Vexillology

Vexillology (pronounced vek-suh-lol-uh-jee)

The study of and the collection of information about flags.

1957 (and in print since 1959): The construct was vexill(um) + -ology.  Vexillum (the plural vexilla) was from the Latin vēxillum (flag, banner), from the Proto-Italic wekslolom (and synchronically a diminutive form of vēlum), from the Proto-Italic wekslom, from the primitive Indo-European wegslom, from weg- (to weave, bind) and cognate with the English wick.  The Latin vexillum translated literally as “flag; banner” but in English was used to mean (1) a flag, banner, or standard, (2) in military use a formation company of troops serving under one standard, (3) the sign of the cross, (4) in botany, the upper petal of a papilionaceous flower and (5) in ornithology, the rhachis and web of a feather taken together.  The suffix -ology was formed from -o- (as an interconsonantal vowel) +‎ -logy.  The origin in English of the -logy suffix lies with loanwords from the Ancient Greek, usually via Latin and French, where the suffix (-λογία) is an integral part of the word loaned (eg astrology from astrologia) since the sixteenth century.  French picked up -logie from the Latin -logia, from the Ancient Greek -λογία (-logía).  Within Greek, the suffix is an -ία (-ía) abstract from λόγος (lógos) (account, explanation, narrative), and that a verbal noun from λέγω (légō) (I say, speak, converse, tell a story).  In English the suffix became extraordinarily productive, used notably to form names of sciences or disciplines of study, analogous to the names traditionally borrowed from the Latin (eg astrology from astrologia; geology from geologia) and by the late eighteenth century, the practice (despite the disapproval of the pedants) extended to terms with no connection to Greek or Latin such as those building on French or German bases (eg insectology (1766) after the French insectologie; terminology (1801) after the German Terminologie).  Within a few decades of the intrusion of modern languages, combinations emerged using English terms (eg undergroundology (1820); hatology (1837)).  In this evolution, the development may be though similar to the latter-day proliferation of “-isms” (fascism; feminism et al).  Vexillology, vexillologist vexillographer, vexillophilia, vexillophile & vexillolatry are nouns, vexillological & vexillologic are adjectives; the most common noun plural is vexillologists.

A vexillographer is one who designs flags, standards & banners, a vexillophile is (1) someone who collects and displays flags and (2) one who studies flags, their history and meaning.  Although there are vexillophiles, there is in medicine no recognized condition known as vexillophilia (which would be a paraphilia describing the sexualized objectification of flags (ie flag) although following the convention established in recent revisions to the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) (DSM-5 (2013) & DSM-5-TR (2022)), the correct clinical description would now be "foot partialism"; vexillophiles anyway prefer to describe themselves as "flag nerds".  Nor is there any record of there being instances of vexillophobia (a morbid fear of flags); there are those opposed to what flags represent  but that's not the same as being a vexillophobe which would be something specific about this type of bunting in general.  In political science, there is the word flagophobe (also as flagphobe), a derogatory term used usually by those on the right (and other nationalists) as a slur suggesting a want of patriotism in an opponent they’ve usually already labelled as “liberal”.  It's based on a metaphorical connection between a national flag and pride in one's country and is thus not a reference to a fear of flags in general.  To vexillize (or vexillate) can mean (1) to gather or to lead an army under a flag, (2) to organize or to lead people under a common cause or goal, (3) to make a flag (sewing, printing, digitally distributing etc), (4) to design a flag or (5) to introduce a specific depiction on a flag.

Wrapped: Vexillologist Lindsay Lohan and the stars & stripes.  The phrase “wrapping themselves self in the flag” is used of politicians who attempt to disguise their self-serving motives by presenting something as being in the national interest or being done for patriotic reasons.  The companion term is “patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel”, a observation made in 1775 by Samuel Johnson (1709-1784) of the hypocrisy of William Pitt (1708-1778 (Pitt the Elder); First Earl of Chatham & UK prime-minister 1766-1768).

Quite when the first flag was flown is not known but so simple is the concept and so minimal the technology required for fabrication that as forms of identification or communication they may have been among the earliest examples of symbolic representation.  Although the nation-state as its now understood is a relatively new creation (barely a thousand years old), prior to that there had for millennia been organized settlements with distinct identities and there is evidence from surviving works of art and drawings that something like a flag existed in the Mediterranean region as long ago as the fourth century BC and it’s possible such things were in use in China even earlier.  The familiar concept of the national flag evolved as the modern nation state emerged in Europe in the late Middle Ages and early modern period and traditionally, Denmark's Dannebrog is cited as the oldest national flag extant, having being in continuous use (though not always as the symbol of state) since the thirteenth century.

Denmark's Dannebrog (usually translated as "the cloth of the Danes").

The legend is that during a battle on 15 June 1219 in what is modern-day Estonia, the Danish army was on the defensive and defeat seemed imminent when suddenly, a red banner with a white cross fell from the sky.  As a result, the fortunes of war shifted, the Danish army won the battle and Denmark gained a flag.

Inherently, a small piece of colored glass three metres in the air can have no effect on a passing car yet the use of red, amber & green traffic lights is what makes modern road systems function as efficiently as they do.  They work because people (usually) respond as they should through the lens of semiotics, the signifier being the color of the light, the signified the instructions conveyed (green=”go”; amber=”prepare to stop or proceed with caution” & red=”stop”) and the referent the physical need to go, proceed only with caution or stop.  The power of the glass lies wholly in its symbolism and the implied consequences of ignoring its message.  Flags, mere pieces of fabric, have no inherent political or military force yet have for millennia been among the most valued and contested of symbols; men have died defending pieces of bunting which could have been replaced with a tick of a supply sergeant’s pen, simply because of the symbolism.  Symbolism has always been integral to the appeal of Nazism (and fascism in general) and by the early summer of 1942, on a map, the military position of Nazi Germany looked impressive, its forces still maintaining a presence in North Africa, most of Western Europe occupied from Norway to the south of France and the territorial gains from Operation Barbarossa reaching well into the Soviet Union.  However, the map substantially reflected the gains which had been made in 1941 and by mid-1942 it was clear to the German military they had under-estimated the ability of the Soviet armies to absorb losses and recover.  It was clear Germany no longer had the strength successfully to advance along the massive front created in 1941 and even Adolf Hitler (1889-1945; Führer (leader) and German head of government 1933-1945 & head of state 1934-1945) realized that, at least temporarily, more modest strategic aims would have to be pursued.

What Hitler set in train was a multi-pronged operation which would have been strategically sound had (1) the resources been available to sustain it and (2) there had not been such a gross under-estimation of the available Soviet military capacity.  Originally, the plan had been to advance on the Caucasus after the encirclement and destruction of the defending forces in the Stalingrad region and the occupation of the city itself.  This was changed, splitting the attacking force to allow the city and the Caucasus simultaneously to be conquered and the area envisaged was vast, including the eastern coast of the Black Sea, the forbidding Caucasian mountain passes and the oil fields of Grozny & Baku, far to the south.  The German generals didn’t need much more than the back of an envelope to work out it simply couldn’t be done and that rather than undertaking sound planning based on reliable intelligence, the Führer was indulging in little more than wishing & guessing.  “Wishing & guessing” was General George Marshall’s (1880–1959; US Army chief of staff 1939-1945) critique of Winston Churchill’s (1875-1965; UK prime-minister 1940-1945 & 1951-1955) dabblings in military matters and the comment wasn’t unjustified but the difference was that while the Allied high command was able to restrain (and if need be, veto) the prime-minister’s romantic (essentially Napoleonic) adventurism, the Wehrmacht’s generals and admirals had by 1942 long been dominated by Hitler.  The German army was however generally the most effective ground force of the war and remarkably, achieved some early tactical gains but such were the distances involved and the disparity of forces available that the offensive was not only doomed but culminated in the loss of some 230,000 troops at Stalingrad, a calamity from which the army never quite recovered and among the German people damaged the prestige of the regime to an extent no previous setback had done.

Third Reich War Flag, Mount Elbrus, August 1942.

Hitler, at least in 1942, wasn’t delusional and understood he was running a risk but his gambler’s instincts had for twenty years served him well and he still clung to the belief a strength of will could overcome many disadvantages, even on the battlefield.  Early in the war, that had worked when he was facing divided, unimaginative or week opponents but those days were over and he was well-aware he was playing for high stakes from a position of weakness.  That he was under great pressure and wracked by uncertainty (whatever might have been his outward displays of confidence) was probably the cause of a celebrated over-reaction to what was one of the war’s more trivial incidents: the planting of the Nazi war flag on the peak of Mount Elbrus, at 5,642 m (18,510 feet) the highest point in Europe.  Hitler thought pursuits like mountain climbing and skiing absurd but, like any practical politician, he liked a good photo-opportunity and had in peacetime been pleased to be photographed with those who had raised the swastika on some mountain or other (something which dedicated Nazis had been doing since the 1920s, long before the party gained power in 1933.  On 21 August 1942, the Third’s Reich’s war flag, along with the divisional flags of the 1st and 4th Divisions fluttered in the wind on the roof of Europe and news of the triumph was transmitted to FHQ (Führer Headquarters).

In the throes of the offensive driving towards Stalingrad and the Caucases, the alpine troops who climbed the peak to plant the flag doubtless though they were “working towards the Führer” and providing him a priceless propaganda piece.  They probably expected medals or at least thanks but Hitler was focused on his military objectives and knew he needed every available man to be devoted to his job and upon hearing two-dozen soldiers had decided to ignore their orders and instead climb up a hill of no strategic value, just to climb down again, his reaction was visceral, recalled in his memoirs by Albert Speer (1905–1981; Nazi court architect 1934-1942; Nazi minister of armaments and war production 1942-1945), then at FHQ:

“I often saw Hitler furious but seldom did his anger erupt from him as it did when this report came in. For hours he raged as if his entire plan of the campaign had been ruined by this bit of sport. Days later he went on railing to all and sundry about “those crazy mountain climbers” who “belong before a court-martial.” They were pursuing their idiotic hobbies in the midst of a war, he exclaimed indignantly, occupying an idiotic peak even though he had commanded that all efforts must be concentrated upon Sukhumi.”

The famous (and subtlety edited) photograph of the Soviet flag being raised over the Reichstag on 30 April 1945 during the Battle of Berlin (actually a staged-shot  taken on 2 May).

The Germans never made it to Sukhumi and the high-altitude sideshow by a handful of troops of course in no way affected the campaign but the reaction at FHQ was an indication of the pressure felt by Hitler.  The planting of a symbolic flag was also though symptomatic of the arrogance which had permeated the German military under the Nazis and it anyway proved a pyrrhic act of conquest, the standard torn down and replaced by the Soviet flag within six months; that the Russian army took the trouble to do that amid the clatter of war illustrates potency of national flags as propaganda devices.  One of the most famous photographs of the conflict was that of the Soviet flag in May 1945 being placed over the Reichstag in Berlin, a symbol of defeat of Nazism.  Interestingly, so important to the Kremlin was the image that the act was actually re-staged the next day, this time with a photographer in place to shoot a roll of film so the perfect shot could be selected and the Russians are not the only ones to have re-staged famous flag raisings.

Anniversary

 Anniversary (pronounced an-uh-vur-suh-ree)

(1) The yearly recurrence of the date of a past event.

(2) The celebration or commemoration of such a date.

(3) Returning or recurring each year; annual.

1200–1250: From the Middle English anniversarie from the Anglo-French and Medieval Latin anniversāria (anniversary (day)) & anniversārius (recurring yearly), the construct being anni (combining form of annus year) + vers(us) (turned), past participle of vertere (vert (turn) + tus (past participle suffix) + ārius or ary.  In Latin, the word was used especially of the day of a person's death but as first an adjective and later a noun, came to be used in Church Latin as anniversaria (dies) in reference to saints' days.  An Old English word for anniversary (as a noun) was mynddæg which translates literally as "mind-day".  Anniversary & anniversarian are nouns and anniversarily is an (archaic) adverb; the noun plural is anniversaries (the Latin anniversaria occasionally seen).

One of pop culture's more celebrated anniversaries is Mean Girls Day on 3 October, the origin of which is that it's the only date mentioned in the 2004 film although it has no specific relevance and could have been any date which fitted in with the weather.  Besides Mean Girls Day, other notable anniversaries on 3 October include: In 1929, the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was renamed Jugoslavija (Yugoslavia).  In 1932, the Kingdom of Iraq was granted independence by the UK.  In 1935, Benito Mussolini (1883-1945; Duce (leader) & prime-minister of Italy 1922-1943) invaded Ethiopia (the Second Italo-Abyssinian War); it was Europe’s last old-style colonial adventure and one which even then looked anachronistic.  In 1952, the UK tested its first A-Bomb, becoming the third nuclear power; H-Bombs would soon follow.  In 1990, the GDR (the German Democratic Republic, the old East Germany) was dissolved and absorbed by the FRG (the Federal Republic of Germany, the old West Germany), marking the formal origin of the modern, unified German state, celebrated by most as German Unity Day and noted by others (then and now) with some regret.

In literature, probably the best known is Bloomsday, a reference to 16 June, a day (in 1904) in the life of Leopold Bloom, the protagonist in the novel Ulysses by James Joyce (1882–1941).  Although Bloomsday is centred usually on gatherings featuring readings from the book, the events also often commemorate other aspects of the author's life and are sometimes integrated with academic conferences or literary festivals.  Political and military anniversaries are often marked and can be celebrated even if the original was a defeat; it's all about the context of history and some have been misused by those with their own agendas to pursue.  Almost always, these events have a specific date but sometimes the day cannot be mentioned because of "political sensitivities".

In the early evening of 3 June 1989, in the culmination of some three weeks of mainly student-led protests directed at the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), martial law was declared and armed troops of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) were assigned to Beijing’s Tiananmen Square where the protests were centred.  What followed a few hours later on 4 June has come variously to be known as the “Tiananmen Square Incident” or “Tiananmen Square Massacre” (the CCP preferring “June Fourth Incident”, the same convention of use the Japanese government adopted in the 1930s when speaking of some of their conduct in China) and although there’s broad consensus about what happened when the soldiers opened fire with automatic weapons (sometimes from tanks and other armored vehicles), the extent remains contested with estimates of the death toll ranging from low-three to high-four figures.  There were at least several hundred thousand protesters in Tiananmen Square at the time of the incident so all estimates are plausible but the photographic evidence from the time is so fragmentary that verification has never been possible.

The traditional annual flowerbed in Tiananmen Square which is part of a "national celebration day" (officially the National Day of the People's Republic of China), marking the foundation of the republic on 3 October 1949.

Such is the sensitivity within the CCP that its impressive digital surveillance of the population has reacted quickly to attempts to circumvent attempts to evade the proscription of references such as “4 June”, “June 4”, “fourth of June” etc.  Because the filters are inherently text & character based this was historically usually just a matter of updating the database of “suspect terms”, done usually in reaction to emerging patterns of use but also sometimes anticipated.  Attempts on Chinese social media to evade the censor’s eye included (1) using fragments of some more obscure foreign languages, (2) using emojis which possess some degree of ambiguity, (3) using Pinyin (the Romanization of Chinese characters), (4) using coded phrases or metaphors to allude to the event, some of which may be understood only within a sub-set of users and (5) the use of numeric references such as “65-1”, “63+1” or “May 35^th”.

Little of this digital subterfuge proved much of an obstacle to the CCP surveillance machine and the regime’s enthusiastic embrace of AI (artificial intelligence) meant that even embedding messaging in imagery or music with no direct mention or even reference to the event or the date can now easily be assessed.  Western analysts note however there’s little to suggest the CCP has an especially large task in countering on-line discussion of the “June Fourth Incident”, other than in places like Hong Kong where malcontents and trouble-makers are known still to exist.  The CCP allows well-behaved Chinese citizen (ie those with a good “social credit” score) to holiday in the West and probably assumes (presumably correctly) that they spend their time taking selfies in front of the Eiffel Town or Trevi Fountain rather than sitting in darkened hotel rooms using the novelty of Google to search for “Tiananmen Square Massacre”.  Indeed, Western political scientists suspect there’s wide knowledge among the population about there being a massacre on 4 June (although not the detail) and for the CCP this is a desirable thing for Chinese citizens to keep in the back of their minds.  Like “something nasty in the woodshed” it’s there to be avoided and not discussed.

Some names for anniversaries      

1        Annual
2        Biennial
3        Triennial
4        Quadrennial
5        Quinquennial
6        Sexennial
7        Septennial
8        Octennial
9        Novennial
10      Decennial
11      Undecennial
12      Duodecennial
13      Tredecennial
14      Quattuordecennial
15      Quindecennial
20      Vigintennial or Vicennial
25      Quadranscentennial
40      Quadragennial
50      Semicentennial or Quinquagenary
60      Sexagennial 
65      Sexagenary
70      Septuagennial
100    Centennial or Centenary
125    Quasquicentennial
150    Sesquicentennial
175    Dodransbicentennial
200    Bicentennial
250    Sestercentennial
300    Tercentenary or Tricentenary
350    Sesquarcentennial
400    Quadricentennial
500    Quincentenary
600    Sexcentenary
700    Septcentennial
800    Octocentenary
900    Nonacentennial
1000  Millennial
1500  Sesquimillennial
2000  Bimillennial

Belt

Belt (pronounced belt)

(1) A band of flexible material, as leather or cord, used for encircling the waist, historically to in some way secure a garment (coat or trousers) but also as a decorative or functional (tool belt, utility belt, gun belt etc) item.

(2) In any context, any encircling or transverse band, strip, or stripe.

(3) In geography, an elongated region having distinctive properties or characteristics.

(4) In machinery, an endless flexible band passing about two or more pulleys, used to transmit motion from one pulley to the other or others or to convey materials and objects.

(5) In (usually military) ballistics, a cloth strip with loops or a series of metal links with grips, for holding cartridges fed into an automatic gun.

(6) A band of leather or webbing, worn around the waist and used as a support for weapons, ammunition etc.

(7) In naval architecture, a series of armor plates forming part of the hull of a warship.

(8) In construction, a broad, flexible strip of rubber, canvas, wood, etc., moved along the surface of a fresh concrete pavement to put a finish on it after it has been floated.

(9) A road, railroad, or the like, encircling an urban center to handle peripheral traffic (as beltway also used in political discourse).

(10) In slang, a hard blow or hit (often in the forms belted or belting), either a person or an object (the latter noted especially in bat & ball sports).

(11) In slang, a shot of liquor, especially as swallowed in one gulp (often in the form “a quick belt”).

(12) In tyre technology, strip of material used in tyre construction, placed between the carcass and the tread for reinforcement (in the forms steel-belted & fabric-belted).

(13) In sport, in a color based ascendency (brown, black etc), a ranking system in various martial arts).

(14) In sport (notably boxing), a form of trophy worn by the holder of a title (WBO Heavyweight Belt, IBF Cruiserweight Belt etc).

(15) As seat belt, an apparatus used in air, sea & land vehicles to secure a passenger, pilot, driver etc in place.

(16) To gird or furnish with a belt.

(17) To surround or mark as if with a belt or band.

(18) In slang, as “belt out”, loudly (though not necessarily pleasingly) to sing or, as “belting along”, rapidly to proceed.

(19) In cricket, as “belter”, a description of a placid pitch ideal for batting and offering little assistance to bowlers.

(20) In astronomy, a collection of small bodies (such as asteroids) which orbit a star; one of certain girdles or zones on the surface of the planets Jupiter and Saturn, supposed to be of the nature of clouds.

(21) In baseball, the part of the strike zone at the height of the batter's waist.

(22) In music, a vocal tone produced by singing with chest voice above the break (or passaggio), in a range typically sung in head voice.

(23)To invest a person with a belt as part of a formal ceremony (even one where as physical belt is not involved or even a historic part).

Pre 1000: From the Middle English belt, from the Old English belt (belt; girdle; broad, flat strip or strap of material used to encircle the waist), from the Proto-Germanic baltijaz (girdle, belt) (source also of the Old High German balz, the Old Norse balti & belti and the Swedish bälte), an early Germanic borrowing from the Latin balteus (belt, girdle, sword-belt) which may be of Etruscan origin.  It was cognate with the Scots belt (belt), the Dutch belt, the German Balz (belt), the Danish bælte (belt), the Swedish bälte (belt, cincture, girdle, zone) and the Icelandic belti (belt).    Synonyms vary according to context including circle, girdle, surround (to encircle), buckle, fasten, strap (to fasten a belt); bash, clobber, smack, wallop. strap, thrash, whip (to hit with a belt); gulp, slurp, guzzle (rapidly to drink); speed, whiz, zoom (rapidly to move).  Belt is a noun & verb, belted is a verb & adjective, belting is a noun, verb & adjective and belter is a noun; the noun plural is belts.

Lindsay Lohan in trench coat, the belt tied and not buckled.

The verb emerged in the early fourteenth century in the sense of “to fasten or gird with a belt” and was derived from the noun.  The meaning "to thrash (as with a belt)" was from the 1640s while the general sense of "to hit, thrash" seems not to have been used until 1838. The colloquial meaning "to sing or speak vigorously" dates from 1949 and was first used in the US, south of the Mason-Dixon Line.  As a development, the noun meaning "a blow or stroke" dates from 1885.  The transferred sense of "broad stripe encircling something with its ends joined" dates from the 1660s while that of a "broad strip or tract" of any sort, without notion of encircling (as in the “wheat belt") emerged by 1808.  As a mark of rank or distinction (sometimes associated with a specific honor in the form of a belt or sash), use began in the mid-fourteenth century and in pugilism, boxing championship belts were first awarded in 1812.  The use in mechanical engineering (drive belts, pulley belts, serpentine belts etc) was first noted in 1795.  The sword-belt dates from the early fourteenth century while the Old English had sweordfætels (sword-belt).  The adjective beltless came from the fashion industry to describe a style without a belt and was from 1854, the belt-loop (through which a belt passes) noted the following year (although such things had existed for centuries).  In the sub-culture of the trench coat, the military tradition was always to use the buckle to secure the belt while true fashionistas prefer to tie, bucklers thought a bit naff.

Lindsay Lohan demonstrates the possibilities offered by belts.

Many languages adopted belt including those of the Raj, the Hindi being बेल्ट (belṭ), the Bengali বেল্ট (belṭ) & the Urdu بیلٹ‎ (belṭ); Afrikaans picked up belt from the Dutch and other variations were the Assamese বেল্ট (belto), the Irish beilt (Welsh & Scots picked up belt), the Japanese: ベルト (beruto) and the Oriya ବେଲ୍ଟ୍ (belṭ).  If used as a proper noun (a surname or place-name), it appears always with an initial capital.  In astronomy, there’s no initial capital when used as a general descriptor but one is used when referring to a specific region (eg as an ellipsis of Main Asteroid Belt).  The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI, or B&R and known originally as One Belt One Road (OBOR)) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) is a trans-national infrastructure project (the strategy of which depends on who is providing the interpretation) dating from 2013 and integral to the PRC’s foreign policy.  As physical infrastructure, it’s analogous with the old Silk Road, the ancient trade route which linked China with the West, carrying goods and (more dangerously) ideas between the two great civilizations of Rome and China.

Lindsay Lohan beltless  (or un-belted).

In idiomatic use, “below the belt” means “not in accord with the principles of fairness, decency, or good sportsmanship” and was drawn from the rules of boxing where restrictions were maintained on blows to the genitals.  To have something “under one's belt” is to have something in one’s literal or figurative (a qualification or achievement) possession.  To tighten one’s belt is “to be more frugal; to undergo hardship patiently” and is often used as an injunction by politicians (directed at others).  Charlie Chaplin (1889-1977) invented “tighten the belten” for the faux German used in his film The Great Dictator (1940).  The use to describe specific regions can be literal (wheat belt, corn belt etc), meteorological (sun-belt, snow-belt) or more figurative (mortgage belt, Bible belt etc), the latter probably more accurately described as “zones” but the meaning is well-understood and some have emerged recently (such as rust belt which refers to once vibrant industrial areas now in economic decline).  A beltway is a road system which encircles (not necessarily in a circular design) a city and is intended to reduce congestion in the inner region; the phrase “beyond the beltway” is US political slang to differentiate the interests and priorities of those “within the beltway” of Washington DC (ie the political class (executive government, the congress, the upper reaches of the civil service etc)) and the general population.  The US term references Interstate 495 around Washington DC (the Capital Beltway, opened in 1964), the figurative use (the culture of the political class) dating from 1978, exclusively in the negative.

Lindsay Lohan demonstrates more possibilities offered by belts.

Seat belts, although began in any volume to be fitted only in the 1960s although they’d been used in ships (both by fishermen and in the navy) and in the early day of aviation without ever becoming standardized fittings although, in a sense, as a safety restraint they were known even in Antiquity.  In Greek mythology, the Sirens were deadly creatures who used their lyrical and earthly feminine charms to lure sailors to their death; attracted by their enchanting music and voices, seafarers would sail their ships too close to the rocky coast of the Siren’s island and be shipwrecked.  Not untypically for the tales from antiquity, the sirens are said to have had many homes.  The Romans said they lived on some small islands called Sirenum scopuli while later authors place them variously on the islands of Anthemoessa, on Cape Pelorum, on the islands of the Sirenuse, near Paestum, or in Capreae.  All were places with rocky coasts and tall cliffs.  It was Odysseus who most famously escaped the sirens.  Longing to hear their songs but having no wish to be ship-wrecked , he had his sailors fill their ears with beeswax, rendering them deaf and to be certain, Odysseus ordered them to tie him to the mast, thereby inventing the seat-belt.  Sailing past, when he heard their enticing voices, he ordered his men to release him but they tightened the knots, not releasing him till the danger had passed.  Some writers claimed the Sirens were fated to die if a man heard their singing and escaped them and that as Odysseus sailed away they flung themselves into the water and died.

Lindsay Lohan demonstrates still more possibilities offered by belts.

Knocking back a bracer: Crooked Hillary Clinton enjoys a quick belt of Crown Royal Bourbon Whiskey, Bronko's restaurant, Crown Point, Indiana, Saturday 12 April, 2008.

In the late 1940s, the rising death toll attracted interest but few cars were at the time fitted with seat-belts and research was difficult with such small sample sizes although it was indicated there was some positive although instances were also noted of injuries being caused by the belts’ then primitive and unregulated design and it was these findings which encouraged the first “inertial reel” (retractable) designs.  A couple of US manufacturers during the 1950s dabbled with the concept, either installing seat belts as standard or offering them as an extra-cost option but the take-up rate was low and some buyers ever returned the cars to dealers to have them removed.

The familiar modern three-point (lap & sash) belt evolved in the late 1950s with much input from US designers but it was Swedish manufacturers which first made them a standard fitting, Scandinavia being often dark and icy, drivers sharing the roads with large elk.  The modern seatbelt design (conceptually unchanged to this day) is credited to Swedish mechanical engineer Nils Bohlin (1920–2002) who was employed by Volvo which made them a standard fitting in 1959, following the example of Saab which had added them the previous year.  During the 1960s, US states gradually imposed a requirement they be fitted until, in 1969, federal law mandated the rule for all cars sold in the country.  The laws requiring them actually to be worn proved more difficult to implement but other countries quickly made both the fitment and wearing of seat-belts compulsory, initially only for those seated in the front seat(s) but before long it extended to all seats.

Instruction sheet for Child Bed (1961 Chevrolet Corvair), Chevrolet Division of General Motors (GM) part-number 985359.

Attitudes to motor vehicle safety were different in 1959 when Chevrolet first started making the Corvair (1959-1969).  At the time, apart from improving the quality of roads (which actually meant higher speeds) the government had done little about either safety or pollution but both the rising highway death toll and the worsening air quality in cities was attracting attention and things would soon be different, decades of legislation soon to unfold.  The Corvair however was a product of a substantially unregulated age and in that spirit Chevrolet thoughtfully offered the “child bed” as an accessory so one’s baby could sleep (unsecured) on the parcel shelf beneath the rear window, the additional benefits of the placement said to be that being rear-engined, the warmth and soothing vibration from the engine gently would lull the infant to sleep.  It was another world.

An early Chevrolet Corvair with swing axles, swinging.

The Corvair was doomed by decisions made even before production began.  It was anyway the twilight of the rear-engined era and although swing axles in Europe proved surprisingly persistent (usually because the design provided a relatively cheap way to implement an independent rear suspension) few installed them on a car as heavy and powerful as the Corvair.  Mercedes-Benz, which was an adherent (despite their experience with the superior De Dion layout) was still producing a handful of 600s (the W100 Grosser) with swing axles as late as 1981 but the Germans tamed the behavior with special anti-squat & anti-dive geometry as well as a compensating centre spring.  Chevrolet did not and with a weight distribution which was even more exaggerated rearward by its relatively heavy and long engine, the Corvair’s handling could be unpredictable, something which the engineers wanted to alleviate by fitting a handful of parts (the cost under US$40) but this the accountants vetoed.  The ensuing crashes, death toll and law suits attracted the interest of consumer lawyer Ralph Nader (b 1934) who wrote Unsafe at Any Speed (1965), a critique on the industry generally although in the public mind it’s always been most associated with the failings of the Corvair which the author made the subject of the opening chapter.

The Corvair before and after.  GM applied a fix in 1963 which rectified the worst of the characteristics and a full re-design was undertaken and released in 1965.  For the Corvair's reputation it was too late.

Actually, the problems as described applied only to the Corvairs built between 1959-1963 but the damage was done, neither its reputation or sales figures ever recovered and it was only the corporation’s desire to save face which saw the much improved car restyled for 1966, production lingering on until 1969 although it may be Nader’s book actually prolonged things, competition in the compact sector notably more intense that in 1960s.  It was unfortunate because the restyled Corvair was one of the better-looking machines of the era, only the truncated length of the bodywork forward of the cowl detracting from the elegance.

The lovely, Italianesque lines of the second generation Corvair (1966-1969).

Curiously, after its demise came a coda.  In 1970, responding to pressure from Nader, the Nixon administration commissioned a study comparing the 1963 Corvair with five “similar” vehicles and a report was in 1972 issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) which concluded, inter alia, the Corvair’s handling and propensity to roll was comparable with that of “other light domestic cars.”  Nader dismissed the study as “a shoddy, internally contradictory whitewash” and accused the NHTSA of using “biased testing procedures and model selection.”  He noted they assessed on the 1963 Corvair which Chevrolet significantly had modified to correct the deficiencies found in those built earlier.  The Nixon administration ignored him, presumably taking the view that “what was good for General Motors was good for the country”.

Lindsay Lohan demonstrates yet more possibilities offered by belts.

Handshake

Handshake (pronounced hand-sheyk)

(1) A gripping and shaking of (traditionally the right) hands by two individuals, as to symbolize greeting, congratulation, agreement or farewell.

(2) In digital communication, as handshaking, an exchange of predetermined signals between a computer and a peripheral device or another computer, made when a connection is initially established or at intervals during data transmission, in order to assure proper synchronization.

1801: The construct was hand + shake.  Hand was from the Middle English hond & hand, from the Old English hand, from the Proto-West Germanic handu, from the Proto-Germanic handuz (and related to the Dutch, Norwegian Nynorsk & Swedish hand, the Danish hånd, the German Hand and the West Frisian hân) of uncertain origin although there may be a link to the Old Swedish hinna (to gain), the Gothic fra-hinþan (to take captive, capture), the Latvian sīts (hunting spear), the Ancient Greek κεντέω (kentéō) (prick) and the Albanian çandër (pitchfork; prop).  Shake was from the Middle English schaken, from the Old English sċeacan & sċacan (to shake), from the Proto-West Germanic skakan, from the Proto-Germanic skakaną (to shake, swing, escape), from the primitive Indo-European skeg-, keg-, skek- & kek- (to jump, move).  It was cognate with the Scots schake & schack (to shake), the West Frisian schaekje (to shake), the Dutch schaken (to elope, make clean, shake), the Low German schaken (to move, shift, push, shake) & schacken (to shake, shock), the Old Norse skaka (to shake), the Norwegian Nynorsk skaka (to shake), the Swedish skaka (to shake), the Danish skage (to shake), the Dutch schokken (to shake, shock) and the Russian скака́ть (skakátʹ) (to jump”).  The present participle is handshaking and the familiar past participle handshaked but some dictionaries still list the rare handshook as an alternative; the noun plural is handshakes.

The handshake not a universal cultural practice (the Japanese famously favor the bow although in recent decades it’s executed often as more of a nod) but, in one form or another, it is global and involves usually two people grasping hands and moving them in a brief, up-and-down movement.  The right hand tends to be favored (left-handers sinister obviously) and this has been linked to the symbolism of that being the usual choice when wielding a weapon but that is speculative and the global preponderance of right-handedness may be of greater significance.  Quite when the handshake became a cultural practice isn’t known but it is certainly ancient, at least among those important enough to be depicted in forms of art because the oldest representations date back more than the-thousand years.

Some handshakes promised much; results were varied.  Clockwise from top left:  Mao Tse-tung & Richard Nixon (1972), Yitzhak Rabin & Yasser Arafat (1993), Mikhail Gorbachev & Ronald Reagan (1985), Donald Trump & crooked Hillary Clinton (2016), Martin McGuinness & Queen Elizabeth II (2012) and Nelson Mandela & FW de Klerk (1994). 

Handshake (hand-shake) is a surprisingly modern construction, dating only from 1801 and "hand-shaking" is attested from 1805; the phrases “to shake hands” & “shaking hands” have been in use since the sixteenth century and the use of the noun “grip” to mean "a handshake" (especially one of a secret society) dates from 1785.  Secret handshakes are created so members of clubs and societies may make their affiliation known to another person without needing to use words.  For a secret handshake to be effective it must be specific enough to be recognized by another member yet subtle enough that a non-member would not find the nature of the grip strange or unusual.  Because of the limited possibilities offered by fingers and thumbs, some secret handshakes involve also actions such as using the other hand to touch an earlobe in a certain way or a tapping a foot.  The concept has been documented since Antiquity and is most famously associated with the Freemasons but to speak of the “secret Masonic handshake” is misleading, some researchers claiming there are at least sixteen distinctly identifiable Masonic handshakes and most have speculated there will be dozens more.  Indeed, except in the early years, Freemasonry has never been monolithic and there are known cases of one faction (even within a lodge) developing their own so that they might discuss matter freely without the risk they may be spilling secrets to the other faction.  The mechanics of the secret handshakes used by members of the Secret Society of the Les Clefs d’Or are not known.

Lindsay Lohan meets Recep Tayyip Erdoğan (b 1954; prime-minister or president of the Republic of Türkiye (Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurbaşkanı) since 2003), Ankara, 2017.

The golden handshake is a clause in executive employment contracts that provides for a generous severance package in certain circumstances.  Created originally as a relatively modest inducement to attract staff to companies in a perilous financial position, they evolved to the point where multi-million dollar pay-outs were common and they became controversial because they appeared to reward failure and there were suggestions (not only by conspiracy theorists) they were used even as Trojan horses to entice a CEO to drive down a company’s share price (thus becoming eligible for a golden handshake) in the interest of asset strippers and others.  The best operators were able to engineer things so they enjoyed both a golden handshake and a golden parachute (the generous package payable upon retirement in the normal course of things).

In computer communications, a handshake is a signal exchanged between two or more devices or programs to confirm authentication and connection.  In the same way that the human handshake is a process: (1) an offer of a hand, (2) the taking of that hand and (3) the shaking of the hands, in computing, the sequence is (1) seeking a connection, (2) verifying the connection and (3) effecting the connection.  The breaking of the handshake and the termination of the connection in each case constitutes the final, fourth setup.  The purpose of handshaking is to establish the parameters for the duration of the session which involves the devices agreeing on vital stuff like (1) both being switched on, (2) both ready to transmit & receive and (3) that certain technical protocols will be used (familiar to many as famous strings like “9600,N,8,1”).  Handshaking historically was a process separate from the security layers which had to be satisfied once communication was established and again, this is analogous with the handshake in the process of human interaction.

The Duce emulates an illustrious Roman forebear.

As a cultural practice with a history known to date back at least ten thousand years, the handshake has proven a resilient tradition which has survived the vicissitudes of many millennia and even the preference of elbow-bumping and such during the COVID-19 pandemic seems only to have been a minor interruption.  Not all however approved.  The Duce (Benito Mussolini, 1883–1945; prime minister and Duce (leader) of Italy 1922-1943) thought handshaking effete and unhygienic (he was ready for pandemics) and preferred the fascist salute he thought (apparently on the basis of statues from Ancient Rome) more martial.  Still, when meeting friends (even those forced on him by the brutishness of political necessity) he shook hands and a handshake was both his first and last interaction with the Führer (Adolf Hitler, 1889-1945; German head of government 1933-1945 and of state 1934-1945).  Their smiles when shaking hands always seemed genuine and were noticeably warm when they parted after the attempt on Hitler’s life in July 1944.

One historian entitled his work on the relationship between Hitler and Mussolini The Brutal Friendship and that it was but it was certainly enduring.  They shook hands on many occasions, the last of which would happen on the railway station platform close to where the attempt on the Führer's life failed.  At this time, Hitler was using his left hand to shake, the right arm injured in the blast.  After this, they would never meet again.  

For politicians, handshakes are a wonderful photo opportunity and some have been famously emblematic of the resolution of problems which have been intractable for decades or more.  However, such photographs can be unpleasant and sometimes embarrassing reminders of a past they’d prefer was forgotten.  When Donald Rumsfeld (1932–2021; US secretary of defense 1975-1977 & 2001-2006) shook hands with Saddam Hussein (1937–2006; president of Iraq 1979-2003) in Baghdad in December 1983, it was as a presidential envoy of Ronald Reagan (1911–2004; president of the US 1981-1989) and he was there to do business with the dictator.  Iraq at the time had started a war with Iran and was using chemical weapons while practicing abuses of human rights on parts of the Iraqi population and Saddam Hussein had even made known to the US administration Baghdad’s intention to acquire nuclear weapons.  Thus was special envoy Rumsfeld dispatched to offer Washington’s hand of friendship, anybody opposed to the Ayatollahs held in high regards in Washington DC. 

Donald Rumsfeld and Saddam Hussein, Baghdad, 1983.

Despite what Mr Rumsfeld would claim twenty years on, he made no mention of chemical weapons or human rights abuses, his discussions instead focusing on the projection of US military force in the Gulf and the need to guarantee and protect the supply of oil.  Later, as international pressure increased on the US to condemn the use of chemical weapons by Iraq it responded with a low-key statement which made no mention of Iraq and actually stressed the need to protect Iraq from Iran’s “ruthless and inhumane tactics”.  When Mr Rumsfeld returned to Baghdad in 1984, during the visit the United Nations (UN) issued a report which stated chemical weapons had been used against Iran, something already known to both the Pentagon and state department.  In Baghdad, the matter wasn’t mentioned and when Mr Rumsfeld departed, it was with another warm handshake.

Nancy Pelosi and Bashar al-Assad, April 2007.

By virtue of her education in a Roman Catholic school, Nancy Pelosi (b 1940; speaker of the US House of Representatives 2007-2011 and since 2019, member of the house since 1987) was well acquainted with the Bible so after shaking hands with Bashar al-Assad (b 1965, President of Syria since 2000) in April 2007, to use the phrase “The road to Damascus is a road to peace” must have been a deliberate choice.  It might also be thought a curious choice given that at the time the president was providing shelter and protection to a range of terrorist groups involved in attacking US forces in Iraq.  As speaker of the house, Ms Pelosi would have received high-level intelligence briefings so presumably was acquainted with the facts and had she been uncertain, could have had aides prepare a summary from publicly available sources.  As recent events in the Far East have illustrated, the speaker’s forays into foreign affairs are not helpful to the State Department.