Consecutive

Consecutive (pronounced kuhn-sek-yuh-tiv)

(1) Following one another in uninterrupted succession or order; successive without interruption.

(2) Marked or characterized by logical sequence (such as chronological, alphabetical or numerical sequence).

(3) In grammar & linguistics, as “consecutive clause”, a linguistic form that implies or describes an event that follows temporally from another (expressing consequence or result).

(4) In musical composition, a sequence of notes or chords which results from repeated shifts in pitch of the same interval (an alternative term for “parallel”).

1605-1615: From the sixteenth century French consécutif, from the Medieval Latin cōnsecūtīvus, from the Latin cōnsecūtus (follow up; having followed), from consequī (to pursue) & cōnsequor (to travel).  The construct was consecut(ion) + -ive.  Consecution dates from the early fifteenth century and by the 1530s was used in the sense of “proceeding in argument from one proposition to another in logical sequence”.  It was from the Middle English consecucioun (attainment), from the Latin consecutionem (nominative consecution), noun of action from the past-participle stem of consequi (to follow after), from an assimilated form of com (in the sense of “with, together”) + sequi (to follow (from the primitive Indo-European root sekw- (to follow).  The meaning “any succession or sequence” emerged by the 1650s.  The Latin cōnsecūtiō (to follow after) was from the past participle of cōnsequor (to follow, result, reach).  The –ive suffix was from the Anglo-Norman -if (feminine -ive), from the Latin -ivus.  Until the fourteenth century, all Middle English loanwords from the Anglo-Norman ended in -if (actif, natif, sensitif, pensif etc) and, under the influence of literary Neolatin, both languages introduced the form -ive.  Those forms that have not been replaced were subsequently changed to end in -y (hasty, from hastif, jolly, from jolif etc).  The antonyms are inconsecutive & unconsecutive but (except in some specialized fields of mathematics) “non-sequential” usually conveys the same meaning.  Like the Latin suffix -io (genitive -ionis), the Latin suffix -ivus is appended to the perfect passive participle to form an adjective of action.  Consecutive is a noun & adjective, consecutiveness is a noun and consecutively is an adverb; the noun plural is consecutives.

In sport, the most celebrated consecutive sequence seems to be things in three and that appears to first to have been institutionalized in cricket where for a bowler to take three wickets with three consecutive deliveries in the same match was first described in 1879 as a “hat trick”.  Because of the rules of cricket, there could be even days between these deliveries because a bowler might take a wicket with the last ball he delivered in the first innings and the first two he sent down in the second.  A hat trick however can happen only within a match; two in one match and one in another, even if consecutive, doesn’t count.  Why the rare feat came to be called “hat trick” isn’t certain, the alternative explanations being (1) an allusion to the magician’s popular stage trick of “pulling three rabbits out of the hat” (there had earlier also been a different trick involving three actions and a hat) or (2) the practice of awarding the successful bowler a hat as a prize; hats in the nineteenth century were an almost essential part of the male wardrobe and thus a welcome gift.  The “hat trick” terminology extended to other sports including rugby (a player scoring three tries in a match), football (soccer) & ice hockey (a player scoring three goals in a match) and motor racing (a driver securing pole position, setting the fastest lap time and winning a race).  It has become common in sport (and even politics (a kind of sport)) to use “hat trick” of anything in an uninterrupted sequence of three (winning championships, winning against the same opponent over three seasons etc) although “threepeat” (the construct being three + (re)peat) has become popular and to mark winning three long-established premium events (not always in the same season) there are “triple crowns).  Rugby’s triple crown is awarded to whichever of the “home countries” (England, Ireland, Scotland & Wales) wins all three matches that season; US Horse racing’s triple crown events are the Kentucky Derby, the Preakness Stakes and the Belmont Stakes.

Graham Hill (1929–1975) in BRM P57 with the famous (but fragile) open-stack exhausts, Monaco Grand Prix, 3 June 1962.  Hill is the only driver to have claimed motor-racing's classic Triple Crown.

The term is widely used in motorsport but the classic version is the earliest and consists of the Indianapolis 500, the 24 Hours of Le Mans and the Formula One (F1) World Drivers' Championship (only one driver ever winning all three) and there’s never been any requirement of “consecutiveness”; indeed, now that F1 drivers now rarely appear in other series while contracted, it’s less likely to happen.

Donald Trump, a third term and the Twenty-second Amendment

Steve Bannon (left) and Donald Trump (right).

Although the MAGA (Make America Great Again) team studiously avoided raising the matter during the 2024 presidential election campaign, while Donald Trump (b 1946; US president (POTUS) 2017-2021 and since 2025) was president elect awaiting inauguration, Steve Bannon (b 1957 and a most prominent MAGA operative) suggested there’s a legal theory (that term may be generous) which could be relevant in allowing him to run again in 2028, by-passing the “two-term limit” in the US Constitution.  Speaking on December 15 at the annual gala dinner of New York’s Young Republican Club’s (the breeding ground of the state’s right-wing fanatics), Mr Bannon tantalized the guests by saying “…maybe we do it again in 28?”, his notion of the possibility a third Trump term based on advice received from Mike Davis (1978, a lawyer who describes himself as Mr Trump’s “viceroy” and was spoken of in some circles as a potential contender for attorney general in a Trump administration).  Although the Twenty-second Amendment to the constitution states: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice”, Mr Davis had noted it was at least arguable this applied only to “consecutive” terms so as Mr Bannon confirmed, there was hope.  Warming to the topic, Mr Bannon went on to say :“Donald John Trump is going to raise his hand on the King James Bible and take the oath of office, his third victory and his second term.” (the MAGA orthodoxy being he really “won” the 2020 election which was “stolen” from him by the corrupt “deep state”.

Legal scholars in the US have dismissed the idea the simple, unambiguous phrase in the amendment could be interpreted in the way Mr Bannon & Mr Davis have suggested.  In the common law world, the classic case in the matter of how words in acts or statutes should be understood by courts is Bank of England v Vagliano Brothers (1891) AC 107, a bills of exchange case, decided by the House of Lords, then the UK’s final court of appeal.  Bank of England v Vagliano Brothers was a landmark case in the laws relating to negotiable instruments but of interest here is the way the Law Lords addressed significant principles regarding the interpretation of words in statutes, the conclusion being the primary goal of statutory interpretation is to ascertain the intention of Parliament as expressed in the statute and that intention must be derived from the language of the statute, interpreted in its natural and ordinary sense, unless the context or subject matter indicates otherwise.  What the judgment did was clarify that a statute may deliberately depart from or modify the common law and courts should not assume a statute is merely a restatement of common law principles unless the statute's language makes this clear.  The leading opinion was written by Lord Herschell (Farrer Herschell, 1837–1899; Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain 1886 & 1892-1895) who held that if the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous, it should be interpreted as it stands, without assuming it is subject to implicit common law principles; only if the language is ambiguous may courts look elsewhere for context and guidance.

So the guiding principle for courts is the words of a statute should be understood with what might be called their “plain, simple meaning” unless they’re not clear and unambiguous.  While the US Supreme Court recently has demonstrated it does not regard itself as bound even its own precedents and certainly not those of a now extinct UK court, few believe even the five most imaginative of the nine judges could somehow construe a constitutional amendment created for the explicit purpose of limiting presidents to two terms could be read down to the extent of “…more than twice…” being devalued to “…more than twice in a row…”.  Still, it was a juicy chunk of bleeding raw meat for Mr Bannon to toss to his ravenous audience.

The ratification numbers: Ultimately, the legislatures of 41 of the then 48 states ratified the amendment with only Massachusetts and Oklahoma choosing to reject.  

What the Twenty-second amendment did was limit the number of times someone could be elected president.  Proposed on 21 March 1947, the ratification process wasn’t completed until 27 February 1951, a time span of time span: 3 years, 343 days which is longer than all but one of the other 26, only the Twenty-seventh (delaying laws affecting Congressional salary from taking effect until after the next election of representatives) took longer, a remarkable 202 years, 223 days elapsing between the proposal on 25 September 1789 and the conclusion on 7 May 1992; by contrast, the speediest was the Twenty-sixth which lowered the voting age to 18, its journey absorbed only 100 days between 23 March-1 July 1971.  While not too much should be read into it, it’s of interest the Eighteenth (prohibiting the manufacturing or sale of alcoholic drinks within the US) required 1 year, 29 days (18 December 1917-16 January 1919) whereas the Twenty-first (repealing the Eighteenth) was done in 288 days (little more than half the time); proposed on 20 February 1933, the process was completed on 5 December the same year.

The path to the Twenty-second amendment began when George Washington (1732–1799; first POTUS, 1789-1797) choose not to seek a third term, his reasons including (1) a commitment to republican principles which required the presidency not be perceived as a life-long or vaguely monarchical position, (2) the importance of a peaceful transition of power to demonstrate the presidency was a temporary public service, not a permanent entitlement and (3) a desire not to see any excessive concentration of power in one individual or office.  Historians have noted Washington’s decision not to seek a third term was a deliberate effort to establish a tradition of limited presidential tenure, reflecting his belief this would safeguard the republic from tyranny and ensure no individual indefinitely could dominate government.

AI (Artificial Intelligence) generated image by Stable Diffusion of Lindsay Lohan and Donald Trump enjoying a coffee in Trump Tower's coffee shop.

For more than a century, what Washington did (or declined to do) was regarded as a constitutional convention and no president sought more than two terms.  Theodore Roosevelt (TR, 1858–1919; POTUS 1901-1909), celebrating his re-election in 1904 appeared to be moved by the moment when, unprompted, he announced: “Under no circumstances will I be a candidate for or accept another nomination” and he stuck to the pledge, arranging for William Howard Taft (1857–1930; POTUS 1909-1913 & chief justice of the SCOTUS (US Supreme Court) 1921-1930) to be his successor, confident he’d continue to pursue a progressive programme.  Taft however proved disappointingly conservative and Roosevelt decided in 1912 to seek a third term.  To critics who quoted at him his earlier pledge, he explained that “…when a man at breakfast declines the third cup of coffee his wife has offered, it doesn’t mean he’ll never in his life have another cup.”  Throughout the 1912 campaign, comedians could get an easy laugh out of the line: “Have another cup of coffee”? and to those who objected to his violating Washington’s convention, he replied that what he was doing was “constitutional” which of course it was.

Puck magazine in 1908 (left) and 1912 (right) wasn't about to let Theodore Roosevelt forget what he'd promised in 1904.  The cartoon on the left was an example of accismus (an expression of feigned uninterest in something one actually desires).  Accismus was from the Latin accismus, from Ancient Greek ακκισμός (akkismós) (prudery).  Puck Magazine (1876-1918) was a weekly publication which combined humor with news & political satire; in its use of cartoons and caricatures it was something in the style of today's New Yorker but without quite the same tone of seriousness.

Roosevelt didn’t win the Republican nomination because the party bosses stitched thing up for Taft so he ran instead as a third-party candidate, splitting the GOP vote and thereby delivering the White House to the Democrats but he gained more than a quarter of the vote, out-polling Taft and remains the most successful third-party candidate ever so there was that.  His distant cousin Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR, 1882–1945, POTUS 1933-1945) was the one to prove the convention could be ignored and he gained not only a third term in 1940 but also a fourth in 1944.  FDR was not only a Democrat but also a most subversive one and when Lord Halifax (Edward Wood, 1881–1959; British Ambassador to the United States 1940-1946) arrived in Washington DC to serve as ambassador, he was surprised when one of a group of Republican senators with whom he was having dinner opened proceedings with: “Before you speak, Mr Ambassador, I want you to know that everyone in this room regards Mr Roosevelt as a bigger dictator than Hitler or Mussolini.  We believe he is taking this country to hell as quickly as he can.”  As a sentiment, it sounds very much like the discourse of the 2024 campaign.

"The Trump Dynasty has begun" four term coffee mugs (currently unavailable) created for the 2020 presidential campaign. 

The Republicans truly were appalled by Roosevelt’s third and fourth terms and as soon as they gained control of both houses of Congress began the process of adding an amendment to the constitution which would codify in that document the two-term limit Washington had sought to establish as a convention.  It took longer than usual but the process was completed in 1951 when the amendment became part of the constitution and were Mr Trump to want to run again in 2028, it would have to be repealed, no easy task because such a thing requires not only the concurrence of two thirds of both the House of Representatives & Senate but also three quarters of the legislatures of the 50 states.  In other countries where presidential term limits have appeared tiresome to those who have no intention of leaving office the “work-arounds” are usually easier and Mr Trump may cast the odd envious eye overseas.  In Moscow, Mr Putin (Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin; b 1952; president or prime minister of Russia since 1999) solved the problem by deciding he and his prime-minister temporarily should swap jobs (though not authority) while he arranged a referendum to effect the necessary changes to the Russian Constitution.  The point about referendums in Russia was explained by comrade Stalin (1878-1953; Soviet leader 1924-1953) who observed: “it matters not who votes, what matters is who gets to count the votes.”  Barring accidents or the visitation of the angel of death (God forbid), Mr Putin seem set to remain as president until at least the mid-2030s.  

Some matters of mutual interest: Donald Trump (left) and Vladimir Putin (right).

There have been many African presidents who have "arranged" for constitutional term limits to be "revised" but the most elegant in the handling of this was Pierre Nkurunziza (1964–2020; president of Burundi 2005-2020) who simply ignored the tiresome clause and announced he would be standing for a third term, tidying up loose ends by having Burundi's Constitutional Court declare the president was acting in accordance with the law.  It would seem the principle of statutory interpretation in Bank of England v Vagliano Brothers (1989) wasn't brought before the court (formerly part of the empire of Imperial Germany (the so-called "Second Reich") and later a Belgian-administered territory under a League of Nations mandate, Burundi follows the civil law tradition rather than the common law inheritance from the old British Empire so the judgment in Vagliano might, at most, have been though "persuasive" and certainly not binding).  As it was, shortly before the verdict was handed down, one judge, fearing for his life, fled into exile, claiming the government had applied "pressure" on the court to deliver a ruling favorable to the president.

For most of the republic's existence, holders of the office of VPOTUS (vice-president of the US) tended to be obscure figures noted only if they turned out to be crooks like Spiro Agnew (1918–1996; VPOTUS 1969-1973) or assumed the presidency in one circumstance or another and during the nineteenth century there was a joke about two brothers: “One ran off to sea and the other became vice-president; neither were ever heard from again.”  That was of course an exaggeration but it reflected the general view of the office which has few formal duties and can only ever be as powerful or influential as a president allows although the incumbent is “a heartbeat from the presidency”.  John Nance Garner III (1868–1967, VPOTUS 1933-1941), a reasonable judge of these things, once told Lyndon Johnson (LBJ, 1908–1973; VPOTUS 1961-1963 & POTUS 1963-1969) being VPOTUS was “not worth a bucket of warm piss” (which in polite company usually is sanitized as “...bucket of warm spit”).  In the US, a number of VPOTUSs have become POTUS and some have worked out well although of late the record has not been encouraging, the presidencies of Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon (1913-1994; VPOTUS 1953-1961 & POTUS 1969-1974), George H. W. Bush (George XLI, 1924-2018; VPOTUS 1981-1989 & POTUS 1989-1993) and Joe Biden (b 1942; VPOTUS 2008-2017 & POTUS 2021-2025) 1963-1968, all ending badly, respectively in despair, disgrace, defeat and decrepitude.

Still, in the post-war years, the VPOTUS has often assumed a higher profile or been judged to be more influential, the latter certainly true of Dick Cheney (1941-2025; VPOTUS 2001-2009) and some have even been given specific responsibilities such as LBJ’s role as titular head of the space program (which worked out well) or Kamala Harris (b 1964; VPOTUS 2021-2025) co-ordinating the response to difficulties on the southern border (a role in which either she failed or never attempted depending on the opinion's source).  So wonderfully unpredictable is Donald Trump that quite what form the Vance VPOTUSship will assume is guesswork but conspiracy theorists already are speculating part of MAGA forward-planning is to have Mr Vance elected POTUS in 2028, simply as part of a work-around in a constitutional jigsaw puzzle.

The conspiracy revolves around the words in Section 1 of the Twenty-second Amendment: “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice” and even the most optimistic MAGA lawyers concede not even Brett Kavanaugh (b 1965; associate justice of the SCOTUS since 2018) or Clarence Thomas (b 1948; associate justice of SCOTUS since 1991) could construct an interpretation which would allow Mr Trump to be elected for a third term although Justice Thomas may make a heroic attempt.  The constitution is however silent on whether any person may serve a third (or fourth, or fifth!) term so that makes possible the following sequence:

(1) In the 2028 election J.D.Vance is elected POTUS and somebody else (matters not who) is elected VPOTUS.

(2) J.D. Vance and somebody else (matters not who) are sworn into office as POTUS & VPOTUS respectively.

(3) Somebody else (matters not who) resigns as VPOTUS.

(4) J.D. Vance appoints Donald Trump as VPOTUS who is duly sworn-in.

(5) J.D. Vance resigns as POTUS and, as the constitution dictates. Donald Trump becomes POTUS and is duly sworn-in.

(6) Donald Trump appoints J.D.Vance as VPOTUS.

Whatever the politics, constitutionally, there is nothing controversial about those six steps because in part it replicates what happened between 1968 when Nixon & Agnew were elected POTUS & VPOTUS and 1974 when the offices were held respectively by Gerald Ford (1913–2006; VPOTUS 1973-1974 & POTUS 1974-1977) & Nelson Rockefeller (1908–1979; VPOTUS 1974-1977), neither of the latter pair having been elected.  Of course, in January 2029 somebody else (matters not who) would be a “left-over” but he (it seems a reasonable assumption somebody else (matters not who) will be male) can, depending on this and that, be appointed something like Secretary of Agriculture or a to sinecure such as an ambassadorship to a nice (non-shithole) country with a pleasant climate and a majority white population. 

Routine

Routine (pronounced roo-teen)

(1) A customary or regular course of procedure.

(2) Commonplace tasks, chores, or duties as must be done regularly or at specified intervals; typical or everyday activity.

(3) Regular, unvarying, habitual, unimaginative, or rote procedure.

(4) An unvarying and constantly repeated formula, as of speech or action; convenient or predictable response; in informal use something perfunctory or insincere; merely procedural.

(5) In computer programming, a complete set of coded instructions directing a computer to perform a series of operations; that series of operations (also as sub-routine (as part of a larger routine) & co-routine (run in conjunction) although few programmers use the hyphens).

(6) In entertainment, an individual act, performance, or part of a performance, as a song or dance, given regularly by an entertainer.

(7) Of the nature of, proceeding by, or adhering to routine.

(8) Dull or uninteresting; commonplace.

(9) One of the key concepts in ethnomethodology (a discipline in sociology focused on the methods groups use to create societal order) and related to routinization of authority, the process through which a charismatic authority becomes a bureaucracy

(10) As RAT (routine activity theory), a sub-field of criminology.

(11) In poker, as Royal Routine, an alternative name for the royal straight flush.

1670–1680: From the Middle English routine (customary course of action; more or less mechanical performance of certain acts or duties), from the sixteenth century French routine from the Middle French route (road, route), from the Old French route & rote (usual course of action, beaten path; a customary way), the construct being rout(e) + -ine (a diminutive suffix), from the Latin rupta (broken, ruptured, burst), perfect passive participle of rumpō, from the Proto-Italic rumpō (break, I break, I violate), from the primitive Indo-European Hrunépti & Hrumpénti (to break), from the root Hrewp-.  Routine is a noun & adjective, routineness, routinization & routiner are nouns, routinize is a verb and routinely is an adverb; the noun plural is routines.

Routine can be merely descriptive of something periodic or a construct and thus neutral or convey something negative in the sense in which the synonyms include conventional, everyday, ordinary, rut, humdrum, unremarkable, habitual, perfunctory & insincere.  In other European languages the descendants include the Catalan (rutina), Dutch (routine), Galician (rutina), Hungarian (rutin), Italian (routine), Portuguese (rotina), Spanish (rutina) & Turkish (rutin).  The rather unhappy noun of action routinization (a being or becoming routine; action of imposing a routine upon) was a creation of US English in 1916 as a development from the verb routinize (subject to a routine, make into a routine) which dates from 1893.  The adjectival sense "of a mechanical or unvaried character, habitually done in the same way" has been used since at least 1917 and was a direct development from the noun.  The now familiar theatrical or athletic performance sense of "carefully rehearsed sequence of actions" dates only from 1926.

In the context of the card game, the word poker is an adaptation of US English of uncertain origin and there’s no evidence of any relationship to other meanings.  Quite why the card game was so-named has attracted speculation but no documentary evidence has ever emerged.  It may be related to the German Pochspiel (a similar card game) from the German pochen (to brag as a bluff (literally "to knock, rap” (and thus the suggested link to the verb poke))) from the Middle High German bochen & puchen, from the Proto-Germanic puk-, which is probably imitative.  An alternative idea is that it was related to the French poquer from poque, (a similar card game and a move in pétanque (a form of boules (in the sense of the game, a shortening of the French jeu de boules)), a game played with metal bowls with origins in the south of France).  The earlier version of the game was in English called brag and the US form seems first to have been played in 1829 on the lower reaches of the Mississippi, presumably among riverboat gamblers and the location, with the French influences, does support some French connection in the etymology.  Interestingly, it appears the original form seems to have been played with a 20-card pack (10-J-Q-K-A) evenly dealt among four players; the full-deck version not played until the 1840s.

Lindsay Lohan's Royal Routine in The Parent Trap (1998)

The Royal Routine (more commonly known as the royal flush) is the least likely winning combination in five-card poker and cannot be beaten unless “agreed rules” are being played which includes an ascendency of suits; in that case, one Royal Routine can beat another, however unlikely such an occurrence may be.  Because in poker all suits are usually of equal value, most prefer to “split the pot” if, after a count-back, two or more hands are equal although rules for a variety of tie-break mechanisms have been defined.  In ascending order, the winning possibilities in poker are:

The Royal Routine (royal flush). The Ace down to the 10 in one suit.  Under standard poker rules, the odds against holding a Royal Routine are 649,739:1.

The straight flush: There are 40 different straight flush possibilities and the odds against are 72,192:1; although in a sense a Royal Routine is just another straight flush, it’s rarer because fewer cards are available for one to be assembled.

Four of a kind: Also called "quads", the odds against are 4,165:1.

Full house: Originally called the "full boat" (a hint of the game’s origins on the lower reaches of the Mississippi) 3744 different full house combinations are available and to players, few things are more annoying than having one’s full house beaten by another on a count-back.  The odds against are 4,165:1.

The flush: Any 5 cards of the same suit, non consecutive with the winning hand determined by the highest individual card held.  5148 different combinations of a flush are available and the odds against are 508.8019:1.

The straight: Originally known as the wheel (another allusion to the Mississippi, this one referencing the wheeled paddles of the ships which plied the route), any 5 consecutive ranked cards in multiple suits where the ace can be high or low (an ace high straight is also called the "broadway").  10240 different straight combinations are possible and the odds against are 253.8:1.

Three of a kind: In some circles called "the trips" or a "set", there are 54,912 different possibilities of 3 of a kind are available and the odds against are 46.32955:1

Two Pairs: There are 123,552 possible two pair combinations and it’s reputedly the game’s most over-bet hand; the odds against are 20.03535:1.

The pair: Any two cards of the same rank.  The odds against are 1.366477:1.

Card High:  The hand with the highest single card wins and there are over 2½ million winning combinations; the odds against are 0.9953015:1.

The Boeing B-29 Superfortress (one of the special Silverplate series) which dropped the one-off, uranium A-Bomb on Hiroshima on 6 August 1945 was named Enola Gay in honor of the mission commander’s mother (Enola Gay Tibbets (née Haggard).  Enola Gay is well known but on the Hiroshima mission were six other B-29s, two of which were named after poker hands (with scatologic graphics), reflecting the popularity of the game among the military.  The three reconnaissance planes which were tasked to report weather conditions over the possible target cities were Jabit III, Full House & Straight Flush; the mission reserve B-29 was Top Secret, Necessary Evil was the camera plane which photographed the bombing and The Great Artiste carried a scientific crew with monitoring equipment.  Poker was quite a thing then and when Richard Nixon (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974) in 1945 returned from his South Pacific tour of duty it was with thousands of dollars in poker winnings, his history including one rare Royal Routine and a prize pot of US$1500 won with a bluff on a pair of twos.

Frame

Frame (pronounced freym)

(1) A (sometimes intricate) border or case for enclosing a picture, mirror etc.

(2) A rigid structure formed of relatively slender pieces, joined so as to surround sizable empty spaces or non-structural panels, and generally used as a major support in building or engineering works, machinery, furniture etc.

(3) A body, especially a human body, with reference to its size or build; the physique of someone (often with a modifier (large frame, slight frame etc).

(4) A structure for admitting or enclosing something (doors, windows etc); other in the plural and used with a plural verb).

(5) In textile production, a machine or part of a machine over which yarn is stretched.

(6) In statistics, an enumeration of a population for the purposes of sampling, especially as the basis of a stratified sample

(7) In telecommunications and data transmission, one cycle of a regularly recurring number of pulses in a pulse train (frame relay etc); in networking, an independent chunk of data sent over a network.

(8) A constitution or structure in general; the system.

(9) In beekeeping, one of the sections of which a beehive is composed, especially one designed to hold a honeycomb

(10) In formal language teaching, a syntactic construction with a gap in it, used for assigning words to syntactic classes by seeing which words may “fill the gap”.

(11) In physical film stock, one of the successive pictures, the concept transferred to digital imagery.

(12) In television, a single traversal by the electron beam of all the scanning lines on a television screen.

(13) In computing, the information or image on a screen or monitor at any one time (dated).

(14) In computing (website design), a self-contained section that functions independently from other parts; by using frames, a website designer can make some areas of a website remain constant while others change according to the choices made by the internet user (an individually scrollable region of a webpage; “collapsible frames” a noted innovation).

(15) In philately, the outer decorated portion of a stamp's image, often repeated on several issues although the inner picture may change; the outer circle of a cancellation mark.

(16) In electronics (film, animation, video games), a division of time on a multimedia timeline.

(17) In bowling, one of the ten divisions of a game; one of the squares on the scorecard, in which the score for a given frame is recorded.

(18) In billiards and related games, the wooden triangle used to set up the balls; the balls when set up by the frame.

(19) In baseball, an inning.

(20) In underworld slang, as “frame-up” or “framed”, to incriminate (an innocent person) on the basis of fabricated evidence.

(21) In law enforcement slang as “in the frame”, being suspected by the authorities of having committed a offence.

(22) In publishing, enclosing lines (usually in the form of a square or rectangle), to set off printed matter in a newspaper, magazine, or the like; a box.

(23) The structural unit that supports the chassis of an automobile (X-Frame, ladder-Frame, perimeter-frame, space-frame etc).

(24) In nautical architecture, any of a number of transverse, rib-like members for supporting and stiffening the shell of each side of a hull; any of a number of longitudinal members running between web frames to support and stiffen the shell plating of a metal hull.

(25) In genetics, as “reading frame”, a way of dividing nucleotide sequences into a set of consecutive triplets.

(26) In mathematics, a complete lattice in which meets distribute over arbitrary joins.

(27) A machine or part of a machine supported by a framework, (drawing frame, spinning frame etc).

(28) In printing, the workbench of a compositor, consisting of a cabinet, cupboards, bins, and drawers, and having flat and sloping work surfaces on top.

(29) In bookbinding, an ornamental border, similar to a picture frame, stamped on the front cover of some books.

(30) One’s thoughts, attitude or opinion (usually as “frame of mind”).

(31) To form or make, as by fitting and uniting parts together; construct.

(32) To contrive, devise, or compose, as a plan, poem, piece of legislation etc.

(33) To conceive or imagine, as an idea.

(34) To provide with or put into a frame (painting, mirror etc).

(35) To give utterance to (typically as “frame an answer” etc).

(36) To form or seem to form (speech) with the lips, as if enunciating carefully (often used in speech therapy and elocution training).

(37) To fashion or shape (often a term used in sculpture).

(38) To shape or adapt to a particular purpose.

(39) To line up visually in a viewfinder or sight.

(40) To direct one's steps (archaic).

(41) To betake oneself; to resort (archaic).

(42) To prepare, attempt, give promise, or manage to do something (archaic).

Pre 1000: From the Middle English verb framen, fremen or fremmen (to prepare; to construct, build, strengthen, refresh, perform, execute, profit, avail), from the Old English framiae, fremian, fremman or framian (to avail, profit), from the Proto-West Germanic frammjan, from the Proto-Germanic framjaną (to perform, promote), from the primitive Indo-European promo- (front, forward) and cognate with the Low German framen (to commit, effect), the Danish fremme (to promote, further, perform), the Swedish främja (to promote, encourage, foster), the Icelandic fremja (to commit), the Old Frisian framia (to carry out), the Old Norse frama (to further) and the Old High German (gi)framōn (to do); the Middle English was derived from the verb.  Derived forms such as deframe, misframe, reframe, subframem unframe, beframe, enframe, full-frame, inframe, outframe, well-framed etc are created as needed.  Frame, framer & framableness are nouns, framed & framing are verbs, framable & frameable are adjectives, frameless is an adjective and framably is an adverb; the noun plural is frames.

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

In Middle English, the sense of the verb evolved from the mid-thirteenth century “make ready” to “prepare timber for building” by the late 1300s and the meaning “compose, devise” was in use by at least the 1540s. The criminal slang (“framed”; a “frame up” etc) made familiar in popular fiction all revolved around the idea of corrupt or unscrupulous police fabricating evidence to “blame an innocent person” seems not to have been in use until the 1920s (although the dubious policing practices would have had a longer history) and all forms are thought to have been a development of the earlier sense of “plot in secret”, noted since the turn of the twentieth century, that possibly and evolution from the meaning “fabricate a story with evil intent”, first attested early in the sixteenth century.  The use of the noun in the early thirteenth century to mean “profit, benefit, advancement” developed from the earlier sense of “a structure composed according to a plan”, developed from the verb and was influenced by Scandinavian cognates (the Old Norse frami meant “advancement”).

Like its predecessor the 300 SL Gullwing (W198; 1954-1957), the Mercedes-Benz 300 SL Roadster (W198; 1957—1963) was built on a tubular space-frame.

The use in engineering “sustaining parts of a structure fitted together” emerged circa 1400 while the general sense of “an enclosing border” of any kind came some two centuries later.  Surprisingly, the familiar form of a “border or case for a picture or pane of glass” seems to have come into use only in the mid-seventeenth century while the use “human body” (ie large frame, slight frame etc) was in use by the 1590s.  Of bicycles it was used from 1871 and of motor cars by 1900 although the early use referred often to what would now be understood as sub-frames, structures which attached to the chassis to support drive-train components, coach-work etc.  The meaning “separate picture in a series from a film” dates from 1960 and was purely descriptive because the individual “frames” on film-stock resembled framed photographs attached in a continuous roll.  The idea of a frame being a “specific state” was in use in the 1660s, the “particular state” (in the sense of “one’s frame of mind”) appears in the medical literature in the 1710s.  The “frame of reference” was coined for use in mechanics and graphing in 1897; the figurative sense coming into use by at least 1924.  As an adjective, frame was in use in architecture & construction by the late eighteenth century.  The A-Frame (a type of framework shaped like the capital letter "A") was an established standard by the 1890s and a vogue for buildings in this shape was noted in the 1930s.

Faster and smaller: By 1964 the IBM 360 mainframe (left) had outgrown its cabinet (the original “main frame”) and had colonized whole rooms.  By 2022, the IBM z16 mainframe (right) was sufficiently compact to return to a cabinet.  

In computing, the word “frame” was used in a variety of ways.  The mainframe (central processor of a computer system) was first described as such in 1964, the construct being main +‎ frame and the reference simply was to the fact the core components were stored in a cabinet which had the largest frame in the room, other, small cabinets being connected with wires and cables.  Mainframes were the original “big machines” in commercial computing and still exist; incomparably good for some purposes, less satisfactory for others.  Frame Relay also still exists as a standardized wide-area network (WAN) technology although it’s importance in the industry has declined since its heyday during the last two decades of the twentieth century.  A packet-switching protocol used for transmitting data across a network, Frame Relay operates at the data link layer of the OSI (Open Systems Interconnection) model, which is the second layer in the seven-layer model.  In a Frame Relay network, data is divided into frames, which are then transmitted between network devices (such as routers), over a shared communication medium and it was this latter aspect which accounted for its widespread adoption: unlike traditional circuit-switching networks (in which a dedicated physical circuit is established for the duration of a communication session), Frame Relay allows multiple logical connections to share the same physical resources so for all but the largest organizations, the potential for cost-saving was considerable.  Importantly too, integral to the protocol’s design was the use of packet switching (which means data is transmitted in variable-sized packets (ie frames) allowing the optimal use of available network bandwidth.  Frame Relay had the advantage also of not adding layers of complexity to the network architecture, relying on the underlying physical layer for error detection and correction rather than including error recovery mechanisms (a la a protocol like X.25 which operate at the network layer).  All of this made Frame Relay scalable and adaptable to various network topologies, making it an attractive “bolt-on” for system administrators and accountants alike.  However, while it still exists in some relatively undemanding niches, the roll-out of the infrastructure required to support internet traffic mean it has substantially been supplanted by newer technologies such as Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS).

Pop-art painting of Lindsay Lohan in a mid-eighteenth century frame by Jean Cherin (circa 1734-1785), Paris, France.  This is an intricately carved example of the transitional Louis XV-style gilt double sweep frame, ornamented with shell centres, acanthus fan corners, and a top crested with a ribbon-tied leaf & flower cluster atop a cabochon.

Sombrero

Sombrero (pronounced som-brair-oh or sawm-bre-raw (Spanish))

(1) A sometimes highly embroidered, broad-brimmed hat of straw or plush felt, usually with a high conical or cylindrical crown and a saucer-shaped brim, worn especially in Spain, Mexico, and the south-western United States.

(2) A style of automobile wheel-cover which became popular in the US during the 1950s, the enveloping design vaguely similar to the motifs associated with the hat.

(3) A mixed drink, made with coffee liqueur and cream.

(4) In ten-pin bowling, a series of four consecutive strikes.

1590–1600: From the Spanish from sombrero de sol (broad-brimmed hat offering shade from the sun) and originally "umbrella, parasol" (a sense found in English by the 1590s), from sombra (shadow; shade) from the Late Latin subumbrare (to shadow), the construct being sub (under) + umbrāre (from umbra (shadow)) + ero (the dative & ablative singular of erus, from the Proto-Italic ezos (master), from the primitive Indo-European heshós (master) and cognate with the Hittite išhāš (master)) and thus literally "shade-maker".  Sombrero is a noun and sombreroed is an adjective, (the non-standard sombrerolike & sombreroesque both used informally); the noun plural is sombreros.

Politicians are often compelled to wear sombreros in the search for votes.  Others wear them by choice.

(1) Gerald Ford (1913–2006; US president 1974-1977).

(2) Comrade Marshal (Josip Broz) Tito (1892–1980;  Yugoslav president 1953-1980).

(3) Adlai Stevenson II (1900–1965; Democratic presidential nominee 1952 & 1956).

(4) Hugo Chávez (1954–2013; Venezuelan president 1999-2002 & 2002-2013).

(5) Richard Nixon (1913-1994; US president 1969-1974).

(6) Britney Spears (b 1981; entertainer).

(7) Benedict XVI (1927–2022; pope 2005-2013, pope emeritus 2013-2022).

(8) Barry Goldwater (1909–1998; Republican presidential nominee 1964).

1961 Lincoln Continental SS-X-100 with sombrero wheel covers, Dallas, 22 November 1963 (left) and with the (ex Continental Mark II) turbine-style wheel covers and some of X-100’s protective accessories (right).

Traces of a sombrero-like shape can be discerned in the designs used for the early post-war Cadillacs but it was in the 1950s the style became popular with many manufacturers emulating the lines.  Although less popular by the early 1960s, the coachbuilders Hess & Eisenhardt chose to use sombrero-style wheel covers from the 1957 Lincoln Premiere when the White House’s 1961 presidential parade limousine was updated in 1963 with a current model grill.  This was the famous SS X-100 (the Secret Service inventory number) in which the president was assassinated in Dallas in November 1963.  It was extensively re-modeled in the aftermath of the assassination (and again in 1967), Hess & Eisenhardt reverted to the turbine-style wheel covers from the Continental Mark II (1956-1957) with which the car had originally been fitted.  Although other presidential parade cars were built in 1968 and 1972, X-100 continued to be used by Presidents Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter until 1977 and it’s now on permanent display in the Henry Ford Museum in Dearborn, Michigan.

1952 Cadillac sombrero wheel covers (16 inch reproductions) (left), 1954 Packard sombrero wheel covers (centre) and 1957 Cadillac sombrero wheel cover, Cadillac by 1957 unable to resist adding embellishments.

The terms “wheel cover” & “hubcap” (or hub-cap) have long been used interchangeably but the two, historically, are different.  The distinction between the two is that a wheel cover covers the entire diameter of the wheel whereas a hubcap covers only the center portion of the wheel, concealing at most only the lug nuts which secure the wheel.  The origin of the hub cap pre-dates powered-transportation and was simply a device which fitted over the hub of a wheel to prevent dirt and debris from entering the assembly and contaminating the grease which provided lubrication and some of the early versions were actually called dirt-caps or grease-caps.

1937 Rolls-Royce Phantom III saloon with wire wheels with centre hub cap (left) and an unusual 1937 Rolls-Royce Phantom III pillarless fixed head coupé (FHC) with wheel covers over wire wheels.

As wheel designs evolved from those used on hand-carts or horse-drawn vehicles, the hubcaps were enlarged to extend protection to the lug nuts, reducing abrasion and limiting the moisture penetration which encouraged rust.  The hubcap was thus a purely utilitarian device and this functionality was extended in the 1920s when all-enveloping wheel covers (some of which had actually been seen in the nineteenth century) began to appear in volume.  These were usually covers for wire wheels (a type preferred because they were much lighter that those made from pressed steel) and served to protect both the spokes and the brakes behind from dirt and the impact of stones and rocks, an important consideration when so many roads were un-sealed.  Owners and drivers appreciated the protection, wire wheels notoriously time-consuming to clean.  One drawback however was that the air-flow to the brake drums was inhibited so the brakes were more prone to overheating, thus reducing their retardative effect but as some soon discovered, speed and economy were actually improved because the smooth wheel covers were aerodynamically more efficient, as aspect of design which continues to be exploited to this day.  In the UK, both hubcaps and wheel covers were originally called nave plates.  Nave (hub of a wheel) was from the Middle English nave, from the Old English nafu, from the Proto-West Germanic nabu, from the Proto-Germanic nabō (which influenced the Dutch naaf, the German Nabe and the Swedish nav), from the primitive Indo-European hneb- (navel) and related to the Latin umbō (shield boss), the Latvian naba and the Sanskrit नभ्य (nabhya).  The idea of it being “something central” was a development from the Latin nāvem, the singular accusative of nāvis, terms from architecture which referred to the middle section of a church (later extended to other structures & shipbuilding).

1959 Imperial Silvercrest Landau (left), 1959 Edsel Citation convertible (centre) and 1957 Cadillac Eldorado Biarritz (right).

Also exploited, for better and worse, were aesthetic sensibilities.  It was in the stylistically exuberant US of the 1950s that wheel covers became truly extravagant and heavy, the latter something that brought its own problems.  The design teams took to wheel covers with enthusiasm because changes were cheap to implement and they soon became part of product differentiation, the higher in the hierarchy a model sat, the more elaborate the wheel covers were likely to be.  The sombreros were just one style, others referencing influences as diverse as the original wire wheels, the turbines in jet engines, water fountains, the full moon (though without pock-marks) and beehives.

Dog dishes: 1966 Ford Fairlane 427 (left), 1970 Dodge Challenger R/T 440 Six Pack and 1969 Yenko Chevrolet Nova 427.

Wheel covers became part of what was typically an annual cycle of styling changes and it wasn’t unusual for those used on last year’s top-of-the-line model to re-appear on a cheaper line and just because wheel covers had arrived, hubcaps didn’t go away, fitted almost always as standard equipment on the cheapest entry-level models and those defined as heavy-duty such as the ones built for police fleets.  Simple steel stampings, they were cheap to produce and, being lightweight, were less prone to becoming detached during brisk driving, the “flying hubcap” (actually usually a wheel cover) a noted feature of many of Hollywood’s car chases and something the many film buffs delight in noting sometime escape the "continuity process", a lost wheel cover inexplicably having re-attached itself later in the sequence.  The simple pressings were sometimes dubbed “poverty hubcaps” but a more common nickname was “dog dish”, a reference to their appearance if upturned.

Mercedes-Benz 600 SWB with early, two-piece hub cap & trim ring combination (left) and the later, less pleasing, one-piece wheel cover.

The wheel cover as part of a re-style was not restricted to the US but manufacturers in the UK & Europe were more conservative (an exception to this tended to be the locally produced models from companies ultimately owned by US corporations; as in Australia, these sometimes used hand-me-downs from Detroit), hubcaps persisting longer while “trim-rings” began to be added to emulate wheel covers but designs were often carried over from one model to the next.  In this, the Mercedes-Benz 600 (M100, 1963-1981) is a footnote in hubcap history in that in its eighteen-odd years in production, the only styling change (other than the disfigurements demanded by US regulators) was to replace the two-piece hubcap/trim ring combination with a one-piece wheel cover.  This was unfortunate because the earlier style better suited the car and designers have distinguished between them, calling one the "frowning" and the other the smiling, the 600 definitely a "frowning" sort of car.

Lindsay Lohan in Sombrero.

Wheel covers remained of interest to those designing cars for competition, the trade-off between brake cooling and aerodynamic advantage weighed up according to the nature of the event.  On the circuits a premium usually was attached to cooling but those setting speed records were particularly attracted to the smoothest possible shape which meant flat wheel covers of some description were often fitted and where possible many choose to enclose the wheel to whatever extent was possible; In testing, Jaguar discovered an additional 3-4 mph (5-6 km/h) could be attained if the XK120’s (1948-1954) rear wheels were wholly enclosed by fender skirts (also called spats).  In the modern era, even with aluminum or composite wheels optimized for lightness and brake cooling, there are manufacturers which use additional wheel covers, either to produce downforce for use in competition or to reduce drag, lowering energy consumption to increase a vehicle’s range.  Like many manufacturers of EVs (electric vehicles) Tesla uses the combination of aluminium wheels (for weight-saving) and a plastic wheel cover (for aerodynamic efficiency), the latter the main reason why there have been so few EV convertibles, the inherent inefficiency of the shape imposing a significant penalty "in the drag".  When the naked wheel of a Tesla Cybertruck is revealed, many are struck by the attractiveness of the design.

The selfie sombrero, a 2014 co-development between Christian Cowan-Sanluis and Acer Inc of Taiwan.

In 2014, in one of the IT industry’s less remembered collaborations with the fashion business, designer Christian Cowan-Sanluis (b 1994) joined with Taiwanese (Taiwan a renegade province of the People’s Republic of China (PRC)) manufacturer Acer to produce a “limited-edition” (a perhaps unnecessary announcement) sombrero with an integrated tablet, able to spin through 360^o.  Said to be the ultimate solution to selfie takers who struggle to find their best angle, the wide-brimmed apparatus included an Iconia A1-840 tablet.  Listed upon release at a not unreasonable Stg£599, the selfie-sombrero was based on a hat in Cowan-Sanluis' autumn-winter 2014 collection, noted for having been modeled by Lady Gaga (b 1986).

Lady Gaga in original sparkly pink sombrero from Christian Cowan-Sanluis’ autumn-winter 2014 collection.

Technically, the design was helpful for selfie-takers because of the mounting which allowed the tablet to spin through 360^o, helping the user to determine the best angle while snapping and reviewing the results.  With an internet connection, the perfect selfie could then instantly be uploaded to the social platform of choice.  Early adopters were encouraged to place an order, the designer noting the creation of ten pink sparkly glitter cases with accompanying hats in the same style as that worn by Lady Gaga.