Duplicity

Duplicity (pronounced doo-plis-i-tee or dyoo-plis-i-tee)

(1) Deceitfulness in speech or conduct, as by speaking or acting in two different ways to different people concerning the same matter; double-dealing.

(2) An act or instance of such deceitfulness.

(3) In law, the act or fact of including two or more offenses in one count, or charge, as part of an indictment, thus violating the requirement that each count contain only a single offense.

1400–1450: From the Late Middle English, from the Old French duplicite, from the Late Latin duplicitatem (nominative duplicitas (doubleness)).  Technically, the word wa borrowed from Latin duplicāre (double), present active infinitive of duplicō and the Medieval Latin duplicitās differed with ite replacing itās.  The notion is of being "double" in one's conduct ultimately is derived from the Ancient Greek diploos (treacherous, double-minded) which translates literally as "twofold, double".  Related in Medieval Latin was ambiguity, noun of quality from duplex, genitive (duplicis (two-fold)).

Duplicity good and bad

Because such conduct is inherent to human interaction, there are many words either similar in meaning or a synonym of duplicity.  Duplicity is the form of deceitfulness that leads one to give two impressions, either or both of which may be false.  Deceit is the quality that prompts intentional concealment or perversion of truth for the purpose of misleading.  The quality of guile leads to craftiness in the use of deceit; one uses guile and trickery to attain one's ends. Hypocrisy is the pretence of possessing virtuous qualities such as sincerity, goodness or devotion.  Fraud refers usually to the practice of subtle deceit or duplicity by which one may derive benefit at another's expense.  Trickery is the quality that leads to the use of tricks and habitual deception.  In modern English usage, the most common sense of duplicity is “deceitfulness.”  The roots of this meaning are in the initial dupl from the Latin duplex (twofold, or double).  We do seem a duplicitous lot.

Alexander Haig (1924–2010; US Secretary of State 1981-1982) & Ronald Reagan (1911–2004; US President 1981-1989) (left) and Lord Carrington (1919–2018; UK Foreign Secretary 1979-1982) & Margaret Thatcher (1925–2013; UK Prime Minister 1979-1990) (right).

To accuse someone duplicity is usually to allege or suggest something negative, the idea that someone has acted in a manner perhaps not dishonest but certainly misleading or dishonorable.  However there are fields of endeavor where the successfully duplicitous are often admired and the most Machiavellian can be held in awe.  In international relations, it’s true in the upper reaches of diplomacy.

Duplicity, art and science: Haig and Carrington, the White House, 26 February 1981.

More than General Colin Powell (b 1937; US Secretary of State 2001-2005) and more even than General Dwight Eisenhower (1890–1969; US President 1953-1961), General Alexander Haig (1924-2010) was an exemplar of that uniquely Washington DC creature, the political soldier, whose career shuttled between the military, diplomacy and politics.  After a meeting in 1981, Haig was heard to remark the UK Foreign Secretary, Lord Carrington, was a "duplicitous bastard".  Beyond the beltway, that would be a disparaging comment, but, in the world of international diplomacy, it’s more an expression of admiration of professional skill.

Mean Girls (2004), a story of duplicity, low skulduggery, Machiavellian manipulation, lies & deceit.  As a morality tale, the message can be reduced to: “Women would rather hear brilliant lies than honest truths”.

Draft

Draft (pronounced drahft)

(1) An initial drawing, sketch, or design.

(2) A first or preliminary form of any writing, subject to revision.

(3) The act of drawing; delineation.

(4) A current of air in any enclosed space, especially in a room, chimney, stove or through a door or window frame; a current of air moving in an upward or downward direction.

(5) A device for regulating the current of air in a stove, fireplace etc.

(6) The act of drawing or pulling loads; something that is drawn or pulled; a haul; an animal or team of animals used to pull a load.

(7) The force required to pull a load; in rail transport, the pulling force (tension) on couplers and draft gear during a slack stretched condition.

(8) The taking of supplies, forces, money etc, from a given source.

(9) A selection or drawing of persons, by lot or otherwise, from a subset of the population; levy; conscription or the persons so selected; in professional sport, the selecting or drawing of new players from a choice group of amateur players by professional teams, especially a system of selecting new players so that each team in a professional league receives some of the most promising players.

(10) In military use, a selection of persons already in military service to be sent from one post or organization to another; detachment.

(11) A written order drawn by one person upon another; a writing directing the payment of money on account of the drawer; bill of exchange; A drain or demand made on anything.

(12) As draft beer, a type drawn from a keg or barrel rather than glass or can.

(13) Something that is taken in by drinking or inhaling; a drink; dose.

(14) A quantity of fish caught; the catch or haul (archaic).

(15) In admiralty use, the depth to which a vessel is immersed when bearing a given load.

(16) In Metallurgy, the slight taper given to a pattern so that it may be drawn from the sand without injury to the mold; also called leave.

(17) In steel fabrication, the change in sectional area of a piece of work caused by a rolling or drawing operation.

(18) In stone masonry, a line or border chiseled at the edge of a stone, to serve as a guide in leveling the surfaces.

(19) In the production of textiles, the degree of attenuation produced in fibers during yarn processing, expressed either by the ratio of the weight of raw to the weight of processed fiber, or by the ratio between the varying surface speeds of the rollers on the carding machine.

(20) An allowance granted to a buyer for waste of goods sold by weight.

(21) Ad drafting, in cycling & motorsport, to drive or ride close behind another car so as to benefit from the reduction in air pressure created behind the car or bike ahead; also called slipstreaming.

(22) In hydrology, the divergent duct leading from a water turbine to its tailrace.

(23) To separate a group of livestock from the rest of the herd (Australia & NZ).

(24) In apothecarial use, a measured portion of a liquid or aerosol medication; a dose.

(25)In politics, a system of forcing or convincing (at least nominally unwilling) people to take an elected position.

(26) A checker: a game piece used in the game of draughts.

(27) In medicine, a mild vesicatory (UK, obsolete).

(28) An outhouse: an outbuilding used as a lavatory (obsolete).

(29) In pre-modern military use, a sudden attack upon an enemy (obsolete).

Circa 1500: A spelling variant of the Middle English draught, from Old English dræht, related to dragan (to draw, drag), from Proto-Germanic drahtuz, noun form of draganą.  Root in English is draw, from the Middle English drawen, draȝen, dragen, from Old English dragan (to draw, drag, pull”), from Proto-Germanic draganą, from the primitive dreǵ (to draw, pull).  It was cognate with the West Frisian drage, the Dutch dragen, the German tragen (to carry), the Danish drage, the Albanian dredh (to turn, spin), the Old Armenian դառնամ (daṙnam) (to turn) and the Sanskrit ध्रजस् (dhrájas) (gliding course or motion).  Draught is a variant spelling of draft and is normally pronounced the same way (draft or drahft or with a vowel somewhere between “a” and “ah”). The pronunciation drawt is sometimes heard for draught, perhaps because “aught” is frequently pronounced awt elsewhere, as in caught and taught.

Caught in the draft:  A Lindsay Lohan wardrobe malfunction, MTV Movie Awards, 2008.

The emergence of draft circa 1500 reflected a change in pronunciation although both it and draught are now pronounced the same.  The meanings "rough copy of a writing" and “something drawn" is attested from the fourteenth century; that of "preliminary sketch from which a final copy is made" is from the 1520s; that of "flow of a current of air" was first noted circa 1770.  The descriptor of a type of beer is from the 1830s, in reference to the method of "drawing" it from the cask.  As applied to a bank draft, later extended to bills of exchange, meaning emerged in 1745. The meaning "a drawing off a group for special duty" is from 1703 and applies especially to military service; the verb in this sense first recorded 1714.  Related forms are the adjectives draftable, undraftable, undrafted & antidraft, the nouns drafter & redraft (also a verb) and the verb redraft.

Except in the US and places which have adopted US English, draft and draught seem now to be alternative spellings and while the old distinctions of use remain technically correct, modern practice appears to be to use them interchangeably.  Draft almost universal in American English and draught persists elsewhere for purposes where the historical association is most strong (draught horse, draught beer etc).  Draftee (person conscripted for military purposes) dates from 1864 in US English, the adjectival homophone drafty (exposed to drafts of air) is from the 1580s, draftiness a few years later.  Updraft (US) and updraught (rising air current) is from 1909, one of a rush of words created or adapted from others to serve the new field of aviation.  Draftsman (one who draws or prepares plans, sketches, or designs) is from the 1660s, a variant of the earlier draughtsman.  In finance, overdraft (action of overdrawing an account) dates from 1841 and by 1891 the meaning had extended to "amount by which a draft exceeds the sum against which it is drawn".  Unrelated was the use by 1884 of overdraft to describe “a draft of air passing over, but not through, the ignited fuel”, a use applied to ovens & furnaces.

Draught (act of pulling or drawing; quantity of liquid that one drinks at a time), the source of all this dates from circa 1200, from the Old English dreaht & dræht and related to dragan (to draw, drag).  The oldest recorded sense besides that of "pulling" is of "drinking", one suggestion being the idea of "so much as is drawn down the throat at once", a similar relationship drag has to the act of inhaling from a cigarette.  Draught is attested from circa 1300 as having some connection with "that which is drawn or written" although it seems clear the original meaning referred to writing in general, not “first draft” as is now understood.  In the UK, more than anywhere else, draught retains the functions (horses, beer etc) that did not branch off with draft.

Catching the draft, the Mercedes-Benz of Valtteri Bottas & Lewis Hamilton, Italian Grand Prix qualifying, Monza, September 2020.

In motorsport, drafting (also called slipstreaming) is a driving technique which exploits being in the slipstream of the vehicle to reduce the drag suffered by one’s own vehicle.  As a general principle, the higher the speeds involved, the lower the average energy expenditure required to maintain a certain speed.  Because it can have the effect also of reducing the turbulence between the vehicles, it can also offer a slight advantage to the lead vehicle.  The advantage gained in reducing the energy expenditure manifests as reduced fuel consumption which can be a strategic advantage but the most dramatic effect of “catching the draft” is the so-called “slingshot effect” whereby a vehicle coming out of the slipstream can use the conserved power to pass the vehicle it’s been deliberately following.

Six-Pack: Three drafters and three draftees drafting, Daytona 500, Daytona Beach, Florida, 2011.

The technique began to be well-understood in the 1960s but wasn’t without risk.  A vehicle of one shape could produce a different slipstream than another and at high-speed, slight differences can have a pronounced effect, the results for the trailing car unpredictable.  Additionally, sitting in the draft, enjoying the lower wind-resistance, although it allowed a higher speed to be attained, also meant a reduction in down-force and consequent instability.  The advantages and dangers are best illustrated on the faster oval speedways used by NASCAR.  On the straights, two or more vehicles will race faster when aligned front-to-rear than a single car, the low-pressure wake behind the leading car reducing the aerodynamic resistance on the front of the trailing car allowing the second car to pull closer.  As the second car nears the first it pushes high-pressure air forward so less fast-moving air hits the lead car's spoiler.  The result is less drag for both cars, allowing faster speeds.  On curves however, the load on one side of the car is higher, this accentuated by changes caused by the draft: the leading car has normal front downforce but less rear downforce.  The trailing car has less front downforce but normal rear downforce.  In a group of three or more, the vehicles with drafting partners both ahead and behind will lose downforce front and rear.

Firecracker 400, Daytona Beach, Florida, 1974.

In NASCAR’s 1974 Firecracker 400, the lead changed forty-five times, a record which would stand until 2010 and it’s remembered also for one of the sport’s most audacious uses of drafting.  As he was about to start the final lap, David Pearson (1973 Mercury #21) feigned engine troubles by slowing and dropping low on the track, forcing the slipstreaming Richard Petty (1974 Dodge #43) to swerve into the lead.  Person then was able to sit in Petty’s slipstream, drafting past on the final corner to win the race.  Petty’s reaction, recorded in the press box after the race, was so memorable it was transcribed and published in next morning’s Orlando Sentinel.

Shaker

Shaker (pronounced shey-ker)

(1) A person or thing that shakes or the means by which something is shaken.

(2) A container with a perforated top from which a seasoning, condiment, sugar, flour, or the like is shaken onto food.

(3) Any of various containers for shaking beverages to mix the ingredients (eg cocktail shaker).

(4) A dredger or caster.

(5) A member of the Millennial Church, originating in England in the middle of the eighteenth century (initial capital letter).

(6) Noting or pertaining to a style of something produced by Shakers and characterized by simplicity of form, lack of ornamentation, fine craftsmanship, and functionality (initial capital letter).

(7) As the later component in mover and shaker, one who is important, influential or a dynamic forced in some field or generally.

(8) An exposed air-intake system for internal combustion engines, attached directly to the induction and thus intended to shake as the engine vibrates.

(9) A variety of pigeon.

(10) In railway line construction, one who holds spikes while they are hammered.

(11) In music, a musical percussion instrument filled with granular solids which produce a rhythmic sound when shaken.

(12) A kind of straight-sided, stackable glass.

1400-1450: From the late Middle English, the construct being shake +‎ -er.  Shake is from the Middle English schaken, from the Old English sċeacan & sċacan (to shake), from the Proto-West Germanic skakan, from the Proto-Germanic skakaną (to shake, swing, escape), from the primitive Indo-European (s)keg- & (s)kek- (to jump, move).  It was cognate with the Scots schake & schack (to shake), the West Frisian schaekje (to shake), the Dutch schaken (to elope, make clean, shake), the Low German schaken (to move, shift, push, shake) & schacken (to shake, shock), the Norwegian Nynorsk skaka (to shake), the Swedish skaka (to shake), the Dutch schokken (to shake, shock) and the Russian скака́ть (skakát) (to jump).  The –er suffix is from the Middle English –er & -ere, from the Old English -ere, from the Proto-Germanic -ārijaz, thought usually to have been borrowed from Latin –ārius and reinforced by the synonymous but unrelated Old French –or & -eor (The Anglo-Norman variant was -our), from the Latin -(ā)tor, from the primitive Indo-European -tōr.  Added to verbs (typically a person or thing that does an action indicated by the root verb) and forms an agent noun.  The plural is shakers.

The Shakers

The Millennial Church later called the Shakers, dates from 1747, the name shaker first casually applied circa 1750 although it had been used to describe similar practices in other sects since the 1640s and, as an adjective, shaker was first applied to their stark furniture in 1866.  The first cocktail shaker was mentioned in 1868 (the ancient Greeks had seison (a kind of vase) which translated literally as “shaker".  The modern-sounding “movers and shakers” is attested as early as 1874.  The Shakers began as a sect of the English Quakers, the movement founded in 1747 by Jane and James Wardley.  Correctly styled as the United Society of Believers in Christ’s Second Appearing, the Shakers were a celibate, millenarian group that established a number of communal settlements in the United States during the eighteenth century.  The early movement was based on the revelations of Ann Lee (1736–1784; addressed within as Mother Ann Lee) who had been active in the English church for almost twenty years after becoming a devotee of the preaching of the Wardleys to whom she confessed her sins; central to her vision was the necessity of repentance and the forsaking of sin as the pathway to redemption.

Movers and shakers: Shakers shaking in worship, New York, 1858.

Promising a vision of a heavenly kingdom to come, Shaker teaching emphasized simplicity, celibacy, & work and communities were flourishing by the mid-nineteenth century, contributing to American culture the style of architecture, furniture, and handicraft for which the movement is today best remembered.  The distinctive feature of their form of worship was the ecstatic dancing or "shaking", which led to them being dubbed “the Shaking Quakers”, later generally shorted to “Shakers”.  The physicality of their practices was neither novel or unique, nor anything particularly associated with Christianity, many religions or sects within, noted for rituals involving shaking, shouting, dancing, whirling, and singing, sometimes in intelligible words, often called “in tongues” (the idea often being what was spoken coming directly from God).

The much-admired Shaker furniture.

Austere though they may have appeared, the Shakers were genuinely innovative in agriculture and industry, their farms prosperous and their ingenuity produced a large number of (usually unpatented) inventions including, the screw propeller, babbitt metal, a rotary harrow, an automatic spring, a turbine waterwheel, a threshing machine and the circular saw.  In agri-business, they were the first in the world to package and market seeds and were once the US’s largest producers of medicinal herbs.  Shaker dance and music is now regarded as a fork in American folk art as well as its religious tradition and the simplicity, functionality and fine craftsmanship of their architecture, furniture and artefacts have had a lasting influence on design.

Although intellectually primitive, Mother Ann’s theology was elaborate but with celibacy as the cardinal principle, the continuity of the communities depended on a constant flow of converts rather than the organic regeneration planned by other sects but the numbers attracted were never sufficient to maintain a critical mass and in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the movement went into decline.  From its height in the 1840s, when some six-thousand members were active, by 1905 there were barely a thousand, compelling the shakers to resort to advertising for members, emphasizing physical comfort of the lifestyle as well as spiritual values.  It became and increasing hard sell in an era of increasing urbanisation and materialism and the convulsion of the twentieth century did little to arrest the trend.  In 1957, the leaders met and voted to close the Shaker Covenant, the document which all new members need to sign to become members.  Membership was thus closed forever and by the turn of the century, there was but one working Shaker village in Sabbathday Lake, Maine; it had fewer than ten members and, in 2023, there appear to be only one or two left alive.

The concept of the cocktail shaker is ancient and ceramic versions dating back some 10,000 years have been found in the Middle East and South & Central America.  The use to which they were put seems in all places to have been essentially the same: a means of mixing fermented fluids with herbs and spices added for flavor, after which a gauze-like fabric could be stretched over the opening so the unwanted residue could be strained off.  Innkeepers for centuries doubtlessly improvised (presumably using two suitably shaped & sized glasses or goblets) their own shakers but it was in cities of the north-east US (New York & Boston factions both claiming the credit) during the early nineteenth century the first commercially produced units were advertised.  By mid-century they were widely used, their functionality and convenience cited by some as one of the reasons there was in the era such an upsurge in the number of recipes publish for mixed drinks.  One of the earliest innovations was the integration of a strainer mechanism although bartenders apparently preferred the detachable devices (said to be much better when working with crushed or shaved ice) and the volume of patent applications for variations on the design of strainers hints at their popularity.  Now, most cocktail shakers are either two-piece (sold with and without a fitted shaker) or (and aimed at the home market) three-piece with a built in shaker, the additional component being a fitted cap which can be used as a measure for spirits or other ingredients.

The shaker and the induction system

1969 Ford Mustang 428 CobraJet.

Shakers were air intakes bolted directly to the induction path of an internal combustion engine’s carburetor(s), the advantage being a measurable increase in power using cool, dense air rather than the inherently warmer under-bonnet air.  Cold-air induction systems weren’t uncommon in the 1960s and 1970s but the shaker’s novelty was that being attached to the engine and protruding through a carefully shaped lacuna in the hood (bonnet), the things shook as the engine vibrated on its mounts.  Men still are excited by such things.

1971 Plymouth Hemi Cuda.

Early advertising material from Chrysler referred to the device as the Incredible Quivering Exposed Cold Air Grabber but buyers called must have thought that a bit much (IQECAG one of history's less mnemonic initializms) and they’ve only ever been referred to as shakers.  The IQECAG was undeniably a sexy scoop and much admired by the males aged 17-39 to whom it was designed to appeal.  Sometimes less is more.  Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) suggested a good title for his book might be Viereinhalb Jahre [des Kampfes] gegen Lüge, Dummheit und Feigheit (Four and a Half Years of Struggle against Lies, Stupidity and Cowardice) but his publisher thought that a bit ponderous and preferred the more succinct Mein Kampf: Eine Abrechnung and even that was clipped to Mein Kampf for publication.  Unfortunately, the revised title was the best thing about it, the style and contents truly ghastly and it's long and repetitious, the ideas within able easily to be reduced to a few dozen pages (some suggest fewer but the historical examples cited for context do require some space).

1974 Pontiac Firebird Trans Am SD-455.

The reverse facing shakers (and air intakes generally) were designed, like cowl-induction, to take advantage of the properties of fluid dynamics which, at speed, produced an accumulation of cold, high-pressure air in the space at the bottom of the windscreen.  Their use created an urban myth that Holly certain makes of carburetor (the Holly and the Rochester among those mentioned) didn't like being "force-fed" which (if done badly) was sort of true but nothing to do with the low-pressure bonnet-mounted devices.  Engineers had long understood the principle and cowl-induction systems were first seen on racing cars in 1910.

1970 Chevrolet Chevelle SS454 (LS6).

A genuine problem with the external induction systems was rain.  In torrential rain, including when the car was parked, moisture entry could cause problems.  Some manufacturers included a flap, providing a protective seal.  The early ones were manually activated but later versions were vacuum-controlled, the extent of opening cognizant of the pressure being applied to the throttle so it opened and closed and engine speed rose and fell.  As a means of getting cold air, this was of course thought most cool.

1964 Ford Fairlane 427 Thunderbolt.

Actually, the bonnet mounted intakes, regardless of which way they faced, weren’t the optimal way to deliver cold air to the induction system but they were the most–admired and something for which buyers were prepared to pay extra so, although they were the most expensive system to produce, they were also the most profitable. Simple ducting from within the wheel-wells delivered most of the benefits but the most efficient harvest of high-pressure air which gained also a “ram-air” effect which, helpfully, increased as speeds rose, was to duct from a forward-facing inlet in the front bumper bar or grill.  Enjoying a much higher pressure than the area around the cowl, with well-designed ducting, a ram-air tube can operate at up to 125% the efficiency of a cowl intake, able to generate a pressure of 2-3 psi (14-20 pascals) at high speed.  Ford in 1936 & 1964 found that by happy coincidence, the inside set of headlights on their Galaxies and Fairlanes were positioned to suit such ducting almost as if they'd been placed there by design so on the limited production "Lightweight" Galaxie and the Fairlane "Thunderbolt", the lens were removed and the apertures re-purposed.  Only 100 of the Thunderbolts were produced, all intended for use in drag racing and this machine secured the 1964 NHRA (National Hot Rod Association) championship in the Super Stock class.

Doomsday

Doomsday (pronounced doomz-dey)

(1) In Christian eschatology, the day of the Last Judgment, at the end of the world (sometimes capital letter); the end of days; the end of times.

(2) Any day of judgment or sentence (sometimes initial capital).

(3) In casual use, the destruction of the world, since the 1950s, by means of nuclear weapons.

(4) As doomsday weapon(s), the device(s) causing the destruction of the world; anything capable of causing widespread or total destruction.

(5) Given to or marked by forebodings or predictions of impending calamity; especially concerned with or predicting future universal destruction.

(6) As Doomsday Clock, a symbolic warning device indicating how close humanity is to destroying the world, run since 1947 as a private venture by the members of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

Pre 1000: A compound from the Middle English domes + dai from the Old English construct dom (judgment) + dæg (day), dōmesdæg (sometimes dōmes dæg) (Judgment Day) and related to the Old Norse domsdagr.  Dome was borrowed from the Middle French dome & domme (which survives in Modern French as dôme), from the Italian duomo, from the Latin domus (ecclesiae) (literally “house (of the church)”), a calque of the Ancient Greek οἶκος τῆς ἐκκλησίας (oîkos tês ekklēsías); doublet of domus.  Dom was from the Proto-West Germanic dōm and was cognate with the Old Frisian dōm, the Old Saxon dōm, the Old High German tuom, the Old Norse dómr and the Gothic dōms.  The Germanic source was from a stem verb originally meaning “to place, to set”, a sense-development also found in the Latin statutum and the Ancient Greek θέμις (thémis).  Dai had the alternative forms deg, deag & dœg all from the Proto-West Germanic dag; it was cognate with the Old Frisian dei, the Old Saxon dag, the Old Dutch dag, the Old High German tag, the Old Norse dagr and the Gothic dags.

In medieval England, doomsday was expected when the world's age had reached 6,000 years from the creation, thought to have been in 5200 BC and English Benedictine monk, the Venerable Bede (circa 672-735) complained of being pestered by rustici (the "uneducated and coarse-mannered, rough of speech"), asking him "how many years till the sixth millennium be endeth?"  However, despite the assertions (circa 1999) of the Y2K doomsday preppers, there is no evidence to support the story of a general panic in Christian Europe in the days approaching the years 800 or 1000 AD.  The use to describe a hypothetical nuclear bomb powerful enough to wipe out human life (or all life) on earth is from 1960 but the speculation was the work of others than physicists and the general trend since the 1960s has been towards smaller devices although paradoxically, this has been to maximize the destructive potential through an avoidance of the "surplus ballistic effect" (ie the realization by military planners that blasting rubble into to smaller-sized rocks was "wasted effort and bad economics").

The Domesday Book

Domesday is a proper noun that is used to describe the documents known collectively as the Domesday Book, at the time an enormous survey (a kind of early census) ordered by William I (circa 1028-1087; styled usually as William the Conqueror, King of England 1066-1087) in 1085.  The survey enumerated all the wealth in England and determined ownership in order to assess taxes.  Domesday was the Middle English spelling of doomsday, and is pronounced as doomsday.

Original Domesday book, UK National Archives, London.

The name Domesday Book (which was Doomsday in earlier spellings) was first recorded almost a century after 1086.  An addition to the manuscript was made probably circa 1114-1119 when it was known as the Book of Winchester and between then and 1179, it acquired the name by which it has since been known.  Just to clarify its status, the Treasurer of England himself announced “This book is called by the native English Domesday, that is Day of Judgement” (Dialogus de scaccario), adding that, like the Biblical Last Judgment, the decisions of Domesday Book were unalterable because “… as from the Last Judgment, there is no further appeal.”  This point was reinforced by a clause in the Dialogue of the Exchequer (1179) which noted “just as the sentence of that strict and terrible Last Judgement cannot be evaded by any art or subterfuge, so, when a dispute arises in this realm concerning facts which are written down, and an appeal is made to the book itself, the evidence it gives cannot be set at nought or evaded with impunity.”  It was from this point that began in England the idea of the centralised written record taking precedence over local oral traditions, the same concept which would evolve as the common law.

The Doomsday Book described in remarkable detail the landholdings and resources of late eleventh century England and is illustrative of both the power of the government machine by the late medieval period and its deep thirst for information.  Nothing on the scale of the survey had been undertaken in contemporary Europe, and was not matched in comprehensiveness until the population censuses of the nineteenth century although, Doomsday is not a full population census, the names appearing almost wholly restricted to landowners who could thus be taxed.  It was for centuries used for administrative and legal purposes and remains often the starting point for many purposes for historians but of late has been subject to an increasingly detailed textual analysis and it’s certainly not error-free.

The Doomsday Clock

The Doomsday Clock is a symbol that represents the likelihood of a man-made global catastrophe.  Maintained since 1947 by the members of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (BOTAS), the clock was created as a metaphor for threat to humanity posed by nuclear weapons.  On the clock, a hypothetical global catastrophe is represented as the stroke of midnight and BOTAS’s view of the closeness to that hour being reached by the number of minutes or seconds to midnight.  Every January, BOTAS’s Science and Security Board committee meets to decide where the second-hand of the clock should point and in recent years, other risk factors have been considered, including disease and climate change, the committee monitoring developments in science and technology that could inflict catastrophic damage.

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

These concerns do have a long history in philosophy and theology but the use in 1945 of nuclear fission to create atomic weapons focused the minds of many more on the possibilities, the concerns growing in the second half of the twentieth century as the bombs got bigger and proliferated extraordinarily to the point where, if all were detonated in the right place at the right time, almost everyone on Earth would have been killed several times over.  At least on paper, the threat was real and even before Hiroshima made the world suddenly aware of the matter, there had been some in apocalyptic mood: Winston Churchill's (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) “finest hour” speech in 1940 warning of the risk civilization might “…sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science”.  It had been a growing theme in liberal interwar politics since the implications of technology and the industrialisation of warfare had been writ large by the World War I (1914-1918).

HG Wells’ (1866–1946) last book was Mind at the End of its Tether (1945), a slim volume, best remembered for the fragment “…everything was driving anyhow to anywhere at a steadily increasing velocity”, seemingly describing a world which had become more complicated, chaotic and terrifying than anything he had prophesized in his fiction. In this it’s often contrasted with the spirit of cheerful optimism and forward-looking stoicism of the book he published a few months earlier, The Happy Turning (1945), but that may be a misreading.  Mind at the End of its Tether is a curious text, easy to read yet difficult to reduce to a theme; in his review, George Orwell (1903-1950) called it “disjointed” and it does have a quality of vagueness, some chapters hinting at despair for all humanity, others suggesting hope for the future.  It’s perhaps the publication date that tints the opinions of some.  Although released some three months after the first use of atomic bombs in August 1945, publishing has lead-times and Wells hadn’t heard of the A-bomb at the time of writing although, he had in 1914 predicted such a device in The World Set Free.  In writing Mind at the End of its Tether, Wells, the great seer of science, wasn’t in dark despair at news of science’s greatest achievement, nuclear fission, but instead a dying man disappointed about the terrible twentieth century which, at the end of the nineteenth, had offered such promise.

In 1947, though the USSR had still not even tested an atomic bomb and the US enjoyed exclusive possession of the weapon, BOTAS was well aware it was only a matter of time and the clock was set at seven minutes to midnight.  Adjustments have been made a couple of dozen times since, the most optimistic days being in 1991 with the end of the Cold War when it was seventeen minutes to midnight and the most ominous right now, BOTAS in 2023 choosing 90 seconds, ten seconds worse than the 100 settled on in 2020.

The committee each year issues an explanatory note and in 2021 noted the influences on their decision.  The COVID-19 pandemic was a factor, not because it threatened to obliterate civilization but because it “…revealed just how unprepared and unwilling countries and the international system are to handle global emergencies properly. In this time of genuine crisis, governments too often abdicated responsibility, ignored scientific advice, did not cooperate or communicate effectively, and consequently failed to protect the health and welfare of their citizens.  As a result, many hundreds of thousands of human beings died needlessly”.  COVID-19 they noted, will eventually recede but the pandemic, as it unfolded, was “a vivid illustration that national governments and international organizations are unprepared to manage nuclear weapons and climate change, which currently pose existential threats to humanity, or the other dangers—including more virulent pandemics and next-generation warfare—that could threaten civilization in the near future”.  In 2023, the adjustment was attributed mostly to (1) the increased risk of the use of nuclear weapons after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, (2) climate change, (3) biological threats such as COVID-19 and (4) the spread of disinformation through disruptive technology such as generative AI (artificial intelligence).

The acceleration of nuclear weapons programs by many countries was thought to have increased instability, especially in conjunction with the simultaneous development of delivery systems increasingly adaptable to the use of conventional or nuclear warheads.  The concern was expressed this “may raise the probability of miscalculation in times of tension”.  Governments were considered to have “…failed sufficiently to address climate change” and that while “fossil fuel use needs to decline precipitously if the worst effects of climate change are to be avoided”, instead “…fossil fuel development and production are projected to increase”.  Political factors were also mentioned including the corrosive effects of “false and misleading information disseminated over the internet…, a wanton disregard for science and the large-scale embrace” of conspiracy theories often “driven by political figures”.  They did offer a glimmer of hope, notably the change of administration in the US to one with a more aggressive approach to climate change policy and a renewed commitment to nuclear arms control agreements but it wasn’t enough to convince them to move the hands of the clock.  It remains a hundred seconds to midnight.

The clock is not without critics, even the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) expressing disapproval since falling under the control of Rupert Murdoch (b 1931).  There is the argument that after seventy years, its usefulness has diminished because over those decades it has become "the boy who cried wolf": a depiction of humanity on the precipice of the abyss yet life went on.  Questions have also been raised about the narrowness of the committee and whether a body which historically has had a narrow focus on atomic weapons and security is adequately qualified to assess the range of issues which should be considered.  Mission creep too is seen as a problem.  The clock began as a means of expressing the imminence of nuclear war.  Is it appropriate to use the same mechanism to warn of impending climate change which has anyway already begun and is likely accelerating?  Global thermo-nuclear war can cause a catastrophic loss of life and societal disruption within hours, whereas the climate catastrophe is projected to unfolds over decades and centuries.  Would a companion calendar be a more helpful metaphor?  The criticism may miss the point, the clock not being a track of climate change but of political will to do something to limit and ameliorate the effects (everyone having realised it can’t be stopped).