Vexillology

Vexillology (pronounced vek-suh-lol-uh-jee)

The study of and the collection of information about flags.

1957 (and in print since 1959): The construct was vexill(um) + -ology.  Vexillum (the plural vexilla) was from the Latin vēxillum (flag, banner), from the Proto-Italic wekslolom (and synchronically a diminutive form of vēlum), from the Proto-Italic wekslom, from the primitive Indo-European wegslom, from weg- (to weave, bind) and cognate with the English wick.  The Latin vexillum translated literally as “flag; banner” but in English was used to mean (1) a flag, banner, or standard, (2) in military use a formation company of troops serving under one standard, (3) the sign of the cross, (4) in botany, the upper petal of a papilionaceous flower and (5) in ornithology, the rhachis and web of a feather taken together.  The suffix -ology was formed from -o- (as an interconsonantal vowel) +‎ -logy.  The origin in English of the -logy suffix lies with loanwords from the Ancient Greek, usually via Latin and French, where the suffix (-λογία) is an integral part of the word loaned (eg astrology from astrologia) since the sixteenth century.  French picked up -logie from the Latin -logia, from the Ancient Greek -λογία (-logía).  Within Greek, the suffix is an -ία (-ía) abstract from λόγος (lógos) (account, explanation, narrative), and that a verbal noun from λέγω (légō) (I say, speak, converse, tell a story).  In English the suffix became extraordinarily productive, used notably to form names of sciences or disciplines of study, analogous to the names traditionally borrowed from the Latin (eg astrology from astrologia; geology from geologia) and by the late eighteenth century, the practice (despite the disapproval of the pedants) extended to terms with no connection to Greek or Latin such as those building on French or German bases (eg insectology (1766) after the French insectologie; terminology (1801) after the German Terminologie).  Within a few decades of the intrusion of modern languages, combinations emerged using English terms (eg undergroundology (1820); hatology (1837)).  In this evolution, the development may be though similar to the latter-day proliferation of “-isms” (fascism; feminism etc).  Vexillology, vexillologist vexillographer, vexillophilia, vexillophile & vexillolatry are nouns, vexillological & vexillologic are adjectives; the most common noun plural is vexillologists.

A vexillographer is one who designs flags, standards & banners, a vexillophile is (1) someone who collects and displays flags and (2) one who studies flags, their history and meaning.  Although there are vexillophiles, there is in medicine no recognized condition known as vexillophilia (which would be a paraphilia describing the sexualized objectification of flags (ie flag) although following the convention established in recent revisions to the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) (DSM-5 (2013) & DSM-5-TR (2022)), the correct clinical description would now be "flag partialism"; vexillophiles anyway prefer to describe themselves as "flag nerds".  Nor is there any record of there being instances of vexillophobia (a morbid fear of flags); there are those opposed to what flags represent  but that's not the same as being a vexillophobe which would be something specific about this type of bunting in general.  In political science, there is the word flagophobe (also as flagphobe), a derogatory term used usually by those on the right (and other nationalists) as a slur suggesting a want of patriotism in an opponent they’ve usually already labelled as “liberal”.  It's based on a metaphorical connection between a national flag and pride in one's country and is thus not a reference to a fear of flags in general.  To vexillize (or vexillate) can mean (1) to gather or to lead an army under a flag, (2) to organize or to lead people under a common cause or goal, (3) to make a flag (sewing, printing, digitally distributing etc), (4) to design a flag or (5) to introduce a specific depiction on a flag.

Wrapped: Vexillologist Lindsay Lohan and the stars & stripes.  The phrase “wrapping themselves self in the flag” is used of politicians who attempt to disguise their self-serving motives by presenting something as being in the national interest or being done for patriotic reasons.  The companion term is “patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel”, a observation made in 1775 by Samuel Johnson (1709-1784) of the hypocrisy of William Pitt (1708-1778 (Pitt the Elder); First Earl of Chatham & UK prime-minister 1766-1768).

Quite when the first flag was flown is not known but so simple is the concept and so minimal the technology required for fabrication that as forms of identification or communication they may have been among the earliest examples of symbolic representation.  Although the nation-state as its now understood is a relatively new creation (barely a thousand years old), prior to that there had for millennia been organized settlements with distinct identities and there is evidence from surviving works of art and drawings that something like a flag existed in the Mediterranean region as long ago as the fourth century BC and it’s possible such things were in use in China even earlier.  The familiar concept of the national flag evolved as the modern nation state emerged in Europe in the late Middle Ages and early modern period and traditionally, Denmark's Dannebrog is cited as the oldest national flag extant, having being in continuous use (though not always as the symbol of state) since the thirteenth century.

An array of Denmark's Dannebrog (usually translated as "the cloth of the Danes") on flagpoles.

The legend is that during a battle on 15 June 1219 in what is modern-day Estonia, the Danish army was on the defensive and defeat seemed imminent when suddenly, a red banner with a white cross fell from the sky.  As a result, the fortunes of war shifted, the Danish army won the battle and Denmark gained a flag.  The implication was of course the symbol was a "sign from God" and countless armies have rallied from difficult positions if soldiers can be persuaded victory can be won "with God on our side". 

Inherently, a small piece of colored glass three metres in the air can have no effect on a passing car yet the use of red, amber & green traffic lights is what makes modern road systems function as efficiently as they do.  They work because people (usually) respond as they should through the lens of semiotics, the signifier being the color of the light, the signified the instructions conveyed (green=”go”; amber=”prepare to stop or proceed with caution” & red=”stop”) and the referent the physical need to go, proceed only with caution or stop.  The power of the glass lies wholly in its symbolism and the implied consequences of ignoring its message.  Flags, mere pieces of fabric, have no inherent political or military force yet have for millennia been among the most valued and contested of symbols; men have died defending pieces of bunting which could have been replaced with a tick of a supply sergeant’s pen, simply because of the symbolism.  Because so much of the structure was fake, symbolism was integral to the appeal of Nazism (and fascism in general) and by the early summer of 1942, on a map, the military position of Nazi Germany looked impressive, its forces still maintaining a presence in North Africa, control extending to the Arctic Circle, most of Western Europe occupied from Norway to the south of France and the territorial gains from Operation Barbarossa (1941) reaching well into the Soviet Union.  However, the map substantially reflected the gains which had been made in 1941 and by mid-1942 it was clear to the German military they had under-estimated the ability of the Soviet armies to absorb losses and recover.  It was clear Germany no longer had the strength successfully to advance along the massive front created by Barbarossa and even Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) realized that, at least temporarily, more modest strategic aims would have to be pursued.

What Hitler set in train was a multi-pronged operation which would have been strategically sound had (1) the resources been available to sustain it and (2) there had not been such a gross under-estimation of the available Soviet military capacity.  Originally, the plan had been to advance on the Caucasus after the encirclement and destruction of the defending forces in the Stalingrad region and the occupation of the city itself.  This was changed, splitting the attacking force to allow the city and the Caucasus simultaneously to be conquered and the area envisaged was vast, including the eastern coast of the Black Sea, the forbidding Caucasian mountain passes and the oil fields of Grozny & Baku, far to the south.  The German generals didn’t need much more than the back of an envelope to work out it simply couldn’t be done and that rather than undertaking sound planning based on reliable intelligence, the Führer was indulging in little more than wishing & guessing.  “Wishing & guessing” was General George Marshall’s (1880–1959; US Army chief of staff 1939-1945) critique of Winston Churchill’s (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) dabblings in military matters and the comment wasn’t unjustified but the difference was that while the Allied high command was able to restrain (and if need be, veto) the prime-minister’s romantic (essentially Napoleonic) adventurism, the Wehrmacht’s generals and admirals had by 1942 long been dominated by Hitler.  The German army was however generally the most effective ground force of the war and remarkably, achieved some early tactical gains but such were the distances involved and the disparity of forces available that the offensive was not only doomed but culminated in the loss of some 230,000 troops at Stalingrad, a calamity from which the army never quite recovered and among the German people damaged the prestige of the regime to an extent no previous setback had done.

Third Reich War Flag, Mount Elbrus, August 1942.

Hitler, at least in 1942, wasn’t delusional and understood he was running a risk but his gambler’s instincts had for twenty years served him well and he still clung to the belief a strength of will could overcome many disadvantages, even on the battlefield.  Early in the war, that had worked when he was facing divided, unimaginative or weak opponents but those days were over and he was well-aware (regardless of what he told the generals) he was playing for high stakes from with a bad hand.  That he was under great pressure and wracked by uncertainty (whatever might have been his outward displays of confidence) was probably the cause of a celebrated over-reaction to what was one of the war’s more trivial incidents: the planting of the Nazi war flag on the peak of Mount Elbrus, at 5,642 m (18,510 feet) the highest point in Europe.  Hitler thought pursuits like mountain climbing and skiing absurd but, like any practical politician, he liked a good photo-opportunity and had in peacetime been pleased to be photographed with those who had raised the swastika on some mountain or other (something which dedicated Nazis had been doing since the 1920s, long before the party in 1933 plotted and swindled their way into office).  On 21 August 1942, the Third’s Reich’s war flag, along with the divisional flags of the 1st and 4th Divisions fluttered in the wind on the roof of Europe and news of the triumph was transmitted to FHQ (Führer Headquarters).

In the throes of the offensive driving towards Stalingrad and the Caucases, the alpine troops who climbed the peak to plant the flag doubtless though they were “working towards the Führer” and providing him a priceless propaganda piece.  They probably expected medals or at least thanks but Hitler was focused on his military objectives and knew he needed every available man to be devoted to his job and upon hearing two-dozen soldiers had decided to ignore their orders and instead climb a hill of no strategic value, just to climb down again, his reaction was visceral, recalled in his memoirs by Albert Speer (1905–1981; Nazi court architect 1934-1942; Nazi minister of armaments and war production 1942-1945), then at FHQ:

“I often saw Hitler furious but seldom did his anger erupt from him as it did when this report came in. For hours he raged as if his entire plan of the campaign had been ruined by this bit of sport. Days later he went on railing to all and sundry about “those crazy mountain climbers” who “belong before a court-martial.” They were pursuing their idiotic hobbies in the midst of a war, he exclaimed indignantly, occupying an idiotic peak even though he had commanded that all efforts must be concentrated upon Sukhumi.”

The famous (and subtlety edited) photograph of the Soviet flag being raised over the Reichstag on 30 April 1945 during the Battle of Berlin (actually a staged-shot  taken on 2 May).

The Germans never made it to Sukhumi and the high-altitude sideshow by a handful of troops of course in no way affected the campaign but the reaction at FHQ was an indication of the pressure felt by Hitler.  The planting of a symbolic flag was also though symptomatic of the arrogance which had permeated the German military under the Nazis and it anyway proved a pyrrhic act of conquest, the standard torn down and replaced by the Soviet flag within six months; that the Russian army took the trouble to do that amid the clatter of war illustrates potency of national flags as propaganda devices.  One of the most famous photographs of the conflict was that of the Soviet flag in May 1945 being placed over the Reichstag in Berlin, a symbol of defeat of Nazism.  Interestingly, so important to the Kremlin was the image that the act was actually re-staged the next day, this time with a photographer in place to shoot a roll of film so the perfect shot could be selected and the Russians are not the only ones to have re-staged famous flag raisings.

A banner used in Croatia between 925-1102 (left), the current Croatian flag adopted after independence in 1990 (centre) and the Croatian naval ensign (1990).

One of the most ancient symbols to endure in modern nation flags is the red & white checkered pattern used to this day on the flag of Croatia.  The oldest known example dates from 925 and the pattern was used (with the odd interruption) for centuries, even when the country was a non-sovereign component of supranational states such as the Habsburg Empire.  A red star was used instead when Croatia was a part of comrade Marshall Tito’s (1892-1980) Jugoslavija (Yugoslavia) between 1945-1990 but the red & white checks were restored when independence was regained in 1990.

Applied vexillologist Ivana Knoll at the FIFA World Cup in Qatar.

Noted Instagram influencer Ivana Knoll (b 1992) was a finalist in the Miss Croatia beauty contest in 2016 and for her appearances at the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar, chose a number of outfits using the national symbol of the red and white checkerboard (matching the home strip worn by the team), taken from the Croatian national flag.  By the standards of Instagram, the design of the hoodie she donned for Croatia's game against Morocco at the Al-Bayat stadium wasn't particularly revealing but it certainly caught the eye.  As if Gianni Infantino (b 1970; president of FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association (International Federation of Association Football) since 2016) doesn't have enough to ponder, the former Miss Croatia finalist tagged FIFA in her posts, fearing perhaps the president may not be among her 600,000 Instagram followers and her strategy seems to have had the desired effect although whether the design which, does cover her hair, shoulders and legs really was sufficiently demur to satisfy the local rules may have been contested by some imams.  The guidance provided by FIFA indicated non-Qatari women don’t need to wear the abaya (the long, black robe), tops must cover their midriff and shoulders, and skirts, dresses or trousers must cover the knees and clothing should not be tight or reveal any cleavage.  In accordance with the rules or not, Ms Knoll proved a popular accessory for Qatari men seeking selfies.

Four Citroën GS “Drapeaux” on the 400 metre athletics track at the Olympic Stadium, Munich, FRG (Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany; the old West Germany) 1949-1990) for the 1971 “The Car Without Borders” press event.

National flags sometimes appear on cars and while that’s done usually with badges, the bunting represented either in the singular (including the Triumph TR6 (1968-1976)) or in multiples for that “international flavour” (such as Cutlass Ciera emblem used by Oldsmobile between the mid-1970s and mid-1990s), in 1971 Citroën used the whole car as a harlequinesque canvas.  Based on mechanically standard GS hatchback and station wagon (Break) models, the flags which adorned the bodywork were those of the twelve nations which participated in voting for the 1971 (ECotY) European Car of the Year, won by the GS.  As well as the four created for the event in Munich, a number of replica GS Drapeaux were built (it’s not clear how many but it may have been as many as 24) for a continent-wide promotional tour, co-ordinated with Citroën dealers.  The voting for the 1971 ECotY was undertaken by a jury of 44 journalists and while not exactly a kind of “automotive Eurovision”, when the numbers were tallied the GS had received a majority in Czechoslovakia, Denmark, the FRG, the Netherlands and the UK, enough to take the title.  The French drapeaux was the plural of drapeau (flag), from the Old French drapel.  In the French dialectical form spoken in Louisiana, a drapeau was a diaper (nappy).

1971 Citroën GS 1220 Club Break in “Drapeaux” trim.

That the ECotY’s jury is made up of specialist automotive journalists has always tended to slant things towards the technically interesting which accounts for winners or place-getters including the NSU Ro80 (1967-1977 and the Wankel-engined winner in 1968 which effectively bankrupted its maker), the Jensen FF (1966-1974 and the first production road car with ABS & AWD (all-wheel-drive and then still called 4WD (four-wheel-drive)) and third in 1967) and the Oldsmobile Toronado (1965-1978 in its original configuration and third in (1966 despite using a 425 cubic inch (7.0 litre) V8 with FWD! (front-wheel-drive) and being as unsuited to the European market as just about anything ever made)).  The ECotY award winners haven’t always been a success in the market but did reflect the sort of machines which appealed to the particular profile of automotive journalists, a breed quite different from those who actually buy new cars.  Nor were the winners necessarily the “best” (admittedly a difficult quality to define), illustrated by the 1990 award when the outstanding Mercedes-Benz R129 (1988-2001) was runner up to the dreary Citroën XM (1989-2000).  By historic standards the GS (1970-1986) was a pretty good choice because not was it only an inspired design but also one which proved a success over a long period, unlike the runner up Volkswagen K70 (1970-1974) and third-placed Citroën SM (1970-1975).  The K70 had actually been inherited by VW when the moribund NSU was absorbed but the many troubles of the SM contributed to Citroën’s bankruptcy though probably not to the same extent as the GS Birotor (1973-1975 and known also as the CX) which used a Wankel engine. 

Flag of Mozambique (left) and flag of the Hezbollah (right).

The flag of the Hezbollah (right), the public display of which is banned in some jurisdictions where both the organization's political & military wings are listed as "terrorist organizations" includes a depiction of  Kalashnikov AK-47 assault rifle but that of Mozambique (left) is the only national flag to feature the famous weapon and the Africans fixed a bayonet to the barrel which was a nice touch.  Mozambique gained independence from Portugal in 1975 although the flag wasn’t officially adopted until 1983 as a modified version of what was essentially the battle flag of the Frente de Libertação de Moçambique (FRELIMO, the Mozambique Liberation Front, the Marxist (later styled “democratic socialist”) resistance movement which fought a war of liberation (1964-1974) against the Portuguese colonial forces).  Artistically, just as Marxism (notably often in Stalinist form) had been politically influential in post-colonial Africa, the hammer & sickle exerted an artistic appeal.  The flag of Mozambique has an AK-47 crossed by a hoe sitting atop an open book and is the only national flag upon which appears a modern firearm, the handful of others with guns all using historic relics like muskets or muzzle-loaded cannons.  The Angolan flag has a machete crossing a half gear wheel and both these African examples follow the symbolic model of the hammer and sickle, representing variously the armed struggle against repression, the industrial workers and the peasantry.

Hybristophilia

Hybristophilia (Pronounced hi-bris-a-fil-ee-uh)

An attraction to an individual who has committed a crime.

1986: The construct was the Ancient Greek ὑβρίζειν (hubrízein) (to commit an outrage against someone), +‎ -philia.  The -philia suffix was from the Ancient Greek φιλία (philía) (fraternal) love).  It was used to form nouns conveying a liking or love for something and in clinical use was applied often to an abnormal or obsessive interest, especially if it came to interfere with other aspects of life (the general term is paraphilia).  The companion suffix is the antonym -phobia. The related forms are the prefixes phil- & philo- and the suffixes -philiac, -philic, -phile & -phily.  One who exhibits hybristophilia is a hybristophile.  Hybristophilia & hybristophile are nouns; the noun plural is hybristophiles.

Cosmopolitan magazine interviewed Dr John Money for the December 1990 edition.

Although never explicitly mentioned in the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), the phenomenon has long been noted and in popular culture is better known as “Bonnie & Clyde syndrome”.  In the mental health community, hybristophilia is (now sometimes) regarded as a paraphilia (a class of mental disorder characterized by a preference for or obsession with unusual (some still treated as “abnormal”) sexual practices) and the word “hybristophila” was in 1986 introduced by Johns Hopkins University professor Dr John Money (1921–2006), a New Zealand-born psychologist and sexologist with an untypical background whose work on human sexuality and gender remains controversial.  Dr Money’s had an academic interest in those who exhibited a sexual attraction towards individuals who committed serious crimes.

In the literature, it’s clear most hybristophiles are female, something not unexpected given the extent to which crime is a male-dominated business; most of the academic work in the field seems to have focused on women who have developed strong affectionate or romantic feelings towards individuals incarcerated for serious crimes and studies have been undertaken in various fields including psychiatry and criminology.  Over the decades, the understanding of hybristophilia has evolved and there’s now a greater appreciation of the nuances which can extend to the political and although the original definition was restricted to sexual attraction (conventionally defined), aspects such as “thrill-seeking”, “sympathy”, “celebrity status hunting” (including deals for interviews and such) and a desire to “nurture or reform” have all been identified as factors which may influence the behaviour while some sources claim an alleged increased frequency of instances may be related to the rise in volume of “true crime” material on the internet and streaming services.  Of interest too is the role of the media in “romanticising” criminals and the rise (indeed the standardization) of the methods used by on-line dating apps: the response generated by the publication of a “hot” police mug-shot, the behaviour is not greatly different from “swiping right” on Tinder.

There has been criticism of the profession’s approach to hybristophilia, usually on the grounds of the definition being too broad and prone to the generation of ambiguities, some arguing the term may pathologize normal variations of human attraction, while others question the empirical evidence supporting its classification as a paraphilia.  Of course, the editors of the DSM have never listed it as a paraphilia and it is others who have made the link which at least implies a degree of disapprobation, the phenomenon perceived seemingly as a form of self-harm from which women need to be protected, an attitude with some history in psychiatry and medicine generally.  The matter of hybristophilia is emblematic of the general problem of the DSM’s category of paraphilic disorders being thought of as a sort of dumping ground for sexual behaviour thought unusual and when the fifth edition (DSM-5) was published in 2013, the editors acknowledged this by differentiating between (1) atypical human sexual behavior and (2) behavior either causing mental distress to a patient or which makes the them a threat to the psychological or physical well-being of others.  Although it’s clear legal implications played a part in the editorial committee’s discussions about revising diagnostic criteria, the goal really was to update the disorders in the category in a way which would reflect the outcomes for patients and those with whom they interacted rather than abstractions about the behaviour itself.

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

What emerged was a change in the defined characteristics of paraphilic disorders, a recognition most people with atypical (as opposed to “abnormal”) sexual interests do not have a mental disorder requiring treatment.  After the DSM-5, to be diagnosed with a paraphilic disorder, a patient must either (1) feel personal distress about their interest (not merely a distress resulting from society’s disapproval) or (2) have a sexual desire or behavior that involves another person’s psychological distress, injury, or death or (3) have a desire to indulge in sexual behaviors involving unwilling persons or persons unable to give legal, informed consent.  There was also a process of re-naming conditions to delineate between an atypical sexual interest and a defined disorder, a process which essentially differentiated between the behavior and the disorder stemming from that behaviour; the APA was giving its imprimatur for folk to engage in consensual atypical sexual behavior without inappropriately being labeled with a mental disorder. With this revision, the DSM-5 distinguished between atypical sexual interests and mental disorders involving these desires or behaviors.  That hybristophilia is not specifically mentioned in any edition of the DSM is thus not an omission as such and the DSM-5 did include the diagnostic category called “Other Specified Paraphilic Disorders” (OSPD) which was created to encompass atypical sexual interests causing significant distress or impairment but not fulfilling the criteria for any of the listed specific paraphilic disorders.  In other words, OSPD was there as a kind of clearing house for clinicians who identified a problem and that might include a hybristophile if the behaviour is causing personal distress or impairment (or consequent problems for others with whom they have some relationship).

Baldur von Schirach in the dock, where he told some lies and some partial truths, Palace of Justice, Nuremberg, May, 1946.

Baldur von Schirach (1907-1974; head of the Hitlerjugend (Hitler Youth) 1931-1940 & Gauleiter (district party leader) and Reichsstatthalter (Governor) of Vienna 1940-1945) would in 1946 have been hanged had some of the material relating to his time as governor of Vienna been brought before the court at the first Nuremberg Trial (1945-1946) but he instead received a 20 year sentence for which he should have been more grateful than ever he was.  In 1965, he was found to be suffering a detached retina and, after some objections from the Soviets, he was sent to the British military hospital in Berlin for surgery.  While under guard in his room on the second floor, the guards noticed movement in the tree next to the window and upon investigation, found a woman climbing the trunk.  She said her name was Karin Stein and told her interrogators she’d had always been “desperately in love” with their prisoner and had for years been sending him letters, cards and flowers (none of which he’d ever been allowed to receive).  She was escorted from the hospital and released but later returned, disguised as a nurse and managed to reach the door to his room before being stopped.  This hybristophile was a good stalker and turned up outside Spandau Prison when, at the stroke of midnight, he was released on 1 October 1966.  For some years she would haunt him and he found FRG (Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany; the old West Germany) 1949-1990) police unsympathetic.

“Sexy Sadie” mug shot, 1969.

Other notorious criminals who have married while serving long sentences include (1) Charles Manson (1934-2017) who at the age of 80 married the 26 year old who administered his social media sites; (2) Masson family member Susan “Sexy Sadie” Atkins (1948–2009) who in 1981 married someone who had convinced her he was a multi-millionaire (she had the marriage annulled when she learned he was poor and had 35 prior marriages) before in 1987 marrying a law student to whom she remained faithful until her death; (3) Manson family member Charles Denton "Tex" Watson (b 1945) who, after becoming a born again Christian in 1975, married an admirer in 1979 and became an ordained minister, going on to father four children before the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation banned conjugal visits for those serving life sentences (the couple divorced in 2003); (4) In custody, confessed serial killer, rapist and necrophile, Ted Bundy (1946-1989) married a twice-divorced mother of two who'd dated him before his arrest and in 1982 she gave birth to a daughter in 1982, naming Bundy as the father; (5) Serial killer Richard Ramirez (1960–2013, dubbed “The Night Stalker” by the press) received his death sentence for, inter alia, 13 murders, five attempted murders and 11 sexual assaults. Seven years into his time on death row, he married a freelance magazine editor who had been in correspondence with him for some years, telling CNN in 1997: “He's kind, he's funny, he's charming, I just believe in him completely.  In my opinion, there was far more evidence to convict O.J. Simpson, and we all know how that turned out."  (6) Both the  Menendez brothers (Lyle (b 1968) & Erik (born 1970), the pair now back in the news) attracted hybristophiles.  Lyle married twice, firstly to a former model (who divorced him after she found out he was writing to another woman) and subsequently to a magazine editor who has since become an attorney although tabloid revelations that about Lyle leading a “double life” in prison as a gay man can’t have made for marital bliss.  Erik married just the once and the couple are still together; (7) There is also apparently (although undocumented) the condition “hybristophile rebound”: serial killer, kidnapper, and rapist Kenneth Bianchi (b 1951) married a woman with whom he’d been corresponding; earlier she had tried woo Ted Bundy before focusing her sights on Bianchi.

Brian Thompson (1974–2024; chief executive officer (CEO) of UnitedHealthcare 2021-2024, left) and Free Luigi hoodie from Chill Guy (right).

Hybristophilia need not of necessity be a matter of sexual attraction although it’s those cases which attract the most publicity.  Somewhat different is the widespread acclaim expressed towards Luigi Mangione (b 1998) who stands accused of the execution-style murder of Brian Thompson.  Mr Thompson was CEO of a health insurance company which had become notorious for its practices of “deny, delay & defend” (there are alliterative variations to that string) to avoid paying out against claims and the popularity of Mr Mangione is more a case of becoming a “folk hero” with his alleged victim being emblematic of corporate greed and the misuse of power in the US.  Still, it’s inevitable Mr Mangione will attract proposals of marriage; even among those not drawn to his single-handed attack on the excesses of capitalism, some will have noted his good-looking mug shot.  Not even 24 hours passed between the news of Mr Mangione’s arrest and the appearance on-line of “Free Luigi” merchandise.

Mr Ghosn (left) and Mr Putin (Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin; b 1952; president or prime minister of Russia since 1999, right), the Kremlin, Moscow, 2006.

Another who became an instant folk hero (among certain groups) was the Brazilian born Carlos Ghosn (b 1954) of Lebanese descent.  While in Japan serving as CEO of Nissan and chairman of Mitsubishi Motors, Mr Ghosn was arrested on suspicion of financial misconduct at Nissan involving millions of dollars and, possibly noting the 99% conviction rate of the famously efficient Japanese criminal justice system, while under house arrest awaiting trial, he arranged to have himself enclosed in a large freight box which was flown out of the country on a private jet.  Upon landing at Lebanon’s Beirut–Rafic Hariri International Airport, the fugitive was greeted by cheering crowds, a reaction which played into the prejudices many hold about the Lebanese national character.  There is no extradition treaty between Japan and Lebanon.

Proctology

Proctology (pronounced prok-tol-uh-jee)

(1) Historically, the branch of medicine dealing with the surgery of the colon, rectum, and anus.

(2) In modern use, colorectal surgery as a specialty inside (as it were) proctology.

(3) A department or building so named in a hospital, university or clinic etc.

1896: The construct was procto- +‎ -logy or proct- + -ology.  Procto was from a Latinized form of the Greek prōktos (anus), from the primitive Indo-European prokto-, the source also of Armenian erastan-k' (buttocks).  The suffix -ology was formed from -o- (as an interconsonantal vowel) +‎ -logy.  The origin in English of the -logy suffix lies with loanwords from the Ancient Greek, usually via Latin and French, where the suffix (-λογία) is an integral part of the word loaned (eg astrology from astrologia) since the sixteenth century.  French picked up -logie from the Latin -logia, from the Ancient Greek -λογία (-logía).  Within Greek, the suffix is an -ία (-ía) abstract from λόγος (lógos) (account, explanation, narrative), and that a verbal noun from λέγω (légō) (I say, speak, converse, tell a story).  In English the suffix became extraordinarily productive, used notably to form names of sciences or disciplines of study, analogous to the names traditionally borrowed from the Latin (eg astrology from astrologia; geology from geologia) and by the late eighteenth century, the practice (despite the disapproval of the pedants) extended to terms with no connection to Greek or Latin such as those building on French or German bases (eg insectology (1766) after the French insectologie; terminology (1801) after the German Terminologie).  Within a few decades of the intrusion of modern languages, combinations emerged using English terms (eg undergroundology (1820); hatology (1837)).  In this evolution, the development may be though similar to the latter-day proliferation of “-isms” (fascism; feminism etc).  A physician specializing in proctology is a proctologist although some may prefer the punchier construction Bart Simpson (from the cartoon TV series The Simpsons), used: “butt doctor”.  The noun proctalgia (pain in the anus or rectum) existed in the medical literature as early as 1811 while the first known use of “proctologist” dates from 1897.  Proctology & proctologist are nouns and proctologic & proctological are adjectives; the noun plural is protologists.

In 1974, The British Medical Journal (BMJ) used the term “guitar nipple” to describe “the irritation to the breast that can occur from the pressure of the guitar against the body.”  In the same spirit, two years later a contributor to the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) was more imaginative still, coining “hot pants syndrome” when documenting cases in which a burn to the skin had been induced by a patient carrying a battery-powered transistor radio in the pocket of their trousers.  There was also in 1978 the New England Journal of Medicine's (NEJM) “disco digit” which referred to “a sore or infected finger caused by too much finger snapping while dancing.”  These terms were indicative of the trend in the English-speaking world for newly-identified (and in some cases novel conditions) to be constructed with English elements, rather than the Latin historically used.  In the fields of proctology, the historic terms (of discomfort in the region) were:

Rectalgia (pain in the rectum), the construct being rect- (a clipping of the New Latin rectum, itself a clipping of the Latin rectum intestinum (literally “the straight intestine”), neuter of rectus (straight) +‎ -algia (from the New Latin -algia (pain), from the Ancient Greek ἄλγος (álgos) (pain).

Proctalgia (pain in the anal or rectal region), the construct being proct- (a New Latin combining form, from Ancient Greek πρωκτός (prōktós) (anus).+‎ -algia.

Anodynia (anal pain; anorectal pain), the construct being ano- (from the Latin anus) + -dynia (an alternative (used when the preceding morpheme has a terminal vowel) form of -odynia (a New Latin combining form, from the Ancient Greek ὀδύνη (odúnē) (sorrow, grief, anguish, unhappiness).

Confusingly though, because terminology evolved often independently an in parallel, medicine contrived to use anodynia also to mean “the absence of pain in a previously painful region” and in that case the construct differed, being an- (from the Ancient Greek ἀν- (an-); a doublet of un- and in- (used her in the sense of a negation) +‎ odynia (a New Latin combining form, from the Ancient Greek ὀδύνη (odúnē) (sorrow, grief, anguish, unhappiness).  So for the non-medically trained, confusion could arise given anodynia can mean either “pain in the butt” or “pain has gone away” although because it’s a word unlikely much to be seen by other than the medically trained, instances of this have presumably been rare.  But in the context of “butt pain” there would seem to be some overlap in meaning between rectalgia, proctalgia & anodynia but while all are used to refer to “pain in or around the rectal area”, in the profession there are distinctions in use, particularly in clinical and diagnostic work 

Rectalgia is used to describe pain localized in the rectum and tends to be used as general term for the condition and often without specifying a cause.  Conditions associated with rectalgia include anorectal abscesses and fissures.  Proctalgia encompasses pain in the anorectal region (both anus and rectum) and is commonly used of proctalgia fugax, a specific condition characterized by sudden, severe, and brief rectal pain with no obvious underlying cause.  As the etymology suggests, proctalgia’s remit is broader than that of rectalgia because it includes both anus and rectum.  Whether or not related to the duality of meaning, anodynia is now not in general clinical use but historically it referred to pain in the vicinity of the anus.  The modern terms for that are “anal pain” & “anorectal pain”.  So, although lay-readers might be forgiven for thinking they could be used interchangeably, clinicians applied them based on anatomical location: rectalgia (rectum), anodynia (anus) &, proctalgia (anorectal region).

In the thoughts of Kellyanne Conway: A protologist's ultrasonic rectal probe (available in 140 & 200 mm (5½ & 8 inch) length versions) by the Electro Surgical Instrument Company (ESI (1896)).

Protology and pains in the butt do feature in idiomatic use in English.  Kellyanne Conway (b 1967; senior counselor to the US president, 2017-2020) when discussing the “Muller probe” (an investigation by special counsel Robert Mueller (1944) into Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021; president elect 2024) and the matter of alleged Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election) told a press conference the whole project was “a political proctology exam.”  She clearly liked the imagery because later, when Mr Muller handed down his report, she told the assembled press pack it was the “best day” since Mr Trump’s (2016) election, repeated the phrase “political proctology” and, sticking with medical allusions, said the verdict delivered “a clean bill of health.”

PITB (and its variations) is widely used.

Kellyanne Conway in hoodie: Miss January, Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute's annual Conservative Women Calendar (2009).

So like Mr Trump, Ms Conway would have found the Muller probe a (metaphorical) pain in the butt but “political proctology exam” was both a more polite and elegant way of saying it.  The saying “pain in the butt” belongs to a class of such expressions (all meaning “a nuisance; a source of trouble or annoyance”) which variously are used according to the need for politeness, the hierarchy of rudeness (in ascending order) being: “pain in the neck”, “pain in the brain”, “pain in the back” (all about equal), “pain in the rear”, “pain in the bum”, “pain in the ass” & “pain in the arse” (the choice between “ass” & “arse” dictated by linguistic tradition).  All are often used as initializms (PITN PITB, PITR, PITA) and PITA seems the most popular while in oral use “pain in the neck” and “pain in the ass (arse)” vie for popularity although some do like “pain in the brain” for the rhyme.

First edition (hardcover, 1956) of Soranus' Gynecology, published by Johns Hopkins University Press, translated and with an introduction by Owsei Temkin MD (1902-2002).

Quite when the idea of “specialists” in the modern sense of the word came to the practice of medicine isn’t certain but long before such things were formalized by the creation of colleges or specialist qualifications, it’s likely the early physicians did tend to develop particular areas of expertise and would have had certain patients referred to them, much as is the modern practice.  Probably, this emergence of specialties would have happened organically, based on geography: a physician in a fishing community on the sunny Aegean coast would have encountered a different patient profile than one who worked in the cold of the mountains.  Thus, while it’s not known who can be though the “first proctologist”, medical students everywhere will probably nominate Soranus of Ephesus, a Greek physician who practiced in both Alexandria and Rome during the first & second century AD.  His four-volume treatise on gynecology still exists so he probably deserves to be remembered as an early gynecologist but, as many medical students will confirm, his name is pronounced sawr-ey-nuhs so a proto-proctologist he must be.  Such things do happen: Winston Churchill’s (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) neurologist was Russell Brain (1895–1966).

Palter

Paltering (pronounced pawl-ter)

(1) Insincerely or deceitfully to talk or act; to lie or use trickery; to prevaricate or equivocate in speech or actions.

(2) To bargain with; to haggle (now rare).

(3) Carelessly to act; to trifle (now rare).

(4) To babble; to chatter (archaic).

1530–1540: The original meaning was “indistinctly to speak; to mumble”.  The origin is obscure and etymologists suggest it may have been an alteration of “falter” in (the sense of a “faltering delivery of speech” same sense, with an appended “p-“ from palsy (in pathology, a complete or partial muscle paralysis of a body part, often accompanied by a loss of feeling and uncontrolled body movements such as shaking).  The predominant meaning by the mid-seventeenth century was the use to describe the particular form of deceptive or misleading conduct that is the telling of a partial truth in such as way as to avoid a “technical lie” yet convey an untruth.  The alternative suggestion is a connection with the Middle English palter (rag, trifle, worthless thing), from Middle Low German palter (rag, cloth).  The verb has long been a mystery because it had the frequentative, but there is nothing to suggest the existence of a verb “palt”; it’s not impossible it may have been an alteration of paltry (trashy, trivial, of little value; of little monetary worth; someone despicable; contemptibly unimportant).  The suffix –ing was from the Middle English -ing, from the Old English –ing & -ung (in the sense of the modern -ing, as a suffix forming nouns from verbs), from the Proto-West Germanic –ingu & -ungu, from the Proto-Germanic –ingō & -ungō. It was cognate with the Saterland Frisian -enge, the West Frisian –ing, the Dutch –ing, The Low German –ing & -ink, the German –ung, the Swedish -ing and the Icelandic –ing; All the cognate forms were used for the same purpose as the English -ing).

Via the notion of “talk in a trifling manner, babble” came (by the 1580s) the sense of both “insincere words” or “misleading statements; “playing fast and loose" with the truth.  The sense of “trifle away, squander” was in use by the 1620s.  The now obsolete noun palterly (paulterly the alternative spelling) is unrelated.  It was a late Middle English form from palter (a rag, worthless thing), from the Middle Low German palter (rag, cloth) and was used to convey the sense of something (or someone) "mean or parsimonious".  Palter and paltered are verbs and palterer & paltering are nouns & verbs; the more common noun plural is palterings but all forms of the word are rare outside of academic use in the analysis of politics and commerce.  Palter has been used as an irregular noun and palteresque is tempting in the post-truth age.

Paltering is an old and, outside of academia, rarely used word but the practice it describes, while hardly a modern invention, seems now more prevalent in public discourse so a revival may happen.  Paltering is a term used to describe the act of deceiving someone by telling the truth, but in a misleading or incomplete way, something more devious even than the many lies of crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; US secretary of state 2009-2013) (which she usually “explains” by saying she “misspoke”).  The essence of paltering was captured in the elegant phrase of former UK cabinet secretary Sir Robert Armstrong (1927-2020; later Baron Armstrong of Ilminster) who, under cross-examination in the “Spycatcher” trial (1986), when referring to a letter, answered: “It contains a misleading impression, not a lie. It was being economical with the truth.”  Whether the old Etonian was aware of much post-Classical writing isn’t known (at Christ Church, Oxford he read the “Greats” (the history and philosophy of Ancient Greece & Rome)) but he may have been acquainted with Mark Twain’s (1835-1910) Following the Equator (1897) in which appeared: “Truth is the most valuable thing we have.  Let us economize it.” or the earlier thoughts of the Anglo-Irish Whig politician Edmund Burke (1729-1797) who in his Two Letters on the Proposals for Peace with the Regicide Directory (1796) noted: “Falsehood and delusion are allowed in no case whatsoever: But, as in the exercise of all the virtues, there is an economy of truth.”  Just as likely however is that Sir Robert had been corrupted by his long service in HMG (Her Majesty’s Government) and was thinking of: “The truth is so precious, it deserves an escort of lies”, a phrase often attributed (as are many) to Sir Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955), but there’s some evidence to suggest he may have picked it up from comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) and even if it wasn’t something the old seminarian coined, it was the mantra by which he lived so he deserves some credit.  Sir Robert’s phrase entered the annals of legal folklore and was good enough to have been lifted from a script from the BBC satire Yes Minister.

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

Unlike crooked Hillaryesque blatant lying (which involves providing false information), paltering involves using truthful statements (or at least those with the quality of plausible deniability) to create a false impression or intentionally to mislead someone.  Paltering is achieved by (1) omitting crucial details, (2) emphasizing certain truths while downplaying or not disclosing others or (3) presenting information in a way that technically is correct but which leads one’s interlocutor(s) to draw erroneous conclusions.  In practice, the mechanics of paltering usually are (1) Selective Truth: (highlighting facts that support one’s position while ignoring those that do not, (2) Omission: Leaving out vital information that would correct a listener's misunderstanding(s) and (4) Context Manipulation: Presenting information out of context to alter its meaning.  The classic wording of the oath or affirmation given by witnesses in legal proceedings (“the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”) is essentially an “anti-paltering” device.

So paltering is insidious because it is the artful use of the truth to create which might be thought a “constructive lie” and the word seems first to have enjoyed its latter day revival when political scientists in the US adopted it when analyzing texts and there is qualitative research which suggests those who palter can tend to rationalize the act by expressing sentiments along the lines of “lying is worse”.  Helpfully, the Trump White House was (and may yet again be) a place where many case-studies in the “compare & contrast” of lies and paltering were created and for that we should be grateful.

An example of the “simple lie” came when Sean Spicer (b 1971; White House Press Secretary & Communications Director 2017) early in 2021 informed the White House press corps that Donald Trump (b 1946; US president 2017-2021) had enjoyed a greater larger live audience at his inauguration than that which had attended Barack Obama’s (b 1961; US president 2009-2017) in 2009.  All available evidence appeared to suggest Obama’s numbers were up to twice those of Trump and if Spicer hadn’t brought it up (it was hardly a great affair of church or state) probably nobody else would have mentioned it but for Trump, who borrowed for his campaign so many of the techniques he’d learned from his career in reality television, viewer numbers were professional life and death and thus the lie. 

Kellyanne Conway in hoodie: Miss January, Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute's annual Conservative Women Calendar (2009).

The Trump administration actually gave the world a linguistic gift, another term for paltering: “alternative facts”, first mentioned by Trump campaign strategist and counselor, Kellyanne Conway (b 1967; senior counselor to the president, 2017-2020).  Ms Conway used the words during a Meet the Press interview to describe the use of statistics quoted by Sean Spicer (b 1971; White House Press Secretary & Communications Director, 2017), numbers which, prima facie, seemed dubious.  She sought later to clarify “alternative facts” by defining the phrase as "additional facts and alternative information" which, when deconstructed, probably did add a layer of nuance but really didn’t help.  Journalists, not a crew always entirely truthful, decided to help and called the phrase "Orwellian", provoking a spike on the search engines as folk sought out "doublethink" and "newspeak"; sales of George Orwell’s (1903–1950) Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949) said overnight to have risen several-dozen fold.  The relationship between the press and the Trump White House was never likely to be friendly but “alternative facts” meant things started badly almost from day one.  That had no discernible effect on Mr Trump who committed a classic act of paltering when, in arguing he had won the 2020 presidential election and it had been “stolen” from him by the corrupt, Democratic Party controlled “deep state”, emphasized that on election day he had “won more votes that any sitting president in history”.  That was of course literally true and something to be noted by psephologists for their trivia nights (psephologists know how to have a good time) but about as relevant to the results of the election as was crooked Hillary Clinton getting three million-odd more votes than Mr Trump in 2016.

The increase in the use of "paltering" is attributed to (1) the internet which encouraged the posting of lists of rare, obscure or archaic words and (2) the use in academia, the publications of which are indexed and harvested by statistical grabbers like Google's Ngrams.  Tempting though it may be, Mr Trump being an arch palterer probably did little to boost the use of the word although he may have inspired others to adopt the technique.

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.