Hotels and cafés often use the paper versions atop plates on which sandwiches, slices of cake and such are served,  This isn't always ideal because paper chaff (from stamping the holes) sometimes remains partially attached (al la the "hanging chads" made infamous in the Florida vote-count during the 2000 US presidential election), only to become detached and end up in the food.      

The alternative spellings were (and in some cases still are) doiley, doilie, doyly, or doyley, sometimes used deliberately as trade-names.  Various sources claim the family name of those running the eponymous London linen drapery was Doily or Doyly but there’s evidence to suggest it really was Doily, one example from Eustace Budgell (1686–1737), an English politician & writer who was a cousin of Joseph Addison (1672–1719), poet, playwright, essayist and fellow parliamentarian, remembered as the co-founder of The Spectator (1711-1712) magazine.  Budgell wrote dozens of pieces for the magazine (unrelated to the current The Spectator published since 1828 which borrowed the name) and in 1712 one (capitalized as originally printed) recorded:

“The famous Doily is still in everyone’s Memory, who raised a Fortune by finding out Materials for such Stuffs as might at once be cheap and genteel”.

That was a reference to the summer-weight woolen clothing which was much favored at the time because it was comfortable, inexpensive and stylish, a combination of virtues which sometimes still eludes manufacturers of many products.  Doily was attached as an adjective to the distinctive garments in the 1780s as “doily suit” & “doily stuffs” and it was only in 1711 the term was picked-up for the small ornamental napkins used at formal dinners when dessert was served.  The “doily-napkins” were literally sold as such (there were many others but the term became generic) and were available in a variety of forms, some quite elaborate and because these resembled the small mats the shop also sold, they came to lend their name to the style, regardless of whether or not purchased from Mr Doily’s shop.  The doilies in their familiar modern form seem first to have been so described in 1714 although it may be they’d been on sale for many years.

Addison is remembered for many reasons, one of which was his once widely performed play Cato (1712) which, based on the final days of Marcus Porcius Cato Uticensis (known variously in history as “Cato the Younger” & “Cato of Utica”), a conservative Roman senator in the late Republic who died by his own hand, explored issues such as the conflict between individual liberty and the powers of the state.  The work suited the zeitgeist of pre-revolution America and many of its lines became phrases the revolutionaries would make famous in the War of Independence (1775-1783).  Cato enjoyed a macabre coda when Budgell, beset with problems, took his own life by throwing himself into the Thames, his suicide note reading: “What Cato did, and Addison approved, cannot be wrong.”

Because plates come in different shapes, so do doilies and there’s no inherent limitation in design although at some point, a construction ceases to be a doily and becomes a tablecloth.

Visually, doilies are strikingly similar to the head-coverings used in a number of Jewish traditions which some Christian women wear in accordance with scriptural dictate:

1 Corinthians 11:1-13: King James Version (KJV 1611)

1 Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.

2 Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you.

3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.

4 Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head.

5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.

6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.

7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.

9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

10 For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels.

11 Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord.

12 For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.

13 Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?

It’s not one of biblical passages much approved by feminists and nor do they like 1 Corinthians 14:34–35: As in all the churches of the saints, women should be silent in the churches.  For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says.  If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home.  For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.

Designer colors are also available and because doilies are a popular thing with hobbyists, the available spectrum is close to limitless and some are variegated.

The origin of the surname Doily was Anglo-Norman, from d'Œuilly (Ouilly), the name of several places in Calvados in the Normandy region, from Old French oeil (eye) and Doiley, Doilie, Doyly & Doyley were all Englishized forms of d'Ouilly and its French variants.  In England, apart from the noted draper, the best known was Richard D'Oyly Carte (1844–1901), the theatrical impresario who for years produced the collaborative works of WS Gilbert (1836-1911) & composer Arthur Sullivan (1842-1900) which came to be known as “Savoy operas”, the name derived from Carte’s Savoy Theatre in which many were first performed.  The D’Oyly part of his name was a forename (he was christened Richard D’Oyly Carte) which he used because his father, Richard Carte (1808-1891), was already well-known in the theatrical business and “Dick Carte” presumably wasn’t thought appropriate but “D’Oyly Carte” anyway became cockney rhyming slang for “fart” and in informal use it was later joined by “doily dyke” a synonym of “lipstick lesbian”, the alliterative terms used to contrast a feminine lesbian with those not (the "butch lesbians").  Except within certain sub-sets of the LGBTQQIAAOP community, both are now proscribed as microaggressions.  The rhyming slang may still be used.

"Japanese car doilies" (more correctly antimacassars & side-curtains) in Toyota Century V12s.

Apparently as culturally obligatory in Tokyo taxis as white gloves used to be for the drivers (though many still follow the tradition), the inevitably white partial seat covers are often referred to as “Japanese seat doilies” but technically, when used to protect the surfaces of chairs, they are antimacassars, the construct being anti- (from the Ancient Greek ἀντι- (anti-) (against, hostile to, contrasting with the norm, opposite of, reverse (also "like, reminiscent of")) +‎ macassar (an oil from the ylang ylang tree and once used to style the hair, the original sources of which were the jungles of the Dutch East Indies (modern-day Indonesia), the product shipped from the port of Macassar.

Fifty years of “continuity with change”: 1967 Toyota Century V8 (left) and 2017 Toyota Century V12 (right).

Produced over three generations (1967-1996; 1997-2017 & since 2018), the Toyota Century is the company’s flagship in the Japanese domestic market (JDM).  Although the Lexus marque was invented to rectify the perception of a “prestige deficit” in the RoW (rest of the world), models from the range were introduced in the home market only in 2005 and the Century has maintained its position at the top of the Toyota tree.  The first generation used a number of Toyota V8 engines which grew in capacity to reach an untypically large (for the JDM) 4.0 litres (245 cubic inch) but the most admired were the 1997-2017 cars (a few hundred of 9500-odd built exported) which used a 5.0 litre (305 cubic inch) V12 unique to the Century.  For political reasons, the factory under-rated the power output of the V12 but it was anyway designed and tuned for smoothness and silence, achieving both to an extent few have matched.  Like the memorable “suicide door” Lincolns of the 1960s, the Century’s external appearance changed little and although there were updates, it needed a trained eye to tell one from another and the 2023 cars still maintain a distinct resemblance to the 1967 original although for various reasons, since 2018 there’s been a reversion to eight-cylinder engines, a 5.0 litre version of the Lexus V8 fitted, augmented with electric motors.  Offered with a choice of leather or cloth interior trim, “Japanese seat doilies” are regularly seen in the Century.

2006 Toyota Century Royal (left) and the 2019 Toyota Century four-door cabriolet built for the Japanese Imperial Household (right).  

The Japanese Imperial Household in 2006 requested Toyota provide a fleet of cars for the royal family and four limousines and one hearse were constructed.  Based on the second generation Century (G50), the range was known as the Century Royal and received the special designation G51.  Following traditional English coach-building practice, the rear compartment was trimmed in a wool cloth while the front used leather and an unusual touch was the fitting of internal granite steps.  The factory released a number of details about the construction but were predictably vague about the “security measures” noting only they were an "integral" part of the design and it’s believed these included Kevlar & metal internal skins (as protection from gunfire or explosive devices) plus a multi-laminate, bullet-proof glass.  Another Century was added to the royal mews in 2019, this time a one-off four-door cabriolet parade car (both Toyota and the palace preferred "convertible").  Although of late heads of state have tended to avoid open-top motoring, while there’s a long Japanese tradition of assassinating politicians, during the last few hundred years emperors have been safe (the rumors about the death in 1912 dismissed by most historians) so the palace presumably thought this a calculated risk.  All the same, it’s doubtful a prime-minister will be invited to sit alongside while percolating through city streets, their faith in Japanese marksmanship unlikely to be as high as their belief His Majesty won't be the target.  It’s believed the ceremonial fleet of the royal mews is now made exclusively by Toyota, ending the use of foreign manufactured cars such as the Mercedes-Benz 770Ks (W07, 1930-1938) and a Rolls-Royce Corniche (1990), the latter the previous open-top parade vehicle.  When in use, the royal cars do not display number plates but are instead adorned with a gold-plated, stylized chrysanthemum, the symbol an allusion to the Chrysanthemum Throne (皇位, kōi (imperial seat)), the throne of the Emperor of Japan.  As far as is known, the cars in the royal mews are not fitted with “Japanese seat doilies”. 

Lindsay Lohan in doily-themed top over pink bikini, Mykonos, Greece, August 2014.

Catafalque

Catafalque (pronounced kat-uh-fawk, kat-uh-fawlk or kat-uh-falk)

(1) A (temporary or permanent) raised structure on which the body of a deceased person lies or is carried in state.

(2) A hearse (obsolete).

1635–1645: The orthodoxy is that catafalque is from the seventeenth century French catafalque, from the Italian catafalco, from the Late Latin catafalicum (scaffold), the construct being cata- (from the Ancient Greek κατά (katá) (downwards (and used in Medieval Latin with a sense of “beside, alongside”))) + fal(a) (wooden siege tower) + -icum (neuter of –icus; (the suffix used to denote "belonging to; derived from or pertaining to"), from the Etruscan.  However, etymologists are divided on the origin.  Some believe English picked up the word directly from the Italian and not via French and regard the Italian of uncertain origin, the connection with the Late Latin only speculative.  From the Medieval Latin catafalicum Old French gained chaffaut & chafaud (scaffold) which exists in the Modern French échafaud (scaffold).  Catafalque (the rare alternative spelling is catafalco) is a noun; the noun plural is catafalques.

The coffin carrying Queen Elizabeth II, rested on its catafalque for the lying in state, Westminster Hall, London, September 2022.

A catafalque is the platform upon which the body of the dead lies before their funeral.  In the West the modern practice is for the body to be placed in a coffin but historically the body was sometimes wrapped and this remains the practice for burials at sea.  Catafalques can be elaborately decorated or constructed with austere simplicity and can be mobile or stationary.  Although associated with state funerals they are a common fixture in crematoria or chapels and exist so the coffin is permitted to sit at an appropriate height for ceremonial purposes, most obviously during “open-casket” services.  Those used by undertakers (funeral directors) are usually mobile 9on wheels) so the coffin may easily be moved from one place to another, by one staff member if need be.  Thus, any appropriately elevated surface used from the purpose can be thought of (if only temporarily) as a catafalque although the name-proper is attached only to dedicated devices.  A catafalque party is a military formation, traditionally numbering four (though it may be more or fewer) assembled to stand guard over the coffin while the body is lying in state or at some other site of memorial.

The 1865 (Abraham Lincoln) catafalque in 2006, after the most recent replacement of its fabric covering.

One catafalque noted for its longevity is that hastily (and, from the point-of-view of a professional carpenter or cabinet maker, rather crudely) fabricated was that used for the coffin of Abraham Lincoln (1809–1865) US president 1861-1865) and still in use today.  Of simple construction and using plain framing timber, it’s not at all ornate and gains its aura from the long history of use, having being used in the funerals of some four dozen US figures from politics, the judiciary, the military or society (most recently Senator Harry Reid (1939–2021; US senator (Democrat, Nevada).  Over the years, it has been enlarged and strengthened to accommodate increasingly heavy coffins and the fabric covering has several times been replaced but almost all the original structure remains so it’s not a “grandfather’s axe”.  The simplicity has sometimes been emulated with intent, Pope John Paul II’s (Karol Wojtyła, 1920–2005; Pope of the Roman Catholic Church 1978-2005) plain cypress coffin sitting atop a catafalque so basic it might have been built by Christ himself.  It’s thought JPII’s successor might choose something just as simple.

Voltaire's catafalque.

Voltaire (François-Marie Arouet, 1694–1778), the radical writer of the French Enlightenment, as controversial in death as in life, was buried quietly some way distant from Paris because his friends feared church and state would seek to deny him the proper rites of burial and it was only some thirteen years after his death, just after the French Revolution that his body was disinterred and moved to the Panthéon in Paris, a site created to honor illustrious citizens.  His catafalque was an impressive three tiered construction inscribed: ”Poet, philosopher, historian, he made a great step forward in the human spirit.  He prepared us to become free”.

David Lloyd George's funeral bier, Good Friday (30 March) 1945, Llanystumdwy, Wales.

In the context of funerals, definitionally, there is no difference between a bier and a catafalque.  Bier ((1) a litter to transport the body of a dead person, (2) a platform or stand where a body or coffin is placed & (3) a count of forty threads in the warp or chain of woolen cloth) was from the Middle English beer, beere & bere, from the Old English bēr, from the West Saxon bǣr (stretcher, bier), from the Proto-West Germanic bāru, from the Proto-Germanic bērō, from the primitive Indo-European bher (to carry, bear) and was cognate with the Saterland Frisian Beere (stretcher, bier), the Dutch baar (bier) and the German Bahre (bier, stretcher).  It’s thus functionally the same as a catafalque and the only point of differentiation in modern use seems to be the convention that catafalque is used when the funeral is grand while for more modest affairs (like David Lloyd George’s (1863–1945; UK prime-minister 1916-1922) “farm cart funeral”), bier is preferred.  The pyre (from the Ancient Greek πυρά (pyrá), from πῦρ (pyr) (fire)), also known as a funeral pyre, is a structure, made almost always of wood, constructed for the purpose of burning a body as part of a funeral rite and thus a form of ceremonial cremation.  Dimensionally, it may be far larger than is required for purposes of combustion because big fires were often an important aspect of the spectacle.

A member of Queen Elizabeth II's catafalque party fainted shortly before his shift was due to end.  He was not seriously injured.

Funeral

Funeral (pronounced fyoo-ner-uhl)

(1) The ceremonies for a dead person prior to burial or cremation; the obsequies.  Technically, it’s distinguished from a memorial service by the presence of the corpse although, for various reasons, this is not absolute.

(2) The processional element of such a ceremony.

(3) The sermon delivered at a burial (obsolete).

1350–1400: From the Middle English adjective funeral, from the Medieval Latin fūnerālia (funeral rites), originally the neuter plural from the adjective fūnerālis (having to do with a funeral), the construct being fūner- (stem of fūnus (funeral rites; death, corpse) + -ālis (the third-declension two-termination suffix (neuter -āle) used to form adjectives of relationship from nouns or numerals).  The origin of the Latin forms (In Classical Latin the adjective was funebris) is unknown, the common speculation linking to the primitive Indo-European dhew (to die).  The noun emerged in the early sixteenth century, probably from the Middle French plural funerailles, from the Medieval Latin fūnerālia, neuter plural of fūnerālis and the singular and plural were used interchangeably in English until circa 1700.  In Elizabethan times, funeral operated also as transitive verb in the sense of "to mourn".  The adjective funereal dates from 1725, influenced by the Middle French funerail, from the Latin fūnereus, from fūnus.  The Middle English forms from Latin via French displaced the native Old English līcþeġnung (literally the helpfully descriptive “dead body service”).

Funeral differs from burial, cremation, entombment, inhumation, interment & planting in that those words refer to a method whereas funeral concerns the ceremonial aspects; the words obsequies, sepulture & solemnities more synonymous although, historically, the closest was probably the obsolete exequy (the also obsolete exsequy the alternative form), a back-formation from exequies, from the Middle English exequies, from the Old French exequies, from the Latin exsequiās, accusative of exsequiae (train of followers).  Funeral appears in many European languages with the odd variation in spelling but in Portuguese, the velório (wake) is a more common reference.  The adjective funerary (pertaining to funerals or burials) dates from the 1690s, from Late Latin funerarius.  The adjective funest (portending death) emerged in the 1650s and had been obsolete since the late eighteenth century except as a poetic device; it was from the fourteenth century French funeste (unlucky), from the Latin funestus (causing death, destructive; mournful) from fūnus (“funeral rites" in this sense)  The related funestal was from a century earlier and died even sooner.  Funeral is a noun & adjective (the verb long obsolete), funereal, funerary & (the obsolete) funebrial are adjectives, funereally an adverb and funeralize is a verb; the noun plural is funerals.  The adjective funereal is used to refer to anything grim and dour rather than funeral as such and in idiomatic use, to say “it will be your funeral” is to suggest there will be unpleasant consequences if some course of action is followed.

In English, undertaker was an agent noun from the verb undertake, the early meaning, strictly speaking, "a contractor of any sort hired to perform some task" but it was applied mostly to those engaged is some sort of commercial enterprise.  There had long been instances of the use of “funeral-undertaker” but by the 1690s, “undertaker” had come to mean almost exclusively those whose profession was to “embalm and bury”.  Most etymologists conclude this organic shift to linguistic exclusivity came via the word being used as a euphemism for the mechanics of the profession, matters of mortality something of a taboo topic.

Undertaker faded from use as “mortician” and “funeral director” came to be preferred, firstly in the US with the latter soon becoming the standard form in the rest of the English-speaking world.  It was at the July 1895 meeting of the Funeral Directors' Association of Kentucky that it was proclaimed “…an undertaker will no longer be known as an "undertaker and embalmer." In the future he will be known as the "mortician."  This soon spread and the term undertaker is now almost unknown except in historic references or in figurative use in fields such as politics and sport.  In general use, the words "undertake", "undertaken" or "undertaking" are now used to describe just about any activity and with no sense of a taint of association with corpses.

In the narrow technical sense, even in modern use, the terms funeral director, mortician, and undertaker mean the same thing (a person who supervises or conducts the preparation of the dead for burial and directs or arranges funerals"  Nuances have however emerged, especially in the US where a funeral director tends to be someone who owns or operates a funeral home whereas the term mortician implies a technical role, a person who handles the body (the embalmer) in preparation for a funeral.  Often of course, these roles are combined, especially in smaller operations so for practical purposes, funeral director and mortician are generally interchangeable and the place a funeral director or mortician works is usually called either a funeral parlor or funeral home.  Although it would probably once have seemed a bizarre construction, there are also now funeral celebrants who officiate at ceremonies not (or only vaguely) connected with religious practice and are thus analogous to the civil celebrants who perform secular marriage ceremonies.  They're not directly connected with the school of thought which prefers to "celebrate a life" rather than "mourn a death" at a funeral, an approach which can be taken even in an overtly religious service. 

So it's largely a matter of how those within the profession prefer to style themselves and Funeral Director seems now the most popular choice although mortician remains widely used in the US.  Mirriam-Webster helpful suggests provides:

Funeral Director: A person whose job is to arrange and manage funerals.

Mortician: A person whose job is to prepare dead people to be buried and to arrange and manage funerals.

Undertaker: One whose business is to prepare the dead for burial and to arrange and manage funerals.

In the United Kingdom and some Commonwealth countries, a pauper's funeral was a funeral for a pauper paid for by the state, originally under the terms of the under the English Poor Law (last codified in 1834 but with legislative antecedents which stretched back centuries.  The common law right of the dead to a dignified burial was first recognized in England in R v Stewart, 12 AD. & E. 773 (1840) and was thus an early recognition of basic human rights.  The phrase "pauper's funeral" is now not widely used in formal discourse but apparently remains undertakers slang and, around the old British Empire, local authorities quietly conduct thousands of funerals a year.  Although not a "State Funeral" as defined, each is a funeral paid for by the state.

Top - Ceremonial funerals: Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) (left), Duke of Edinburgh (1921-2021) (centre) & Baroness Thatcher (1925-2013 (right).

Bottom - State Funerals: George V (1865-1936) (left), George VI (1895-1952) (centre) & Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965 (right). 

So, when Lord Salisbury (1893–1972) was asked by one of Winston Churchill’s (1874-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) private secretaries what a State Funeral was, in answering “A funeral paid for by the state” he was only partly correct, a State Funeral in the UK requiring uniquely the consent of both houses of parliament: the Commons and the Lords Spiritual & Temporal.  In the UK, the state funeral has long been a rare thing and in recent years it’s become more exclusive still, Elizabeth II’s upcoming event only the sixth in the last hundred years of which two were not departed sovereigns, the last being Churchill’s in 1965.  The big, set piece, televised events which look like State Funerals such as those of the Queen Mother (1900-2002 and Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) were styled as “ceremonial funerals” and over the same period there have been eight of these.  There has been speculation about the form Elizabeth’s funeral (operation "London Bridge", planned since 1962) will take, some suggesting it will, befitting the end of an era, be a glittering, elaborate spectacle which will contrast with the later coronation of Charles III, that expected to be something simpler than the last in 1953, reflecting the changed times.  It's not known how many people, over the years, have been involved in planning "London Bridge" but as a comparison, some sources claim 277 souls were on the committee which designed the State Funeral of Kim Il-sung (Kim I, 1912-1994; The Great Leader of the DPRK (North Korea (1948-1994)).  

Not all jurisdictions treat them as such rarified events.  While governments have different rules for state funerals, few show the largess of the Australian states which grant them to well-behaved pop singers and reasonably successful football coaches though, being obviously symbolic, they serve many purposes: both Adolf Hitler (1889-1945, Nazi head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) and Comrade Stalin (1878–1953; Soviet leader 1922-1953) attended (as chief mourner) a number of state funerals where the deceased had been murdered on their orders.

Mormon Funeral Potatoes

Although often called Mormon Funeral potatoes (although the same general recipe also produces great potatoes, cheesy potatoes, hash brown casserole, cheesy hash browns & party potatoes), the unusual combination of potatoes and toppings is popular beyond Utah as a traditional potato hotdish or casserole in the US West and Midwest.  The name "funeral potatoes" comes from the frequency with which the side-dish is served at funerals where it's popular not only because of tradition but the ease with which it can be transported and re-heated.  It remains a standard component of funerals conducted by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the Mormons).  Although there are variations, the recipe usually includes hash browns or cubed potatoes, some type of cheese, onions, a cream soup (chicken, mushroom, or celery) or sauce, sour cream, and a topping of butter with corn flakes or (latterly) crushed potato chips.

Preparation time: 10 minutes

Cooking time: 50-55 minutes

Serving time: 10 minutes

Ingredients

20 oz frozen hash browns, slightly defrosted
2 cups of a cheese which melts well (cheddar, mozzarella etc)
1.5 cup of sour cream
1 can of cream soup (alternatively use 1 cup of stock concentrate and increase sour cream to 2 cups)
8 tablespoons of butter, melted
1 cup of corn flakes
1 cup of fried onions
Salt, pepper to taste

Instructions

(1) Pre-heat oven to 330^o F (165^o C) and butter baking tray.

(2) In large bowl, thoroughly mix hash browns, sour cream, chicken soup, dried onion, butter, salt and pepper and cheese.

(3) Put mixture in baking tray, spreading to an even depth.

(4) Evenly sprinkle cornflakes on top by gently crushing them.

(5) Bake for 50-55 minutes.  Allow to cool down for 10 minutes before serving.

The Machete funeral hearse

Lindsay Lohan in habit, emerging from hearse in Machete (2010).  The Machete hearse was based on a 1987 Cadillac Brougham (1987-1992).

Between 1931-1979, General Motors' Cadillac division offered a line called the Cadillac Commercial Chassis, a long-wheelbase, heavy-duty platform which was mechanically complete but with a partially built body (without bodywork rear of the windscreen, doors and other panels included on request).  Produced on the D platform (exclusive to Cadillac), the Commercial Chassis was used by coach-builders to create high-roofed ambulances, hearses (often called funeral coaches in the US) and cleverly designed hybrids which at short notice could be converted from ambulances to hearses or used by a coroner's staff to transport a corpse; they were popular in towns with small populations.  The early Commercial Chassis were based on the Series 355 (1931-1935) and the Series 75 (1936-1992) from 1936 and although there were specific modification to the frame, the mechanical components were always shared with the 75 which, used for the big limousines, meant costs were amortized across the ranges.  After 1980, production continued on the downsized platform but there was no longer a separate D platform, the partially bodied cars structurally identical to the mainstream line.  The landau irons (which some coachbuilders insist should be called "carriage bars") on the rear side-panels emulate in style (though not function) those used on horse-drawn carriages and early automobiles (the last probably the Mercedes-Benz 300 (the “Adenauer”; W186 (1951-1957) & W189 (1957-1962)) Cabriolet D).  On those vehicles, the irons actually supported the folding mechanism for the fabric roof but on hearses they are merely decorative, there to relieve the slab-sidedness of the expanse of flat metal.

Undertaker

Undertaker (pronounced uhn-der-tey-ker)

(1) A person whose profession is the preparation of the dead for burial or cremation and the management of funerals (like embalmer, now mostly a historic reference, the preferred modern terms being funeral director or mortician)

(2) A person receiving land in Ireland during the Elizabethan era, so named because they gave an undertaking to abide by several conditions regarding marriage, to be loyal to the crown, and to use English as their spoken language (obsolete, now used only for historic references).

(3) A contractor for the royal revenue in England, one of those who undertook to manage the House of Commons for the king in the Addled Parliament of 1614 (obsolete, now used only for historic references).

(4) A person who undertakes something (became rare because of the likelihood of confusion with funeral directors but "undertake", "undertaking" and "undertaken" now common).  Historically, the word was associated in Middle and early Modern English with those running businesses but as the association with embalming and burials became pervasive, it came to be replaced with the French entrepreneur.

1350–1400: A compound word under- + -take- + -er, a back-formation from the earlier undertake (after undernim (from the Middle English undernimen, from the Old English underniman (to take in, receive, comprehend, understand, blame, be indignant at, take upon oneself, steal), the construct being under- +‎ nim.  It was cognate with the Dutch ondernemen (to undertake, attempt) and the German unternehmen (to undertake, attempt).  Under is from the Middle English under-, from the Old English under-, from the Proto-Germanic under, from the primitive Indo-European n̥dhér (lower) and n̥tér (inside).

Take is from the Middle English taken (to take, lay hold of, grasp, strike), from the Old English tacan (to grasp, touch), of North Germanic origin, from the Old Norse taka (to touch, take), from the Proto-Germanic tēkaną (to touch), from the primitive Indo-European dehig- (to touch).  Gradually, it displaced the Middle English nimen (to take), from the Old English niman (to take).  It was cognate with the Icelandic and Norwegian Nynorsk taka (to take), the Norwegian Bokmål ta (to take), the Swedish ta (to take), the Danish tage (to take, seize), the Middle Dutch taken (to grasp), the Dutch taken (to take; grasp) and the Middle Low German tacken (to grasp); tackle is related.

The –er suffix was added to verbs to create a person or thing that does an action indicated by the root verb; used to form an agent noun.  It added to a noun it denoted an occupation.  The suffix is from the Middle English -er & -ere, from the Old English -ere, a borrowing from the Proto-Germanic -ārijaz, thought to have been borrowed from Latin -ārius and reinforced by the synonymous but unrelated Old French -or & -eor (the Anglo-Norman variant of which was -our), from the Latin -(ā)tor, from the primitive Indo-European -tōr.

Mercedes-Benz 600 Hearse

In English, undertaker was an agent noun from the verb undertake, the early meaning, strictly speaking, "a contractor of any sort hired to perform some task" but it was applied mostly to those engaged is some sort of commercial enterprise.  There had long been instances of the use of “funeral-undertaker” but by the 1690s, “undertaker” had come to mean almost exclusively those whose profession was to “embalm and bury”.  Most etymologists conclude this organic shift to linguistic exclusivity came via the word being used as a euphemism for the mechanics of the profession, matters of mortality something of a taboo topic.

Undertaker faded from use as “mortician” and “funeral director” came to be preferred, firstly in the US with the latter soon becoming the standard form in the rest of the English-speaking world.  It was at the July 1895 meeting of the Funeral Directors' Association of Kentucky that it was proclaimed “…an undertaker will no longer be known as an "undertaker and embalmer." In the future he will be known as the "mortician."  This soon spread and the term undertaker is now almost unknown except in historic references or in figurative use in fields such as politics and sport.  In general use, the words "undertake", "undertaken" or "undertaking" are now used to describe just about any activity and with no sense of a taint of association with corpses. 

In the narrow technical sense, even in modern use, the terms funeral director, mortician, and undertaker mean the same thing (a person who supervises or conducts the preparation of the dead for burial and directs or arranges funerals"  Nuances have however emerged, especially in the US where a funeral director tends to be someone who owns or operates a funeral home whereas the term mortician implies a technical role, a person who handles the body (the embalmer) in preparation for a funeral.  Often of course, these roles are combined, especially in smaller operations so for practical purposes, funeral director and mortician are generally interchangeable.  Although it would probably once have seemed a bizarre construction, there are also now funeral celebrants who officiate at ceremonies not (or only vaguely) connected with religious practice and are thus analogous to the civil celebrants who perform secular marriage ceremonies.  They're not directly connected with the school of thought which prefers to "celebrate a life" rather than "mourn a death" at a funeral, an approach which can be taken even in an overtly religious service.  

So it's largely a matter of how those within the profession prefer to style themselves and Funeral Director seems now the most popular choice although mortician remains widely used in the US.  Mirriam-Webster provides:

Funeral Director: A person whose job is to arrange and manage funerals.

Mortician: A person whose job is to prepare dead people to be buried and to arrange and manage funerals.

Undertaker: One whose business is to prepare the dead for burial and to arrange and manage funerals.

1967 Mercedes-Benz 600 (W100) hearse by German coach builders, Pollmann of Bremen.

Built on a (lengthened) 1967 short wheelbase (SWB) platform, it’s a genuine one-off, the only 600 hearse ever built.  The story (which may be true), repeated whenever it’s offered for sale, is it was originally a sedan purchased by a German farmer (always referred to as Herr K) whose particular experience of the Wirtschaftswunder (the German post-war economic miracle) was the massive capital gain he enjoyed when he sold his farmland for urban development.  Happy, he bought Mercedes-Benz 600 (in champagne metallic gold) for his wife and commissioned an architect to design a house for them to enjoy.  Unfortunately, he arrived home one day to find the ungrateful hausfrau had run off with the architect and, unable to bear to keep the 600 because it was a reminder of the strumpet’s infidelity, he returned the car to the dealer to off-load.  It was sold to the coach-builders Pollmann which converted it to a hearse which seems appropriate although it's not known if the former farmer was impressed by the symbolism of the transformation.  It was used for some years for the purpose for which it was designed and has since been restored by US-based expert in all things 600esque, Karl Middelhauve.

The Machete funeral hearse

Lindsay Lohan in habit, emerging from hearse in Machete (2010).  The Machete hearse was based on a 1987 Cadillac Brougham (1987-1992).

Between 1931-1979, General Motors' Cadillac division offered a line called the Cadillac Commercial Chassis, a long-wheelbase, heavy-duty platform which was mechanically complete but with a partially built body (without bodywork rear of the windscreen, doors and other panels included on request).  Produced on the D platform (exclusive to Cadillac), the "Commercial Chassis" was used by coach-builders to create high-roofed ambulances, hearses (often called funeral coaches in the US) and cleverly designed hybrids which at short notice could be converted from ambulances to hearses or used by a coroner's staff to transport a corpse; these multi-purpose devices were popular in towns with small populations.  The early Commercial Chassis were based on the Series 355 (1931-1935) and the Series 75 (1936-1992) from 1936 and although there were specific modification to the frame, the mechanical components were always shared with the 75 which, used for the big limousines, meant costs were amortized across the ranges.  After 1980, production continued on the downsized platform but there was no longer a separate D platform, the partially bodied cars structurally identical to the mainstream line.

1960 Mercedes-Benz 300d Cabriolet D (left) and 1960 Cadillac hearse (Funeral Carriage) on the Commercial Chassis (right).

Dating from the age of horse drawn carriages, the landau irons (which some coachbuilders insist should be called "carriage bars") on the rear side-panels of hearses emulate in style (though not function) those used on carriages and early automobiles (the last probably the Mercedes-Benz 300 (the “Adenauer”; W186 (1951-1957) & W189 (1957-1962)) Cabriolet D).  On those vehicles, the irons actually supported the folding mechanism for the fabric roof but on hearses they are merely decorative, there to relieve the slab-sidedness of the expanse of flat metal.  The alternative approach with hearses is to use a more conventional glass panel, usually with curtains fitted which can be drawn as desired.  In many cases, there is a desire to make the coffin (casket) as visible as possible because some, to permit the dead a final act of conspicuous consumption, are crafted with some extravagance.

1971 Ford Thunderbird with standard vinyl roof (left) and 1967 Ford Thunderbird with the vinyl removed (right).

There was however one curious use of a stylized iron for a purpose which was both functional and aesthetic.  When, in a sign of the times, the 1967-1971 Ford Thunderbird included a four-door sedan rather than a convertible as a companion to the coupés in the range, the sedans were fitted with the combination of the irons and a vinyl roof.  In this one, unique, case the irons and the vinyl actually improved rather than detracted from the appearance because, built on a surprisingly short wheelbase, the Thunderbird had to be fitted with rather short rear doors (also compelling the use of the front-opening "suicide door" configuration) and to accommodate the shape of C-pillar, each had to intrude on the other.  What the (always dark) vinyl and the sweep of the irons did was conceal the compromise and for that reason, this generation of Thunderbirds is probably the only car where vinyl roofs are rarely removed because exposing the metal results in a very strange look.  Because (1) they're ugly and (2) they trap moisture, thereby encouraging rust, removing a vinyl roof usually improves the appearance of a car but this is the one exception.       

Jagwah

Jagwah (pronounced jag-whar)

A slang term in western Africa; a colloquialism for a smart man-about-town.

From early 1960s post-colonial Nigeria.  A phoneticism based on the admiration locals felt for the large green and white Jaguars run by the newly-independent Nigerian Government on their executive car fleet.  An example of aspirational association; desired life-style linked to status-symbols.  In west-Africa, Jagwah to this day remains a  colloquialism for "a smart man-about-town".

Under British colonial rule since the early nineteenth century, Nigeria gained independence in 1960.  Within a few weeks, the new government had bought forty Jaguar Mark IXs, all painted in the Nigerian state colours of green and white.  The big Jags, much admired by the local citizens, were ideal for African conditions, being robustly built and supplied with a low-compression engine suitable for the octane-rating of the petrol then available in the continent.  The economics were also compelling with their price being less than half that of a visually similar Rolls-Royce or Bentley.

The big post-war Jaguars

1947 Jaguar Mark IV 3.5 Saloon.

Jaguar Mark IV, 1945-1949:  Like many of the cars produced immediately after WWII, the Jaguar Mark IV range was essentially the same at that made in the pre-war years.  The nomenclature however changed in 1945 and would later again change retrospectively, the Mark IV tag adopted only when the Mark V was introduced in 1948.   At that time there had never been a Mark I, II & II but Jaguar’s strange relationship with numerical progression, Arabic & Latin, would continue in the 1950s, the Mark VI skipped in deference to Bentley which already had one on sale although whether this was an attempt to push brand-perception up-market or on legal advice isn’t known.  Later, structurally unrelated to the earlier cars there would be a Mark 2 and (retrospectively) a Mark 1 but after the Mark X & Mark 2 were in 1967 re-named, both Roman numerals and the use of "Mark" were abandoned in favor of an alpha-numeric mix.  The other change was the dropping of the SS label, the association with the Nazi Party’s SS (Schutzstaffel (security section or squad)) too unsavoury in those times although the moment would soon pass, Jaguar in 1957 reviving the name for the XKSS, the road-going version of the D-Type race car.  Jaguar’s pre-war use of SS was apparently derived from the company’s origin as the Swallow Sidecar Company but, after the association with the Standard Motor Company as an engine supplier, the factory began to prefer Standard Swallow, the cars sold under the badge Jaguar SS.

1945 Jaguar Mark IV 3.5 DHC.

Between 1945-1949 therefore, what came to be called the Mark IV was sold as the Jaguar 1½ litre, 2½ litre & 3½ litre; most were saloons but a small number of drophead coupés (DHC or convertible) were built.  Still using Standard’s engines (although manufactured by Jaguar after 1946), the larger units were overhead valve (OHV) straight sixes, the smaller one an OHV four.  Quite old-fashioned even then, the cars still used mechanical brakes and were built on a separate chassis frame with semi-elliptic leaf suspension on rigid axles front and rear.

1950 Jaguar Mark V 3.5.

Jaguar Mark V, 1948-1951:  Unlike the first genuinely new post-war American cars which were stylistically a generation advanced, in appearance the Mark V was clearly an evolution from the pre-war lines, the flowing curves more integrated into the coachwork and the once separate headlamps now in nacelles flared into the bodywork.  Bigger and heavier than its predecessors, the Mark V, again offered as a saloon or DHC, was fitted only with the six-cylinder engines; it would be decades before the next four-cylinder Jaguar would be sold, the XK-four prototypes tested for a couple of years thought unsuitable for the market segment Jaguar played a part in creating.  The OHV six was carried over from the Mark IV, the new double overhead camshaft (DOHC) XK-six remaining exclusive to the XK-120 sports car until the debut of the Mark VII in 1951 but under the skin, it was rather more modern, now with independent front suspension and hydraulic brakes though the separate chassis would remain until the end of the Mark IX in 1961.  There would be no Jaguar Mark VI, apparently because the visually similar Bentley Mark VI was already on sale and the story (which has been repeated over the years) that the abortive Jaguar Mark VI was a Mark V fitted with the XK-six is apparently a myth although several such cars certainly were built as testbeds for the drivetrain which would be used in the Mark VII.     

The Jaguar Mark VII M which won the 1956 Monte Carlo Rally.

Jaguar Mark VII, 1951-1956:  Unpersuaded by the various newer aesthetics emerging from the design studios in Europe and the US, Jaguar remained reluctant entirely to abandon the pre-war lines, the Mark VII again evolutionary in appearance, something of a streamlined Mark V, but under the bonnet (hood) now sat the XK-120’s 3.4 litre (210 cubic inch) XK-Six which enabled the big saloon (there were no more DHCs) to top 100 mph (160 km/h) with acceleration to match all but the most powerful of the competition from Detroit.  The lusty performance made the bulky Mark VII a somewhat improbable competition vehicle and it enjoyed success both on the track and as a rally car, a career enhanced when the Mark VII M was introduced in 1954, the 3.4 XK engine now with more aggressive camshafts and a higher compression ratio made possible by the wider availability of high-octane petrol.  The lift in performance was sufficient for victory in the 1956 Monte-Carlo Rally and while success continued on the track, Jaguar's win in a 1956 NASCAR event was enough to convince the ruling body to ban foreign-built cars.  In a sign of the times, the automatic gearbox, previously available only on export models, was offered as an option on the home market.   

1958 Jaguar Mark VIII.

Jaguar Mark VIII, 1956-1958:  Externally distinguishable from its predecessor only by the new, one-piece curved windscreen and other detail changes, the Mark VIII gained another useful increase in performance by the adoption of a variation of the XK-140’s higher performance 3.4 XK-Six, tuned to deliver low and mid-range torque rather than the top-end power needed in sports-car trim.  Now with more elaborate appointments, weight increased so the lift in performance was a little blunted but Jaguar’s choice as a performance saloon had anyway switched to (what came retrospectively to be known as) the smaller Mark 1 which in 1957 gained the 3.4 litre engine, becoming something of the BMW M5 of its day.  Additionally, the 1956 Suez crisis had made the smaller car much more attractive to customers and from its introduction the smaller saloon would out-sell the big Marks.

1959 Jaguar Mark IX.

Jaguar Mark IX, 1958-1961:  With the success of the smaller Mark I & 2, they became the mainstream Jaguar saloons and the Mark IX was upgraded with more luxurious fittings and some previously optional features such as the steel sliding sun-roof became standard equipment.  Power was again increased, the XK-six now bored out to 3.8 litres (231 cubic inches) and rated at 220 bhp (164 kW), the same unit which would power the smaller Mark 2 to such success in competition; only the triple carburetor versions in the XK150S, Mark X (later 420G) & E-Type (XKE) would be more powerful.  Befitting the market at which it was aimed, power steering was now standard as were four-wheel disc brakes which were typical of the early versions of the type, often noisy and with quite high pedal pressures but very effective, so good in fact that in conjunction with the power of the new 3.8 engine, on the track the big Jaguar was again remarkably competitive in it its class.  Even by 1958 however, the Mark IX was stylistically, a bit of a relic and in 1961 it was replaced by the longer, lower, wider Mark X.

1967 Jaguar 420G.

Jaguar Mark X, 1961-1966 & 420G, 1966-1970:  A transformative vehicle, the Mark X in so many ways set the template for Jaguar saloons, one which would serve the line for half a century, the lines first seen in 1961 not retired until the X358 version of the XJ ended production in 2009 (to be replaced by something which looked like a big Hyundai).  While in engineering terms, a considerable advance over its baroque predecessor; its low-slung lines made it less suitable as a state vehicle, a market-gap not adequately filled by the visually antiquated limousines Jaguar had inherited when it absorbed Daimler in 1960 and this would not be resolved until late in the decade.  The Mark X represented Jaguar’s particular take on modernity.  Introduced in the same year, while it didn’t create anything like the splash the sensational E-Type managed, it shared much of the mechanical specification including the very clever rear suspension with its inboard disc brakes, another long-lived design which wouldn’t be retired until 2006.  Also shared with the E-Type was the triple carburetor 3.8 XK-six, rated at up to (a perhaps optimistic) 265 horsepower although in 1965, that would be replaced by the 4.2 litre iteration, installed in the quest for more torque, something distinctly lacking compared with the big displacement V8s used by US manufacturers.

1965 Jaguar Mark X 4.2.

The long-stroke 4.2 did improve drivability, as did the improved, all-synchromesh four-speed manual gearbox which, while shared with and much welcomed in the E-Type, was anyway becoming increasingly less relevant in cars in this market segment.  That was certainly true in the United States which was the market at which the Mark X was intended to succeed but there it never did.  It was always understood by the factory that because of its sheer size, appeal in the home market would be limited but there were high hopes for success across the Atlantic and indeed, the Mark X was is so many ways perfect niche competition for the big Buicks, Cadillacs, Lincolns and Imperials.  However, by the early 1960s those manufacturers were building the finest engine-transmission combinations in the world with V8 engines up to 430 cubic inches (7.0 litres) and gearboxes which didn’t so much change gear as slur effortlessly from one ratio to the next.  It was a driving experience the XK-six couldn’t match under the conditions in which most American driving took place and the joys offered by the brakes and suspension (two generations ahead of anything from Detroit), didn’t compensate for the lack of effortlessness or amenities like air-conditioning which actually worked.  The obvious solution would have been to install the superb 4.6 litre (278 cubic inch) V8 acquired with the purchase in 1960 of Daimler and the V8 was tested in a Mark X with most satisfactory results and if more was wanted, enlargement well beyond five litres (305 cubic inches) was possible.  Unfortunately, Jaguar at the time was convinced engines should have either six or twelve cylinders and it’s true their V12 with its turbine-like smoothness would have suited the Mark X perfectly but it took so long to develop that the big car was out of production by the time it arrived.  The failure to pursue the simple expedient of using the Daimler V8 in the Mark X was emblematic of the mistakes, bizarre decisions and missed opportunities which was the tale of the British motor industry in the 1960s and 1970s,  

1967 Jaguar 420G.

So, selling is much lower volumes than had been hoped, the 4.2 litre Mark X continued until 1970 by which time production had slowed to a trickle.  To mark some detail changes in trim and a few additions to conform with new safety regulations, it was in 1966 renamed 420G (rather than Mark XI as tradition suggested) but even the option of air-conditioning and a central partition to make it a more suitable vehicle for those with chauffeurs didn’t arouse much interest.  When the Mark X’s fine underpinnings were instead offered in the much more manageably sized XJ6 in 1968, it was the death knell, the 420G, its tooling long amortized, remaining on the books to fulfil the small demand which still existed for a car which, whatever its failings, still offered a unique combination of virtues for those who appreciated such things.

Daimler DS420, Buckingham Palace, London.

Daimler DS 420, 1968-1992:  British Leyland, which had absorbed Jaguar, had continued production of both the Daimler Majestic Major with its old-fashioned body and modern V8 engine and the truly antiquated Vanden Plas Princess, replacing them (and in a sense the old Jaguar Mark IX) with the new Daimler DS420.  The DS420 needs to be considered when assessing the Mark X/420G as a failure because it was atop the Mark X’s platform the DS420 sat.  Suddenly the sheer bulk of the Mark X, which had proved such an impediment to market acceptance, was an invaluable asset, the stately DS420 long & tall, as ideal for presidents and potentates and it proved for funeral directors and the wedding trade.  Most were configured as conventional limousines but coachbuilders built also hearses and the odd landaulet; they were for decades a fixture at state events, weddings and funerals (the hearse for Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) was a DS420).  The last was made in 1992 and was noted also for being the final car to use the old XK-six, introduced more than forty years earlier in the XK120.

Daimler DS420s: One of the rare landaulet’s (left) of which Vanden Plas built only two although coach-builders and others have created a number (of varying quality) by modifying standard limousines; two with their chauffeurs awaiting their passengers,  Pall Mall, Westminster, London, 1974 (centre) and the funeral of Diana, Princess of Wales, London, 6 September 1997 (right).

Diana's hearse (B626MRK) was a 1985 model, built by Wilcox Limousines and owned by the Funeral Directors Leverton & Sons; it was the last DS420 so modified by Wilcox before hearse production was shifted to the sister company Eagle Specialist Vehicles and was the same car used to collect her coffin from RAF Northolt after its arrival from France.  In 2003, Levertons sold B626MRK after it had for some years been in storage.  It was purchased by an anonymous buyer for £90,000, the somewhat macabre celebrity association gaining it quite a premium over the £3,000 and £4,000 a typical DS420 hearse of this age and condition would be expected to attract.  Inevitably, there was criticism, some claiming the thing should have been donated to a museum but, accustomed to death, undertakers are pragmatic and to Levertons doubtlessly it was just another piece of obsolete equipment to be sold to the highest bidder.