Congress

Congress (pronounced kong-gris, kuhn-gres, kuhng-gris or khung-gres)

(1) The national legislative body of the US, a continuous institution consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives (initial capital).

(2) This body as it exists for a period of two years during which it has the same membership (other than replacements by necessity).  By convention, Congresses sequentially are numbered.

(3) A session of this body.

(4) The national legislative body of a nation (used especially in republics and it has been used also of political parties or movements (such as the South African liberation movement the ANC (African National Congress, founded in 1912) and India’s INC (the Indian National Congress, founded in 1885 during the British Raj)).

(5) A formal meeting or assembly of representatives for the discussion, arrangement, or promotion of some matter of common interest (in this context often a synonym of academy, society, convention, council or conference).  Use of congress in this sense is not restricted to governmental or other official bodies, associations, special interest groups and sporting organizations routinely using the term.

(6) The act of coming together; an encounter; meeting.

(7) An association, especially one composed of representatives of various organizations (often used interchangeably with conference, society or association).

(8) Familiar relations; dealings or intercourse.

(9) Sexual intercourse; coitus.

(10) The collective noun for a group of baboons (something which can delight those observing the antics of those in the US Congress).

(11) To assemble together (ie to meet in a congress).

1350–1400 From the Middle English congres & congress (body of attendants, following (the meaning in the fifteenth century extending to “meeting of armed formations” while the sense of “a coming together of people, a meeting of individuals” emerged in the 1520s), from the Latin congressus (both “a friendly meeting” & “a hostile encounter”), past participle of congredi (to meet with; to fight with), an assimilated form, the construct being con- (in the sense of “with, together”), + gradi (to walk, step), from gradus (a step (from the primitive Indo-European root ghredh- (to walk, go)).  The adjective congressional (of or pertaining to a congress) was an adaptation from the Latin congressionem and the most common use now is the sense of “of or pertaining to the US Congress”, dating from 1776.  As something new, in the UK it was initially treated as “a barbarous Americanism” but as early as 1816 it was pointed out in England that the Congress (the highest legislative body in the US) had been formed in defiance of the UK and the nation’s citizens were hardly likely to wait on ascent from London before forming and using the adjectival derivative.  Congress is a noun & verb, congressional & congressive are adjectives and congressionally is an adverb; the noun plural is congresses.

The use of “congress” to describe “sexual intercourse; coitus” dates from the 1580s but, except in historic references or as a deliberate archaism, use tends now to be as a euphemism.  There was however once a handy distinction (heard from pulpits and in legal proceedings) between the naked noun and “marital congress (sexual intercourse as performed by two people enjoying benefit of marriage), the latter quite respectable (if not much discussed), the former not always, especially if adulterous.  The special adjective uncongressed was coined in the science of genetics to describe “unaligned chromosomes”, a phenomenon presumably about as bad as it sounds.  By contrast, a marriage in which “sexual intercourse; coitus” was held not to have transpired was said to be “unconsummated”, something often unfortunate for one or both parties but useful because it was grounds upon which a bishop might declare an otherwise legally marriage annulled.  That had the advantage of creating the legal fiction the ceremony had “never happened” with the couple able to return to church to marry new partners, something historically not always possible for divorcees (although for those rich enough there were sometimes “word-arounds” that could persuade an appropriately compensated bishop).  In centuries gone by, being “married before the eyes of God” was no small thing with important legal and social implications.

Making a fine legal point, one apparently open to interpretation.

Crooked Hillary Clinton (b 1947; FLOTUS 1993-2001 & US secretary of state 2009-2013, left) watching attentively as her husband Bill Clinton (b 1946; POTUS 1993-2001) assured the nation “I did not have sexual relations with that woman… Miss Lewinsky.” (White House intern Monica Lewinsky (b 1973)), the White House, January 1998.  A trained lawyer and former Arkansas attorney-general, Mr Clinton may have been tempted to say “I did not have congress with that woman… Miss Lewinsky.”  At least arguably that could have be held to be “truthful” because “congress” generally is understood as coitus (penetrative sexual intercourse) where as “sexual relations” casts a wider net.  Whether such sophistry would have saved him from impeachment seems unlikely and nothing was going to save him from the wrath of crooked Hillary.  Unfortunately, in subsequent legal proceedings, we never got to hear Mr Clinton's deconstruction of “congress” but we did learn what the word “is” means and that his definition of “sexual relations” extended to “giving” oral sex but excluded “receiving” oral sex.  The latter distinction surprised a few but at least now we know.

“Congress grass” is a synonym for “famine weed” (Parthenium hysterophorus), a highly invasive plant noted for its devastating impact on agriculture, food security, and native ecosystems. The undesirable plant gained the name “famine weed” from the way aggressively it would colonize farmland and pastures, replacing nutritious native flora and releasing allelopathic chemicals that severely would stunt the growth of crops and grasses, leading to sharp declines in agricultural yields, famines associated with heavily infested regions.  In India, during the 1950s, the plant came derisively to be damned with the moniker “Congress grass” after the accidental introduction of the species by seeds in contaminated US wheat, imported during a national food shortage.  The name references not the US Congress but the INC (Indian National Congress, usually clipped to “the Congress”), in control of the national government that had arranged the importation.  Native to Central America, Parthenium hysterophorus is listed as invasive also in Australia and a number of African nations.

The specific sense of congress as “a meeting of delegates, formal meeting of persons having a representational character” was in use by at least the 1670s and in 1775 became the name for the national legislative body of the American states (with an initial upper case) which became the USA, the word chosen from a number of suggestions (legislative assembly, parliament etc).  The three sittings of the “Continental Congress” (representing the 13 American colonies seeking independence from imperial rule) were convened in 1774, 1775-1776 & 1776-1781.  The Congress of the Confederation (formally the United States in Congress Assembled) was the national governing body of the US between March 1781 and March 1789; established by the Articles of Confederation, it served as a transitional government between the Second Continental Congress and the modern US Congress which first sat on 4 March, 1789.

The US Capitol Building where the Congress sits, the House of Representatives housed in the south wing, the Senate in the north.  The original building was completed in 1800 and the final engineering sign-off of the dome structure came in 1867.  The last major structural changes were undertaken in 1962.

The US Congress is the is the legislative branch of the federal government, declared constitutionally “co-equal” with the executive and legislative branches although that’s a philosophical stance rather than a functional description, the Congress uniquely able to pass federal laws (in legal theory the occasionally infamous “Executive Orders” issued by POTUSs as unilateral actions under powers granted by Article II of the Constitution or federal law(s) are valid only to the extent they are constitutional and comply with federal law).  The Congress is divided into two houses: the Senate and the House of Representatives both of which are now elected by a popular vote; each state having two senators, the Senate has 100 members while in the House of Representatives there are 435, size of a state’s population determining its allocation.  Within each state, it is the legislature which has the power to determine electoral boundaries and over the years these processes have given rise to a rich vocabulary including “gerrymander”, “re-districting” & “electoral malapportionment”, the the memorable judicial maxim “legislators represent people, not trees and acres” handed down in a judgment by Chief Justice Earl Warren (1891–1974; Chief Justice of the US 1953-1969) in Reynolds v. Sims, 377 U.S. 533 (1964)).  The way the Democrats and Republicans draw lines on maps to maximize the benefit of their respective parties and disadvantage their opponents has always been entertaining but, because the exercise ultimately is one of math, what will be interesting is (1) how the process will be perfected when optimized by the use of AI (artificial intelligence) and (2) how the courts (ultimately the USSC (US Supreme Court)) will rule on the lawfulness of increasingly exaggerated distortions.

Constitutionally, the formal title for someone holding a seat in the House of Representatives is “Representative” which makes sense but “Congressman”, although originally a term of derision, became common.  “Representative” remains the preferred term in formal writing (certainly official government documents) and when addressing a member, the convention being “Representative Name” although “The Honorable Name” is in certain contexts used.  “Congressman” & “Congresswoman” are however deeply entrenched in US English and seem to be the most popular forms used by the public and much of the media.  The first congresswoman was Jeannette Rankin (1880–1973), a women's rights advocate, in 1916 elected as a Republican in Montana for a single term (she served a second in 1941-1943); she remains the only woman ever elected to Congress from Montana.  The gender-neutral “Congressperson” belongs to the “modern” class of words (which predate the mainstreaming of wokism) including “chairperson”, “salesperson” etc.  It has been accepted by dictionaries and style guides with some media organizations recommending use although it’s said rarely to be heard in oral use.  Representatives are elected for two-year terms and senators for six so in the congressional elections conducted every two years; all 435 seats in the House are contested along with about a third of the Senate.

One who would have been grateful “congressperson” wasn’t in general use in the early 1960s would have been the singer-songwriter Bob Dylan (b 1941) who released The Times They Are a-Changin' as the title-track of his 1964 album, “Come senators, congressmen” appearing as the first line of the third verse and suiting the rhythm of the work in a way “Come senators, congresspersons” wouldn’t have worked.

Come senators, congressmen

Please heed the call

Don't stand in the doorway

Don't block up the hall

For he that gets hurt

Will be he who has stalled

The battle outside ragin'

Will soon shake your windows

And rattle your walls

For the times they are a-changin'

Although The Times They Are a-Changin' now is regarded as a classic Dylan song and one of his standards, while internationally it enjoyed some success as a single, it was never released in that form in the US, included only on the original eponymous album and subsequent compilations.  Like much of Dylan’s work, there were several influences including biblical echos from Mark and Ecclesiastes.

Official portrait of George Santos while he was entitled to be styled “Representative the honorable George Santos”.

The first (openly) LGBTQQIAAOP Republican elected to Congress as a freshman (one's first elected presence there, a use borrowed from universities where it describes first-year students), George Anthony Devolder Santos (b 1988) entered Congress in the 2022 mid-term elections, taking the seat of New York's 3^rd congressional district.  Although he seems to have passed untroubled through the Republican Party’s candidate vetting process, after his election a number of media outlets investigated and found his public persona was almost wholly untrue and contained many dubious or blatantly false claims about, inter alia, his mother, personal biography, education, criminal record, work history, financial status, ancestry, ethnicity, sexual orientation & religion.  When confronted, Mr Santos did admit to lying about certain matters, was vague about some and ducked and weaved to avoid discussing others, especially the fraud charges in Brazil he evaded by fleeing the country.  Although a life-long Roman Catholic, Mr Santos on a number of occasions claimed to be Jewish, even fabricating stories about his family suffering losses during the Holocaust.  Later, after the lies were exposed, he told a newspaper “I never claimed to be Jewish.  I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background I said I was ‘Jew-ish.”  In the right circumstances, delivered on-stage by a Jewish comedian, it might have been a good punch-line.

George Santos: The Congress's loss was OnlyFans' gain but unfortunately the new career didn't last because of an excessive number of “fan solicitations”.

Following an investigation by the House Ethics Committee and a federal indictment, the House of Representatives in 2023 voted 311–114 to expel Mr Santos, meaning he gained the dubious distinction of being the first member of Congress to have been expelled without having previously been convicted of a crime or having supported the Confederacy (the pro-slavery southern states opposed to the Union forces in the US Civil War (1861-1865)).  In other historic footnotes, he became the sixth member of the House to be expelled and the first Republican.  Subsequently, Mr Santos pled guilty to identity theft & wire fraud and in April 2025 was sentenced to a prison term of 87 months.  However, in October that year, after spending only some three months behind bars, Donald Trump (b 1946; POTUS 2017-2021 and since 2025) commuted his sentence, cancelling all unpaid fines and restitution, one of the reasons cited being Mr Santos's solid voting record in Congress (100% Republican).  There was a time when such a pardon would have attracted much comment but such has been Mr Trump’s use of his power to issue pardons, few now seem exceptional or even noteworthy.  The power to pardon (inherited from Kings of England who no longer discharge it as a personal right) is unusual in being the only power in the US Constitution not subject to “checks & balances”; it is a personal presidential prerogative.  Noting that, political scientists and legal scholars are looking forward to the pardons announced on the last day of Mr Trump’s term on the basis: “We ain’t seen nothing yet”.  Members of the House of Representatives typically are addressed as "the honorable" in formal use but this is a courtesy title and not a requirement.  It's a matter left to individual members and as far as is known, Mr Santos has not yet indicated whether he wishes people to continue to address him as “the honorable George Santos” but clearly he has a fan base.  In 2024, Mr Santos opened an OnlyFans page (US29.99 per month) but after only a few weeks he was forced to “abandon the platform due to the high volume of fan solicitations”.

Congressman Randy Fine (b 1974; Representative for Florida's 6^th congressional district since April 2025) in red MAGA (Make America Great Again) hat (left) and a rooster with a large red coxcomb (the fleshy red pate of a rooster, left).

The long familiar “congressman” actually started as a term of derision before entering mainstream use as a neutral descriptor, a milder form being the later plural noun “congressfolk”.  Because voters (and others) so often find cause to be critical of those in Congress, a rich vocabulary of variants has over the years appeared, “congressfolk” yielding “congressdope” while independently coined terms included “congresscritter” and congressjerk while the offensive, ethnic slur “congresscoon” was a label applied to the first black congressmen (the presence of whom in the Congress many whites found appalling and not just those south of the Mason-Dixon Line).  To this day, phrases such as “those fuckwits in Congress” or “the stupid Congress” are part of US vernacular English although literary standards have declined since 1780 when one wrote: “Ye coxcomb Congressmen, declaimers keen, Brisk puppets of the Philadelphia scene.”  

Even within the political class the word can be weaponized.  Although in passing over 900 bills the 80^th Congress (1947-1949) was hardly inert, it didn’t do everything the administration wanted so, on the campaign trail in 1948, the ever-combative Harry S. Truman (1884–1972; POTUS 1945-1953) dubbed it the “Do Nothing Congress” although the nickname was something of a “tar by association” tactic against his Republican opponent (Thomas E. Dewey (1902-1971) in the presidential election as much as it was against the legislators.  Most of the world fixates on presidential politics because of the drama and the cults of personality but domestically, it’s in the legislatures that lobbyists do their work and that’s where they make “campaign contributions” in exchange for getting the legislation which most benefits the corporations employing them.  “The business of America is business” was how former president Calvin Coolidge (1872–1933; POTUS 1923-1929) summed it up.  It’s not wholly dissimilar to the development of the English constitution; it took centuries to evolve but essentially, in exchange for getting the money he needed to fight his wars, the king approved the laws the politicians wished to pass.  In the US, the dynamic relationship is between politicians & corporations, mediated by the lobbyists and between the two sides, there's much interchanging of personnel which is why the system is sometimes described by political scientists as “incestuous”.  The dynamic of the system does of course shift; sometimes those in Congress have dominated the president and sometimes he has dominated them so in that sense Trump 2.0 (Mr Trump's second administration) is just a phase the system is going through.

The reformed Lindsay Lohan.  Congress hasn't much mended its ways.

Others have found inventive ways to color their critique of the Congress.  In March 2011, delivering an address to the annual Washington Conference of the Institute of International Bankers, Richard W. Fisher (b 1949; president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank (the “Dallas Fed”) 2005-2015), spent some time discussing the fiscal policy (ie the dynamics of government spending vs revenue (taxation and such)) of the US Congress, his concern that for long-term investment to be secured, investors must have “…confidence in the long-term prospects of where they invest.  In my judgment, it will be hard to secure that needed comfort until Congress makes clear it will refrain from the errant fiscal ways of the past, changes the way it taxes and spends and regulates, and places the nation demonstrably, and unalterably, on a path of fiscal rectitude.”  To illustrate his point in an immediately accessible way, Mr Fisher added that the country had “…suffered for too long from ‘Lindsay Lohan’ Congresses.  Like Ms. Lohan, the American Congress is a beautiful creation, blessed with enormous talent. But it has been waylaid by addiction—in the case of the Congress to spending and debt—and by a proclivity for shoplifting—in the case of the Congress to pocketing for their immediate gratification the economic future of our children and grandchildren and our grandchildren’s children.”  It may have been a bit of a “mean boy” way of putting it but doubtlessly his point was well understood by his audience, Ms Lohan then in her “troubled starlet” phase.  However, while Ms Lohan became an admirably reformed creature, the US Congress (which alone has the authority to authorize every dollar raised, borrowed and spent by the federal government) remains something of a fabulous beast, the national debt now some US$38 trillion and growing.

Senator Rebecca Ann Felton (1835–1930, left) and Senator Mitch McConnell (b 1942; US senator (Republican-Kentucky) since 1985; leader of the Senate Republican Conference 2007-2025, right).  The spooky resemblance between Senator Fulton (who in 1922 served for one day as a senator (Democratic-Georgia), appointed as a political manoeuvre) and Senator McConnell has led some to suggest he might be her reincarnated.  Some not so acquainted with history assumed the photograph of Senator Felton was Mitch McConnell in drag.

Members of the Senate, regardless of gender, are styled as “Senator” even though the Senate is a part of the Congress.  Although it has become common to describe the Senate and House respectively as “upper house” and “lower house” (reflecting the UK practice of so-describing the House of Lords and House of Commons), many political scientists claim that’s misleading and the two houses should be regarded as co-equal wings of the congress, each fulfilling a distinct function but not in a hierarchical structure.  They’re correct in asserting the use sits awkwardly with later constitutional development but the terminology is, in the US context, ancient, dating from at least the first federal Congress in 1789 when the Senate routinely was described as the “upper” chamber and the House the “lower”, simply reflecting the British parliamentary vocabulary with with those involved were familiar.

Federal Hall, New York City, circa 1950.

The framers of the US constitution did not use the terms “upper” and “lower”, something in keeping with spirit of an age that was the not exactly egalitarian but it certainly reflected their deliberately (if imperfectly) democratic, anti-aristocratic intentions.  The conceptual analogy can however be pursued, the Senate being smaller, the members granted longer terms with election originally being indirect by state legislatures while the house was directly elected (although the franchise was far from one of universal suffrage).  However, whatever the constitutional niceties, that arrangement did neatly map onto the bicameral model familiar in the UK and Europe where upper and lower chambers often were seen although surveys of early American political writing seems to hint there might have been some reluctance to use the traditional “upper” & “lower”, the Senate instead referred to as a “more select” or “more elevated” body; while many in the US political class were elitist, there was a reluctance to make that explicit.  That in 1789 members of the two houses first sat with senators assembling in a room on the first floor while representatives convened downstairs is a charming anecdote but is regarded by historians as a piece of architectural determinism, the downstairs room in New York’s Federal Hall being large enough for all the representatives, the less multitudinous senators able to fit upstairs.  Still, although the use “upper” & “lower” was already deeply embedded in the Anglo-American constitutional lexicon before Congress first met in the upstairs-downstairs arrangement, some did note the coincidence and it’s not impossible use of the terminology at least briefly was reinforced.  The room-allocation certainly didn’t create the use.

However, by the early nineteenth century, “upper house” and “lower house” routinely appeared as neutral descriptive terms in newspapers, parliamentary manuals, and political commentary, used of the Congress as well as state legislatures.  Modern political scientists have analysed the texts and concluded the use was merely of convenience as verbal shorthand because the terms were so well understood; it was in no way an attempt to “put meaning into the words of the constitution”.  Although there were obvious structural similarities with the UK parliament, the social and political history was different but while the powers of the House of Lords greatly were curtailed by the Parliament Acts (1911 & 1949), the US Senate became one of democracy’s more powerful “second chambers” in that it has a power of veto over executive appointments (judges, ambassadors, members of the cabinet etc) and no POTUS may have a treaty with a foreign entity ratified without the concurrence of the Senate.  Along with the Australian Senate (routinely and uncontroversially styled as an “upper house”) which has the power to force governments from office, the US Senate is one of the democratic world’s more powerful, the term in the jargon of political science being “strong bicameralism.”

Kim Jong-Un (Kim III, b 1982; Supreme Leader of DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea)) since 2011) leads the bowing ceremony before the portraits of Kim Il-Sung (Kim I, 1912–1994; Great Leader of DPRK, 1948-1994, left) and Kim Jong-Il (Kim II, 1941-2011; Dear Leader of DPRK, 1994-2011, right), 9^th Congress of the WPK (Workers' Party of Korea), April 25 House of Culture, Pyongyang, 19-25 February 2026.  Unanimously, delegates paid tribute to the Supreme Leader and declared it the “best congress ever”.

In political use, although a “party congress” and “party caucus” both involve the party’s members meeting together, they are almost always different institutions.  By convention, a party congress is a large formal gathering of the membership or selected delegates.  These tend in scope to be national or regional and concerned with matters such as policy platforms, leadership and the endorsement of candidates although in recent decades they have become carefully managed (and scripted), set-piece events designed to demonstrate (or, for public purposes, to emulate) unity.  Held periodically and being now highly structured, they fulfil a ceremonial as well as practical purpose although functionally, most are now wholly unnecessary; dating from a time before modern communications when the only way for things to be “thrashed out” was for members to assemble to debate and vote, most “decisions” announced at party congresses have been worked out well in advance with the debates and announcements just “window-dressing” and a type of “brand identity”.  Most are now far removed from the origin in European, socialist or communist traditions but in authoritarian systems like those in the PRC (People’s Republic of China) or DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea)), the visual choreography is tighter even than that imposed by political machines in the West.

A party caucus inherently is a smaller gathering because almost always it’s restricted to elected or appointed members within a legislature or other (sometimes nominally) deliberative body.  The exact practice differs between (and sometimes even within) countries but, as a general principle, in parliamentary systems a caucus describes all elected legislators from one party meeting privately to discuss matters such as strategy, leadership coordination, or internal discipline.  The terms “party congress” and “party room” are thus usually interchangeable although there are instances where “caucus” has for historic reasons become so associated with one party that others avoid the label.  An obvious example is the ALP (Australian Labor Party (or as some prefer, Agitprop, Lies & Propaganda)) where use of “caucus” is entrenched so other parties tend to use “party meeting”, “party room” etc.  Similarly, in the US, while the congressional Democrats collectively are a “caucus” (sharing the noun with baboons which seems a nice touch), the Republicans are a “conference”.  Membership can be “loose”, the self-described “democratic socialist” Bernie Sanders (b 1941; senior US senator (Independent, Vermont) since 2007) having long “caucused with the Democrats”.  In the US, “caucus” was adopted for certain versions of “primary contests” in which candidates are selected (in other places the process might be called “pre-selection”).

Joe Biden (b 1942; VPOTUS 2009-2017 & POTUS 2021-2025) and his wife, Dr Jill Biden (b 1951) at a campaign stop during the Iowa Caucuses, Council Bluffs, Iowa, 30 November, 2019.

In the US, caucuses are now less common and the party machines would be delighted were they wholly to go extinct because, unlike primaries which are conducted at locations which are easily managed, caucuses are from the “horse & buggy” era and are geographically spread, often taking places in people’s houses.  For candidates, it can be a logistical nightmare but so culturally entrenched are the famous “Iowa Caucuses” which “kick off” the four-yearly cycle of presidential elections that whatever happens elsewhere, Iowa won’t be for turning.  In the US, there are also “sub-set caucuses” such as the “Congressional Black Caucus” and, upon formation in 1971, it was envisaged as a “non-party” gathering at which Democrats, Republicans and others could assemble to discuss matters of especial interest to the African-American community.  Remarkably, from time to time, Republicans have attended meetings.  The proliferation of caucuses within the Democratic Party has increased and there are caucuses labelled as “Jewish”, “Progressive”, “Muslim”, “women’s”, “African American”, “Education”, “Hispanic”, “Veterans”, “LGBTQ+”, “Pride”, “Stonewall”, Asian American & Pacific Islander”, “Native” and “Senior”; there may be more because the modern Democratic Party is a fissiparous beast.  

Watercolor of a Viennese ball.  So frequent were the balls at the Congress of Vienna, the Prince de Ligne famously observed “Le Congrès dance beaucoup, mais il ne marche pas” (Congress dances much, but it doesn't walk).

There are many aspects to the relationship between the US and PRC and following the May 2026 meeting in Beijing between Xi Jinping (b 1953; General Secretary of the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) and paramount leader of the PRC since 2012) and Donald Trump, analysts covered most of them.  There was much on trade, tariffs, military actions (calling events such as invasions “wars” has become unfashionable) in the Middle East or Ukraine, AI (artificial intelligence), oil, the renegade province of Taiwan and more.  What was however most striking about President Xi’s narrative was his observation the PRC and US had much more to gain from “cooperation” than “conflict”.  What Mr Xi seemed to be suggesting was different from earlier concepts which had at times characterized the relationship between the US and the Soviet Union; he wasn’t advocating a revival of “peaceful co-existence” or “détente” but something like a genuine, if unofficial, partnership based on mutual interest.  Although it’s speculative, it seems likely President Xi admires the Congress of Vienna (1814-1815) when the ruling elites met over some nine months to construct a post-Napoleonic Europe divided between the great powers, a structure in which (1) the ruling class would be spared another unpleasantness like the French Revolution (1789) and (2) a perpetual balance of power would be maintained, ensuring peace.  That in the two centuries since, the Congress has attached much criticism, largely for imposing a stultifying air of reaction on the continent, does not render the structure irrational nor detract from the rationale and some historians have come to regard the congress more fondly; while it’s not true the consequence was a exactly century of peace in Europe, it created a framework which meant a goodly number of decades notably less blood-soaked than what came before and certainly what followed after 1914.

In geopolitics, for authoritarian leaders to suggest “cooperation” with those more liberal is not new.  Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) in 1940, not best pleased at being at war with the British (the nation he regarded still as Germany’s natural ally), offered London what to many in the British establishment seemed a tempting deal, given the army had just been forced into an hasty and ignominious retreat from the beaches of Dunkirk.  As Hitler imagined the globe under his new order in which the German Empire would extend from the English Channel to the Urals, one feature which fitted in nicely was the British Empire and in return for offering his obviously potent military to assist in its defence, all he wanted from the British was an end to hostilities and “non-interference” in a Europe now under German occupation or hegemony.  The British had their own reasons for rejecting that kind offer but, after the tide of the war had turned, they heard something similar (and possibly about as sincere) from comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953).  At the Yalta Conference in February 1945, the British and Americans first heard comrade Stalin’s idea that the ideal arrangement for the upcoming post-war world was that the Soviets wouldn’t interfere in the way the countries in the Western sphere of influence were handled and in return he expected no interference in the Soviet sphere (basically those nations unfortunate enough to end up behind what came to be called the Iron Curtain).

Deals being done: The Congress of Vienna (1819), engraving by Jean-Baptiste Isabey (1767–1855).

However, the circumstances of 2026 differ greatly from the world of 1815 and what could be achieved at the Congress of Vienna by Lord Castlereagh (1769–1822; UK foreign secretary 1812-1822) and Prince Klemens von Metternich (1773-1859; Foreign Minister of the Austrian Empire 1809-1848 & Chancellor 1821-1848) was a function of what was unique about that time and place.  The so-called Concert System (known also as the Vienna System in a nod to the epoch-making congress) in which the spheres of influence of Europe’s five great powers (Austria, France, Prussia, Russia and the UK) were effectively formalized with mechanisms created to resolve disputes by means other than armed conflict, while a model which could be mapped onto the geopolitical map of 2026 is of course an implausible resurrection because things are different.  Still, Mr Xi is a diligent student of history and is aware how much more productive can be great-power cooperation than conflict, outcome of the latter sometimes as bad for the “winners” as the “losers”.  What he’ll have noticed is Donald Trump genuinely is unique among post-war presidents in that he avowedly has no interest in “spreading democracy” around the globe, content if other countries, whatever their political arrangements buy US goods and services; he cares not at all whether or not they buy the US Constitution.

As Mr Xi could have told him, that’s a sensible position to take because a system which suits one national culture may wholly be incompatible with others and what’s remarkable is not that the US, debatably for the first time since the 1920s, now has a “pragmatic president” but that it took so long for them to get one.  What most distinguished US foreign policy since 1945 was the way it was affected by the much-discussed national characteristic of “exceptionalism”, a collective confidence that proved an asset in a venture like sending men to walk on the moon but in foreign policy has on occasions led the Americans astray.  Essentially, the problem is the idealistic American belief that every problem can be overcome (exemplified by the Pentagon’s standard doctrine of “overwhelming force”) whereas less ambitious realists understand some problems are insoluble and need just endlessly to be “managed”, witness the way the British for so long ran the Raj with a relative handful of troops and administrators.

Horse trading at the Yalta Conference, February 1945, Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR, 1882–1945, POTUS 1933-1945, left), comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953, centre) and Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955, right).

The cartoon was by Ernest Howard "E.H." Shepard (1879–1976) and appeared in Punch some days after the conference communiqués were published.  In the UK it was titled The Pellmell of the European Puzzle but, in many other markets, that was changed to The European Hotch-Potch because “pell-mell” was thought obscure.  Pellmell (also as pell-mell) traditionally was used in the sense of “hasty and uncontrolled” so it was at least half-right to apply the term to what was done at Yalta.  Pellmell was from the French pêle-mêle, from the Old French pesle-mesle, reputedly a rhyme based on the stem of mesler (to mix, meddle).  Unlike the Congress of Vienna which absorbed some nine leisurely months between September 1814-June 1815, the Yalta Conference was done in little more than a week but although there were many dinners, there were no balls and no dancing.  So intractable was the position of comrade Stalin on matters of consequence to him, had it lasted nine months it's doubtful the outcomes would greatly have differed.   

President Xi (left) and President Trump (right).  While structuralists might disagree, behaviorists would likely find more similarities than differences.     

While something like a “Congress of Singapore” with global or even extensive regional ambitions would be overreach, it’s not difficult to imagine Mr Xi and Mr Trump at a table demonstrating the “art of the deal(s)”, each sacrificing the odd pawn to secure an uncontested rook or knight (or even a bishop).  The pawns of course might object to being “shuffled around” but as Mr Xi would explain to them: “twas ever thus” and their people will much prefer the fruits of an increasing co-prosperity to abstractions like democracy and the chimera of free speech.  Mr Trump’s background was in the world of corporations and deals rather than politics (as he one admitted, he “bought” politicians as required and was impressed by how cheap they were) so he can relate to someone like Mr Xi who functions as the CEO of a corporate state, more than he can presidents or prime ministers juggling the competing interests upon which they depend.  Like Mr Trump who wants as little as possible to do with the internal affairs of America’s customers (ie other countries), Mr Xi has no wish to waste effort or resources in the pointless business of attempting to impose Beijing’s way of running the PRC on others; good relations and mutually beneficial trade ties are much more sensible goals.  In Mr Xi and Mr Trump, not since a couple of horse-traders like comrade Stalin and Winston Churchill were running their countries have two great powers been headed by a pair more suited to “doing deals”.  While problems like Kashmir and Palestine will need “endless management”, in other places, there is scope for a couple of realists to “cooperate” and because Mr Trump (mostly) has purged the US system of tiresome idealists, for the first time in living memory, at least slight progress may be possible.  As at Yalta, there might be victims but where deals are there to be done, someone always has to pay the price.

Spider

Spider (pronounced spahy-der)

(1) Any predatory silk-producing arachnid of the order Araneae, having four pairs of legs and a rounded un-segmented body consisting of abdomen and cephalothorax, most of which spin webs that serve as nests and as traps for prey.

(2) In non technical use, any of various other arachnids resembling or suggesting these.

(3) A cast-iron frying pan with three legs or feet once common in open-hearth cookery (now rare and applied more loosely; still used by chefs).

(4) A trivet or tripod, as for supporting a pot or pan on a hearth.

(5) In digital technology. digitally to survey websites, following and cataloging their links in order to index web pages for a search engine.

(6) In engineering, a skeleton or frame with radiating arms or members, often connected by crosspieces, such as a casting forming the hub and spokes to which the rim of a fly wheel or large gear is bolted; the body of a piston head; a frame for strengthening a core or mould for a casting.

(7) In agriculture, an instrument used with a cultivator to pulverize soil.

(8) Any implement, tool or other device which is some (even if vague) was resembles or is suggestive of a spider (sometimes as spider-like or spideresque).

(9) In nautical use, a metal frame fitted at the base of a mast to which halyards are tied when not in use.

(10) A drink made by mixing ice-cream and a soda (a fizzy drink such as lemonade) (mostly Australia & New Zealand).

(11) An alcoholic drink made with brandy and lemonade or ginger beer (mostly Australia & New Zealand and probably extinct although it still appears in some anthologies of cocktails).

(12) In slang, a person spindly in appearance (dated); also a popular nickname for those with the surname Webb.

(13) In slang, a man who persistently approaches or accosts a woman in a public social setting, particularly in a bar (also as bar spider).

(14) In snooker & billiards, a stick with a convex arch-shaped notched head used to support the cue when the cue ball is out of reach at normal extension; a bridge.

(15) In bicycle design, the part of a crank to which the chain-rings are attached.

(16) In drug slang, one of the many terms for heroin (an allusion to the web-like patterns on the arms of addicts into which the needle is poked).

(17) In music, part of a resonator instrument that transmits string vibrations from the bridge to a resonator cone at multiple points.

(18) In fly fishing, a soft-hackle fly (mostly southern England).

(19) In the sport of darts, the network of wires separating the areas of a dartboard.

(20) In mathematics, a type of graph or tree.

(21) In passenger transport, a early type of light phaeton (obsolete) and latterly a descriptor for a roadster (also as spyder).

(22) In photography and film-making, a support for a camera tripod, preventing it from sliding.

1380s: From the Middle English spydyr, spydyr & spither (the forms from mid-century were spiþre, spiþur & spiþer), from the Old English spīþra & spīthra (spider), from the Proto-West Germanic spinþrijō, from the Proto-Germanic spinnaną & spin-thon (“to spin”).  The Old English forms were akin to spinnan (to spin) and cognate with the Danish spinder (literally “spinner”) and the German Spinne and (mostly) displaced attercop (spider, unpleasant person) which was relegated to a dialectal term.  The root of the European form was the primitive Indo-European spen & pen (to draw, stretch, spin) + the formative or agential -thro.  The connection with the root is more transparent in other Germanic cognates such as the Middle Low German, Middle Dutch, Middle High German & German spinne and the Dutch spin (spider).  The loss of -n- before spirants is familiar in Old English (such as goose or tooth).  Spider is a noun, spidery and spideresque are adjectives, spidering is a verb and spidered is a verb & adjective; the noun plural is spiders.

Lindsay Lohan with Spiderman and spideresque offspring, Harper’s Bazaar photo shoot, Los Angeles, 2007.

Despite the ancient lineage, in the Old & Middle English there were more common words used when speaking of arachnids including lobbe (or loppe as Geoffrey Chaucer (circa 1344-1400) would have it), atorcoppe (the Middle English attercop translates literally as “poison-head”), and (from the Latin aranea), renge.  Middle English also had araine (spider) which was picked up, via the Old French from the Latin word with the same spelling and, more poetically, in the Old English there was gangewifre (a weaver as he goes).  In literature, the spider was often a figure of cunning, skill, and industry as well as venomous predation.  In the seventeenth century, the spider figuratively represented venomousness and thread-spinning but also sensitivity to vibrations and the habit of solitary lurking, waiting for prey to fall into the web; quintessentially, the spider was an independent character.  The two-pack game of solitaire (patience) called spider dates from 1890 (still available in software), the choice of name thought owed to the resemblance of the layout of the decks in the original form of the game.  In zoology, the spider crab was first identified in 1710 (an applied to various species) while the spider monkey, so called for its long limbs, dates from is from 1764.  The noun spider-web in the 1640s replaced the more cumbersome spider's web from a century-odd earlier and the adjective spidery (long and thin) was first noted in 1823.

The Exorcist’s “spider walk” scene.

Based on the William Peter Blatty (1928-2017) novel The Exorcist (1971), the film version (1973) was directed by William Friedkin (1935-2023) and that it did not win the Best Picture Academy Award is a mystery explained only by the prejudices held at the time by those members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences who cast ballots for The Sting (1973) a well-made but formulaic piece and hardly the a landmark like The Exorcist.  The “spider walk” scene was long the subject of speculation.  Not included in the original theatrical release, the director for years claimed it had never been shot and it was only when copies of the takes were found in the archives he admitted it had been done but that it couldn’t be used because the technology didn’t at the time exist to edit out the wires attached to a rail above which made the performance possible.  Subsequently, it was revealed the scene had been shot without use of the harness designed for the purpose because it was performed by an experienced stunt double with gymnastic training.  Apparently the director didn’t include it because he thought it appeared too early and disrupted the sequence which is interesting because structurally, The Exorcist is far from perfect.  The spider walk scene was included in the “director’s cut” editions released the next century.

Little Miss Muffet in Hell (left) and with MWC's (Motor Wheel Corporation) Spyder wheel (right).  Because the use by European manufacturers lent the spelling "spyder with a y" a tinge of the exotic, it was used in US commerce, MWC of Lansing Michigan dubbing one of their "jellybean style" wheels thus.  The wheel, produced in the early 1970s, used the then popular technique of combining a styled aluminun center with a chromed steel rim.  MWC's wheels were highly regarded for quality and the Spyder was produced for use with disc or drum brakes.  Note the latter day Little Miss Muffet's strategic positioning of the tip of the tongue. 

The 1550s noun tuffet (little tuft) was from the Old French touffel (the diminutive suffix -et replacing the French -el) which was a diminutive of touffe.  In English the word is obsolete except for the use in the nursery rhyme Little Miss Muffet which seems first to have appeared in print in 1805 although it (and variations) may have been circulating much earlier.  Etymologists believe Little Miss Muffet’s tuffet was a grassy hillock or a small knoll in the ground (a variant spelling of an obsolete meaning of tuft).  The latter-day use to refer to a hassock or footstool is an example of how (usually obscure) words can acquire meanings if erroneous definitions are often repeated and come to serve some purpose.  Tuffet for example became a favorite of antique dealers who are apt to call both footstools and low seats “tuffets”, a handy practice perhaps when provenance is doubtful.

Little Miss Muffet
Sat on a tuffet,
Eating her curds and whey;
There came a big spider,
Who sat down beside her
And frightened Miss Muffet away.

Those whose fear of spiders (and other arachnids, such as scorpions and ticks) is so severe as to adversely affect normal life are said to be arachnophobic.  Although one of the most commonly described anxiety disorders, in the current edition (DSM-5-TR) of the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), arachnophobia is not a diagnostic category but is classified as a sub-type of Specific Phobia, Animal Type, a clinical diagnosis typically described as “Specific Phobia, Animal Type (spiders)”.  The DSM’s criteria for a specific phobia include (1) marked fear or anxiety about a specific object or situation, (2) immediate fear response on exposure, (3) active avoidance or intense distress, (4) fear disproportionate to the actual danger, (5) persistence (typically 6+ months) and (6) and clinically significant impairment or distress.  So, one who merely is not fond of spiders would not meet the DSM’s criteria; the fear must be severe enough to impair functioning or cause substantial distress over at least six months.  The irony is that as well as most spiders being small, non-venomous and not at all anxious to attack humans, co-existing with them and their webs in most cases will improve quality of life by culling the insect population.  For those not convinced, arachnophobia can be treated by a number of therapies including (1) systematic desensitization (a gradual exposure to the source of the distress), (2) the adoption of “calming techniques” which can lower the distress response and (3) CBT (cognitive behaviour therapy), a structured, goal-oriented form of psychotherapy focusing on identifying and changing negative or dysfunctional thought patterns and behaviours.  The estimates vary but all research indicates well under 10% of the global population suffer arachnophobia to the extent a clinician would diagnose with women being significantly more affected.

Spider Phaeton, circa 1875, US.

There are cars called spider and spyder although, unlike many other natural or engineered creations which in some way resemble arachnids, these cars are almost always small roadsters which in appearance don’t look anything like their eight-legged namesakes.  The origin of the name lies in the horse & buggy era when a spider phaeton was a lightweight horse-drawn carriage intended for short-distance journeys and the design was intended to impress so there was often little protection from the elements beyond perhaps something to shade ladies from the sun.  Unlike some true “convertible” or “cabriolet” carriages, there were no side windows and the spider name was gained from the “spider”, a small single seat or bench for the use of a groom or footman, the name based on the spindly supports which called to mind an arachnid’s legs.  Quite where this style of coachwork was first seen isn’t known but they were certainly in use on both sides of the Atlantic in the 1860s and it’s not impossible the invention was both simultaneous and independent although there are sources which insist it was first seen in the ante-bellum US.  Historians of early transportation note also the similarity of the small seat with the "jump seat" and the later "rumble" or dicky (also as dickie or dickey) seats.

1931 Alfa Romeo 8C 2300 Spider Monza.

As engines (steam, electric and predominately internal combustion) made possible horseless carriages, in the earliest days the body-styles were carried over as were the designations which is why berlinas, cabriolets and phaetons appeared in the catalogues of the early automotive coach-builders.  However, the spider nomenclature seems to have for decades been forgotten, because although the ancillary seats still existed, the terms “dicky”, “rumble” and “jump” came to be preferred, each with its own etymological tale.  The revival of the name had to await the interwar years, Alfa Romeo in 1931 introducing the 8C, powered by 2.3, 2.6 & 2.9 litre stright-8s, the line continuing until 1939.  Many were touring cars but the Spider version was a sports car built for road and track, and 8C 2300 Spiders won the 1931 & 1932 Targa Florio road-race in Sicily and it was victory in the 1931 Italian Grand Prix which the factory honored with the "Monza", the GP car a shortened, lightweight version of the Spider.

1961 Ferrari 250 GT SWB California Spyder, one of the few times the factory preferred Spyder to Spider.

To date, Ferrari's only Spyders have been the 250 GT California (1957–1963), the 365 California (1966) and the 365 GTS/4 (Daytona, 1971–1973).  Other than those, it's been Spiders (or Cabriolets for the 2+2s) all the way but the factory's website seems for all (two seat) purposes to have standardized on Spider and whatever the original designation, the coachwork now is listed as "two seat spider".

Encouraged by the image Alfa-Romeo gained from the illustrious 8C Spiders, a few other cars emerged from Europe in the 1930s but it was in the post-war years the name became really fashionable, the economic boom and the availability of chassis suitable to carry the imagination of carrozzerias meant there was a concurrence of supply and demand for stylish roadsters, many of which carried the magic of the spider name.  Seemingly more glamorous still must have been “Spyder” because it was in the 1950s that roadsters called Spyder began to appear.  Quite why the “y” sometimes was preferred to the “i” has over the years attracted comment and speculation but the reason for the adoption remain obscure.  The idea it was to avoid legal action from Alfa-Romeo was soon discounted because, spider being a historic generic from coach-building (like sedan, limousine, cabriolet etc), it couldn’t be trade-marked or otherwise protected and Alfa-Romeo seems anyway never to have tried.  There was however a quasi-legal status granted to the spelling “spider” because in 1924, the (the apparently now forgotten) Milan-based National Federation of Body makers declared that was how it should be written, the speculation being that Il Duce (Benito Mussolini, 1883-1945; Duce (Leader) & Prime-Minister of Italy 1922-1943) wanted to make everything as Italian as possible and, there being no "y" in the alphabet, spider it was.  Of whether such matters much occupied the fascist mind, there seems no documentation and it does seem dubious; X, Y, W, J not appearing in the Italian alphabet either although many words in the languages include them.

1964 Chevrolet Corvair Monza Spyder Coupe.  Although it looks frumpy compared with the most accomplished re-styling of 1965, the original Corvair (1990-1965) was a modernist take on the US design language of the late 1950s and was restrained compared with some of what came off the drawing boards in the era.

In 1962 Chevrolet chose “Spyder” as the name for the high-performance version of the rear-engined Corvair, introduced in 1960 as a compact car with an emphasis on economy of operation with no pretentions of sportiness (although drivers would soon discover the sometimes quirky handling characteristics could make the things feel rather like certain racing cars).  Adopting the name for the turbocharged Spyder made sense because GM (General Motors) had from the state positioned the Corvair as a more “European” type of car although the irony was it made its debut at a time when across the Atlantic many manufacturers were for their next generation of mass-market machines pondering a switch from RE-RWD (rear engine-rear wheel drive) to FE-FWD (front engine, front wheel drive).  In the way Detroit was rather loose in the handling of nomenclature, the “Spider” package was available for the Monza versions both as a coupe and convertible; notably, it made the Corvair only the second passenger vehicle in series production to have been fitted with a turbo-charger, Oldsmobile F-85 Turbo Jetfire having been released a few months earlier.  The Oldsmobile venture was brief because the early implementation of the technology demanded rather more of drivers than US buyers had become accustomed to giving and anyway, despite the specification (turbocharged, all aluminium, 215 cubic inch (3.5 litre) V8) sounding tempting, on the road it was less than exciting and GM soon abandoned the engine (whether with forced aspiration or not).  The corporation came to regret that decision because the light, compact V8 would have proved a useful augmentation to their ranges in the troubled decades to follow.  As it was, in 1965 it sold the rights and tooling to Rover and the V8 would until 2006 provide stellar service to the UK industry.  Chevrolet in 1965 retired the “Spyder” name from the Corvair and replaced it with “Corsa”.

1965 Chevrolet Corvair Corsa Coupe (left) and 1967 Chevrolet Corvair 500 Sport Sedan (right).  The almost Italianesque lines of the second generation Corvair (1965-1967) were as fine as anything from Detroit in the 1960s but the damage to the car's reputation was done.  The four-door version was notable for being the only compact four-door hardtop the industry produced and uniquely, there was no companion model with a B-pillar. 

As an evocative name for a car, the Latin corsa (from the Ancient Greek κόρση (kórsē) (variously (1) in building, the uprights on the gate of a temple, (2) in anatomy the sides of the forehead (ie the temples) or (3) the hair on the temples)) wasn't encouraging as a noun because it meant “the outer strip in the molding about a door (a girder)”.  However, the Latin adjective corsa could (in the feminine) be used to mean “a Corsican” or “of or relating to Corsica” and that obviously was very European.  To emphasise that, “Corsa” exists in a number of Romance languages including Asturian, Catalan, French, Galician, Italian, Latin, Portuguese & Spanish.  There is nothing to suggest there was in the mid-1960s and market resistance to the name “Spyder”, the switch to “Corsa” made just to create the aura of “newness” at the time so important.  In 1965 that was a quality especially important for the second generation Corvair, the reputation of which (rightly) had suffered after the publication of Ralph Nader’s (b 1934) Unsafe at Any Speed (1965) which was a devastating critique on the safety standards of US-made automobiles, the dubiously implemented swing-axles on the very early Corvairs the emblematic case study.  Ironically, as well as being one of the loveliest designs of the era, the revised Corvair greatly was improved but by them the damage was terminal and the project doomed, the model lingering until 1969 only because GM didn’t wish it thought Nader had claimed a scalp.

Advertising was different in the 1970s.

MWC may not have wanted customers to associate its Spyder with the then recently cancelled Corvair but may have been encouraged by FoMoCo (Ford Motor Company) which as early as 1958 had borrowed the French spelling Galaxie for the top-trim option for its then full-sized Fairlane, the company in 1966 adding the 7 Litre option to the range.  Even then liters were not unknown in US English (especially among scientists and engineers) but they tended not to use the French spelling (although Pontiac used it to emphasize the distinctly "European" flavor of its short-lived (1966-1969) OHC (overhead camshaft) straight-six).  FoMoCo's marketing staff wouldn’t have deluded themselves by imagining use of “litre” would suggest to buyers there was anything remotely “French” about the Galaxie's biggest engine option (by 1966, French cars certainly weren’t built with 7 litre V8 engines) but it avoided a linguistic clash with Galaxie and anyway such things were then anyway part of the zeitgeist of commerce.  Then as now, New York City was no more representative of life in the US than were things south of the Mason-Dixon Line but cars were named for the whole country and just as wild creatures (cougar, mustang, barracuda etc) suited some segments, “Galaxie” in 1958 had been chosen because, post-Sputnik, it was the dawn of the “space age” with rockets and satellites suddenly part of the cultural milieu.  So it was a deliberate exercise in branding and not a linguistic accident, just as litre appealed because more than any other European nation, France was thought redolent with connotations of modernity and sophistication, making "Galaxie 7 Litre" a happy combination.

1971 Ford LTD Convertible with MWC's Spyder wheels.  The proliferation of smaller ranges (the pony cars and intermediates) meant the demise of the "sporty" versions of the full-size lines; among the Fords, the last big block V8 / 4-speed manual transmission combo was built in 1969 and the last LTD convertible would appear in 1972. 

A 1971 LTD is an improbable resting place for a set of MWC Spyders which presumably enjoyed an earlier life on another vehicle or perhaps several, certainly they were never a FoMoCo factory option.  The LTD began in 1965 as just another option for the Galaxie; it was a "luxury package" (ie letting the Galaxie fulfil the role for which in 1939 Mercury had been created).  Although in the 1930s & 1940s there had been various "Deluxe" & "Super Deluxe" Fords, it was when the Edsel venture played out over two and a bit seasons (1958-1960) that the real intra-corporate cannibalization began with Ford in the 1960s increasingly trespassing on what in marketing theory should have been Mercury's fenced-off turf.  Even when Mercury stumbled on its one bona fide hit (the 1967 Cougar), it wasn't long before there was a Ford emulating it and, to add insult to injury, at a lower cost.  Mercury did well to last until 2011 when FoMoCo grasped the excuse of the GFC (global financial crisis, 2008-2012) to shutter the brand.

The alpha-numeric juxtaposition also simplified the administration of the badgework because in 1966 & 1967, FoMoCo actually offered two very different versions of their 7 litre FE V8, the 427 (a famously powerful & robust beast with a stellar reputation on the circuits which was expensive, noisy, prone to being cantankerous and an oil burner) or the 428 (mild-mannered, smooth, quiet, cheap to build and offering prodigious low-speed torque), the choice at the dealership just a tick on the box for those with the cash of credit rating to afford the 427.  The market spoke, the sales breakdown between the 427/428 in 1966/1967 being 11035/38 and 1056/12.  So the 427 was retired from the full-sized line for 1968, a run 350-odd of a curious version with hydraulic valve lifters (intended originally for the Mustang) used in the Mercury Cougar, coupled exclusively to an automatic gearbox; for the 1968 Cougars, Ford decided there were just 427s & 428s and didn't bother with litres or liters.  Strangely, by then, the corporation would have had an excuse to stick with the French because in 1968 FoMoCo had three different 7 litre V8s in the showrooms, the 427 & 428 from the FE family and the 429 from the 385 series.  Fortunately, another 7 litre (the 430 from the MEL family) had been retired in 1966 after being enlarged to 462 cubic inches (7.5 litres).            

1955 Lancia Aurelia B24S Spider.

In Italy, the naming trend really took off in 1954 when Lancia introduced the B24 Aurelia Spider and soon Ferrari and other from Italy would follow although spyders would appear too, (including some from Ferrari & Lancia), and General Motors (GM), noted scavengers of European nomenclature (GTO, Grand Prix etc) shamelessly tacked Spyder onto the doomed Corvair, even for versions with a fixed roof.  North of the Brenner Pass, spyder has found favour, used by Porsche, Audi and BMW while in the Far-East, companies like Toyota and Mitsubishi, arch-imitators in style and perfectionists in execution have rolled out their own spyders.  Alfa-Romeo and Fiat however have stuck to spider, Lancia and Ferrari too seeming to have forsaken their youthful indiscretions and only using the original.

1967 Alfa Romeo 1600 Spider Duetto.

Although in continuous production between 1966-1993, it was only during the first three years the bodywork featured the memorable Osso di Seppia (Round-tail, literally "cuttle fish") coachwork.  After 1970, the Spider gained a Kamm-tail which increased luggage capacity and apparently also conferred some aerodynamic advantage but purists have always coveted the cigar-shaped original, despite it violating a few rules in the design handbook.  The Duetto name was the winning entry in a competition Alfa Romeo in 1965 conducted and in those days that meant running advertisements in newspapers (which people actually paid for and read) to which readers responded by cutting out and filling in the coupon, writing in their suggestion, putting it in an envelope on which they wrote the address, buying and affixing a stamp and putting envelope in mailbox.  Then, entering a competition took effort and commitment.  The company's directors liked "Duetto" because it summed up the romantic essence of a machine definitely built for a couple but unfortunately, for some legal reason relating to an existing trademark, it couldn't officially be used but for decades, among the cognoscenti,  the little roadsters have always been called Duettos.  To keep the tiresome lawyers at bay, when released at the Geneva Motor Show in March 1966, the car was released as the Spider 1600.

1980 (left) and 1978 (right) Lancia Beta Zagato Spiders.

Whatever its dynamic qualities, the Lancia Beta (1972–1984) tends to be remembered only for its extraordinary predilection for rusting, vying with the early Alfa Romeo Alfasuds (1971-1989) for the title of “most susceptible”.  The coupé (1973-1984) and shooting brake (1975-1984 and named HPE (High-performance Estate)) appear less affected by body-rot but the tainted reputation has meant these models have never attained the desirability of earlier Lancias like the exquisite Fulvia (1963-1976).  Tellingly, although convertibles tend in the collector market to attract a premium, not even the Beta Zagato Spider enjoys much of a following despite almost 10,000 having been produced in an era when new convertibles were becoming a rarity.  The Zagato Spider was more of a targa than a true convertible but was a clever design with both a removable targa-top atop the front seats and a folding rear-section, al la the early Porsche “soft window” Targas of the late 1960s.  The coach-building and design house Zagato has operated in Italy since 1919 and although there have been some nice creations, the operation has often been associated with the angular and the quirky, some designs simply weird.  Despite that, more than a century on, Zagato remains while others responsible for many sensuous shapes have come and gone. 

Robert the Bruce, colored engraving by an unknown artist (1797).

Robert I (Robert the Bruce, 1274–1329; King of Scots 1306-1329) was crowned King of Scots in 1306 and led Scotland to victory in the First War of Scottish Independence against the English.  Earlier though, he’d had his defeats and his spirits were said to be at a low ebb when after one disastrous battle, he was forced to take refuge in a cave.  Sitting in the cold, dark space, he noticed a small spider attempting to weave a web and time and time again, the little creature failed.  However, each time the spider fell, it climbed back up to try again until finally, the silk took hold and the web was spun.  From this, Robert was inspired to return to the fight and was victorious in the Battle of Bannockburn (1314), a triumph which turned the tide of the war and ultimately, in 1328. the independence of Scotland was won.

Bruce and the spider, by Bernard Barton (1784-1849)

FOR Scotland's and for freedom's right
The Bruce his part has played;--
In five successive fields of fight
Been conquered and dismayed:
Once more against the English host
His band he led, and once more lost
The meed for which he fought;
And now from battle, faint and worn,
The homeless fugitive, forlorn,
A hut's lone shelter sought.
 
And cheerless was that resting-place
For him who claimed a throne;--
His canopy, devoid of grace,
The rude, rough beams alone;
The heather couch his only bed--
Yet well I ween had slumber fled
From couch of eider down!
Through darksome night till dawn of day,
Absorbed in wakeful thought he lay
Of Scotland and her crown.
 
The sun rose brightly, and its gleam
Fell on that hapless bed,
And tinged with light each shapeless beam
Which roofed the lowly shed;
When, looking up with wistful eye,
The Bruce beheld a spider try
His filmy thread to fling
From beam to beam of that rude cot--
And well the insect's toilsome lot
Taught Scotland's future king.
 
Six times the gossamery thread
The wary spider threw;--
In vain the filmy line was sped,
For powerless or untrue
Each aim appeared, and back recoiled
The patient insect, six times foiled,
And yet unconquered still;
And soon the Bruce, with eager eye,
Saw him prepare once more to try
His courage, strength, and skill.
One effort more, his seventh and last!--
The hero hailed the sign!--
And on the wished-for beam hung fast
That slender silken line!
Slight as it was, his spirit caught
The more than omen; for his thought
The lesson well could trace,
Which even "he who runs may read,"
That Perseverance gains its meed,
And Patience wins the race.