Consecrate

Consecrate (pronounced kon-si-kreyt)

(1) To make or declare sacred; set apart or dedicate to the service of a deity (most often in the context of a new church building or land).

(2) To make something an object of honor or veneration; to hallow.

(3) To devote or dedicate to some purpose (usually in the form “a life consecrated to something”) usually with some hint of solemnly.

(4) In religious ritualism, to admit or ordain to a sacred office, especially (in the Roman Catholic Church) to the episcopate.

(5) In Christianity to sanctify bread and wine for the Eucharist to be received as the body and blood of Christ.

1325–1375: From the Middle English consecraten (make or declare sacred by certain ceremonies or rites), from the Latin & cōnsecrātus & cōnsecrāre (to make holy, devote), perfect passive participle of cōnsecrō, the construct being con- (from the Latin prefix con-, from cum (with); used with certain words (1) to add a notion similar to those conveyed by with, together, or joint or (2) to intensify their meaning) +‎ sacrāre (to devote) (from sacrō (to make sacred, consecrate”), from sacer (sacred; holy).  The most frequently used synonyms are sanctify & venerate (behallow is now rare); the antonyms are desecrate & defile.  The original fourteenth century meaning was exclusively ecclesiastical, the secular adoption in the sense of "to devote or dedicate from profound feeling" is from the 1550s.  The verb was the original for, the noun consecration developing within the first decade of use; it was from the Latin consecracioun (the act of separating from a common to a sacred use, ritual dedication to God) and was used especially of the ritual consecration of the bread and wine of the Eucharist (from the Latin consecrationem (nominative consecratio)), a noun of action from past-participle stem of consecrare.  In the Old English, eallhalgung was a loan-translation of the Latin consecratio.  Consecrate is a verb & adjective, consecration, consecratee, consecratedness & consecrater (also as consecrator) are nouns, consecrates, consecrated & consecrating are verbs and consecratory & consecrative are adjectives; the most common noun plural is consecrations.

The common antonym was desecrate (divest of sacred character, treat with sacrilege), dating from the 1670s, the construct being de- + the stem of consecrate.  The de- prefix was from the Latin dē-, from the preposition dē (of, from (the Old English æf- was a similar prefix).  It imparted the sense of (1) reversal, undoing, removing, (2) intensification and (3) from, off.  In the Old French dessacrer meant “to profane” and a similar formation exists in Italian.  However, the Latin desecrare meant “to make holy” (the de- in this case having a completive sense).  In Christianity, to deconsecrate is not a desecration but an act of ecclesiastical administration in which something like a church or chapel ceases to be used for religious purposes and is able to be sold or otherwise used.  It means that in Christianity the notion of “sacred sites” is not of necessity permanent, unlike some faiths.  The alternative unconsecrated seems now obsolete but was once used as a synonym of deconsecrated (and also in clerical slang to refer to laicization (defrocking)).  The un- prefix was from the Middle English un-, from the Old English un-, from the Proto-West Germanic un-, from the Proto-Germanic un-, from the primitive Indo-European n̥-.  It was cognate with the Scots un- & on-, the North Frisian ün-, the Saterland Frisian uun-, the West Frisian ûn- &  on-, the Dutch on-, the Low German un- & on-, the German un-, the Danish u-, the Swedish o-, the Norwegian u- and the Icelandic ó-.  It was (distantly) related to the Latin in- and the Ancient Greek ἀ- (a-), source of the English a-, the Modern Greek α- (a-) and the Sanskrit अ- (a-).

The word "consecrate" is of interest to etymologists because of the history.  By the early fifth century, Rome was forced to recall the legions from Britain because the heart of the empire was threatened by barbarian invasion.  This presented an opportunity and not long after the soldiers withdrew, the Angles, Saxons and Jutes landed on the shores of the British Isles, beginning the Germanic invasion which would come to characterize Britain in the early Middle Ages.  As the invaders forced the native Celts to escape to Wales, Ireland and the northern districts of Scotland, the Celtic language and indeed the last residues of Latin almost vanished; in a remarkably short time, the culture and language in most of what is now England was almost exclusively Germanic.  It was the arrival of Christianity in the sixth century which caused Latin to return; with the faith came nuns & priests and the schools & monasteries they established became centres of literacy and stores of texts, almost all in Latin.  For a number of reasons, the Germanic tribes which by then had been resident for five generations, found Christianity and the nature of the Roman Church attractive and readily adopted this new culture.  At this time words like temple, altar, creed, alms, monk, martyr, disciple, novice, candle, prophet and consecrate all came into use and it was the mix of Latin & the Germanic which formed the basis of The Old English, a structure which would last until the Norman (as in "the Northmen") invasion under William the Conqueror (circa 1028-1087; King William I of England 1066-1087) in 1066 at which point Norman-French began to infuse the language.

Bartholomew I (Dimitrios Arhondonis (b 1940); Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople since 1991) consecrating his Patriarchal Exarch in Ukraine to the episcopate, Istanbul, November 2020.

Additionally, just as buildings, land and other objects can be consecrated and deconsecrated, they can subsequently be reconsecrated (to consecrate anew or again), a verb dating from the 1610s.  In the wars of religion in Europe and places east, when buildings often swapped in use between faiths as the tides of war shifted, this lead even to theological debate, some arguing that when a church was re-claimed, there was no need to perform a reconsecration because there had been no valid act of deconsecration while other though “a cleansing reconsecration” was advisable.  The re- prefix was from the Middle English re-, from the circa 1200 Old French re-, from the Latin re- & red- (back; anew; again; against), from the primitive Indo-European wre & wret- (again), a metathetic alteration of wert- (to turn).  It displaced the native English ed- & eft-.  A hyphen is not normally included in words formed using this prefix, except when the absence of a hyphen would (1) make the meaning unclear, (2) when the word with which the prefix is combined begins with a capital letter, (3) when the word with which the is combined with begins with another “re”, (4) when the word with which the prefix is combined with begins with “e”, (5) when the word formed is identical in form to another word in which re- does not have any of the senses listed above.  As late as the early twentieth century, the dieresis was sometimes used instead of a hyphen (eg reemerge) but this is now rare except when demanded for historic authenticity or if there’s an attempt deliberately to affect the archaic.  Re- may (and has) been applied to almost any verb and previously irregular constructions appear regularly in informal use; the exception is all forms of “be” and the modal verbs (can, should etc).  Although it seems certain the origin of the Latin re- is the primitive Indo-European wre & wret- (which has a parallel in Umbrian re-), beyond that it’s uncertain and while it seems always to have conveyed the general sense of "back" or "backwards", there were instances where the precise was unclear and the prolific productivity in Classical Latin tended make things obscure.  The Latin prefix rĕ- was from the Proto-Italic wre (again) and had a parallel in the Umbrian re- but the etymology was always murky.   In use, there was usually at least the hint of the sense "back" or "backwards" but so widely was in used in Classical Latin and beyond that the exact meaning is sometimes not clear.  Etymologists suggest the origin lies either in (1) a metathesis (the transposition of sounds or letters in a word) of the primitive Indo-European wert- (to turn) or (2) the primitive Indo-European ure- (back), which was related to the Proto-Slavic rakъ (in the sense of “looking backwards”).

Rose Aymer (1806) by Walter Savage Landor (1775–1864)

Ah what avails the sceptred race,
Ah what the form divine!
What every virtue, every grace!
Rose Aylmer, all were thine.
Rose Aylmer, whom these wakeful eyes
May weep, but never see,
A night of memories and of sighs
I consecrate to thee.

Rose Aylmer is Landor’s best remembered poem, one he dedicated to Rose Whitworth Aylmer (1779-1800), daughter Lord Aylmer and his wife Catherine Whitworth.  Rose sailed to India with an aunt in 1798, dying from cholera within two years. The poem is epigrammatic, written in tetrameters and trimeter iambics with rhyming alternate lines.  It’s a lament for the loss of a divine creature for Rose was imbued with every virtue and grace, the last two lines verse alluding to memories of their night of passion he so vividly recalls, consecrating its memory to her.

Consecration and the Church

Consecrated ground: A church graveyard.

Movie makers sometimes dig into religious themes for plot-pieces or props and one which has been used by those working usually in the horror or supernatural genres is the idea “the dead can’t arise from unconsecrated soil”, one implication being the soul of the deceased cannot ascend to heaven and are compelled for eternity to lie cold and lonely (in horror films there are also other consequences).  However, there’s no basis for this in Christian theology and noting in Scripture which could be interpreted thus but the consecration of burial grounds and the burial of the deceased in consecrated earth seems to have a long tradition in Christianity.  The idea though clearly bothered some and there’s a record of a fifteenth century German bishop assuring seafarers that Seebestattung (burial at sea) is proper, the ceremony alone a sufficient act of consecration.  So, in the Christian tradition, consecrated ground for a burial seems “desirable but not essential”, one’s salvation depending on faith in Jesus Christ and God's grace, not where one’s early remains are deposited.

There were though some other restrictions and in many places the Church did not permit those who had died by their own hand to be laid to rest within the consecrated boundaries of a cemetery; those sinners were buried just outside in unconsecrated ground.  The tradition seems mostly to have been maintained by the Jews and Roman Catholics although it was not unknown among the more austere of other denominations, evidence still extant in the United States.  After the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II; 1962-1965), rules in the Catholic Church were relaxed and the burial in consecrated ground of those who had committed suicide became a matter for the parish priest, a referral to the bishop no longer demanded.  The attitude within Judaism doubtlessly varies according to the extent to which each sect conforms to orthodoxy but generally there has probably been some liberalization, even those with tattoos now able to have a plot among the un-inked, the old prohibition based on the prohibition of one of the many abominations listed by Leviticus (Vayikra) in Chapter 19 of the Old Testament (the Torah or Pentateuch): You shall not make cuts in your flesh for a person [who died].  You shall not etch a tattoo on yourselves. I am the Lord. (Leviticus 19:28).

The Vatican, the USAVC and Legal Fictions

The United States Association of Consecrated Virgins (USACV) is a voluntary association of consecrated virgins living in the world, the purpose of which is said to be “to provide support members in the faithful living out of their vocation to consecrated virginity” and “…to assist one another in service to the Church as befits their state” (Canon 604, Code of Canon Law).

In 2018, a document from the Vatican discussing the role of consecrated virginity drew criticism from some in the USACV which alleged there was a passage in the text which seemed ambiguous.  The issue was whether entering the Church's "order of virgins" requires women genuinely are virgins (in the accepted sense of the word).  Issued on 4 July, by the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, Ecclesiae Sponsae Imago (ESI; The image of the Church as Bride) contained a passage the critics claimed was "intentionally convoluted and confusing" and appeared to suggest “…physical virginity may no longer be considered an essential prerequisite for consecration to a life of virginity.”  The dissenting statement called this implication "shocking", pointing out there “are some egregious violations of chastity that, even if not strictly violating virginity, would disqualify a woman from receiving the consecration of virgins”, adding “The entire tradition of the Church has firmly upheld that a woman must have received the gift of virginity – that is, both material and formal (physical and spiritual) – in order to receive the consecration of virgins.”

The USAVC did seem to have a point, the ESI instructing that “it should be kept in mind that the call to give witness to the Church's virginal, spousal and fruitful love for Christ is not reducible to the symbol of physical integrity. Thus to have kept her body in perfect continence or to have practiced the virtue of chastity in an exemplary way, while of great importance with regard to the discernment, are not essential prerequisites in the absence of which admittance to consecration is not possible.  The discernment therefore requires good judgment and insight, and it must be carried out individually. Each aspirant and candidate is called to examine her own vocation with regard to her own personal history, in honesty and authenticity before God, and with the help of spiritual accompaniment.”

In the spirit of Vatican II, US-based canon lawyers responded, one (herself a consecrated virgin of the Archdiocese of New York) issuing a statement saying, inter alia: “I don't see this as saying non-virgins can be virgins. I see this as saying in cases where there is a real question, it errs on the side of walking with women in individual cases for further discernment, as opposed to having a hard-dividing line to exclude women from this vocation.  The presumption of the document is that these are virgins who are doing this [consecration].  An important thing to do though is to read the questionable paragraph in context with the rest of the document.  The instruction talks a lot about the value of virginity, Christian virginity, the spirituality of virginity.  The nature of this kind of document as an instruction doesn't change the law that it's intended to explain.  The rite of consecration itself is the law, while the instruction is meant as "an elaboration for certain disputed points; it's just giving you further guidance in places where existing law is vague.”

For those not sure if this helped, she went on, verging close to descending to specifics, saying the ESI was offering a “more generous description” of the prerequisite of virginity in “allowing for people in difficult situations to continue some serious discernment”, adding that what ESI appeared to do was cover those “difficult cases” in which a woman cannot answer whether she is a virgin according to a strict standard; those instances where women might have lost their virginity without willing it or against their will, or out of ignorance. Women might thus have “committed grave sins against chastity but not actually lost their virginity in their minds”.  Such a concept has long been a part of criminal law in common law jurisdictions and the Latin phrase actus reus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea (the act is not culpable unless the mind is guilty and usually clipped to “mens rea” (guilty mind)) and is the basic test for personal liability.

Had the Vatican been prepared to descend to specifics it might have avoided creating the confusion and the president of the USAVC, while noting the potentially ambiguous words, stated where “…a woman has been violated against her will and has not knowingly and willingly given up her virginity, most would hold that she would remain eligible for consecration as a virgin. Such a case would require depth of good judgment and insight carried out in individual discernment with the bishop.”  That seemed uncontroversial but the president continued: “In our society, questions of eligibility for the consecration of virgins are raised by those who have given up their virginity, perhaps only one time, and who have later begun again to live an exemplary chaste life.”  What the ESI should have made explicit, she said, was that “…these women do not have the gift of virginity to offer to Christ.  They may make a private vow of chastity, or enter another form of consecrated life, but the consecration of virgins is not open to them.”  Clearly, in the view of the USAVC, the ESI does not change the prerequisites for consecration into the USAVC.  One who is a victim of a violation has surrendered nothing whereas one who willingly succumbed cannot retrospectively re-assume virginity, however sincere the regret or pure their life since.

Pope Innocent VIII wearing the papal triple tiara.

So, according to the Vatican, the state of virginity can, in certain circumstances, be a “legal fiction”, another notion from the common law which allows certain things to be treated by the law as if they were fact however obvious it may be they are not.  That sounds dubious but legal fictions are an essential element in making the legal system work and are not controversial because they have always been well publicized (in a way which would now be called “transparent”) and if analysed, it’s obvious the alternatives would be worse.  Rome actually had “a bit of previous” in such matters.  For example, during the Renaissance, although the rules about the conduct and character of those eligible to become pope were well documented (and had once been enforced), there was Innocent VIII (1432–1492; pope 1484-1492) who, before drifting into an ecclesiastical career, had enjoyed a dissolute youth (something no less common then as now), fathering at least six or seven illegitimate children, one son and one daughter actually acknowledged.  Despite it all, he was created a cardinal and for reasons peculiar to the time proved acceptable as pope while all others did not, not because their pasts were more tainted still but because of curia politics; plus ça change…  After the vote, all the cardinals added their signatures to the document warranting Innocent VIII was of fine character.  Scandalous as it sounds, there were Renaissance popes who were plenty worse; the Vatican in those decades needed plenty of legal fictions.

Witches are also consecrated (by the coven).  Although now most associated with ecclesiastical ceremony & procedure, secular use in the sense of “to devote or dedicate (to something) from profound feeling" has existed since the mid-sixteenth century.  Just for the record, Lindsay Lohan has not been, and has no desire to be consecrated a witch.

Tie

Tie (pronounced tahy)

(1) A knot; a fastening.

(2) A knot of hair (as at the back of a wig).  (a tiewig is (1) a wig having a tie or ties, or one having some of the curls tied up or (2) a wig that is tied upon the head; a court-wig tied with ribbon at the back).

(3) A long narrow piece of material worn, most often by men, under the collar of a shirt, tied in a knot close to the throat with the ends hanging down the front.  Also called necktie (a bow tie is never truncated to tie).

(4) A lace-up she or boot, historically as Oxford ties, Derby ties etc (now a rare use).

(5) As “twist tie”, a piece of wire embedded in paper or a strip of plastic, wound around something (typically a bag, cable etc) and tightened to secure it.

(6) A connection between people (or groups of people) or between people and institutions, ideologies etc, especially a strong connection (familiar in the phrases “ties of friends”, “ties of allegiance”, “ties that bind” etc).

(7) In construction, any of various structural members (beams, rods, stringers etc) used to keep two objects (rafters; haunches of an arch etc), from spreading or separating.

(8) In rail track construction, any of a number of closely spaced transverse beams of concrete, metal or (historically and still mostly) wood, for holding the rails forming a track at the proper distance from each other and for transmitting train loads to the ballast and roadbed (in other places known as a “sleeper”).

(9) In sport and related competitions, the situation in which two or more participants in a competition are placed equally (known variously as a “draw” or stalemate”.  The exception is long-form cricket (test & first class) where a tie (both sides having the same total of runs when the last ball has been delivered) is distinct form a draw (neither side able to force a win).

(10) In sport and related competitions, a meeting between two players or teams in a competition (mostly UK & Commonwealth use).

(11) In music, a curved line connecting two notes of the same pitch denoting that they should be played as a single note with the combined length of both notes (distinct from a slur).

(12) In typography & phonetic transcription, a curved line connecting two letters (⁀), used in the IPA to denote a co-articulation, as for example /d͡ʒ/.

(13) In statistics, one or more equal values or sets of equal values in the data set.

(14) In surveying, a bearing and distance between a lot corner or point and a benchmark or iron off site; a measurement made to determine the position of a survey station with respect to a reference mark or other isolated point.

(15) In graph theory, a connection between two vertices.

(16) To bind, fasten, or attach with a cord, string, or the like, drawn together and knotted.

(17) To draw together the parts of with a knotted string or the like.

(18) To fasten, join, or connect in any way.

(19) To confine, restrict, or limit.

(20) To bind or oblige, as to do something.

Pre 900: From the Middle English teye, tiegh & tegh (cord, rope; chain) from the Old English tēag, tēah, tēagh and tēgh (cord; chain), from the Proto-West Germanic taugu, from the Proto-Germanic taugō, from the Old Norse taug (rope) & tygill, from the primitive Indo-European dewk- and ultimately from the from the prehistoric deuk (to pull, to lead).  It was cognate with the Danish tov.  The Middle English tien and the Old English tīgan (to tie) were both derivative of the noun and related to the Old Norse teygja (to draw, stretch out) and the Old English tēon (to pull).  Tie is a noun & verb, tying is a noun & verb, tied is a verb & adjective; the noun plural is ties.

The figurative sense dates from the 1550s and the adoption in the US to describe railway sleepers is from 1857.  The meaning "equality between competitors" was first noticed in the 1670s although the meaning “to finish equal to a competitor” seems not to have been formalized until the late 1880s.  The tie-breaker (a mechanism used to force a tied match to a win) was first mentioned in 1938 and is most familiar from tennis when it was first widely used in the early 1960s.  In mist forms of sport, the “tie” is interchangeable with “draw “ except in the four-innings cricket in which, apparently uniquely, four results are possible, win, lose, draw and the (rare) tie.  The sense of a “cravat’; necktie” (usually a simple one knotted in front) dates from 1761.  The idea of the bow tie (a necktie tied in the form of a bow or a knot with two loops) was familiar by 1887 although the earlier use in the sense “a ribbon or other fabric tied in a bow-knot) was in use in 1874.

In idiomatic use, to “tie the knot” means “to form a union” (usually marriage) dates from 1707.  To “Tie one on” (get drunk) was first recorded in 1944)" is recorded from 1944.  The phrase “old school tie” has been in use since 1938 and refers literally to the neckties worn by former students of a certain English public (private) schools and is used as an allusion to the way the class system is maintained.  The “tie-in” (a specific connection) was first documented in 1934 and was said to be from a verbal phrase noted since 1793.  The verb “hog-tie” was literally the most efficient way of securing a body (by binding the hands and feet by crossing and tying them) and was first documented (it’s unclear how long the technique had been in use) in 1887.  The verb tie-dye is associated with hippies and their spiritual descendants but the technique was first patented in 1902.  In telecommunications, a "tie-line" is a dedicated line between two extensions.  The origin was in the physical wire which once ran point-to-point ("tying" the two together), the classic example the cables run by the military in the trenches of World War I (1914-1918).  The term is still used to refer to dedicated private services but most are now part of distributed networks and implemented with a combination of physical switching and software.

The RSVP - What to wear

White Tie Dress Code.

White tie, also called full evening dress or a dress suit, is now the most formal evening dress code in western culture.  For men, it consists of a black tailcoat worn over a white starched shirt, Marcella waistcoat and a white bow tie worn around a detachable collar.  High-waisted black trousers and patent leather pumps complete the ensemble; decorations need not be worn unless specified, top hats and canes the only permitted accessories.   White scarves were once frequently seen but seem now frowned upon.  For women, it’s a full-length gown.  Optional is jewelry, a tiara, a small bag and evening gloves though with accessories, fashion critics urge restraint.

Although now the most elaborate western dress code, white tie is derived from the eighteenth century movement towards a less elaborate aesthetic of style and by the 1840s was de rigueur for the small fragment of the population who moved “in society circles”.  The two great events of the twentieth century, the world wars, rent social fissures which rendered white tie extinct for all but a handful of ceremonial and state occasions such as balls at some of the old universities and royal households.  The white tie belongs mostly to the lost, pre-1914 world although still required for the annual Nobel Prize ceremony.

Black Tie Dress Code.

Transcending class distinctions, black tie is a dress code for evening events and social functions.  It emerged and evolved during the late nineteenth century, was essentially codified by the 1920s and, for men, little changed since.  For men, the elements are a white dress shirt with black bow tie, an evening waistcoat or cummerbund, a dinner jacket in black or midnight blue and polished black shoes.  This setup is known in the US as a tuxedo and in France as cravate noire.  Black tie permits variations, lighter colored jackets, dating from hot climates of the Raj, are now not unusual but variations need still to be on the theme.

By contrast with the essentially static men’s code, women's dress for black tie has been subject to trends, both in fashion and social mores.  Traditionally it was evening shoes and ankle or lower-calf length (depending on the hour) sleeveless evening gown, often set-off by a wrap or stole and, almost inevitability, gloves.  In the twenty-first century, women are essentially free to construct whatever seems to suit the occasion, a gown, a cocktail dress, a LBD (little black dress), even trousers and boots; black tie for women is now post-modern and thus more concept than code.

Black tie invitation: Lindsay Lohan interprets.

Loafer

Loafer (pronounced loh-fer)

(1) A person who loafs about; a lazy idler; a lay-about.

(2) A name for a moccasin-like, laceless, slip-on shoe, worn by both men and women.

(3) In some south-western US dialects, a wolf, especially a grey or timber wolf (often in the compound form “loafer wolf).

1830: The construct was loaf + -er.  Loaf was from the From Middle English lof & laf, from the Old English hlāf (bread, loaf of bread), from the Proto-West Germanic hlaib, from the Proto-Germanic hlaibaz (bread, loaf), of uncertain origin but which may be related to the Old English hlifian (to stand out prominently, tower up). It was cognate with the Scots laif (loaf), the German Laib (loaf), the Swedish lev (loaf), the Russian хлеб (xleb) (bread, loaf) and the Polish chleb (bread).  It was used to mean (1) a block of bread after baking, (2) any solid block of food, such as meat or sugar, (3) a solid block of soap, from which standard bar (or cake) of soap is cut or (4) in cellular automata, a particular still life configuration with seven living cells.  The origin of “use your loaf” meaning “think about it” in Cockney rhyming slang was as a shortened form of “loaf of bread” (ie “use your head”).  The –er suffix was from the Middle English –er & -ere, from the Old English -ere, from the Proto-Germanic -ārijaz, thought most likely to have been borrowed from the Latin –ārius where, as a suffix, it was used to form adjectives from nouns or numerals.  In English, the –er suffix, when added to a verb, created an agent noun: the person or thing that doing the action indicated by the root verb.   The use in English was reinforced by the synonymous but unrelated Old French –or & -eor (the Anglo-Norman variant -our), from the Latin -ātor & -tor, from the primitive Indo-European -tōr.  When appended to a noun, it created the noun denoting an occupation or describing the person whose occupation is the noun.  Loafer & loafing are nouns & verbs, loafed, loafering & loafered are verbs and loaferish is an adjective; the noun plural is loafers.

The use to describe “a lazy idler” was first documented in 1830 as an Americanism which may have been short for landloafer (vagabond), similar (though not necessarily related) to the obsolete nineteenth century German Landläufer (vagabond) or the Dutch landloper.  Etymologists suggest landloafer may have been a partial translation of a circa 1995 loan-translation of the German Landläufer as “land loper” (and may be compared with the dialectal German loofen (to run) and the English landlouper) but this has little support and most regard a more likely connection being the Middle English love, loove, loffinge & looffinge (a remnant, the rest, that which remains or lingers), from Old English lāf (remainder, residue, what is left), which was akin to Scots lave (the rest, remainder), the Old English lǣfan (to let remain, leave behind).  One amusing coincidence was that in Old English hlaf-aeta (household servant) translated literally as “loaf-eater” (ie, one who eats the bread of his master, suggesting the Anglo-Saxons might still have felt the etymological sense of their lord & master as the “loaf-guard”.  The expression "one mustn't despair because one slice has been cut from the loaf" describes a pragmatic reaction to learning one's unmarried daughter has been de-flowered and is said to be of Yiddish origin but no source has ever been cited.  In modern idomatic use, the derived phrases "a slice off a cut loaf is never missed" and "you never miss a slice from a cut loaf" refer to having enjoyed sexual intercourse with someone who is not a virgin, the idea being that once the end of a loaf (the crust) has been removed, it's not immediately obvious how many slices have been cut. 

The loafer is a style, a slip-on shoe which is essentially a slipper designed as an all-weather shoe for outdoor use.  They’re available in a wide range of styles from many manufacturers and this image is just a few of the dozens recently offered by Gucci.  In the old Soviet Union (the USSR; 1922-1991), there were usually two (when available): one for men and one for women, both (sometimes) available in black or brown.

The verb loaf was first documented in 1835 in US English, apparently a back-formation from the earlier loafer and loafed & loafing soon emerged.  The noun in the sense of “an act of loafing” was in use by 1855.  What constitutes loafing is very much something subjective; a student underachieving in Latin might be thought a loafer by a professor of classics but the “hard working, much published” don who in his whole career never lifted anything much heavier than a book would probably be dismissed as “a loafer” by the laborer digging the trench beneath his study.  A “tavern loafer” was one who spent his hours drinking in bars while a “street loafer” was a synonym for a “delinquent who hung about on street corners”.  Loafer as a description of footwear dates from 1937 and it was used of lace-less, slip-on shoes worn on less formal occasions (essentially slippers designed for outdoor use, a popular early version of which was the “penny loafer”, so named because it featured an ornamental slotted leather band across the upper where a coin was often mounted.  The use in some south-western dialects as “loafer” or “loafer wolf” to describe a grey or timber wolf is based on the American Spanish lobo (wolf), reinterpreted as or conflated with loafer (idler).

Rowan Williams (b 1950; Archbishop of Canterbury 2002-2012) admiring Benedict XVI’s (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) red loafers, Lambeth Palace, September 2010.

When in 2013 announced he was resigning the papacy, there was much discussion of what might be the doctrinal or political implications but a few fashionistas also bid farewell to the best-dressed pontiff for probably a century and the one Esquire magazine had named “accessorizer of the year”.  In recent memory, the world had become accustomed to the white-robed John Paul II (1920–2005; pope 1978-2005) who would don colorful garments for ceremonial occasions but never wore them with great élan and eschewed the use of the more elaborate, perhaps influenced by Paul VI (1897-1978; pope 1963-1978) whose reign was marked by a gradual sartorial simplification and he was the last pope to wear the triple tiara which had since the early Middle Ages been a symbol of papal authority; briefly it sat on his head on the day of his coronation before, in an “act of humility”, it was placed on the alter where, symbolically, it has since remained.

The pope and the archbishop discuss the practicalities of cobbling.

Benedict’s pontificate however was eight stylish years, the immaculately tailored white caped cassock (the simar) his core piece of such monochromatic simplicity that it drew attention to the many adornments and accessories he used which included billowing scarlet satin chasubles trimmed with crimson velvet and delicate gold piping and others woven in emerald-green watered silk with a pattern of golden stars.  Much admired also was the mozzetta, a waist-length cape, and the camauro, a red velvet cap with a white fur border that around the world people compared with the usual dress of Santa Claus, X (then known as twitter) quickly fleshing out the history of the Coca-Cola Corporation’s role in creating the “uniform” although there was some exaggeration, the Santa-suit and hat familiar by at least the 1870s although Coca-Cola’s use in advertizing did seem to drive out all colors except red.  On popes however, the red velvet and white fur trim had been around for centuries though it fell from fashion after the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II; 1962-1965) and was thus a novelty when Benedict revived the style.

The pope farewells the archbishop.

Not all (including some cardinals) appreciated the papal bling but what attracted most attention were his bright red loafers, a style of shoe which popes have been depicted wearing since Roman times and the Holy See was forced to issue a statement denying they were hand-crafted by the high-end Italian fashion house Prada.  In their press release, the Vatican’s Press Office reminded the world the red symbolizes martyrdom and the Passion of Christ, the shoes there to signify the pope following in the footsteps of Christ.  Rather than a fashion house, the papal loafers were the work of two Italian artisan cobblers: Adriano Stefanelli and Antonio Arellano and Signor Stefanelli’s connections with the Vatican began when he offered to make shoes for John Paul II after noticing his obvious discomfort during a television broadcast.  Signor Arellano had a longer link with Benedict’s feet, having been his cobbler when, as Joseph Ratzinger, he was the cardinal heading the Inquisition (now called the Dicastery for the Doctrine of the Faith (DDF)) and as soon as Benedict’s surprise elevation was announced, he went immediately to his last and made a pair of red loafers for him (he’s an Italian size 42 (a UK 8 & a US 9)).  Upon his resignation, as pope emeritus, he retired the red loafers in favor of three pairs (two burgundy, one brown) which were a gift from a Mexican cobbler: Armando Martin Dueñas.  Pope Francis (b 1936; pope since 2013) has reverted to the austere ways of Vatican II and wears black shoes.

Channeling Benedict: Lindsay Lohan in red loafers, September 2016.  Although unconfirmed, it's believed these were not a papal gift.

Macrocephalic

Macrocephalic (pronounced mak-roh-sef-a-lee)

The condition of having an abnormally large head or skull, the diagnostic criterion usually the circumference being beyond the normal range.

1851: From the Ancient Greek makrokephalos, the construct being māk ros (large, long), from the primitive Indo-European root māk- (long, thin) + the Ancient Greek κεφαλή (kephalḗ) (head).  English borrowed cephaly from the French -céphalie or the German -zephalie, from the Latin -cephalia, from the Ancient Greek kephalḗ.  The form macrocephalous (having a long head) dates from 1810.  The primitive Indo-European root māk (long, thin) forms part of emaciate, macro, macro-, macrobiotic, macron, meager & paramecium.  It’s thought to be the source of the Ancient Greek makros (long, large) & mēkos (length), the Latin macer (lean, thin), the Old Norse magr & the Old English mæger (lean, thin).  The less commonly used terms in pathology are megacephaly and megalocephaly and a related term is sub-macrocephaly.  Macrocephalic & macrocephalous are adjectives, macrocephalous and macrocephaly are nouns; the noun plural is macrocephalies

DPRK generals in their big hats, leaving the monthly hat ceremony, wearing the millinery badges they've been awarded.

There’s no evidence heads in North Korea differ, on a population basis, from the those of the rest of the human race.  Even though the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK; North Korea) has to a high degree been physically isolated from the outside population since the early 1950s, the gene pool in the population is sufficiently diverse that most in the field expect there’d be no change to aggregate outcomes in human physiology.  Indeed, those changes which have been noted (stunting etc), are thought the consequence of nutritional deficiencies rather than anything genetic.

Suleiman I (Süleyman the Magnificent, 1494-1566, Sultan of the Ottoman Empire 1520-1566) (far left), Pius XII (1876-1958; pope 1939-1958) in the papal triple tiara (triple crown) at his coronation, 1939 (centre left), depiction of Süleyman the Magnificent in his retaliatory four tier helmet (centre right) and Officer of the 4th (Royal Irish) Dragoon Guards (1826), watercolor by Richard Simkin (1850-1926) (far right).

Kim Jong-un, looking at DPRK generals in their big hats.

In military uniforms, ecclesiastical dress and fashion, big hats have been a thing for thousands of years, the earliest presumably a form of biomimicry, inspired by examples like the plumage of birds or the manes of lions.  In human society, the purpose would not have been dissimilar to that of the other animals: wishing to appear (1) larger and more threatening to deter attacks, (2) of a higher status than others or (3) more attractive to attract a mate and this procreate.  Some uses would of course have been for mere function, headwear serving as protection from the elements or impacts, modern examples including the wide-brimmed hats adopted to shade one from the sun, the Mexican sombrero emblematic of this.  In the modern era (and it's a trend noted since at least late antiquity), extravagant headwear exists for no purpose other than to attract whatever is the currency of the age, photographers at the fashion shows or clicks on the internet.  On the catwalks, some creations can hardly be described as functional or conventionally attractive so clickbait is the only explanation and whether some of that worn by figures such as Lady Gaga (b 1986) was inspired by the millinery of Süleyman the Magnificent isn't known but the thematic similarities can't be denied.  Of course, over thousands of years, there's going to be some stylistic overlap; there are only so many ways to adorn a head.

Kim Jong-un at a military briefing, conducted by DPRK generals in their big hats.

The papal triple tiara is a crown which has been worn by popes of the Roman Catholic Church since the eighth century.  Traditionally it was worn for their coronation but no pontiff has been so crowned since Saint Paul VI (1897-1978; pope 1963-1978) in 1963 and he abandoned its use after the Second Vatican Council (Vatican II, 1962-1965).  The name tiara refers to the entire headgear and it has used a three-tiered form since a third crown was added during the Avignon Papacy (1309–1378).  It's also referred to as the triregnum, triregno or Triple Crown.  In a piece of one- (or perhaps four-) upmanship, Süleyman the Magnificent commissioned from Venice a four tier helmet to show, in addition to the authority claimed by popes, he could add the symbol of his imperial power, his secular sovereignty.  Often put on display as the centrepiece of Ottoman regalia to impress visitors, there's no documentary evidence the sultan ever wore the four layer tiara, crowns not part of the tradition and, fashioned from gold and gemstones, it would anyway have been extraordinarily heavy and it may be it was worn only for brief, static, set piece ceremonies because an incautious movement could have risked neck injury.

A younger, more svelte Kim Jong-un at a military field conference, noting one general not issued with big hat.

A representation of the triregnum combined with two crossed keys of Saint Peter continues to be used as a symbol of the papacy and appears on papal documents, buildings and insignia.  Remarkably, there’s no certainty about what the three crowns symbolize.  Some modern historians link it to the threefold authority of the pope, (1) universal pastor, (2) universal ecclesiastical jurisdiction and (3) temporal power.  Others, including many biblical scholars, interpret the three tiers as meaning (1) father of princes and kings, (2) ruler of the world and (3) vicar of Christ on Earth, a theory lent credence by the words once used when popes were crowned:  Accipe tiaram tribus coronis ornatam, et scias te esse patrem principum et regum, rectorem orbis in terra vicarium Salvatoris nostri Jesu Christi, cui est honor et gloria in saecula saeculorum (Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns and know that thou art father of princes and kings, ruler of the world, vicar on earth of our Savior Jesus Christ, to whom is honor and glory for ever and ever).

Kim Jong-un out walking with DPRK generals, discussing the politics of big hair and big hats.

The preference in the DPRK armed forces for big hats is appears to be a matter of military fashion rather than physiological need and big hats are part of a military tradition which, although now restricted mostly to ceremonial use, were once functional in that they provided warmth, an impression of greater height and some degree of protection from attack.  Being made from animal fur, the hats are now controversial but, as a natural material, they have proved more durable and resistant to the weather than synthetic alternatives, factors which military authorities long cited as the reason for their retention.

Bearskin cap of the UK Foot Guards, made traditionally with the fur of Canadian bears (left) and model Lucy Clarkson (b 1982, right), fetchingly body-painted in the uniform of the Queen's Guards, in a demonstration organized by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) to draw attention to the slaughter of the bears due to the use of real bearskins in the Guard's ceremonial headdress, Westminster Bridge, London 2010.  Whether the Ministry of Defence was persuaded by PETA's arguments, Ms Clarkson's charms or some analysis which revealed the exorbitant cost of purchasing and maintaining the bearskin hats isn't clear but recently it was announced the traditional ones will be "phased out" in favor of units made from “faux” bearskin.

Kim Jong-un discussing millinery ethics with DPRK generals wearing big hats.

The tall bearskin cap, usually associated with parade ground manoeuvres around Buckingham palace, was historically the headgear of the Grenadier Guards and, remarkably, it was sometime part of battlefield dress even in the twentieth century.  It remains part of the ceremonial uniforms in many armed forces and not just those once part of the British Empire.  That up to a hundred Canadian bears are each season slaughtered "just so men could wear big hats while marching around in circles" is claimed by the activists to be of "no obvious military value but merely a tourist attraction".  While there's merit in the argument there is a legitimate military purpose in the maintenance of traditions, extending that to fur hats does seem quite abstract.         

Kim Jong-un, looking at the big hat of Jang Song-thaek shortly before he signed Jang's death warrant.

Jang Song-thaek (1946-2013) was married to Kim Kyong-hui (b 1946; believed still alive), only daughter Kim Il-sung (1912-1994; Great Leader of DPRK 1949-1994) and only sister of North Korean general secretary Kim Jong-il (1941-2011; Dear Leader of DPRK; 1994-2011). He was thus the uncle (by marriage) of Kim Jong-un (B circa 1983; Supreme Leader of DPRK since 2011).  Within the party, he had a mixed career but ups and downs within the structure were not unusual and later in the reign of the Dear Leader, he emerged as a important figure in both the political and military machines.  His position appeared to be strengthened when the Supreme Leader assumed power but, in 2013 he was accused of being a counter-revolutionary and was expelled from the party, dismissed from his many posts and was un-personed by having his photograph and mention of his name digitally erased from all official recorded.  In December that year, the DPRK state media announced his execution.

Kim Jong-un, looking through binoculars across the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) at the small hats worn by Republic of Korea (RoK; South Korea) generals.

On the basis of the official statement issued by DPRK State Media, he must have been guilty, highlights of the press release including confirmation he was “an anti-party, counter-revolutionary factional element and despicable political careerist and trickster…, a traitor to the nation for all ages who perpetrated anti-party, counter-revolutionary factional acts in a bid to overthrow the leadership of our party and state and the socialist system”.  It noted that despite receiving much trust and benevolence by the “peerlessly great men … The Great Leader, The Dear Leader and The Supreme Leader”, he behaved “worse than a dog, perpetrated thrice-cursed acts of treachery in betrayal of such profound trust and warmest paternal love”.  Of note was his subversion of interior decorating, preventing “the Taedonggang Tile Factory from erecting a mosaic…” while erecting a monument to the Great Leader, not in its deserved place in the sun but “…in a shaded corner”.  Perhaps worse of all, he “let the decadent capitalist lifestyle find its way to our society by distributing all sorts of pornographic pictures among his confidants since 2009. He led a dissolute, depraved life, squandering money wherever he went.”  In summary, the release added Jang was a “thrice-cursed traitor without an equal in the world” and that “history will eternally record and never forget the shuddering crimes committed by Jang Song Thaek, the enemy of the party, revolution and people and heinous traitor to the nation”.

DPRKesque fashion: Lindsay Lohan wearing some big hats.

Details of such matters are hard to confirm so it’s not known if the rumors of him being executed by anti-aircraft gun fire or a flame-thrower are true.  Nor is it known if whatever remained of the corpse was thrown to a pack of wild dogs but the state media release did add “…the revolutionary army will never pardon all those who disobey the order of the Supreme Commander and there will be no place for them to be buried even after their death” so the dog-food theory is at least plausible.