Undecennial

Undecennial (pronounced uhn-duh-seh-nee-uhl)

(1) Occurring or observed every eleventh year.

(2) As “undecennial magnetic period”, the Sun’s solar cycle.

1858: The construct was undec-, (from the Latin undecim, (eleven), the construct being unus (one) + decem (ten)) + -ennial.  The -ennial suffix was from the Latin -enniālis, the construct being annus (year (and figuratively “time, season, epoch”)) + -ium (the suffix used to form abstract nouns) + -ālis (suffixed to nouns or numerals creating adjectives of relationship).  It was a combining form denoting years.  The Latin undecentesimus was from ūndēcentum (ninety-nine; 99).  In Roman numerals, 99 was written as XCIX, the construct of which was XC (90: 100 minus 10) + IX (9: 10 minus 1) thus XC (90) plus IX (9) equals XCIX (99).  The fear of the number 11 is described as hendecaphobia.  The alternative adjective (and non-standard noun) is undecennary (once every eleven years) and the adjective in Portuguese is undecenal.  Undecennial & undecennary are adjectives and a (non-standard) noun; the noun plural is undecennials.

Centennial (every hundred years; commemoration of an event that happened a hundred years earlier) is the best known of the words suffixed with “-ennial” but there are fun constructs with meanings not immediately obvious including demisesquicentennial (75 years), the construct being demi- (half-of) +‎ sesqui- (one-and-a-half) +‎ centennial (of 100 years) and quadranscentennial (twenty-fifth anniversary (now often called “silver jubilee)), the construct being quad, from the Latin quadrans (quarter) + -ennium (a variant of annus) + -ālis (the “quad” thus a reference to the four 25 year quarter-centuries in a century).  Unfortunately, sexennial (pertaining to a period of six years; taking place once every six years) (the construct being sexennium (a period of six years) + -al) means just a “six year period or cycle” although in August 2024, in Boston Massachusetts there was the Sexennial: A Sex-Positive Variety Show.

In modern use, there’s also been some re-purposing.  The first use of “postmillennial” was to describe the world after the year 1000 and it has been used of things Pos-2000 but it was also adopted in the nineteenth century by certain Christian sects to describe the doctrine the Second Coming of Christ will take place after the millennium; the antonym was premillennial (pertaining to the belief the Second Coming will take place before the millennium.).  In the 21^st century, it’s used also of “Generation Z”, the one following the “Millennial Generation”.  Premillennial seems not to be used in this context (that would be the (Baby) Boomers).  The construct of the adjective perennial was the Latin perenn(is) (lasting through the whole year or for several years, perennial; continual, everlasting, perpetual”) + the English -al (the adjective-forming suffix imparting the meaning “of or pertaining to”.  It’s familiar from its use in botany where it describes plants active throughout the year, or having a life cycle of more than two growing seasons (and thus used sometimes in the sense of “appearing again each year; annual”) but is used also (sometime loosely) of waterways and such.  In figurative use, “perennial” is used widely (and loosely) of just about anything (art, music, politics et al) with the quality of or tending to “continuing without cessation or intermission for several years, or for an undetermined or infinite period; never-ending or never failing; perpetual, unceasing”.

Images from NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory highlight the appearance of the Sun at solar minimum (December 2019, left) versus solar maximum (May 2024, right).  These images are in the 171-angstrom wavelength of extreme ultraviolet light, which reveals the active regions on the Sun that are more common during solar maximum.

The Sun’s 11-year cycle was first detected in 1843 by German apothecary & amateur astronomer Heinrich Schwabe (1789–1875). Schwabe noticed a pattern in the number of sunspots that appeared on the Sun's surface over time.  In 1825 Herr Schwabe obtained his first telescope and between then and 1867 (on every day the skies were clear) he recorded the size & shape of sunspots and it was in 1838 he first suspected the phenomenon might be cyclical, his initial findings suggesting a ten-year cycle.  The discovery was wholly serendipitous because he wasn’t interested in sunspots (then thought random events) but was one of a number of astronomers searching for “Vulcan” a speculative planet in an orbit between Mercury which theories suggested should exist because its presence would account for the otherwise inexplicable peculiarities in Mercury's orbital path.  As a theory, the science was sound because earlier the same math had been used correctly to predict the existence of Neptune, based on calculation which determined the gravitational influence required to explain disturbances in the orbit of Uranus.  Over the decades, sightings of Vulcan had been reported but all quickly were discounted and the search continued until Albert Einstein’s (1879-1955) theory of general relativity (1915) was confirmed and Mercury's variation from the orbit predicted by Newtonian physics was understood to be a manifestation of the curvature of space-time induced by the mass of the Sun.

Because of Vulcan’s predicted proximity to the Sun, it would have been very difficult to observe with the telescopes of the nineteenth century, the only plausible method being to view it during its transit in front of the Sun.  The reason Herr Schwabe kept notebooks with almost daily sketches of the Sun and its spots was that he wanted to ensure he would never confuse a spot with the passing Vulcan and mush have be surprised when he noticed the suggesting of a cyclical pattern.  In 1843 he published his initial findings which indicated sunspot activity appeared to peak every ten-odd years and which his paper attracted little interest, it did inspire a Swiss professional astronomer to begin his own regular observations and these, combined with Herr Schwabe’s earlier drawings confirmed the sun’s undecennial pattern.  The use in 1858 of “undecennial” to describe the solar cycle seems to have been the first use of the word in English.

Visible light images from NASA’s Solar Dynamics Observatory highlight the appearance of the Sun at solar minimum (Dec 2019, left) versus solar maximum (May 2024, right). During solar minimum, often the Sun is "spotless".

The Sun's eleven-year cycle (the solar cycle) is driven almost wholly by changes in the body’s magnetic field dynamics.  The Sun’s magnetic field isn’t as stable as that of Earth which, although subject to some ongoing movement, retains its essential polarity for at least hundreds of thousands of years.  Deep within the Sun there exists a layer called the convection zone (where hot plasma rises, cools, and sinks) and these interactions, over time, cause the Sun’s magnetic field lines to twist and tangle.  Things are influenced also by differential rotation, the Sun rotating faster at its equator than at its poles (the equatorial regions taking some 25 days to complete a rotation, the polar regions around 35.  What this does is “stretches and wind up” the magnetic field lines, resulting in what astronomers describe as “a twisted, complex magnetic environment”.  All this combines to produce the “solar maximum & minimum”: Every eleven years the “twisted & tangled” magnetic field lines stretch to the point where suddenly they “snap”, creating a realigning process in which they are “straightened out”.  During solar maximum, the Sun has many sunspots (regions of intense magnetic activity), solar flares, and coronal mass ejections.  When the cycle resets to solar minimum, these activities reduce as the Sun's magnetic field temporarily stabilizes.  The other obvious effect of the undecennial magnetic period is the periodic polarity flip:  Every 11 years, the Sun’s magnetic poles reverse, north becoming south and vice-versa, something which happens on earth every few hundred-thousand years.

Quantum Tech Club's chart of the solar cycle: This cycle of low-high-low sun activity operates on a cycle of about eleven years though there are always variations, the length of each cycle not exact and the volume of activity also varies.  The previous Solar Cycle (24) was classified "not particularly active" and the current cycle (25) was predicted to be similar but it turned out to be more vibrant.  So, while the numbers bounce around, the undecennial pattern remains constant. 

For cultural reasons, an eleven year cycle sounds somehow strange to us and we’re unaccustomed to such things being associated with prime numbers although in entomology there are insects with no aversion to primes.  In entymology, there are insects with no fear of the number 17.  In the US, the so-called “periodical cicadas” (like those of the genus Magicicada) exist in a 17 year life cycle, something thought to confer a number of evolutionary advantages, all tied directly to the unique timing of their mass emergence: (1) The predator satiation strategy: The creatures emerge in massive numbers (in the billions), their sheer volume meaning it’s physically impossible for predators (both small mammals & birds) to eat enough of them to threaten the survival of the species. (2) Prime number cycles: Insects are presumed to be unaware of the nature of prime numbers but 17 is a prime number and there are also periodic cicadas with a 13 year cycle.  The 13 (Brood XIX) & 17-year (Brood X) periodic cicadas do sometimes emerge in the same season but, being prime numbers, it’s a rare event, the numbers' least common multiple (LCM) being 221 years; the last time the two cicadas emerged together was in 1868 and the next such even is thus expected in 2089.  The infrequency in overlap helps maintain the effectiveness of the predator avoidance strategies, the predators typically having shorter (2-year, 5-year etc) cycles which don’t synchronize with the cicadas' emergence, reducing chances a predator will evolve to specialize in feeding on periodical cicadas. (3) Avoidance of Climate Variability: By remaining underground for 17 years, historically, periodical cicadas avoided frequent climate changes or short-term ecological disasters like droughts or forest fires. The long underground nymph stage also allows them to feed consistently over many years and emerge when the environment is more favorable for reproduction.  Etymologists and biological statisticians are modelling scenarios under which various types of accelerated climate change are being studied to try to understand how the periodic cicadas (which evolved under “natural” climate change) may be affected. (4) Genetic Isolation: Historically, the unusually extended period between emergences has isolated different broods of cicadas, reducing interbreeding and promoting genetic diversity over time, helping to maintain healthy populations over multiple life-cycles.

Lohanic undecenniality: Lindsay Lohan at eleven year intervals: 2002 (left), 2013 (centre) and 2024 (right).

A “year” as defined (one orbit of our world around the sun) on Earth is a standard measure and on this planet it makes complete sense but in other places (such as the Sun) it’s just an abstraction although we map “years” onto many remote places, vast distances best understood as expressed in “light years” although cosmologists for many purposes prefer the parsec (a unit of astronomical length, based on the distance from Earth at which a star would have a parallax of one second of arc which is equivalent to 206,265 times the distance from the earth to the sun or 3.26 light-years.  Its lineal equivalent is about 19.1 trillion miles (30.8 trillion km)).  It takes Pluto 248 Earth years to make its orbit of the Sun so that’s the length of one Plutoian year, meaning that between being discovered in 1930 and the humorous cosmic clerks at the International Astronomical Union (IAU) in 2006 voting re-classify Pluto as a dwarf planet (on the basis that the icy orb failed to meet a set of criteria which the IAU claimed had been accepted for decades), not even on year had there passed.

So it’s only on Earth one of our “years” is of direct relevance and we tend to measure anniversaries with the numbers we prefer (1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 25, 50. 100, 250, 500, 1000, 10,000 etc) (21 is a special case) but this meaning nothing to the physics of the Sun and even here there have been cultures in which some things have tended to the undecennial.  In India, the Kumbh Mela (or Kumbha Mela) is one of the great pilgrimage festivals in Hinduism (the pre-Covid gathering in 2019 said to be the largest (peaceful) assembly of people ever known) and although it is celebrated in what tends to be a twelve year cycle, because of the complexity and regional distribution of some celebrations, there have been times when things have happened at an eleven year interval.  Among the indigenous peoples of North America (notably the Hopi), there were also reports from anthropologists of ceremonial cycles based on natural and astronomical cycles that can approximate an eleven year pattern due to environmental changes or social cycles, although it doesn’t appear the intervals ever assumed a precise, recurrent eleven-year pattern.  Certain ceremonies were linked with observations of the sun (and other celestial bodies), aligning closely with solar maximums in some cases.

Heptadecaphobia

Heptadecaphobia (pronounced hepp-tah-dech-ah-foh-bee-uh)

Fear of the number 17.

1700s: The construct was the Ancient Greek δεκαεπτά (dekaepta) (seventeen) + φόβος (phobos).  The alternative form is septadecaphobia, troubling some the purists because they regard it as a Greek-Latin mongrel, the construct being the Latin septem (seven) + deca, from the Latin decas (ten), from the Ancient Greek δεκάς (dekás) (ten) + the Ancient Greek φόβος) (phobos) (fear).  Heptadecaphobia deconstructs as hepta- “seven” + deca (ten) + phobos.  The suffix -phobia (fear of a specific thing; hate, dislike, or repression of a specific thing) was from the New Latin, from the Classical Latin, from the Ancient Greek -φοβία (-phobía) and was used to form nouns meaning fear of a specific thing (the idea of a hatred came later).  Purists use the spelling heptadekaphobia to avid the mix.

There are a variety of theories to account for the Italian superstition which had rendered 17 the national “unlucky number”.  The most accepted is that in Roman numerals 17 is XVII which, anagrammatically, translates to VIXI (Latin for “I have lived” (the first-person singular perfect active indicative of vīvō (to live; to be alive)), understood in the vernacular as “my life is over”.  That would have been ominous enough but Romans noted also that Osiris, the Egyptian god of, inter alia, life, death, the afterlife and resurrection, had died on the 17th day of the month, 17 thus obviously a “death number” to the logical Roman mind and the worst 17th days of the month were those which coincided with a full moon, an intensifier in the same sense that in the West the conjunction leading to a Friday the 13th is so threatening.  Mashing up the numerical superstitions, that 17 is an “unlucky number” shouldn’t be surprising because it’s the sum of 13 + 4, the latter being the most dreaded number in much of East Asia.

Just because a “fear of a number” is listed somewhere as a “phobia” doesn’t mean the condition has much of a clinical history or even that a single case is to be found in the literature; many may have been coined just for linguistic fun and students in classics departments have been set assessment questions like “In Greek, construct the word meaning “fear of the number 71” (the correct answer being “hebdomekontahenophobia”).  Some are well documented such as tetraphobia (fear of 4) which is so prevalent in East Asia it compelled BMW to revise the release strategy of the “4 Series” cars and triskaidekaphobia (fear of 13) which has such a history in the West it’s common still for hotels not to have a thirteenth floor or rooms which include “13”, something which in the pre-digital age was a charming quirk but when things were computerized added a needless complication.  The use of the actual number is important because in such a hotel the “14^th” floor is of course the 13^th (in the architectural sense) but there’s little to suggest there’s ever been resistance from guests being allocated room 1414.

Some number phobias are quite specific: Rooted in the folklore of Australian cricket is a supposed association of the number 87 with something bad (typically a batter being dismissed) although it seems purely anecdotal and more than one statistical analysis (cricket is all about numbers) has concluded there's nothing “of statistical significance” to be found and there’s little to suggest players take the matter seriously.  One English umpire famously had “a routine” associated with the score reaching a “repunit” (a portmanteau (or blended) word, the construct being re(eated) +‎ unit) (eg 111, 222, 333 etc) but that was more fetish than phobia.

No fear of 17: Some Lindsay Lohan Seventeen magazine covers.  Targeted at the female market (age rage 12-18), the US edition of Seventeen is now predominately an on-line publication, printed only as irregular "special, stand-alone issues" but a number of editions in India and the Far East continue in the traditional format. 

Other illustrative number phobias include oudenophobia (fear of 0), (trypophobia (fear of holes) said to sometimes be the companion condition), henophobia (fear of 1) (which compels sufferer to avoid being associated with “doing something once”, being the “first in the group” etc) , heptaphobia (fear of 7) (cross-culturally, a number also with many positive associations), eikosiheptaphobia (fear of 27) (a pop-culture thing which arose in the early 1970s when a number of rock stars died messy, drug-related deaths at 27), tessarakontadyophobia (fear of 42) (which may have spiked in patients after the publication of Douglas Adams’ (1952–2001) Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1979-1992), enenekontenneaphobia (fear of 99) (thought not related to the Get Smart TV series of the 1960s), tetrakosioeikosiphobia (fear of 420) (the syndrome restricted presumably to weed-smokers in the US), the well-documented hexakosioihexekontahexaphobia (fear of 666), heftakosioitessarakontaheptaphobia (fear of 747) (though with the withdrawal from passenger service of the tough, reliable (four engines and made of metal) Boeing 747 and their replacement by twin-engined machines made increasingly with composites and packed with lithium-ion batteries, a more common fear may be “not flying on a 747”).  Enniakosioihendecaphobia (fear of 911) (presumably, in the US, sometimes a co-morbidity with tetrakosioeikosiphobia or suffered by those with a bad experience with a pre-modern Porsche 911 which, in inexpert hands, could behave as one would expect of a very powerful Volkswagen Beetle) and the rare condition nongentiseptuagintatrestrillionsescentiquinquagintanovemmiliacentumtredecimdeciesoctingentivigintiquattuormiliatrecentiphobia (fear of 973,659,113,824,315) (that one created presumably by someone determined to prove it could be done). There’s also compustitusnumerophobia (fear of composite numbers), meganumerophobia (fear of large numbers), imparnumerophobia (fear of odd numbers), omalonumerophobia (fear of even numbers), piphobia (fear of pi), phiphobia (fear of the golden ratio), primonumerophobia (fear of prime numbers), paranumerophobia (fear of irrational numbers), neganumerophobia (fear of negative numbers) and decadisophobia (fear of decimals).  The marvellous Wiki Fandom site and The Phobia List are among the internet’s best curated collection of phobias.

The only one which debatably can’t exist is neonumerophobia (fear of new numbers) because, given the nature of infinity, there can be no “new numbers” although, subjectively, a number could be “new” to an individual so there may be a need.  Sceptical though mathematicians are likely to be, the notion of the “new number” has (in various ways) been explored in fiction including by science fiction (SF or SciFi) author & engineer Robert A Heinlein (1907–1988) in The Number of the Beast (1980), written during his “later period”.  More challenging was Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions by English schoolmaster & Anglican priest Edwin Abbott Abbott (1838–1926) which was published under the pseudonym “A Square”, the layer of irony in that choice revealed as the protagonist begins to explore dimensions beyond his two-dimensional world (in Victorian England).  Feminists note also Ursula K Le Guin’s (1929–2018) The Left Hand of Darkness (1969) in which was created an entirely new numerical system of “genderless" numbers”.  That would induce fear in many.

Lindsay Lohan's cover of Edge of Seventeen appeared on the album A Little More Personal (2005).  Written by Stevie Nicks (b 1948), it appeared originally on her debut solo studio album Bella Donna (1981).

In entymology, there are insects with no fear of the number 17.  In the US, the so-called “periodical cicadas” (like those of the genus Magicicada) exist in a 17 year life cycle, something thought to confer a number of evolutionary advantages, all tied directly to the unique timing of their mass emergence: (1) The predator satiation strategy: The creatures emerge in massive numbers (in the billions), their sheer volume meaning it’s physically impossible for predators (both small mammals & birds) to eat enough of them to threaten the survival of the species. (2) Prime number cycles: Insects are presumed to be unaware of the nature of prime numbers but 17 is a prime number and there are also periodic cicadas with a 13 year cycle.  The 13 (Brood XIX) & 17-year (Brood X) periodic cicadas do sometimes emerge in the same season but, being prime numbers, it’s a rare event, the numbers' least common multiple (LCM) being 221 years; the last time the two cicadas emerged together was in 1868 and the next such even is thus expected in 2089.  The infrequency in overlap helps maintain the effectiveness of the predator avoidance strategies, the predators typically having shorter (2-year, 5-year etc) cycles which don’t synchronize with the cicadas' emergence, reducing chances a predator will evolve to specialize in feeding on periodical cicadas. (3) Avoidance of Climate Variability: By remaining underground for 17 years, historically, periodical cicadas avoided frequent climate changes or short-term ecological disasters like droughts or forest fires. The long underground nymph stage also allows them to feed consistently over many years and emerge when the environment is more favorable for reproduction.  Etymologists and biological statisticians are modelling scenarios under which various types of accelerated climate change are being studied to try to understand how the periodic cicadas (which evolved under “natural” climate change) may be affected. (4) Genetic Isolation: Historically, the unusually extended period between emergences has isolated different broods of cicadas, reducing interbreeding and promoting genetic diversity over time, helping to maintain healthy populations over multiple life-cycles.

In automotive manufacturing, there was nothing unusual about unique models being produced for the Italian domestic market, the most common trick being versions with engines displacing less than 2.0 litres to take advantage of the substantially lower tax regime imposed below that mark.  Thus Ferrari (1975-1981) and Lamborghini (1974-1977) made available 2.0 litre V8s (usually variously in 2.5 & 3.0 litre displacements), Maserati a 2.0 V6 (a 3.0 in the Maserati Merak (1972-1983) although it appeared in 2.7 & 3.0 litre form in the intriguing but doomed Citroën SM (1970-1975)) and Mercedes-Benz created a number of one-off 2.0 litre models in the W124 range (1974-1977) exclusive to the Italian domestic market (although an unrelated series of 2.0 litre cars was also sold in India).

US advertisement for the Renault 17 (1974), the name Gordini adopted as a "re-brand" of the top-of-the-range 17TS,  Gordini was a French sports car producer and tuning house, absorbed by Renault in 1968, the name from time-to-time used for high-performance variants of various Renault models.

One special change for the Italian market was a nod to the national heptadecaphobia, the car known in the rest of the world (RoW) as the Renault 17 (1971-1979) sold in Italy as the R177.  For the 17, Renault took the approach which had delivered great profits: use the underpinnings of mundane mass-produced family cars with a sexy new body draped atop.  Thus in the US the Ford Falcon begat the Mustang and in Europe Ford got the Capri from the Taunus/Cortina duo.  Opel’s swoopy GT was (most improbably) underneath just a Kadett.  It wasn’t only the mass-market operators which used the technique because in the mid 1950s, Mercedes-Benz understood the appeal of the style of the 300 SL (W198, 1954-1957) was limited by the high price which was a product of the exotic engineering (the space-frame, gullwing doors, dry sump and the then novel mechanical fuel-injection), the solution being to re-purpose the platform of the W120, the small, austere sedan which helped the company restore its fortunes in the post-war years before the Wirtschaftswunder (economic miracle) was celebrated in 1959 with the exuberance of the Heckflosse (tailfin) cars (1959-1968).  On the W120 platform was built the 190 SL (W121, 1955-1963), an elegant (it not especially rapid) little roadster which quickly became a trans-Atlantic favourite, particularly among what used to be called the “women’s market”.

Only in Italy: The Renault 177.

Using the same formula, the Renault 17 was built on the underpinnings of the Renault 12, a remarkably durable platform, introduced in 1979 and, in one form or another, manufactured or assembled in more than a dozen countries, the last not produced until 2006.  Like the Ford Capri, the 17 was relatively cheap to develop because so much was merely re-purposed but for a variety of reasons, it never managed to come close to match the sales of the wildly successful Ford, front wheel drive (FWD) not then accepted as something “sporty” and Renault's implementation on the 17 was never adaptable to the new understanding of the concept validated by FWD machines such Volkswagen’s Sirocco GTi & Golf GTi.  Like most of the world, the Italians never warmed to the 17 but presumably the reception would have been even more muted had not, in deference to the national superstition about the number 17, the name been changed to “Renault 177”, the cheaper companion model continuing to use the RoW label: Renault 15.

Malachite

Malachite (pronounced mal-uh-kahyt)

(1) In mineralogy, a bright-green monoclinic mineral, occurring as a mass of crystals (an aggregate).  It manifests typically with a smooth or botryoidal (grape-shaped) surface and, after cutting & polishing, is used in ornamental articles and jewelry.  It’s often concentrically banded in different shades of green, the contrast meaning that sometimes lends the substance the appearance of being a variegated green & black.  Malachite is found usually in veins in proximity to the mineral azurite in copper deposits.  The composition is hydrated copper carbonate; the chemical formula is Cu₂CO₃(OH)₂ and the crystal structure is monoclinic.

(2) A ceramic ware made in imitation of this (in jewelry use, “malachite” is used often as a modifier).

(3) In mineralogy, as pseudomalachite, a mineral containing copper, hydrogen, oxygen, and phosphorus.

(4) In mineralogy, as azurite-malachite, a naturally-occurring mixture of azurite and malachite

(5) In organic chemistry, as malachite green, a toxic chemical used as a dye, as a treatment for infections in fish (when diluted) and as a bacteriological stain.

(6) Of a colour spectrum, ranging from olive-taupe to a mild to deeply-rich (at times tending to the translucent) green, resembling instances in the range in which the mineral is found.  In commercial use, the interpretation is sometimes loose and some hues are also listed as “malachite green”).

1350-1400: From the Middle French malachite, from the Old French, from the Latin molochītēs, from the Ancient Greek malachitis (lithos) (mallow (stone)) & molochîtis (derivative of molóchē, a variant of maláchē), from μολόχη (molókhē) (mallow; leaf of the mallow plant).  It replaced the Middle English melochites, from the Middle French melochite, from the Latin molochītis.  Malachite is a noun & adjective; the noun plural is malachites.

A pair of Malachite & Onyx inlay cufflinks in 925 Sterling Silver (ie 92.5% pure silver & 7.5% other metals), Mexico, circa 1970.

Although in wide use as a gemstone, technically malachite is copper ore and thus a “secondary mineral” of copper, the stone forming when copper minerals interact with different chemicals (carbonated water, limestone et al.  For this reason, geologists engaged in mineral exploration use malachite as a “marker” (a guide to the likelihood of the nearby presence of copper deposits in commercial quantities).  It’s rare for malachite to develop in isolation and it’s often found in aggregate with azurite, a mineral of similar composition & properties.  Visually, malachite & azurite are similar in their patterning and distinguished by color; azurite a deep blue, malachite a deep green.  Because the slight chemical difference between the two makes azurite less stable, malachite does sometimes replace it, resulting in a “pseudomorph”.  Although there is a range, unlike some minerals, malachite is always green and the lustrous, smooth surface with the varied patterning when cut & polished has for millennia made it a popular platform for carving, the products including al work, jewelry and decorative pieces.  For sculptors, the properties of malachite make it an easy and compliant material with which to work and it’s valued by jewelers for its color-retention properties, the stone (like many gemstones) unaffected by even prolonged exposure to harsh sunlight.  Despite the modern association of green with the emerald, the relationship between mankind & malachite is much more ancient. evidence of malachite mining dating from as early as 4000 BC found near the Isthmus of Suez and the Sinai whereas there’s nothing to suggest the emerald would be discovered until Biblical times, some two millennia later.

Lindsay Lohan in malachite green, this piece including both the darker and lighter ends of the spectrum.

The Malachite is relatively soft meant it was easy to grind into a powder even with pre-modern equipment; it was thus used to create what is thought to be the world’s oldest green pigment (described often as chrysocolla or copper green).  In Antiquity, the dye was so adaptable it was used in paint, for clothing and Egyptians (men & women) even found it was the ideal eye makeup.  Use persisted until oil-based preparations became available in quantity and these were much cheaper because of the labor-intensive grinding processes and the increasing price of malachite which was in greater demand for other purposes.  This had the side-effect of creating a secondary market for malachite jewelry and other small trinkets because the fragments and wastage from the carving industry (once absorbed by the grinders for the dye market) became available.  The use in makeup wasn’t without danger because, as a copper derivate, raw malachite is toxic; like many minerals, the human body needs a small amount of copper to survive but in high doses it is a poison’ in sufficient quantities, it can be fatal.  Among miners and process workers working with the ore, long-term exposure did cause severe adverse effects (from copper poisoning) so it shouldn’t be ingested or the dust inhaled.  Once polished, the material is harmless but toxicology specialists do caution it remains dangerous if ingested and any liquid with which it comes in contact should not be drunk.  Despite the dangers, the mineral has long been associated with protective properties, a belief not restricted to Antiquity or the medieval period; because the Enlightenment seems to have passed by New Agers and others, malachite pendants and other body-worn forms are still advertised with a variety of improbable claims of efficacy.

The Malachite Room of the Winter Palace, St Petersburg, Russia was, during the winter of 1838-1839, designed as a formal reception room (a sort of salon) for the Tsar & Tsarina by the artist Alexander Briullov (1798–1877), replacing the unfortunate Jasper Room, destroyed in the fire of 1837.  It’s not the only use of the stone in the palace but it’s in the Malachite Room where a “green theme” is displayed most dramatically, the columns and fireplace now Instagram favorites, as is the large large urn, all sharing space with furniture from the workshops of Peter Gambs (1802-1871), those pieces having been rescued from the 1837 fire.  Between June-October 1971 it was in the Malachite Room that the Provisional Government conducted its business until the representatives were arrested by Bolsheviks while at dinner in the adjoining dining room.  The putsch was denounced by the Mensheviks who the Bolsheviks finally would suppress in 1921.

Polished malachite pieces from the Congo, offered on the Fossilera website.

Where there is demand for something real, a supply of a imitation version will usually emerge and the modern convention is for items erroneously claiming to be the real thing are tagged “fake malachite” while those advertised only as emulation are called “faux malachite”.  Although not infallible, the test is that most fake malachite stones are lighter than the real thing because, despite being graded as “relatively soft” by sculptors, the stone is of high in density and deceptively heavy.  The patterning of natural malachite is infinitely varied while the synthetic product tends to some repetition and is usually somewhat brighter.  The density of malachite also lends the stone particular thermal properties; it’s inherently cold to the touch, something which endures even when a heat source is applied.  Fake malachite usually is manufactured using glass or an acrylic, both of which more rapidly absorb heat from the hand.

Lindsay Lohan with Rolex Datejust in stainless steel with silver face (left) and the Rolex's discontinued "malachite face" (centre & right).  Well known for its blue watch faces, during the more exuberant years of the 1970s & 1980s the company “splashed out” a bit and offered a malachite face.  The Datejust is now available with a choice of nine faces but the Green one is now a more restrained hue the company calls “mint green”.

Dreadnought

Dreadnought (pronounced dred-nawt)

(1) A type of battleship armed with heavy-calibre guns in turrets: so called from the British battleship HMS Dreadnought (1906); a name used by the Royal Navy for many ships and submarines.

(2) A garment made of thick woolen cloth that can defend against storm and cold.

(3) A thick cloth with a long pile (known also as fearnought).

(4) Slang a heavyweight boxer in the heavyweight class.

(5) By extension, something the largest or heaviest in a given field.

(6) A person who fears nothing; something that assures against fear.

(7) A type of acoustic guitar with a very large body and a waist less pronounced than in other designs, producing a deep, "bold" sound.

1800-1810: The construct was dread + nought.  Dread was from the Middle English dreden, from Old English drǣdan (to fear, dread), aphetic form of ondrǣdan (to fear, dread), from and- +‎ rǣdan (from which English picked up read); corresponding to an aphesis of the earlier adread.  The Old Saxon was antdrādan & andrādan (to fear, dread), the Old High German was intrātan (to fear) and the Middle High German entrāten (to fear, dread, frighten).  Nought was from the Middle English nought & noght, (noȝt), from the Old English nōwiht & nāwiht (the construct being nay +‎ a +‎ wight), which in turn came from ne-ā-wiht, a phrase used as an emphatic "no", in the sense of "not a thing".  In the transition to Modern English, the word reduced gradually to nought, nawt and finally not; a doublet of naught.  The alternative spelling (though never used by the Admiralty) is Dreadnaught.  Dreadnought is a noun; the noun plural is dreadnoughts.

The dreadnoughts

HMS Dreadnought, 1906.

Launched in 1906, HMS Dreadnought is often said to have revolutionized naval power, the design so significant it proved the final evolution of what had, by the late nineteenth century, evolved into the battleship.  Subsequent vessels would be larger, faster, increasingly electronic and more heavily armed but the concept remained the same.  HMS Dreadnought rendered instantly obsolete every other battleship in the world (including the rest of the Royal Navy) and all other battleships then afloat were immediately re-classified as pre-dreadnoughts.  In naval architecture, so epoch-making was the ship that it changed the nomenclature in navies world-wide: after 1906 there would be pre-dreadnoughts, semi-dreadnoughts, demi-dreadnoughts & super-dreadnoughts (hyphenated and not),  The adjective dreadnoughtish was non-standard but was used to describe ships of a design beyond that of the orthodox battleship of the late nineteenth century but with only some of a dreadnought's distinguishing characteristics.  Presumably someone in the Admiralty would have coined dreadnoughtesque but no document seems to have survived as proof.    

HMS Dreadnought.

Her main design features were speed, armor, steam turbine propulsion and, especially, firepower almost exclusively of weapons of the largest caliber.  In the decades after her launch, British, German, American, Japanese and other navies would build larger and heavier dreadnoughts until, during world war two, their utility was finally seen to been eclipsed by both aircraft carriers and submarines.  The last dreadnought, HMS Vanguard, launched in 1946, was scrapped in 1958 but the US Navy maintained until 2004 (on either the active or reserve list), at least one of the four battleships it retained from World War II (1939-1945) when the last was decommissioned.

HMS Dreadnought, 1908.

That it was the Royal Navy which first launched a dreadnought doesn’t mean the British Admiralty was alone in pursuing the concept.  Naval strategists in several nations had noted the course of battle between the Russian and Japanese fleets in 1905 and concluded the immediate future of naval warfare lay in the maximum possible deployment of big guns, able to launch attacks from the longest possible range, subsidiary smaller caliber weapons seen even as a disadvantage in battle.  That the Royal Navy was the first with such a ship afloat was a testament to the efficiency of British designers and shipbuilders, not the uniqueness of its plans.

Much read in palaces, chancelleries and admiralties around the word was a book released in 1890 called The Influence of Sea Power Upon History, 1660–1783 by US naval officer and theorist Captain Alfred Mahan (1840-1914).  Published in what, in retrospect, was a historical sweet-spot (technologically and politically) for the views it espoused, it brought Mahan great fame and exerted an extraordinary influence on diplomacy, military planning and the politics of the era.  The book was not alone the cause of the naval arms-race in the decade before World War I (1914-1918) but was at least a sharp nudge, push or shove depending on one’s view.  Curiously though, although a work primarily about naval strategy, while many of the maritime powers seemed convinced by Mahan’s arguments about the importance of naval sea power in geopolitics, not all admiralties adopted the strategic template.  What all agreed however was they needed more ships.

The nineteenth century of Pax Britannica ("British Peace", echoing the Pax Romana of the Roman Empire), describes the century of relative great-power stability between the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815) and the outbreak of war in 1914 encompasses the idea of British Empire as the global hegemon, a role possible only because the Royal Navy enjoyed an unchallenged ability to patrol and protect the key maritime trade routes.  The effective control of these transport corridors not only guaranteed the security of the British Empire but it meant also the British effectively controlled maritime access to much of Asia, the Americas, Oceania the south Pacific, although, one factor in the success was it was that London ran things essentially in accordance with US foreign policy, assisting Washington in enforcing the Monroe Doctrine which upheld the US preponderance of interest in the Americas.  It can be argued the roots of the so-called "special relationship" took hold here.

The British Empire, in terms of the impression created by a map of the world on which its colonies and dependencies were colored usually in some shade of red, was deceptive, the remit of the local administrators sometimes extending little beyond the costal enclaves, even the transport links between towns not always entirely secure.  Never did the Empire posses the military resources to defend such vast, remote and disparate territories but it was the control of the sea, uniquely in history, which allowed the British for centuries to maintain what was, with no disparagement intended, a confidence trick.  The reason the empire could be maintained was not because of control of big colonies, it was all the little islands dotted around the oceans which enabled the navy to operate outposts which housed the ports and coaling stations from which ships could make repairs or provision with fuel, food and water.  All those little dots on the map were the "keys to the world".  Mahan’s book had drawn its influential conclusions from his study of the role of sea power during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; what the British did was take advantage of the circumstances of the nineteenth century and deploy their sea power globally, in competition when necessary, in cooperation when possible and in conflict when required.  The practical expression of all this was British naval policy: that the Royal Navy must be of sufficient strength simultaneously to prevail in war against the combined strength of the next two biggest navies, either in separate theatres or as a massed fleet.

By the early twentieth century, economic and geopolitical forces combined to render the policy impossible to maintain, Britain no longer able to operate in “splendid isolation” (another somewhat misleading phrase of the era), needing alliances to spread the load of imperial defense.  It wasn’t just the rapid growth of the German fleet which had changed the balance of power but that alone was enough for the British and the French to reach an accommodation which is remembered as the Entente Cordiale (Cordial Agreement) of 1904 which may or may not have been an alliance but was enough of one for the admiralties in Paris and London cooperatively to organize the allocations of their fleets.  It certainly illustrated Lord Palmerston's (1784–1865) doctrine that the country had neither eternal allies nor perpetual enemies but only permanent interests for despite the centuries of enmity between Britain and France, the self-interest of both dictated the need to align against the German threat.

Royal Navy battlecruiser HMS New Zealand, 1911.

It was in this atmosphere the great naval arms race took place, plans for which were laid before the Wright brothers had flown a hundred–odd feet, barely off the ground, torpedoes were in their infancy and submarines were little threat more than a few miles from the coast.  The measure of a fleet was its battleships and their big guns and whichever side could put to sea the most firepower was winning the race.  It intrigued the navalists, strategists and theorists who knew from history that such a race, if left to run, could end only in war, the great, decisive set-piece battle of which would be the clash of massed fleets of battleships on the high seas, trading shell-fire at a range of twenty miles (32 km), before closing for the kill as the battle climaxed.  Dreadnought was one strand of the theorists’ imagination but there were others.  There was a school of thought which favored an emphasis on radio communications and a greater attention to the possibilities offered by the torpedo and, most influentially, what seems now the curious notion of a complimentary range of faster capital ships, essentially battleships with the big guns but little armor, the loss of protection off-set by the few knots in speed gained; these ships were called battlecruisers.  The argument was they could fight at such range nothing but a battleship would be a threat and those the battlecruiser could outrun because of their greater speed.  It seemed, to many, a good idea at the time.

Super-Dreadnought: HMS Iron Duke, Port Said, 1921.

But it was the Dreadnoughts which captured the imagination and defined the era.  Impressive though she was, HMS Dreadnought was not long unique as navies around the world launched the own and, as happens in arms races, the original was quickly out-classed and the next generation of ships, bigger and more heavily gunned still, came to be known as super dreadnoughts.  War did come but the grand battle on the high seas which the navalists had, for a quarter century been planning, never happened.  There were smaller clashes of squadrons but the imperative of the Royal Navy was more practical and traditionally British: avoid defeat.  As Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955), then First Lord of the Admiralty (minister for the navy), emphasized to the First Sea Lord (the navy’s senior admiral), against a continental empire like Germany, while the Royal Navy couldn’t in a year win the war, because Britain’s empire was maritime, they could lose it in one afternoon.  Accordingly, the Royal Navy made no sustained attempts to induce a massed battle, focusing instead on a blockade, keeping the German fleet confined to its ports.  It was the German admirals who attempted to force the British to a set-piece battle, venturing into the North Sea in May 1916 with a fleet of nearly a hundred, including sixteen dreadnoughts and five battlecruisers.  Against this, the British assembled a hundred and fifty odd with twenty-eight dreadnoughts and nine battlecruisers.  The action came to be known as the Battle of Jutland.

Imperial German Navy battlecruiser SMS Goeben, 1914.

On paper, although the result described as inconclusive, it was a tactical success for the Germans but strategically, the British achieved their goal.  The dreadnoughts barely engaged, most of the action confined to the battlecruisers and, unlike the smaller Battle of Tsushima (May 1905) in the Far East, fought by pre-dreadnoughts a decade earlier between the Japanese and Russian fleets, there was no winner in the traditional sense of naval warfare.  The German's tactical success in retrospect was something of a Dunkirk moment but the strategic implications were profound.  British losses were heavier but their numeric advantage was such they could absorb the loss and had the financial and industrial capacity to restore the fleet’s strength.  Damage to the German fleet was less but they lacked the time or capacity to build their navy to the point it could be used as a strategic weapon and it remained confined to its ports.  Both sides learned well the inherent limitations of the battlecruiser.

WWI era German U-Boot (Unterseeboot (under-sea-boat)), anglicized as U-Boat.

After Jutland, the German admirals concluded that to venture again against the British Home Fleet would either be an inconclusive waste or lead to the inevitable, decisive defeat.  They accordingly prevailed on the politicians and eventually gained approval to use the only genuinely effective weapon in their hands, the submarine.  It was the consequences of unrestricted submarine warfare which would bring the United States into the war in 1917 as a belligerent and without that intervention, the war would certainly have followed a different course and reached perhaps a different conclusion.

Although HMS Dreadnought lent her name to an era and remains one of the most significant warships built, she's remembered for the geopolitical reverberations in the wake of her launching rather than any achievement at sea, missing even the anti-climatic Battle of Jutland (1916) because of a scheduled re-fit.  Indeed, her only achievement of note in combat was the ramming and sinking of German U-Boat SM U-29 on 18 March 1915 although that does remain a unique footnote in naval history, being the only time a battleship deliberately sank an enemy submarine.  Dreadnought was decommissioned in 1920 and scrapped the next year.  Later, under the terms of the 1922 Washington Naval Treaty which sought to prevent another naval arms race, most of the surviving dreadnoughts were scrapped or scuttled but many of the super-dreadnoughts remained in the fleets, some not scrapped until after World War II.  The name has a strong resonance in the halls of the Admiralty (now the Navy Command in the UK's Ministry of Defense) and has been chosen for the class of vessels to replace the existing Vanguard class ballistic nuclear-missile submarines.  Now under construction, the first of the nuclear-powered Dreadnought class boats is expected to enter service early in the 2030s.

Dreadnought coats

The term “dreadnought coat” was adopted by the UK’s garment industry in 1908 to refer to a heavy, durable and water-resistant overcoat.  It was an opportunistic “borrowing” that verged on what would now be called “ambush marketing” and took advantage on the extensive publicity the name attracted during the so-called “naval scare” during that decade, the attraction being the arms-race had done the hard word of “brand-name recognition”.  The reference point of the design was the heavy “pea coat” (the construct being the Dutch pij (cowl) + the English coat) issued to Royal Navy sailors (although similar garments were worn in many navies).  Typically, naval pea coats were made from a thick wool yarn, designed to protect against the harsh maritime weather encountered in coastal environments as well as on the high-seas.  Pea coats were of rugged construction, almost always double-breasted and featured large lapels (for extra warmth around the neck, often turned up in cold weather) and deep pockets.

A dreadnought pea coat by Triple Aught ("Dreadnaught Peacoat" the spelling used) (left), Lindsay Lohan in dreadnought coat (London, June, 2014, centre) and in trench coat (London, October 2015, right).

To facilitate ease of movement and avoid becoming entangled in the ropes and chains which are a feature of a ship’ deck, the classic naval pea coat was hip-length, unlike the ankle-length great coats used by armies.  When the double-breasted design was extended to the civilian market, the pea coat was almost unchanged (although many were of lighter construction and navy blue remained the most popular color.  When the style of a pea coat is extended to something calf or ankle-length, it becomes a “dreadnought coat” which should not be confused with a “trench coat” which is of lighter construction, traditionally beige and belted and, as all fashionistas know, the belt is always tied, never buckled.