Lawful, Legal & Licit

Lawful (pronounced law-fuhl)

(1) Allowed or permitted by law; not contrary to law.

(2) Recognized or sanctioned by law; legitimate.

(3) Appointed or recognized by law; legally qualified.

(4) Acting or living according to the law; law-abiding.

(5) In role-playing games, a character having a lawful alignment.

Circa 1600: From Middle English laweful, the construct being law + -ful and conflated with the Middle English leful, leeful & leveful (according to law, lawful, pertaining to law).  Law dates from 1250-1300 and was from the Middle English lawe & laȝe, from the Old English lagu (law), from the Old Norse lǫg (law (literally “things laid down or fixed”)), originally the plural of lag (layer, stratum, a laying in order, measure, stroke), from the Proto-Germanic lagą (that which is laid down), from the primitive Indo-European legh (to lie).  It was cognate with the Icelandic lög (things laid down, law), the Swedish lag (law) and the Danish lov (law).  It replaced the Old English ǣ and ġesetnes and despite appearances, was unrelated to the French loi and the Spanish ley, both derived from leǵ- (to gather).  The –ful suffix was from the Middle English –ful & -full, from the Old English –ful & -full (full of), from the Proto-Germanic fullō & fullijô (“filling”) and fullaz (-ful), from fullaz (full).  It was cognate with the Scots -fu, the Saterland Frisian -ful (-ful), the West Frisian -fol (-ful), the Dutch -vol (-ful), the German -voll (-ful), the Swedish -full (-ful) and the Icelandic –fullur & -fyllur (-ful).  It was used to form adjectives from nouns, with the sense of tending to fullness or “as much as can be held by what is denoted by the noun”.

The synonyms include legal & licit, the words with related meanings including authorized, constitutional, justifiable, legal, permissible, proper, rightful, statutory, valid, bona fide, canonical, card-carrying, commanded, condign, decreed, due, enacted, enforced, enjoined, established.  The spelling lawfull is long obsolete and the rarely used plural remains lawfuls.  Lawful is an adjective, lawfully an adverb and lawfulness a noun.

Legal (pronounced lee-guhl)

(1) Permitted by law; lawful.

(2) Of or relating to law; connected with the law or its administration.

(3) Appointed, established, or authorized by law; deriving authority from law.

(4) In technical use, recognized, enforceable, or having a remedy at (common) law rather than in equity

(5) Of, relating to, or characteristic of the profession of law or of lawyers:

(6) In theology, of or relating to the Mosaic Law (the Torah or the first five books of the Hebrew Bible, once thought to have be written exclusively by Moses).

(7) In theology, of or relating to the doctrine that salvation is gained by good works rather than through free grace.

(8) A person who acts in a legal manner or with legal authority.

(9) A foreigner who has entered or resides in a country lawfully (usually in the plural as “legals”, the more common form being the undocumented “illegals”)

(10) A person whose status is protected by law.

(11) A fish or game animal, within specified size or weight limitations, that the law allows to be caught and kept during an appropriate season.

(12) In the slang of counter espionage, a foreigner who conducts espionage against a host country while working there in a legitimate capacity, often in the diplomatic service.

(13) In the plural legals, authorized investments that may be made by fiduciaries, as savings banks or trustees; also used in various commercial contexts to refer to documents related to contractual or other legal matters.

(14) In motorsport, vehicles which have passed scrutineering; parts and components certified as homologated and approved for use in competition.

(14) In informal use, a person above the age of consent or the permitted drinking age.

(15) In stationery, of paper or document layouts, a cut of sheet-paper measuring 8½ in × 14 in (215.9 mm × 355.6 mm). known also as “legal-size”; use is restricted almost wholly to North American markets.

1490–1500: From the fourteenth century French légal, from the Latin lēgālis (of or pertaining to the law), the construct being lēg- (stem of lēx (an enactment; a precept, regulation, principle, rule; formal proposition for a law, motion, bill; a contract, arrangement, contrivance)) + -ālis (the adjective suffix) and a doublet of loyal and leal.  The origin is curiously misty.  It’s probably related to legere (to gather) from the primitive Indo-European root leg- (to collect, gather) with derivatives meaning "to speak (ie to “pick out words”).  The noun was historically supposed to have come from the verb reflecting the idea of "a collection of rules," but some etymologists suggest the reverse.  The mystery is that the verb legare and its compounds all have a meaning which involves a “task or assignment” an can thus be interpreted as derivatives of lēx (“law” in its simple sense).  The Proto-Italic root noun leg- (law) can be interpreted as a “collection” but whether the root noun existed already in the primitive Indo-European has never been established.  The sense of "permitted by law" was known as early as the 1640s.  Legal is a noun and adjective; legally is an adverb.

Legal proved a productive word in the generation of English forms.  Legal tender (money which the creditor is bound by law to accept) is from 1740 and the first legal holiday (one established by statute or proclamation, during which government business was usually suspended, was established in 1867).  The adjective medico-legal (of or relating to law and medicine) dates from 1824 and the noun legalese (the language of legal documents), the construct being legal + the language name suffix (–ese) was attested from 1914; technically it can be a mere technical descriptor but tends to be applied disparagingly in critiques of the turgid and prolix.

The modern sounding verb legalize (and the related legalized & legalizing) was actually used as long ago as 1716.  The paralegal (often as para-legal) (one trained in subsidiary legal matters) was first used in 1972 to describe a kind of legal assistant with skills beyond the merely clerical and use has expanded, thus far apparently little-affected by office automation although there is speculation developments in AI (artificial intelligence) might impact on them as much as trained lawyers.

The adjective legalistic is from 1843 and was originally used to describe "one who advocates strict adherence to the law", a use applied especially in theology after the 1640s although as a formal term, legalism in theology was first attested only in 1838.  Legalistic, depending on context, can carry neutral or negative connotations and was sometimes part of the language of criticism used in the 1980s in the squabbles between the by the “legal sociologists” and the “black-letter” or “substantive” lawyers.  The noun legality (law-abiding behavior or character) is from the mid-fifteenth century, from the Medieval Latin legalitatem (nominative legalitas), from the Latin lēgālis (of or pertaining to the law)

Licit (pronounced lis-it)

(1) Legal; lawful; legitimate; permissible; not forbidden by formal or informal rules; explicitly established or constituted by law.

(2) A less common word for lawful

1475–1485: From the Latin licitus (permitted; lawful; allowable), past participle of licēre (to be permitted; it is permitted (impersonal verb)) and replacing the earlier Middle French licite.  In early nineteenth century England, many disapproved of licit, claiming, entirely unjustly. It was an Americanism.  Licit is an adjective, licitly an adverb and licitness a noun

Lawful, Legal & Licit

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

The terms lawful and legal have long been used interchangeably to convey the sense of “something against the law” and in many cases that’s either correct or, when erroneous, of little matter because the context of use makes the real meaning obvious.

Lawful deals with the substance of law, legal with the form.  For a contract to be legally correct it must conform to certain criteria such as there being an offer & acceptance, certainty of terms and consideration (some exchange of value).  If a contract complies with the requirements demanded in law, it is a “legal contract”.  However, a “legal contract” could be executed in which one party arranges with another to murder some third party.  Murder being against the law, the contract, while remaining “legal” is void for illegality because the matter contracted is unlawful and the fact that the legal contract exists might be relevant evidence in a prosecution.  Similar conditions attach to the legal state of possession.  To be legally in possession of something demands certain conditions are fulfilled and if one buys a car and drives off then one is in legal and lawful possession of the vehicle.  If however one steels a car and drives off, generally one will be in legal but unlawful possession.  A lawful act thus is one authorized or not forbidden by law. A legal act is that which is in accordance with the technical conditions defined in law.

Licit is interesting because it’s so rare yet illicit is co common.  The adjective illicit is from the fourteenth century Old French illicite (unlawful, forbidden), from the Latin illicitus (not allowed, unlawful, illegal), from an assimilated form, the construct being i(n)- (not, opposite of) + licitus (lawful), past participle of licere (to be allowed). 

Illicit can thus be used as a direct synonym of unlawful but because use has evolved with an overlap to mean also things quite lawful yet disapproved of.  Barnaby Joyce’s (b 1967; deputy prime-minister of Australia thrice variously since 2016) adulterous affair was illicit but certainly neither illegal nor unlawful yet, in certain jurisdictions at certain times, it would have been legal but certainly both unlawful & illicit.  Licit & Illicit also retain a place in canon law, notably in the abstract definitions in the Roman Catholic Church where it’s considered with the “valid and invalid”.  A “valid” act is one which produces the desired effect whereas an act which does not produce the desired effect is labelled "invalid".  A “licit” act is one which legitimately has been performed whereas an illicit act is one not legitimately performed.  Thus it’s possible for some acts to be illicit yet still be valid.  The rules canon lawyers have developed to administer matter of procedure and ritual are long and intricate (although with the benefit of codification) and they contain a formula to determine validity or invalidity.  The concept of valida sed illicit (valid but illicit) is a distinction similar to that between “legal” & “lawful” possession in secular law.  

Weed: Often still labeled as illicit even in places where, legally, use is no longer unlawful.

Reflecting perhaps the long tradition of using the word when discussing matters of outrage or immorality, illicit seems often to be the preferred adjective applied to illegal narcotics regarded as less harmful, such as cannabis.  In December 2023, the Netherlands government announced it would be undertaking a trial (in selected locations) in which the production, sale and consumption of cannabis would (under certain circumstances) become lawful.  Contrary to the widespread belief among the generations of who happily have travelled to Amsterdam so spend time in coffee shops (many without having a coffee), smoking weed has not over the decades been lawful, merely "tolerated" by law enforcement agencies.  Although not initially enthusiastic about being required, in effect, to ignore the law they were employed to enforce, the police soon become very supportive, noting dealing with stoners was a rarely violent and much more pleasant experience than handling those affected by alcohol.      

Mizzle & Drizzle

Mizzle (pronounced miz-uhl)

(1) To rain in fine drops; a form of precipitation between mist and drizzle.

(2) In (almost exclusively British) slang, to decamp; to disappear or suddenly leave (now rare).

(3) In (almost exclusively British) slang, to induce a muddled or confused state of mind.

1475–1485: From the late Middle English missellen & missill (to drizzle), cognate with the Dutch dialectal form mizzelen (to drizzle), the Low German miseln & mussel (to mizzle), the Dutch miezelen (to drizzle, rain gently) and akin to the Middle Dutch misel (mist, dew).  The slang use in both senses dates from the mid-eighteenth century.  It’s of obscure origin, possibly a frequentative related to the base of mist or related to the Middle Low German mes (urine), the Middle Dutch mes & mis (urine), both from the Old Saxon mehs (urine), from the Proto-Germanic mihstuz, mihstaz & mihsk- (urine), from mīganą (to urinate), from the primitive Indo-European meigh & omeigh (to urinate).  There’s also some relationship with the English micturate (to urinate), the Old Frisian mese (urine), the Low German miegen (to urinate), the Dutch mijgen (to urinate) and the Danish mige (to urinate).  Mizzle and mizzler are nouns, the verbs (used with or without object) are mizzled & mizzling; mizzly the adjective.

Now often though a portmanteau word (the construct being mi(st) + (dr)izzle) mizzle & drizzle have wholly separate etymologies and, historically, mizzle was a synonym of dizzle.  As verbs the difference between drizzle and mizzle is that drizzle is (ambitransitive) “to rain lightly; to shed slowly in minute drops or particles” while mizzle is “to rain in very fine drops”.  As nouns the difference is that drizzle is light rain while mizzle is misty rain or drizzle, thus the sense in the etymologically wrong portmanteau turns out to be English as it is used: mizzle is precipitation somewhere between mist and drizzle.  What mizzle and drizzle have in common is that unlike fog droplets, both fall to the ground.

The strange use in (mostly) British slang to mean “abscond, scram, flee” is an example of a dialectical form which spread although use has declined to the point where it’s now rare.  The other slang sense (to muddle or confuse) was probably an imperfect echoic, a misreading of past tense/participle of “misled”.  Charles Dickens (1812–1870) liked words which, given how profligate he was in their use, was good.  In Bleak House (1852-1852), a cautionary tale of the woes to be had were one's matters to end up in the list of the Court of Chancery, mentioned to the Lord High Chancellor are Messrs Chizzle, Mizzle, Drizzle and otherwise.

Drizzle (pronounced driz-uhl)

(1) To rain gently and steadily in fine drops; to sprinkle (In meteorology, defined as precipitation consisting of numerous minute droplets of water less than 0.02 inch (0.5 millimeter) in diameter).

(2) To let something fall in fine drops or particles; to sprinkle.

(3) To pour in a fine stream.

1535–1545: From the Old English drēosan (to fall), of obscure origin but may be a formation from dryseling or a dissimilated variant of the Middle English drysning (a falling of dew), from the Old English drysnan (to extinguish), akin to the Old English drēosan (to fall; to decline (cognate to the Modern English droze & drwose)) and cognate with the Old Saxon driosan, the Gothic driusan, the dialectal Swedish drösla and the Norwegian drjōsa.  Drizzle & drizzler are nouns, the verbs (used with or without object) is drizzled & drizzling, drizzly the adjective.  A honey dipper is a tool with a grooved head, used to collect viscous liquids such as honey or syrup so it may be drizzled over toast, cereal or other food.

Honey being drizzled on almond-butter toast.

Shakespeare in act 3, scene 5 of Romeo and Juliet (1597) used the word in the sense familiar in the sixteenth century

When the sun sets the air doth drizzle dew,

But for the sunset of my brother’s son

It rains downright.

How now? A conduit, girl? What, still in tears,

Rain stopped play during the last session on the first day of the pink-ball cricket match in Hobart on 14 January 2021.  The fifth and final test of the 2020-2021 series and the first Ashes test played in Hobart, the curious decision by the umpires deprived the crowd the chance to watch the last thirty-odd overs.  The stoppage was prompted by a brief, light drizzle which nobody except the umpires seem to think could be called rain and the sight of the solitary umbrella opened in the ground being that held by the umpire attracted a few derisive comments.  There was a sudden spike in traffic to the Bureau of Meteorology’s website as people looked at the rain radar seeking some indication of when play might resume but the radar showed almost no cloud and virtually no indication of rain in a 128 km (60 mile) radius.  The next day, the bureau reported the rain gauges at weather stations in the Hobart CBD and airport registered a total of 0.0 mm of rain on that evening.

The laws of cricket actually don’t prohibit the game being played when it’s raining, provided it is not dangerous or unreasonable, Law 3.8 including the clause:  If conditions during a rain stoppage improve and the rain is reduced to drizzle, the umpires must consider if they would have suspended play in the first place under similar conditions. If both on-field umpires agree that the current drizzle would not have caused a stoppage, then play shall resume immediately.

It was certainly unusual and many test matches have resumed in drizzle or mizzle heavier than what was seen that Friday night.  The consensus was the umpires might have been concerned about the effect of a wet outfield on the pink ball, a construction relatively new to cricket which attempts to emulate the behavior of the traditional red ball while remaining easily visible under the artificial lighting used for day-night matches.  It seems the pink ball is more affected by moisture than the traditional red or the white ball used in limited-overs competitions, tending to swell.

Mizzle & Drizzle protection: Lindsay Lohan in New York City, August 2013.

Spat

Spat (pronounced spat)

(1) A petty quarrel; a dispute.

(2) A light blow; a slap or smack (now rare).

(3) A classic footwear accessory for outdoor wear (technically an ankle-length gaiter), covering the instep and ankle, designed to protect these areas from mud & stones etc which might be splattered (almost always in the plural).

(4) In automotive design, a piece of bodywork on a car's fender encapsulating the aperture of the wheel-arch, covering the upper portion of the wheel & tyre (almost always on the rear) and used variously to reduce drag or as a aesthetic choice.  In the US, these tend to be called "fender skirts".

(5) In aviation, on aircraft with fixed undercarriages, a partial enclosure covering the upper portion of the wheel & tyre, designed to reduce drag.

(6) In zoology, a larval oyster or similar bivalve mollusc, applied particularly when one settles to the sea bottom and starts to develop a shell; young oysters collectively, especially seed oysters.

1350-1400: From the Middle English spat (argument, minor scuffle), from the Anglo-Norman spat, of unknown origin but presumed related either to (1) being the simple past tense & past participle of spit or (2) something vaguely imitative of the sound of a dispute in progress.  In use, a spat implies a dispute which is minor and brief.  That doesn’t preclude violence being involved but the word does tend to be applied to matters with few serious consequences but a spat can of course escalate to something severe at which point it ceases to be a spat and becomes a brawl, a fight, a murder, a massacre or whatever the circumstances suggest is appropriate.  Otherwise, a spat is synonymous with words like bickering, brouhaha, disagreement, discord, falling-out, feud, squabble, tiff or argument.

As a descriptor of the short gaiter covering the ankle (which except in technical and commercial use is used only in the plural), use dates from 1779 as an invention of American English and a shortening of the trade-terms spatterdash (or splatterguard) (long gaiter to keep trousers or stockings from being spattered with mud), the construct being spatter + dash (or guard), the former the same idea as the noun dashboard which was a timber construction attached to the front of horse-drawn carriages to protect the passengers from mud or stones thrown up when the beasts were at a dash.  In cars, the use of the term dashboard persisted although the device both shifted rearward (aligned with the cowl (scuttle) & windscreen) and changed in function.  In aircraft where the link to horse-drawn transport didn’t exist, the preferred equivalent term became “instrument panel”.

Stanley Melbourne Bruce (front row, second from left) in spats, official photograph of his first cabinet, Melbourne, 1923.

Spats date from a time when walking in cities could be a messy business, paved surfaces far from universal.  As asphalt and concrete became commonplace in the twentieth century, spats fell from frequent use though there were those who clung to them as a fashion accessory.  Stanley Melbourne Bruce (1883–1967; prime minister of Australia 1923-1929) liked spats and wore them as late as the 1940s but historians of fashion note it's said nothing was more influential in their demise than George V (1865–1936; King of the United Kingdom 1910-1936) eschewing them after 1926.

However, despite losing the imprimatur of the House of Windsor (ex Saxe-Coburg and Gotha), when Disney in 1947 created Scrooge McDuck (the world's richest duck, noted for diving into his vast "money bin" to swim among the cash), spats must still have been associated with wealth and uncle Scrooge has almost always been depicted sporting a pair.

Spats (left) and gaiters (centre & right).  Historically, gaiters were either medium (mid-calf) or long (reaching to the knee) while the shorter variations, extending from ankle to instep, were known as spats.  In the fashion industry, the terms gaiters and spats are often used interchangeably and except among the equestrian and other horse-oriented crowds, they now exist only as a fashion item, improvements in the built-environment meaning the need for them as functional devices has diminished.  They days, spats tend to be seen only in places like the Royal Enclosure at Ascot or smart weddings (used as a wealth or class signifier) although variations are still part of some ceremonial full-dress military uniforms.  Technically, a spat probably can be called a “short” or “ankle-length” gaiter but it’s wise to use “spat” because gaiters are understood as extending higher towards the knee.

Lindsay Lohan in SCRAM bracelet (left), the SCRAM (centre) and Chanel's response from their Spring 2007 collection (right).

Spats for the twenty-first century: Before Lindsay Lohan began her “descent into respectability” (a quote from the equally admirable Mandy Rice-Davies (1944-2004) of MRDA fame), Lindsay Lohan inadvertently became of the internet’s early influencers when she for a time wore a court-ordered ankle monitor (often called “bracelets” which etymologically is dubious but rarely has English been noted for its purity).  At the time, many subject to such orders often concealed them under clothing but Ms Lohan made her SCRAM (Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor) a fashion statement, something that compelled the paparazzi to adjust their focal length to ensure her ankle of interest appeared in shots.  The industry responded with its usual alacrity and “ankle monitor” purses were soon being strutted down the catwalks.

Chanel's boot-mounted ankle purse in matching quilted black leather.

In one of several examples of this instance of Lohanic influence on design, in their Spring 2007 collection, Chanel included a range of ankle bags.  Functional to the extent of affording the wearing a hands-free experience and storage for perhaps a lipstick, gloss and credit card (and the modern young spinster should seldom need more), the range was said quickly to "sell-out" although the concept hasn't been seen in subsequent collections so analysts of such things should make of that what they will.  Chanel offered the same idea in a boot, a design actually borrowed from the military although they tended to be more commodious and, being often used by aircrew, easily accessible while in a seated position, the sealable flap on the outer calf, close to the knee.

On the Jaguar 2.4 & 3.4 (1955-1959, top row; later retrospectively named Mark 1), full-sized spats were standard equipment when the standard wheels were fitted but some owners used the cut-down versions (available in at least two designs) fitted when the optional wire wheels were chosen.  For use in competition, almost all drivers removed the spats.  The Mark 2 (bottom row;1959-1969) was never fitted with the full-size units but many used slimmer version available from both the factory and third-party suppliers; again, in competition, spats in any shape were usually discarded.  On the big Jaguars, spats (which had already been scalloped) disappeared after production of the Mark IX ended in 1961.    

On cars, it wasn’t until the 1930s that spats (which some English manufacturers called "aprons" and in the US they came to be called “fender-skirts” though the original slang was “pants”) began to appear as the interest in streamlining and aerodynamic efficiency grew and it was in this era they became also a styling fad which, for better and worse, would last half a century.  They’d first been seen in the 1920s as aerodynamic enhancements on speed record vehicles and some avant-garde designers experimented with enveloping bodywork but it was only late in the decade that the original style of separate mudguards (later called cycle-fenders) gave way to more integrated coachwork where the wheel-arch was an identifiable feature in the modern sense.  Another issue was that the early tyres were prone to wear and damage and needed frequently to be changed, hence the advantage of making access to the wheels un-restricted.  In the 1930s, as streamlining evolved as both a means to reduce drag (thus increasing performance and reducing fuel consumption) and as a styling device, the latter doubtlessly influenced by the former.  On road cars, spats tended to be used only at the rear because of the need to provide sufficient clearance for the front wheels to turn although there were manufacturers (Delahaye, Nash and others) which extended use to the front and while this necessitated compromise (notably the turning circle and cooling of the brakes), there were some memorable art-deco creations.

The aerodynamic advantages were certainly real, attested by the tests conducted during the 1930s by Mercedes-Benz and Auto-Union, both factories using spats front and rear on their land-speed record vehicles, extending the use to road cars although later Mercedes-Benz would admit the 10% improvement claimed for the 1937 540K Autobahn-kurier (highway cruiser) was just “a calculation” and it’s suspected even this was more guesswork than math.  Later, Jaguar’s evaluation of the ideal configuration to use when testing the 1949 XK120 on Belgium roads revealed the rear spats added about 3-4 mph to top speed though they precluded the use of the lighter wire wheels and did increase the tendency of the brakes to overheat in severe use so, like many things in engineering, it was a trade-off.

1958, 1959 & 1960 Chevrolet Impalas.  Not actually wildly popular when new, accessory spats now often appear on restored cars as a “period accessory”.

In the post-war years, concerns with style rather than specific aerodynamic outcomes probably prevailed.  In the US especially, the design motifs borrowed from aircraft and missiles (where aerodynamic efficiency was important and verified in wind tunnels) were liberally applied to automobiles but in some cases, although they actually increased drag, they anyway appeared on production cars because they lent the desired look.  Because they added to the cost of production, spats tended often to be used on the more expensive ranges, this association encouraging after-market accessory makers to produce them, often for models where they’d never been available as a factory fitting or option.  Although now usually regarded as naff (at least), there’s still some demand because they are fitted sometimes (often in conjunction with that other acquired taste period-accessory, the "Continental" spare-tyre kit) by those restoring cars from the era although the photographic record does suggest that when the vehicles were new, such things were vanishingly rare.

Spats vanished from cars made in the UK and Europe except among manufacturers (such as Citroën) which made a fetish of conspicuous aerodynamics and in the US, where they endured, increasingly they appeared in cut-down form, exposing most of the wheel with only the upper part of the tyre concealed.  By the mid 1990s spats appeared only on some of the larger US cars (those by then also down-sized from their mid-seventies peak) and none survived into the new century, the swansong the 1996 Cadillac DeVille.  However, the new age of efficiency did see a resurgence of interest with spats (some actually integrated into the bodywork rather than being detachable) used on some electric and hybrid vehicles where every possible way of optimizing the use of energy is deployed.

1 1937 Mercedes-Benz 540K Autobahn-kurier
2 1937 Mercedes-Benz W125 Rekordwagen
3 1937 Auto-Union Type C Stromlinie
4 1939 Mercedes-Benz W154 Rekordwagen
5 1939 Mercedes-Benz T80 Rekordwagen
6 1940 Mercedes-Benz 770K Cabriolet B
9 1970 Porsche 917 LH
8 1988 Jaguar XJR9

1939 Mercedes-Benz T80, Mercedes-Benz Museum, Stuttgart, Germany.

Designed by Ferdinand Porsche (1875–1951), the Mercedes-Benz T80 was built between 1937-1939 to lay siege to the world land speed record (LSR) but with the outbreak of World War II (1939-1945), the attempt was never made.  It was a single-purpose machine designed to achieve maximum terminal velocity and for that reason, the T80 was an exercise in pure functionalism; not one nut or bolt was used other than for the purpose of ensuring its top speed would be as high as possible.  Cognizant of the existing record, the initial goal was 550 km/h (342 mph) but as others in the late 1930s raised the mark, so were Professor Porsche’s ambitions and when the final specification was set in 1939, the target was 650 km/h (404 mph) (not 750 km/h (466 mph) as is sometimes quoted).  Configured with six wheels, the T80 would have used a supercharged, fuel-injected, 44.5 litre (2716 cubic inch) Daimler-Benz DB 603 inverted V12 aero-engine, an enlarged version of the DB 601 which powered a number of Messerschmitts and other warplanes.  Intended for use in bombers, the T80’s engine was actually the third DB 603 prototype and was initially tuned to generate some 2237 kW (3000 horsepower) on an exotic cocktail of methyl alcohol (63%), benzene (16%), ethanol (12%), acetone (4.4%), nitrobenzene (2.2%), avgas (2%), and ether (0.4%) with MW (methanol-water) injection for charge cooling and as an anti-detonant.  This was more than twice the output of the Hurricanes, Spitfires and Messerschmitts which in 1940 fought the Battle of Britain but Porsche’s calculations suggested 2,574 kW (3,500 hp) would be needed to touch the 650 km/h target and the DB 603 would have been re-tuned to achieve this as an “emergency war rating”.

1939 Mercedes-Benz T80, Mercedes-Benz Museum, Stuttgart, Germany.

Some 8 metres (26 feet) in length with two of the three axles providing drive, the weight when fuelled and crewed was some 2600 kg (2.9 short tons) while the measured coefficient of drag (CD) was reported at 0.18, an impressive figure for such a thing as late as the 1990s and it would have been lower still, had wind-tunnel testing not revealed the need to add two small “winglets” to provide sufficient down-force to ensure the shape didn’t at speed assume the characteristics of an aeroplane and "try to take off" and notably, when in 1964 the Bluebird-Proteus CN7 set the flying mile record at 403.1 mph (648.7 km/h), it was the first LSR machine to include “ground effect” technology to reduce lift.  Fundamentally, the aerodynamics are thought sound although there would be the usual vulnerability to cross-winds, the cause of several deaths in such attempts and the surface conditions of what was a temporarily closed public road would also have been critical; whether the tyre technology of the time would have been adequate under such conditions will never be known.  Had the T80 been run on the long, flat straights of the salt flats in the US (Bonneville) or Australia (Lake Eyre), the prospects of success would have been better but for propaganda purposes (always a theme for the Nazis) the LSR runs had to be on German soil.

Bluebird-Proteus CN7, Lake Eyre, Australia, 1964.

The plan was for the attempt to be staged in January 1940 during what the regime dubbed RekordWoche (Record Week) on a section of the Berlin-Halle-Leipzig autobahn (now part of the A9), closed for the occasion.  The legend is that Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) himself choose the nickname Schwarzer Vogel (Black Bird) but that too may have been propaganda.  The design was all done in the era of slide rules and although some computer work has been applied to emulating the event, there’s no consensus on whether the T80 really would have hit 650 km/h and set the world land speed record (LSR).  As it was, it wasn't until November 1965 that the 650 km/h mark was reached by a machine powered by four fuel injected Chrysler 426 cubic inch (7.0 litre) hemi V8s.  On the Bonneville Salt Flats, it recorded a two-way average of 658.526 km/h (409.277 mph).

Ground effects: 1970 Chaparral 2J (the "sucker car"). 

The most extraordinary vindication of the concept was probably the 1970 Chaparral 2J, built for the Canadian-American Challenge Cup (the Can-Am, a series for unlimited displacement sports cars under the FIA’s minimalist Group 7 rules).  Although using a similar frame and power-plant (the all aluminum, 427 cubic inch (7.0 litre) Chevrolet V8 (ZL1)) as most of its competition, it differed in that the bodywork was rather more rectilinear, the transmission was semi-automatic and, most intriguingly, the use of two small auxiliary engines (Rockwell JLO 247 cm³ two-stroke, two-cylinder units which usually powered snowmobiles).  Unlike the auxiliary engines used in modern hybrids which provide additional or alternative power, what the Rockwells did was drive two fans (borrowed from the M-109 Howitzer, the US Army’s self-propelled 155 mm (6 inch) cannon) which pumped air from underneath at 9650 cfm (cubic feet per minute) (273 m3 per minute), literally sucking the 2J to the road, the technique enhanced by a Lexan (a thermoplastic polymer) skirt which partially sealed the gap between the shell and the road.  The rear spats (integrated into the body-shell) were part of the system, offering not only their usual contribution to reduced drag but increasing the extent of the suction generated by the extractor fans.  The 2J was immediately faster than the competition but the suction system proved fragile although, as a proof of concept it worked and it was clear that only development was needed to debug things.  Unfortunately, innovation and high speeds have always appalled the FIA (the Fédération Internationale de l'Automobile which has for decades been international sport’s dopiest regulatory body) and they banned the 2J.  Really, the FIA should give up on motorsport and offer their services to competitive crochet where they can focus on things like pins and needles not being too sharp.

1949 Delahaye 175-S Saoutchik roadster (left), 1967 Cadillac Fleetwood Sixty Special  (centre) & 2016 Rolls-Royce Vision Next 100 (electric) (right).

Fashions change and spats in the post-war years became unfashionable except in the odd market segment which appealed to an older demographic and even there, as the years were by, they were cut-away, revealing more of the wheel & tyre but they never entirely went away and designers with big computers now don’t even need even bigger wind tunnels to optimize airflow and spats have been displayed which are mounted vertically, some even responding to dynamic need by shifting location or direction.

Flown first in 1938 and named after the Spartan admiral Lysander (circa 467-395 BC), the Westland Lysander was a British army co-operation and communications aircraft used extensively during the Second World War (1939-1945).  Although it couldn’t match the extraordinary STOL (short Take-Off & Landing) performance of the its German contemporary the Fieseler Fi 156 Storch, it was capable, robust and had a good enough short-field capability to perform valuable service throughout the conflict.  Like many aircraft with a fixed undercarriage, partially enveloping spats were fitted to reduce drag but those on the Lysander had the unusual feature of being fitted with their own removable spats (similar to those used on automobiles).  Once these were dismounted, assemblies could be fitted to mount either Browning machine guns or stub wings which could carry light bombs or supply canisters.  The arrangement was popular with ground crew because the accessibility made servicing easy and pilots appreciated the low placement because the change in weight distribution had little adverse effect on handling characteristics.

Duumvirate

Duumvirate (pronounced doo-uhm-ver-it)

(1) A coalition of two persons holding the same office at the head of government.

(2) The office or government of two such persons.

1656: From the Latin duumvirātus (one of two officers or magistrates jointly exercising the same public function), the construct being duumviri (the office held in the Roman Republic by two joint magistrates and plural of duumvir) + -atus.  Duumviri was from the Old Latin, the construct being duum (of two) + vir (man) and a duumvir was one who served in the office of a duumvirate.  The Latin suffix -ātus was from the Proto-Italic -ātos, from the primitive Indo-European -ehtos.  It’s regarded as a "pseudo-participle" and perhaps related to –tus although though similar formations in other Indo-European languages indicate it was distinct from it already in early Indo-European times.  It was cognate with the Proto-Slavic –atъ and the Proto-Germanic -ōdaz (the English form being -ed (having).  The feminine form was –āta, the neuter –ātum and it was used to form adjectives from nouns indicating the possession of a thing or a quality.  In Ancient Greece, a similar polity was a diarchy, the construct in the Ancient Greek being δι- (di-) (double) + -αρχία, (-arkhía) (ruled).

In political science, a diarchy (Greek) or duumvirate (Latin) is a form of government characterized by co-rule, two people ruling a polity together, either lawfully or by collusion & force and such leaders can be styled as co-rulers.  Inventions in language have occurred such as biarchy and tandemocracy though none became common use, unlike co-regency, used still to describe a monarchy temporarily controlled by two.  Under the Raj, diarchy was often used to refer to the system of “shared rule”, a colonial fix of which the British were the cynical masters.  Native Indian representation in government had long been a feature of British India and it was formalized in the Indian Councils Act (1892), the powers further devolved in the Government of India Acts (1919 (implementing the Montague-Chelmsford reforms) & 1935).

Under the Raj, provincial governments included British members (executive councilors) and Indian members (ministers from the legislative council).  So that administrative authority could be conferred on Indian members, the diarchy was introduced and with it the concept of transferred and reserved subjects.  The transferred subjects included law and order, revenue & justice; the reserved subjects included education & public health etc so in this way, so typical of British colonial rule, Indians gained control over large parts of the government which dealt directly with the people while authority over critical matters (money, defense, foreign affairs, internal order) remained under the purview of British executive councilors.  Diarchy operated in the Indian provinces between 1921- 1937 before being replaced by provincial autonomy in 1937.

However, those uses on the sub-continent reflect the post-classical practice to use both duumvirate and diarchy to describe just about any arrangement where the highest office or institution in a state (and often other places too) is not in the hands of a single individual.  A duumvirate, as originally defined, referred to the offices of the various duumviri (of two) under the Roman Republic and while there were later triumvirates (of three) and beyond, it was usually the Roman practice to use duumvirate in the sense of “rule by more than one”.

A classical duumvirate is obviously still possible but while instances of genuine co-rule are rare, the shared model has proved a useful tactic in states where the lines of geographic definition don’t align with tribal, religious or ethnic identity.  There, presidencies can be shared, sometimes on a sequential basis (which is another expression of co-rule) but also simultaneously, an illustrative example of which is the office of the Presidency of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a three-member body which collectively serves as head of state of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  Each member elected from a defined region (the Bosniak and Croat members from a joint constituency in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Serb from the Republika Srpska.  The office of the presidency exists as the collective head with one member elected as chairperson which is rotational, changing every eight months; the incumbent thus primus inter pares (first among equals).

Even when an arrangement of two is described as a duumvirate, and may contain some elements of co-rule, it need not of necessity be a system of co-equal rule.  Gough Whitlam (1916-2014; Prime Minister of Australia 1972-1975), always anxious to flaunt his learning before his adoring acolytes, eagerly dug up duumvirate to describe the two man ministry which, for a fortnight, constituted the first Whitlam government but it was merely a device of convenience, the deputy prime-minister (Lance Barnard, 1919-1997, Deputy Prime Minister of Australia 1972-1974) a mere cipher for Whitlam’s initiatives.  The so-called duumvirate actually turned out to be the best days of the Whitlam government; from there it was mostly downhill.  It was a thing made possible only because the results in some seats wouldn’t be known immediately after the 1972 election and thus the names available to be included in the ministry wouldn’t be known for two weeks.  This gave Whitlam the excuse he needed; the Australian Labor Party (ALP) having been in opposition for twenty-three years, he wasn’t prepared to wait.  Thus, Whitlam had the governor-general swear him in as prime minister and Barnard as deputy leader, the two men sharing the twenty-seven portfolios during the fortnight before a full cabinet could be determined.  The “duumvirate” proved a model of administrative efficiency, not something much said of the subsequent cabinet (1972-1975) which, the ALP then in an “egalitarian” phase, insisted should contain all members of the ministry, not the traditional dozen-odd with the others serving in an “outer ministry”.  It was an unwieldy apparatus and the ALP has not subsequently repeated the error; there have been plenty of other mistakes just not that one.

Australia’s tradition of coalition governments has also tempted many to use hyphenated forms to describe administrations although the practice has never been consistent.  The short-lived Reid-McLean ministry (1904-1905) was an example but the moniker was both something of a necessity to distinguish it from the previous Reid ministry in New South Wales (NSW) and a tribute to what sounds one of the more improbable political coalitions: Free traders & protectionists.  Tellingly, it didn’t last long.  There was also the more enduring Bruce-Page government (1923-1929) although it’s only subsequent Country (National) Party leaders who have been inclined to adopt the style.

The constitutional arrangements of a diarchic kingdom are (as in the classic game) reflected in Diarchic Chess, played on the Gustavian board, invented by Gustav III of Sweden (1746–1792; King of Sweden 1771-1792).  The enemy witch has the friendly pieces and pawns under her spell, rendering them unable to attack an enemy king (the bewitchment does not affect the friendly witch and kings).  The only way the spell can be broken is for the friendly witch to sacrifice herself so, when either witch disappears, the spell is broken for all pieces on the board. The witch moves like a rook but can also make one step on the diagonal; princesses move like a bishop and can make one step on the orthogonal; the kings cannot castle; the pawn promotes to queen and other pieces, but not to witch.  The goal remains checkmate.

The kings being immune from attack (except by the witch), they are powerful attacking pieces and it’s not hard to believe the rules of the game were written by a king on his throne.  However, the game would suit not all kings because to take advantage of the rules, a king must be both (1) aggressive early in the game and (2) maintain a position cognizant the enemy witch may sacrifice herself, making the king suddenly vulnerable to the enemy pieces.  King Gustav never indicated if he'd enjoyed some experience of self-sacrificing witches or if the rule was just an imaginative flourish but it is a vital aspect of Diarchic Chess, in one move perhaps transforming the contest.  In practice, it’s a radically different game.