Esquire

Esquire (pronounced es-kwahyuhr or e-skwahyuhr)

(1) An unofficial title of respect (usually with no precise definition or significance and sometimes self-conferred), placed (often in its abbreviated form), after a man's surname in formal written address (used with initial capital letter).

(2) In the US, an informal honorific used by lawyers (male & female).

(3) In the UK, a term applied to a commoner considered to have gained the social position of a gentleman (historically a man belonging to the order of English gentry ranking immediately below a knight).

(4) An alternative form for squire when that was used to mean “a youth who in the hopes of becoming a knight attends upon a knight” (obsolete).

(5) To raise to the rank of esquire; in medieval use the attendant and shield bearer of a knight (and subsequently sometimes knighted themselves), one practical significance of the title being it conferred the right to bear arms.

(6) In heraldry, a bearing similar in form to a gyron, but extending across the field so that the point touches the opposite edge of the escutcheon.

(7) To address as Esquire.

(8) A gentleman who attends or escorts a lady in public; a male escort (rare and long archaic except when applied humorously or euphemistically (as a sanitized alternative to “tame cat”, “rent boy” et al).

1425–1475: From the late Middle English esquier, from the Middle French escuyer & escuier (shield bearer; an attendant young man in training to be a knight), from the Old French esquiere, esquierre & esquarre (square), from the Latin scūtārius (“shield bearer”, “guardsman”, the construct being scūt(um) (shield) + -ārius (-ary).  The suffix -aris was a form of -ālis with dissimilation of -l- to -r- after roots containing an l (the alternative forms were -ālis, -ēlis, -īlis & -ūlis); it was used to form adjectives, usually from noun, indicating a relationship or a "pertaining to").  The form reached modern French as écuyer (shield-bearer, armor-bearer, squire of a knight, esquire, equerry, rider, horseman).  Rather (as some might reasonably suppose) than esquire being formed as e- + - squire, the word squire was a product of apheresis (the suppression or complete loss of a letter or sound (syllable) from the beginning of a word) from the earlier French & English.  Esquire is a noun & verb and esquired & esquiring are verbs; the noun plural is esquires.

Lindsay Lohan in Esquire (Middle East).

Esquire began as a feudal rank ranking below a knight, the origin of the word in the role of a squire who attended upon a knight as a kind of combination of personal assistant, apprentice and servant.  For those not from established families, it was one of the few available paths to knighthood.  As the historic role of knights receded in the sixteenth century, the use broadened to encompass (1) the educated or professional class (especially those practicing in law) & (2) members of the gentry and their sons not otherwise entitled to some title.  In the US, esquire became attached to lawyers (both male & female), probably as an identifier to align in some way with the “Dr” granted to physicians because by convention, those with vocational doctorates (Doctor of Jurisprudence (J.D., JD, D.Jur., or DJur) don’t use the “Dr” like those with higher or research doctorates (Ph.D, D.Sc, DCL et al).  Reflecting the shared origin with lawyers as “men of letters” (the lawyers more anxious to acknowledge their past than the surgeons are to recall they came out of the barber shops) writers and journalists also long liked to adopt an “esq” though much derision means it’s now less common.

Admiral Sir Reginald Aylmer Ranfurly Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax KCB.  Lest it be thought multi-element names are a thing exclusive to the British Isles, they exist elsewhere, an example of which was the German Count Graf Philipp-Constantin Eduard Siegmund Clemens Tassilo Tobias von Berckheim (1924-1984).

In England, for historic reasons, the history and current usage is complicated.  The title is granted to the eldest sons of knights, the elder sons of the younger sons of peers and their eldest sons in succession, officers of the king's courts and of the royal household, barristers, justices of the peace while in commission & sheriffs and is available to gentlemen who have held commissions in the military.  It thus enjoys a wide vista but even now a definitive listing of the correct use has never been codified and some view it as pretentious even when technically correct.  Littered in the history of honors are also curiosities like the right of a Knight of the Most Honourable Order of the Bath to appoint three esquires at the time of his installation, something which seems of ancient origin but was formalized in 1815 when the old order of knighthood (KB) was re-organized into three classes: Knight Grand Cross (GCB), Knight Commander (KCB) & Companion (CB).  One task a KCB’s helpful esquire might have performed was to assist translators in formal ceremonies.  In 1939, when Admiral Sir Reginald Aylmer Ranfurly Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax, KCB, DSO, JP, DL (1880-1967) was introduced at a ceremony in Moscow, diplomatic protocol required his honors be read out in full, the Russian translator rendering his KCB as рыцарь умывальник (rytsar' umyval'nik) (Knight of the Wash Tub).  The Russians couldn’t help but laugh and, fortunately for the then strained diplomatic relations between the Kremlin and Downing Street, the admiral shared their amusement.  In legal documents and uses deemed "formal", a capitalized "Esquire" usually is written in full after the names of those using the designation.  It’s otherwise abbreviated to Esq or (the now less common) Esqr.  Those conventions should in theory be observed also when adding an address to an envelope and American lawyers settled on a post-nominal Esq. (almost always with the needless period (full-stop)) in their e-mail signature blocks.

Lindsay Lohan attending the Esquire and DKNY fashion show, London, June 2014.

Squire was a truncation of esquire, the process known in linguistics as apheresis (the suppression or complete loss of a letter or sound (syllable) from the beginning of a word).  It too was thus from the Old French escuier, from the Late Latin scutarius (shield bearer) which is Old English was spelled scutifer.  The equivalent in the Classical Latin was armiger (arms bearer).  The early meanings of squire were essentially the same as those attached to esquire but it evolved in England by the mid seventeenth century also to describe (with some variations) “a substantial landholder in a town or village who is a landlord to most or many inhabitants”.  The less formal term “lord of the manor” was essentially analogous and given the nature of the class system and economic relations in England, the role of squire often overlapped with offices such as that or mayor or magistrate and that (linguistic) tradition continues in contemporary American use, “squire” the title used for justices of the peace or similar local dignitaries.  Although the attractive slang forms squirearchy & squiress seem not to have survived, in UK working class slang, “squire” is used in a respectful and friendly way between men, a democratic re-purposing of the earlier sense of “country gentlemen”, dating from 1828.  The meaning “a ruler; a carpenter's square; a measure” was derived from the Middle French esquierre (rule, carpenter's square) or the Old French esquire (another form of esquarre (square)) and is long obsolete.

Ford Country Squires: 1951 (with genuine wood, left), 1959 (centre) and 1971 (right).

Long replaced in public favor by even more commodious SUVs, vans and people-movers, mass-market station wagons were a post-war phenomenon which was an element in a number of inter-related economic and sociological trends including (1) rising prosperity which made the "two car family" a standard which tricked down from the middle-class, (2) a shift of the population from urban to more remote suburban locations and (3) the development of suburban shopping malls (including supermarkets) with vast car parks.  The style remain popular until the late 1980s though a few lingered on for another decade.  Consistently the best-selling of the full-sized breed were the big Fords, the top-of-the-range being the Country Squire which was available between 1950-1991.  Its most distinctive feature was the “woodgrain” Appliqué which adorned the sides and for most of the Country Squire’s life it was rendered in DI-NOC, (Diurno Nocturna, from the Spanish, literally “daytime-nighttime” and translated for marketing purposes as “beautiful day & night”), an embossed vinyl or polyolefin material with a pressure-sensitive adhesive backing produced since the 1930s and perfected by Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing (3M).  The early cars (1950-1951) actually used genuine timber in a nod to earlier coach-building traditions which were an economic imperative, station wagons (until the suburban developments of the post-war years made them popular) never produced in sufficient volume to make viable tooling factories for production in metal.  Much cheaper, the plastic DI-NOC replaced the timber in 1952 (although the perimeter moldings remained timber until 1953, after which 3M produced a fibreglass emulation) and other manufacturers copied the idea which eventually (and unfortunately) spread beyond station wagons.  It was very much a thing which suited US tastes, Ford’s attempt to tempt UK & Australian buyers brief and unsuccessful.  They never bothered to trouble the Germans or the French.

One-off 1967 Ford Country Squire with Q-Code 428 V8 and four-speed manual transmission.

In the US, Ford for decades churned out the Country Squires by the thousand but there was the odd oddity.  Like most big station wagons, almost all  Country Squires were built for function and although the engines might sometimes be large (in the 1970s they were available with 429 & 460 cubic inch (7.0 & 7.5 litre) V8s), they were configured to carry or tow heavy loads and were thus sold almost always with heavy-duty automatic transmissions.  In 1967 however, there was a one-off Country Squire built with the combination of a 428 cubic inch (7.0 litre) V8 in Q-Code configuration (the “Q” a marker of the engine's specification which included "Cobra Jet" style cylinder heads with larger valves, a four barrel carburetor (typically a 735 CFM (cubic foot per minute) Holley, a higher compression ration and exhaust manifolds with reduced impedance).  The Q-Code 428 was the most powerful offered that year in full-sized Fords (except for 12 Ford XLs with the 427 V8 derived from a unit built for competition).  Such vehicles are usually unicorns, often discussed and sometimes even created as latter-day “tributes” and are thus rarely "real" but the 1967 Country Squire is a genuine one-off and as a type may be unique not only among Fords but also the entire full-size ecosystem of the era.  The tale is sometimes still repeated that Plymouth built a special order Belvedere station wagon at the request of Bill Harrah (1911–1978) of Harrah's Hotel and Casinos in Nevada (now part of Caesars Entertainment) with the 426 cubic inch (7.0 litre) HEMI V8 for the rapid transport of cash across the desert but that is a myth and the coda (that Harrah decided instead to build his own) is just as unverified.  So the 1967 Country Squire is a curious period piece and a collectors’ item; despite its dilapidated appearance, its "one-of-one" status (much-prized in collector circles) meant that in 2020 it sold at auction in the US for almost US$50,000.  When exhibited at the South Carolina’s Hilton Head Island Concours d’Elegance in November 2024, an entry on the car’s placard claimed production of the special order required the personal approval of Lee Iacocca (1924–2019), then vice-president of Ford’s car and truck group.  The one-off wagon received a Palmetto Award in the “Barn Finds” class in which patina is a virtue.

1962 Pontiac Catalina convertible with Riveria "Esquire" Series 300 hard top.

Introduced in 1956 for the 1957 model year, the Ford Fairlane 500 Skyliner revived (at a larger scale), the idea of a retractable, full-sized hard-top, last seen in (limited) series production in Europe during the 1930.  Available for three seasons (the name bulked-up to Fairlane 500 Galaxie Skyliner for its last year), in advertising the feature was called the Hide-Away Hardtop and in operation the all-steel apparatus was a mesmerizing piece of early space-age mechanical choreography, controlled by three drive motors, ten solenoids and many relays & circuit breakers, all connected with a reputed 610 feet (186 m) of electrical cabling.  Despite the intricacy, it proved a reliable system.  After that, no manufacturer attempted a removable hard top on the scale of the big Skyliner but at least one aftermarket supplier thought there might be demand for something large and detachable.  Riveria Inc, based in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, between 1963-1964 offered the "Esquire" hard-top for the big (then called full or standard-size) General Motors (GM) convertibles.  Such was GM’s production-line standardization, the entire range of models, spread over five divisions and three years could be covered by just three variations of hard top.  Made from fibreglass with an external texture which emulated leather, weight was a reasonable 80 lb (30 kg) but the sheer size rendered them unmanageable for many and not all had storage for such a bulky item, the growth of the American automobile meaning garages accommodative but a few years earlier were now cramped.    

1962 Chevrolet Impala SS (Super Sport) convertible with Riveria "Esquire" Series 100 hard top.

Riveria offered their basic (100 series) hardtop in black or white, a more elaborately textured model (200 series) finished in gold or silver while the top of the range (300 series) used the same finishes but with simulated “landau” irons.  No modification was required to the car, the roof attaching to the standard convertible clamps, the soft- top remaining retracted.  Prices started at US$295 and the company seems to have attempted to interest GM dealers in offering the hard tops as a dealer-fitter accessory but corporate interest must have been as muted as buyer response, Riveria ceasing operations in 1964.

Basketweave

Basketweave (pronounced bah-skit-weev (U) or bas-kit-weev (non-U))

(1) A plain woven pattern with two or more groups of warp and weft threads are interlaced to render a checkerboard appearance resembling that of a woven basket; historically applied especially (in garment & fabric production) to wool & linen items and (in furniture, flooring etc), fibres such as cane, bamboo etc.

(2) Any constructed item assembled in this pattern.

(4) In the natural environment, any structure (animal, vegetable or mineral) in this pattern.

(5) In automotive use, a stylized wheel, constructed usually in an alloy predominately of aluminum and designed loosely in emulation of the older spooked (wire) wheels.   

1920–1925: The construct was basket + weave (and used variously as basketweave, basket-weave & basket weave depending on industry, product, material etc).  Basket was from the thirteenth century Middle English basket (vessel made of thin strips of wood, or other flexible materials, interwoven in a great variety of forms, and used for many purposes), from the Anglo-Norman bascat, of obscure origin.  Bascat has attracted much interest from etymologists but despite generations of research, its source has remained elusive.  One theory is it’s from the Late Latin bascauda (kettle, table-vessel), from the Proto-Brythonic (in Breton baskodenn), from the Proto-Celtic baskis (bundle, load), from the primitive Indo-European bhask- (bundle) and presumably related to the Latin fascis (bundle, faggot, package, load) and a doublet of fasces.  In ancient Rome, the bundle was a material symbol of a Roman magistrate's full civil and military power, known as imperium and it was adopted as the symbol of National Fascist Party in Italy; it’s thus the source of the term “fascism”.  Not all are convinced, the authoritative Oxford English Dictionary (OED) noting there is no evidence of such a word in Celtic unless later words in Irish and Welsh (sometimes counted as borrowings from English) are original.  However, if the theory is accepted, the implication is the original meaning was something like “wicker basket”, wicker one of the oldest known methods of construction.  The word was first used to mean “a goal in the game of basketball” in 1892, the use extended to “a score in basketball” by 1898.  In the 1980s, as operating systems evolved, programmers would have had the choice of “basket” or “bucket” to describe the concept of a “place where files are stored or reference prior to processing” and they choose the latter, thus creating the “download bucket”, “handler bucket” etc.  On what basis the choice was made isn’t known but it may be that baskets, being often woven, are prone to leak while non-porous buckets are not.  Programmers hate leaks.

A classic basketweave pattern.

Weave was from the Middle English weven (to weave), from the Old English wefan (to weave), from the Proto-West Germanic weban, from the Proto-Germanic webaną, from the primitive Indo-European webh (to weave, braid).  The sense of weave as “to wander around; not travel in a straight line” was also in the early fourteenth century absorbed by the Middle English weven and was probably from the Old Norse veifa (move around, wave), related to the Latin vibrare, from vibrō (to vibrate, to rattle, to twang; to deliver or deal (a blow)), from the  Proto-Italic wibrāō, denominative of wibros, from the primitive Indo-European weyp- (to oscillate, swing) or weyb-.  The root-final consonant has never been clear and reflexes of both are found across Indo-European languages.  The verb sense of “something woven” dates from the 1580s while the meaning “method or pattern of weaving” was from 1888.  The notion of “to move from one place to another” has been traced to the twelfth century and was presumably derived from the movements involved in the act of weaving and while it’s uncertain quite how the meaning evolved, it’s documented from early fourteenth century as conveying “move to and fro” and in the 1590s as “move side to side”,  In pugilism it would have been a natural technique from the moment the first punch was thrown but formally it entered the language of boxing (as “duck & weave”) in 1918, often as weaved or weaving.  By analogy, the phrase “duck & weave” came to be used of politicians attempting to avoid answering questions.  In the military, weave was also used to describe evasive maneuvers undertaken on land or in the air but not at sea, the Admiralty preferring zig-zag, as the pattern would appear on charts.  The fencing method known as teenage is a kind of basketweave.  Basketweave is a noun & adjective and (in irregular use) a verb and basketweaver is a noun; the noun plural is basketweaves.

Attentive basketweavers: Students in a lecture  (B.A. (Peace Studies)) at Whitworth University, Spokane, Washington, USA.

A basketweaver is of course “one who weaves baskets” but in idiomatic use, basketweaver is used also to mean “one whose skills have been rendered redundant by automation or other changes in technology”.  The term “underwater basketweaving” is used of university course thought useless (in the sense of not being directly applicable to anything vocational) and is applied especially to the “studies” genre (gender studies, peace studies, women’s studies et al).  Beyond education, it can be used of anything thought “lame, pointless, useless, worthless, a waste of time etc”.  Basketweaving is also a descriptor of a long and interlinked narrative of lies, distinguished from an ad-hoc lie in that in a basketweave of lies, there are dependencies between the untruths and, done with sufficient care, each can act to reinforce another, enabling an entire persona to be constructed.  It’s the most elaborate version of a “basket of lies” and can work but, like a woven basket, if one strand becomes lose and separates from the structure, under stress, the entire basket can unravel, spilling asunder the contents.

Official portrait of Representative the honorable George Santos.

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

Lindsay Lohan in Miami, clothes by Amiparism, Interview Magazine, December 2022.  The car is a Jaguar XJS convertible with the factory-fitted basketweave (or lattice) wheels.

Few are laughing however and Mr Santos is under investigation by both Brazilian and US authorities.  However, despite many calls (from Republicans and Democrats alike) that he resign from Congress, Mr Santos has refused and the Republican house leadership, working with an unexpectedly paper-thin majority, has shown no enthusiasm to pursue the matter.  What Mr Santos has done is expose the limitations of the basketweaving technique.  While a carefully built construct can work, it relies on no loose threads being exposed and while this can be manageable for those not public figures, for anyone exposed to investigation, in the twenty-first century such deceptions are probably close to impossible to achieve and Mr Santos was probably lured into excessive self-confidence because, in relative anonymity, he had for years managed to deceive, fooling many including the Republican Party and perhaps even himself.  In retrospect, he might one day ponder how he ever thought he’s get away with it.  One thing that remains unclear is how he should be addressed.  Members of the House of Representatives typically are addressed as "the honorable" in formal use but this is merely a courtesy title and is not a requirement.  The use is left to individual members and as far as is known, Mr Santos has not yet indicated whether he wishes people to address him as “the honorable George Santos”.

Borrani wire wheels on 1972 Ferrari 365 GTB/4 (Daytona) coupé (far left), ROH “Hotwire” wheels on 1974 Holden Torana SL/R 5000 (with after-market flares emulating those used on the L34 (1974) and A9X models (1977-1978)), centre left), “Basketweave” wheels on 1990 Jaguar XJS coupé (centre right) & 1986 Holden Piazza (far right).

Basketweave wheels remain popular (although some feelings may be strained when it comes time to clean the things) but visually, the use of “basketweave” to describe the construction was sometimes a bit of a stretch and often “lattice” was is preferred which seems architecturally closer.  Were the motif of the classic basketweave to be applied to a wheel it would look something those used on the Holden Piazza, briefly (1986-1989) available on the Australian market.  Because it’s not easy successfully to integrate something inherently square or rectangular into a small, circular object, such designs never caught on although variations were tried.  The “basketweave” wheels which did endure owed little to the classic basketweave patters although there are identifiable hints in the construction so people understand the connection and rather than thought of as a continuation of the design elements drawn from the traditions of weaving, the wheels really established a fork of the meaning.  As a design, they were an evolution of the “hotwire” style popular in the 1970s when was a deliberate attempt to echo the style of the classic spoked (wire) wheels which, being lighter and offering better brake cooling properties than steel disk wheels, were for decades the wheel of choice for high performance vehicles.  That changed in the 1960s as speeds & vehicle weight rose and tyres became wider and stickier, a combination of factors which meant wire wheels were no longer strong enough to endure the rising stresses.  Additionally, the wire wheel was labor intensive to make in an era when that beginning to matter, wheels cast from an alloy predominately of aluminum were cheaper to produce as well as stronger.

1988 Porsche 911 (930) Turbo Cabriolet (left) and Hans Stuck (1900–1978) in Auto Union Type C (6.0 litre V16), Shelsley Walsh hill climb, Worcestershire, England, June 1936 (right).

The Porsche is fitted with three-piece, 15 inch BBS RS basketweave wheels with satin lips: The rear units are 11 inches in width (running 345/35 tyres) while at the front the wheels are 9 inches wide (mounted with 225/50 tyres).  Although advances in electronics since 1988 have made the behaviour of the most powerful rear-engined Porsches easier to tame, in 1988, the best way to ameliorate the inherent idiosyncrasies of the configuration was to fit wider wheels, increasing the rubber’s contact area with the road.  The idea was not new, both the straight-eight Mercedes-Benz W125 and the V16 Type C Auto-Union Grand Prix cars of 1937 using twin rear tyres when run in hill climbs.  The Porsche 930 (1975-1989) quickly gained the nickname “widow maker” but the Auto Union, which combined 520 horsepower and a notable rearward weight bias with tyres narrower than are these days used on delivery vans, deserved the moniker more.  Fitting the second set of rear wheels did help but the handling characteristics could never be made wholly benign and it wasn’t until the late 1950s that mid-engined Grand Prix cars became manageable and notably, they had about half the power of the German machines of the 1930s.

Thumbnail

Thumbnail (pronounced thuhm-neyl)

(1) The (finger)nail of the thumb.

(2) As thumbnail sketch, anything quite small or brief, as a small drawing or short essay, a précis or summary.

(3) In printing, a small, rough dummy.

(4) In journalism, a half-column portrait in a newspaper (also called the porkchop).

(5) Something quite small or brief; concise.

(6) Concisely to describe (something or someone).

(7) In computing (on the graphical user interfaces (GUI) of operating systems), a small image used as a preview of the original which loads upon clicking the thumbnail.  Unlike an icon, which is (Usually) a representative symbol, a thumbnail is a smaller copy of the original larger image (although technically, a thumbnail can be constructed which reports a smaller file size than the original).

1595–1605: The construct was thumb + nail.  Thumb was from the Middle English thombe, thoume & thoumbe, from the Old English þūma, from the Proto-West Germanic þūmō, from the Proto-Germanic þūmô from Proto-Indo-European tūm- (to grow).  The spellings thum, thume & thumbe were still in use in the late seventeenth century but are all long obsolete.  Nail was from the Middle English nail & nayl, from the Old English næġl, from the Proto-West Germanic nagl, from the Proto-Germanic naglaz, from the primitive Indo-European hnogh- (nail).  The earliest known instance of the phrase “thumbnail sketch” in the sense of "drawing or sketch of a small size" (though usually not literally the size of a thumbnail) dates from 1852, the verb usage adopted in the 1930s.  Thumbnail is a noun & adjective; thumbnailer is a noun, thumbnailed is a verb & adjective and thumbnailing is a verb; the noun plural is thumbnails.

Fifteen images of Lindsay Lohan’s thumbnails.

The term "thumbnail sketch" began with architects, designers and artists who quickly would create small, conceptual sketches of their ideas so they could be tested without the time or effort required to render at full-scale.  While it’s possible some may literally have been the size of a actual thumbnail, most would have been larger and the term was chosen just as something indicative of “smallness”.  The practice or architects and others creating small sketches was of course ancient and may even have been associated with prehistoric cave painting but it was in the mid-nineteenth century the term “thumbnail sketch” came to be used.  The use of the thumbnail sketch (including the companion “pencil test” in graphic design) is now universal in industries where images need to be created and the techniques learned proved useful in the 1980s when icons became widely used in the on were used on graphical user interfaces (GUI) of operating systems.  In text, in the 1950s, the thumbnail sketch came to be applied to any a précis or summary and has always been prevalent in publishing and criticism (as brief plot summaries, reviews etc) and as short-form biographical data, especially when assembled in a list of those so profiled.

Thumbnail sketches of recent Australian administrations

Kevin Rudd (right) & Cardinal Pell (left), 2010.

Kevin Rudd (b 1957; Australian prime-minister 2007-2010 & 2013): There have been few Australian prime-ministers who entered office with such goodwill as that enjoyed by Kevin Rudd and none who have so quickly squandered it all.  Mr Rudd’s win in 2007 was a testament to his personal popularity and a reasonable achievement given that, by any standards, on paper, the previous government shouldn’t have lost office, there being no crisis, an outstandingly good fiscal position, low unemployment and no serious scandals.  Essentially, the electorate seemed bored by a decade-odd of dull competence and Mr Rudd was new, presentable and in his nerdy, weird way, appealing and thus the country voted.  His honeymoon wasn’t noticeably short but he had the misfortune to be prime-minister when the global financial crisis (GFC) hit and while for many reasons, Australia was relatively unaffected, the stresses it induced revealed tensions in his government and his background as a public servant wasn’t useful whenever decisiveness was required; long used to providing advice to others who made decisions, his government stuttered under the weight of committees and boards of enquiry.  A contrast with this intellectual timidity was his reputation for arrogance and abrasiveness when dealing with his colleagues and this didn’t help him maintain their support; he lost an internal party vote in 2010 and the Australian Labor Party (ALP) choose another leader.  In 2023, it was announced Dr Rudd would be Australia’s next ambassador to the United States and there are rumors he’s negotiated a secret, back-channel deal whereby he reports directly to the prime-minister and not, as is usual, to the foreign minister.

Julia Gillard (left) & Kevin Rudd (right), 2013.

Julia Gillard (b 1961; Australian prime minister 2010-2013):  Julia Gillard is thus far the only woman to become Australia’s prime-minister and some of the treatment she endured in office might make a few women wonder if reaching the top of the greasy pole is worth the price to be paid.  That said, it’s still a good gig and many will try.  Metaphorically knifing her predecessor in the back meant her premiership didn’t start in the happiest of circumstances and it didn’t help and he made little attempt to conceal his thoughts on recent events.  The poison spread through the party and the healthy majority gained in 2007 was lost in the 2010 election, the Gillard government surviving only with the support of three independents, all of whom extracted their own price.  Bizarrely as it might seem to some, Rudd returned for a while as foreign minister, an unhappy experience for many.  It couldn’t last and it didn’t, Mr Rudd resigning and unsuccessfully contesting the leadership.  Still despite it all, on paper, the Gillard government managed things successfully in a tight parliament and although the actual achievements were slight, they probably exceed expectations.  Ms Gillard is probably best remembered for her “misogyny” speech which deservedly went viral because it was highly entertaining although it did reveal someone sensitive to criticism and one wonders if she’d ever reviewed some of things said about male politicians over the centuries.  It’s clearly a more sensitive age but nor did she appear to see any inconsistencies between the words spat at her and her use of “poodle” and “mincing” (with all that they imply) when decrying one of her male opponents.  As it was, Mr Rudd got his revenge, toppling her in 2013 although his victory may have seemed pyrrhic (his second coming lasting three months-odd), he was probably content.

Tony Abbott (left) & Vladimir Putin (right) with koalas, 2014.

Tony Abbott (b 1957; Australian prime-minister 2013-2015): One probably disappointed that Ms Gillard was in 2013 replaced was Mr Abbott because all the indications were the Liberal-National coalition’s victory in the 2013 election would have produced a landslide-scale majority rather than the merely comfortable one achieved against Mr Rudd.  Still, the majority was sufficient for Mr Abbott easily to purse his objectives and he immediately set to reducing expenditure, cutting taxes, stopping irregular immigration (his famous “stop the boats” campaign lent three word slogans (3WS) a new popularity which endures to this day) and attacking trade unions.  He was a very different character from Mr Rudd but similarly inept in managing public perception of his government.  In his thoughts, there was a certainly of purpose Mr Rudd lacked but the core problem was that his world view seemed to have been set in stone by the Jesuits who taught him while he was training for the priesthood and while much had changed since the fourteenth century, he’d not moved on.  Thus created were the tensions which marked his government which was split between technocratic realists, right-wing fanatics, a genuinely liberal wing and his coalition partners, the National Party which was devoted to the horse trading necessary to extract the money required to pork-barrel their electorates.  Presiding over this lot as a leader with thoughts were more akin to the old Democratic Labor Party (DLP) than anything from the third millennium, it’s probably remarkable Mr Abbott lasted as long as he did.  The 2014 budget which made big cuts was blamed by many for his demise and while it’s true it was badly designed and poorly explained, it does appear Mr Abbott, while one of the most formidably focused and effective oppositions leaders, simply lacked the skills needed to be prime-minister.  In 2013, he lost an internal party ballot to the man he’d replaced in a similar vote in 2009.

Malcolm Turnbull (right) & Peter Dutton (left) roadside billboard (2016).

Malcolm Turnbull (b 1954; Australian prime minister 2015-2018):  There was an unusually great public optimism which immediately surrounded Mr Turnbull’s accession to office.  So encouraging were the polls that he probably should have gone to an early election as Anthony Eden (1897-1977; UK prime-minister 1955-1957) did in 1955, thus avoiding the grinding down of energy inevitable in “fag-end” administrations.  Instead he delayed, making the same mistake as Gordon Brown (b 1951; UK prime-minister 2007-2010) and John Gorton (1911-2002; Australian prime-minister 1968-1971) and the early support evaporated, the government surviving the 2016 election with only a slender majority.  Being from the liberal wing, Mr Turnbull really wasn’t a good fit as leader of the modern Liberal Party he’d been accepted only because he was rich, a virtue which in the party tends to mean other vices are overlooked (if not forgiven).  This allowed him sometimes to prevail but ultimately it was the corrosive and related issues of energy and an emissions reduction policy which proved his nemesis.  Even if the public didn’t fully understand the intricacies of the issue (and the especially complex mechanisms in the associated legislation), increasingly they were being persuaded by the science underlying climate change and just wanted the matter resolved.  The factions in the Liberal-National coalition had for more than a decade been torn asunder by climate policy and the divisions poisoned public perception of the government; Mr Abbott may have been wrong in how he handled the matter in 2013 but he was at least certain and decisive and was accordingly rewarded.  Support for Mr Turnbull eroded and in an amusingly chaotic leadership coup in 2018, he lost the leadership.  In retirement, he found common cause with Mr Rudd as they joined to complain about the undue influence Rupert Murdoch’s (b 1931) News Corporation exerts in Australian politics, especially the national daily The Australian which, despite a notionally small distribution, is highly effective in setting agendas, forcing other outlets to pursue News Corp's pet issues.

The Turnbull administration is remembered also for imposing the "bonk ban", a consequence of one of the many extra-parliamentary antics of "bonking Barnaby" (Barnaby Joyce, b 1967; thrice (between local difficulties) deputy prime minister of Australia 2016-2022 and known also within the beltway as "the beetrooter", a nicknamed explained as (1) an allusion to this often florid complexion and (2) the use of "root" in Australia to refer to sexual intercourse).  Mr Turnbull was a keen student of etymology and having once worked as a journalist was fond of the alliterative phrase so when writing his memoir (A Bigger Picture (2020)) he included a short chapter entitled "Barnaby and the bonk ban".  As well as the events which lent the text it's title, the chapter was memorable for his inclusion of perhaps the most vivid thumbnail sketch of Barnaby Joyce yet penned:

"Barnaby is a complex, intense, furious personality.  Red-faced, in full flight he gives the impression he's about to explode.  He's highly intelligent, often good-humoured but also has a dark and almost menacing side - not unlike Abbott (Tony Abbott (b 1957; prime-minister of Australia 2013-2015)) - that seems to indicate he wrestles with inner troubles and torments."

Mr Turnbull and Mr Joyce in parliament, House of Representatives, Canberra, ACT.

The substantive matter was the revelation in mid-2017 the press had become aware Mr Joyce (a married man with four daughters) was (1) conducting an affair with a member of his staff and (2) that the young lady was with child.  Mr Turnbull recorded that when asked, Mr Joyce denied both "rumors", which does sound like a lie but in the narrow sense may have verged on "the not wholly implausible" on the basis that, as he pointed out in a later television interview, the question of paternity was at the time “...a bit of a grey area”.  Mr Joyce and his mistress later married and now have two children so all's well that end's well (at least for them) and Mr Turnbull didn't so much shut the gate after the horse had bolted as install inter-connecting doors in the stables.  His amendments to the Australian Ministerial Code of Conduct (an accommodating document very much in the spirit of Lord Castlereagh's (1769–1822; UK foreign secretary 1812-1822) critique of the Holy Alliance) banned ministers from bonking their staff which sounds uncontroversial but was silent on them bonking the staff of the minister in the office down the corridor.  So the net effect was probably positive in that staff having affairs with their ministerial boss would gain experience through cross-exposure to other portfolio areas although there's the obvious moral hazard in that they might be tempted to conduct trysts just to engineer a transfer in the hope of career advancement.  There are worse reasons for having an affair and a bonk for a new job seems a small price to pay.  It's been done before.

Scott Morrison (left) & Grace Tame (right), 2022.

Scott Morrison (b 1968; prime-minister 2018-2022): There are a few candidates who deserve to be regarded as Australia’s worst prime-minister (some of them quite recent) but the uniquely distinguishing feature of assessments of Mr Morrison’s term is that so many view it with such distaste.  His narrow victory in the 2018 election was a remarkable personal achievement but that proved the high-water mark of his administration.  Many critiques noted his lack of background, his experience limited to sales, marketing and slogans which has its place but did seem to result in him viewing a democracy rather as a sales manager views his employer’s customer loyalty programmes: Just as only good customers are entitled to the benefits of membership, in the Morrison government it seemed only electorates which returned coalition members were deserving of funding.  That did change in the run-up to an election; then marginal electorates which might elect coalition members attracted largess and while all parties do this, few have been so so blatant or extreme as Mr Morrison.  He also blundered in foreign affairs, publicly and pugnaciously calling for an international enquiry into the origins of the SARS-COV-2 virus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic.  That was a good idea but it should have been handled through the usual channels, not as foghorn diplomacy and the assumption of most was he was looking forward to going to his church (one where they clap, sing, strum guitars and the preacher assures the congregation God approves of surf-skis and big TVs) and telling everyone he’d stood up to the Godless atheists in the Chinese Communist Party.  Then there was the matters like the way a submarine contract was cancelled (costing the taxpayer a few hundred million) and the “robodebt” scandal (which turned out to be unlawful) which cost an as yet uncertain millions more.  Robodebt also exposed the contrast between his attitude to poor people who might be entitled to small welfare payments and that towards corporations which benefited from COVID-19 payments intended for those suffering certain defined losses in revenue.  When it was pointed out many companies which had received millions actually increased their revenue during the pandemic, Mr Morrison made it clear they could keep the money.  Maybe poor people should become Liberal Party donors.

Thumbnails of Lindsay Lohan image files in a sub-directory.

Abnegate

Abnegate (pronounced ab-ni-geyt)

(1) To refuse or deny oneself (privileges, pleasure, rights, conveniences etc); reject; renounce.

(2) To relinquish; give up.

1650–1660: From the Latin abnegātus (denied), past participle of abnegāre (to deny), the construct being ab- + negate.  The Ab- prefix was from the Latin ab-, from the primitive Indo-European hepo (off, away) and a doublet of apo- and off-.  The alternative prefixes were (1) a- (with root words starting with m, p, or v) & (2) abs- (with root words starting with c or t).  Ab- was used to convey (1) “from” & (2) “away from” & “outside of”.  Negate was from then Latin negātus, past participle of negāre (to deny, refuse, decline), reduced from nec-aiare (or some similar form), the construct being nec (not, nor) + aiere (to say).  Abnegate is a verb, abnegated & abnegating are verbs & adjectives, abnegation & abnegator are nouns; the most common noun plural is abnegations.

Abnegate should not be confused with abdicate.  Dating (perhaps surprisingly) only from 1541, abdicate was from the Latin abdicātus (renounced), perfect passive participle of abdicō (renounce, reject, disclaim), the construct being ab + dicō (proclaim, dedicate, declare), akin to dīcō (say).  Abdicate now (except informally) is used almost exclusively to refer to a reigning monarch renouncing their throne in favour of a successor (chosen or imposed) but was once applied with greater latitude.  Between the mid-sixteenth & early nineteenth centuries, it was used to mean “to disclaim and expel from the family” (as a parent might of a child) and when this is done now, one is said to have disowned (as a statement of family & social relations) or disinherited (at law in the matter of inheritance).  Between the mid-sixteenth & late seventeenth centuries it could mean “formally to separate oneself from or to divest oneself of”.  Between the early seventeenth & late eighteenth centuries, it could mean “to depose” which meant (1) remove from office suddenly and forcefully (ie what might now be thought a forced (or “constructive”) abdication or (2) in law, to testify to or give evidence under oath (usually in writing).  Between the mid-sixteenth & late seventeenth centuries it could mean “to reject; to cast off; to discard (an object, an association, an obligation etc).

The modern meaning has existed since the mid-sixteenth century (though not commonly used for another two-hundred odd years) and means “to surrender, renounce or relinquish, as sovereign power; to withdraw definitely from filling or exercising, as a high office, station, dignity.  This can apply to anyone personally exercising sovereign authority (kings, queens, popes, tsars et al) and is the act of renouncing the throne (and thus sovereignty).  Procedurally, most monarchies have detailed administrative procedures (and abdication has of late assumed a new popularity) to ensure the transfer from old to new is legally identical in consequence to what happens in the case of a sovereign dying but the lawyers have previously resolved cases where formalities were lacking.  In the matter of James VII and II (1633–1701; King of England and King of Ireland (as James II) & King of Scotland (as James VII) 1685-1688 who left the throne in the circumstances of the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the act of “abandonment” or “forfeiture”, even in the absence of any formal mechanism, was held to be an abdication, albeit one that might (analogously with use in other aspects of law) be styled a “constructive abdication”.

Pope Benedict XVI in Popemobile (Mercedes-Benz ML 430 (W163)), 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington DC, 2008.

Although the term abdication is sometimes used of papal resignations, the Vatican is emphatic the word is not used in any official documents of the Church.  This imprecise use of abdication is attributable to the Holy See being (as well as the universal government of the multi-national Roman Catholic Church) the authority ruling the Vatican City State, a sovereign, independent territory since the Lateran Concordat of 1929.  The Pope is thus the ruler of both Vatican City State and the Holy See; collectively an absolute theocracy.  It’s thus a fine point and were the Holy See to prefer “abdicate” to “resign”, it would seem not a substantive change and the fact the office is elected and not dynastic is not significant, Holy Roman emperors and the some early kings of England all elected. 

Pope Benedict XVI in Popemobile, Seravalle stadium, San Marino, 2011.

What none can deny is that the Holy See has a long (if of late infrequent) history of precedent, five popes between the tenth & fifteenth centuries resigning with a further four between the third & eleventh possibly having done so.  Mysteriously, there’s even another event which may or may not have been a resignation and indeed the subject may not even have been a pope but rather an anti-pope, somewhat analogous with the idea the MAGA Republicans have of Joe Biden (b 1942; US president since 2021) being an anti-president.  The revisions to canon law in 1917 and 1983 only clarified certain aspects of the resignation process and had no effect on anything definitional.  Thus, what Pope Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022) did when renouncing office in 2013 was an act of abnegation and not an abdication and that he chose subsequently to be styled pope emeritus remains of no legal or constitutional significance.