Adultery

Adultery (pronounced uh-duhl-tuh-ree)

Voluntary sexual intimacy between a married person and someone other than his or her lawful spouse.

1325-1375: From the Middle English adulterie, from the Classical Latin adulterium (voluntary violation of the marriage bed).  Adulterie replaced an earlier Middle English form advouterie, drawn from the Old French avoutrie.  So, construct was: adulterie, altered (as if directly from Latin adulterium) from avoutrie, via Old French from Latin adulterium, from adulter, back formation from adulterāre.  Modern spelling, with the re-inserted -d, is from early fifteenth century.  Interestingly, in Middle English, word also applied even to "sex between husband and wife for recreational purposes”, sex for other than procreation being regarded by the church as idolatry, perversion and heresy.  The church variously classified the sin as single adultery (with an unmarried person) and double adultery (with a married person).  In Old English the word was æwbryce (breach of lawful marriage), drawn from the German Ehebruch.  As one might imagine, the tradition of adultery goes way back and so does the condemnation by clerics and others; it is of course proscribed by one of the Ten Commandments (coming in usually at 6 or 7 in most translations) in the Christian Bible and the ever zealous Leviticus (at 20:10) spelled out the consequences: If there is a man who commits adultery with another man's wife, one who commits adultery with his friend's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

In the US, Adultery Dune in Arizona corresponds to the Navajo sei adilehe (adultery sand), the place where, prior to European settlement, illicit lovers met.  It’s apparently something between Hampstead Heath and Death Valley as depicted in Michelangelo Antonioni’s (1912-2007) Zabriskie Point (1970).  Everyone should see Zabriskie Point before they die.

Double Adultery: Cheryl Kernot & Gareth Evans.

Although adultery can be a difficult, complicated business, two avoid things ending badly, there are really two options.  One is not to commit adultery because, in the words of  English author, Arthur Hugh Clough (1819-1861), "advantage rarely comes of it."  Option two is not to get caught but there is a long list of politicians who made the greatest mistake of all: getting caught.  Although adultery seemed once almost obligatory (and once also tolerated) for French politicians great and humble, in the English-speaking world, it's always a scandal.  Of late, we’ve had the helpfully named Anthony Weiner (b 1964), Bill Clinton (b 1946; US president 1993-2001) who had only himself to blame and Sir John Major (b 1943; UK prime-minister 1990-1997) who really must be admired; an affair with Edwina Currie (b 1946) hardly being safe-sex.  Jim Cairns (1914–2003) perjured himself while lying about his affair and John Profumo (1915–2006) committed adultery with Christine Keeler (1942–2017) while she was enjoying another adulterous affair with a Russian spy.  While leader of the opposition, Ben Chifley (1885–1951; prime minister of Australia 1945 to 1949) told the prime-minister he was going home to read a detective story, dying that night in the company of his mistress; men wept at the news of his death.  John Kennedy's (JFK, 1917–1963; US president 1961-1963) adultery was (within the beltway), famous even at the time and David Lloyd George (1863–1945; UK prime-minister 1916-1922) blatantly took his mistress to the Paris Peace Conference in 1919; one author claimed even the long-assumed faithful Winston Churchill (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) may have strayed.  Doing his bit, Gareth Evans (b 1944; Australian Labor Party (ALP) senator or MP 1978-1999, sometime attorney-general & foreign minister) had an affair with then Democrats leader Cheryl Kernot (b 1948) who subsequently rated on them and joined the ALP although whether that was because or in spite of Gareth’s adulterous caresses has never been clear.

End of the line for Sir Billy Snedden.

Most illustrious are those said to have died on the job, expiring usually in hotel rooms following heart-attacks or strokes.  The list includes the 70 year old Nelson Rockefeller (1908-1979; US vice-president 1974-1977) who was with a 25 year old aide and the 76 year old Albert Speer (1905–1981; Nazi court architect 1934-1942; Nazi minister of armaments and war production 1942-1945) who was in the company of an admirer of 37.  Lord Palmerston (1784-1865; variously UK prime-minister or foreign secretary on several occasions 1830-1865) is rumoured to have died on a billiard table with a housemaid and Pope John XII (circa 933–964; pope 955-964) is said to have died in circumstances not dissimilar.  Famously, Sir Billy Snedden (1926–1987), at 61, breathed his last in a Travelodge at Sydney's Rushcutter’s Bay with a somewhat younger woman who was his son’s ex-girlfriend, an event recorded by what was perhaps the Melbourne Truth's most memorable front page.  Remarkably, despite decades of speculation, her identity has never publicly been confirmed.

Former Australian Country Party leader Barnaby Joyce (b 1967; thrice (between local difficulties) deputy prime minister of Australia 2016-2022).

Mr Joyce joined a long line of adulterous politicians who made the greatest mistake of all: getting caught.  He's pictured here escorting wife to the parliament's mid-winter ball (left) and casting his mistress an admiring glance (right).  The whip he carried was thought a photo-opportunity prop, an allusion to his role as a rural member of the house of representatives rather than an indication of any proclivities.

Conversation

Conversation (pronounced kon-ver-sey-shuhn)

(1) A (usually) informal interchange of thoughts, information, etc, by spoken words; oral communication between persons; talk; colloquy.

(2) Association or social intercourse; intimate acquaintance.

(3) In tort law, as criminal conversation, an action variously available (according to circumstances), pursuant to adultery.

(4) Behavior or manner of living (obsolete).

(5) Close familiarity; intimate acquaintance, as from constant use or study (now rare).

1300–1350: From the Middle English conversacion & conversacioun, from the Old French conversacion (behavior, life, way of life, monastic life), from the Latin conversātiōnem (accusative singular of conversātiō) (conversation) (frequent use, frequent abode in a place, intercourse, conversation), noun of action from the past-participle stem of conversari (to live, dwell, live with, keep company with), the passive voice of conversare (to turn about, turn about with (conversor (abide, keep company with) a frequently used derivative)), from an assimilated form, the construct being com (with, together) + versare, frequentative of vertere (to turn), from the primitive Indo-European root wer (to turn, bend).  Both the mid-fourteenth century meanings (1) "place where one lives or dwells" and (2) "general course of actions or habits, manner of conducting oneself in the world" are long obsolete.  Those senses were picked up from the Old French conversacion and directly from the Latin conversationem.

The modern sense of "informal interchange of thoughts and sentiments by spoken words" dates from the 1570s but this for a long time ran in parallel with being a synonym for "sexual intercourse", in use since at least the late fourteenth century.  Depending on the circles in which one moved, that might have been the source of misunderstandings.  In common law, the tort of criminal conversation emerged in the late eighteenth century.  The "conversation-piece" was noted from 1712 in the sense of "painting representing a group of figures arranged as if in conversation" al la "still life"; by 1784 it had come to mean "subject for conversation, something about which to talk".

The tort of criminal conversation

Like “knowing” (of biblical origin), "conversation" was a euphemism for illicit sex and in this sense has long been obsolete except as “criminal conversation”. which, at common law, is a tort which can be used in proceedings pursuant to certain types of adultery.  Dating from the eighteenth century, although abolished in England in 1857, the tort survived in Australia until 1975 when the Family Law Act replaced the old Matrimonial Causes Act, a piece of law reform which much disappointed Liberal Party lawyers, not a few moralists (professional & amateur) and readers of the Melbourne Truth, a most disreputable tabloid noted for its outstanding racing form guide and publication of salacious photographs (often taken through the windows of St Kilda motels) used as evidence in divorce cases.  The action remains available in a handful of jurisdictions in the United States where the rules can be more liberal than permitted in English courts in that women are entitled to sue.  The name has always been misleading; although called "criminal" conversation, the action was only ever strictly a claim for damages in money.

Example one (Cheryl & Gareth): A man has an affair with a married woman.  

The husband of the unfaithful wife would have been able to sue the unfaithful husband in the tort of criminal conversation.

It was a precisely defined tort which existed to allow wronged parties to seek monetary compensation for acts of unfaithfulness.  Under criminal conversation, within certain limitations of timings and sequence of events, a husband could sue any man who slept with his wife, even if consensual.  If the couple was already separated, the husband could sue only if the separation was caused by the person he was suing.

Example two (Vikki & Barnaby): A man has an affair with an unmarried woman.  

No action would have been possible in the tort of criminal conversation because the woman has no husband to raise the action.  Only a husband could be the plaintiff, and only the "other man" could be the defendant.

Reflecting the moral basis of the tort, each separate adulterous act could give rise to a separate claim for criminal conversation and curiously, the plaintiff, defendant and wife were not permitted to take the stand, evidence being given by other observers, often servants in the employment of one of the parties to the suit.  The tort was a matter wholly a creature of civil law and the definitions of adultery codified in canon law had no relevance to the offence or any subsequent penalty.  Under canon law, someone was deemed to have committed adultery if they enjoyed intimacy with someone while married to another whereas if the other party was also married, the offence was double adultery but neither aggravated the offence or could be offered in mitigation.

Conversation piece: Lindsay Lohan in conversation with her sister Aliana, La Conversation bakery & café, West Hollywood, California, April 2012.  Sadly, La Conversation is now closed.

Conversation piece: The Schutz Family and their Friends on a Terrace (1725) by Philip Mercier, Tate Gallery.  As a genre in painting, the "conversation piece" was a notionally informal (though obviously often staged) group portrait, usually small in scale and depicting families (and sometimes groups of friends) in domestic interior or garden settings.  They were popular for much of the eighteenth century, the most noted artists in the style including Philip Mercier (1689-1760), William Hogarth (1697-1764), Arthur Devis (1712-1787) and Johan Zoffany (1733-1810).

The form is interesting because it reflects the emergence of a new component of the leisured class, the newly rich merchants, or mine and factory owners whose wealth was derived from the profits of industrial revolution and the country’s expanding international trade.  The painters tended to show their subjects in genteel interaction, taking tea, playing games or sitting with their pets.  Conversation pieces were thus different from the formal court or grand style portraits favored by the aristocracy and were an attempt to represent the new middle class behaving as they imagined the old gentry did in everyday life.  Their influence worked also in reverse, aristocratic and royal patrons soon commissioning artist to paint their families in a similar vein.

Fake & Faux

Fake (pronounced feyk)

(1) To prepare or make something specious, deceptive, or fraudulent.

(2) To conceal the defects of or make appear more attractive, interesting, valuable etc, usually in an attempt to deceive.

(3) To pretend; simulate; emulate.

(4) To accomplish by trial and error or by improvising:

(5) To trick or deceive.

(6) In jazz music, to improvise (non pejorative).

(7) To play music without reading from a score (usually non pejorative).

(8) Anything made to appear otherwise than it actually is; counterfeit.

(9) A person who fakes; faker.

(10) To lay (a rope) in a coil or series of long loops so as to allow to run freely without fouling or kinking (often followed by down).

(11) Any complete turn of a rope that has been faked down; any of the various ways in which a rope may be faked down.

(12) In German, a male given name.

1350–1400: From the Middle English faken (to coil a rope) of unknown origin.  The nautical adoption fake (one of the windings of a cable or hawser in a coil) was from the Swedish veck (a fold) and probably entered English from exchanges between English and Scandinavian sailors.  The more familiar modern meaning is documented from 1775 as an adjective meaning “to counterfeit”.  It’s attested from 1812 as vagrants' slang meaning “to do for, rob or kill someone” but was also, in an echo of the earlier form, used to mean “shape something”.  It’s thought to have been either (1) a variant of the obsolete feak & feague (to beat), akin to Dutch veeg (a slap) & vegen (to sweep, wipe) or (2), a part of the Lingua Franca via Polari from the Italian facciare (to make or do).

It’s documented from 1851 as a noun (a swindle) and from 1888 was applied to a person (a swindler), but most etymologists assume the oral use was older.  The most likely source is thought to have been feague (to spruce up by artificial means), from the German fegen (polish, sweep) which, in colloquial use was used to mean "to clear out, to plunder".  In English, much of the early slang of thieves is from German or Dutch sources, dating from that great linguistic melting pot, the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) and until the nineteenth century, was largely un-documented although the fragmentary evidence available does suggest use was constantly shifting.

Fake news (journalism deliberately misleading), although popularized in the 2016 US presidential campaign (and subsequently applied quite incorrectly), was actually first attested in 1894 although, as a device, fake news is probably about as old as news itself.  Faker as an agent noun from faker the verb is from 1846 and the noun fakement (forgery) is from 1811.  To “fake (someone) out” is a description of applied gamesmanship in sport and noted from 1941.  To jazz musicians, “to fake” was merely oral slang for improvising and the “fake book” is attested from 1951.  Interestingly, the adjective "jivey" was sometimes used as a pejorative (phony, fake) unlike "jive" which, in a musical context, was always purely descriptive.

Fake is a noun & verb, faker & fakery are nouns and the verbs (used with object) are faked, faking; the noun plural is fakes.  Synonyms include ersatz, fake, false, imitation, imitative, unreal, counterfeit, fabricated, factitious, spurious, substitute, affected, contrived, feigned, insincere, plastic, synthetic, unnatural, bogus, affected, forged, fraudulent, mock, phony, spurious, deception, forgery, hoax, scam, sham, trick, put on, assumed, fraud, impostor, quack, charlatan, deceiver, substitute, contrived, feigned, insincere, plastic, unnatural

Faux (pronounced foh)

Artificial or imitation.

1676: from the twelfth century French faux (feminine singular fausse, masculine plural faux, feminine plural fausses), from the Old French fals, from the Latin falsus (false), perfect passive participle from fallō (deceive, trick; mistake).  The origin of fallō is uncertain.  It’s thought either from the Proto-Italic falsō, from the primitive Indo-European (s)whzel (to stumble) or from the primitive Indo-European ǵhwel- (to lie, deceive) but etymologists note structural problems with the latter.  A doublet of false.

The word fake almost always carries negative connotations, the idea of something that is not real, an imitation designed to trick someone into thinking it is real or original.  A fake might be a forgery or copy which is (certainly with many digital fakes) indistinguishable from whatever is the real or original thing it imitates, indeed it might even be an improvement but it remains fake.

Lindsay Lohan in faux fur, amfAR gala, New York City, 2013.

Faux has since the 1980s been used in English (with French pronunciation) to describe anything which is imitative without attempting to deceive.  Prior to this, the only frequent use in English was the faux pas (breach of good manners, any act that compromises one's reputation (literally "false step")), noted since the 1670s.  Faux tends not to convey the negative association of fake because it so blatantly an alternative rather than an attempt to deceive, indeed, it can have positive connotations, such as when it’s fur.  Faux fur is now respectable and, among some circles, there’s long been a micro-industry devoted to turning into social pariahs anyone wearing the real thing.  Sometimes, supporters of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) use direct action, the flinging of red paint onto the offending coast or stole a favorite.

Pamela Anderson, mostly real.

People do however seem unforgiving of fake boobs which, even if advertised as fake (which really should make them faux), seem forever doomed to be called fake.  The preferred form seem to be "fake tits". 

Faux also blends well; there are fauxmosexuals & fauxtatoes.  Donald Trump dubbed Elizabeth Warren (b 1949; United States senator (Democrat) for Massachusetts since 2013) Pocahontas because of her claim to Native American ancestry which proved dubious but allies of her predecessor Scott Brown (b 1959; United States senator (Republican) for Massachusetts 2010–2013), referred to her as Fauxcahontas.  That was actually an incorrect use necessitated by the need of rhyme and word formation; technically she was a Fakecahontas but as a word it doesn’t work as well.  People anyway seemed to get the point: as a Native American, she was fake, bogus, phoney.

Christ with the Woman Taken in Adultery by Han van Meegeren (1889–1947) following Vermeer (1632-1675).

In May 1945, immediately after the liberation from Nazi occupation of the Netherlands, the authorities arrested Dutch national Han van Meegeren (1889–1947) and charged him with collaborating with the enemy, a capital crime.  Evidence had emerged that van Meegeren had during World War II sold Vermeer's Christ with the Woman Taken in Adultery to Hermann Göring (1893–1946; prominent Nazi 1922-1945, Reichsmarschall 1940-1945).  His defense was as novel as it was unexpected: He claimed the painting was not a Vermeer but rather a forgery by his own hand, pointing out that as he had traded the fake for over a hundred other Dutch paintings seized earlier by the Reich Marshal and he was thus a national hero rather than a Nazi collaborator.  With a practical demonstration of his skill, added to his admission of having forged five other fake "Vermeers" during the 1930s, as well as two "Pieter de Hoochs" all of which had shown up on European art markets since 1937, he convinced the court and was acquitted but was then, as he expected, charged with forgery for which he received a one year sentence, half the maximum available to the court.  He died in prison of heart failure, brought on by years of drug and alcohol abuse. 

His skills with brush and paint aside, Van Meegeren was able successfully to pass off his 1930s fakes as those of the seventeenth century painter of the Dutch baroque, Johannes Vermeer (1632–1675), because of the four years he spent meticulously testing the techniques by which as a new painting could be made to look centuries old.  The breakthrough was getting the oil-based paints thoroughly to harden, a process which naturally occurs over fifty-odd years.  His solution was to mix the pigments with the synthetic resin Bakelite, instead of oil.  For his canvas, he used a genuine but worthless seventeenth-century painting and removed as much of the picture as possible, scrubbing carefully with pumice and water, taking the utmost care not to lose the network of cracks, the existence of which would play a role in convincing many expert appraisers they were authentic Vermeers.  Once dry, he baked the canvas and rubbed a carefully concocted mix of ink and dust into the edges of the cracks, emulating the dirt which would, over centuries, accumulate.

Guilty as sin: Hermann Göring in the dock, Nuremberg, 1946.

Modern x-ray techniques and chemical analysis mean such tricks can no longer succeed but, at the time, so convincing were his fakes that no doubts were expressed and the dubious Christ with the Woman Taken in Adultery became Göring's most prized acquisition, quite something given the literally thousands of pieces of art he looted from Europe.  One of the Allied officers who interrogated Göring in Nuremberg prison prior to his trial (1945-1946) recorded that the expression on his face when told "his Vermeer" was a fake suggested that "...for the first time Göring realized there really was evil in this world".

2013 Mercedes-AMG G 63 6×6.

Aimed at the Middle East market and manufactured between 2013-2015, a run of one-hundred units was planned for the Mercedes-AMG G 63 6×6 and it was advertised on that basis, exclusivity part of the attraction.  Such was the demand that dealers prevailed on behalf of a few influential customers so some additional units were built but not many and within months, used models were selling for well above the US$550,000 (€379,000) list price.  That encouraged imitations.

2014 Brabus B63S.

The tuning house Brabus, noted for catering to the small but lucrative market of those who like the AMG cars but think they need more power, released the B63S, its 700 horsepower quite a chunk above the 536 offered by AMG.  Something imitative certainly but nobody calls the B63S a faux or a fake.  Being in some sense a manufacturer lends validity so what Brabus does can be imitative but what ends up as their part-number is not an imitation, let alone a fake.

2017 Mercedes-AMG G63 6×6 Conversion.

This was said to have been a “conversion” of a 2017 G63 by G Wagon Car Technology GmbH (Austria).  Very well done and said to have been completed with mostly factory part-numbers, most would regard it as a clone, replica or recreation.

1938 Mercedes-Benz G4 (W31).

The G63 6x6 may anyway have had its own hint of the imitative.  Although Mercedes-Benz prefers not too much to dwell on the details of its activities between 1933-1945, one of the remarkable vehicles it built during the era was the G4 (W31).  The factory developed three-axle cross-country vehicles for military use during the 1920s but after testing a number of the prototype G1s, the army declined to place an order, finding them too big, too expensive and too heavy for their intended purpose.  Adolf Hitler (1889-1945) however, as drawn to big, impressive machines as he was to huge, representational architecture, ordered them adopted as parade vehicles and the army soon acquired a fleet of the updated G4, used eventually not only on ceremonial occasions but also as staff and command vehicles, two even specially configured, one as a baggage car and the other a mobile communications centre, packed with radio-telephony.

Eventually, between 1934-1939, fifty-seven were built, originally exclusively for the OKW (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (Armed Forces High Command)) and OKH (Oberkommando des Heeres (Army High Command)) but one was gift from Hitler to Generalissimo Franco (1892-1975; Caudillo of Spain 1939-1975).  The Spanish G4, one of few which still exists, was restored and remains in the royal garage in Madrid.  According to factory records, all were built with 5.0, 5.3 & 5.4 litre straight-eight engines but there is an unverified report of interview with Hitler’s long-time chauffeur, Erich Kempka (1910-1975), suggesting one for the Führer’s exclusive use was built with the 7.7 litre straight-eight used in the 770K Grosser (W07 (1930–1938) & W150 (1938–1943)).  Some of the 770s were supercharged so, if true, it's a tantalizing prospect but the story is widely thought apocryphal, no evidence of such a one-off ever having be sighted.

There are however fake cars and they're considered bogus if represented as a factory original (a modified version of something else).  Even if an exact copy of what the factory did, that’s fake yet exactly the same machine modified in the same way is instead a “clone” a “recreation” or a “replica” if represented as such.  Clone, recreation & replica do imply a exact copy but some leeway does seem to be granted given mechanical exactitude is sometimes simply not possible.  A vehicle which is substantially a replica of something but includes modifications to improve safety, performance or some other aspect of the dynamics is usually styled a “tribute” or restomod (a portmanteau word, the construct being resto(red) + mod(ified)).  The improvements can be transformative and, in certain cases, increase value but in others, might actually detract.  Whether a clone, a replica or a tribute, if what’s being referenced is something rare and desirable, the difference in value can be a factor of more than fifty times.  Originality can trump all.

1962 Ferrari 250 GTO recreation by Tempero of New Zealand.

As an extreme example there is the Ferrari 250 GTO, of which it’s usually accepted 36 were built although there were actually 41 (2 x (1961) prototypes; 32 x (1962–63) Series I 250 GTO; 3 x (1962–1963) “330 GTO”; 1 x (1963) 250 GTO with LM Berlinetta-style body & 3 x (1964) Series II 250 GTO).  The 36 in the hands of collectors command extraordinary prices, chassis 4153GT in June 2018 realizing US$70 million in a private sale whereas an immaculately crafted replica of a 1962 version by Tempero (New Zealand), said to be better built than any original GTO (although that is damning with faint praise, those who restore pre-modern Ferraris wryly noting that while the drive-trains were built with exquisite care, the assembly of the coachwork could be shoddy indeed), was listed for sale at US$1.3 million (no NFT required).  Even less exalted machinery, though actually more rare still, like the 1971 Plymouth Hemi Cuda convertible also illustrate the difference for there are now considerably more clones / replicas / recreations etc than ever there were originals and the price difference is typically a factor of ten or more.

Hypocrite & Pharisee

Hypocrite (pronounced hip-uh-krit)

(1) A person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles etc., that they do not actually possess, especially a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.

(2) A person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, especially one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.

1175–1225: from the Middle English ypocrite & ipocrite (false pretender to virtue or religion), from the Old French ypocrite (the Modern is French hypocrite), from the Ecclesiastical Latin hypocrita, from the Ancient Greek ὑποκριτής (hupokritḗs) (a stage actor, one who plays a part), from ὑποκρίνομαι (hupokrínomai) (I answer, act, feign, the construct being from hupo(krinein) (to feign (from krinein (to judge) + -tēs (the agent suffix).  Hypocrite is a noun (and long ago an adjective), hypocritical an adjective and hypocritically an adverb

Hypocrite came to English from the Ancient Greek hypokrites, which translates as “an actor”, the word a compound noun, the construct being two Greek words that literally translate as “an interpreter from underneath.”  That sense may sound strange but is actually literal, the actors in ancient Greek theater wearing large masks to indicate the part being played, thus they interpreted the story from underneath their masks.  This meaning endured from Antiquity, the Greek word later taking on an extended meaning to refer to someone said figuratively to be masked and thus pretending to be someone or something they were not.  This sense was taken-up in medieval French and subsequently English, where initially it used the earlier spelling ypocrite and in thirteenth century was used to refer to someone who pretends to be morally good or pious in order to deceive others.  Hypocrite gained its initial h- by the sixteenth century and it wasn’t until the early 1700s that it assumed in general use the now familiar modern meaning “a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings”, some five-hundred years after those striding English stages were so-described.

The adjective hypocritical (of, pertaining to, or proceeding from hypocrisy) dates from the 1540s (as implied in hypocritically) and prevailed over hypocritish (1520s) & hypocritic (1530s).  It was adjectivally innovative because from the thirteenth century, Middle English used the simple hypocrite as the adjective as well as the noun.  In Scottish, the late fifteenth century Lowrie (the characteristic name of the fox) was also used in the dual sense of "crafty person; hypocrite”

Hypocrite is so precise and well-understood that synonyms really aren’t required to convey any intent of meaning but for literary purposes there’s also bigot, charlatan, crook, impostor, phony, trickster, actor, backslider, bluffer, casuist, cheat, deceiver, decoy, dissembler, dissimulator, fake, four-flusher, fraud, humbug, informer, pretender & pharisee.  That such an impressively long list exists is a commentary on the human condition.  The noun dissembler is probably closest; a dissembler is “one who conceals his opinions, character etc, under a false appearance, one who pretends that a thing which is not".  Attested since the 1520s, it’s the agent noun from dissemble.

Pharisee (pronounced far-uh-see)

(1) A member of a Jewish sect that flourished between the second century BC and first century AD (during the Second Temple Era (536 BC-70 AD) which differed from the Sadducees principally in its strict observance of religious ceremonies and practices, adherence to oral laws and traditions (as interpreted rabbinically), belief in an afterlife and the coming of a Messiah (always with initial capital).  The movement was ultimately the basis for most contemporary forms of Judaism.

(2) Of or pertaining to the Pharisees.

(3) A sanctimonious, self-righteous, or hypocritical person (usually and correctly with initial lower-case).

(4) In figurative (and usually derogatory or offensive) use, a person who values the letter of the law over its spirit or intention; a person who values form over content.

Pre 900: From the Middle English Pharise & Farise, from the Old English Fariseos & Farīsēus, from the thirteenth century Old French pharise, from the Church Latin Pharisaeus (a variant of Pharīsaeus), from the Ancient Greek Φαρισαῖος (Pharisaîos), a transliteration of the Aramaic פְּרִישַׁיָּא‎ (pərîšayyâ’), emphatic plural of פְּרִישׁ‎ (pərîš) (separatist (literally “separated”)) and related to the Hebrew פרוש‎ (parush), qal passive participle of the verb פָּרַשׁ‎ (pāraš) (one who is separated for a life of purity), from parash (the Aramaic (Semitic) pərīshayyā was the plural of what is usually rendered as perīsh & pərīshā (literally “separated”)).  The extended meaning "any self-righteous person, formalist, hypocrite, scrupulous or ostentatious observer of the outward forms of religion without regard to its inward spirit" dates from the 1580s.  There’s no agreement between scholars about whether "Pharisee", derived words meaning “separated; set apart" refers to a physical separation from impure gentiles or a doctrinal separation from less religiously rigorous Jews and there’s even a suggestion they were regarded as "separatists" in the modern political sense.  The derived terms pharisaic, pharisaical, pharisaically, pharisaicalness, pharisaism & phariseeism (used according to context with and without an initial capital) are rarely used except in biblical scholarship or especially learned (and usually critical) legal texts.

The ancient Jewish sect which flourished between the second century BC and first century AD was distinguished the strict observance by its members of laws of behavior & ritual but were so extreme in their adherence that others came to regard them as pretentious and self-righteously sanctimonious and one of those others, recorded in the Gospel of Matthew was Jesus Christ himself:

Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,

(23) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

(24) Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.

(25) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.

(27) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness.

(28) Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

Matthew 23 (King James Version (KJV 1611))

The recently revealed text messages sent by Australia’s deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce (b 1967; thrice deputy prime-minister 2016-) included a character assessment of Prime Minister Scott Morrison (b 1968; Prime Minister of Australia 2018-) as “…a hypocrite and a liar from my observations and that is over a long time,” adding “I have never trusted him, and I dislike how earnestly [he] rearranges the truth to a lie.”  That was good but more amusing still was Mr Joyce’s “unreserved” apology to which he added the reservations that (1) it was a long time ago (10 months) and he was younger then, (2) he didn’t really know him at the time the message was sent (they’ve served together in cabinet for most of the last decade), (3) his opinion since he got to know him better has softened and he now thinks he’s a fine chap “of high integrity and honesty” and (4), he was in a bad mood when sending the message.

Given the ferocity of the critique, one might have thought Mr Morrison may have been consumed by hatred and vengeful thoughts but, perhaps feeling constrained by Luke 6:37…:

Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven. (King James Version (KJV 1611))

… issued a statement saying he’d forgiven Mr Joyce his trespasses, a gesture which either demonstrates some generosity of spirit or hints at his increasingly perilous political position.

Grace Tame looking at Scott Morrison, The Lodge, Canberra, annual pre-Invasion Day (aka Australia Day) festivities, 25 January 2021 and, arm in sling, after “a bike stack”.

Mr Joyce however may still nervously be looking over his shoulder.  A few days after Grace Tame (b 1994; activist for survivors of sexual assault & 2021 Australian of the Year), not best pleased with some aspects of Mr Morrison’s commitment to helping victims of sexual assault, spoiled one of his prized photo-opportunities by fixing him with a frosty stare rather than the expected asinine smile, she was involved in an accident, tumbling from her bike, breaking a collarbone and sustaining the odd graze.  There is no suggestion either Mr Morrison or the Liberal Party’s squad of dirty tricks operatives were involved in what Ms Tame described as a “bike stack” but Mr Joyce, noting no doubt that Mr Morrison said only “forgive” and not “forget”, may be impressed by the coincidence.

Even if he worries about that, perhaps Mr Joyce might have time to reflect on the attitude of Jesus to hypocrisy, discussed in the Gospel of John.  The Pharisees, in an attempt to discredit Jesus, brought before him a woman they accused of adultery, reminding the crime was under Mosaic law punishable by stoning.

(3) And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

(4) They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

(5) Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

(6) This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

(7) So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

(9) And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.

(10) When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?

(11) She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

John 8 (King James Version (KJV 1611)

Given the enthusiasm Mr Joyce showed for defending the sanctity of the marriage vow during the debate about same-sex marriage before deserting his wife to co-habit with a former employee with whom he’d been conducting an adulterous affair, it may be time for him to read the bible rather than just thumping one.

Gladys Berejiklian looking at Scott Morrison.

What made the latest in Mr Joyce’s long line of gaffs funnier still was the release a few days earlier of text messages between former New South Wales premier Gladys Berejiklian (b 1970; Premier of NSW 2017-2021) and an un-named member of Mr Morrison’s cabinet in which Ms Berejiklian branded the prime minister a “horrible, horrible person” who was "untrustworthy" and “more concerned with politics than people”.  The minister proved responsive to the then premier’s analysis, describing his leader as “a fraud”, “a complete psycho” and “desperate and jealous.”  Perhaps a victim of Sinodinos syndrome, when asked, Ms Berejiklian said she couldn't recall of the exchange.

Spirit of forgiveness: The prime-minister washes and conditions his deputy’s hair (digitally altered image).

As soon as this scurrilous texting was revealed, Mr Joyce affected outrage that anyone would do such a thing, condemning the anonymous minister and demanding they reveal their identity.  “I would suggest that if you know anything about this don’t wait to be outed”, Mr Joyce told the media.  He also had practical advice, adding “…and give an explanation.  Maybe it was a bad day in the office, I don’t know. That’s a better way to do it. It getting out is one good rump steak, with horseradish sauce, vegetables and chips, two bottles of red wine, and some journo is going to say ‘You know who told me that? Blah blah blah.’ And she’s out.”  That may yet prove sound advice.  Most revealing perhaps was (1) the admission by the journalist who provided the leak that the ministerial author had on two prior occasions over the last year refused to authorize a public release of the text, dropping the embargo only to permit a release on 1 February 2022 and (2) the journalist writes for the Murdoch press.  Politicians’ motives for doing things always attract interest (when being told of the Belgium ambassador’s death, Talleyrand mused “I wonder what his motive was?”) and there’s been much speculation, most of it pondering which minister would gain most to gain from the messages entering the public domain.

Former NSW premier Bob Carr (b 1947; Premier of NSW 1995-2005, foreign minister 2012-2013 (@bobjcarr)), anxious to help, tweeted:

The minister who shared the text with van Onselen and gave permission to use it was Peter Dutton. If PM Morrison has one more week in free fall the prospect of a leadership change pre-election is real.  Party rules don’t count if most MPs think you will lead them to defeat.

Mr Dutton (b 1970; member of cabinet since 2013) responded by tweeting “Bob Carr’s tweet is baseless, untrue and should be deleted” but Mr Carr declined, instead adding “Only one way Peter Dutton can win his case: get another colleague to admit that they were the source for comments about the Prime Minister.  If not you, Mr Dutton, which of your colleagues? Until then who has most to gain from undermining further a flailing PM?”

In happier times: Liberal-National Party billboard for the 2016 election campaign.

Given Ms Berejiklian and Mr Dutton sat in different parliaments, hailed from different states and belonged to different factions, it does seem strange he might be the suspect texter but few things in politics unite like a mutual loathing.  Mr Carr offered no evidence for his claim and seemed unconcerned the notably litigious Mr Dutton might issue a writ.  The former foreign minister said that, like a journalist, he wouldn’t be revealing his sources but did indicate the tip came from a normally reliable source and was not supposition based on Mr Dutton having “a bit of previous”.  Mr Dutton's texting history included sending one calling a journalist a "mad fucking witch".  Unfortunately he sent the text to the target of his remarks but fortunately she worked for the Murdoch press and thus had to cop it sweet which the witch did with some aplomb, even complimenting Mr Dutton for having been a minister who had made a great contribution to government.  The conspiracy theory which underpins Mr Carr's tweet is the notion that in 2018 Mr Morrison tricked Mr Dutton into triggering the defenestration of Malcolm Turnbull (b 1954; prime-minister of Australia 2015-2018) and then double-crossed him, securing the numbers and The Lodge for himself.  Not quite Fortinbras in Hamlet but an anyway successful venture.  Mr Dutton has never denied being a Freemason.

Peter Dutton looking at Scott Morrison.

Amidst the Sturm und Drang which has raged since the text messages emerged, what’s not been discussed is the desirability of characteristics such as hypocrisy, having more interest in politics than people and being an actual psychopath in a prime-minister.  Being a hypocrite in its original meaning in Ancient Greek (an actor; one playing a part) is so obvious a helpful attribute for a political leader that Ronald Reagan (1911-2004 US President 1981-1989) was probably genuinely surprised at the journalistic naiveté when, during the 1980 presidential election campaign, he was asked if was possible for an actor to be good president.  His rely was “How is it possible for a good president not to be an actor?” and his point was well made and Harold Macmillan (1894-1986, UK prime-minister 1957-1963) was habitually referred to as an “actor-manager”.  Being, in its modern sense, a hypocrite, liar and psychopath might sound less promising qualifications for political leadership and for idealists something truly appalling and it may be these qualities are more valuable in attaining office than exercising successfully its power although there’s always the extraordinary example of Comrade Stalin (1878-1853; leader of the USSR 1924-1953) to illustrate just what a serious psychopath can achieve.

Another fun aspect of these text messages is that the conflict is internecine.  Politicians being mean to those on the other side is so common it barely rates as news unless there’s some particularly egregious accusation, preferably involving a goat or some other abomination but when it’s within the same party, it’s especially amusing because that’s where the real hatreds lie.  That’s why Gordon Brown (b 1951; UK prime-minister 2007-2010) being was labeled “a psychopath” by Tony Blair (b 1953; UK prime-minister 1997-2007) was funny; had he said it of the leader of the opposition it’s doubtful anyone would have noticed.  Mr Joyce’s contribution to the genre was really quite good as was that of Mr Dutton (or whomever the culprit may be) but that of Ms Berejiklian lacked punch; she needs to sharpen the hatchet.